No, this is not a post about the Animaniacs, as awesome as that cartoon was back in the nineties. The title of the post is, rather, an attempt at deciding whether the long known about decision of Jim DeMint to boycott CPAC (along with other senators) in order to protest the attendance of GOProud is a good or bad thing. It really depends on the outcome, which we will not know about until it actually happens. Some, such as That Mr. Guy, are afraid that such a boycott, along with Michelle my Bell Bachmann giving the TEA Party response to the President's latest upcoming SOTU speech, will give the Democratic minority in the house enough momentum to return for a second shot in 2012.
I do not believe this to be the case. While I also do not know whether the boycott of CPAC is a good or bad idea, I do know that the movement that has gathered steam over the last two years has more motivation than the actions of a few senators. Besides, isn't the whole point of the new Conservative movement to give long silent conservative voices the chance to speak out about their views, whatever those views might be? Most might not agree with Demint's decision, but it's still his decision to make, and he'll suffer whatever consequences result from it. Personally, I think he has a lot of sand for making a statettment like that, and I would vote for him if I could, with that being part of the reason.
Upon reflection, the boycott of CPAC is a minor issue, and is therefore a distraction. DeMint might not speak there, but that won't stop him from using the senate floor as his forum, or any of the wildly successful conservative opinion shows on Fox News, or for that matter, whatever liberal TV talk shows invite him on (though I don't know why they would).
Remember, people, this isn't about the gays, or any one particular group. This is about the country as a whole, and one boycott cannot be used to completely derail every other issue on the table. Keep your eyes on the prize, fellow tin-foil-hat-wearers. Don't be distracted!
A way for me to voice my thoughts on all manner of topics from Politics to pizza.
Showing posts with label Traditional Values. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Traditional Values. Show all posts
Sunday, January 23, 2011
Monday, January 17, 2011
Teenagers: Stupid when I was one, Stupid now that I'm Not
That Mr. Guy has an interesting post that he picked up via The Other McCain, involving two teenagers that have been charged with a crime for making a fake Facebook profile involving another student and posting lewd messages, including "as many of you know, I'm a huge whore". An excerpt from the news article in question states the following:
Two Florida girls are facing cyberstalking charges for allegedly creating a fake Facebook profile in the name of a fellow high school student and placing obscene photos on the page . . .
[O]ne of the suspects, Taylor Wynn, 16 . . . admitted creating two fake Facebook pages “as a joke because she thought it would be funny.” Wynn said she was once friends with the unnamed victim, “but they do not like each other now.”
Wynn told probers that a second girl, McKenzie Barker, 15, created the image showing the victim’s head atop the naked body. Wynn reportedly copped to placing a photo of an adult male’s erect penis “by the victim’s face” . . .
[T]he victim . . . told a deputy that she had been subjected to “numerous incidents of teasing and ridicule” as a result of the Facebook hoax. One of the fake pages . . . included an assortment of disparaging comments, including an “About Me” claim that, “As you may know, I am a huge whore. I love dick so much.”
The two students claim that it was just a prank, yet now they're being charged with cyberstalking. The article does not say whether they will serve any time, or what their punishment will be at all, but I'm hoping the shame and guilt is enough to at least make these two think about what they've done and change their behavior quickly while they're still young enough to do something about it.
Two Florida girls are facing cyberstalking charges for allegedly creating a fake Facebook profile in the name of a fellow high school student and placing obscene photos on the page . . .
[O]ne of the suspects, Taylor Wynn, 16 . . . admitted creating two fake Facebook pages “as a joke because she thought it would be funny.” Wynn said she was once friends with the unnamed victim, “but they do not like each other now.”
Wynn told probers that a second girl, McKenzie Barker, 15, created the image showing the victim’s head atop the naked body. Wynn reportedly copped to placing a photo of an adult male’s erect penis “by the victim’s face” . . .
[T]he victim . . . told a deputy that she had been subjected to “numerous incidents of teasing and ridicule” as a result of the Facebook hoax. One of the fake pages . . . included an assortment of disparaging comments, including an “About Me” claim that, “As you may know, I am a huge whore. I love dick so much.”
The two students claim that it was just a prank, yet now they're being charged with cyberstalking. The article does not say whether they will serve any time, or what their punishment will be at all, but I'm hoping the shame and guilt is enough to at least make these two think about what they've done and change their behavior quickly while they're still young enough to do something about it.
Labels:
Culture War,
cyberstalking,
Traditional Values
Sunday, January 2, 2011
Some Solutions to Some of our Most Difficult Problems
A friend of mine recently complained about my blog not offering up solutions to the problems I bring to light here every few days. So, per his advice, I've started posting some. Here's a solution to the gun control and airline security problems we face, courtesy of Archie Bunker of All in the Family:
As for the economy, here is a solution, brought to light by the Great Communicator, President Ronald Wilson Reagan:
And as an added bonus, here's the SAME SOLUTION brought about by a left of center president, Mr. John Fitzgerald Kennedy:
the website www.parentalrights.org offers a solution in the form of a constitutional amendment called the Parental Rights Amendment.
So there you have it, fellow tin-foil-hat wearers. Solutions to some of the most important problems of our day.
Feedback always welcome
As for the economy, here is a solution, brought to light by the Great Communicator, President Ronald Wilson Reagan:
And as an added bonus, here's the SAME SOLUTION brought about by a left of center president, Mr. John Fitzgerald Kennedy:
the website www.parentalrights.org offers a solution in the form of a constitutional amendment called the Parental Rights Amendment.
So there you have it, fellow tin-foil-hat wearers. Solutions to some of the most important problems of our day.
Feedback always welcome
Labels:
Family Values,
Ronald Reagan,
Traditional Values
Where Have all the Heroes Gone?
I just recently read Biill O'Reilly's review of the movie "True Grit", a remake of the John Wayne classic of the same name. I haven't seen the movie yet, but if O'Reilly's assessment is at all accurate, then we in America are suffering from a distinct shortage of heroic icons to look up to. Apparently the main lead, played by Wayne in the original and by Jeff Bridges in the remake, is a hard drinking U.S. Marshal who, despite his shortcomings, is able to uphold some semblance of law and order in the Wild West, and help a young girl avenge the death of her father at the hands of some gang of desperadoes. John Wayne was and still is a hero in the eyes of many people belonging to my parents' and grandparents' generations. He is even a hero in the eyes of some of my own generation. Those who appreciate the past, mostly, and can see beyond the idea that that person is "passe" because he starred in "old movies".
Yet where are our heroes today? The world today is far different than it was fifty years ago, as many belonging to previous generations can no doubt attest. Looking around, you could probably see the difference if you only looked hard enough. In fact, you need look no further than Hollywood to see how much the world (or at least the country) has changed since our parents were kids.
When they were young, they had a clear representation of who their heroes were. Whether it be their parents, another relative, a sports figure, or even a superhero like Superman or Green Hornet. Back in those days, Hollywood produced all manner of genuine heroes for kids to look up to, from the Lone Ranger to Bob Kane's Batman (adapted from the comics of the time), or the aforementioned Green Hornet, who did the right thing in spite of being labeled a criminal (unjustly) by the local law enforcement. As O'Reilly says in his article regarding the remake of True Grit, we as Americans had a clearer set of boundaries back then. It was easy to find heroes, because we just looked for people who tried to emphasize the good in life over the shortcomings. Not to mention, in those days, when the family wasn't under constant assault by those who would see it destroyed, children could simply look to their father or mother to find someone worthy of admiration.
Those people are harder to find today. Not impossible, but certainly harder to find. Today children have no real sense of who their heroes are, in my view, because so may of our traditional boundaries have been crossed, and the "outrageous" bar continues to rise higher and higher while other bars, such as the education and accomplishment bars, continue to be lowered. Comic books, for example, continue to become more "gritty" and "realistic" in order to appeal to an audience who wants things to be "believable". There is still, and always will be, an element of the fantastic to them, as there was in the Golden and Silver Ages of comics, but for the most part the gleaming "shining city on a hill" that heroes were in the past has given way to "heroes are no different than you or I."
This is not to say that one needs some sort of elaborate, physics defying superpower or a Domino mask to be a hero. As we saw in the aftermath of September 11th, the National Guard, as well as the New York Fire and Police departments, proved that heroes do still exist today, and risk their lives daily in service to others. My lament, however, comes from the idea that such examples are few and far between in today's world. Back to my earlier assessment involving Hollywood, it seems that what once defined a hero fifty years ago no longer does so in the eyes of the entertainment industry. We hear all day long about the shortcomings of so many of our Hollywood icons, like Lindsay Lohan, Charlie Sheen, and others, that we forget that it wasn't always this way. Once upon a time, I seem to remember Charlton Heston in a film telling the epic story of the Ten Commandments. What happened, I wonder, to that Hollywood, that has been replaced by a Hollywood that seems to focus now on making films that try to break as many Commandments as possible as quickly as possible, as many times as possible?
That being said, most of you probably think by now that I don't believe their ARE any real heroes in today's world, but that simply isn't true. I believe that heroes still exist, though like true heroes they don't seek recognition for what they do. The U.S. military, by and large, is full of people like that, as are the aforementioned police and fire departments. And let's not forget historical figures. Martin Luther King is a hero to may. Not just blacks, either, but people of all walks of life, because of his message of a color blind society, which I believe we have largely achieved since his death.
Ordinarily I'd go on and on about how the Founders were heroes as well. People who risked everything, their "lives, fortunes, and sacred honor" to live their own lives according to their own destiny, but to those who read this blog, that very likely goes without saying.
I suppose that the point I'm trying to make by rambling on like this is simply that heroes are not born. They're made. Heroes are people who have the strength to stand by their principals without regard for what others might think. In that context, there are heroes made every day. The American people attempting to stop the race toward socialism in this country is one such example of that kind of heroism, as future generations will likely come to believe.
So after all this, what is the answer to the question that makes up the title of this post? Quite simply, heroes haven't gone anywhere. It's simply the type of people who exhibit heroics that have changed. No more do we need to look toward someone in spandex tights and a cape to see true heroism, because it's all around us, if only we have the eyes to recognize it for what it is.
Yet where are our heroes today? The world today is far different than it was fifty years ago, as many belonging to previous generations can no doubt attest. Looking around, you could probably see the difference if you only looked hard enough. In fact, you need look no further than Hollywood to see how much the world (or at least the country) has changed since our parents were kids.
When they were young, they had a clear representation of who their heroes were. Whether it be their parents, another relative, a sports figure, or even a superhero like Superman or Green Hornet. Back in those days, Hollywood produced all manner of genuine heroes for kids to look up to, from the Lone Ranger to Bob Kane's Batman (adapted from the comics of the time), or the aforementioned Green Hornet, who did the right thing in spite of being labeled a criminal (unjustly) by the local law enforcement. As O'Reilly says in his article regarding the remake of True Grit, we as Americans had a clearer set of boundaries back then. It was easy to find heroes, because we just looked for people who tried to emphasize the good in life over the shortcomings. Not to mention, in those days, when the family wasn't under constant assault by those who would see it destroyed, children could simply look to their father or mother to find someone worthy of admiration.
Those people are harder to find today. Not impossible, but certainly harder to find. Today children have no real sense of who their heroes are, in my view, because so may of our traditional boundaries have been crossed, and the "outrageous" bar continues to rise higher and higher while other bars, such as the education and accomplishment bars, continue to be lowered. Comic books, for example, continue to become more "gritty" and "realistic" in order to appeal to an audience who wants things to be "believable". There is still, and always will be, an element of the fantastic to them, as there was in the Golden and Silver Ages of comics, but for the most part the gleaming "shining city on a hill" that heroes were in the past has given way to "heroes are no different than you or I."
This is not to say that one needs some sort of elaborate, physics defying superpower or a Domino mask to be a hero. As we saw in the aftermath of September 11th, the National Guard, as well as the New York Fire and Police departments, proved that heroes do still exist today, and risk their lives daily in service to others. My lament, however, comes from the idea that such examples are few and far between in today's world. Back to my earlier assessment involving Hollywood, it seems that what once defined a hero fifty years ago no longer does so in the eyes of the entertainment industry. We hear all day long about the shortcomings of so many of our Hollywood icons, like Lindsay Lohan, Charlie Sheen, and others, that we forget that it wasn't always this way. Once upon a time, I seem to remember Charlton Heston in a film telling the epic story of the Ten Commandments. What happened, I wonder, to that Hollywood, that has been replaced by a Hollywood that seems to focus now on making films that try to break as many Commandments as possible as quickly as possible, as many times as possible?
That being said, most of you probably think by now that I don't believe their ARE any real heroes in today's world, but that simply isn't true. I believe that heroes still exist, though like true heroes they don't seek recognition for what they do. The U.S. military, by and large, is full of people like that, as are the aforementioned police and fire departments. And let's not forget historical figures. Martin Luther King is a hero to may. Not just blacks, either, but people of all walks of life, because of his message of a color blind society, which I believe we have largely achieved since his death.
Ordinarily I'd go on and on about how the Founders were heroes as well. People who risked everything, their "lives, fortunes, and sacred honor" to live their own lives according to their own destiny, but to those who read this blog, that very likely goes without saying.
I suppose that the point I'm trying to make by rambling on like this is simply that heroes are not born. They're made. Heroes are people who have the strength to stand by their principals without regard for what others might think. In that context, there are heroes made every day. The American people attempting to stop the race toward socialism in this country is one such example of that kind of heroism, as future generations will likely come to believe.
So after all this, what is the answer to the question that makes up the title of this post? Quite simply, heroes haven't gone anywhere. It's simply the type of people who exhibit heroics that have changed. No more do we need to look toward someone in spandex tights and a cape to see true heroism, because it's all around us, if only we have the eyes to recognize it for what it is.
Labels:
Culture War,
Founding Fathers,
Superheroes,
Traditional Values
Saturday, January 1, 2011
Planned Parenthood Exposes Their True Colors...Again
Many who read this should know by now that I absolutely despise the organization known as Planned Parenthood. I'm not even sure why they're taken seriously by anyone anymore, really, after all the exposure their agenda has been getting in the new media by bloggers such as myself. Well, fellow tin-foil-hat-wearers, they're at it again, once again usurping parental authority under the guise of providing education and advice. An article headlined Planned Parenthood Launches 'Social Change Initiative' to Teach Parents how to Educate Children About Sex, Including Masturbation and Homosexuality goes into some detail about the procedure, which, when you get right down to it, is basically PP (hehe) telling parents that they're too stupid to teach their own kids about the birds, the bees, and the coconut trees, so they're going to do it for them. Well, what did you expect from an organization that was founded by a Hitler-idolizing baby killer who thought Eugenics was a good idea? Not much, I hope.
But enough about Sanger, and back to the important thing, the article: Here's a few highlights:
Specifically, Planned Parenthood’s Web site announced the group is preparing to launch a nationwide “social change initiative” to end the “stigma and shame about sex” in American culture. The project aims to teach parents and caregivers how to educate children about sex — from birth. And it recommends telling teenagers about masturbation, oral sex and “where to go for help to prepare to be sexually active.”
Yes, you read that right. FROM BIRTH! The article goes on to state Planned Parenthood's position that babies are interested in sex from pretty much the moment they pop out of mommy's womb. Well, I don't know about you folks, but I was more interested in getting a bottle and a nap than I was at learning "what goes where". That didn't come up until I was about eight or nine, and that was because THEY brought it up, not me.
Note also that they desire to teach children "Where to go to prepare for becoming sexually active." Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't there only be one place a child should go to prepare for that sort of thing? I think so. They're called...parents or something, right? Yeah, that's it.
Another highlight from the article that proves they're trying to usurp parental authority yet again:
The initiative is geared to parents and caregivers of children aged 8 to 18. In the four pilot states, parents were invited to attend workshops where they received Planned Parenthood’s guide to “Sex Ed for Parents, Real Life. Real Talk.” The events were held at different community venues, including schools, churches, social services facilities and libraries.
So it's not just parents, but all types of legal guardians that they want to subvert. Grandparents, aunts, uncles, foster parents, you name it. The language used here is more than a little scary, as it completely undermines the family structure, which as we all know is something Planned Parenthood has been after the destruction of since their founding in 1913.
Spread the word, patriots. Things like this can't go unanswered! let's fight back and push Planned Parenthood into the dustbin of history! Full article here.
Continuing to Fight the Good Fight.
But enough about Sanger, and back to the important thing, the article: Here's a few highlights:
Specifically, Planned Parenthood’s Web site announced the group is preparing to launch a nationwide “social change initiative” to end the “stigma and shame about sex” in American culture. The project aims to teach parents and caregivers how to educate children about sex — from birth. And it recommends telling teenagers about masturbation, oral sex and “where to go for help to prepare to be sexually active.”
Yes, you read that right. FROM BIRTH! The article goes on to state Planned Parenthood's position that babies are interested in sex from pretty much the moment they pop out of mommy's womb. Well, I don't know about you folks, but I was more interested in getting a bottle and a nap than I was at learning "what goes where". That didn't come up until I was about eight or nine, and that was because THEY brought it up, not me.
Note also that they desire to teach children "Where to go to prepare for becoming sexually active." Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't there only be one place a child should go to prepare for that sort of thing? I think so. They're called...parents or something, right? Yeah, that's it.
Another highlight from the article that proves they're trying to usurp parental authority yet again:
The initiative is geared to parents and caregivers of children aged 8 to 18. In the four pilot states, parents were invited to attend workshops where they received Planned Parenthood’s guide to “Sex Ed for Parents, Real Life. Real Talk.” The events were held at different community venues, including schools, churches, social services facilities and libraries.
So it's not just parents, but all types of legal guardians that they want to subvert. Grandparents, aunts, uncles, foster parents, you name it. The language used here is more than a little scary, as it completely undermines the family structure, which as we all know is something Planned Parenthood has been after the destruction of since their founding in 1913.
Spread the word, patriots. Things like this can't go unanswered! let's fight back and push Planned Parenthood into the dustbin of history! Full article here.
Continuing to Fight the Good Fight.
Labels:
Abortion,
Freedom,
Planned Parenthood,
Traditional Values
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)