Sad But True ~~~
A dog had followed his owner to school. His owner was a fourth grader at a public elementary school.
The dog went inside the building and made it all the way to the child's classroom before a teacher noticed and shooed him outside, closing the door behind him.The dog sat down, whimpered and stared at the closed doors.
Then God appeared beside the dog, patted his head, and said,
"Don't feel bad fella they won't let ME in either!"
Stay safe.
31 August 2011
30 August 2011
You don't need a gun....
To kill yourself....
Or to kill someone else.
Sad situations, both. Contrary to what the anti-gunners would have you believe, the fact of the matter is that if you want to kill yourself or others, you'll find a way to do it. Where there's a will, there's a way. Where there's desire, there's a device. It's not the tool, it's the person using it. Seems pretty simple to me.
I watched a guy in a black Pontiac Grand Prix run through a 4-way stop and nearly nail the guy who had already stopped and was then making a legal left turn on my way home from work tonight. The guy in the Pontiac? Gangsta' lean. Cell phone. Could have killed someone. 'Nuff said.
Stay safe.
Or to kill someone else.
Sad situations, both. Contrary to what the anti-gunners would have you believe, the fact of the matter is that if you want to kill yourself or others, you'll find a way to do it. Where there's a will, there's a way. Where there's desire, there's a device. It's not the tool, it's the person using it. Seems pretty simple to me.
I watched a guy in a black Pontiac Grand Prix run through a 4-way stop and nearly nail the guy who had already stopped and was then making a legal left turn on my way home from work tonight. The guy in the Pontiac? Gangsta' lean. Cell phone. Could have killed someone. 'Nuff said.
Stay safe.
29 August 2011
27 August 2011
26 August 2011
25 August 2011
24 August 2011
Jon Tumilson....
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/heart-wrenching-image-dog-keeps-watch-over-fallen-seals-casket-during-funeral/
Thank you for your service. Rest in peace.
Stay safe.
Hump Day...
I'm sure that this is too simple for some folks to understand. The indoctrination has been that thorough.
Stay safe.
23 August 2011
Killed in Holland....
Too violent to be seen in Holland. Hmmmm.....
It certainly got my attention. :)
Stay safe.
22 August 2011
Roe has no clothes....
http://stevedeace.com/news/iowa-politics/roe-has-no-clothes/
by Andy Alexander
Since the 1960s the pro-abortion movement has employed the notion that it is someone’s “right” to choose whether they have an abortion. That archaic idea is fallacious at best and ignorant at worst. I’m going to take you back to January 22, 1973–a time when most Americans(especially those of the church) were essentially asleep. Their attention was being directed toward one or more of the following: Elvis Presley’s televised concert from Hawaii was watched by 1.5 billion people worldwide (Jan 14, 1973), the Miami Dolphins Super Bowl victory capping the completion of the only perfect season in NFL history (Jan 14, 1973), the suspension of offensive action in Vietnam (Jan 15, 1973), President Richard “not a crook” Nixon’s 2nd inaugural term (Jan 20, 1973), the Foreman/Frazier heavyweight championship bout(Jan 25, 1973), the death of former president Lyndon Johnson (Jan 25, 1973), the Paris Peace Accord signing that ended the war in Vietnam (Jan 27, 1973), and former presidential aides James McCord and G. Gordon Liddy were convicted of conspiracy, burglary and wiretapping for their roles in the Watergate break-in (Jan 30, 1973).
On February 5, just 14 days after the landmark decision, Newsweek put it this way: “The end of a war and the death of a President got bigger headlines. But in a quiet way, a third event last week may have as lasting an influence on American life. . . . In one of the boldest and most sweeping decisions of the Nixon years, the Court ruled 7-2 that the criminal abortion laws of almost every state violate a constitutional ‘right to privacy’ and must therefore be struck down.” That media whirlwind was the backdrop of the January 22nd, 1973, decision of seven non-elected men, appointed for life, that changed the course of history… for the worse.
Those seven men caved to the pressure of the i-don’t-want-to-face-the-consequences-of-my-actions crowd of the 1960s sexual revolution. That choice of the SCOTUS essentially aborted every state law that had previously protected human beings in the womb. Without a single vote being cast, without one word of due legislation being written, those seven oligarchs usurped the authority of the U.S.Congress and Senate, every individual State legislature and governor, not to mention “We the People,” and created the worst human rights violation in the history of man kind by killing, over 53 million human beings to date.
But the biggest usurpation is that of the supplanting of the authority of the Natural Law, or, as the Declaration of Independence states, “the Law of Nature and of Nature’s God.”
The Right to Life. The Right to Liberty. The Right to the Pursuit of Happiness.
In their wisdom (which is lacking today) the writers and signers of the Declaration ofIndependence listed three of the inalienable rights. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. These Rights were listed in that order for a very logical reason. It is impossible for someone to pursue happiness without the right to liberty and it is impossible to have any rights without the right to life. Thus, the Right to Life is the foundational and the greatest of all Rights. Since that is the case, not only is it un-American, but should also be illegal to terminate the life of another human being. However, in the two-plus-two-makes-five society in which we now live it is not only accepted, but encouraged to put one’s own liberty and/or pursuit of happiness ahead of the life of another individual, all in the name of “choice.” In order to justify their murderous choice, some will selfishly say, “Well, if I have this baby, my life will be messed up and stuff because I’ll have to…like…take care of it and stuff. So, it’s really about MY right to life.” By doing so, they create another fallacious reality to appease their conscious once they realize the fallacy of their previous position. Delusion begets more delusion.
The abolition of abortion does not imply that the child is more valuable than the mother. Rather, it recognizes that the child’s right to not be killed is greater and more fundamental than the woman’s right to not be pregnant. The same can be said about an individual’s right to liberty being greater than another’s right to pursue their happiness. This is precisely why slavery was correctly abolished. Life is the foundation of all of the Rights that we possess. If we cannot acknowledge that truth than all of our other rights will be taken away from us.
We’re not in 1973 anymore, Toto!
Biological and medical sciences have progressed greatly since 1973. It is now very widely accepted that every new life has its genesis at conception. This is an irrefutable FACT of biology. It is true for animals and true for humans. When considered alongside the law of biogenesis – that every species reproduces after its own kind – only one conclusion can be drawn in regard to abortion. The circumstances of conception notwithstanding, and whether it be the morning after or the third trimester, abortion always ends the life of an individual human being. Even abortion advocates concede this simple fact. Faye Wattleton, the longest reigning president of the largest abortion provider in the world – Planned Parenthood – argued as far back as 1997 that everyone already knows that abortion kills. She proclaims the following in an interview with Ms. Magazine:
“I think we have deluded ourselves into believing that people don’t know that abortion is killing. So any pretense that abortion is not killing is a signal of our ambivalence, a signal that we cannot say yes, it kills a fetus.”(Source: Faye Wattleton, “Speaking Frankly,” Ms., May / June 1997, Volume VII,Number 6, 67.) Naomi Wolf, a prominent feminist author and abortion supporter, concedes the same point when she writes: ”Clinging to a rhetoric about abortion in which there is no life and no death, we entangle our beliefs in a series of self-delusions, fibs and evasions. And we risk becoming precisely what our critics charge us with being: callous, selfish and casually destructive men and women who share a cheapened view of humanlife…we need to contextualize the fight to defend abortion rights within a moral framework that admits that the death of a fetus is a real death.”(Source: Naomi Wolf, “Our Bodies, Our Souls,” The New Republic, October 16,1995, 26.)
The point is: There is simply NO debate among honest, informed people that abortion kills a human beings.
Exposing Roe
The problem is, Roe vs. Wade is actually built on the claim that there’s no way to say for certain whether or not abortion kills because no one can say for certain when life begins. Justice Harry Blackmun, who authored the majority opinion wrote: ”The judiciary, at this point in the development of man’s knowledge, is not in a position to… resolve the difficult question of when life begins… since those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus.”(Source: Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).) Because we now know without a doubt that this is scientifically and medically false, Justice Blackmun’s assertion is a ridiculous one. Biologically, life’s beginning is a settled fact. Individual human life begins at fertilization, and there numerouas authoritative, public resources to prove this.
“Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a malegamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete oroocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.” “A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).”(Source: Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology ,7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.)
“Development begins with fertilization, the process by which the male gamete, the sperm, and the femal gamete, the oocyte, unite to give rise to a zygote.” (Source: T.W. Sadler, Langman’s Medical Embryology, 10th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2006. p. 11.)
“[The zygote], formed by the union of an oocyte and a sperm, is the beginningof a new human being.” (Source: Keith L. Moore, Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology, 7thedition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2008. p. 2.)
“Although life is a continuous process, fertilization (which, incidentally, is not a’moment’) is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte.” (Source: Ronan O’Rahilly and Fabiola Müller, Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 2001. p. 8.)
“The two cells gradually and gracefully become one. This is the moment of conception, when an individual’s unique set of DNA is created, a human signature that never existed before and will never be repeated.” (Source: In the Womb, National Geographic, 2005.)
“Biologically speaking, human development begins at fertilization.”(Source: The Biology of Prenatal Develpment, National Geographic, 2006.)
As if those were not enough, here’s some icing for your cake. In 1981, a United States Senate judiciary subcommittee received testimony from numerous medical experts. Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth of Harvard University Medical School stated that “it is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive…It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception.” The official Senate report reached this conclusion: Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being – a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings (Source: Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session 1981, 7.)
So, if medical science, tells us that the Roe v. Wade decision is false, and pro-abortion activists like former Planned Parenthood President, Faye Wattleton, know and agree that abortions ends the life of a human being, some questions are begging to be asked: Why is Roe v. Wade still something that we use to justify the murder of 1.4 million babies every year? And why is abortion even an issue at all?
It stands to reason that if the court decision that made abortion “legal” by denying personhood status to the unborn is based on information that is scientifically proven to be false that the court decision itself is false.
With this enlightenment we have but one course of action: Abolish human abortion. We must pass legislation that would make abortion illegal in every form and at every stage of pregnancy in every state, equate the practice of human abortion with that of murder, and execute such legislation with the full force of the law.
Bottom line: No one’s “right” to choice EVER trumps another individual’s Right to Life. Re-educate yourself, then re-educate those around you. It’s time for responsible, intelligent Americans to wake up, smell the blood-stained coffee of the reality that is this culture which has been created by our our ignorance and indifference and start to change it! It is our responsibility to shine the light of truth into the darkness of delusion and work to abolish the abomination that is abortion once and for all.
Something to think about, eh?
But, but, but.... What about rape, incest, or the health of the mother?
Abortions performed for all three of these reasons combined total slightly more than 2% of all abortions.
Abortion is birth control for folks who have no self control.
The freedom to choose should only go as far as the freedom to choose whether to open your legs and risk pregnancy or not. Once that egg is fertilized the freedom to choose is gone. You have made your choice. You have created a human life. Now it's time to be responsible, which is probably something you are unfamiliar with. To take that life is murder.
Just because it's legal doesn't make it right.
Stay safe.
by Andy Alexander
Since the 1960s the pro-abortion movement has employed the notion that it is someone’s “right” to choose whether they have an abortion. That archaic idea is fallacious at best and ignorant at worst. I’m going to take you back to January 22, 1973–a time when most Americans(especially those of the church) were essentially asleep. Their attention was being directed toward one or more of the following: Elvis Presley’s televised concert from Hawaii was watched by 1.5 billion people worldwide (Jan 14, 1973), the Miami Dolphins Super Bowl victory capping the completion of the only perfect season in NFL history (Jan 14, 1973), the suspension of offensive action in Vietnam (Jan 15, 1973), President Richard “not a crook” Nixon’s 2nd inaugural term (Jan 20, 1973), the Foreman/Frazier heavyweight championship bout(Jan 25, 1973), the death of former president Lyndon Johnson (Jan 25, 1973), the Paris Peace Accord signing that ended the war in Vietnam (Jan 27, 1973), and former presidential aides James McCord and G. Gordon Liddy were convicted of conspiracy, burglary and wiretapping for their roles in the Watergate break-in (Jan 30, 1973).
On February 5, just 14 days after the landmark decision, Newsweek put it this way: “The end of a war and the death of a President got bigger headlines. But in a quiet way, a third event last week may have as lasting an influence on American life. . . . In one of the boldest and most sweeping decisions of the Nixon years, the Court ruled 7-2 that the criminal abortion laws of almost every state violate a constitutional ‘right to privacy’ and must therefore be struck down.” That media whirlwind was the backdrop of the January 22nd, 1973, decision of seven non-elected men, appointed for life, that changed the course of history… for the worse.
Those seven men caved to the pressure of the i-don’t-want-to-face-the-consequences-of-my-actions crowd of the 1960s sexual revolution. That choice of the SCOTUS essentially aborted every state law that had previously protected human beings in the womb. Without a single vote being cast, without one word of due legislation being written, those seven oligarchs usurped the authority of the U.S.Congress and Senate, every individual State legislature and governor, not to mention “We the People,” and created the worst human rights violation in the history of man kind by killing, over 53 million human beings to date.
But the biggest usurpation is that of the supplanting of the authority of the Natural Law, or, as the Declaration of Independence states, “the Law of Nature and of Nature’s God.”
The Right to Life. The Right to Liberty. The Right to the Pursuit of Happiness.
In their wisdom (which is lacking today) the writers and signers of the Declaration ofIndependence listed three of the inalienable rights. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. These Rights were listed in that order for a very logical reason. It is impossible for someone to pursue happiness without the right to liberty and it is impossible to have any rights without the right to life. Thus, the Right to Life is the foundational and the greatest of all Rights. Since that is the case, not only is it un-American, but should also be illegal to terminate the life of another human being. However, in the two-plus-two-makes-five society in which we now live it is not only accepted, but encouraged to put one’s own liberty and/or pursuit of happiness ahead of the life of another individual, all in the name of “choice.” In order to justify their murderous choice, some will selfishly say, “Well, if I have this baby, my life will be messed up and stuff because I’ll have to…like…take care of it and stuff. So, it’s really about MY right to life.” By doing so, they create another fallacious reality to appease their conscious once they realize the fallacy of their previous position. Delusion begets more delusion.
The abolition of abortion does not imply that the child is more valuable than the mother. Rather, it recognizes that the child’s right to not be killed is greater and more fundamental than the woman’s right to not be pregnant. The same can be said about an individual’s right to liberty being greater than another’s right to pursue their happiness. This is precisely why slavery was correctly abolished. Life is the foundation of all of the Rights that we possess. If we cannot acknowledge that truth than all of our other rights will be taken away from us.
We’re not in 1973 anymore, Toto!
Biological and medical sciences have progressed greatly since 1973. It is now very widely accepted that every new life has its genesis at conception. This is an irrefutable FACT of biology. It is true for animals and true for humans. When considered alongside the law of biogenesis – that every species reproduces after its own kind – only one conclusion can be drawn in regard to abortion. The circumstances of conception notwithstanding, and whether it be the morning after or the third trimester, abortion always ends the life of an individual human being. Even abortion advocates concede this simple fact. Faye Wattleton, the longest reigning president of the largest abortion provider in the world – Planned Parenthood – argued as far back as 1997 that everyone already knows that abortion kills. She proclaims the following in an interview with Ms. Magazine:
“I think we have deluded ourselves into believing that people don’t know that abortion is killing. So any pretense that abortion is not killing is a signal of our ambivalence, a signal that we cannot say yes, it kills a fetus.”(Source: Faye Wattleton, “Speaking Frankly,” Ms., May / June 1997, Volume VII,Number 6, 67.) Naomi Wolf, a prominent feminist author and abortion supporter, concedes the same point when she writes: ”Clinging to a rhetoric about abortion in which there is no life and no death, we entangle our beliefs in a series of self-delusions, fibs and evasions. And we risk becoming precisely what our critics charge us with being: callous, selfish and casually destructive men and women who share a cheapened view of humanlife…we need to contextualize the fight to defend abortion rights within a moral framework that admits that the death of a fetus is a real death.”(Source: Naomi Wolf, “Our Bodies, Our Souls,” The New Republic, October 16,1995, 26.)
The point is: There is simply NO debate among honest, informed people that abortion kills a human beings.
Exposing Roe
The problem is, Roe vs. Wade is actually built on the claim that there’s no way to say for certain whether or not abortion kills because no one can say for certain when life begins. Justice Harry Blackmun, who authored the majority opinion wrote: ”The judiciary, at this point in the development of man’s knowledge, is not in a position to… resolve the difficult question of when life begins… since those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus.”(Source: Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).) Because we now know without a doubt that this is scientifically and medically false, Justice Blackmun’s assertion is a ridiculous one. Biologically, life’s beginning is a settled fact. Individual human life begins at fertilization, and there numerouas authoritative, public resources to prove this.
“Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a malegamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete oroocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.” “A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).”(Source: Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology ,7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.)
“Development begins with fertilization, the process by which the male gamete, the sperm, and the femal gamete, the oocyte, unite to give rise to a zygote.” (Source: T.W. Sadler, Langman’s Medical Embryology, 10th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2006. p. 11.)
“[The zygote], formed by the union of an oocyte and a sperm, is the beginningof a new human being.” (Source: Keith L. Moore, Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology, 7thedition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2008. p. 2.)
“Although life is a continuous process, fertilization (which, incidentally, is not a’moment’) is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte.” (Source: Ronan O’Rahilly and Fabiola Müller, Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 2001. p. 8.)
“The two cells gradually and gracefully become one. This is the moment of conception, when an individual’s unique set of DNA is created, a human signature that never existed before and will never be repeated.” (Source: In the Womb, National Geographic, 2005.)
“Biologically speaking, human development begins at fertilization.”(Source: The Biology of Prenatal Develpment, National Geographic, 2006.)
As if those were not enough, here’s some icing for your cake. In 1981, a United States Senate judiciary subcommittee received testimony from numerous medical experts. Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth of Harvard University Medical School stated that “it is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive…It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception.” The official Senate report reached this conclusion: Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being – a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings (Source: Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session 1981, 7.)
So, if medical science, tells us that the Roe v. Wade decision is false, and pro-abortion activists like former Planned Parenthood President, Faye Wattleton, know and agree that abortions ends the life of a human being, some questions are begging to be asked: Why is Roe v. Wade still something that we use to justify the murder of 1.4 million babies every year? And why is abortion even an issue at all?
It stands to reason that if the court decision that made abortion “legal” by denying personhood status to the unborn is based on information that is scientifically proven to be false that the court decision itself is false.
With this enlightenment we have but one course of action: Abolish human abortion. We must pass legislation that would make abortion illegal in every form and at every stage of pregnancy in every state, equate the practice of human abortion with that of murder, and execute such legislation with the full force of the law.
Bottom line: No one’s “right” to choice EVER trumps another individual’s Right to Life. Re-educate yourself, then re-educate those around you. It’s time for responsible, intelligent Americans to wake up, smell the blood-stained coffee of the reality that is this culture which has been created by our our ignorance and indifference and start to change it! It is our responsibility to shine the light of truth into the darkness of delusion and work to abolish the abomination that is abortion once and for all.
Something to think about, eh?
But, but, but.... What about rape, incest, or the health of the mother?
Abortions performed for all three of these reasons combined total slightly more than 2% of all abortions.
Abortion is birth control for folks who have no self control.
The freedom to choose should only go as far as the freedom to choose whether to open your legs and risk pregnancy or not. Once that egg is fertilized the freedom to choose is gone. You have made your choice. You have created a human life. Now it's time to be responsible, which is probably something you are unfamiliar with. To take that life is murder.
Just because it's legal doesn't make it right.
Stay safe.
21 August 2011
What to do with Liberals....
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
Sarcasm Alert!
I suggest that all Liberals be sent to re-education camps in the wide open spaces along our northern border for an initial stay of one year.
At the end of that one year period each Liberal would be evaluated to determine the progress of their re-education. There will be no early release for good behavior. :)
At this point, those individual Liberals determined to have been successfully re-educated would bereleased back into returned to society subject to a probationary period of six months to one year to determine whether or not the re-education process was completely successful. During this probationary period these individuals would have to meet with a qualified civilian probation officer on a bi-weekly basis and their success, or lack thereof, documented. The individual Liberal would be responsible for any fees associated with their probation. Those who revert back to Liberalism or fail to meet the requirements of their probation during the probationary period would be sent back to the re-education camp for a period of one year.
If it is determined at the initial One Year Evaluation that a Liberal has not been appropriately re-educated, that Liberal would spend an additional year in the re-education camp in a final intensified attempt at re-education. If it is determined at the end of the second year that the Liberal has been successfully re-educated, he or she will be returned to society with the same probationary requirements as those who were re-educated in the initial one year period. Those Liberals who spend two consecutive years in the re-education camps because they were unable to be re-educated in the initial year will not have the opportunity to return to the re-education camp for further re-education if they fail their probation. Life is hard, I guess.
If it becomes apparent at any time during the re-education or probationary period, or at any time after all authorized re-education opportunities have been exhausted, that an individual Liberal cannot or will not be successfully re-educated, that individual Liberal would be dispatched to the socialist country of his or her choice, anywhere in the world, for the actual price of air fare and meals plus a small convenience fee. This, of course, rests on the willingness of the chosen socialist country to accept the individual Liberal. If the Liberal fails to choose a socialist country to be dispatched to, or if the socialist country chosen by the individual Liberal refuses to accept that Liberal, a socialist country that will accept the Liberal will be chosen for the Liberal.
As you can see, the re-education camps are not intended to house any individual Liberal on a permanent basis. With a maximum of two years re-education and a maximum of one year probation, the majority of the re-education camps will need to operate for no more than three years to handle the initial influx of Liberals to be re-educated. They will not become housing "Projects" such as we currently see in major metropolitan areas. Obviously, a small number of camps will have to remain operable to handle those who slip into Liberalism for the first time at some point after the initial batch of Liberals is re-educated.
The obvious goal of re-education is to turn Liberals into productive members of society. I realize that it will be difficult....
The reason that areas along our northern border are being suggested is twofold:
1. These areas are far from the southern border, which Liberals seem to want to keep wide open in order to allow unfettered illegal immigration. The further they are from our southern border, the better.
2. These areas have brutal winters and it is my contention that brutal weather forces one to pay attention. God knows that Liberals need to learn to pay attention.
I envision these re-education camps being less like "camps" and more like small towns and villages. They would have to create business and industry and become self sufficient. The intention would not be oppression. Each Liberal would have to work and pay his or her own way. They could choose to rent or to own their houses or apartments but all houses and apartments would be the same design and size. Property taxes would pay for essential services. The Liberals would operate or work for heavily taxed and regulated businesses. Those who earned more would be taxed at a higher rate. The "rich" would be taxed heavily. Businesses would be taxed heavily. There would be no rent subsidies or farm subsidies. No more could be spent to operate the re-education camps than could be taken in taxes from the camps.
Each Liberal would be required to work at a job for 8 hours a day and would be required to attend school for 6 hours every day. There would be no government welfare programs. They would have to determine how to create and fund their own charities to assist those in need.
In school they would be taught non-revisionist American History and non-revisionist world history. They would learn math. They would learn science. They would be taught English. They would attend classes on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. They would be taught the benefits of self respect and respect for others.
Sarcasm Alert over....
You get the drift.... It's obviously an over-simplified scenario. It's obviously sarcasm. We have more problems today than just Liberals.
It's what those currently in power are planning and executing already. Their reasons are different, though. Look around. Open your eyes. They won't send those who can't or won't be re-educated to other countries. They will use other alternatives to rid themselves of those they cannot re-educate. I suspect that there are some whom they will not even attempt to re-educate. If you don't see the world the way they see the world, you're on a list. Or will be.
I wonder if there will actually be another Presidential election in 2012? If so, and the current President isn't re-elected, will there be an inaugration of a new President in January of 2013? Gotta wonder.
To borrow a phrase "Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean that they aren't after me".
I realize that we need varying opinions and viewpoints to make our society function and to be the great nation that we are. I'm frustrated, like most of you are, that there is so much division and so little communication regarding our vision for the America of the future.
We all better start paying closer attention to what's going on around us.
Enjoy the time that remains.
Stay safe.
Sarcasm Alert!
I suggest that all Liberals be sent to re-education camps in the wide open spaces along our northern border for an initial stay of one year.
At the end of that one year period each Liberal would be evaluated to determine the progress of their re-education. There will be no early release for good behavior. :)
At this point, those individual Liberals determined to have been successfully re-educated would be
If it is determined at the initial One Year Evaluation that a Liberal has not been appropriately re-educated, that Liberal would spend an additional year in the re-education camp in a final intensified attempt at re-education. If it is determined at the end of the second year that the Liberal has been successfully re-educated, he or she will be returned to society with the same probationary requirements as those who were re-educated in the initial one year period. Those Liberals who spend two consecutive years in the re-education camps because they were unable to be re-educated in the initial year will not have the opportunity to return to the re-education camp for further re-education if they fail their probation. Life is hard, I guess.
If it becomes apparent at any time during the re-education or probationary period, or at any time after all authorized re-education opportunities have been exhausted, that an individual Liberal cannot or will not be successfully re-educated, that individual Liberal would be dispatched to the socialist country of his or her choice, anywhere in the world, for the actual price of air fare and meals plus a small convenience fee. This, of course, rests on the willingness of the chosen socialist country to accept the individual Liberal. If the Liberal fails to choose a socialist country to be dispatched to, or if the socialist country chosen by the individual Liberal refuses to accept that Liberal, a socialist country that will accept the Liberal will be chosen for the Liberal.
As you can see, the re-education camps are not intended to house any individual Liberal on a permanent basis. With a maximum of two years re-education and a maximum of one year probation, the majority of the re-education camps will need to operate for no more than three years to handle the initial influx of Liberals to be re-educated. They will not become housing "Projects" such as we currently see in major metropolitan areas. Obviously, a small number of camps will have to remain operable to handle those who slip into Liberalism for the first time at some point after the initial batch of Liberals is re-educated.
The obvious goal of re-education is to turn Liberals into productive members of society. I realize that it will be difficult....
The reason that areas along our northern border are being suggested is twofold:
1. These areas are far from the southern border, which Liberals seem to want to keep wide open in order to allow unfettered illegal immigration. The further they are from our southern border, the better.
2. These areas have brutal winters and it is my contention that brutal weather forces one to pay attention. God knows that Liberals need to learn to pay attention.
I envision these re-education camps being less like "camps" and more like small towns and villages. They would have to create business and industry and become self sufficient. The intention would not be oppression. Each Liberal would have to work and pay his or her own way. They could choose to rent or to own their houses or apartments but all houses and apartments would be the same design and size. Property taxes would pay for essential services. The Liberals would operate or work for heavily taxed and regulated businesses. Those who earned more would be taxed at a higher rate. The "rich" would be taxed heavily. Businesses would be taxed heavily. There would be no rent subsidies or farm subsidies. No more could be spent to operate the re-education camps than could be taken in taxes from the camps.
Each Liberal would be required to work at a job for 8 hours a day and would be required to attend school for 6 hours every day. There would be no government welfare programs. They would have to determine how to create and fund their own charities to assist those in need.
In school they would be taught non-revisionist American History and non-revisionist world history. They would learn math. They would learn science. They would be taught English. They would attend classes on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. They would be taught the benefits of self respect and respect for others.
Sarcasm Alert over....
You get the drift.... It's obviously an over-simplified scenario. It's obviously sarcasm. We have more problems today than just Liberals.
It's what those currently in power are planning and executing already. Their reasons are different, though. Look around. Open your eyes. They won't send those who can't or won't be re-educated to other countries. They will use other alternatives to rid themselves of those they cannot re-educate. I suspect that there are some whom they will not even attempt to re-educate. If you don't see the world the way they see the world, you're on a list. Or will be.
I wonder if there will actually be another Presidential election in 2012? If so, and the current President isn't re-elected, will there be an inaugration of a new President in January of 2013? Gotta wonder.
To borrow a phrase "Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean that they aren't after me".
I realize that we need varying opinions and viewpoints to make our society function and to be the great nation that we are. I'm frustrated, like most of you are, that there is so much division and so little communication regarding our vision for the America of the future.
We all better start paying closer attention to what's going on around us.
Enjoy the time that remains.
Stay safe.
20 August 2011
Texas Longhorns....
Where did the Texas longhorn logo idea come from?
Thanks, Rhonda Mae ;)
I did not know this!!!
Thanks, Rhonda Mae ;)
Stay safe.
Washington D.C. logic....
Life inside the obama regime....
It's gettin' kinda weird. I wonder how his apologists will spin this one?
We had a saying when I was in the Army. "Fuck up, move up". Seems to be the case here.
Weird.
Stay safe.
It's gettin' kinda weird. I wonder how his apologists will spin this one?
We had a saying when I was in the Army. "Fuck up, move up". Seems to be the case here.
Weird.
Stay safe.
19 August 2011
Oldie but goodie....
I just received this via email from my oldest manchild.
His comment was " I feel safer knowing that this particular weapon cannot kill me."
Blow it up and look at the picture.
I wonder if she received remedial firearms training after this incident?
"To Protect and to Serve"
Stay safe.
The Scoop....
Each Friday I receive an email from Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa in which he shares some information about what he's working on in Washington.
This weeks edition contains another article regarding the investigation into Fast and Furious. Read it here.
Apparently Holder and the DOJ are still being less than forthcoming. It's interesting that they release some information to Grassley and Issa and then follow up a few days later with a letter saying that the information they sent was inaccurate but fail to explain the inaccuracies. Weird. Show of hands: Who's surprised?
Ahhhh, well.... It's Friday. Enjoy the weekend!
Stay safe.
This weeks edition contains another article regarding the investigation into Fast and Furious. Read it here.
Apparently Holder and the DOJ are still being less than forthcoming. It's interesting that they release some information to Grassley and Issa and then follow up a few days later with a letter saying that the information they sent was inaccurate but fail to explain the inaccuracies. Weird. Show of hands: Who's surprised?
Ahhhh, well.... It's Friday. Enjoy the weekend!
Stay safe.
18 August 2011
The family is fine....
I was at the store yesterday, and I ran into Tarzan! I asked him how it was going and if he was into making any more movies.He told me that he could no longer make any more movies as he had severe arthritis in both shoulders and could no longer swing from vine to tree.
I asked how Jane was doing, he told me she was in bad shape, in a nursing home, has Alzheimer's and no longer recognizes anyone.. How sad.
I asked about Boy, and he told me that Boy had gone to the big city, got hooked up with bad women, drugs, alcohol, and the only times he heard from him was when he was in trouble or needed something.
I asked about Cheeta, he beamed and said she was doing good. She married a lawyer, had gotten some plastic surgery, and now lived in the White House!!!
I know, I know, something bad is going to happen to me!!!!! :)
Stay safe.
I know, I know, something bad is going to happen to me!!!!!
Stay safe.
You know the honeymoon is over when the comedians start....
The liberals are asking us to give Obama time.
We agree...and think 25 to life would be appropriate.
--Jay Leno
Nancy Pelosi needs a Halloween mask.
--Jay Leno
Q: Have you heard about McDonald's'
new Obama Value Meal?
A: Order anything you like
and the guy behind you has to pay for it.
--Conan O'Brien
Q: What does Barack Obama
call lunch with a convicted felon?
A: A fund raiser.
--Jay Leno
Q: What's the difference between
Obama's cabinet and a penitentiary?
A: One is filled with tax evaders, blackmailers,
and threats to society.
The other is for housing prisoners.
--David Letterman
Q: If Nancy Pelosi and Obama were on a boat
in the middle of the ocean and it started to sink,
who would be saved?
A:
--Jimmy Fallon
Q: What's the difference between
Obama and his dog, Bo?
A: Bo has papers.
--Jimmy Kimmel
Q: What was the most positive result of
the "Cash for Clunkers" program?
A: It took 95% of the Obama bumper
stickers off the road.
--David Letterman
Stay safe.
Solution to the problem in
Trouble in Paradise: Liberal Op/Ed at Huffington Post slams obama...
What? Another Department of Jobs?
Floundering. Flopping around like a fish on deck. That's the best description of the Obama administration this summer. The president's now on a bus tour of the Heartland. Next, he's slated to go to Martha's Vineyard for a well-earned vacation.
He's done about all the damage he can do for one summer, so let's give him a break. The media shows the president stepping smartly off Air Force One or briskly scaling the stairway up to Air Force One. It's intended to impress us and it does impress. Until you recall that that's $187,000 an hour to fuel and fly the jumbo jet, all added to our national debt.
Earlier this month, President Obama announced a new program for returning veterans. In his "Weekly Radio Address," he called it "a reverse boot camp." A what? What does that mean? Boot camp, as everyone knows, is designed to whip you into shape, to get you ready for the rigors of military service. So, what's a reverse boot camp? To reverse that process would do what? Get you out of shape? Make you less prepared for your role? Leave you a couch potato? It cannot mean wear your boots in reverse.
Who writes this stuff, anyway? The president's speechwriter makes $172,200 a year. Maybe we could start trimming the deficit there. Barack Obama is on record saying he's a better speechwriter than his speechwriters. If this is what that speechwriter comes up with, Mr. Obama could hardly do worse.
Now making the rounds is this howler: The president is planning to unveil his new jobs proposals -- in September. Why wait until after Labor Day? Wouldn't it be neat to think, as we approach Labor Day, that the administration had a forward-looking plan in place right now? I think the 25 million unemployed or underemployed Americans would be especially excited to hear of a plan before they have to shell out for the kids' new school shoes.
One of the trial balloons currently being floated is that the president will announce a new Department of Jobs. This has got to be a joke. Here's a paragraph on the U.S. Department of Labor. It details the history of this federal agency, now approaching its one hundredth year of existence:
Reads pretty much like a Jobs Department to me. Has anyone talked to Labor Sec. Hilda Solis about any new "Jobs Department?" What is she supposed to do, how is she supposed to labor, if we have another Jobs Department?
Then, of course, we have the U.S. Commerce Department. The Mission Statement of this department makes it sound like it, too, is a Jobs Department.
He's done about all the damage he can do for one summer, so let's give him a break. The media shows the president stepping smartly off Air Force One or briskly scaling the stairway up to Air Force One. It's intended to impress us and it does impress. Until you recall that that's $187,000 an hour to fuel and fly the jumbo jet, all added to our national debt.
Earlier this month, President Obama announced a new program for returning veterans. In his "Weekly Radio Address," he called it "a reverse boot camp." A what? What does that mean? Boot camp, as everyone knows, is designed to whip you into shape, to get you ready for the rigors of military service. So, what's a reverse boot camp? To reverse that process would do what? Get you out of shape? Make you less prepared for your role? Leave you a couch potato? It cannot mean wear your boots in reverse.
Who writes this stuff, anyway? The president's speechwriter makes $172,200 a year. Maybe we could start trimming the deficit there. Barack Obama is on record saying he's a better speechwriter than his speechwriters. If this is what that speechwriter comes up with, Mr. Obama could hardly do worse.
Now making the rounds is this howler: The president is planning to unveil his new jobs proposals -- in September. Why wait until after Labor Day? Wouldn't it be neat to think, as we approach Labor Day, that the administration had a forward-looking plan in place right now? I think the 25 million unemployed or underemployed Americans would be especially excited to hear of a plan before they have to shell out for the kids' new school shoes.
One of the trial balloons currently being floated is that the president will announce a new Department of Jobs. This has got to be a joke. Here's a paragraph on the U.S. Department of Labor. It details the history of this federal agency, now approaching its one hundredth year of existence:
The organic act establishing the Department of Labor was signed on March 4, 1913, by a reluctant President William Howard Taft, the defeated and departing incumbent, just hours before Woodrow Wilson took office. A Federal Department of Labor was the direct product of a half-century campaign by organized labor for a "Voice in the Cabinet," and an indirect product of the Progressive Movement. In the words of the organic act, the Department's purpose is "to foster, promote and develop the welfare of working people, to improve their working conditions, and to enhance their opportunities for profitable employment."
Reads pretty much like a Jobs Department to me. Has anyone talked to Labor Sec. Hilda Solis about any new "Jobs Department?" What is she supposed to do, how is she supposed to labor, if we have another Jobs Department?
Then, of course, we have the U.S. Commerce Department. The Mission Statement of this department makes it sound like it, too, is a Jobs Department.
The U.S. Department of Commerce promotes job creation, economic growth, sustainable development and improved standards of living for all Americans by working in partnership with businesses, universities, communities and our nation's workers.
Reading these official statements -- cranked out by people whose salaries we all pay -- reminds us of Ronald Reagan's famous line. The closest thing to eternal life we will see on this earth is a government program.
If the function of the U.S. Secretary of Commerce is to promote job creation and economic growth, it sure seems that -- how can I say this charitably? -- this distinguished public servant has been falling down on the job of late. Like the last two and a half years.
If I were Mr. Obama's Commerce Secretary, I'd want to get out of town, and fast. In fact, that's exactly what Sec. Gary Locke did. Having done such yeoman's work in promoting job creation and economic growth here, Gary Locke was recently sworn in as our Ambassador to China.
Now, there's a jobs plan! If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. Ambassador Locke can now observe job creation and economic growth from a unique vantage point: Beijing.
As he unpacks in China's Forbidden City, I suggest that Amb. Locke enter into meaningful dialog with the Chinese about U.S. exports. Maybe he can persuade them to buy more American flounder. We have entirely too much American floundering here and on Martha's Vineyard.
Stay safe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)