Photo by Frederick Meekins
Click On The Headline
Sunday, May 06, 2018
Saturday, May 05, 2018
Friday, May 04, 2018
Thursday, May 03, 2018
Wednesday, May 02, 2018
Hit & Run Commentary #107
President Trump’s immigration policies are being cast as the villain in the saga of a 39 year old father being deported after having been living undocumented in the United States since he was nine years old. How about much of the blame being placed on the Obama administration and the court system pussyfooting around for nearly a decade with one repeated stay after another instead of decisively settling this case? Perhaps this example ought to serve as a reminder to all of us that this governing by kicking the can down the road cannot go on forever indefinitely.
Albert Mohler posted an article titled “Moralism Is Not The Gospel But Many Christians Think It Is”. If that is the case, isn’t that more the fault of professional religionists such as himself rather than the mere pewfillers often forced to abide by an extensive list of regulations if they desire to remain in the good graces of those wielding authority? Sometimes these requirements are, at best, merely tangentially related to anything explicitly stated in Scripture or, at worst, the mere opinions of the ecclesiastical staff. If the mere pewfillers are the ones coming off as judgemental about enforcing nitpicky rules, it is often because they have been forced to live under the most stringent requirements their entire lives while they are passed over in terms of position, opportunity, or even attention in favor of newcomers and the like who (though perhaps sincerely Christian) are not held to the same standard as those that have bought into what is being taught from the pulpit that believers must act a certain way and if you don’t you aren’t likely one. Right or not, those told that it’s evil to date and further bashed from the pulpit if they are then not married by the age of 24 are going to raise an eyebrow in resentment if they see the pregnant teen moms fawned over with babyshowers.
In a review of “Thor: Ragnarok”, homeschool activist Kevin Swanson condemned the superhero genre for depicting Germanic gods. One can legitimately point out how these films promote a version of ancient alien hypothesis in that Thor is depicted as an extradimensional entity. But the movies do not really depict Thor as an actual god or that your child is likely to abandon their Christian faith if they happen to enjoy these sorts of costumed adventures. In the first Avengers movie, didn’t Captain America say that there was only one God and that he certainly wasn’t Loki? Even if movies consisted of nothing more than accurate detailed depictions of Bible stories, would those of this sort of hardline mentality accept that or would they find something else to gripe about. Coming to mind particular are fundamentalist objections to “The Passion Of The Christ” and criticism of Roma Downey’s series “AD”.
In his review of “Star Wars” The Last Jedi”, homeschool activist Kevin Swanson lamented that parents should not be surprised if after steadily watching these sorts of films that their children walk away from the church. That is because watching these films is the epistemological equivalent of regularly attending a mosque and then converting to Islam. First, if Swanson wants to remain consistent with his Calvinist soteriology, doesn’t he have to admit that those walking away from the faith as a result of allegedly being exposed to Star Wars were never intended to rank among the predestined to begin with? Second, in his remarks does Swanson intend to criticize those Christian leaders that for decades level condemnation against those believers that would have been drawn towards creative pursuits such as literature and filmmaking?
Isn’t the greater outrage not that a Trump appointee to Americorps articulated blunt remarks over how protected demographics often live their lives at variance with majoritarian preferences but rather that this constitutionally dubious agency continues to exist?
Al Sharpton said the integrity of Evangelicals that support President Trump. But does a “minister” that advanced the lies of Tawana Brawley and stoked the burning of Freddie’s Fashion Mart possess any integrity himself?
President Trump is now being accused of speaking in an Indian accent to imitate the Prime Minister of India. If that is to be condemned, will similar criticisms be leveled against those that spoof the President’s own elocutionary idiosyncrasies such as his oddly shaped lips and sounding hoarse much of the time?’
If all countries are to be viewed as possessing equal quality with no one allowed to admit what these places are really like, aren’t those that vacation in Bermuda, Aruba, or the Bahamas but not Hati even more racist than Donald Trump?
If President Trump does not want his offspring criticized in the media, perhaps he should utilize other minions as his policy advisors and enforcers.
A Washington Post column laments in the title, “Trump Evangelicals Have Lost Their Gag Reflex”. Shouldn’t these establishmentarian elites be the first to celebrate religious conservatives for having advanced their sense of political sophistication to the point that distinction is now made between an elected official’s policy positions and personal moral failings? Didn’t the liberal pundits used to pine how they wished America could be more like France where no one cared how many mistresses a high official might have bedded? If Evangelicals now downplay the importance of private virtue in public life, it is for the most part for having been ridiculed for decades how if they didn’t let go of their outdated morality particularly in regards to sexual ethics, they would forever consign the Republican Party to electoral defeat. For were not influential media outlets the ones that depicted public officials that consistently lived by their professed values such as Ted Cruz, Michele Bachmann, and Rick Santorum as something akin to a Sasquatch with communicable leprosy?
For Afrosupremacisit Propaganda Month, a Vermont school has announced it will fly the Black Lives Matter flag for the month of February. Mind you, these are the same sorts that threaten renewed rounds of looting of hair care product providers and electronics retailers unless every remaining remembrance of the Confederacy is removed from public view.
The growing concern is that social media is potentially harmful to democracy. This perspective is now so pervasive that even the Facebook corporate office concurs. Do the propagandists in in the mainstream engage in the same degree of manufactured outrage when it comes to the dangers posed by centralized hierarchical journalism and media analysis?
If so-called “Indigenous People” cannot celebrate Columbus Day because of the mistreatment received at the hands of European colonizers, why should European-Americans support Indigenous People Day because of the mistreatment innocent settlers experienced at the hands of heathen savages?
President Trump has been accused of an alleged affair with a pornstar. If true, talk about low hanging fruit. It doesn’t say much as to the prowess of your manhood and skills as a lover to bed a woman that will not only sleep with anyone for the right amount of money but also allow the encounter to be videoed.
Celebrity Chef Gordon Ramsay announced that he lost over 50 pounds over fear that his girth would cause him to lose his wife to another man. Frankly, it sounds like she is not worth keeping. Where is the media outrage that would have erupted about fat shaming and positive body image if it was his wife that felt similar pressure to lose weight in order to save her marriage?
In a broadcast commentary transcript, Cal Thomas concluded, “You may not like his behavior. You may not like his personality. But you cannot deny the objective results. This President in his first year in office is bringing about real change that is promoting the general welfare.” So is Thomas now saying that the health of a nation is determined solely in terms of materialistic financial statistics? The promised wall is no more closer to being built, proposals are being suggested for what will essentially amount to yet another amnesty, and (as usual) the State of the Union promises to be a litany of yet additional handout programs that the country can no longer afford. As a self-professed student of Francis Schaffer, one would think Thomas would know better. Does Thomas renounce the inclusion of his name in an edition of National Review published prior to the election suggesting that a Trump presidency would mark the ruination of the Republic?
During the 2018 State of the Union Address, Democrats booed President Trump’s remarks that immigration policy should consider quality individuals or nuclear family units rather than import entire slum villages as results from chain migration. If Joe Kennedy III is stepping forward to spearhead the antithesis of the Trump agenda, perhaps hundreds of migrants can be warehoused on the numerous spacious Kennedy family properties.
Fascinating how liberal agitators demand the remainder of the country refrain from comment when Columbus Day is rebranded as “Indigenous People Day” in urban cesspools of multiculturalism but they have no problem imposing their New York values upon the bastions of the Confederacy when it comes to what memorials will be allowed to remain on public property.
At an event titled “The People’s State Of The Union”, celebrities, activists, and social justice front groups converged to reinforce amongst themselves just how much they despise the idea of others enjoying a standard of living just above that of mere squalor to the point that they are advocating violent Communist upheaval. For if these limousine revolutionaries really gave the proverbial rodent’s rear shank about actual poverty, wouldn’t they have actually instead directed the resources needed to give themselves a gigantic pat on the back to actual poor people?
Did the thought police all jacked out of shape at a racially questionable sweatshirt sold on line ever get around to expressing similar degrees of outrage regarding the knockout game or the looting of businesses over unpopular trial verdicts?
Pope Francis repeatedly lectures the West about defending the oppressed and downtrodden in terms of throwing borders open to swarms of migrants and refugees. Yet in regards to the persecuted in Red China he certainly doesn’t mind turning the proverbial blind eye in terms of forcing two underground bishops to step down and granting Vatican approval to the bishops of the Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association.
A Super Bowl commercial proclaimed the following: "You come with open minds and the instinct that we are equal. Some people may see your differences and be threatened by them. But you are unstoppable. You'll love who you want. You'll demand fair and equal pay. You will not allow where you come from to dictate where you're going. You will be heard, not dismissed. You will be connected, not alone. Change starts now." Does that include Roy Moore loving whom he wanted to love in his younger days? And what of those now advocating bestiality, necrophilia, and these reports of a man fathering a child with his own 20 year old daughter? Will those that disagree with this predetermined agenda be guaranteed the same right to be heard and not dismissed or will that privilege only be granted to those acquiescing to the preferences of nefarious cabalistic elites? For what if the individual approaches the evidence and articulated justifications with this supposedly open mind and he concludes that the change needed is not to the extent advocated by the nihilistic vanguard?
Amusement Park King’s Dominion will no longer be referring to its classic wooden roller coaster as “The Rebel Yell”. Such an allusion to Confederate heritage might unduly trigger the weak minded and sociologically delicate. Instead the attraction will be renamed “Racer 75”. Just how much longer will this stupidity continue? Should the entire park be renamed since “King” refers to not only monarchy but one ruled over by a patriarchal figure without paying due homage to the gynocracy for the atrocities committed in the name of phallocentrism. And shouldn’t the name “Racer 75” also be considered offensive? For does not “Racer” imply a competition based on speed with that quantifiable measurement used to determine such potentially psychologically damaging categorizations such as winter and loser. Lastly, since the 75 is a chronometric recognition of when the ride was built, shouldn’t that also be considered offensive since that measurement is ultimately a relativistic one calculated through tabulation of the temporal interval having elapsed from that moment back to the existence of Christ?
By Frederick Meekins
Tuesday, May 01, 2018
Monday, April 30, 2018
Sunday, April 29, 2018
Saturday, April 28, 2018
Thursday, April 26, 2018
Will NPR Snobs View Trade School Graduates As Cultural Equals?
NPR’s All Things Considered posted an article 4/25/18 titled “High Paying Trade Jobs Sit Empty While High School Grads Line Up For University”.
Students should be encouraged to consider these occupations if they are naturally imbued with mechanical aptitude.
However, the sorts of leftwing elites that gravitate towards NPR need also be asked a question or two regarding their own promotion of this alternative career path.
Should students pursue a trade school rather than the academic route, will the biases of technocrats result in a sort of caste system where those not credentialed in the liberal arts or higher science backgrounds NPR types prefer as their equals be excluded from weighing in on cultural concerns?
Punitive sanction might be imposed upon any daring to raise a voice beyond the narrow concerns of their servile guild craft.
In the olden days, this used to be looked down upon as articulating opinions above or harboring aspirations beyond one’s station.
Already teachers look down upon parents that raise concerns seen as infringing upon a profession that the parents have themselves not been schooled in.
It must also be noted that many of these trade jobs are highly paid because they are quite frankly labor intensive and often downright dangerous.
So what will be done with those pushing into their late 40’s and early 50’s whose bodies are worn out by that point but who do not have the academic qualifications to move on into work considered more white collar in nature?
Sure the pay is good when one is able to bust one’s back.
But soon as the back is busted, some of these employers are ready to toss aside workers that barely missed a day the previous twenty years if the employee is unable to return to the job full steam ahead a month after surgery to repair injuries aggravated by these glories of proletarian labor advocated by this vanguard that hasn’t lifted a finger at all.
By Frederick Meekins
Wednesday, April 25, 2018
Tuesday, April 24, 2018
Monday, April 23, 2018
Saturday, April 21, 2018
Friday, April 20, 2018
Thursday, April 19, 2018
Wednesday, April 18, 2018
Tuesday, April 17, 2018
Monday, April 16, 2018
Municipalities Take Aim At Basic Liberties
The town of Deerfield, Illinois has enacted a regulation banning assault weapons.
Those violating the ban could face fines of up to $1000 per day.Will progressives that tossed a fit over Sheriff Joe Arpaio taking it upon himself to enforce the national immigration laws that the federal government refused to get as worked up over mere town ordinances contradicting what might be allowed under state and federal law?
What other products otherwise perfectly legal in a state might municipal aldermen take upon themselves to ban?
For motorist safety, what if a town decided to forbid residents from owning compact automobiles that rolled off the assembly line after a given year since in traffic accidents such vehicles often have about as much structural integrity as the average soda can?
What, if in order to protect pedestrians, a town passed legislation insisting that smartphones present such a threat of distraction that it is not enough to restrict when these devices can be used but that these gadgets must be banned altogether within the boundaries of a specified jurisdiction?
While we are at it, if local authorities possess the power to ban products deemed legal by the state granting the municipality the right to exist in the first place, why not certain behaviors or even relationships?
For example, if the representatives of Deefield, Illinois insist that if those electing them to office want to live in a town without firearms it is their right to do so irrespective of how neighboring jurisdictions might decide to order their own affairs, on what grounds then should some backwoods enclave be forbidden from retaining laws against sodomy or promulgating a decree refusing to accept the validity of gay marriage?
By Frederick Meekins
Sunday, April 15, 2018
Saturday, April 14, 2018
Friday, April 13, 2018
Thursday, April 12, 2018
Deputy Questioning Gun Control Agenda Found Dead Under Mysterious Circumstances
Click On The Headline
Televangelist Threatens Lives Of Those Criticizing Ecclesiastical Functionaries
Click On The Headline
Wednesday, April 11, 2018
Tuesday, April 10, 2018
Ingraham Insufficiently Deviant For Leftists To Defend Her Speech
The world has about come unhinged over Fox News pundit Laura Ingraham for daring to poke a little fun at a petulant youth known to excoriate with the vilest of profanities those reluctant to embrace his policy proposals demanding the abandonment of centuries of constitutional theory deemed fouler than his acute potty mouth.
The font of deliberative political contemplation, GQ Magazine, has posted a column in support of the Ingraham boycott titled “Boycotting Ingraham Is Patriotic”.
Yet those assenting to this sentiment are the very sorts of thinkers that would condemn the Census for tabulating how many within the boundaries of the United States are actually citizens.
But if it is inappropriate to classify who is and is not of a particular jurisdiction --- the most basic of functions in establishing the foundations of a nation/state --- isn't the concept of patriotism --- the idea that a set of principles in large part derived from a particular geography inhabited by a specific sort of people is superior to all others --- even more verboten?
GQ is celebrating the decentralized justice inherent to a boycott as about the purest form of free expression imaginable.
After all, consumers are not obligated to bestow their funds upon someone advocating a set of values that they find abhorrent.
Likewise, Ingraham is not entitled to be lavished with these funds.
Interesting, though, how amongst postmodernist hordes this realization is a one way street.
For would the editorial staff of GQ Magazine as eagerly applaud a boycott organized by a Christian cabal seeking to impose their particular ethical idiosyncrasies in a way that would implement comprehensive revolutionary change across the entire culture even if a significant percentage was still not amenable to such a fundamental alteration of the social compact.
After all, those now threatening social upheaval are the children of many who denounced Pat Buchanan's culture war oration at the 1992 Republican convention.
At the time, opponents of the pious populist insisted that absolute objective values did not exist and, even if they did, it was not the place of cultural institutions to advocate on behalf of or to enforce a hegemony of values.
Of Lady Ingraham's status within the ongoing civic discussion, the enlightened archons of GQ assure the unsettled of weak mind, “Laura Ingraham remains as empowered as ever to impart her bad takes, whether to viewers on Fox News or to passer-bys on the street, without fear of being arrested by agents of the state.” But for how long?
Already the right of free expression --- deliberately enshrined among the first protections of the Bill of Rights --- is restricted in the presence of those seeking an abortion --- a procedure that honest jurists are compelled to admit cannot be found clearly delineated anywhere in this charter document but rather only in interpretative penumbras of it.
In the case of Lara Ingraham still enjoying her innate liberties as a free citizen despite being economically inconvenienced, how is that less of an outrage than the gay couple denied the wedding cake by the Christian baker?
In the transaction dragged before the judicial system, no one prevented the couple from the state granting its official recognition of their unnatural liaison.
The only thing they would have had to have endured was the search for a baker willing to provide it, which would have cost considerably less that the advertising revenue rescinded from Fox News.
So why are some forms of speech worthy of protection and some not the part of the most vociferously insistent that the most egregious imposition imaginable is to somehow insist that someone else's truth might not be quite as true as initially suspected?
By Frederick Meekins
Monday, April 09, 2018
Sunday, April 08, 2018
Saturday, April 07, 2018
Government Downplays Vaccine Researcher’s Death
And to verify this story in a mainstream news source, check out the account at CNN.com
Friday, April 06, 2018
Thursday, April 05, 2018
Wednesday, April 04, 2018
Tuesday, April 03, 2018
Geraldo Insists O’Reilly’s Problem Was That O’Reilly Not As Amazing As Geraldo
Click On The Headline
Monday, April 02, 2018
Saturday, March 31, 2018
Friday, March 30, 2018
Thursday, March 29, 2018
Wednesday, March 28, 2018
Tuesday, March 27, 2018
Monday, March 26, 2018
Friday, March 23, 2018
Sunday, March 18, 2018
Saturday, March 17, 2018
Friday, March 16, 2018
Thursday, March 15, 2018
Wednesday, March 14, 2018
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)