For those of you who attended public school indoctrination centers, the Whigs were a political party that existed from the founding of the nation in 1789 to just prior to the beginnings of the Civil War. The Whig party, originally a party based in many principals which are today called conservative, fell out of favor with the American people in the 1880s, and faded into obscurity with the rise of the anti-slavery Republicans, who elected the illustrious Abraham Lincoln to office just in time to lead the nation in a time of great crisis and division.
Does any of that above sound a little familiar? It does to me. We all know the political climate these days is anything but calm, with unemployment sky high, with a POTUS who acts more like Louis the 14th and a First Lady who acts more like Marie Antoinette. Let's count down the similarities, shall we?
1. National discontent and division. Obama has done more to divide this nation than any other president since James Buchanan refused to acknowledge or address the secession of the southern states during his term in office. The difference is that Obama has been dividing us on ideological lines rather than geographical, by silencing any opposition to his statist agenda, or at least attempting to.
2. National uncertainty. While there is always a certain degree of uncertainty in the nation at any given time, now it is at an all time high thanks to the recession, which is fast becoming a depression, and other disputes, such as the insecurity of the southern border with Mexico, is leading many to question as never before the relationship between the people and the government who is supposed to serve there interests above all others.
3. A new political movement rising. the TEA party coming to be has given me much to think about in terms of a potential third party. While historically third party candidates lose big (even Teddy Roosevelt lost his bid for a third term, despite his popularity at the time), when the republican party rose in the 1800s, there was already so much discontent with the Whigs that many former Whigs became Republicans, the Whigs themselves having become nothing more than "me-too" Democrats, which brings us to...
4. No discernable difference between the parties. There does not seem to be, up until recently at least, any discernable difference between the current Democratic and Republican Parties. Many Republicans simply go along with, or worse, actually subscribe to, today's Democratic Party and their socialistic principals. If you don't believe me, look at Linsday Graham-nesty or Olympia Snow Job. Not exactly standard bearers for the Conservative point of view.
So back to the original point: Is the Democratic Party facing the same fate as the Whigs? They may be, is my assessment. Many of the same crises that the Whigs faced, the Democrats are now facing. Admittedly, the Dems aren't facing slavery as an issue, but they are having to carry the weight of Obamacare on their backs, which essentially confines the nation and its people to debt slavery, so in a way I suppose they ARE dealing with it after all. Also, illegal immigration has been compared to slavery by Glenn Beck, in that they're "doing the jobs Americans won't do", just as slaves were "doing the jobs that white men wouldn't do."
They say history repeats itself, and we may in fact be repeating several eras at once, the Civil War era only one amongst many.
Continuing to fight the Good Fight
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Monday, August 16, 2010
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
They May Have Won the Battle...
...But we will win the war.
Today a federal rogue judge declared California's vote in favor of Proposition 8 unconstitutional. While I am disheartened by this ruling, it was not all together unexpected. I can't remember where I saw the story, but I remember reading on the net that the case went before one of the only two openly gay federal judges on the bench. Am I angered by the ruling? Yes. Am I upset? You bet your bottom dollar, friend. Am I surprised? No. Likewise I am not discouraged.
For the first few months of the American Revolution, George Washington lost every single battle with the British and their Hessian allies. Yet he was victorious in the end, as we traditionalists shall be. I had a thought after reading the story, which comes from Legal Insurrection, and that is "what about all the other states that have passed these kinds of laws protecting the sacred nature of marriage?" Indeed, are all of those laws unconstitutional now as well? And what kind of authority does this give a federal judge via the new precedent set by this ruling? What, if anything, can a judge NOT overrule if he can overrule the votes of millions of Californians?
The notion that the judge is gay has no bearing on my feelings about this ruling, for those of you who might think I'm just a bible-thumping homophobic. If you do think that, you're wrong, and though you can think it all you want, it won't make it true. Marriage is, as I mentioned earlier, sacred, and should stay that way. Call me what you will, but I will not abandon a cornerstone of civilization just because some limp-wristed dandies are whining about how unfair life is.
Continuing to Fight the Good Fight.
Today a federal rogue judge declared California's vote in favor of Proposition 8 unconstitutional. While I am disheartened by this ruling, it was not all together unexpected. I can't remember where I saw the story, but I remember reading on the net that the case went before one of the only two openly gay federal judges on the bench. Am I angered by the ruling? Yes. Am I upset? You bet your bottom dollar, friend. Am I surprised? No. Likewise I am not discouraged.
For the first few months of the American Revolution, George Washington lost every single battle with the British and their Hessian allies. Yet he was victorious in the end, as we traditionalists shall be. I had a thought after reading the story, which comes from Legal Insurrection, and that is "what about all the other states that have passed these kinds of laws protecting the sacred nature of marriage?" Indeed, are all of those laws unconstitutional now as well? And what kind of authority does this give a federal judge via the new precedent set by this ruling? What, if anything, can a judge NOT overrule if he can overrule the votes of millions of Californians?
The notion that the judge is gay has no bearing on my feelings about this ruling, for those of you who might think I'm just a bible-thumping homophobic. If you do think that, you're wrong, and though you can think it all you want, it won't make it true. Marriage is, as I mentioned earlier, sacred, and should stay that way. Call me what you will, but I will not abandon a cornerstone of civilization just because some limp-wristed dandies are whining about how unfair life is.
Continuing to Fight the Good Fight.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
The Ragheads Gain a Foothold
Yes, the Muslims have gained a foothold in New York, as we all suspected might happen with the Bagel and Lox Jew Michael Bloomberg at the helm. Why do I call him a Bagel and Lox Jew, you ask? Well, simply put, because he insults and demeans his own faith by allowing this monstrosity to go ahead with little challenge. Check this video I found on The Right Site. It details three things most people don't know about the so-called Religion of Peace.
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Headhunting Mexicans Loose in our Land
This will probably be the first post I ever make in this blog lately that has nothing to do with the Commissar in Chief, all though it does have something to do with his latest debacle, the illegal immigration problem. Via Fuzzy's Dad at Musings of a Vast Right Winger: MAInfo is posting a tweet being sent out that offers a cool million for Joe Arpaio's head on a plate. How will the LSM react to this? I think we all know. I can already hear the chirping of the crickets.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
The Cracks are Showing
Apparently the cracks are showing in the Left's supposed death grip on American television. This ad was seen on, get this, COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMAN! Someone was DEFINITELY asleep at the switch. Apparently the commie censors that work there aren't earning their paychecks. Fine by me, though. Help this ad go viral! It's awesome!
Monday, July 26, 2010
Harry Reid at it Again
Harry Reid’s Push To Nationalize ALL Cop/Firemen Unions
July 20, 2010 By 5 Comments
Senate Democrat Majority Leader Harry Reid is quietly trying to nationalize rules governing every police, fire and first responder union in the nation. Through the benignly named Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act (H.R.413) Reid wants all first responders represented by collective bargaining rules emanating from Washington D.C. Naturally he thinks that it is necessary as a matter of national security.
Reid is pushing this monstrosity as a major sop to his union supporters who will greatly benefit from nationalized rules for police and fire unions. This plan would replace with federal rules all state laws on collective bargaining between state and local governments and their first responder unions and would greatly empower unions to dictate pay scales and benefits on a national level.
Imagine the loss of control that local governments will face when first responder unions no longer have to deal with local rules and laws but can force a federal one-size-fits-all style rule on all local governments. Local governments will no longer be able to determine pay scales and benefits and will lose control of their own ability to budget. Reid’s plan will also completely remove the ability of voters to have any say in local matters as a top down control from Washington will rule the day where it concerns local police, fire and other first responders.
Also remember, if a local government wants to fire a policeman or fireman they now have to deal with local laws and home-based unions. If H.R.413 passes no local government will be able to fire a cop or fireman without appealing to the federal government, a source far, far removed from the local area and a source completely unfamiliar with the needs and interests of that local area.
Unfortunately, there is a large contingent of Republicans supporting this nanny state, big government take over. Many think that what they are doing is leveling the playing field for all first responders and setting rules that can govern them equally. In this age of terrorism when our first responders are so important it almost makes sense. After all, wouldn’t it be smart to have our first responders treated regularly across the nation so that we can rely on them for their services?
It almost makes sense. That is until you think about it harder.
In truth this law will wildly inflate the costs of our police and fire protection to state and local governments. With a nationalized set of rules the high costs of large governments will be visited on the smallest, first responders will no longer be under any local control at all, union bosses will gain outsized powers to control local government budgets and costs will soar as a result. And who can’t imagine this is the first step on the road to a national fire department, a national police force or other such bloated country-wide force controlled by politicians in Washington D.C. And imagine the soaring costs of court cases as these union disputes become federal cases in every instance.
H.R.413 also outrageously violates the most basic tenet of American politics: local control. This is the worst example of statism, one that must be defeated.
Conservatives need to tell their Representatives to drop their co-sponsorship of this un-American attempt to nationalize our police and fire departments. After all, Big Labor is keen to force this bill through Congress this session. If Big Labor is hot on this one, how can any Republican in good conscience support this thing?
Republican Co-Sponsors
- Rep. Judy Biggert [R, IL-13]
- Rep. Brian Bilbray [R, CA-50]
- Rep. Vern Buchanan [R, FL-13]
- Rep. Dan Burton [R, IN-5]
- Rep. David Camp [R, MI-4]
- Rep. Shelley Capito [R, WV-2]
- Rep. Geoff Davis [R, KY-4]
- Rep. Charles Dent [R, PA-15]
- Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart [R, FL-21]
- Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart [R, FL-25]
- Rep. John Duncan [R, TN-2]
- Rep. Jo Ann Emerson [R, MO-8]
- Rep. Elton Gallegly [R, CA-24]
- Rep. Jim Gerlach [R, PA-6]
- Rep. Samuel Graves [R, MO-6]
- Rep. Duncan Hunter [R, CA-52]
- Rep. Timothy Johnson [R, IL-15]
- Rep. Walter Jones [R, NC-3]
- Rep. Peter King [R, NY-3]
- Rep. Mark Kirk [R, IL-10]
- Rep. Leonard Lance [R, NJ-7]
- Rep. Steven LaTourette [R, OH-14]
- Rep. Frank LoBiondo [R, NJ-2]
- Rep. Thaddeus McCotter [R, MI-11]
- Rep. John McHugh [R, NY-23]
- Rep. Candice Miller [R, MI-10]
- Rep. Tim Murphy [R, PA-18]
- Rep. Thomas Petri [R, WI-6]
- Rep. Todd Platts [R, PA-19]
- Rep. Ted Poe [R, TX-2]
- Rep. Dennis Rehberg [R, MT-0]
- Rep. Dave Reichert [R, WA-8]
- Rep. Michael Rogers [R, MI-8]
- Rep. Thomas Rooney [R, FL-16]
- Rep. Peter Roskam [R, IL-6]
- Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen [R, FL-18]
- Rep. Paul Ryan [R, WI-1]
- Rep. Timothy Ryan [D, OH-17]
- Rep. Aaron Schock [R, IL-18]
- Rep. John Shimkus [R, IL-19]
- Rep. William Shuster [R, PA-9]
- Rep. John Sullivan [R, OK-1]
- Rep. Lee Terry [R, NE-2]
- Rep. Todd Tiahrt [R, KS-4]
- Rep. Patrick Tiberi [R, OH-12]
- Rep. Michael Turner [R, OH-3]
- Rep. Frederick Upton [R, MI-6]
- Rep. Zach Wamp [R, TN-3]
- Rep. Edward Whitfield [R, KY-1]
- Rep. Donald Young [R, AK-0]
Democrat Co-Sponsors
- Main Sponsor: Dale Kildee [D, MI]
- Rep. Gary Ackerman [D, NY-5]
- Rep. John Adler [D, NJ-3]
- Rep. Jason Altmire [D, PA-4]
- Rep. Robert Andrews [D, NJ-1]
- Rep. Michael Arcuri [D, NY-24]
- Rep. Joe Baca [D, CA-43]
- Rep. Tammy Baldwin [D, WI-2]
- Rep. John Barrow [D, GA-12]
- Rep. Melissa Bean [D, IL-8]
- Rep. Shelley Berkley [D, NV-1]
- Rep. Howard Berman [D, CA-28]
- Rep. Robert Berry [D, AR-1]
- Rep. Sanford Bishop [D, GA-2]
- Rep. Timothy Bishop [D, NY-1]
- Rep. Earl Blumenauer [D, OR-3]
- Rep. Dan Boren [D, OK-2]
- Rep. Leonard Boswell [D, IA-3]
- Rep. Robert Brady [D, PA-1]
- Rep. Bruce Braley [D, IA-1]
- Rep. Corrine Brown [D, FL-3]
- Rep. Lois Capps [D, CA-23]
- Rep. Michael Capuano [D, MA-8]
- Rep. Dennis Cardoza [D, CA-18]
- Rep. Russ Carnahan [D, MO-3]
- Rep. Christopher Carney [D, PA-10]
- Rep. Ben Chandler [D, KY-6]
- Rep. Judy Chu [D, CA-32]
- Rep. Yvette Clarke [D, NY-11]
- Rep. William Clay [D, MO-1]
- Rep. Emanuel Cleaver [D, MO-5]
- Rep. Steve Cohen [D, TN-9]
- Rep. Gerald Connolly [D, VA-11]
- Rep. John Conyers [D, MI-14]
- Rep. Jim Cooper [D, TN-5]
- Rep. Jerry Costello [D, IL-12]
- Rep. Joe Courtney [D, CT-2]
- Rep. Henry Cuellar [D, TX-28]
- Rep. Elijah Cummings [D, MD-7]
- Rep. Kathleen Dahlkemper [D, PA-3]
- Rep. Lincoln Davis [D, TN-4]
- Rep. Artur Davis [D, AL-7]
- Rep. Danny Davis [D, IL-7]
- Rep. Diana DeGette [D, CO-1]
- Rep. William Delahunt [D, MA-10]
- Rep. Rosa DeLauro [D, CT-3]
- Rep. Norman Dicks [D, WA-6]
- Rep. John Dingell [D, MI-15]
- Rep. Joe Donnelly [D, IN-2]
- Rep. Michael Doyle [D, PA-14]
- Rep. Steve Driehaus [D, OH-1]
- Rep. Keith Ellison [D, MN-5]
- Rep. Brad Ellsworth [D, IN-8]
- Rep. Eliot Engel [D, NY-17]
- Rep. Anna Eshoo [D, CA-14]
- Rep. Sam Farr [D, CA-17]
- Rep. Bob Filner [D, CA-51]
- Rep. John Garamendi [D, CA-10]
- Rep. Gabrielle Giffords [D, AZ-8]
- Rep. Charles Gonzalez [D, TX-20]
- Rep. Barton Gordon [D, TN-6]
- Rep. Alan Grayson [D, FL-8]
- Rep. Al Green [D, TX-9]
- Rep. Raymond Green [D, TX-29]
- Rep. Parker Griffith [D, AL-5]
- Rep. Raul Grijalva [D, AZ-7]
- Rep. Luis Gutiérrez [D, IL-4]
- Rep. John Hall [D, NY-19]
- Rep. Deborah Halvorson [D, IL-11]
- Rep. Phil Hare [D, IL-17]
- Rep. Alcee Hastings [D, FL-23]
- Rep. Martin Heinrich [D, NM-1]
- Rep. Brian Higgins [D, NY-27]
- Rep. Baron Hill [D, IN-9]
- Rep. Maurice Hinchey [D, NY-22]
- Rep. Mazie Hirono [D, HI-2]
- Rep. Paul Hodes [D, NH-2]
- Rep. Tim Holden [D, PA-17]
- Rep. Rush Holt [D, NJ-12]
- Rep. Jay Inslee [D, WA-1]
- Rep. Jesse Jackson [D, IL-2]
- Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee [D, TX-18]
- Rep. Henry Johnson [D, GA-4]
- Rep. Paul Kanjorski [D, PA-11]
- Rep. Marcy Kaptur [D, OH-9]
- Rep. Patrick Kennedy [D, RI-1]
- Rep. Ronald Kind [D, WI-3]
- Rep. Frank Kratovil [D, MD-1]
- Rep. Dennis Kucinich [D, OH-10]
- Rep. James Langevin [D, RI-2]
- Rep. Rick Larsen [D, WA-2]
- Rep. John Larson [D, CT-1]
- Rep. Barbara Lee [D, CA-9]
- Rep. Sander Levin [D, MI-12]
- Rep. John Lewis [D, GA-5]
- Rep. Daniel Lipinski [D, IL-3]
- Rep. David Loebsack [D, IA-2]
- Rep. Zoe Lofgren [D, CA-16]
- Rep. Nita Lowey [D, NY-18]
- Rep. Ben Luján [D, NM-3]
- Rep. Carolyn Maloney [D, NY-14]
- Rep. Jim Matheson [D, UT-2]
- Rep. Doris Matsui [D, CA-5]
- Rep. Carolyn McCarthy [D, NY-4]
- Rep. Betty McCollum [D, MN-4]
- Rep. James McDermott [D, WA-7]
- Rep. James McGovern [D, MA-3]
- Rep. Kendrick Meek [D, FL-17]
- Rep. Gregory Meeks [D, NY-6]
- Rep. Michael Michaud [D, ME-2]
- Rep. Bradley Miller [D, NC-13]
- Rep. George Miller [D, CA-7]
- Rep. Walter Minnick [D, ID-1]
- Rep. Gwen Moore [D, WI-4]
- Rep. Dennis Moore [D, KS-3]
- Rep. Christopher Murphy [D, CT-5]
- Rep. Patrick Murphy [D, PA-8]
- Rep. John Murtha [D, PA-12]
- Rep. Grace Napolitano [D, CA-38]
- Rep. Eleanor Norton [D, DC-0]
- Rep. James Oberstar [D, MN-8]
- Rep. John Olver [D, MA-1]
- Rep. Frank Pallone [D, NJ-6]
- Rep. William Pascrell [D, NJ-8]
- Rep. Edward Pastor [D, AZ-4]
- Rep. Donald Payne [D, NJ-10]
- Rep. Ed Perlmutter [D, CO-7]
- Rep. Gary Peters [D, MI-9]
- Rep. Collin Peterson [D, MN-7]
- Rep. Pedro Pierluisi [D, PR-0]
- Rep. Chellie Pingree [D, ME-1]
- Rep. Earl Pomeroy [D, ND-0]
- Rep. David Price [D, NC-4]
- Rep. Mike Quigley [D, IL-5]
- Rep. Nick Rahall [D, WV-3]
- Rep. Laura Richardson [D, CA-37]
- Rep. Ciro Rodriguez [D, TX-23]
- Rep. Mike Ross [D, AR-4]
- Rep. Steven Rothman [D, NJ-9]
- Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard [D, CA-34]
- Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger [D, MD-2]
- Rep. Bobby Rush [D, IL-1]
- Rep. Linda Sánchez [D, CA-39]
- Rep. John Sarbanes [D, MD-3]
- Rep. Janice Schakowsky [D, IL-9]
- Rep. Mark Schauer [D, MI-7]
- Rep. Adam Schiff [D, CA-29]
- Rep. Allyson Schwartz [D, PA-13]
- Rep. David Scott [D, GA-13]
- Rep. Robert Scott [D, VA-3]
- Rep. José Serrano [D, NY-16]
- Rep. Joe Sestak [D, PA-7]
- Rep. Carol Shea-Porter [D, NH-1]
- Rep. Brad Sherman [D, CA-27]
- Rep. Heath Shuler [D, NC-11]
- Rep. Albio Sires [D, NJ-13]
- Rep. Adam Smith [D, WA-9]
- Rep. Victor Snyder [D, AR-2]
- Rep. Zachary Space [D, OH-18]
- Rep. Jackie Speier [D, CA-12]
- Rep. Bart Stupak [D, MI-1]
- Rep. Betty Sutton [D, OH-13]
- Rep. John Tierney [D, MA-6]
- Rep. Paul Tonko [D, NY-21]
- Rep. Peter Visclosky [D, IN-1]
- Rep. Timothy Walz [D, MN-1]
- Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz [D, FL-20]
- Rep. Diane Watson [D, CA-33]
- Rep. Melvin Watt [D, NC-12]
- Rep. Henry Waxman [D, CA-30]
- Rep. Peter Welch [D, VT-0]
- Rep. Robert Wexler [D, FL-19]
- Rep. Lynn Woolsey [D, CA-6]
- Rep. David Wu [D, OR-1]
- Rep. John Yarmuth [D, KY-3]
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Captain America no Longer in Love with...America!?
As you all learned from a couple of posts ago, if you've been stopping by regularly, you will have known that I am a rather huge fan of Marvel's Captain America, AKA Steve Rogers. I describe my admiration for this heroic icon of a character at length in my post entitled "American Values: Whose Side are You On?". Those of you who know that post and have read it can then imagine my absolute elation at the idea of the Red White and Blue Avenger coming to the silver screen.
Can you also imagine my anger at what the director of the upcoming picture is doing to my favorite superhero? You'll be able to by the time I'm done here.
Via Hot Air it would seem that the leftists in Hollywood have found a new target for their touchy-feely "everyone is an American" One World Government bullshit. Now they're going after a blatantly American Icon when they decide to make Captain America less of a "flag waver". Excuse me, but his COSTUME IS THE AMERICAN FLAG!!!! How can you call someone less of a flag waver and yet have his COSTUME be modeled after the VERY THING you do not want him WAVING!? Michael Savage is right. Liberalism IS a mental disorder, and this is just another set of proof to go along with the mountain range of evidence.
This upsets me for two reasons:
1. Captain America, before he became the superhero he is today, was a frail weakling less than 100 lbs. in weight. Steve Rogers didn't originally want to be Captain America. He wanted to be Private Steve Rogers of the United States Military. The whole reason Rogers agreed to the experimental Super Soldier Serum experiment was so that he could SERVE HIS COUNTRY, despite being declared 4F. Unfit. He wanted to do his part to drive back the onslaught of Nazi agression. Captain America was, in the forties, created as a piece of propaganda, yes, but it was propaganda that GLORIFIED the ideals of America and the men and women who fight to protect those ideals every day. Now this moonbat director wants him to be less Jingoistic. Let's take a look at the definition of Jingoism, shall we?
Jingoism is defined as:bellicose chauvinism
Bellicose chauvinism. That's what this director thinks of people who are in love with their country and proud of it. If, according to this director, you wave the flag, respect our troops, and proudly display such affections, you are nothing more than a foreigner hating bigot. That's essentially what a jingoist is. Teddy Roosevelt was Jingoistic, btw.
Reason number 2: This spits in the face of every fighting veteran still alive today that has seen the horrors of World War II. The men who stormed the beaches at Normandy are having their deeds dragged through the mud, since Captain America was meant to glorify those very men.
Now, I'm not jumping the gun FULLY here. I just needed to get the initial rage off of my chest. For there is a force more powerful than hollywood that can turn back this tide of idiocy. No, I'm not talking about thousands upon thousands of patriotic Americans. I am speaking of one thing: Nerd Rage.
Seeing this story go viral will upset SO MANY fans of Captain America that there WILL be backlash if they go through with it. Trust me. As one of those fans, I have a unique perspective on the issue. I am also aware of the great Playstation Blackout of '09, wherein several thousand gamers expressed EXPONENTIAL levels of displeasure at being logged out of Playstation Network for a day. Imagine then,the influx of PATRIOTIC nerds, as well as collectors and artists, not to mention people like the average Joe Schmoe who just reads the comic. There WILL be backlash, mark my words.he comic for fun.
There is a storm coming, mark my words.
Can you also imagine my anger at what the director of the upcoming picture is doing to my favorite superhero? You'll be able to by the time I'm done here.
Via Hot Air it would seem that the leftists in Hollywood have found a new target for their touchy-feely "everyone is an American" One World Government bullshit. Now they're going after a blatantly American Icon when they decide to make Captain America less of a "flag waver". Excuse me, but his COSTUME IS THE AMERICAN FLAG!!!! How can you call someone less of a flag waver and yet have his COSTUME be modeled after the VERY THING you do not want him WAVING!? Michael Savage is right. Liberalism IS a mental disorder, and this is just another set of proof to go along with the mountain range of evidence.
This upsets me for two reasons:
1. Captain America, before he became the superhero he is today, was a frail weakling less than 100 lbs. in weight. Steve Rogers didn't originally want to be Captain America. He wanted to be Private Steve Rogers of the United States Military. The whole reason Rogers agreed to the experimental Super Soldier Serum experiment was so that he could SERVE HIS COUNTRY, despite being declared 4F. Unfit. He wanted to do his part to drive back the onslaught of Nazi agression. Captain America was, in the forties, created as a piece of propaganda, yes, but it was propaganda that GLORIFIED the ideals of America and the men and women who fight to protect those ideals every day. Now this moonbat director wants him to be less Jingoistic. Let's take a look at the definition of Jingoism, shall we?
Jingoism is defined as:bellicose chauvinism
Bellicose chauvinism. That's what this director thinks of people who are in love with their country and proud of it. If, according to this director, you wave the flag, respect our troops, and proudly display such affections, you are nothing more than a foreigner hating bigot. That's essentially what a jingoist is. Teddy Roosevelt was Jingoistic, btw.
Reason number 2: This spits in the face of every fighting veteran still alive today that has seen the horrors of World War II. The men who stormed the beaches at Normandy are having their deeds dragged through the mud, since Captain America was meant to glorify those very men.
Now, I'm not jumping the gun FULLY here. I just needed to get the initial rage off of my chest. For there is a force more powerful than hollywood that can turn back this tide of idiocy. No, I'm not talking about thousands upon thousands of patriotic Americans. I am speaking of one thing: Nerd Rage.
Seeing this story go viral will upset SO MANY fans of Captain America that there WILL be backlash if they go through with it. Trust me. As one of those fans, I have a unique perspective on the issue. I am also aware of the great Playstation Blackout of '09, wherein several thousand gamers expressed EXPONENTIAL levels of displeasure at being logged out of Playstation Network for a day. Imagine then,the influx of PATRIOTIC nerds, as well as collectors and artists, not to mention people like the average Joe Schmoe who just reads the comic. There WILL be backlash, mark my words.he comic for fun.
There is a storm coming, mark my words.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Conspiracy and Idiocy in Politics, Volume One
After listening to and watching several videos on Youtube throughout my latest traipsing through the internet community, I have decided to put together a little anthology. I run into so much idiocy as I wade through the jungle that is the modern media, that I decided to pay tribute to my favorite aspects of stupidity ever since I started paying attention in '08:
Number One: Bush can't open a door and the media goes nuts. Obama makes this many gaffs and only Fox and talk radio have the balls to report it, citing a double standard:
I guarantee you haven't seen all of those. And if you have, doesn't it make you cringe to know that the liberal media pretty much makes love to this moron every time he ties his shoes?
For our second bout of idiocy we turn to your favorite and mine, Vice President Joe "bite me" Biden:
And, for our third and final bout of idiocy, we turn to Conservatives4Palin, who originally posted the video of Obama's gaffes. They, an obviously pro-Sarah Palin website, brought this little gem to my attention just today:
We Won't Stand Down, We Will 'Refudiate': Exhibit A
By Sheya
How can I say this without offending anyone? I can’t. And frankly I don’t care if I do offend someone. The left, the media, and the entire national elite have gone mad, crazy, off their rockers.
Governor Palin sends a tweet and uses the word “refudiate” and bang! whack! every national and international media outlet goes into attack mode debating whether it’s a word or not. I am not going to pretend to know what the Governor's intentions were -- whether it was made on purpose or in error. Personally I believe it was intentional. The only reason the Mosque story got the attention it did today was as a result of this made-up controversy. She gets them every time.
But for the sake of this article let’s assume the Governor made a mistake. Newsflash: Governor Palin is a human being and she makes mistakes. We’re not a bunch of kooks who believe Governor Palin is the “Messiah”. At least her mistakes don’t leave the country trillions of dollars in debt.
So it was a mistake. Who the hell cares? By the outrage of the left you’d think that this was the first time a politician made a gaffe. Let’s examine the evidence, shall we:
“The time has changed for come.” (Barack Obama)
“Let me be absolutely clear, Israel is a strong friend of Israel’s.” (Barack Obama)
“I want to be very clear, we are resolved to halt the rise of [piracy] privacy.” (Barack Obama reading off a teleprompter)
“The reforms we seek, will bring greater competition, choice, savings and inefficiencies to our health care system.” (Barack Obama reading off a teleprompter)
“There is much to celebrate from the FBI’s 100 days" [years] . (Barack Obama reading off a teleprompter)
“I don’t know what the term is in Austrian.” (Barack Obama to an audience of Austrians who, of course, speak German)
Refers to Matt Lauer as “Tim” not once but at least three times during an interview with Matt Lauer. (Barack Obama)
Refers to a guy named Mr. Williams as “Mr. Walters.” (Barack Obama)
“...Here in St. Louis... I’m in Kansas City.” (Barack Obama during his own nomination convention)
“How’s it going, Sunshine?” (Barack Obama in Sunrise, Florida)
“Thank You, Sioux City.” (Barack Obama in Sioux Falls)
Reads the word “Corpsman” as “Corpse Man“ twice (Barack Obama reading off a teleprompter)
“I have now been in 57 states.” (Barack Obama)
"One of the things which is a HUGE advantage for America compared to countries like Europe" (Barack Obama)
"The members of our highest court are granted life tenure, often serving long after the Presidents who appointed them. And they are charged with the vital task of applying principles put to paper more than 20 centuries ago to some of the most difficult questions of our time". (Barack Obama in nominating Judge Sotomayor)
Wow. Going nuts over a conservative woman making what was in all honesty most likely just a typo on twitter? How desperate are these loons that they have to jump and scream every time Palin makes a comment they don't like? They know who she is, and they're bat shit scared of her. If this doesn't prove it, what does?
Number One: Bush can't open a door and the media goes nuts. Obama makes this many gaffs and only Fox and talk radio have the balls to report it, citing a double standard:
I guarantee you haven't seen all of those. And if you have, doesn't it make you cringe to know that the liberal media pretty much makes love to this moron every time he ties his shoes?
For our second bout of idiocy we turn to your favorite and mine, Vice President Joe "bite me" Biden:
And, for our third and final bout of idiocy, we turn to Conservatives4Palin, who originally posted the video of Obama's gaffes. They, an obviously pro-Sarah Palin website, brought this little gem to my attention just today:
We Won't Stand Down, We Will 'Refudiate': Exhibit A
By Sheya
How can I say this without offending anyone? I can’t. And frankly I don’t care if I do offend someone. The left, the media, and the entire national elite have gone mad, crazy, off their rockers.
Governor Palin sends a tweet and uses the word “refudiate” and bang! whack! every national and international media outlet goes into attack mode debating whether it’s a word or not. I am not going to pretend to know what the Governor's intentions were -- whether it was made on purpose or in error. Personally I believe it was intentional. The only reason the Mosque story got the attention it did today was as a result of this made-up controversy. She gets them every time.
But for the sake of this article let’s assume the Governor made a mistake. Newsflash: Governor Palin is a human being and she makes mistakes. We’re not a bunch of kooks who believe Governor Palin is the “Messiah”. At least her mistakes don’t leave the country trillions of dollars in debt.
So it was a mistake. Who the hell cares? By the outrage of the left you’d think that this was the first time a politician made a gaffe. Let’s examine the evidence, shall we:
“The time has changed for come.” (Barack Obama)
“Let me be absolutely clear, Israel is a strong friend of Israel’s.” (Barack Obama)
“I want to be very clear, we are resolved to halt the rise of [piracy] privacy.” (Barack Obama reading off a teleprompter)
“The reforms we seek, will bring greater competition, choice, savings and inefficiencies to our health care system.” (Barack Obama reading off a teleprompter)
“There is much to celebrate from the FBI’s 100 days" [years] . (Barack Obama reading off a teleprompter)
“I don’t know what the term is in Austrian.” (Barack Obama to an audience of Austrians who, of course, speak German)
Refers to Matt Lauer as “Tim” not once but at least three times during an interview with Matt Lauer. (Barack Obama)
Refers to a guy named Mr. Williams as “Mr. Walters.” (Barack Obama)
“...Here in St. Louis... I’m in Kansas City.” (Barack Obama during his own nomination convention)
“How’s it going, Sunshine?” (Barack Obama in Sunrise, Florida)
“Thank You, Sioux City.” (Barack Obama in Sioux Falls)
Reads the word “Corpsman” as “Corpse Man“ twice (Barack Obama reading off a teleprompter)
“I have now been in 57 states.” (Barack Obama)
"One of the things which is a HUGE advantage for America compared to countries like Europe" (Barack Obama)
"The members of our highest court are granted life tenure, often serving long after the Presidents who appointed them. And they are charged with the vital task of applying principles put to paper more than 20 centuries ago to some of the most difficult questions of our time". (Barack Obama in nominating Judge Sotomayor)
Wow. Going nuts over a conservative woman making what was in all honesty most likely just a typo on twitter? How desperate are these loons that they have to jump and scream every time Palin makes a comment they don't like? They know who she is, and they're bat shit scared of her. If this doesn't prove it, what does?
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Christianity: the Only Religion you can Hate with Impunity
Christianity: The Only Religion you can Hate With Impunity
I am and always have been a firm believer in religious principals. I am, like all other humans on the planet, fallible and a sinner, yet what separates me from certain human beings is that I believe that my transgressions are forgiven thanks to my devotion to the Savior, Jesus Christ, the son of God in Heaven. This does not mean that I consider myself better or superior to any other human on the planet. What it does mean, is that I have been given a chance at redemption through God’s Grace, and I will unshakably declare that to anyone who asks.
In the mind of some, this makes me a hateful bigot because of certain tenants within that faith, such as the Catholic church’s aversion to homosexuality, pedophilia, abortion, gay marriage, and a host of other hot button issues. Apparently it is narrow-minded and hateful to believe that these particular acts and practices are wrong, with feminists calling you against women’s rights if you oppose abortion, to the simple cry of RACIST or more appropriately BIGOT if you oppose, as I do, gay marriage and homosexuality. Now, of course, the practice of homosexuality will not go away, but that doesn’t mean I have to find it appropriate public behavior. Having standards in today’s world is among the highest crimes and misdemeanors of unwritten cultural law.
I bring this up because, yet again, the so-called “artistic” community has struck, using a piece of “art” erroneously entitled “Moral Values”, which consists of a painting of the Holy Bible (which version is not specified). Now, this would normally be a cause for the LEFT to be up in arms. I mean, after all, a Bible on public grounds is fast becoming a crime punishable by lynching, or worse, by Barbara Streisand. Cheap shots aside, the reason that the RIGHT is up in arms about this is because underneath the painting of the bible is painted the words “Warning: May impair judgment.” What, does this artist think herself some sort of anti-religious surgeon general, or something?
I make no apologies for the smart ass nature of those two remarks, by the way. Political correctness is no longer an effective filter for me, and shouldn’t be for anyone, really. But guess what would have happened if this had been a painting of the Quran? That’s right, boys and girls, the left would have been OUTRAGED at the very IDEA that someone would think that the tenants of Islam are somehow able to brainwash people into losing their sense of judgment. If only we could find out if that were true…oh, wait, it is. Those Maddrassas aren’t just for show, boys and girls.
The story comes from my local toilet rag, the Sacramento Bee, though admittedly it’s better than most newspapers out there. That’s right, I’m looking at you, New York Times. And saying that the Bee is better than the New York Times is like saying Al Sharpton is less racist than David Duke. And don’t go telling me Sharpton isn’t a racist either. You can have black skin and be racist. It’s true, I swear.
Now again, imagine if this had been a painting of the Quran with the same words. How much outrage do you think the left would have generated if that had been the case? A lot? That doesn’t even begin to describe it.
Still, this gives me cause for hope. A year ago a story like this wouldn’t have even been newsworthy, yet here it is in a widely read newspaper, admittedly only in one state, but it happens to be the most populous state in the country. Are we making a comeback to our old school principals? Signs like this tell me yes, we are, however, the indignant attitudes of the so-called “artist” who put this piece of trash up give me cause to believe also that much more work remains to be done before a reawakening of religious principals can occur. She is quoted as saying, in the article, “I came to the conclusion that there must be something about religious faith that renders people stupid.” Her exact words, I swear. Google the name Jeri Wyrick and you might find this very story online. I don’t know as I haven’t looked yet, but that’s beside the point.
The point is that in addition to this person being a moron, the justification for leaving it up is that only one person complained. Excuse me? Only one person complained so it’s okay to leave up a piece of anti-Christian art? How many times have Christmas displays had to undergo complete overhauls just because ONE person MIGHT have been offended off in some parallel universe somewhere? Huh? How many? DOZENS, that’s how many. At least.
Rant aside, this article was both informative and revealing. Revealing in the sense that it points out the stupidity of the leftist agenda to remove religion from the public square, and informative because it tells me that for Christianity to once again draw attention in the media beyond use of the phrase “religious right”, it must be creeping back into the forefront of our consciousness again. That would certainly be a welcome change. We have strayed far too long on the path away from God, and will only achieve greatness again when we deliver ourselves into His hands.
I know that last bit sounded preachy, but it’s still true. This I believe with all my might.
Continuing to Fight the Good Fight
UPDATE: I just read in TODAY'S version of the Bee that that garbage has been sold. Someone bought the thing for 500 bucks. Paltry sum where art is concerned. Apparently someone who shares the artists views decided to buy it. This now becomes a non-issue in the eyes of the media.
I am and always have been a firm believer in religious principals. I am, like all other humans on the planet, fallible and a sinner, yet what separates me from certain human beings is that I believe that my transgressions are forgiven thanks to my devotion to the Savior, Jesus Christ, the son of God in Heaven. This does not mean that I consider myself better or superior to any other human on the planet. What it does mean, is that I have been given a chance at redemption through God’s Grace, and I will unshakably declare that to anyone who asks.
In the mind of some, this makes me a hateful bigot because of certain tenants within that faith, such as the Catholic church’s aversion to homosexuality, pedophilia, abortion, gay marriage, and a host of other hot button issues. Apparently it is narrow-minded and hateful to believe that these particular acts and practices are wrong, with feminists calling you against women’s rights if you oppose abortion, to the simple cry of RACIST or more appropriately BIGOT if you oppose, as I do, gay marriage and homosexuality. Now, of course, the practice of homosexuality will not go away, but that doesn’t mean I have to find it appropriate public behavior. Having standards in today’s world is among the highest crimes and misdemeanors of unwritten cultural law.
I bring this up because, yet again, the so-called “artistic” community has struck, using a piece of “art” erroneously entitled “Moral Values”, which consists of a painting of the Holy Bible (which version is not specified). Now, this would normally be a cause for the LEFT to be up in arms. I mean, after all, a Bible on public grounds is fast becoming a crime punishable by lynching, or worse, by Barbara Streisand. Cheap shots aside, the reason that the RIGHT is up in arms about this is because underneath the painting of the bible is painted the words “Warning: May impair judgment.” What, does this artist think herself some sort of anti-religious surgeon general, or something?
I make no apologies for the smart ass nature of those two remarks, by the way. Political correctness is no longer an effective filter for me, and shouldn’t be for anyone, really. But guess what would have happened if this had been a painting of the Quran? That’s right, boys and girls, the left would have been OUTRAGED at the very IDEA that someone would think that the tenants of Islam are somehow able to brainwash people into losing their sense of judgment. If only we could find out if that were true…oh, wait, it is. Those Maddrassas aren’t just for show, boys and girls.
The story comes from my local toilet rag, the Sacramento Bee, though admittedly it’s better than most newspapers out there. That’s right, I’m looking at you, New York Times. And saying that the Bee is better than the New York Times is like saying Al Sharpton is less racist than David Duke. And don’t go telling me Sharpton isn’t a racist either. You can have black skin and be racist. It’s true, I swear.
Now again, imagine if this had been a painting of the Quran with the same words. How much outrage do you think the left would have generated if that had been the case? A lot? That doesn’t even begin to describe it.
Still, this gives me cause for hope. A year ago a story like this wouldn’t have even been newsworthy, yet here it is in a widely read newspaper, admittedly only in one state, but it happens to be the most populous state in the country. Are we making a comeback to our old school principals? Signs like this tell me yes, we are, however, the indignant attitudes of the so-called “artist” who put this piece of trash up give me cause to believe also that much more work remains to be done before a reawakening of religious principals can occur. She is quoted as saying, in the article, “I came to the conclusion that there must be something about religious faith that renders people stupid.” Her exact words, I swear. Google the name Jeri Wyrick and you might find this very story online. I don’t know as I haven’t looked yet, but that’s beside the point.
The point is that in addition to this person being a moron, the justification for leaving it up is that only one person complained. Excuse me? Only one person complained so it’s okay to leave up a piece of anti-Christian art? How many times have Christmas displays had to undergo complete overhauls just because ONE person MIGHT have been offended off in some parallel universe somewhere? Huh? How many? DOZENS, that’s how many. At least.
Rant aside, this article was both informative and revealing. Revealing in the sense that it points out the stupidity of the leftist agenda to remove religion from the public square, and informative because it tells me that for Christianity to once again draw attention in the media beyond use of the phrase “religious right”, it must be creeping back into the forefront of our consciousness again. That would certainly be a welcome change. We have strayed far too long on the path away from God, and will only achieve greatness again when we deliver ourselves into His hands.
I know that last bit sounded preachy, but it’s still true. This I believe with all my might.
Continuing to Fight the Good Fight
UPDATE: I just read in TODAY'S version of the Bee that that garbage has been sold. Someone bought the thing for 500 bucks. Paltry sum where art is concerned. Apparently someone who shares the artists views decided to buy it. This now becomes a non-issue in the eyes of the media.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
I Thought a Deck had only 52 Cards...
If the above holds true, then the left should have run out of Race Cards ages ago, yet they keep on coming. It's getting almost comical at this point. Now we have a formerly noble organization, the NAACP, coming out and denouncing the TEA Party as racist based on...Nothing. They produce no video, no news articles, no quotes, and no suspects in any alleged racial profiling or other illegal or immoral act. You know what this means?
They got NOTHIN'!!! Nothing at all, brothers and sisters. The NAACP is like a smaller version of the UN. A good idea in theory, but in practice a big disappointment. At the start the organization wasn't disappointing, as the issues they bring to the forefront were real issues back in the day. Now though, people know better, and so there is less call for an organization whose sole purpose is to stamp out racism wherever it resides. Apparently they don't yet realize that they've succeeded largely in what they set out to do.
Via Moonbattery and the O'Reilly Factor today, as well as the Glenn Beck Program, I came across a story that involves the NAACP denouncing the TEA party and the racist elements within. Read the full story here.
Honestly, these nimrods need to get a clue. We are not racist, all the violent acts that have been perpetrated in our name have been performed by crazy LEFTISTS or by people PRETENDING to be associated with us TEA Partiers. Someone needs to wake up and smell the fireworks. Really.
here's the REAL TEA Party, in my opinion described perfectly in a song by Krista Branch;
.
Also, as a shameless attempt to gain more traffic, Legal Insurrection has a take on this.
They got NOTHIN'!!! Nothing at all, brothers and sisters. The NAACP is like a smaller version of the UN. A good idea in theory, but in practice a big disappointment. At the start the organization wasn't disappointing, as the issues they bring to the forefront were real issues back in the day. Now though, people know better, and so there is less call for an organization whose sole purpose is to stamp out racism wherever it resides. Apparently they don't yet realize that they've succeeded largely in what they set out to do.
Via Moonbattery and the O'Reilly Factor today, as well as the Glenn Beck Program, I came across a story that involves the NAACP denouncing the TEA party and the racist elements within. Read the full story here.
Honestly, these nimrods need to get a clue. We are not racist, all the violent acts that have been perpetrated in our name have been performed by crazy LEFTISTS or by people PRETENDING to be associated with us TEA Partiers. Someone needs to wake up and smell the fireworks. Really.
here's the REAL TEA Party, in my opinion described perfectly in a song by Krista Branch;
.
Also, as a shameless attempt to gain more traffic, Legal Insurrection has a take on this.
Monday, July 12, 2010
Some Thoughts on Videos about the Commissar
Here's a list of interesting videos I found today while surfing at the library:
1. I am Israel, courtesy of Moonbattery:
2. A few videos from a site known as JoeDanMedia.com. First on the list, Parasite:
3. Next from Joe Dan Media, Freedom is Color Blind:
Our message is out, fellow-tin-foil-hat wearers. Let's keep it out there and keep it LOUD AND PROUD!!!!
1. I am Israel, courtesy of Moonbattery:
2. A few videos from a site known as JoeDanMedia.com. First on the list, Parasite:
3. Next from Joe Dan Media, Freedom is Color Blind:
Our message is out, fellow-tin-foil-hat wearers. Let's keep it out there and keep it LOUD AND PROUD!!!!
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Marvel Comics and American Values: Whose Side are You On?
Those of you who read this no doubt realize by the backdrop against my title that I am a fan of the great Sentinel of Liberty, Captain America. Ever since I was a kid I've been a fan of superheroes, like most geeks, nerds, and dweebs out there, but oddly enough, even before I started READING Captain America in earnest a few years ago, he was and still is my favorite comic book hero. He, and others at Marvel, created by comic giant Stan Lee, reinforced quite handily the values my mother and father taught me as a child about honesty, integrity, and justice for all (Cap's influence is especially responsible for my views on number 3).
A few years back, I attended MTI College of Business and Technology for a year in the hopes of gaining a "suck the money out of honest people" degree, otherwise known as a law degree. Fortunately I have since come to my senses and have decided to, like Cap, do some good with the gifts God has given me. What that is, remains to be seen. But I'm getting off track here. While I was at MTI, I had the opportunity, in my American History class, to do a homework assignment that allowed me to learn more about the Red White and Blue Avenger than I ever thought I'd have the chance to learn. We were supposed to come up with an idea involving how American values are reflected through history, and I chose Marvel Comics to be my guide through the process.
Oddly, though, it wasn't until Captain America's untimely (yet fortunately short-lived) death and the mourning period that followed that sparked my interest for this idea. Hearing on AOL news that Marvel had decided to gun down Cap on the steps of a federal courthouse, I was driven with an insatiable need to answer one single question: WHY?! Why would the editorial staff decide at such a crucial point in our history, with the country divided along political and ideological lines as it hadn't been since the Civil War, would Captain America's writers decide to shuffle him off this mortal coil? With a new sense of purpoes, I went on a journey of information gathering. Like many such journeys, it turned out to have far different outcomes and consequences than I had first realized it would have.
With excitement building in me as never before, I approached my professor and asked for approval of the idea. It was granted. What was that idea exactly? I would show how, through the eyes of Marvel Comics character Captain America, show just how and why America as a nation had gone through the changes it had, and how Marvel chose to reflect those changes through Cap's interaction with the other characters in his story lines.
It began, of course, with his origin in the 1940s:
At the height of World War II, Captain America was created to serve as a piece of American propaganda, which would result in Cap becoming literally a symbol of all that was good and great about our Republic. Cap's chief enemy at this time was, predictably, Nazi Germany.
Cap's enemies and allies changed throughout the decades, with the 50's and 60's resulting in him adopting an anti-Communist attitude, the seventies pitting him against a corrupt Nixonesque administration within the very government he fought to defend, and ended briefly with his tragic death on the steps of a courthouse at the hands of the assassin Crossbones.
Why am I telling you all this? Because even today, Marvel continues to have its ear to the ground regarding our values and the emotional climate of the decade.
Here in the 21st century, Cap's new foes are chiefly terrorists, though in classic comic book fashion, the terrorists are not Al Quaeda or the Taliban, but an alien race known as the Skrull, coupled as well with sleeper cells from the underwater city of Atlantis (who have since been dealt with.) this, in my view, clearly is a mirror image of what is going on in Afghanistan and Iraq in recent years, but not only does it deal with the war. At home, an initiative was created that was known as the Superhero Registration Act, which forced all heroes to register against their will with the federal government. this leads to a split in the community of superheroes, resulting in a knockdown drag out fight. in the end, the federal government reigns victorious and the 50 state initiative is put into place.
Eventually, the initiative is revealed to be what it truly is: A plot by a race known as the Skrulls to conquer Earth by dividing its most powerful weapons and heroes against themselves, thus rendering them too weak to resist. However, the heroes emerge victorious after rallying due to the death of one of their own: Founding Avenger Janet Van Dyne, the Wasp. Even Earth's super criminals are brought into the fray against the invaders, proving that when given common cause, a group of individuals can accomplish the impossible, as they have.
Like the America of the real world, the Marvel America was brought to heel with overreaching governmental policies, a tyrannical bill-become-law that nearly resulted in America becoming a police state, and ultimately an invasion conducted from within the very core of society (the enemy were shape-shifting infiltrators, and had replaced several dozen heroes with enemy spies.)
We here in the real US face similar challenges in today's environment: A tyrannical health care bill, an overreaching government, and terrorist threats that seek nothing less than our conquest in the form of Islamofascist dictators.
Yet, as has happened in the comic book US, we are also starting to band together and prove that we as Americans can achieve the impossible. Like the players in the Civil War story, we are choosing sides in the battle to take the country back. Some are choosing the big government side (pro-registration) and some are choosing the side of personal liberty and responsibility (anti-registration). Which side will win depends on which side wants it more, of course, but we must not lose sight of the bigger picture, as the heroes of Marvel did. Namely, we must hold to our principals, whatever those may be, if we truly wish to gain victory and bring this country back from the brink.
How long will it take for our own heroes to band together with those whom they do not necessarily agree with and do what is truly best for this country? This one awaits the answer to that question with anxiety, nervousness, and trepidation, but also a nagging optimism.
Continuing to Fight the Good Fight.
A few years back, I attended MTI College of Business and Technology for a year in the hopes of gaining a "suck the money out of honest people" degree, otherwise known as a law degree. Fortunately I have since come to my senses and have decided to, like Cap, do some good with the gifts God has given me. What that is, remains to be seen. But I'm getting off track here. While I was at MTI, I had the opportunity, in my American History class, to do a homework assignment that allowed me to learn more about the Red White and Blue Avenger than I ever thought I'd have the chance to learn. We were supposed to come up with an idea involving how American values are reflected through history, and I chose Marvel Comics to be my guide through the process.
Oddly, though, it wasn't until Captain America's untimely (yet fortunately short-lived) death and the mourning period that followed that sparked my interest for this idea. Hearing on AOL news that Marvel had decided to gun down Cap on the steps of a federal courthouse, I was driven with an insatiable need to answer one single question: WHY?! Why would the editorial staff decide at such a crucial point in our history, with the country divided along political and ideological lines as it hadn't been since the Civil War, would Captain America's writers decide to shuffle him off this mortal coil? With a new sense of purpoes, I went on a journey of information gathering. Like many such journeys, it turned out to have far different outcomes and consequences than I had first realized it would have.
With excitement building in me as never before, I approached my professor and asked for approval of the idea. It was granted. What was that idea exactly? I would show how, through the eyes of Marvel Comics character Captain America, show just how and why America as a nation had gone through the changes it had, and how Marvel chose to reflect those changes through Cap's interaction with the other characters in his story lines.
It began, of course, with his origin in the 1940s:
At the height of World War II, Captain America was created to serve as a piece of American propaganda, which would result in Cap becoming literally a symbol of all that was good and great about our Republic. Cap's chief enemy at this time was, predictably, Nazi Germany.
Cap's enemies and allies changed throughout the decades, with the 50's and 60's resulting in him adopting an anti-Communist attitude, the seventies pitting him against a corrupt Nixonesque administration within the very government he fought to defend, and ended briefly with his tragic death on the steps of a courthouse at the hands of the assassin Crossbones.
Why am I telling you all this? Because even today, Marvel continues to have its ear to the ground regarding our values and the emotional climate of the decade.
Here in the 21st century, Cap's new foes are chiefly terrorists, though in classic comic book fashion, the terrorists are not Al Quaeda or the Taliban, but an alien race known as the Skrull, coupled as well with sleeper cells from the underwater city of Atlantis (who have since been dealt with.) this, in my view, clearly is a mirror image of what is going on in Afghanistan and Iraq in recent years, but not only does it deal with the war. At home, an initiative was created that was known as the Superhero Registration Act, which forced all heroes to register against their will with the federal government. this leads to a split in the community of superheroes, resulting in a knockdown drag out fight. in the end, the federal government reigns victorious and the 50 state initiative is put into place.
Eventually, the initiative is revealed to be what it truly is: A plot by a race known as the Skrulls to conquer Earth by dividing its most powerful weapons and heroes against themselves, thus rendering them too weak to resist. However, the heroes emerge victorious after rallying due to the death of one of their own: Founding Avenger Janet Van Dyne, the Wasp. Even Earth's super criminals are brought into the fray against the invaders, proving that when given common cause, a group of individuals can accomplish the impossible, as they have.
Like the America of the real world, the Marvel America was brought to heel with overreaching governmental policies, a tyrannical bill-become-law that nearly resulted in America becoming a police state, and ultimately an invasion conducted from within the very core of society (the enemy were shape-shifting infiltrators, and had replaced several dozen heroes with enemy spies.)
We here in the real US face similar challenges in today's environment: A tyrannical health care bill, an overreaching government, and terrorist threats that seek nothing less than our conquest in the form of Islamofascist dictators.
Yet, as has happened in the comic book US, we are also starting to band together and prove that we as Americans can achieve the impossible. Like the players in the Civil War story, we are choosing sides in the battle to take the country back. Some are choosing the big government side (pro-registration) and some are choosing the side of personal liberty and responsibility (anti-registration). Which side will win depends on which side wants it more, of course, but we must not lose sight of the bigger picture, as the heroes of Marvel did. Namely, we must hold to our principals, whatever those may be, if we truly wish to gain victory and bring this country back from the brink.
How long will it take for our own heroes to band together with those whom they do not necessarily agree with and do what is truly best for this country? This one awaits the answer to that question with anxiety, nervousness, and trepidation, but also a nagging optimism.
Continuing to Fight the Good Fight.
Friday, July 9, 2010
A Breath of Fresh Air to Wipe Away the Stink of PCness
Well, well well, look what we have here. Apparently not all areas of entertainment are vociferously controlled lock, stock, and barrel by the Loony Left. Here is, via Moonbattery, a very very refreshing clip of a stand-up comedian mocking those of us who would try using the "I'm offended" shtick to shut up those of us who do nothing more than tell the truth. God bless this man:
On a completely unrelated note, a story via Newsmax is suggesting that Sarah Palin may replace Michael Steele as the RNC chairman. Your take? Comment below.
On a completely unrelated note, a story via Newsmax is suggesting that Sarah Palin may replace Michael Steele as the RNC chairman. Your take? Comment below.
Thursday, July 8, 2010
I'll Take Religious Principals for 100, Alex
The Bible is being taught as historical literature in a California public School. It's finally begun. After years of repression of our religious history as a nation, it begins to creep ever so slowly back to the forefront, making tiny baby steps at first, but if those steps continue, it will likely snowball into a full blown repeal of every anti-religious hyper-secular law ever passed by any rogue activist judge in the country. That's my prediction, at least, and best case scenario at that. But anyway, this is a good start, I think, and I hope to see an upward swing in this trend. As someone who has had his faith shaken quite a bit recently, I know that it is more important than ever to hold onto that faith, lest everything else be lost.
The story is via Hot Air.
This would merit little attention by me beyond the initial "wow that's cool" except for the fact that Texas has already introduced a similar initiative in an elective class that they've put on their curriculum just a year or two ago, I believe. That story can be found here.
Note that is is PMSNBC that reports this story. Wow...maybe there's hope for them yet.
On a less positive note regarding religion in the world today, there is this story, via Jihad Watch and The Other McCain.
The story basically says that some nutjob Imam or cleric or whatever these backward thugs call themselves, called on Australian Muslims to forsake their own country because the democratic process is forbidden, and that Allah is the sole lawmaker and all their other hate filled garbage that they spew on a daily basis. Well, let me ask you this, my burka wearing friends (term used VERY loosely), WHO DOES ALLAH EXPECT TO WRITE DOWN THOSE LAWS IF HUMANS CAN'T DO IT THEMSELVES?
Even the Christian God used humans to write laws after giving Moses the Ten Commandments on Mt. Sinai. But apparently the Bearded One is too high and mighty to have us puny humans write our own damn laws. Last time I checked, Allah wasn't handing out tablets or parchment based documents to his prophets and telling the people how to live. If he'd not going to do it, how are they going to make ANY laws unless they write them themselves, hm? Answer me that.
Even worse, our Commissar in Chief has yet again insulted the Israelis and pandered to the burka-wearing nutballs by actually saying that he believes the Israeli's are suspicious of him because of his name. his NAME. Read the full account here.
Honestly...can the world get anymore interesting/screwed up?
The story is via Hot Air.
This would merit little attention by me beyond the initial "wow that's cool" except for the fact that Texas has already introduced a similar initiative in an elective class that they've put on their curriculum just a year or two ago, I believe. That story can be found here.
Note that is is PMSNBC that reports this story. Wow...maybe there's hope for them yet.
On a less positive note regarding religion in the world today, there is this story, via Jihad Watch and The Other McCain.
The story basically says that some nutjob Imam or cleric or whatever these backward thugs call themselves, called on Australian Muslims to forsake their own country because the democratic process is forbidden, and that Allah is the sole lawmaker and all their other hate filled garbage that they spew on a daily basis. Well, let me ask you this, my burka wearing friends (term used VERY loosely), WHO DOES ALLAH EXPECT TO WRITE DOWN THOSE LAWS IF HUMANS CAN'T DO IT THEMSELVES?
Even the Christian God used humans to write laws after giving Moses the Ten Commandments on Mt. Sinai. But apparently the Bearded One is too high and mighty to have us puny humans write our own damn laws. Last time I checked, Allah wasn't handing out tablets or parchment based documents to his prophets and telling the people how to live. If he'd not going to do it, how are they going to make ANY laws unless they write them themselves, hm? Answer me that.
Even worse, our Commissar in Chief has yet again insulted the Israelis and pandered to the burka-wearing nutballs by actually saying that he believes the Israeli's are suspicious of him because of his name. his NAME. Read the full account here.
Honestly...can the world get anymore interesting/screwed up?
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
The Paradox of the Muslim Faith
We all know that the Muslims are a very different culture from us. Anyone with half a brain in the furthest recesses of his skull can figure out that the Muslim world and the West are as different as night and day. I for one hardly gave them a thought until the 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers, but now that they've been brought to the forefront of my attention, I can only say that they are indeed a culture of death. Hack Wilson has a story at his blog today that took my breath away, so horrifying was it to see with my own eyes. I could hardly believe I was reading the words of a mother speaking about her son when I saw the paragraphs that I will post further down.
For now, however, an explanation is in order. the story that I've linked to is one wherein a Muslim mother is praying night and day, at the expense of her own health at times (so much so, in fact, that the Israeli doctor tending her son had to personally insist that she eat and drink to stay healthy) that her son's life be spared from the sickness he's contracted. Yes, you read that right. The doctor tending to him is Israeli, and I didn't mention this previously, but the son is being treated, according to the story, in the city of Jerusalem. This is what the mother had to say when a documentary filmmaker intent on showing that not all Palestinians are murderous thugs was taping her for a scene in his film:
Nevertheless, this idyllic situation developed into a deep crisis that led to the severance of the relations and what appeared to be the end of the filming. From an innocent conversation about religious holidays, Raida Abu Mustafa launched into a painful monologue about the culture of the shahids - the martyrs - and admitted, during the complex transplant process, that she would like to see her son perpetrate a suicide bombing attack in Jerusalem.
"Jerusalem is ours," she declared. "We are all for Jerusalem, the whole nation, not just a million, all of us. Do you understand what that means - all of us?"
She also explained to Eldar exactly what she had in mind. "For us, death is a natural thing. We are not frightened of death. From the smallest infant, even smaller than Mohammed, to the oldest person, we will all sacrifice ourselves for the sake of Jerusalem. We feel we have the right to it. You're free to be angry, so be angry."
And Eldar was angry. "Then why are you fighting to save your son's life, if you say that death is a usual thing for your people?" he lashes out in one of the most dramatic moments in the film.
"It is a regular thing," she smiles at him. "Life is not precious. Life is precious, but not for us. For us, life is nothing, not worth a thing. That is why we have so many suicide bombers. They are not afraid of death. None of us, not even the children, are afraid of death. It is natural for us. After Mohammed gets well, I will certainly want him to be a shahid. If it's for Jerusalem, then there's no problem. For you it is hard, I know; with us, there are cries of rejoicing and happiness when someone falls as a shahid. For us a shahid is a tremendous thing."
This, to me, is absolutely appalling. How can someone at the same time revere and disregard human life? the mother clearly states that she wants her son to live, but then declares in the same breath that she'd rather become a shahid (martyr)?
The Muslim culture by and large, in my view, is a culture of death and destruction, and the above corroborates my hypothesis. I do not for the life of me understand how anyone thinks that these people, who value the lives of their own children less than they value their deaths, can be rationally spoken with or negotiated with. Our culture, the West, largely believes in life over death. Not the other way around. It brings to mind a very disturbing question.
Can two civilizations who are so fundamentally different ever truly be at peace?
For now, however, an explanation is in order. the story that I've linked to is one wherein a Muslim mother is praying night and day, at the expense of her own health at times (so much so, in fact, that the Israeli doctor tending her son had to personally insist that she eat and drink to stay healthy) that her son's life be spared from the sickness he's contracted. Yes, you read that right. The doctor tending to him is Israeli, and I didn't mention this previously, but the son is being treated, according to the story, in the city of Jerusalem. This is what the mother had to say when a documentary filmmaker intent on showing that not all Palestinians are murderous thugs was taping her for a scene in his film:
Nevertheless, this idyllic situation developed into a deep crisis that led to the severance of the relations and what appeared to be the end of the filming. From an innocent conversation about religious holidays, Raida Abu Mustafa launched into a painful monologue about the culture of the shahids - the martyrs - and admitted, during the complex transplant process, that she would like to see her son perpetrate a suicide bombing attack in Jerusalem.
"Jerusalem is ours," she declared. "We are all for Jerusalem, the whole nation, not just a million, all of us. Do you understand what that means - all of us?"
She also explained to Eldar exactly what she had in mind. "For us, death is a natural thing. We are not frightened of death. From the smallest infant, even smaller than Mohammed, to the oldest person, we will all sacrifice ourselves for the sake of Jerusalem. We feel we have the right to it. You're free to be angry, so be angry."
And Eldar was angry. "Then why are you fighting to save your son's life, if you say that death is a usual thing for your people?" he lashes out in one of the most dramatic moments in the film.
"It is a regular thing," she smiles at him. "Life is not precious. Life is precious, but not for us. For us, life is nothing, not worth a thing. That is why we have so many suicide bombers. They are not afraid of death. None of us, not even the children, are afraid of death. It is natural for us. After Mohammed gets well, I will certainly want him to be a shahid. If it's for Jerusalem, then there's no problem. For you it is hard, I know; with us, there are cries of rejoicing and happiness when someone falls as a shahid. For us a shahid is a tremendous thing."
This, to me, is absolutely appalling. How can someone at the same time revere and disregard human life? the mother clearly states that she wants her son to live, but then declares in the same breath that she'd rather become a shahid (martyr)?
The Muslim culture by and large, in my view, is a culture of death and destruction, and the above corroborates my hypothesis. I do not for the life of me understand how anyone thinks that these people, who value the lives of their own children less than they value their deaths, can be rationally spoken with or negotiated with. Our culture, the West, largely believes in life over death. Not the other way around. It brings to mind a very disturbing question.
Can two civilizations who are so fundamentally different ever truly be at peace?
Sunday, July 4, 2010
I Hear a Ghost of My Country
Ah, the birth of our nation. Such a day brings to mind images of barbeque, fireworks, and family get-togethers. I have many such memories, the most recent of which is today's, where I successfully pulled off my own first 4th of July barbeque, where my fiance and I served a delectable spread of burgers, corn, and pudding for dessert.
As a kid, I had little to no realization of the history behind the holiday, except for what one learns in the elementary school textbooks. Only in recent years have I truly begun to really understand the importance of today.
I thought long and hard about what to post here in rememberance of the fourth, and I think this poem sums it up rather nicely:
"I hear a ghost of my country...
I hear a ghost of my country
Made real on this day in July
I am wrestled from tyranny's clutches
By the sound of its birthing cry
We are bound by a fair declaration
Of which I am a proud engineer
I hear a ghost of my country;
'Tis the promise of all I hold dear."
It's a poem written by John Adams in an issue of Captain America called "Ghosts of my Country". My fiance showed it to me and as I read the first page of the issue, I knew that this was what I wanted this post to center around. Even though in the comic John Adams (the author) doesn't quite like it, I think its simplicity puts this nation's birth into perspective rather nicely. We are the promise so many hold dear throughout the world, even now with a freedom hating president in the White House.
Here's to many more Fourths, and many more celebrations of freedom for every other freedom loving country across the globe.
Continuing to Fight the Good Fight.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Read all About it: Government Officials Discover That Governing is...Hard.
Well, at least we're getting some truth out of Washington for a change. My usual informants on conservative talk radio have today informed me, your humble crusader for constitutional justice, that the Obama administration and its cronies are for lack of a better term, giving up.
Don't believe me? Consider these words from DHS Secretary Janite Napolitano, via ABC News:
"The notion that you’re going to somehow seal the border and only at that point will you discuss immigration reform – that is not an answer to the problem,” she said. “The border is as secure now as it’s ever been, but we know we can always do more and that will always be the case,” she said. “It’s a big border. It is 1,960 miles across that southwest border. It’s some of the roughest toughest geographical terrain in the world across that border… You’re never going to totally seal the border."
Ummm...Madame Secretary, we're not asking you to SEAL anything. We want the border SECURE. You know, you're the head of the Department of Homeland SECURITY, so a little bit of that on the border with ol' Meh-he-co would go a long way toward reestablishing your long since lost credibility. Though I doubt you'll do so, considering that, as a government official, your common sense has long since gone bye-bye. After all, we still remember your asinine comment about the system "working" in the aftermath of the Underwear Bomber incident.
Or, how about this little gem from Vice President Joe "Bite Me" Biden on June 24th, via CBS News:
Vice President Joe Biden gave a stark assessment of the economy today, telling an audience of supporters, "there's no possibility to restore 8 million jobs lost in the Great Recession."
No possibility? Really? What about the trillion dollars us taxpayers forked over for all of those shovel-ready projects? Wasn't that supposed to CREATE 8 million jobs? Apparently not, since the best you can do is "create or save" jobs in mythical districts and shove money down the throats of car companies and states that didn't want the funds in the first place. Great job there, Skippy.
Add on top of this Obama pushing a so-called "recovery summer" in which a whopping 260 jobs per state (according to Rush Limbaugh) were created this month. Great. A whole 260 jobs. Now I can go out and get the extra income I need to pay off my credit cards....NOT! Obama, I've said it before and I'll say it again, you suck as president and I can't wait until you and your cronies are out in November.
Don't believe me? Consider these words from DHS Secretary Janite Napolitano, via ABC News:
"The notion that you’re going to somehow seal the border and only at that point will you discuss immigration reform – that is not an answer to the problem,” she said. “The border is as secure now as it’s ever been, but we know we can always do more and that will always be the case,” she said. “It’s a big border. It is 1,960 miles across that southwest border. It’s some of the roughest toughest geographical terrain in the world across that border… You’re never going to totally seal the border."
Ummm...Madame Secretary, we're not asking you to SEAL anything. We want the border SECURE. You know, you're the head of the Department of Homeland SECURITY, so a little bit of that on the border with ol' Meh-he-co would go a long way toward reestablishing your long since lost credibility. Though I doubt you'll do so, considering that, as a government official, your common sense has long since gone bye-bye. After all, we still remember your asinine comment about the system "working" in the aftermath of the Underwear Bomber incident.
Or, how about this little gem from Vice President Joe "Bite Me" Biden on June 24th, via CBS News:
Vice President Joe Biden gave a stark assessment of the economy today, telling an audience of supporters, "there's no possibility to restore 8 million jobs lost in the Great Recession."
No possibility? Really? What about the trillion dollars us taxpayers forked over for all of those shovel-ready projects? Wasn't that supposed to CREATE 8 million jobs? Apparently not, since the best you can do is "create or save" jobs in mythical districts and shove money down the throats of car companies and states that didn't want the funds in the first place. Great job there, Skippy.
Add on top of this Obama pushing a so-called "recovery summer" in which a whopping 260 jobs per state (according to Rush Limbaugh) were created this month. Great. A whole 260 jobs. Now I can go out and get the extra income I need to pay off my credit cards....NOT! Obama, I've said it before and I'll say it again, you suck as president and I can't wait until you and your cronies are out in November.
Monday, June 28, 2010
Frabjous Day! Calloo Callay! He Chortled in his Joy!
Two stories seem to be all over every news outlet today: the death of Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia and the recent Supreme Court decision regarding the Chicago gun ban.
First, my take on Bob Byrd: It is sad when any of us loses someone we love, and my heart goes out to his family, though I do not know by whom he is survived. Reports are that he was seriously ill and hospitalized shortly before the good Lord Above brought him home. Rest in peace, Senator. I may not have agreed with your politics or your decisions, but God loves all His children equally and I like to think that I endeavor to do the same.
And now that I've said my piece on that, to the reason for the blog post's title: WOOHOO! The majority of the Supreme Court actually knows what the hell the Second Amendment MEANS!! Hallelujiah! Praise the Lord! I wonder what the hell was bugging the four liberal justices on the court? They should have been APPLAUDING this decision. I heard about it first on the Rush Limbaugh program this morning, and have since heard about it on Tom Sullivan and through various net sites such as American Thinker and Drudge. Basically it boils down to this: People can own guns across all fifty states. Period. End of discussion, no soup for you, come back one year.
Naturally, when the left gets ahold of this, they are going to have a conniption and try to distort the meaning of the ruling, but I wouldn't worry about them having too much ammo to mount an assault. After all, they can't appeal the decision, since there is no higher court in the land, and any litigation that the appellate courts try to funnel upwards will likely be sifted out of the filter that is our justice system.
this is, as Rush touted on his show, a "Glory Glory Hallelujah day" for those of us who believe in the Constitution and our fundamental civil liberties. Could this be a sign of future positive portents to come? Or is this just the first shot fired across the bow in a newly sparked war for our freedoms? Only time will tell.
First, my take on Bob Byrd: It is sad when any of us loses someone we love, and my heart goes out to his family, though I do not know by whom he is survived. Reports are that he was seriously ill and hospitalized shortly before the good Lord Above brought him home. Rest in peace, Senator. I may not have agreed with your politics or your decisions, but God loves all His children equally and I like to think that I endeavor to do the same.
And now that I've said my piece on that, to the reason for the blog post's title: WOOHOO! The majority of the Supreme Court actually knows what the hell the Second Amendment MEANS!! Hallelujiah! Praise the Lord! I wonder what the hell was bugging the four liberal justices on the court? They should have been APPLAUDING this decision. I heard about it first on the Rush Limbaugh program this morning, and have since heard about it on Tom Sullivan and through various net sites such as American Thinker and Drudge. Basically it boils down to this: People can own guns across all fifty states. Period. End of discussion, no soup for you, come back one year.
Naturally, when the left gets ahold of this, they are going to have a conniption and try to distort the meaning of the ruling, but I wouldn't worry about them having too much ammo to mount an assault. After all, they can't appeal the decision, since there is no higher court in the land, and any litigation that the appellate courts try to funnel upwards will likely be sifted out of the filter that is our justice system.
this is, as Rush touted on his show, a "Glory Glory Hallelujah day" for those of us who believe in the Constitution and our fundamental civil liberties. Could this be a sign of future positive portents to come? Or is this just the first shot fired across the bow in a newly sparked war for our freedoms? Only time will tell.
Friday, June 25, 2010
You can't Know Where You're Going...
Man o man SO MUCH to blog about today. I heard something incredibly stupid from the president, remeniscent of Orwellian doublespeak, I am watching currently a recorded presentation of Glenn Beck's "Founding Fridays" segment of his show, and am learning so much more about history that's not in the text books that I could very well go to wherever they write these things, and beat someone over the head for not including them, and for outright destroying the most important weapon in the war for freedom and liberty: Information!
This will likely be a long post, so those with short attention spans (*cough*liberals*cough) should really consider reading Dick and Jane instead. Or if that's too much for you, might I suggest Dr. Seuss..
Anyhow, to the news!
Item One: Apparently an Arizona Supervisor doesn't even know that her state is on the border. Via Hot Air:
There was an odd moment during the debate when Supervisor Peggy West stood up and seemed to be confused about her geography. “If this was Texas, which is a state that is directly on the border with Mexico, and they were calling for a measure like this saying that they had a major issue with undocumented people flooding their borders, I would have to look twice at this. But this is a state that is a ways removed from the border,” West said during debate…
While speaking at the meeting, West did go on to talk about National Guard troops on the border in Arizona. West points to that as she tells us that she simply misspoke…
West claims that the point she was trying to make is that because Texas has a much larger border with Mexico, she might feel differently about such a law in that state. “Had Texas come out with the legislation, having the largest border, I think that I would be more receptive to the fact that there was a problem. But having it be Arizona, having it be the second largest boarder and knowing there are troops on the border in Arizona, it didn’t seem to me that this legislation was particularly necessary at this moment in time,” West said.
Can you even BELIEVE that she said that? Just to make sure the world hadn't turned upside down, I had to look up a map of the United States to make sure that Arizona hadn't been moved without me knowing. Fortunately, it hadn't. Still, someone might want to tell this moonbat to look at a damned map every once in a while.
Item 2: President Obama on radio this morning actually had the hugeness of balls to say that cutting deficit spending will make the deficit expand! What?!
Via Talk Radio and Washington Post:
But as he meets with the Group of 8 in a rural resort town north of here, Obama is appealing to European leaders not to trim back public spending in the midst of a growing debt crisis on the continent.
The radio version of his words, a direct sound bite, said something about how cutting spending would somehow cause the Europeans' deficits to expand anyway.
Um...How? How will NOT spending money result in SPENDING OF MONEY!? Good God this president makes my head hurt!
Item 3 (possibly the most important item). So it turns out that there were black people back in 1789. Huh. Who knew? Well, apparently those in charge of writing our textbooks for schools knew and decided not to tell anyone. What's more, they decided to lie and say that everyone was a Negro hating racist ever since the founding of this country, even though they have newspapers and history books FROM THAT TIME PERIOD that not only mention these guys, but give the ones who fought in the Revolution FULL MILITARY HONORS. Huh. What bigoted assholes.
Item 4: I have decided that whenever I have the money to take a trip to another state, one of those states must be Virginia, capital state of the now defunct Confederacy. Or, as they called themselves in the Confederate Constitution, the SLAVEHOLDING Confederate States of America. That's right, I said SLAVE HOLDING. All those morons who say the Confederacy was fighting for states rights are pretty much liars, since it says IN THE CONSTITUTION that to join the Confederacy you must allow slavery. Wow. I thought it was about States Rights. Wouldn't that mean that the state would be the one to choose? Yeah, I think it would. Funny how those "rights" things work, ain't it?
And that's just the tip of the iceberg. More to come in future posts. Please tape your heads together to keep the brain matter inside in the event of a cranial explosion.
This will likely be a long post, so those with short attention spans (*cough*liberals*cough) should really consider reading Dick and Jane instead. Or if that's too much for you, might I suggest Dr. Seuss..
Anyhow, to the news!
Item One: Apparently an Arizona Supervisor doesn't even know that her state is on the border. Via Hot Air:
There was an odd moment during the debate when Supervisor Peggy West stood up and seemed to be confused about her geography. “If this was Texas, which is a state that is directly on the border with Mexico, and they were calling for a measure like this saying that they had a major issue with undocumented people flooding their borders, I would have to look twice at this. But this is a state that is a ways removed from the border,” West said during debate…
While speaking at the meeting, West did go on to talk about National Guard troops on the border in Arizona. West points to that as she tells us that she simply misspoke…
West claims that the point she was trying to make is that because Texas has a much larger border with Mexico, she might feel differently about such a law in that state. “Had Texas come out with the legislation, having the largest border, I think that I would be more receptive to the fact that there was a problem. But having it be Arizona, having it be the second largest boarder and knowing there are troops on the border in Arizona, it didn’t seem to me that this legislation was particularly necessary at this moment in time,” West said.
Can you even BELIEVE that she said that? Just to make sure the world hadn't turned upside down, I had to look up a map of the United States to make sure that Arizona hadn't been moved without me knowing. Fortunately, it hadn't. Still, someone might want to tell this moonbat to look at a damned map every once in a while.
Item 2: President Obama on radio this morning actually had the hugeness of balls to say that cutting deficit spending will make the deficit expand! What?!
Via Talk Radio and Washington Post:
But as he meets with the Group of 8 in a rural resort town north of here, Obama is appealing to European leaders not to trim back public spending in the midst of a growing debt crisis on the continent.
The radio version of his words, a direct sound bite, said something about how cutting spending would somehow cause the Europeans' deficits to expand anyway.
Um...How? How will NOT spending money result in SPENDING OF MONEY!? Good God this president makes my head hurt!
Item 3 (possibly the most important item). So it turns out that there were black people back in 1789. Huh. Who knew? Well, apparently those in charge of writing our textbooks for schools knew and decided not to tell anyone. What's more, they decided to lie and say that everyone was a Negro hating racist ever since the founding of this country, even though they have newspapers and history books FROM THAT TIME PERIOD that not only mention these guys, but give the ones who fought in the Revolution FULL MILITARY HONORS. Huh. What bigoted assholes.
Item 4: I have decided that whenever I have the money to take a trip to another state, one of those states must be Virginia, capital state of the now defunct Confederacy. Or, as they called themselves in the Confederate Constitution, the SLAVEHOLDING Confederate States of America. That's right, I said SLAVE HOLDING. All those morons who say the Confederacy was fighting for states rights are pretty much liars, since it says IN THE CONSTITUTION that to join the Confederacy you must allow slavery. Wow. I thought it was about States Rights. Wouldn't that mean that the state would be the one to choose? Yeah, I think it would. Funny how those "rights" things work, ain't it?
And that's just the tip of the iceberg. More to come in future posts. Please tape your heads together to keep the brain matter inside in the event of a cranial explosion.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
How Well do YOU Think the Commies are Doing?
Check this out: It's the goals in 1963 for the Communist Party USA. How many have they completed and how many are they about to complete? Ask yourself that and check the ones off that you think they've accomplished:
CURRENT COMMUNIST GOALS
1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.
6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.
7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.
8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.
9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.
10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.
11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)
12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.
13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.
14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.
15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
18. Gain control of all student newspapers.
19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.
21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms."
23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."
24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a "religious crutch."
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."
29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."
31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the "big picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.
32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.
34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.
36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.
37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.
38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].
39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use ["]united force["] to solve economic, political or social problems.
43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.
44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.
45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike.
CURRENT COMMUNIST GOALS
1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.
6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.
7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.
8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.
9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.
10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.
11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)
12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.
13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.
14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.
15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
18. Gain control of all student newspapers.
19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.
21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms."
23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."
24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a "religious crutch."
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."
29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."
31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the "big picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.
32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.
34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.
36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.
37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.
38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].
39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use ["]united force["] to solve economic, political or social problems.
43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.
44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.
45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike.
I'm in Love with Her, and I Won't Apologize
For those of you who are completely not in the know about things that are awesome, which hopefully is very few, I would like to introduce you to my new favorite song writer ever in all the world and universe combined. The man calls himself Jon David. I say "calls himself" because that isn't his real name. I will not divulge that here because I do not want to be even indirectly responsible for more attacks against him, as he receives such daily, like many conservative performers in Hollywood. Yes, he's a Hollywood Conservative. Gasp and Horror! Amazing. I thought they died out years ago.
Here's the video:
Here's the video:
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Further Attempts to Discredit a Celebrity
So, I just put myself through the worst sort of torture I can possibly think of: I read an issue of Newsweek. Voluntarily. Yes, I know, you’re asking “What the hell were you thinking?” “Don’t you know that can be hazardous to the health of a thinking person?”
Yes, I do know that, and I apologize to you, my fellow tin-foil-hat-wearers, for endangering my life so recklessly. I felt it necessary to delve into that subculture of left wing lunacy in order to discover some modicum of fairness and impartiality in that flagging toilet rag of a magazine. As of yet, I have come up empty in that search. My latest foray merely stoked the fires of my outrage against all things Leftist, and has given me the wherewithal to write these words.
To the point, once again the left has attempted to drag both Sarah Palin and the institution of marriage through the mud.
Newsweek truly does not screen their writers for content, otherwise they would very likely see that the articles written for them are little more than failed school assignments written by disgruntled college dropouts. Case in point, the article on Sarah.
It points out many supposed “facts” about the governor and does try to at least PRETEND to be fair in there assessment of her, but they don’t do a very good job. They constantly wonder why Palin has the star power that she has, all the while dismissing her reasons as “suspect”. They can’t understand why she continues to tell the story of the birth of her son Trig, claiming that to do so was “charming at first” but now has become “suspicious” and “self serving.” These idiots just don’t get it, and I find myself wondering what I was thinking when I allowed myself to believe that this time they might. I guess I just enjoy beating my head against a wall. I don’t know, really.
My favorite part of the article, though, was the few paragraphs that described Palin’s new brand of feminism as a “joke” and a “contrivance.” She (Palin) derided the old school feminism as “a relic of the faculty lounge at some East Coast college, right?” Well, there I can’t say she’s wrong. How many times have the NOW (Neurotic Overbearing Whiners) told us one or another thing we should be outraged about, only to discover that they are the only ones outraged by it. Remember the Tim Tebow super bowl ad all those months ago? I rest my case.
As a Palin supporter, I have to say I’m sympathetic to her plight involving the moonbats on the left. Though if these are the best attacks they can muster, they’re not exactly rolling out the big guns. Maybe they wasted all their ammo on Anne Coulter and trying to convince us that she’s once again “gone too far.”
Palin’s religion, of course, is also subject to attacks throughout the article. Check out this little gem: “It is impossible to know what Palin really believes about God, but having been raised in conservative evangelical churches in Alaska, she is fluent in evangelical language and culture.” Language and culture? What are they, a tribe of Pygmies? Yeesh. And what’s all that about not really knowing what Palin believes about God? Do they have wax in their ears? Or are they just too busy trying to degrade the Tea Party as racist to be able to realize that she tells those listening to her exactly what she believes every time the subject comes up? My vote is for the latter.
There will be more on this Newsweek issue in the next few days, thanks to their being several articles out there that runaway Malaysian sweatshop workers could have written better than these so called “journalists”.
I can’t wait to grade them.
Yes, I do know that, and I apologize to you, my fellow tin-foil-hat-wearers, for endangering my life so recklessly. I felt it necessary to delve into that subculture of left wing lunacy in order to discover some modicum of fairness and impartiality in that flagging toilet rag of a magazine. As of yet, I have come up empty in that search. My latest foray merely stoked the fires of my outrage against all things Leftist, and has given me the wherewithal to write these words.
To the point, once again the left has attempted to drag both Sarah Palin and the institution of marriage through the mud.
Newsweek truly does not screen their writers for content, otherwise they would very likely see that the articles written for them are little more than failed school assignments written by disgruntled college dropouts. Case in point, the article on Sarah.
It points out many supposed “facts” about the governor and does try to at least PRETEND to be fair in there assessment of her, but they don’t do a very good job. They constantly wonder why Palin has the star power that she has, all the while dismissing her reasons as “suspect”. They can’t understand why she continues to tell the story of the birth of her son Trig, claiming that to do so was “charming at first” but now has become “suspicious” and “self serving.” These idiots just don’t get it, and I find myself wondering what I was thinking when I allowed myself to believe that this time they might. I guess I just enjoy beating my head against a wall. I don’t know, really.
My favorite part of the article, though, was the few paragraphs that described Palin’s new brand of feminism as a “joke” and a “contrivance.” She (Palin) derided the old school feminism as “a relic of the faculty lounge at some East Coast college, right?” Well, there I can’t say she’s wrong. How many times have the NOW (Neurotic Overbearing Whiners) told us one or another thing we should be outraged about, only to discover that they are the only ones outraged by it. Remember the Tim Tebow super bowl ad all those months ago? I rest my case.
As a Palin supporter, I have to say I’m sympathetic to her plight involving the moonbats on the left. Though if these are the best attacks they can muster, they’re not exactly rolling out the big guns. Maybe they wasted all their ammo on Anne Coulter and trying to convince us that she’s once again “gone too far.”
Palin’s religion, of course, is also subject to attacks throughout the article. Check out this little gem: “It is impossible to know what Palin really believes about God, but having been raised in conservative evangelical churches in Alaska, she is fluent in evangelical language and culture.” Language and culture? What are they, a tribe of Pygmies? Yeesh. And what’s all that about not really knowing what Palin believes about God? Do they have wax in their ears? Or are they just too busy trying to degrade the Tea Party as racist to be able to realize that she tells those listening to her exactly what she believes every time the subject comes up? My vote is for the latter.
There will be more on this Newsweek issue in the next few days, thanks to their being several articles out there that runaway Malaysian sweatshop workers could have written better than these so called “journalists”.
I can’t wait to grade them.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
The Whorrification of Hannah Montana
I wish there was something else I could rant about, but it's a slow news day and everyone else has decided to take up the McCrystal story (hat's off to the guy, btw. I wish I had balls that big.) And so, I take it upon myself, along with Hack Wilson, to discuss the skankification of someone who used to be, in my eyes, a good role model for teenage girls.
I, being a man in my late twenties, was in no way interested in the television show Hannah Montana when it first aired. I still am not. However, I did see the movie at the behest of my fiance, and after I saw it, I was able to come to the conclusion that, yes, the Hannah Montana character did in fact push a decent message for young girls of that age group.
Unfortunately my approval was not to last. I was at first skeptical when my mother first told me of stories about the teen star dating men twice her age and her father, country singer Billy Ray Cyrus, approving of it. But when she showed me the article and pictures, there wasn't much I could do to deny what I saw right in front of my face.
Now, after watching last night's O'Reilly Factor, I am fully convinced that my daughters, whenever they are born, will have nothing to do with this degenerate insult to femininity everywhere. Her justification is, apparently, wanting to emulate Lady Gaga, who is plenty "gaga' alright, but is no lady.
The culture war continues to rage, boys and girls, and Miley Cyrus's positive message about self reliance and following your dreams is but the latest casualty. As Bob Marley once sang: "How long can they kill our prophets while we stand aside and look?" When, in other words, will we do something to stop the constant inner decay of the morals of this country and finally clean up the mess left behind by the Sexual Revolution and the counter culture of the sixties? WHEN!?
I, being a man in my late twenties, was in no way interested in the television show Hannah Montana when it first aired. I still am not. However, I did see the movie at the behest of my fiance, and after I saw it, I was able to come to the conclusion that, yes, the Hannah Montana character did in fact push a decent message for young girls of that age group.
Unfortunately my approval was not to last. I was at first skeptical when my mother first told me of stories about the teen star dating men twice her age and her father, country singer Billy Ray Cyrus, approving of it. But when she showed me the article and pictures, there wasn't much I could do to deny what I saw right in front of my face.
Now, after watching last night's O'Reilly Factor, I am fully convinced that my daughters, whenever they are born, will have nothing to do with this degenerate insult to femininity everywhere. Her justification is, apparently, wanting to emulate Lady Gaga, who is plenty "gaga' alright, but is no lady.
The culture war continues to rage, boys and girls, and Miley Cyrus's positive message about self reliance and following your dreams is but the latest casualty. As Bob Marley once sang: "How long can they kill our prophets while we stand aside and look?" When, in other words, will we do something to stop the constant inner decay of the morals of this country and finally clean up the mess left behind by the Sexual Revolution and the counter culture of the sixties? WHEN!?
Monday, June 21, 2010
No, That's NOT a Water Balloon...
At least that's what the moobat liberals would have you believe. Via Moonbattery.
Yeah, I'll let that sink in just a bit before I go on.
Ready yet? No? Okay...
Yeah. It's going to take a while to clean up all the brain tissue from all the heads that exploded as a result of reading that article, so I'm going to go on while they do so.
How long are we going to let this happen? Kids have more rights than parents these days, honestly. Why not teach abstinence? Why? Because that would deny children the fundamental right of being perverted. Yep, those Founding Fathers, evil racist bigots that they were, didn't include a fundamental right to sexual depravity in that tired old piece of paper we call the constitution. They were just too damned focused on us being able to live our own damn lives without big daddy government getting in the way. Such incredibly shortsighted individuals, those guys.
I can't really say anymore on this that hasn't already been said, so feel free to fill in your own take on the comments section.
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Stepford Wives: Family Values Being Dragged Through the Mud
Well, last week I just had the unfortunate experience of watching some Left Wing drivel out of Hollywood. Watching the Stepford Wives was supposed to be an evening of dark humor and mild suspense. It turned out to be nothing more than a thinly veiled political statement against traditional values. Namely the traditional American family.
From the moment I saw the fictional community of Stepford, I knew something wasn’t right, and not just because I already knew the plot of the movie going in. I knew that somehow, some way, this movie would be used to discredit the American housewife, and I was right.
From the moment the main characters, a high powered female TV executive recently fired from her job due to bad publicity thanks to an angry, gun-toting former contestant on the infidelity promoting game show “I Can do Better”, and a “house husband” played by Matthew Broderick, whose idea it is to move to Stepford in order for his wife to recharge the batteries and maybe connect with her on a more personal level, move to the seemingly benign Connecticut gated community, things are weird. All the women are thin, blonde, and beautiful, and are creepily cheerful 24/7.
This in and of itself is only marginally creepy, however, until you find out the reason why. The reason Stepford is the way it is is because each of the women who live there is being forcibly mind controlled by their overbearing husbands. Even the gay couple, who moved to Stepford for the same reasons the other families did, is affected, with the overly effeminate character being "reeducated" into acting more masculine so that he can run and win a bid for the Connecticut state Senate.
Put this into the atmosphere of Stepford, which is overly patriotic, with the American flag everywhere and music such as The Halls of Montezuma playing during picnics and other city functions, and you have the makings for a movie that deliberately tries to discredit family life in every way shape and form. The housewives are drones, the husbands are overbearing louts, and the two characters who believe in the 1950's stereotype are a robot and a lunatic!
So what does this say about the characters in this movie? A lot. it says that anyone pushing the traditional view of the American family is either a robot incapable of thinking for themselves, or a lunatic trying to "turn back the clock."
Think I'm kidding? Consider this: The man I mentioned above, who was a contestant on a fictional reality show, is portrayed as a gun-toting psycho. The women who make up the Stepford Wives were all in positions of power, but were subverted by their overbearing, underachieving husbands because the men were "afraid" of their wives. Jon Lovitz, who is hilarious in many of the movies he does, specifically answers his wife's question of "why can't you clean the house once in a while?" with "because I have a PENIS?" As if that exempts him from doing any kind of housework.
The end scene of the movie is, while humorous to some, insulting to yours truly, as it shows the men trolling through the grocery store utterly and completely lost, as if they have no idea what to do. The laughter of their respective wives is heard as a voice over, adding insult to injury. Apparently someone wanted to show men their "Proper" place in the universe.
All in all, the movie was a waste of time, and I felt the need to shower immediately after watching it.
From the moment I saw the fictional community of Stepford, I knew something wasn’t right, and not just because I already knew the plot of the movie going in. I knew that somehow, some way, this movie would be used to discredit the American housewife, and I was right.
From the moment the main characters, a high powered female TV executive recently fired from her job due to bad publicity thanks to an angry, gun-toting former contestant on the infidelity promoting game show “I Can do Better”, and a “house husband” played by Matthew Broderick, whose idea it is to move to Stepford in order for his wife to recharge the batteries and maybe connect with her on a more personal level, move to the seemingly benign Connecticut gated community, things are weird. All the women are thin, blonde, and beautiful, and are creepily cheerful 24/7.
This in and of itself is only marginally creepy, however, until you find out the reason why. The reason Stepford is the way it is is because each of the women who live there is being forcibly mind controlled by their overbearing husbands. Even the gay couple, who moved to Stepford for the same reasons the other families did, is affected, with the overly effeminate character being "reeducated" into acting more masculine so that he can run and win a bid for the Connecticut state Senate.
Put this into the atmosphere of Stepford, which is overly patriotic, with the American flag everywhere and music such as The Halls of Montezuma playing during picnics and other city functions, and you have the makings for a movie that deliberately tries to discredit family life in every way shape and form. The housewives are drones, the husbands are overbearing louts, and the two characters who believe in the 1950's stereotype are a robot and a lunatic!
So what does this say about the characters in this movie? A lot. it says that anyone pushing the traditional view of the American family is either a robot incapable of thinking for themselves, or a lunatic trying to "turn back the clock."
Think I'm kidding? Consider this: The man I mentioned above, who was a contestant on a fictional reality show, is portrayed as a gun-toting psycho. The women who make up the Stepford Wives were all in positions of power, but were subverted by their overbearing, underachieving husbands because the men were "afraid" of their wives. Jon Lovitz, who is hilarious in many of the movies he does, specifically answers his wife's question of "why can't you clean the house once in a while?" with "because I have a PENIS?" As if that exempts him from doing any kind of housework.
The end scene of the movie is, while humorous to some, insulting to yours truly, as it shows the men trolling through the grocery store utterly and completely lost, as if they have no idea what to do. The laughter of their respective wives is heard as a voice over, adding insult to injury. Apparently someone wanted to show men their "Proper" place in the universe.
All in all, the movie was a waste of time, and I felt the need to shower immediately after watching it.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Neither the Time nor the Place
This story from the Cape Cod Times really makes my blood boil. I'm all for dissent, and yes, I DO believe that it is the highest form of patriotism. However, I do not believe that one side has exclusive rights to patriotism.
The story basically goes down as saying that two teachers held a silent protest while attending a recognition ceremony for high school seniors who are entering the military after graduation. Okay, they can protest. They can express their way of thinking. That's what makes this country great. If they didn't think the ceremony should have been held they could say so. That's not what my beef is with these two.
My beef with these two is WHY DID THEY EVEN GO TO THE CEREMONY IF THEY DIDN'T AGREE WITH IT!?
They claim "captive audience" in the article, but I don't buy that for a minute. The students might have been required to attend, but the teachers could have found some way out somehow. If you don't believe that, you're a fool in my opinion.
Uh oh. I called people a name. The liberals must be going out of their minds trying to pin me as a terrorist Tim MacVeigh wannabe. Psh.
My personal favorite excuse, actually, is when one of the teachers says "I want them to be home and alive and well and going to college and dating and having kids and coaching Little League."
My question to that is...Who doesn't?
I may be a conservative, but that doesn't mean I enjoy watching our brave troops go into harms way. It's not like it's a game for me, who has three cousins in the Marine Corps, and who has a proud military tradition going all the way back to the days of the Founders.
The real issue here, though, is that they called this ceremony a "recruiting effort". Bull. There sole rationale for reaching this conclusion was that one of the organizers of the ceremony decided to show up in military fatigues. WHAT?!
According to that logic, everything the military shows up toin fatigues is a recruiting drive, and why the hell shouldn't they try to recruit? The military is a prestigious and honorable way of life to undertake. I myself tried to enter into that life just a year ago, as an Air Force reservist, but unfortunately did not pass the physical.
Again, how is showing up in military fatigues to a ceremony honoring those entering the military a recruitment drive? There was no one out there holding brochures or handing out fliers.
Just a bunch of idiocy to me, really.
The story basically goes down as saying that two teachers held a silent protest while attending a recognition ceremony for high school seniors who are entering the military after graduation. Okay, they can protest. They can express their way of thinking. That's what makes this country great. If they didn't think the ceremony should have been held they could say so. That's not what my beef is with these two.
My beef with these two is WHY DID THEY EVEN GO TO THE CEREMONY IF THEY DIDN'T AGREE WITH IT!?
They claim "captive audience" in the article, but I don't buy that for a minute. The students might have been required to attend, but the teachers could have found some way out somehow. If you don't believe that, you're a fool in my opinion.
Uh oh. I called people a name. The liberals must be going out of their minds trying to pin me as a terrorist Tim MacVeigh wannabe. Psh.
My personal favorite excuse, actually, is when one of the teachers says "I want them to be home and alive and well and going to college and dating and having kids and coaching Little League."
My question to that is...Who doesn't?
I may be a conservative, but that doesn't mean I enjoy watching our brave troops go into harms way. It's not like it's a game for me, who has three cousins in the Marine Corps, and who has a proud military tradition going all the way back to the days of the Founders.
The real issue here, though, is that they called this ceremony a "recruiting effort". Bull. There sole rationale for reaching this conclusion was that one of the organizers of the ceremony decided to show up in military fatigues. WHAT?!
According to that logic, everything the military shows up toin fatigues is a recruiting drive, and why the hell shouldn't they try to recruit? The military is a prestigious and honorable way of life to undertake. I myself tried to enter into that life just a year ago, as an Air Force reservist, but unfortunately did not pass the physical.
Again, how is showing up in military fatigues to a ceremony honoring those entering the military a recruitment drive? There was no one out there holding brochures or handing out fliers.
Just a bunch of idiocy to me, really.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Screw the Union Label
Remember that old song, "Look for the Union Label"? No? Me either.
Actually, I do know of the song, thanks to an old episode of the sitcom Boy Meets World, but that's not what this is about.
This is about how much Unions suck the fat ass.
Take a look at this story from Fox News and tell me that you aren't outraged. Go ahead, tell me. What's the matter? Cat got your tongue? I thought so.
I guess I really shouldn't be surprised. Teachers Unions have been wallowing around in their own self importance like Jabba the Hutt for decades now, and like the Star Wars gangster slug, think themselves untouchable. Well, we'll see how that plays out in the future. Meantime, I wish this brave soul victory in his latest battle to continue serving our country by teaching our newest generation the values of military service.
One can only hope that, like Luke Skywalker in Return of the Jedi, someone puts a choke hold on these dimwits trying to extort money from people who aren't even members, and allow us to watch their last gasps as the concept of the worker's union dies a long overdue death.
Actually, I do know of the song, thanks to an old episode of the sitcom Boy Meets World, but that's not what this is about.
This is about how much Unions suck the fat ass.
Take a look at this story from Fox News and tell me that you aren't outraged. Go ahead, tell me. What's the matter? Cat got your tongue? I thought so.
I guess I really shouldn't be surprised. Teachers Unions have been wallowing around in their own self importance like Jabba the Hutt for decades now, and like the Star Wars gangster slug, think themselves untouchable. Well, we'll see how that plays out in the future. Meantime, I wish this brave soul victory in his latest battle to continue serving our country by teaching our newest generation the values of military service.
One can only hope that, like Luke Skywalker in Return of the Jedi, someone puts a choke hold on these dimwits trying to extort money from people who aren't even members, and allow us to watch their last gasps as the concept of the worker's union dies a long overdue death.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Red? Blue? No! What Color is Tea Again?
I'm 24 hours late in bringing this to the blog, but I still feel the need to say something. A THIRD PARTY CANDIDATE won the Nevada Primary and will now slug it out with Prince Harry Reid in November...WTF?! I thought third parties only split the votes and made it easier for the liberals to win! This is momentous! Even if she doesn't beat Harry, it's still sending a message to Washington that we'd rather see a complete unknown go in than either a Democrat OR a Republican. Now, I know this isn't the end of the fight, but still, I'm filled with hope for my home state for the first time in two years. What would it mean if Sharon Angle, the Tea Party candidate who beat down Danny Tarkanian (I think that's how you spell it),actually beat Harry Reid? Or even came close for that matter? Well, let's look at that.
Nowhere in history can you find a place where a third party ever beat both establishments, except maybe for the election of Jessie "The Body" Ventura on the libertarian ticket a while back, who turned out to be little more than a one term wonder. Even Teddy Roosevelt, the most popular president in our history, couldn't win on a third party ticket. Yet here comes Ms. Angle, out of nowhere, completely smashing the conventional wisdom to bits and snagging the nomination.
As a native Nevadan, I can tell you that I would have voted for her as well, if her record is as accurate as I'm told it is. Seeing that she's won tells me a couple of things about the mood of that state.
1. They are fed up. Fed up with both the dems and the repubs. I'm willing to bet that the democrats who voted for Harry Reid only did so because they had to per the rules of the primary.
2. They aren't falling for the RINO ploy anymore. The liberal republican who was trying for the nomination flat out lost. Tarkanian came in second, and Angle won. Again, this does not bode well for either party in Nevada.
Now, I can just hear the liberal left going nuts over this: "The TEA party will never beat Harry Reid, she'd too unknown" Blah blah blah. Yeah, they said the same thing about Harry Truman being unable to defeat Thomas Dewey in the 40's. He won. Nuff said.
Here's to ya, Nevada, hoping to bring forth the first wave of real Hope and Change in the coming November landslides.
Continuing to Fight the Good Fight.
Nowhere in history can you find a place where a third party ever beat both establishments, except maybe for the election of Jessie "The Body" Ventura on the libertarian ticket a while back, who turned out to be little more than a one term wonder. Even Teddy Roosevelt, the most popular president in our history, couldn't win on a third party ticket. Yet here comes Ms. Angle, out of nowhere, completely smashing the conventional wisdom to bits and snagging the nomination.
As a native Nevadan, I can tell you that I would have voted for her as well, if her record is as accurate as I'm told it is. Seeing that she's won tells me a couple of things about the mood of that state.
1. They are fed up. Fed up with both the dems and the repubs. I'm willing to bet that the democrats who voted for Harry Reid only did so because they had to per the rules of the primary.
2. They aren't falling for the RINO ploy anymore. The liberal republican who was trying for the nomination flat out lost. Tarkanian came in second, and Angle won. Again, this does not bode well for either party in Nevada.
Now, I can just hear the liberal left going nuts over this: "The TEA party will never beat Harry Reid, she'd too unknown" Blah blah blah. Yeah, they said the same thing about Harry Truman being unable to defeat Thomas Dewey in the 40's. He won. Nuff said.
Here's to ya, Nevada, hoping to bring forth the first wave of real Hope and Change in the coming November landslides.
Continuing to Fight the Good Fight.
Sunday, June 6, 2010
Outrage Rediscovered, Courtesy of the Savage Nation.
Well, it was bound to happen. The Constitutional Crusader is BACK IN THE GAME, people! Once more you shall be regailed with cynical tales of outragiously stupid liberals who think this place is run by magical money-generating unicorns and leprechauns!
Kudos to Micheal Savage for bringing this to America's attention, and kudos to the person who posted this on Facebook for bringing it to MY attention.
Note the part where she actually thinks that this country is capable of sustaining six hundred million people (There are currently 300 million in the country, btw).
Also, note the absolutely moronic comments regarding where Obama gets the money to pay for her welfare check (yes, she is on welfare and is proud of it.)
According to her logic, we should just get rid of our borders and welcome everyone, even the terrorists and criminals who killed and terrorized Arizona and Texas ranchers for years. Yeah, that'll solve the problem.
This is why welfare needs to be severely cut down, if not eliminated entirely, save for those who NEED it. In my opinion, if you can walk into the welfare office under your own power, with no assistance whatsoever, you get your scrawny ass OUT THERE AND GET A DAMN JOB!
Rant over. Until next time, fellow-tin-foil-hat wearers.
Continuing to Fight the Good Fight.
Kudos to Micheal Savage for bringing this to America's attention, and kudos to the person who posted this on Facebook for bringing it to MY attention.
Note the part where she actually thinks that this country is capable of sustaining six hundred million people (There are currently 300 million in the country, btw).
Also, note the absolutely moronic comments regarding where Obama gets the money to pay for her welfare check (yes, she is on welfare and is proud of it.)
According to her logic, we should just get rid of our borders and welcome everyone, even the terrorists and criminals who killed and terrorized Arizona and Texas ranchers for years. Yeah, that'll solve the problem.
This is why welfare needs to be severely cut down, if not eliminated entirely, save for those who NEED it. In my opinion, if you can walk into the welfare office under your own power, with no assistance whatsoever, you get your scrawny ass OUT THERE AND GET A DAMN JOB!
Rant over. Until next time, fellow-tin-foil-hat wearers.
Continuing to Fight the Good Fight.
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Still hangin' in There.
As the title suggests, I'm still alive. Haven't had much time for blogging lately, but I get to it when I can (like now). As I write this I've had several crappy things happen to me over the past couple of weeks that have somewhat shaken my newfound faith in my own ability to live on my own, however, with the support system I have, it'll only be a matter of time before things get better.
Anyway, to the explanation of what that above means:
1. My car finally crapped out on me after years of loyal service due to a blown head gasket that will cost more than the car is worth to fix. Hence, it will soon be sent to the junk heap.
2. I got a parking ticket for that car just the next week later because it had been on the street without current registration tags. Crap. Oh, well.
3. My payment to Capital One to take care of my Credit Card balance was returned, thus rendering me in receipt of a returned check fee, as well as an over limit fee, so I now owe them more of what they know I do not have.
So all in all, fun week for me. OH! And I stumbled across some new "blame Bush" crap from the left:
Apparently that big bad GWB won the presidency in 2000, which made Al Gore bitter and resentful, thus resulting in marital problems at home, culminating in the split of Al and Tipper. What a piece of work these nimrods are, huh?
Anyway, to the explanation of what that above means:
1. My car finally crapped out on me after years of loyal service due to a blown head gasket that will cost more than the car is worth to fix. Hence, it will soon be sent to the junk heap.
2. I got a parking ticket for that car just the next week later because it had been on the street without current registration tags. Crap. Oh, well.
3. My payment to Capital One to take care of my Credit Card balance was returned, thus rendering me in receipt of a returned check fee, as well as an over limit fee, so I now owe them more of what they know I do not have.
So all in all, fun week for me. OH! And I stumbled across some new "blame Bush" crap from the left:
Apparently that big bad GWB won the presidency in 2000, which made Al Gore bitter and resentful, thus resulting in marital problems at home, culminating in the split of Al and Tipper. What a piece of work these nimrods are, huh?
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Leave the Blogosphere for one Stinkin' Week...
Well, it's actually been more like two or three weeks now, but still, I haven't been away THAT long, have I? I've been filling my head with a steady stream of talk radio once or twice a week to keep in the know, even though I've basically shut out everything else from Beck to O'Reilly and back again.
The major issue appears to be, even after its overwhelming passage and acceptance by the people of Arizona, the new law that (gasp) actually keeps a lookout for those who have entered our country illegally. Now I'm hearing that ICE won't process illegals sent to them from Arizona, and everyone's favorite rogue cop Sheriff Joe is doing what the head of ICE refuses to do? Why am I not surprised by this turn of events?
I'll tell you why. It's because this is nothing more than we've come to expect from the Feds for the last few decades. When was the last time we had a president that took illegal immigration seriously on either side of the isle? Dem or Repub? Anyone? Anyone? I didn't think so.
Even on the state level it's a bit shaky. Both of California's candidates for governor claim to be tough on illegals, but who do we believe? Personally I'm throwing my lot in with Meg Whitman, as she has yet to say anything untrue about Steve Poizner's positions on the issues. But that's enough endorsing politicos for right now. That's not what I'm posting about.
What I AM posting about is more like a "what the hell was going on while I was gone" kind of post, but even as I type this I can see that that reaction is not appropriate either.
Too much, quite frankly, has happened in my life for me to be concerned with the national or world stage at the moment, though having just found out that the movie about my absolute favorite superhero, Captain America, is being shot in LONDON of all places has me somewhat annoyed; I'll save that for later.
Let me just say that November can't get here fast enough, especially in the wake of Felipe Calderone's asinine comments about the United States violating human rights by protecting their own damn borders! Good God, when will it end?
Back into the Good Fight.
The major issue appears to be, even after its overwhelming passage and acceptance by the people of Arizona, the new law that (gasp) actually keeps a lookout for those who have entered our country illegally. Now I'm hearing that ICE won't process illegals sent to them from Arizona, and everyone's favorite rogue cop Sheriff Joe is doing what the head of ICE refuses to do? Why am I not surprised by this turn of events?
I'll tell you why. It's because this is nothing more than we've come to expect from the Feds for the last few decades. When was the last time we had a president that took illegal immigration seriously on either side of the isle? Dem or Repub? Anyone? Anyone? I didn't think so.
Even on the state level it's a bit shaky. Both of California's candidates for governor claim to be tough on illegals, but who do we believe? Personally I'm throwing my lot in with Meg Whitman, as she has yet to say anything untrue about Steve Poizner's positions on the issues. But that's enough endorsing politicos for right now. That's not what I'm posting about.
What I AM posting about is more like a "what the hell was going on while I was gone" kind of post, but even as I type this I can see that that reaction is not appropriate either.
Too much, quite frankly, has happened in my life for me to be concerned with the national or world stage at the moment, though having just found out that the movie about my absolute favorite superhero, Captain America, is being shot in LONDON of all places has me somewhat annoyed; I'll save that for later.
Let me just say that November can't get here fast enough, especially in the wake of Felipe Calderone's asinine comments about the United States violating human rights by protecting their own damn borders! Good God, when will it end?
Back into the Good Fight.
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
What Happened to the Outrage?
That has been a question I have been asking myself for the last couple of weeks. I think I've saturated myself on so much talk radio and TV news (O'Reilly, Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh, Van Sustren, and a little Brett Baeir thrown in for flavoring) that I just can't be outraged anymore.
This is why I haven't posted anything relevant lately. I feel like I know it's already happening, and by the time I get around to posting about something I believe is important, it's all over the blogosphere. That slow response is another reason I've just decided to take a little hiatus from the whole political news scene. I'll still be coming around, and I'll get back into the game eventually, after the engines have been cooled and the fire has been re-lit.
Continuing to Fight the Good Fight (after a break)
This is why I haven't posted anything relevant lately. I feel like I know it's already happening, and by the time I get around to posting about something I believe is important, it's all over the blogosphere. That slow response is another reason I've just decided to take a little hiatus from the whole political news scene. I'll still be coming around, and I'll get back into the game eventually, after the engines have been cooled and the fire has been re-lit.
Continuing to Fight the Good Fight (after a break)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)