The last allowable prejudice?

There was an editorial letter in the Miami Sun Sentinel in defense of true natural marriage. This was penned by Archbishop Thomas Wenski. I invite you to read it HERE.

In response Brandon Thorp wrote THIS in the Broward-Palm Beach New Times.

As far as my response to Mr. Thorp. I feel Thomas Peters response is much better then anything I could come up with.

His seven questions for liberals:

1) Isn't this is a rush to war?

2) Is Obama invading Libya because Gaddafi insulted him?

3) Is this a war for oil?

4) Where are the massive protests?

5) Shouldn't we have tried to talk it out with Gaddafi instead?

6) Aren't we just starting a cycle of violence by bombing Libya?

7) Isn't Barack Obama a chickenhawk?

Huffington Post

“If you’re looking for the usual flame-throwing, name-calling, and simplistic attack dog rhetoric....don’t bother coming to The Huffington Post.” ~~Arianna Huffington

Yeah, she actually said that! To me its more like Mos Eisley.

Liberals anti-education, pro-indoctrination?

What don't the Democrats understand about education? The science speaks for itself: vouchers work. Students who attend private schools of their parents choosing graduate at higher rates than students who do not. It is not surprising that Obama sends his kids to private schools. Why shouldn't everyone have this opportunity?

Twirling

The question came up as to my being conservative or not. To which I say "sure, why not". Liberal, to me, is derogatory anyways...

The question becomes what is a Conservative, who defines the term and how tightly do you have to follow that definition?

Penn Jillette

I am a fan of Penn and Teller. Other then the colorful metaphors that get tossed out in an over done manner.

A while back Penn had a videoblog on his encounter with an Christian which was thoughtful and insightful. I posted it on my blog.

Anyways, last night on the George Lopez show Penn and Teller made an appearance talking about The Showtime show: Penn & Teller: Bullshit. This follows in the Houdini tradition of exposing frauds. Not being a Lopez fan I rarely see the show but as the serendipity that is channel surfing, I came across this segment.

I was able to find the dialog on Newsbusters. It was rather remarkable:

LOPEZ: And have you gotten any shit for stuff that you guys have covered that people have been upset about?

JILLETTE: Well, you know, we’ve done heavy stuff. I mean, we've done the Vatican. We've done Mother Teresa. We've done the Dalai Lama. We've done really, really heavy subjects. And I've got to say it was actually a shock doing the show, the religious communities in the United States of America are the most tolerant people worldwide. I mean, we did really aggressive stuff we believe strongly, and mostly got letters from Christians and Catholics saying we really like how passionately and clearly you put out your ideas. Very few nut cases. However, the nut cases were the 9/11 conspiracy people, who we thought, you know, they're kind of nerdy, they'll be okay. They actually showed up at the offices to attack some of the writers, you know, verbally. And the chiropractors, chiropractors, we did the show on chiropracty, and they went absolutely bug nutty, and like 75 chiropractors showed up at our show at Rio, watched our whole show, then came up after and said we want you to know because of your Bullshit show we are boycotting you. And I went, 75 of you have just bought tickets in order to tell us, I guess not only is your medical science bad, your math really sucks. When you're doing a boycott, you don't give the people money. You don't show up, give them money, and then say now we're boycotting.

As far as the Catholic show goes an expose was released by The Catholic League.

It just keeps getting worserist. Real Hope and change in November.

First Watch this one...

Then watch this one...

Personally, I am waiting for the other shoe to drop. This is a result of having 2700 pages of legislation that contains anything and everything. The Obama regime is still trying to sell healthcare and we keep getting these bombshells aimed at our wallets.

SOURCE:

The president kept telling us we could keep our coverage if we liked it. Observers replied that employers will have every incentive to dump us onto whatever kind of subsidized provision eventually emerges.

This is exactly what observers say will happen with retiree drug benefits: The tax change will mean about 1.5 million to 2 million people will be dumped onto Medicare Part D, usually with inferior benefits.

It's not just taxes, either. The tax break staved off the reality that when public options duplicate what employers provide, employers have every reason to stop providing.

Nice benefits, while costly, help employers compete in hiring talent. But if taxpayers cover the benefit for everyone else, employers get no boost from generosity.

Even if employers want to be generous anyhow, the state's generosity makes theirs meaningless. It inculcates a sense of, "We already gave - through the IRS."

The Sell Job has been confusing and the backlash is going to propel lots of change in DC

SOURCE:

"They're saying, 'Where do we get the free Obama care, and how do I sign up for that?' " said Carrie McLean, a licensed agent for eHealthInsurance.com. The California-based company sells coverage from 185 health insurance carriers in 50 states.

SOURCE:

Presaging the looming Republican sweep is the shift in the party ratings on various issues. Rasmussen has the Republicans ahead by 49-37 on the economy and 53-37 on healthcare. His likely-voter poll shows GOP leads on every major issue area: national security (49-37), Iraq (47-39), education (43-30), immigration (47-34), Social Security (48-36) and taxes (52-34).

When Republicans are winning issues like education, healthcare and Social Security — normally solidly Democratic issues — a sweep of unimaginable proportions is in the offing.

The Teaparty movement is gaining momentum. Even CNN has tried embracing them. Not that anyone is watching CNN. Way too much liberal bias is driving the population to watch FOX. The race baiting and intolerance of the Liberal mindset is unattractive to say the least.

Tighten your belt and support fiscal conservatives would be the mantra of the day.

Pope Hunt (more hatred via MSM)

There have been some good explanations of the Fr. Murphy case in regards to the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith and how then-Cardinal Ratzinger was involved in the case. I think though that Jimmy Akin has the clearest and best presentation of the Fr. Murphy case I have seen. He lays out the facts as we know them along with the Church’s process and timeline of events. He also points out areas where the handling of the case could prudentially be criticized.

The hysteria that the New York Times generated in it’s piece which could be described as a “Pope hunt” go so far beyond the evidence that it is hard to see other than malice involved. Though Jimmy Akin also charitably addresses this aspect.

So I found this CBO report. It Projects that. President Obama's fiscal 2011 budget will generate nearly $10 trillion in cumulative budget deficits over the next 10 years, $1.2 trillion more than the administration projected, and raise the federal debt to 90 percent of the nation's economic output by 2020...

That is seriously screwed up. In pointing this out the response I got was a head scratching.

But, George Bush spent lots of money! To me this is like saying, "Wow, having my finger cut off hurt" and someone responding. "Oh yeah? My friend got a paper cut!"

Yeah Bush 41 did over spend. Yes, the congress was enabling this expenditure. Guess what? We the people voted them all the hell out. As a Republican I find myself defending GW, despite him not being anywhere near the President I would have wanted. I suppose it is akin to living in New Jersey and being an NBA fan.

The Government is causing Obesity!

My buddy Flying Van is hostile towards school lunches. I believe he feels that the government is spending his money incorrectly. A point I am in agreement with.

The idea behind the lunch entitlement is that poor people can not afford to buy food or they care so little about the kids they have they choose not to feed them or they lack the training on how to purchase and prepare food. Seeing how kids are required to go to school, this makes it a logical place to feed these poor starving kids, who must be thinking about their empty stomachs instead of learning reading, writing and arithmetics.

That is to say your brain needs calories to function. Add to that the fact that hunger is a distraction and you have a prime example of the Government aiding education!

One of the primary problems with the above idea that people are starving. No doubt there are people in the US, who cannot access the cornucopia of goodness. If someone is starving the human thing to do is to get them fed, then have them to feed themselves. Finally have them help feed those who are starving.

So holding a parent responsible for providing for their child gets jettisoned. Having a community wanting to help the less fortunate is also jettisoned. And the chance of the child learning to feed themselves is shunted towards letting the government feed you.

Case in point: If you are on food stamps the USDA added incentives and other changes that targets the link between Obesity and Food Stamps with an idea to trim rampant obesity rates among low-income groups. Obesity is not caused by starvation... Right?

So we know that food stamps, from the government, are making poor people fat. Now I read that school lunches are not just making sure that hungry kid has sustenance to insure better performance. No our School lunch program, from the government, are making hungry kids Obese.

I never got\purchased school lunches. My mom made me a sandwich with some fruit and veg for quite a number of years. Sadly, many of those lunches were never eaten. Sometime around third grade I was responsible for my own lunch. Which means I had breakfast and dinner at home and ignored lunch. In HS I was on swim team and had instant breakfast (beats upchucking). Again, if I did have some lunch it was not everyday.

Basically, I was too lazy to make a lunch and too busy to bother with lunch. When I did eat, I made up for the missing meals. I did a pretty good job of burning off any extra calories as well.

Now my daughter needs to have regular intervals of food intake or she gets listless. My nephew would have to eat a certain nutritional balance to avoid nasty headaches.

To my way of thinking. Yes, we need to feed habitually hungry kids. The parents need to be held responsible or face some kind of consequence. Funding a Union does not seem to be covering the basic need.

Why exactly?

Someone recently commented on Facebook that they hated poor people. The assertion is this person is fiscally well off and should be demonized. Why exactly?

Hate itself is a problem: 1 a : intense hostility and aversion usually deriving from fear, anger, or sense of injury b : extreme dislike or antipathy : loathing.

Hatred is irrational most of the time, so I can see questioning the rational behind the above loathing. How different is I hate poor people from I hate people?

Do I have intense hostility for the tall person sitting in front of me at the theater? Maybe it is just a pet peeve of mine. Not sure.

If you hate something, surely you want less of that something around. Juxtapose Loveing something you would want more. So if you hate poor people you would want less poor people around. I would venture to guess many poor people would like to move up and out of that tax bracket. If not, state lotteries would not do nearly so well.

If you love poor people you would want more and more of them. Hmmm, maybe this explains the liberal mindset?

In case you forgot, They are elected to Represent!

If you are a Citizen of the United States and of Voting age, please contact your representative and tell them how you feel about the Health Care Bill issue going around Congress.

There is some very ethically challenged things going on, today, to get thwart the will of the people. President Obama, Pelosi and Reid are unable to get the votes needed and are resulting in questionable rule violations.

The Senate Parliamentarian came out with a ruling that Thursday that stopped one of the "creative solutions" to getting a bill passed when you do not have the votes.

It boils down to this. Healthcare costs keep going up. More government will not make costs go down (check out Medicare for out of control). The Republican solutions are to include individuals in the tax breaks that companies get when they purchase insurance. Reform Tort law to stop the revolving door of lawyers trying for a quick buck. Drop barriers so you can purchase healthcare from any state. Set up a high risk pool for existing conditions.

The constitution of the United States puts limits on what Government should do, we need our Representatives to look to that document for guidance.

Great viewpoint here.

Fiscal responsibility.

Obama, to much fan-fair, Praised the Pay-as-you-go rule. The media high-fived and there was much rejoicing. There was talk of fiscal responsibility and joyous singing praise of the deficit hawk Obama. The meaning, at first glance, is to make sure any bill is funded prior to passing. That means you cut other programs or raise revenue by some other means. That sounds good right? Not adding to the debt or deficit with any new expense. Pres. Barry says: “the American people are tired of politicians who talk the talk but don’t walk the walk when it comes to fiscal responsibility.”

The same bill raised the deficit limit to 14.3 Trillion. This is disturbing to anyone who has a household budget. Liberals just shrug and think it is a good thing to borrow that much more money to help the economy. Because nothing makes you richer then being in more debt... [/facepalm]. Also, because they passed PayGo they are now fiscally responsible... Trust in them...

Enter Senator Jim Bunning who stated his intent to block a $10 billion spending bill until it is offset by cuts elsewhere, or payed-for-as-they-go. Which should have gotten him the same high praise from the media right? I mean Pres. Obama got accolades as did the Congress for fiscal responsibility? This is a Republican joining the Democrats! Bi-Partisan support for PayGo! This is winning!

Nope, Jim Bunning is\was being vilified for his mean spirited fiscal responsibility. So as I sit mystified at the MSM and the hypocrisy. The Democrats are going to pass healthcare despite the fact they do not have the votes, nor the ability to under the rules that they operate. Pelosi said this is the most Ethical Congress ever! Which can only be true if your Ethics are situational...

Source:

Bunning’s Spending Hold Makes Him a Cad to TV Nets, Focus on His Supposed Victims

Jim Bunning's fiscal hardball jams GOP

More on the Bunning Benefits Blockade

Professor (the new 'N' word?)

Wow, just wow! Did you realize how Racist a term like Professor has been used?

Me neither... I guess it helps to be involved in Race and Justice to draw these kinds of conclusions..

Ogletree, founding and executive director of the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice, says he sees the “professor” label as a thinly veiled attack on Obama’s race. Calling Obama “the professor” walks dangerously close to labeling him “uppity,” a term with racial overtones that has surfaced in the political arena before, Ogletree said.

Amazing. (source)

Why are liberals so condescending?

I present for you a Washington Post piece in which Gerard Alexander attempts to answer a question I have long pondered.

"Every political community includes some members who insist that their side has all the answers and that their adversaries are idiots. But American liberals, to a degree far surpassing conservatives, appear committed to the proposition that their views are correct, self-evident, and based on fact and reason, while conservative positions are not just wrong but illegitimate, ideological and unworthy of serious consideration. Indeed, all the appeals to bipartisanship notwithstanding, President Obama and other leading liberal voices have joined in a chorus of intellectual condescension."

Read the entire article.

President Palin

Okay, so get this. There was a convention of the Tea Party which is for fiscal responsibility in government. Sarah Palin gave a great speech. This has caused the MSM to become unglued.

And the major unglued story I read today? She jotted some hand notes for the speech. There is something truly amazing about Sarah and her ability to drive liberals over the top nutzo.

She has unleashed some amazing unprecedented media responses from her Facebook postings. It seems to go like this. She issues a statement, the MSM gears up the attack team. People, most of whom are savvy to this hatred, figure out what she means and scoffs at the press. Sarah becomes more popular and the state run media is left scratching its head on what just happened.

The idea around these stories is that Sarah is unsophisticated and a "Dumb Hick". Most of us jott something down on our hands at some point. It is a smart thing to do, as you will not leave your hand on your desk when you need that info.

I suppose the more intellectually elite thing to do would be to set up a higher tech method of note cribbing. I mean, that would not look as silly right?

Superbowl Abortion advertisement

Copy Pasted from here: By Jeff Miller

Being both a Catholic pundit and living in Gator country by contract I am required to comment on the Im Tebow Superbowl ad. A lot of pixels and ink have already been spilled over this so I will spill some more.

Those who support legal abortion often chaff at being called pro-abortion - the much prefer pro-choice. No doubt they believe this is the case, but in reality there are few if any who see abortion and not having an abortion both a morally neutral acts of exactly the same weight. After all what was the last time you saw a Planned Parenthood Maternity Ward or a NARAL Home for Unwed Mothers.

The fuss over the Tim Tebow ad really proves this. The ad presents one side of choice so what is the big deal to them? A mother talking about the decision to choose life is not exactly controversial since all of our mothers did exactly the same thing.

The obvious reason they hate they so much is that it shows the reality of "choice" the existence or the snuffing out of a human being. Over the years more and more people whose mothers considered abortion and decided against it have been talking about this fact. They are survivors of a "choice". There is also the case of abortion survivor Gianna Jessen who lived despite the attempt to abort her. The pro-abortion side is upset that they can't run similar ads. In fact they have been able to find zero aborted babies willing to film a Superbowl or any other ad for them. They can't even find people who want to take their mothers to task for having them. Those that each day regret their mothers did not abort them.

Tim Tebow does not represent a tissue mass or any other ecumenism euphemism for a child in the womb, but the normal consequence of not stopping life while in the womb. A Heisman Trophy winner is present because he mother choose life over the doctor's suggestion. Though Joy Behar said he could just as easily have become a "racist." Great idea Joy Behar - we should kill all children to prevent such an occurrence. Seeing Tim Tebow and hearing this story can remind us of the 50 Million individual persons who did not survive their mother's choice.

The abortion industry and abortion supporters have always been about minimizing or hiding reality. Women are told across the world falsehoods about the stages of the child in their womb. Terms are used to describe this that have no bearing on the reality. Over and over Ultrasound has been called a weapon because it helps to visualize reality. Laws requiring that women be properly informed about the life in the womb and presented with factual medical and scientific information about this are blocked time and again by the pro-abortion crowd.

A mother choosing life is polarizing and divisive. What a sick culture we live in.

A rather odd fact is that Planned Parenthood is responding to this ad by having two men, an ex-footbal player and a Gold Medalist, talking about women's rights being respected. Now could you imagine the outcry of a pro-life ad involving two men talking against abortion? The pro-abortion crowd would go crazy criticizing it for being so out of touch and not being able to speak for women.

Though I guess Planned Parenthood could get lots of men who favor abortion to do commercials for them. They could speak how abortion saved them from being trapped in a relationship. How abortion enabled them to maintain their lifestyle of treating women as objects and to keep pretending their was not natural consequence of sex. Predatory males certainly love legal abortion. In the meantime pro-abortion supporters want to remain to keep their head in the sand and to deny that a women's choice determines if a person will continue to live or not. Tim Tebow should just go away and not remind them of the consequence of "choice".

For us who are pro-life it reminds us to pray for those mothers in difficult situations that are considering abortion as a solution and to help them in every possible way that we can.

Grasshopper and the Ant. (Obama Version)

OLD VERSION

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away..

Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed. The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be responsible for yourself!

MODERN VERSION

The ant works hard in the withering heat and the rain all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.

Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while he is cold and starving.

CBS, NBC , PBS, CNN, and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food.

America is stunned by the sharp contrast. How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?

Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper and everybody cries when they sing, “It's Not Easy Being Green.”

ACORN stages a demonstration in front of the ant's house where the news stations film the group singing, "We shall overcome." Then Rev. Jeremiah Wright has the group kneel down to pray to God for the grasshopper's sake.

President Obama condemns the ant and blames President Bush, President Reagan, Christopher Columbus, and the Pope for the grasshopper's plight.

Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid exclaim in an interview with Larry King that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.

Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity For Grasshoppers Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer.

The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the Government Green Czar and given to the grasshopper.

The story ends as we see the grasshopper and his free-loading friends finishing up the last bits of the ant's food while the government house he is in, which, as you recall, just happens to be the ant's old house, crumbles around them because the grasshopper doesn't maintain it.

The ant has disappeared in the snow, never to be seen again. The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident, and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the ramshackle, once prosperous and once peaceful, neighborhood.

The entire Nation collapses bringing the rest of the free world with it.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be careful how you vote in 2010.

Media Cynical about good news.

So I read this in Popular Science. I have been a long time, part time, student of Fusion. It is very tough to stay optimistic with a science that used to be ten years away back in the 60's.

I guess I should clarify my term. Fusion in this context is the generation of electrical energy through the release of energy, caused when multiple like-charged atomic nuclei join together to form a heavier nucleus. Clear?

Of course there will have to be some Environmental group out there that will take up signs in protest. I am just wondering, in advance, what the crises to avoid, will be...

News Organization of Record

FNC or Fox News gets blasted by liberals as being horribly biased. Further, anyone who watches the show is painted as having a mental handicap at worst. The same groups will fawn over MSNBC, the Huffington Post and Media Matters, laughingly stating these are truth sayers.

Why do people watch the news they watch? One would have to assume it is entertaining and informative and in general reasonable by the given observer.

So which news organization do most people watch? Fox News.

Which only means they are popular, what about Trust in the Information? Fox News again.

Well, that could be due to them catering to conservatives? Public Policy Polling nationwide survey of 1,151 registered voters Jan. 18-19 found that 49 percent of Americans trusted Fox News, 10 percentage points more than any other network. 30 percent of Democrats polled said they trusted the network

Does this mean they are "Fair and Balanced" as they logo? Actually it does.

The non-partisan Center for Media and Public Affairs found only Fox News Offered Obama Historically Normal Scrutiny in 2009.

Lets taking something as politically charged as an election, a biased network would thow in for their ideology right? Apparently so unless your Fox News.

During coverage of the Massachusetts special election, CNN and MSNBC aired only a fraction of the Republican candidate's speech. CNN only ran 26% of Brown's speech 82% of Coakley, while MSNBC aired 37% of Browns 100% of Coakley. Fox News Channel carried 100% of both speeches.

Yeah, well what about Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly? Okay, yes FNC has conservative shows. Those biased shows are doing much better viewer ship then the biased alternatives.

Now for the shocker. I get the bulk of my news from news.google.com. Which is a portal type site for all the news organization. The next place I usually hit is The Telegraph website (it is a United Kingdom site). Next I hit Mother Jones Headlines, then TownHall.com.

If I have some reading time then Newsbusters or Rush Limbaugh. I should note that these sites are a quick read then following the provided source links to re-read.

As far as FNC goes, I occasionally watch O'Reilly. I never have watched an entire show. I will catch the talking heads if there is something breaking in the world or elections that I am watching. Other then that I steer clear of televised news.

So when you hear someone spouting on and name calling the liberal assumption that people in general are stupid. Remember this is the product of intellectual elitism. Do not fall for that.

These folks believe you should live, watch, read, eat, believe, and think like they do.