Friday, September 28, 2012

Guest from the Left: J. Marquis

Mitt's Two Biggest Problems

Number one: Mitt is Mitt. No point kicking the guy anymore, everybody knows he's a robot who thinks a wild Saturday night is one filled with drinking milkshakes and trying to remember the names of his cloned sons. Number two: He's been forced to walk a fine line between the real world and that of wild-eyed Tea Party members who want to somehow simultaneously slash taxes for the rich, boost the military budget and solve the budget problem. If he wasn't such a dick I'd almost feel sorry for him.

(You can read J. Marquis daily at Major Conflict)

Thursday, September 27, 2012

Could This Possibly Be For Real?

Not the phone, I don't even care about that --this woman in general. Is she for real or is this some crazy schtick...?

Guest Post by Rickvid in Seattle

The painting* says it all, but still, the fight will be joined. We have hope for victory despite resistance, complaining, and collaboration. To paraphrase Henry V:

“He which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his passport shall be made

And crowns for convoy put into his purse:

We would not vote in that man's company

That fears his fellowship to vote with us.”

*From Bosch Fawstin at

Caption It...

Wednesday, September 26, 2012

You Met With Who?!

To think that any American would meet with Ahmahdinejad is disheartening, but the fact that it was veterans makes it just that much worse...

Veterans For Peace Meets With Ahmadinejad

"Members of Veterans For Peace, along with other U.S. peace activists, met Tuesday night with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Veterans For Peace President Leah Bolger addressed the meeting, stressing VFP's commitment to doing everything possible to prevent a U.S. or U.S.-assisted attack on Iran. VFP hopes to send a delegation to Iran in October."

You can read Leah Bolger's full remarks here (if you can stomach it). BTW, Leah Bolger is the President of veterans for peace as well as the article's author, who wrote about herself in third person...

Monday, September 24, 2012


Gift Horse

The SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT thing he's learned over the past four years is that "You can't change Washington from the inside, you can only change it from the outside." Why haven't I seen this looping in Romney commercials 24/7 since it was uttered by the president? This says EVERYTHING. THIS is his most valued lesson?! That he was more effective as a Chicago Community Organizer than as a President. You can get more inside Washington than the President of the United States.

Link this together with Obama saying if he didn't change the economy it would be a one term proposition...and he's ushering himself out the door.

Mitt...why isn't this everywhere?! Is it true that you hired McCain passive gaggle of campaign managers?! ugh.

Sunday, September 23, 2012

Saturday, September 22, 2012

You're Not Voting Romney, Because He's Obama-Light? I Don't F@#$!&* Think So.

2016: Obama's America has been "leaked" in its entirety. I just finished watching and I actually feel a little sick to my stomach. Romney is no Obama Light. Hillary isn't even Obama Light... I knew this was someone with a very different set of ideals than most Americans, I just didn't realize how innately anti-America those ideals were....

Friday, September 21, 2012

I Side With Mitt Romney

Though I'd hate to actually meet the individual that needs a quiz to help them decide whether they are more in line with Mitt Romney or with Barack Obama...this quiz is a particularly good one.

I Side With Dot Com

(If you check "choose from more answers," you can probably find one closer to your views than most quizzes offer. I only had to write in my own answer to one question.)

My results:

My final result said that I am 92% Republican, 69% Libertarian, 16% Democrat and 4% Green. Sounds about right.

Take the quiz.

Star Spangled Banner...Who Knew?

This one is a bit different from the 'Call Me Maybe' series...

Thursday, September 20, 2012

"Radical Islamists, not global warming, is the cancer on this world and it must be forcibly removed."

I was sick last night thinking of what really went down in Lybia. (Ambassador Stevens knew he was a target) How disgusting that the Obama administration was THANKING Libyans for taking Ambassador Stevens to the hospital --acting as if they weren't brandishing his body Mogadishu-style after gang raping him and murdering him. (Why would the Obama administration send a gay ambassador to a Muslim country?!!) And his family now has to hear this. After hearing Obama thank his brandishers and blame it on a low budget YouTube trailer. I think Obama really believed it though. He does worship at the alter of himself and is probably genuinely shocked that this would happened while he is President. So, while the media is out there doctoring Mitt Romney tapes, Americans are being raped and killed and escaping with an apology in lieu of any condemnation or reprisal. This Washington Times article by Eric Galub says it all...

"Radical Islamists, not global warming, is the cancer on this world and it must be forcibly removed.

While American embassies in Libya, Syria, and many other Arab Muslim nations are under siege, leftist enablers want "dialogue". The 'leftist-that-blame-America' crowd' thinks that an American movie critical of Islam sparked the violence.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

These coordinated attacks on the eleventh anniversary of 9/11 were premeditated acts of war. An American diplomat was sodomized and dragged through the streets before being killed. The days of dialogue with radical Islamists and their leftist enablers has to end right now.

No more "diversity." No more "multiculturalism." No more "understanding." No more "root causes." No more political correctness. No more "sensitivity."

No more "appealing to their better nature."

This does not work with Islamists, because like leftists, they do not have one. They hate for the sake of hate.

Leftists blather about "coming together" and then refuse to come together with Republicans against a threat trying to kill us all.

They don't hate the terrorists. They hate George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Sarah Palin, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Grover Norquist, the Koch Brothers, Sheldon Adelson, and anybody else wanting to cut taxes and kill terrorists. None of those people have ever murdered anyone.

Islamists murder Americans. Then Governor Romney criticizes President Obama for doing nothing. Liberals excoriate Romney for criticizing their demigod. For once in their miserable lives it would be nice if they hated Islamists more than Republicans

While Americans were mutilated and dehumanized, President Obama continued his campaign tour." (Read the entire story: Ambassador Stevens's brutal death at the hands of Radical Islam)

Caption It...

For Jpck & SoLow

As promised, the USMC answer to the military 'Call Me Maybe" craze...

(...and if anyone happens to know the boy at 1:58 holding the blue sister wants the hook up! lol)

Wednesday, September 19, 2012

I'll See Your Mitt Romney Tape and Raise You a Barack Obama Tape

"...because I actually believe in redistribution. At least at a certain level to make sure that everybody's got a shot." ~Barack Obama

Personally, I'd like apologies from everyone that said calling Obama a SOCIALIST was "histrionics" or "unfair" or "taking the political speech too far."

What would they call the belief in the redistribution of wealth? AND, if Barack believes in wealth redistribution and he gave such a small amount to charity --what happened to the 46 MILLION he and Michelle have made...?

Dedicated to Free

We heard from the Navy yesterday with their version of Gangnam Style by PSY, but the Army and the Marines battled over versions of "Call Me Maybe" with tons of videos all over YouTube...My favorites:

US ARMY (Kunar, Afghanistan):

Come on Free, you know you were smiling while you watched it!

USMC coming tomorrow.

(UPDATE: When I picked this as my favorite, I didn't even notice that these are 4th ID Dad's old Division...)

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

I Agreed With OWS The First Time --When They Bathed and Had Jobs and Were called The TEA PARTY.

Wow. The Obama campaign spins more than Pauly D.

First the Arab Spring that sprung over a movie and now acting as if Mitt Romney's words are somehow a gift to them on the birthday of Occupy Wall Street?

Personally, I think Mitt Romney's words are right on and cast an uncomfortable light on an ever growing, Greece-becoming, dependent voter base.

Sorry Mother Jones, your September Surprise sucks and only serves to remind Republicans that might not be sold on Romney that the 47% he refers to will only grow before the next election...making Hillary 2012 a forgone conclusion if Obama wins this, Thanks!

Gangnam, Navy style!

I know I should be posting something for the USAF given today is their 65th birthday, but I REALLY needed a laugh this morning and the Navy boys obliged!

Monday, September 17, 2012

It Was a 'Spontaneous Gathering?'

Have you even seen the film that is supposedly causing the ongoing evil that is happening in the Middle East? The movie that Obama officials have called reprehensible? Reprehensible? Maybe Ridiculous. Or preposterous. Asinine even. But, reprehensible? The riots are reprehensible. The Killings certainly reprehensible...but the movie?

The movie, Innocense of Muslims, is like the worst and most poorly produced Saturday Night Live skit gone bad. I can't even begin the fathom the smooth brained individual that would be offended by this low budget offering.

A pro-Obama Democrat (other than Lefty Jones) had one of the best articles about this I've read:

President Obama, stop blaming the victim for Mideast violence By Kirsten Powers

I am beyond disgusted that the AMERICAN GOVERNMENT has taken the supposed film maker into custody. What if my 13 year old and his dopey friends make a movie in our basement mocking Mohammad and post it to YouTube? Could he be carted away? Could I? Did I take some Ambien and leave America in a stupor....?

And all the while, the Administration keeps beating the 'it was a spontaneous gathering' drum.

Saturday, September 15, 2012

Guest Post by Lefty Jones

Why we should be marching in the streets and burning Arabic Flags.....

I don’t care about your god. I don’t care if you don’t have a god. I don’t care if you aren’t sure if there might be a god. But I’ll make a movie about any damn one of those scenarios if I like…even if you find it offensive…and I’ll expect other Americans to stand up for my right to do so.

If you live in a country that does not have a separation of church and state, or mosque and state or temple and state…I’m sorry for you. Go ahead and march around and scream and burn flags all you like……but if you think you are going to overrun our embassies and kill our ambassadors…you need to know with assurance that you will be helped to go and help you MEET your god immediately.

And if the host countries governments will not provide the protection they are legally and morally obligated to provide…....then I believe we are obligated to remind them how important security issues are by Tomahawking the military outpost of our choice.

These recent events highlight why I don’t believe in including “god” in a party platform, in our pledge of allegiance or in any government sponsored format. Keep god and government separate.

When we don’t, the immediate question of “which” God?....becomes part of the equation. And while I’m frankly much more comfortable with the “Buddy Jesus” god that is currently in fashion than I am with the warmongering gods of the Old Testament and the Koran, I don’t want there to be any mistaking that we are a secular nation the allows free speech and defends our right to have it both inside and outside of our borders.

I think as a nation we need to be very forceful on this “separation” issue. I very frankly don’t buy into almost any religion being able to claim they “are a religion of peace” but I want our diplomatic stance to be crystal fucking clear so that it goes something like this:

  • Oh, there is a movie that you claim denigrates Allah? Yeah…welcome to the club. There are limitless movies in America that mock Jesus and about any other religious figure you can think of. But the American government didn’t make the movie… .and we have free speech…sometimes that’s painful…maybe you could just not watch it.
  • Oh….but you say you’re an Islamic State that is bound to defend Allah and Mohammed??? Yeah, well we’re a secular state bound to defend our citizens, our embassies, our ambassadors and our interests….and we will. So go tell your cute, little crowd of flag burners to take a step back from the embassy gate unless they are planning on going home to Allah today.
  • The first person to so much as begin scaling that wall….napalm.
  • Apply liberally to people who react the same.

Ok…maybe there’s a better option than napalm….but I want to make sure it hurts really bad…and that everyone getting ready to climb that wall behind them sees just how bad it hurts to try to impose your God on America.

I think most of the people who read this site are totally nitwits…some of you I like a little…most of you I don’t. But I love that you have the right to say what you want and I truly believe we have to fight together on that front.

This fear around the globe of what will happen if you say something about Allah, Mohammed or Islam leaves me stunned and angry. They know they have the West scared…and it has to stop. A multi city American showing of throngs of people holding signs up saying EXACTLY what we think of their religion, their beliefs and their prophet may no longer be what we should have done….it may now be our obligation. Showing we’re not afraid…and that no one here or there will stop us from saying what we think any damn time we want about any damn thing we want.


Friday, September 14, 2012

Obamacare Summed Up in ONE SENTENCE

My goalie and I decided to transcribe this for those of you that can't watch a video at work:

"We are going to be gifted with a health care plan that we are forced to purchase and fined if we don't, which reportedly covers at least 10 million more people without adding a single new doctor but provides for 16,000 new IOS agents, written by a Congress that didn't read it but exempted themselves from it and signed by a President that smokes with funding administered by a treasury chief that didn't pay his taxes, for which we will be taxed four years before any benefits take effect by a government which has already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare and all to be overseen by a Surgeon General who is obese and financed by a country that's broke, so what the _____ could possibly go wrong?!"

Thursday, September 13, 2012

Guest from the Right: T. Paine

A Christian Argument Against "Gay Marriage"

It would seem that the very important subject of gay marriage is a topic that has not even yet begun to wane in its ascendancy. Indeed, there are many well-meaning folks that are trying mightily to make this into the new civil rights issue for our times. While I think that such comparisons are strongly misplaced, and frankly do an injustice to those good people of color that had to struggle and suffer to finally reach equality in their rights under the law, I can see cleverness in couching the debate in such terms. It is a debate that has even caused President Obama to reconsider his position on gay marriage and for him to state, unconstitutionally, that he will not have his administration enforce the Defense of Marriage Act that was passed in congress and signed into law back in 1996 under President Clinton.

The rhetoric from the pro-gay marriage side of the debate has become quite heated. Often times, an immediate and vociferous proclamation regarding one’s bigotry and hatefulness is issued if one does not agree and support the concept of gay marriage. Evidently it doesn’t occur to these folks or it is rather ignored that those of us that support and defend traditional marriage do so out of strong sociological reasons that support the concept that a family composed of a mother and a father is typically the very best environment in which to raise and support children. The fact that many people who think this way also do so because of a strong religious Christian faith only seems to exacerbate the matter. Indeed, many pro-gay marriage advocates and even many “enlightened” Christians think that God’s word is not necessarily eternal and on this issue it is antiquated. It is an anachronism to them accordingly.

I have been confronted by pro-gay marriage proponents that have used the fallacious logic that “Christ never said anything about same-sex marriage”. This argument is used as justification for some Christians to assume that Christ would not condemn such marriages, since they are still constituted in love. The notion is silly frankly. Christ also never explicitly said anything about rape, suicide, or pedophilia either. Surely, following such flawed logic, they are not implying that our Lord is just fine with those things too.

While I absolutely do not support gay marriage or condone homosexual acts, I certainly do not have any hatred or loathing for gay people. My thoughts on the issue, while having matured over time, have always been rooted in the same basic tenet that such actions were intrinsically wrong. People with same-sex attraction though are God’s children, just as we all are, and should thus be treated with respect and dignity.

I was very pleased to read what the Catechism of the Catholic Church had to say on the subject, as I found myself in complete agreement with the teaching of the Church’s Magisterium and thus Christ’s own teachings accordingly.

CCC 2357 states: “Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, *141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." *142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

CCC 2358: The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

So what specifically did Christ have to say about marriage? In the gospel of Matthew 19:3-12, Christ gives us His word on what marriage is supposed to be.

Some Pharisees approached him, and tested him, saying, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause whatever?” He said in reply, “Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female' and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate." They said to him, "Then why did Moses command that the man give the woman a bill of divorce and dismiss (her)?" He said to them, "Because of the hardness of your hearts Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery." [His] disciples said to him, "If that is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry." He answered, "Not all can accept [this] word, but only those to whom that is granted. Some are incapable of marriage because they were born so; some, because they were made so by others; some, because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Whoever can accept this ought to accept it."

The people seemed to be amazed at what Christ told them regarding a valid marriage and how anyone who divorced and remarried was living in adultery. “If that is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry!” (Mt.19:10 ) The fact that Jesus didn’t clarify or back-pedal means that they had obviously understood his meaning. Jesus knew that it would be difficult for fallen men to live by that definition of marriage, and yet he held firm. “Not all can accept this word, but only those to whom that is granted” (Mt. 19:11).

Let’s look closely at what Jesus said next: “Some are incapable of marriage because they were born so; some, because they were made so by others; some, because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven” (Mt. 19:12). The implications of Christ’s words are absolute then. A man’s ability to be united to his wife sexually is was what made him a candidate for marriage. If he was unable to achieve sexual union because of a birth defect, castration, or a vow of celibacy, than marriage was not his vocation.

Consequently it would seem that the foundation of Jesus’ whole argument is indeed biological. Unless “a man” and “his wife … become one flesh,” there is no valid marriage. For Jesus, and for anyone committed to His teachings, it is impossible to speak of a “Christian same-sex marriage.” Jesus’ words rule it out absolutely. The parameters for marriage between Christians, the parameters for a sacramental marriage, have been set by Jesus and cannot be changed. Indeed, as Christ said, “Heaven and earth will pass away but my words will never pass away” (Lk.23:33).

*141 Cf. Gen 191-29; Rom 124-27; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tim 1:10.
*142 CDF, Persona humana 8. [Rom.1:21-32, 1 Cor.6:9-11]

(You can read T. Paine daily at Saving Common Sense)

Guest from the Left: J. Marquis

I'd Really Like to Know

I hear a lot of conservatives criticize the administration regarding what's happened in several Middle Eastern countries recently. I'd really like to know what they think we should have done differently...are they saying we should have somehow used our military to maintain the status quo there?

(You can read J. marquis daily at Major Conflict)

Wednesday, September 12, 2012

In His Own Words: Part 3,246

Over a YouTube Trailer?!

Wow, he really is Jimmy Carter.

When it comes to the Middle East, I feel like I could just keep recycling posts... (Notice, Photobucket removed the Mohammad cartoon!)

UPDATE: (12:36 pm EST)

Is this true?!


And, why did I learn of this on facebook and not the news...I've had FNC on all morning?!

Tuesday, September 11, 2012

Where Were They?

Everyone has a 9/11 story. Here in Philly we're just under 2 hours from Manhattan, so most people have a very personal story. An 'I know someone that was there' or 'that was supposed to be there' story.

As I was falling asleep last night and thinking about my story, I realized I had never heard the Obama's story. I have had complete strangers in the super market line impart their 9/11 tale to me...but for the life of me can't remember ever hearing the President or the First Lady share where they were when those planes hit the Towers in NYC. What they thought, what they felt and what they told their two small girls (Their two girls are the exact ages of my first two boys). Now, I don't normally rush to watch or DVR speeches by either, so perhaps I have just missed those stories the past 3 or 4 years...? I didn't have any luck Googling the question either...

It's cathartic to talk about that day. Where you were and what you were doing. When people tell their stories the emotion is still so palpable and raw this many years later. I think the country has a touch of PTSD from that day, but like a huge group therapy group it helps to talk about it because we all went through it together.

As long as I live I will never forget standing on the soft wet sand in Ocean City, New Jersey and watching in horror a line of black smoke creep across the pristine horizon line...and the sinking feeling of sorrow that crept in with it.

It's always hard watching the coverage this day each year and reliving the feelings to a small extent. But I always do.

Friday, September 07, 2012

Guest from the Right: T. Paine

I am evidently an anachronism. In many respects, I do not appreciate the “progress” we have made via the women’s liberation movement when it comes to how our boys have been indoctrinated. I don’t like the fact that guys are seemingly no longer guys in the younger generations. They seem to have all been feminized or out-right neutered. What really strikes me as odd is the fact that the new American culture seems to encourage this, as the discernible differences between young men and women appears to be narrowing.

Many of the signs of this are immediately apparent when simply looking at the young men of today. Evidently you women-folk are okay if your “man” goes and gets a manicure and his hair highlighted right along with you. I mean, a manicure? A guy used to do his own “manicure” with a pocketknife to get the grease or dirt out from under his fingernails. Nowadays one would be hard put to even find one of these new metro-sexual men even carrying a pocket knife, let alone having a need to get grease out from under his nails.

As for the clothing donned by young men today, it usually goes to one of two extremes: pants that are worn so low and baggy that his boxer shorts are showing (and just begging for a power wedgie) or they are so skinny and tight that it appears they got them from the junior girls department.

We won't even begin talking about chest waxings.

The attitudes of these men are decidedly un-masculine as well. There is no sense of respect, let alone any modicum of a chivalrous attitude displayed towards women by these boys. Girls are considered as objects or “Ho’s” by these self-centered punks, instead of young women with dignity whom are deserving of respect. The fact that many of these women are as coarse and undignified and accepting of such treatment only ensures that such despicable attitudes by these men-children will continue.

I think the feminization/neutering of our young men starts in the elementary school playground these days. No longer are boys allowed to play dodge-ball, or cops and robbers, or cowboys and Indians, let alone smear the queer. Those games are WAY too violent for our sensitive boys of this new millennium. We mustn’t regress and allow our little boys to run and rough-house anymore by playing such games in this new enlightened age of caring. Heck, even making an imaginary gun with your thumb and forefinger today in such game play will likely get you expelled for violent tendencies, with a follow up trip to the psychologist to find out why little Timmy exhibited such abhorrent anti-social behavior. Further, “robbers” aren’t really bad guys. They are just the unfortunate victims who are negatively impacted by the draconian welfare cuts that those evil conservatives wish to enact. As for cowboys and Indians… well talk about politically incorrect! Why the very name of the game is offensive today! And changing the name to “cowboys and native Americans” really tends to lose something in the translation. I wonder if today’s youngsters even have heard of such vile games? And smear the queer!?! Why even saying the name of that game in front of a teacher will likely get you a trip to the principal’s office; never mind that we older folks never even thought of the word “queer” as being a pejorative… or at least not until we reached high school.

It used to be that little Johnny would join the local Little League team and be expected to show up to practices, work to improve his fielding, throwing, and batting skills, and absolutely he had to pay attention to the games when they were in progress. Nowadays, everyone can join and the focus is ONLY on “fun”, or so they tell us. Why sometimes the score isn’t even kept. Indeed, half of the kids are goofing off so much during the game that they have to ask if they won after the final inning is completed. And of course, at the end of the season, everyone gets a trophy. We wouldn’t want to hurt these little guys’ feelings or crush their artificially manufactured self-esteem that has been inflated through accomplishing… nothing. Indeed, there is no incentive to work, to improve, and to achieve a goal. It is all about “fun”, despite the fact that there really isn’t much fun without real competition, and hence most of these boys are bored accordingly. In other words, it has no semblance to the real world. I seem to remember that through improving my skills and working hard to get better that I actually had REAL fun. I must have been the exception to this new age rule today, though.

And what becomes of these youngsters as they reach high school now-a-days? Well, they look for the easy way through school. They have been taught that they are wonderful and brilliant without ever having experienced failure or defeat and having to pick themselves up, work harder, and succeed accordingly. Failure is something to be feared and avoided by taking the path of least resistance. They don’t want challenges; they want undeserved praise. They want spell-check and calculators to do the work for them. Those few that seek excellence are castigated. Why some schools have even gone so far as to eliminate their valedictorian so as not to make those others that didn’t work their tails off to achieve that status feel badly. Evidently failure is something to be avoided at all cost, even if that means never challenging our young men. They don’t learn how to effectively deal with failure and disappointment, so when real life shows up and failure does occur, these boys do not know how to pick themselves up, brush off the dirt, and walk it off. They don’t learn that failure is often a great teacher and makes your better, if you are willing to keep working and are able to learn the lessons that such failure was trying to teach you. Instead you see them pout, cry, and bemoan the unfairness of their situation. Why some will even join Occupy Wall Street rallies accordingly!

So we end up with young “men” that have been told by society not to act like boys used to act. We have told them that they are special and winners, despite having never really worked and struggled to actually achieve anything more meaningful than a X-box high score.

These young men, at best, graduate with a mediocre education, which is usually weak on mathematics and sciences. If they go to college, it is usually to pursue a relatively easier course of studies in the liberal arts or something equally useless for the job market today. They then are baffled why they are unable to get a $60,000 a year starting salary with their newly attained art-history degree. Further, if they don’t go to college, they typically will live at home with mommy and daddy still providing for them as they may work a part time job and hang out with their friends, thus delaying adding any more responsibility on their already “over-burdened” shoulders. Delaying manhood becomes the goal as far as responsibilities are concerned. When it comes to rights and privileges of manhood, well those things must be bestowed upon these man-children immediately. Theirs is a world where instant gratification is absolutely required for them.

These young men would rather live at home in Mom & Dad’s basement instead of venturing out on their own and making their own mark in the world. They seem to be either incapable or unwilling to provide for their own needs. I mean, why go through all of the hassle of actually having to get up before noon and go to work at some low-paying job where the boss doesn’t understand how brilliant Johnny is and how he is deserving of so much more money and authority, but no more responsibility… thank you. After all, Mom and Dad will still provide for him and his needs and wants. They want to be taken care of by their mommies and daddies rather than have the burden of taking care of a wife and family of their own, or even attempting to better themselves so that might one day be a possibility.

They expect their girlfriend to take over Mom’s job in providing for their domestic needs with the addition of sex, of course, while they both live at his parent's home. We won't even start with the avoidance of his taking responsibility and actually marrying the woman that is supposedly loved by the boy. The man-child isn’t interested in taking care of, providing for, or protecting a wife. It is all about continuing to maintain his artificially created self-esteem and what HE wants. And the young women seem to accept and be okay with these boys, until they realize after the babies start coming, that it is a lot of work when your “man” doesn’t want to provide and actually expects the women to still cater to his whims. He simply is another child for which the woman must care and provide. The young woman doesn't have a man and a husband on whom she can depend. She has her baby's daddy instead.

So after a few generations now of this post-women’s-liberation and feminization of men, we are now hard-pressed to find a young man these days that has a sense of purpose, a willingness to work hard to improve life for himself and his family, and a notion that God in His wisdom created the wonderful differences between men and women for a very good reason.

Today's young men are more likely to idolize Justin Bieber or find their heroes in sparkly vampires instead of the rugged self-sufficient John Wayne hero-types of my youth. Yep, the masculinity deficit that our post-women’s lib nation has wrought is now full of these man-boys that have been coddled and protected from real life. They are growing up and have achieved nothing of significance accordingly. It is exceptionally rare to find a young man these days that is willing to work hard, take personal responsibility, and try to better himself and his world. Such real men of honor and integrity are all the more remarkable because of their scarcity these days, and lucky is the young lady that can find one and have the sense to realize the quality of his character.

On the other hand, I guess the good news for these other “men-children” is that they evidently are still qualified under today’s standards to win a Nobel Prize or perhaps even grow up to be President of the United States one day. Yep, I am indeed an anachronism.

(You can read T. Paine daily at Saving Common Sense)

Guest from the Left: J. Marquis

Well, He Can Always Cut Some More Brush

The Dems invite Bill Clinton to their convention and he rocks the country. The Republicans did everything except get a restraining order to keep Dubya from showing up in Tampa.

(You can read J. Marquis daily at Major Conflict)

Caption It...

Wednesday, September 05, 2012

Skanky Libs

Guess this explains why they are so keen on abortion on demand...

(These buttons are being distributed by the Illinois delegation to the Democratic convention. -H/T: RSC)

Her Own Words...


Mitt won't let you kill your baby! Paul Ryan doesn't think you have a right to kill your baby! The Republicans want to take away your right to kill your baby! WHY CAN'T WE JUST KILL OUR BABIES IN PEACE?! AGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!

Jesus, this is a political platform?! NOW, NARAL, Planned Parenthood up there screeching is what they want the face of their party to be? Even Michelle Obama touted her husband's willingness to let you kill your baby. I thought the President's job was to protect his most innocent and helpless of citizens? It's the economy, stupid.

It was so bizarre. Honestly, I couldn't watch much. I went to bed with a stomach ache.

And, I have to wonder about the wisdom of this platform given that even CNN's latest poll shows that SIXTY-TWO PERCENT of the country say that want abortion illegal in all circumstances. Only NINE PERCENT said they wanted it legal in most circumstances.

And, this platform seems to make the assumption that all women are pro-choice? Talk about living in a bubble.

I guess it makes perfect sense that they took GOD out of the platform. I am pretty sure he's thanking them for that this morning.

Monday, September 03, 2012

Guest Post by: Freakchylde

Right of the Middle

Regardless what the "tried and true" Republicans want to think, they - and the Democrats - did themselves a disservice this last week at the convention. Shout as you want, about the illegality of what the Paul delegates did or did not do, but they are out of the party, and here's why that's a problem.

They are a grassroots group of folks, they're the younger generation that the parties are trying to woo. Last election, some of them ended up going over to Obama, this year, that probably won't happen. But...with the failure of the RNC to even admit that Paul was still "in the race" (he hadn't conceded as of the start of the convention), they decided to make the appearance that there was some type of unity among the Republican caucus, when there wasn't. They ignored the count of Paul delegates, down to even silencing the microphone repeatedly during one State announcing their delegate totals. Whether intentional or not, the bus containing the most vocal dissenting vote for the new rules managed to pass by the convention center 3 times without stopping, and managing to arrive 45 minutes AFTER the vote. This was their failure, and it wasn't even close to a failure that can be rectified.

I'm more than willing to bet that had the game playing not occurred, and the RNC just allowed the votes to go on as needed and not tried to intervene, there would be many Paul supporters who might have conceded their own vote, in the upcoming general election, for Romney. But that will never happen with enough votes to really mean anything. It's a toss-up now, because most of these voters will not be voting for either candidate. They'll pass over to the Libertarians, or they'll write-in Paul. And they will do it in more than just this election, because most of them are in the 18-25 crowd and they will not forget this year, and probably not forgive.

The RNC truly showed its ass, pun intended, not only with the scripted approvals and tacit lip-service given to Paul in the video presentation (but no speech to try and sooth the beast that is his constituency) but also with the candidate that they expect us so vote for in his stead. Yes, Romney has executive level experience, and that is one thing that I've wanted a candidate to have (short of military experience), but I would honestly prefer one who came from the ground up, or even a second or third generation business owner. But his failure is in the fact that he can't even connect with what the younger generations are facing, nor has he even made a real stance that truly differentiates himself from Obama. He has not really elaborated on anything other than appealing the healthcare bill (how he'll disassemble that one is still anyone's guess), which is exactly what happened in the last election when Obama vaguely hinted at the things he wanted to do. And the folks who voted for Obama last time, but were supporting Paul this time, are not going to make that mistake again. They see the lies that are pandering to the people who just want to hear a sound bite, the ones who aren't interested in substance or the real issues. Throw that in with his Veep choice and you've got a good reason to not vote for him. I like Ryan, I like his ideas for the budget, and my retired parents like his ideas for medicare. But during the last 3 years, he's put forth bills that define rape and tried to govern social issues on the national level, as well as pushing an extremely divisive Congress into failing to pass a budget, or create a real exit strategy to get this country back on steady footing. Ron Paul, and 3rd party supporters don't care about those things, because the Federal Government originally existed for the purpose of providing defense for the country borders, solving disputes between the States, and regulating national commerce.

What we don't want to hear are the lies that keep coming out of both parties, nor do we care about this "we have to deal with the hand we're dealt" BS that is a result of the GOP tent getting smaller. If it were about the hand we were dealt, the Congress wouldn't be going on a 2nd year of no budget, with the moderates of both parties exiting stage left. All we're going to have are the extremes of both parties who will continue to get nothing done. Which brings us to the point of why it Obama and Romney are both worthless candidates - No matter who wins, Congress will not have enough pull in either direction to do anything. We also don't care about religious dictates, whether the Catholic Church is appeased, or whether someone's moral compass has been turned around. We want the focus of the government to be on its operation and function within the constraints of the Constitution. Leave the Catholic Church to manage itself, and the moral compasses to the individuals and the communities to which they belong. Keep us safe within our borders and keep the economy running, preferably in a profitable manner.

All that said, I truly hope there are high returns, and a very slim margin of electoral votes for those two. I can't say for sure who is going to win, but I can say that I'd rather see them both lose. While the Richards/Williams election took politics to a new low, I don't know exactly what this election is taking us to, but it's not a positive, yet. It has re-awakened a generation who has grown up with lackluster candidates that encourage us to stay home, and invigorated a new generation who really wants to make a difference. But they're not going to play the "lesser of two evils" game, and telling them they're stupid, ignorant, or ensuring a win for the anti-candidate is not going to get them to come to the table. They understand how the system was supposed to work, and they don't view this as an either/or choice. Because it isn't. Yes, one of the Big 2 is probably going to win. But they aren't the only candidates, and viewing it as an either/or choice helps no one in this country, and it definitely won't help us in the future elections.

Oh, and don't try to maintain the status quo by lying to us about our anti-vote being a vote for Obama. It's not, it's a vote against the both of them and for someone else. We care about the candidates, not the party.

(You can read Freakchylde daily at Freakchylde's Playground)

PC Back-to-School Markers

This is for real. Available on Crayola's website: Crayola® Washable Multicultural Markers.

Just in time for back-to-school..."an assortment of ethnic-sensitive colors."


Sunday, September 02, 2012

From Greek Columns to Giant Sand Sculptures...

And gas is $4 a gallon again. And unemployment is insane. And unemployment for veterans worse than insane. And food prices are ridiculous. But, let's not let that stop us from erecting a statue in honor of the man that has done nothing to change the situation...

Love or hate Obama, I think you have to agree this is incredibly ostentatious and perhaps even a bit creepy.

...who else could you envision commissioning a sculpture like this of himself. A certain deceased dictator, with a shared name, perhaps?