Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin has certainly shown that he has an almost Reaganesque steel spine. He's been standing up to the onslaught of ungrateful liberal union whiners with nothing more than public support and a pen, and he continues to do so even now, when the liberal courts are entering the fray. According to Hot Air, the Temporary Restraining Order that a judge issued took effect within the last few days, which was supposed to block the implementation of the new budget repair bill.
Walker, however, has found a loophole. The order only restricts certain agencies from implementing the bill, so Walker decided to use one that WASN'T mentioned in the restraining order to continue his work of doing what the people voted him into office to do.
It's so nice to see that there are still some good people in politics.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Monday, March 28, 2011
Motivation Monday's Absence is now Over
It's been a while, what with several personal issues taking precedence over the blog, but I'm back and have been for the last few days, though my motivation Monday had to take more of a backseat than other posts. Hoping to make up for that, here's the Mormon Tabernacle Choir singing one of my favorite songs, The Battle Hymn of the Republic:
Friday, March 25, 2011
Philadelphia Police act Stupidly. Barack Obama Could not be Reached for Comment
Remember when Barry O decided without facts that the police acted stupidly when they were dealing with the Crowley/Gates issue? Well, here's a video I found via Conservative Scalawag, who is an avid Second Amendment defender, as I am. In the fifteen minute video, which is really just audio with an image attached, the PA police stop a man who was legally carrying a Glock pistol in full view on his hip. I'll let the words exchanged paint a picture for you, but trust me when I say that THESE cops, as opposed to Officer Crowley, did in fact act stupidly, not to mention illegally.
Audio rated NSFW due to multiple F bombs and utter stupidity on the part of the boys in blue.
Audio rated NSFW due to multiple F bombs and utter stupidity on the part of the boys in blue.
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Wait Wait Wait...
I am a regular listener of Sean Hannity's radio program, as well as an occasional viewer of his Fox News opinion show. The reason for this is because Hannity has a way of placing certain events into a neat little box of perspective that enables me to understand most of what's really going on with various news stories around the country and/or the world. Tonight was no exception. As I was working alone in the production center at my place of employment tonight, I flipped on his show promptly at seven so that I could remain apprised of world events, and get his take on those same events before posting a blog entry like this one.
When he brought up Libya again, I had to roll my eyes. More of the same? Really? We already know that Gaddafi is winning his civil war thus far, and that the UN has authorized a no-fly-zone over the country, effectively grounding the tin-pot dictator's piss poor air force. We also know that people are rightly up in arms over Obama waiting for the UN to give the okay before we decided to take military action, as well as Obama being raked over the coals for not going to Congress before authorizing the missile strikes on Lybian soil. All this ran through my head in a scant few seconds at the mention of the word Lybia. Then...something caught my attention.
More bureaucratic nonsense doesn't usually hold my attention the way it used to, but this one was unique. Apparently, there is a struggle to find out just who exactly is in charge of our little jaunt into Col. Gaddafi's back yard. Such confusion has erupted from recent events that some sort of political committee has been formed to lead military efforts. The ones who proposed the idea? The French.
I'll wait for you to stop hyperventilating.
What the hell are the French doing leading this thing? These nimrods haven't won a war in recent memory. The one that comes to mind is the Hundred Years War, and even then they were losing handily before divine intervention turned things around in the form of Mademoiselle Joan of Arc and her voices from Heaven. That being said, in my opinion this bunch of cheese-eating surrender monkeys couldn't lead a fish to water, much less lead troops into battle and expect to actually win.
One big mess. That's what this whole thing in Lybia has turned into. Our president can't even decide whether or not he's in the fight, since he keeps paying lip service to ousting Gaddafi while at the same time sitting on his hands hoping Col. G will just realize the error of his ways and step down of his own free will like a good little citizen of the world.
Yeah...and maybe a moistened bint at the bottom of a lake will hand me a shiny sword and I'll be proclaimed the Once and Future King...
When he brought up Libya again, I had to roll my eyes. More of the same? Really? We already know that Gaddafi is winning his civil war thus far, and that the UN has authorized a no-fly-zone over the country, effectively grounding the tin-pot dictator's piss poor air force. We also know that people are rightly up in arms over Obama waiting for the UN to give the okay before we decided to take military action, as well as Obama being raked over the coals for not going to Congress before authorizing the missile strikes on Lybian soil. All this ran through my head in a scant few seconds at the mention of the word Lybia. Then...something caught my attention.
More bureaucratic nonsense doesn't usually hold my attention the way it used to, but this one was unique. Apparently, there is a struggle to find out just who exactly is in charge of our little jaunt into Col. Gaddafi's back yard. Such confusion has erupted from recent events that some sort of political committee has been formed to lead military efforts. The ones who proposed the idea? The French.
I'll wait for you to stop hyperventilating.
What the hell are the French doing leading this thing? These nimrods haven't won a war in recent memory. The one that comes to mind is the Hundred Years War, and even then they were losing handily before divine intervention turned things around in the form of Mademoiselle Joan of Arc and her voices from Heaven. That being said, in my opinion this bunch of cheese-eating surrender monkeys couldn't lead a fish to water, much less lead troops into battle and expect to actually win.
One big mess. That's what this whole thing in Lybia has turned into. Our president can't even decide whether or not he's in the fight, since he keeps paying lip service to ousting Gaddafi while at the same time sitting on his hands hoping Col. G will just realize the error of his ways and step down of his own free will like a good little citizen of the world.
Yeah...and maybe a moistened bint at the bottom of a lake will hand me a shiny sword and I'll be proclaimed the Once and Future King...
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Reductio ad Absurdum
So...I just learned a new Latin term today, thanks to the Classic Liberal, whose post on social justice I just read is one of the most elaquent explanations of the flawed redistribution philosophy that I've ever read.
Simply put, for those of you who read this and don't know, Reductio ad Absurdum translates to "Reduction to the Absurd." The phrase is used to describe something when it becomes so ridiculous as to have lost all credibility. There seems to be a lot of that these days, doesn't there? From Climategate pretty much trashing every argument that has to do with manmade global warming to the idea that the ecomonic prosperity of a given country can be improved by taking from those who work and giving to those who do not.
Why, though, are we so given to the absurd that we believe such things? Are we mere sheep or cattle who react to the whims of a few ranchers, as Glenn Beck has pointed out on his television show? Are we robots that wait for commands from on high, as Nancy Pelosi seemed to think during the health care debate and rise of the Tea Party?
Because we only had a few sources of information back then, that's why.
For a long time, it seemed as though what is now known to be the minority view was in fact the majority. Much like Lenin and his Bolsheviks when they "seized the telegraph office" in what would become Soviet Russia, an ideological coup had taken place in our newsrooms and, more slowly, our schools and universities.
Even Hollywood, as witnessed by the great Ronaldus Maximus, had become a bastion for a particular ideology over the years, with movies bashing America becoming so common place that even those who paid attention, such as my mother, barely noticing anything wrong after a few years of the same tired old claptrap. In fact, up until recently, I wasn't even aware there were actors in Hollywood who DID support America in anything. I'm glad it turns out I was wrong.
Even as early as ten years ago, I never would have thought that a movie making fun of those on the left could ever make it past the planning stages in Hollywood, or that the works of an uberindividualist like Ayn Rand would see her greatest work, Atlas Shrugged, become a feature film.
What's different? Why the change in attitude, however small it might be? I'm not sure, but I hope to see more of it int he future.
Simply put, for those of you who read this and don't know, Reductio ad Absurdum translates to "Reduction to the Absurd." The phrase is used to describe something when it becomes so ridiculous as to have lost all credibility. There seems to be a lot of that these days, doesn't there? From Climategate pretty much trashing every argument that has to do with manmade global warming to the idea that the ecomonic prosperity of a given country can be improved by taking from those who work and giving to those who do not.
Why, though, are we so given to the absurd that we believe such things? Are we mere sheep or cattle who react to the whims of a few ranchers, as Glenn Beck has pointed out on his television show? Are we robots that wait for commands from on high, as Nancy Pelosi seemed to think during the health care debate and rise of the Tea Party?
Because we only had a few sources of information back then, that's why.
For a long time, it seemed as though what is now known to be the minority view was in fact the majority. Much like Lenin and his Bolsheviks when they "seized the telegraph office" in what would become Soviet Russia, an ideological coup had taken place in our newsrooms and, more slowly, our schools and universities.
Even Hollywood, as witnessed by the great Ronaldus Maximus, had become a bastion for a particular ideology over the years, with movies bashing America becoming so common place that even those who paid attention, such as my mother, barely noticing anything wrong after a few years of the same tired old claptrap. In fact, up until recently, I wasn't even aware there were actors in Hollywood who DID support America in anything. I'm glad it turns out I was wrong.
Even as early as ten years ago, I never would have thought that a movie making fun of those on the left could ever make it past the planning stages in Hollywood, or that the works of an uberindividualist like Ayn Rand would see her greatest work, Atlas Shrugged, become a feature film.
What's different? Why the change in attitude, however small it might be? I'm not sure, but I hope to see more of it int he future.
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Conservative Porn at it's Finest: Wisconson Edition
Glenn Beck coined the phrase "conservative porn." He did so on his hour long Fox News opinion show before showing us the epic dressing down of Senator Barbara "Ma'am" Boxer by one Harry Alford of the National Black Chamber of Commerce. That episode of Beck set the tone for my entire day, which was, I'm glad to say, epic in it's awesomeness.
Well, boys and girls, get out the cigarettes, because I have not one, but two items that fall into that category tonight, in the form of one hat tip from The Other McCain, and another HT from the Left Coast Rebel. Be warned about the epic rant, however, as it is somewhat NSFW due to its peppering of F-bombs throughout. Still worth the read.
As to the other, here is Rand Paul, newly elected Senator of Kentucky, dressing down some moonbat bureaucrat that actually tries to tell him that restricting choices leads to us having more of them. Don't wrap your head around that. It'll explode and you'll have a huge mess to clean up.
Well, boys and girls, get out the cigarettes, because I have not one, but two items that fall into that category tonight, in the form of one hat tip from The Other McCain, and another HT from the Left Coast Rebel. Be warned about the epic rant, however, as it is somewhat NSFW due to its peppering of F-bombs throughout. Still worth the read.
As to the other, here is Rand Paul, newly elected Senator of Kentucky, dressing down some moonbat bureaucrat that actually tries to tell him that restricting choices leads to us having more of them. Don't wrap your head around that. It'll explode and you'll have a huge mess to clean up.
A Turning Point?
I've seen more than a few motivational videos in my time, but nothing quite puts a spring in my step like an unapologetic acknowledgment of the greatness of one Jesus Christ, and a defense of his day of birth as a part of our heritage both as a country and as a human being. Here's the video that has put me on Cloud 9 for the time being:
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
A Reason to Vote for Herman Caine
As you all who read this know, I'm a Palinista. I've backed Palin for president ever since I heard the first glimmer of rumors that she might run for the office in 2012. That being said, a case is continually being made for Tea Party motivator and favorite Herman Caine. I liked the guy from the get go, but not until I heard this did I really consider changing my vote from Palin to someone else. Honestly, if Caine can do to Congress and our enemies what he just did to this nitwit high school/college kid, he could end up serving twelve years!
Here's the video of the incident that shall hence forth be known as...The Ownage:
Here's the video of the incident that shall hence forth be known as...The Ownage:
Sunday, March 6, 2011
If you can't Protect the Speech you Don't Like, you don't Have Free Speech
The title of this post is a comment my political sciences teacher at MTI technical college told my classmates and me during a lesson on the Constitution one day. No more apparent is that example than in the Supreme Court's decision to protect Fred Phelps and his group of inbred cultists who have the audacity to call themselves a church.
I have nothing but dislike and loathing for the practices of the Westboro group, as I've stated in previous posts about them, such as when they protested the funeral of Elizabeth Edwards, or when they lauded the actions of psychopath Jarod Lee Loughner when he ended the lives of several, and injured several more, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords.
The act of horrific hate I'm referring to comes in the form of yet another funeral protest, this one (of course) a soldier who died bravely in Afghanistan (or was it Iraq?) Either way, this young man who gave his life for his country was at the time the latest target of the Westboro crazies. It had gotten so out of hand, in fact, that Bill O'Reilly of the O'Reilly factor had gotten involved and actually picked up the tab for the plaintiff's legal fees, said plaintiff being the young soldier's own father.
But now the supreme court has ruled that Fred and the gang can protest all they want at soldier's funerals under the First Amendment. This is wildly inconsistent of them given previous rulings on speech, particularly in cases involving the Catholic church or other branches of Christianity. How can it be that these people can spew nothing but hate at a solemn time of grief for a family who now has to bury their son, yet a single nativity scene on a front lawn is a violation of that same right?
Before I go on a free speech rant, though, I should make my point clear. The Supreme Court was right to rule as they did. In THIS case, at least. I've got plenty of opinions on bogus free speech rulings by the Supreme Court in the past, but in this case they did the right thing. No matter which side of the aisle you're on, once we start banning certain types of speech, it's basically all over. Despicable as it may have been for these people to do what they do, the only way we can stop them is by not giving them a forum from which to spew their hate. If private broadcasters would disallow more than barely minimal coverage of these wackos, their message would just be ineffective whistling past the graveyard.
I have nothing but dislike and loathing for the practices of the Westboro group, as I've stated in previous posts about them, such as when they protested the funeral of Elizabeth Edwards, or when they lauded the actions of psychopath Jarod Lee Loughner when he ended the lives of several, and injured several more, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords.
The act of horrific hate I'm referring to comes in the form of yet another funeral protest, this one (of course) a soldier who died bravely in Afghanistan (or was it Iraq?) Either way, this young man who gave his life for his country was at the time the latest target of the Westboro crazies. It had gotten so out of hand, in fact, that Bill O'Reilly of the O'Reilly factor had gotten involved and actually picked up the tab for the plaintiff's legal fees, said plaintiff being the young soldier's own father.
But now the supreme court has ruled that Fred and the gang can protest all they want at soldier's funerals under the First Amendment. This is wildly inconsistent of them given previous rulings on speech, particularly in cases involving the Catholic church or other branches of Christianity. How can it be that these people can spew nothing but hate at a solemn time of grief for a family who now has to bury their son, yet a single nativity scene on a front lawn is a violation of that same right?
Before I go on a free speech rant, though, I should make my point clear. The Supreme Court was right to rule as they did. In THIS case, at least. I've got plenty of opinions on bogus free speech rulings by the Supreme Court in the past, but in this case they did the right thing. No matter which side of the aisle you're on, once we start banning certain types of speech, it's basically all over. Despicable as it may have been for these people to do what they do, the only way we can stop them is by not giving them a forum from which to spew their hate. If private broadcasters would disallow more than barely minimal coverage of these wackos, their message would just be ineffective whistling past the graveyard.
Saturday, March 5, 2011
Take two Asprin...
Ugh...Sick as a dog right now. Also, due to a death in the family, I will be busy helping with funeral arrangements for a while and will not be able to post. Keep up the fight, true believers. I'll be back as soon as I'm able.
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Ask Not for Whom the Bell Tolls...
The title of this post is inspired by a tragic event. An even that, as of this writing, happened a mere five hours ago at Sutter Roseville in the emergency room. Two years ago, a similar tragedy occurred in the form of the death of my would be Father in Law, Billy Eckhardt, who died of heart failure in his home the very day after two friends of mine were married.
A similar tragedy struck today, as you might have guessed from the timing of this post. Apparently God wasn't happy with just one Eckhardt parent keeping him company upstairs. Just three years after taking her dad, he decided that it was time for her mother to come home as well. This couldn't have come at a worse time. With no employment, my fiance can no longer afford to live in the house they moved into after the one they used to own was repossessed by the bank. Fortunately we have a pair of great friends who are willing to help her out by allowing her to stay with them.
I'm more worried about her mental state, really. So close to the death of her last parent, she's been going on and on about how she could have done something better or different, or how she should have listened a little more so that God wouldn't have punished her by taking her mother away.
I know that's ludicrous, and so does she. The thing that makes this so hard for me to bear is that she's like a lost little girl now that she doesn't have the rock of stability that her parents were. I'm doing my best, but I feel so incredibly inadequate in regards to this, even though I know I'm doing everything expected of me and more besides. I wish to high heaven that comic book physics worked so I could get bitten by a genetically altered insect or bombarded with gamma rays to gain superpowers. Maybe then I'd be able to do enough good to satisfy my conscience.
I don't know...
A similar tragedy struck today, as you might have guessed from the timing of this post. Apparently God wasn't happy with just one Eckhardt parent keeping him company upstairs. Just three years after taking her dad, he decided that it was time for her mother to come home as well. This couldn't have come at a worse time. With no employment, my fiance can no longer afford to live in the house they moved into after the one they used to own was repossessed by the bank. Fortunately we have a pair of great friends who are willing to help her out by allowing her to stay with them.
I'm more worried about her mental state, really. So close to the death of her last parent, she's been going on and on about how she could have done something better or different, or how she should have listened a little more so that God wouldn't have punished her by taking her mother away.
I know that's ludicrous, and so does she. The thing that makes this so hard for me to bear is that she's like a lost little girl now that she doesn't have the rock of stability that her parents were. I'm doing my best, but I feel so incredibly inadequate in regards to this, even though I know I'm doing everything expected of me and more besides. I wish to high heaven that comic book physics worked so I could get bitten by a genetically altered insect or bombarded with gamma rays to gain superpowers. Maybe then I'd be able to do enough good to satisfy my conscience.
I don't know...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)