It's rather sad that so many people now fail to grasp basic concepts such as the difference between marriage and other kinds of relationships. I have answered a challenge that started at Twitter by posting a response to another blogger's assertion that governments should dilute the meaning of marriage, over at The Opine Editorials.
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
There Are Different Kinds of Relationships
Labels:
family,
marriage neutering,
the two sexes
Monday, September 24, 2012
What a Three Year-Old Knows
My son seems to have a natural inclanation to enjoy music and an ability to dance. He didn't get the dance moves from me, that's for sure. His sister was enrolled in dance classes. They take boys, too, so we enrolled the boy just after he turned 3.
We took him to class. He was the only male. The students were all female. The instructors were all female.
My boy refused to join the class, saying, "I'm not a girl. I'm a boy."
After showing him video of famous male dancers in action, we tried to get him to join the class the next time.
Nothin' doin'.
All he saw was girls. He didn't think he belonged.
Now, if the sexes had been reversed, it would have been our politically correct duty, along with the help of Gloria Allred, to convince him of the importance of making sure the class didn't stay all-male. But as it was, we left the girls alone and I was proud of my boy for defending his masculinity.
Diversity is so important to Leftists, with rare exceptions. The only voluntary association men should be allowed exclude women is a marriage.
My son knew he was a boy. He knew he was not a girl. He knew the difference mattered. Even babies can tell there's a difference. But... argue with a marriage neutering advocate for any length of time, and they'll actually try to maintain with a ...straight... face that that there's no difference between men and women. If you say "penis vs. vagina, XY vs. XX" they'll cite some very rare cases where someone has a genital mutation or some chromosomal problems, as if the fact that some dogs end up with three legs means that dogs are not quadrepeds. And yet, they will also maintain that a homosexual woman is not attracted to men, and thus doesn't have access to marriage. But if there is no difference between men and women, how is this possible? This is one reason why basing the demand to neuter marriage on homosexuality being an objective and inherent condition is an argument that kills itself.
It doesn't matter if their girlfriends are butch or their boyfriends are effeminate. Everyone has government-issued documents called birth certificates and identification, and those documents, at least until the gender confusion advocates change things, note whether someone is male or female. It is those documents that are used as references when state marriage licenses are issued. In most places, marriage licenses aren't issued where there will be no bride (woman) or no groom (man). Why? Sex integration is inherent to marriage.
It takes a lot of brainwashing or conditioning for people to deny the obvious differences between men and women and marriage and other relationships.
We took him to class. He was the only male. The students were all female. The instructors were all female.
My boy refused to join the class, saying, "I'm not a girl. I'm a boy."
After showing him video of famous male dancers in action, we tried to get him to join the class the next time.
Nothin' doin'.
All he saw was girls. He didn't think he belonged.
Now, if the sexes had been reversed, it would have been our politically correct duty, along with the help of Gloria Allred, to convince him of the importance of making sure the class didn't stay all-male. But as it was, we left the girls alone and I was proud of my boy for defending his masculinity.
Diversity is so important to Leftists, with rare exceptions. The only voluntary association men should be allowed exclude women is a marriage.
My son knew he was a boy. He knew he was not a girl. He knew the difference mattered. Even babies can tell there's a difference. But... argue with a marriage neutering advocate for any length of time, and they'll actually try to maintain with a ...straight... face that that there's no difference between men and women. If you say "penis vs. vagina, XY vs. XX" they'll cite some very rare cases where someone has a genital mutation or some chromosomal problems, as if the fact that some dogs end up with three legs means that dogs are not quadrepeds. And yet, they will also maintain that a homosexual woman is not attracted to men, and thus doesn't have access to marriage. But if there is no difference between men and women, how is this possible? This is one reason why basing the demand to neuter marriage on homosexuality being an objective and inherent condition is an argument that kills itself.
It doesn't matter if their girlfriends are butch or their boyfriends are effeminate. Everyone has government-issued documents called birth certificates and identification, and those documents, at least until the gender confusion advocates change things, note whether someone is male or female. It is those documents that are used as references when state marriage licenses are issued. In most places, marriage licenses aren't issued where there will be no bride (woman) or no groom (man). Why? Sex integration is inherent to marriage.
It takes a lot of brainwashing or conditioning for people to deny the obvious differences between men and women and marriage and other relationships.
Labels:
identity politics,
marriage neutering,
the two sexes
Saturday, September 22, 2012
Will the People of Maryland Defend Marriage?
Although the marriage neutering advocates would have you believe otherwise, one does not need to be "anti-gay" to oppose the neutering of marriage. I take a look at the opinion piece penned by a self-identified gay man over at The Opine Editorials.
Tuesday, September 18, 2012
The Importance of Marriage
I almost forgot to tell you that I have posted and entry at The Opine Editorials about a quick way to point out that marriage does matter.
Labels:
family,
marriage neutering,
worldview
Sunday, September 9, 2012
Tony, Zev, Dick, and God
Poor Tony Villar.
Don't know who Tony Villar is? Just as Barry Soetoro became Barack Obama, Tony Villar became… Antonio Villaraigosa. Going by "Antonio" became politically advantageous, going by "Villaraigosa" became personally advantageous, as it is a combination of Villar's surname and his now ex-wife's surname. I wonder if he ever stands to urinate?
Villar was Speaker of California’s joke of an Assembly, City Councilmember in Los Angeles, and is now in the last lap of his term-limited reign as City of Los Angeles Mayor.
The political wonks/nerds in greater Los Angeles had expected County of Los Angeles Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, also a former City Councilmember, to run for Mayor and to get elected to follow Villar. Yaroslavsky, who is Left of center on much (he voted to remove a mission cross from the official county seal... one must wonder what would happen to the rosary beads on the city seal), is nonetheless no dummy. He's sharp and woe to anyone who gets into an argument with him, especially if they don't have their facts together.
The five-member County of Los Angeles Board of Supervisors governs the county, each member representing over 2 million people. They hold legislative, most executive, and a little judicial power. There are still many parts of the county that are unincorporated, and this the Board serves as the direct governing authority for those areas. In addition, many cities contract with the county government for certain services rather than hire their own staff, and there are some government functions generally retained at the county, rather than city, level. The County of Los Angeles, which is run much better than the City of Los Angeles (but that's not saying much), has to deal with raids of funds by the disastrously-run State of California as it has various disputes with the city.
The City of Los Angeles is so poorly run they can't even fix their sidewalks. The city's infrastructure is crumbling, and businesses find the climate there to be hostile.
While the City of Los Angeles has a Mayor and a 15-member City Council, The county does not have a Mayor or equivelant; not long ago the Board of Supervisors elevated the office of Chief Administrative Officer to Chief Executive Officer with some reorganizing, but the position is appointed by the Board. A slot of the five-member Board of Supervisors was essentially a lifetime position (the last time an incumbent was defeated was 1980), but now term limits are taking effect.
Yaroslavksy has long wanted to be City of Los Angeles Mayor. Term limits will remove him from his county position. So why wouldn't he go for it, and extend his political career longer than he could by staying on the County Board of Supervisors?
My guess is that he agrees with businessman Richard Riordan, the last good Mayor the city has had for at least 39 years. (It is no accident that Riordan is registered as a Republican.) Riordan predicts the city will declare bankruptcy in 2013. So it seems obvious to me that Yaroslavsky doesn't want that to stain his legacy. Why will the city go bankrupt? Well, eight years of Tony Villar hasn't helped matters.
Yaroslavksy has long wanted to be City of Los Angeles Mayor. Term limits will remove him from his county position. So why wouldn't he go for it, and extend his political career longer than he could by staying on the County Board of Supervisors?
My guess is that he agrees with businessman Richard Riordan, the last good Mayor the city has had for at least 39 years. (It is no accident that Riordan is registered as a Republican.) Riordan predicts the city will declare bankruptcy in 2013. So it seems obvious to me that Yaroslavsky doesn't want that to stain his legacy. Why will the city go bankrupt? Well, eight years of Tony Villar hasn't helped matters.
Villar is infamous around southern California for his desperation to be on-camera as much as possible. To put it in crude terms, he's an attention whore. He's even ended up dating local news anchors/reporters, one such relationship coming at (or causing) the end of his marriage. At least one of these anchors reported on him and his marriage at the time. So it must have been a painful twist of fate for Villar to be given a prominent role at the Democratic National Convention, only to have the first moment in his entire life during which he regrets being on-camera.
The bogus "let's boo God" fraudulent vote must have been a very painful experience for Villar, who clearly had his marching orders of cleaning up what was either a botched piece of the Democrat platform or an intentionally set-up trial message to Lord-knows-who. But the delegates were not cooperating. Villar needed 2/3rds of them to approve. He got perhaps 1/2... far short of what he needed. He polled them twice more, which was a stupid move, and like Peter denying Jesus three times, at least half of the delegates present denied God three times, then some of them grumbled after the bogus vote, because Villar went ahead and declared the matter approved. One must wonder if Obama plans on having Villar count the votes in November?
Villar will probably be out of office by the time the City of Los Angeles has its fiscal collapse, but people should remember that the guy who did this slimy thing at the DNC had eight years to do something to prevent the collapse, and he failed. It's a shame Yaroslavsky won't be taking the Mayor's office. If it must be a Democrat, Yaroslavsky has at least some sense.
You can read more about the bogus DNC vote and see video:
The bogus "let's boo God" fraudulent vote must have been a very painful experience for Villar, who clearly had his marching orders of cleaning up what was either a botched piece of the Democrat platform or an intentionally set-up trial message to Lord-knows-who. But the delegates were not cooperating. Villar needed 2/3rds of them to approve. He got perhaps 1/2... far short of what he needed. He polled them twice more, which was a stupid move, and like Peter denying Jesus three times, at least half of the delegates present denied God three times, then some of them grumbled after the bogus vote, because Villar went ahead and declared the matter approved. One must wonder if Obama plans on having Villar count the votes in November?
Villar will probably be out of office by the time the City of Los Angeles has its fiscal collapse, but people should remember that the guy who did this slimy thing at the DNC had eight years to do something to prevent the collapse, and he failed. It's a shame Yaroslavsky won't be taking the Mayor's office. If it must be a Democrat, Yaroslavsky has at least some sense.
You can read more about the bogus DNC vote and see video:
http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/bobbeauprez/2012/09/06/act_of_god_jerusalem_a_disaster_for_dems
http://www.dailynews.com/columnists/ci_21498589/doug-mcintyre-los-angeles-mayor-antonio-villaraigosa-brings
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2012/09/08/villaraigosa_on_god_jerusalem_vote_i_definitely_heard_a_23_majority
http://townhall.com/columnists/derekhunter/2012/09/09/the_dnc_as_i_saw_it
http://www.dailynews.com/columnists/ci_21498589/doug-mcintyre-los-angeles-mayor-antonio-villaraigosa-brings
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2012/09/08/villaraigosa_on_god_jerusalem_vote_i_definitely_heard_a_23_majority
http://townhall.com/columnists/derekhunter/2012/09/09/the_dnc_as_i_saw_it
Labels:
budget,
California,
City of LA,
debt,
deficit,
Democrats,
elections
Friday, August 31, 2012
Who Needs Drugs?
Whenever I want to giggle or get a look at the world through a distorted lens, I look at how gender-confused Leftists and radical feminists have reacted to something I've written. Quite often, they complete misrepresent what I've written and assign all kinds of sinister motives to me. There's either some projection going on with them, or they lack reading comprehension, or they just can't handle logic and reason, or they are deliberately lying. But it IS good for a giggle, and it reminds me just how much I've been blessed to have married my wife, who is a follower of Christ, kind, intelligent, virtuous, smoking hot, and devoted to her husband and children. I feel sorry for someone who has chosen to be with some of these obviously misandrist and emotionally disturbed people.
Wednesday, August 29, 2012
Obama is the Extremist on Abortion
There's no way around it. Abortion is the intentional killing of an innocent human being.
Labels:
Democrats,
miracles,
Obama,
right to life,
video
Monday, August 20, 2012
Legitimate Rape
Warning: possible triggers and explicit language ahead.
Labels:
crime,
elections,
feministas,
GOP,
right to life
Saturday, August 4, 2012
A Real Sign Obama Will Not Be Re-elected
I don't personally assign any more or less weight to celebrity political endorsements. I don't favor or disfavor any political candidate or legislation based on what a celebrity says. I also believe celebrities have just as much right to give their opinion as anyone else - though they need to be mindful if what they say will hurt the people they work with, who might be struggling financially.
That all being said, I think Clint Eastwood's endorsement for Romney spells trouble for Obama. Eastwood has long been involved in politics, even serving as Mayor of a California city. Comedian John Lovitz, a Democrat who voted for Obama, has spoken out against some of Obama's statements, tactics, and policies. Even adult video performer Jenna Jameson, a name known widely even among people who do not view such material, has endorsed Romney.
Centrists and even people who lean a little Left, people who usually vote Democrat, are thinking a change is needed - and more importantly, they are speaking up about it. Are there prominent Republicans or conservatives speaking up, saying they will vote to give Obama a second term? We could be in Jimmy Carter territory here. To me, it is very telling that someone of Eastwood's stature and entrenchment in politically-active Hollywood is willing to endorse Romney and appear at a Romney fundraiser.
This should give us hope, but not assurance. We must reach out to conservatives and libertarians who are leaning towards not voting at all, or voting for a third party candidate (which would really be a de facto vote to re-elect Obama. We need to reach out to centrists and classical liberals. We need to get the word out, get people registered, and get them excited about voting.
We need to elect Romney, and we need to elect Senators and Representatives who will support limited government policies. This will help the economy to recover. We can make this happen!
That all being said, I think Clint Eastwood's endorsement for Romney spells trouble for Obama. Eastwood has long been involved in politics, even serving as Mayor of a California city. Comedian John Lovitz, a Democrat who voted for Obama, has spoken out against some of Obama's statements, tactics, and policies. Even adult video performer Jenna Jameson, a name known widely even among people who do not view such material, has endorsed Romney.
Centrists and even people who lean a little Left, people who usually vote Democrat, are thinking a change is needed - and more importantly, they are speaking up about it. Are there prominent Republicans or conservatives speaking up, saying they will vote to give Obama a second term? We could be in Jimmy Carter territory here. To me, it is very telling that someone of Eastwood's stature and entrenchment in politically-active Hollywood is willing to endorse Romney and appear at a Romney fundraiser.
This should give us hope, but not assurance. We must reach out to conservatives and libertarians who are leaning towards not voting at all, or voting for a third party candidate (which would really be a de facto vote to re-elect Obama. We need to reach out to centrists and classical liberals. We need to get the word out, get people registered, and get them excited about voting.
We need to elect Romney, and we need to elect Senators and Representatives who will support limited government policies. This will help the economy to recover. We can make this happen!
Thursday, August 2, 2012
Hope For Anna Drive in Anaheim?
I haven't made a secret of my opinions on current events in Anaheim. I did see something I like from residents of Anna Drive, however. They told outside agitators By Any Means Necessary to stop hijacking their issue. Greg Hardesty and Eric Carpenter reported on this at the Orange County Register. If the people of Anna Drive have enough sense integrity to rebuff BAMN, maybe they can and will help kick out the gangs.
Good for her.
And Diaz, from what should be clear from his behavior and statements about himself, was clearly a devout Catholic. </sarcasm>
A planned march organized by a Los Angeles-based group from the Anna Drive neighborhood where a man was shot and killed by police July 21 fizzled Wednesday evening, with about 12 participants instead exchanging words with some residents who didn't want them there.If they encourage illegal aliens, then they actually trample on the rights of immigrants, who should never be confused with illegal aliens.
With TV cameras rolling and no police presence apparent, the group from BAMN, which advocates for social issues such as immigrant rights, started gathering about 5 p.m. near the spot where Manuel Diaz, 25, was shot after fleeing from officers, touching off days of civil unrest.
BAMN's lead organizer, Adam Lerman, 42, led his sign-carrying group off Anna Drive shortly before 7 p.m. after some locals said the neighborhood wants peace and quiet and that BAMN's presence was not welcome.
"What are they doing here?" resident Yesenia Rojas said. "They don't even live here."Good for her.
Community advocate Gloria Alvarado did not want BAMN members to interfere with a 7 p.m. prayer and rosary for Diaz.
Good for her.
Following a Latino and Catholic tradition, rosaries are being held for him for nine consecutive days that began Sunday.
And Diaz, from what should be clear from his behavior and statements about himself, was clearly a devout Catholic. </sarcasm>
Lerman told Alvarado, Rojas and other residents that his group wants to continue putting pressure on city leaders to get to the bottom of the shooting, which is being investigated by local and federal agencies.Lerman wants attention more than anything. The investigations are going to take their course whether or not anyone else whines at this point.
Labels:
crime,
illegal aliens,
parental rights,
religion
The Fascists Don't Understand Liberty
Being Liberal is the gift that keeps on giving on Facebook, where there photos get passed around like a barely legal man at a bathhouse.
There are so many things wrong about this, and it gives a glimpse into the mind of a fascist.
First of all, there's the charge that Chick-fil-A is an "anti-gay" company. What is this based on? Certainly not the Cathy position (held by at least half of Americans and virtually everyone in history) that marriage is between a man and a woman. Because that would mean President Obama was was "anti-gay" up until a few weeks ago.
If someone sincerely believes there positions will actually make things better for people with homosexual feelings, are they really "anti-gay"?
Nor am I going to concede that "gay" has to mean homosexual, but that's a tangent.
I don't recall seeing anyone allege that Chick-fil-A discriminates in its business operations. Rather, Cathy's words in interviews with Christian media express his conviction that God knows best about family, and that God has made that opinion known to us, and he and/or the company donates for Christian ministries that seek to strengthen families. Among some of those companies many positions is opposing the neutering of state marriage licenses. Is someone who opposes the neutering of state marriage licenses necessarily "anti-gay"? Was say, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. anti-gay? After all, in his leadership for civil rights causes, not once did he ever say that there was a right for a brideless or a groomless pairing to get a state marriage license.
Notice the requisite use of the word "bigot". Nobody can disagree with a Leftist without the Leftists considering that person a bigot of some sort. In the Leftist mind, it isn't possible to have a different opinion, reached at through reason, experience, feelings, or anything else - no, you re just a bigot. That way, the Leftist doesn't need to defend their opinions, because any contrary opinion is dismissed as mindless bigotry.
Did the Palins say they were supporting Chick-fil-A because it is, let's assume for the sake of argument, "anti-gay"? Or was that an assumption made the Leftist mind-readers?
We can even assume for the sake of argument that Chick-fil-A is actually "anti-gay" and that the Palins were supporting them because of that, and that still doesn't mean there is any conflict in buying goods and services provided by "pro-gay" companies.
One can be against Cathy's positions and statements and still want to show support for Chick-fil-A. This is what the fascists don't comprehend because, for all of their talk about diversity, they are intolerant. Many people who identify as gay or lesbian supported Chick-fil-A yesterday, because they wanted to support a company after elected officials implied that the company would not be allowed the freedom of enterprise due to an executive exercising his freedom of speech. Like them, the Palins could have been demonstrating against fascism. There is a Constitutional right to freedom of speech, especially about political matters. (Speaking of the Constitution... the 14th Amendment that marriage neutering advocates use because they insist it compels us to neuter state marriage licensing was written and adopted by people who were not supporters of neutering marriage. Does that mean they shouldn't use it?) The fascists want everyone to believing marriage unites the sexes and that our laws should reflect that is necessarily a hate-filled attack on people who identify as gay or lesbian, and that is a lie. Where does it stop? Is tithing to the Roman Catholic Church hateful and "anti-gay"?
There are many people who were involved in this demonstration who do agree with Cathy, but they have no problem buying products and services from companies whose donations or whose executives have publicly expressed an opinion contrary to theirs, because for them it is a matter of free enterprise and free speech. Dennis Prager has said be buys Ben & Jerry's ice cream fully aware that Ben and Jerry have positions he finds to be wrong and even destructive. For more about this, see "We Are Your Family and Neighbors" over at The Opine Editorials.
There are so many things wrong about this, and it gives a glimpse into the mind of a fascist.
First of all, there's the charge that Chick-fil-A is an "anti-gay" company. What is this based on? Certainly not the Cathy position (held by at least half of Americans and virtually everyone in history) that marriage is between a man and a woman. Because that would mean President Obama was was "anti-gay" up until a few weeks ago.
If someone sincerely believes there positions will actually make things better for people with homosexual feelings, are they really "anti-gay"?
Nor am I going to concede that "gay" has to mean homosexual, but that's a tangent.
I don't recall seeing anyone allege that Chick-fil-A discriminates in its business operations. Rather, Cathy's words in interviews with Christian media express his conviction that God knows best about family, and that God has made that opinion known to us, and he and/or the company donates for Christian ministries that seek to strengthen families. Among some of those companies many positions is opposing the neutering of state marriage licenses. Is someone who opposes the neutering of state marriage licenses necessarily "anti-gay"? Was say, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. anti-gay? After all, in his leadership for civil rights causes, not once did he ever say that there was a right for a brideless or a groomless pairing to get a state marriage license.
Notice the requisite use of the word "bigot". Nobody can disagree with a Leftist without the Leftists considering that person a bigot of some sort. In the Leftist mind, it isn't possible to have a different opinion, reached at through reason, experience, feelings, or anything else - no, you re just a bigot. That way, the Leftist doesn't need to defend their opinions, because any contrary opinion is dismissed as mindless bigotry.
Did the Palins say they were supporting Chick-fil-A because it is, let's assume for the sake of argument, "anti-gay"? Or was that an assumption made the Leftist mind-readers?
We can even assume for the sake of argument that Chick-fil-A is actually "anti-gay" and that the Palins were supporting them because of that, and that still doesn't mean there is any conflict in buying goods and services provided by "pro-gay" companies.
One can be against Cathy's positions and statements and still want to show support for Chick-fil-A. This is what the fascists don't comprehend because, for all of their talk about diversity, they are intolerant. Many people who identify as gay or lesbian supported Chick-fil-A yesterday, because they wanted to support a company after elected officials implied that the company would not be allowed the freedom of enterprise due to an executive exercising his freedom of speech. Like them, the Palins could have been demonstrating against fascism. There is a Constitutional right to freedom of speech, especially about political matters. (Speaking of the Constitution... the 14th Amendment that marriage neutering advocates use because they insist it compels us to neuter state marriage licensing was written and adopted by people who were not supporters of neutering marriage. Does that mean they shouldn't use it?) The fascists want everyone to believing marriage unites the sexes and that our laws should reflect that is necessarily a hate-filled attack on people who identify as gay or lesbian, and that is a lie. Where does it stop? Is tithing to the Roman Catholic Church hateful and "anti-gay"?
There are many people who were involved in this demonstration who do agree with Cathy, but they have no problem buying products and services from companies whose donations or whose executives have publicly expressed an opinion contrary to theirs, because for them it is a matter of free enterprise and free speech. Dennis Prager has said be buys Ben & Jerry's ice cream fully aware that Ben and Jerry have positions he finds to be wrong and even destructive. For more about this, see "We Are Your Family and Neighbors" over at The Opine Editorials.
It was so great to see what was happening yesterday as Americans, including gay people and lesbian people, supported free speech and FREE ENTERPRISE and told fascists and radical activists and hypocritical politicians "We will NOT let people be bullied that way!" It was a clear demonstration that the homofascists (who do NOT represent all gays and lesbians) are in the very, very small minority. It will be very interesting to see how the size and behavior of the crowds yesterday compares to the organized sexual harassment planned for tomorrow.
The same freedoms that allow you to NOT support Chick-fil-A and allow you to commit to - and have ceremony with - someone of the same sex... allow people to NOT endorse that relationship as "marriage." For example, Californians have TWICE voted to reiterate that state marriage licenses, issued on our behalf, are to be reserved for bride+groom unions (you know, "marriage".) Freedom is for more than just expressing Leftism.
Saturday, July 28, 2012
Much Ado About Nothing
Tim Martin of Corona, California noticed how the Leftist-MSM Complex fabricated an anti-Romney story, and he wrote to the Orange County Register about it.
Yeah, that's pretty much it.
Mitt Romney is getting crucified over his supposed comments that England wasn’t ready for the Olympics. A little fact checking is in order. In a 17-minute “allow-me-to-twist-this-honey-laden-dagger-in-your-back” interview, the opening question from Brian Williams was, “In the short time you’ve been here, do they look ready to your experienced eye”?
Romney then gave a direct answer to this direct question, noted there were three areas of concern, and concluded, “We’ll know once the games begin.” How in the wide world of political sports is that an attack on England?
Then magically, Mark Phillips from CBS interviewed Michelle Obama at the Olympics, who properly said “They know what they’re doing.”
More magically, the interview, on the CBS site, edits out Phillips’ final comments on “the reputation of the city and country are on the line, they want to look good” (and is nervous about how it will turn out). Sorry, I didn’t take notes quickly enough, and didn’t realize that CBS would cut the part where Phillips basically echoes the answer that Romney gave to Williams.
Just like with the Sandra Fluke fracas, Romney gets assailed for saying nothing, gets attacked for an honest answer and gets pilloried for something somebody else said... It doesn’t matter what the facts are. The media will paint Romney as the out of touch “other” that can’t be trusted.
Yeah, that's pretty much it.
Labels:
elections,
Europe,
media bias,
MSM
Thursday, July 26, 2012
Who Cares Who Sally Rode?
A Leftist is someone who believes that a marriage is the ONLY organization in which men have the right to exclude women. Read the latest on chicks, chicken, scouts, and what the homofascists are doing, over at The Opine Editorials.
Wednesday, July 25, 2012
The Anaheim Criminal Pride Parade
Ah, Mickey Mouse, the Los Angeles Angeles, and the wastes of human potential who are "gangstas" or the foolish people who aid & abet them. They can all be found in Anaheim, which is not the official seat of Orange County, California leadership, but might as well be.
In addition to the high-end bedroom area of Anaheim Hills, the Anaheim Resort District, the Honda Center, and Anaheim Stadium are the highlights of the city. Venture mere yards from these gems and you can easily run into gangland and neighborhoods overrun with uneducated, unskilled illegal aliens who speak little to no English.
But you don't have to mingle with the tattoo-covered 32-year-old grandmothers handing their grandkids lead-tainted candy - you can have your car stolen from the Resort District by some career criminal whose little brother is busy applying graffiti to a nearby wall.
Mirroring what has already happened to nearby Santa Ana, the actual seat of the OC, Anaheim's illegal alien and gang population, of which there is much overlap, are growing. In addition to property crimes, vandalism, and illegal garage apartment fires, it seems that stabbings and shootings are now to be expected every night, or even every day.
And true to the playbook, the very neighborhoods and families that raise career criminals are the same ones whining and complaining and threatening police officers who are trying to do something about the menaces to society. Playing to the MSM, the professional agitators are joining the automatic whining with each shooting.
"There have been too many police officers shooting people lately" they say.
We have proof that this is a lie.
The proof? There's still graffiti showing up.
As long as the taggers and gangstas are still active, I want the APD to keep shooting.
Having attracted media attention, the usual demographic of troubled youths on the failure track, and the professional police blamers and urban terrorists, the "how dare they shoot my career criminal brother" types are literally rioting in the streets of Anaheim. One of the more "brilliant" things people are doing is bringing their little kids (if they're 15, grandkids if they are 30) to these riots, presumably willing to sacrifice their child's safety for a crack at a large financial settlement from the city when the police clear the rioters.
We've all seen this movie before.
The criminals and trouble makers will get rewarded.
The police will have their hands tied and will be punished.
And the productive, taxpaying, legal residents and citizens of Anaheim and all of Orange County will have to pay even more.
I support the police, and I support a severe crackdown by the police, even if it doesn't look pretty.
Why? Because the alternative is the fed-up people of Orange County taking the law into their own hands in fighting these career criminals and their enablers, and that would get very ugly.
What we need is a "sweep and hold" approach.
The Anaheim Police Department and the Orange County Sheriff's Department need to be fully supported. Bring in the CHP. Target the troubled neighborhoods with constant patrols, conducting traffic stops for the slighest infraction, stopping and citing pedestrians for so much as jaywalking or littering. Bring in code enforcement. Bring in ICE. Deport illegal aliens and any noncitizens commiting serious crime. It should be so unpleasant for the criminals that they literally flee.
We can't let things get even worse.
In addition to the high-end bedroom area of Anaheim Hills, the Anaheim Resort District, the Honda Center, and Anaheim Stadium are the highlights of the city. Venture mere yards from these gems and you can easily run into gangland and neighborhoods overrun with uneducated, unskilled illegal aliens who speak little to no English.
But you don't have to mingle with the tattoo-covered 32-year-old grandmothers handing their grandkids lead-tainted candy - you can have your car stolen from the Resort District by some career criminal whose little brother is busy applying graffiti to a nearby wall.
Mirroring what has already happened to nearby Santa Ana, the actual seat of the OC, Anaheim's illegal alien and gang population, of which there is much overlap, are growing. In addition to property crimes, vandalism, and illegal garage apartment fires, it seems that stabbings and shootings are now to be expected every night, or even every day.
And true to the playbook, the very neighborhoods and families that raise career criminals are the same ones whining and complaining and threatening police officers who are trying to do something about the menaces to society. Playing to the MSM, the professional agitators are joining the automatic whining with each shooting.
"There have been too many police officers shooting people lately" they say.
We have proof that this is a lie.
The proof? There's still graffiti showing up.
As long as the taggers and gangstas are still active, I want the APD to keep shooting.
Having attracted media attention, the usual demographic of troubled youths on the failure track, and the professional police blamers and urban terrorists, the "how dare they shoot my career criminal brother" types are literally rioting in the streets of Anaheim. One of the more "brilliant" things people are doing is bringing their little kids (if they're 15, grandkids if they are 30) to these riots, presumably willing to sacrifice their child's safety for a crack at a large financial settlement from the city when the police clear the rioters.
We've all seen this movie before.
The criminals and trouble makers will get rewarded.
The police will have their hands tied and will be punished.
And the productive, taxpaying, legal residents and citizens of Anaheim and all of Orange County will have to pay even more.
I support the police, and I support a severe crackdown by the police, even if it doesn't look pretty.
Why? Because the alternative is the fed-up people of Orange County taking the law into their own hands in fighting these career criminals and their enablers, and that would get very ugly.
What we need is a "sweep and hold" approach.
The Anaheim Police Department and the Orange County Sheriff's Department need to be fully supported. Bring in the CHP. Target the troubled neighborhoods with constant patrols, conducting traffic stops for the slighest infraction, stopping and citing pedestrians for so much as jaywalking or littering. Bring in code enforcement. Bring in ICE. Deport illegal aliens and any noncitizens commiting serious crime. It should be so unpleasant for the criminals that they literally flee.
We can't let things get even worse.
Labels:
border control,
California,
crime,
illegal aliens
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
Some Lies We’re Told Every Four Years Now
It's the President's job to make sure you get a high-quality free education, from all-day kindergarten through college degrees.
It's the President's job to make sure your kids are getting breakfast and lunch at their school even though it is also his job to make sure you are getting food stamps which are supposed to pay for your kids to eat.
It's the President's job to find you a nice place to live and to pay for it.
It's the President's job to help you out if you run up your credit cards.
It's the President's job to find you a doctor, pay your medical bills, and make sure you visit.
It's the President's job to make sure you are getting paid as much as you want to get paid for your job.
It's the President's job to make sure any stocks in which you've invested only increase in value.
It’s the President's job to make sure you feel like doing something worthwhile.
It's the President's job to make sure you feel good about who turns you on, and to force everyone else to call brideless or groomless pairings "marriage".
It's the President's job to make life easier for someone whose parents brought them here illegally.
The truth: Some things just aren't the responsibility of the Executive Branch of the federal government.
Labels:
elections,
federalism,
limited government
Saturday, July 21, 2012
Fauxmentum and Poll Dancing in Churches
Greg Koukl did an awesome job dealing with two news articles from a
few weeks back about the issues of marriage neutering and general
homosexuality advocacy in churches in general and the PCUSA
specifically, dealing with issues which I have referred to as fauxmentum
and poll dancing. You can download this MP3 of his broadcast,
at least for the time being. If you can't, you might need to register
with his site at STR.org or depending on when you're reading this (if
many months later), it might be too late. The portions of the podcast to which I'm referring are from 0-18 minutes, and 56 minutes to 1 hour and 16 minutes.
Although Koukl does offer nonreligious arguments for marriage as uniting a bride and groom, his comments are being offered this time in relation to church matters. If you don't personally care what the Bible says or do not consider the Bible an authority, this won't be relevant to you.
Although Koukl does offer nonreligious arguments for marriage as uniting a bride and groom, his comments are being offered this time in relation to church matters. If you don't personally care what the Bible says or do not consider the Bible an authority, this won't be relevant to you.
Thursday, July 19, 2012
Who Will be the GOP Nominee for VP?
What is needed in a VP candidate?
In addition to what I wrote about what I wanted in a Presidential candidate, from a political science consideration, a VP candidate should:
1) Round out the ticket as far as experience and appeal to the electorate. Does the person experience the Presidential candidate doesn't? Does the person appeal to a voting demographic the Presidential candidate isn't reaching, or reaching strongly enough? Will that person help carry states the Presidential candidate might not otherwise carry? Romney was Governor of Massachussetts but has otherwise been a businessman.
2) Be a good prospect to run for President in 8 years and likely to build, rather than shrink, the GOP and its influence. Will the candidate help unite the GOP and motivate the GOP donors and voters? Will he or she help recruit new voters to the GOP?
3) Not leave vacant a critical office that will likely be filled with a Democrat.
4) Make the Presidential candidate look good, rather than overshadowing or embarrassing them. (Of course, Obama still got elected with Biden.)
Call me cynical, but I think it will help if "white, male, Mormon" Romney is also "balanced out" with someone who is "ethnic" and/or female. Sex or ethnic background matters not to me, but apparently it matters to enough voters, and it certainly matters to the media.
Senator Marco Rubio of Florida has been mentioned a lot. Advantages: experience in the Senate, ability to carry Florida, Cuban/Latino, Roman Catholic and attends a large Evangelical church, young
Governor Susana Martinez of New Mexico. Advantages: former District Attorney, ability to carry New Mexico, female, Latina, Roman Catholic.
Governor Nikki Haley of South Carolina. Advantages: former legislator, female, daughter of immigrants from India, Methodist with a Sikh background, young, was endorsed by Romney
Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana. Advantages: fomer legislator, entrepreneurial experience, ability to carry Louisiana, son of immigrants from India, Roman Catholic, young
All of them are decidedly conservative, which should motivate conservative GOP voters who think Romney isn’t a solid conservative. It looks to me like any of them would be a great President, and thus would be a great pick to the VP candidate.
What do you think? Am I missing someone?
Thursday, July 12, 2012
We're Freaks - We Want a Decent Education For Our Kids
Have you ever noticed that homeschoolers are portrayed as freaks for homeschooling?
Yeah, I'm a freak. I’m a freak because my wife and I are homeschooling our kids.
I'm a freak because I think it is better for my children to be educated and supervised by an R.N. who is smart as a whip, loves them more than anything else in the world, and can immediately and effectively discipline them without red tape. We don't want them sitting in a room with a teacher who is a pervert feeding them semen-covered cookies or doing worse, or burnt out, or powerless, overwhelmed and a captive to a union, or worse yet, believes all of the junk the union promotes and hasn't been fired because of the union. We don't want them sitting a room with a bunch of disruptive kids who have never had parental supervision because their parent(s) is/are never around, stuck them in day orphanages almost from birth, and values material things more than raising their child or has made poor life decisions that has left them alone to earn for the child.
Yeah, I'm a freak. I’m a freak because my wife and I are homeschooling our kids.
I'm a freak because I think it is better for my children to be educated and supervised by an R.N. who is smart as a whip, loves them more than anything else in the world, and can immediately and effectively discipline them without red tape. We don't want them sitting in a room with a teacher who is a pervert feeding them semen-covered cookies or doing worse, or burnt out, or powerless, overwhelmed and a captive to a union, or worse yet, believes all of the junk the union promotes and hasn't been fired because of the union. We don't want them sitting a room with a bunch of disruptive kids who have never had parental supervision because their parent(s) is/are never around, stuck them in day orphanages almost from birth, and values material things more than raising their child or has made poor life decisions that has left them alone to earn for the child.
Labels:
education,
family,
parental rights
Saturday, July 7, 2012
Green Jobs Don't Count
When talking about job creation, "green" jobs or any other jobs that are government jobs - or rely on government funding - don't count. The only government jobs I'm happy to see more of are police, prison guard, and military ones.
The Left thinks green jobs count because they think jobs are all about providing people with another way of acquiring self-esteem (and, getting women away from the horrible life of actually raising their own kids who made it out of the womb without being aborted).
But the real reasons why more jobs is better than fewer jobs include: 1) they generate wealth; 2) they help provide goods and services. Most government jobs consume wealth or impede the generation of wealth, and don't provide goods or services, or at least not ones that couldn't be provided more efficiently and better through free markets.
It is absurd to say - as RINO former Governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger did - that legislation that hinders legitimate private businesses creates green jobs because it funds the installation of solar panels.
It is absurd to say - as RINO former Governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger did - that legislation that hinders legitimate private businesses creates green jobs because it funds the installation of solar panels.
Labels:
economy,
environment,
jobs
Monday, July 2, 2012
Relying on Big Brother For Everything
I found this list posted by a Leftist who is dutifully repeating Central Government's talking points.
More government involvement in health insurance and health care will make those things less affordable, not more. Government control of something never makes things more affordable. Rather, costs are redistributed, and additional costs are often added in the process, especially if an individual or company thinks "someone else" will pick up the tab so that they will not have to deal with the financial impact of their decisions.
Will some individuals come out ahead because of Obamacare? Yes. Some people come out ahead by robbing others directly too. The difference is, someone who has been robbed by a mugger may get their money returned or may at least see the person who forcibly took money from them brought to justice. People who use Central Government to force strangers to pay their way through life may never have to face those strangers.
There are "hard luck" stories out there, to be sure. But those stories do not justify usurping more choices in voluntary interactions in Central Government, and turning even more of economy over to federal bureaucrats.
That SCOTUS has ruled Obamacare Constitutionally permissible under taxation powers doesn't mean it should stay in place, or that it will make anything better.
HORRIFYING OBAMACARE!!!
What is so terrible about:
Keeping your kids on your policy until they reach the age of 26.If you want to do that, and your insurance company agrees, fine. This is not something that should be forced upon anyone by Central Government.
Eliminating the lifetime cap on benefits.If you want to do that, and your insurance company agrees, fine. This is not something that should be forced upon anyone by Central Government. What if someone could force you to keep working for them?
Stopping insurance companies from canceling your policy if you get sick.Insurance companies should keep a contract with you if you keep our end of the contract. I'm not sure why this is a Central Government matter. There are civil lawsuits a person can bring, and your state has an Attorney General and perhaps an Insurance Commissioner.
Lowering the cost of care and medication for Medicare recipients.Costs are not being lowered. What is going on is that people who aren't getting the service are going to have to pay more for others to get the service. Do you like being forced to pay for services other people you don't even know receive?
Covering preventative care at no charge.If you want that, and your insurance company agrees, fine. This is not something that should be forced upon anyone by Central Government. Preventative care costs money when it is performed – even if it saves money down the line. (By the way, preventative care that does not actually detect anything harmful is an added expense, and more people will be demanding preventative care.) Clearing brush off of your property is "preventative care" for your home in terms of fires. Should Central Government force your homeowner's insurance company to cover the costs of brush clearance? Do you want someone being able to force you to work without getting paid?
Strengthening fraud protections by increasing penalties.Great. Fraud should be prevented and punished, and it if happens interstate, then the federal government should be able to assume jurisdiction.
Stopping insurance companies from denying coverage to children with pre-existing conditions.Don't like the terms of insurance a company is offering? Go to another insurer, or go without insurance. Should my homeowner's insurance company be forced to extend coverage if I want to add a house that is in the path of a raging wildfire?
Stopping insurance companies from arbitrarily jacking up rates.Don't like the terms of insurance a company is offering? Go to another insurer, or go without insurance. Should Central Government have the power and the bureaucracy to tell other private businesses whether and when they can raise their prices? Would you want some Central Government stranger to come in and deny a raise you just asked for from your boss?
Getting a rebate if your insurance company spent too much on ads and CEO bonuses.Don't like how an insurance company is spending its money? Go to another insurer, or go without insurance. Should Central Government have the power and the bureaucracy to tell other private businesses how much they can pay their employees and how much money they can spend on ads? Would you want a Central Government stranger taking money from your bank account and giving to back to your employer because someone didn't like an ad you put on a website, or thought you were paying your plumber too much money?
Tax credits to small businesses so they can afford quality health coverage for their employees.Why should Central Government encourage small businesses (at the expense of other businesses, individuals, families, etc.) to provide health insurance to employees, while not doing the same when it comes to motor vehicle insurance, homeowner's insurance, renter's insurance, etc.?
Building and improving community health centers.Why should this be Central Government's responsibility? So many hospitals were built or started by churches. Why not leave this to voluntary associations such as businesses and nonprofits and charities? Or even state and local governments?
Giving working Americans a tax credit so they can afford insurance (begins in 2014).Why should Central Government encourage working Americans to buy health insurance? What other products and services should Central Government encourage working Americans to buy?
Also in 2014, ending discrimination against adults with pre-exiting conditions.Don't like the terms of insurance a company is offering? Go to another insurer, or go without insurance. Should my homeowner's insurance company be forced to extend coverage if I want to add a house that is in the path of a raging wildfire?
Preventing insurance companies from charging higher prices to women based solely on their gender (2014).Don't like the terms of insurance a company is offering? Go to another insurer, or go without insurance. Why not have Central Government prevent life insurance companies from charging men more even though men die younger, and car insurance companies from charging young men more than young women, even though young male drivers cost more? I know this will come as a shock to the gender confused, but men don't get pregnant, never get injured in abortions (although plenty of boys are killed), never give birth, never need lactation consultants, don't get ovarian, uterine, or cervical cancer, are less likely to get breast cancer, etc.
Creating insurance exchanges where people can shop and compare and get the most for their health insurance dollars (2014).People can already shop and compare health insurance plans now. They could do that a lot more if government retreated from some of their existing controls on insurance companies.
More government involvement in health insurance and health care will make those things less affordable, not more. Government control of something never makes things more affordable. Rather, costs are redistributed, and additional costs are often added in the process, especially if an individual or company thinks "someone else" will pick up the tab so that they will not have to deal with the financial impact of their decisions.
Will some individuals come out ahead because of Obamacare? Yes. Some people come out ahead by robbing others directly too. The difference is, someone who has been robbed by a mugger may get their money returned or may at least see the person who forcibly took money from them brought to justice. People who use Central Government to force strangers to pay their way through life may never have to face those strangers.
There are "hard luck" stories out there, to be sure. But those stories do not justify usurping more choices in voluntary interactions in Central Government, and turning even more of economy over to federal bureaucrats.
That SCOTUS has ruled Obamacare Constitutionally permissible under taxation powers doesn't mean it should stay in place, or that it will make anything better.
Labels:
federalism,
freedom of association,
health care,
Nanny State
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
