This blog is dedicated to logical Reasoning, political consciousness, religious dialogue, intelligent thoughts, uncommon wisdom, current events, and humor.
By now, we all know about President Obama’s visit to Notre Dame. It was filled with controversy for Christians and especially for Catholics. Please! Get real! I have 2 quick observations:
First, I find it fascinating that the Republican party – the party that prides itself on less regulation and more personal responsibility – is so determined to pursue Constitutional Amendments against gay marriage and abortion. Whatever happened to leaving regulations to the States? Whatever happened to leaving personal matters to individuals’ decisions? Clearly, all that big talk apply only if they agree with your religious views and political agendas.
Second, let’s assume abortion is killing a living baby. I can truly accept and, in a way, believe that. Now, some one tell me how abortion can be viewed as a much worse act than killing a living person. Remember the 10 Commandments? Remember the sixth one: thou shalt not murder? No where does it say thou shalt not murder only the unborn.
I find it absolutely hypocritical that most Christians who are so against abortion are precisely the same individuals whose core ideology is the same as that of Rush Limbaugh’s and Dick Cheney’s. The same ideology that merits we (the U.S.) are the king of the world, we should govern the world and protect ourselves at any cost, and if some innocent lives are lost in the process, so be it. Every time we drop bombs and rockets to kill terrorists, we inevitably kill some innocent by-standards in the process. Some of those innocent souls are children, newborns and even unborn. Therefore, we are violating the sixth commandment. Where’s the outrage? Where are the protests?
In no way am I suggesting that we should not fiercely protect ourselves or avoid pre-emptive strikes. And I’m not so naive to think that we can do all that with no non-military casualties. But then I don’t have an existential crisis, and I’m not hypocritically against abortion while practically supporting the deaths of unborn and pregnant women in war. That is not for me to resolve. Those of you Christians who are against abortion and thought Obama’s visit to Notre Dame was an abomination must work this out between yourselves and your God. And be careful what conclusion you reach. If you believe that God agrees with your views and supports your plan, you have reached the wrong conclusion. It should be exactly the opposite!
Eternal damnation is not just for those who support or perform abortion. It is also for those who violate the sixth commandment. That could be you. Think about it.
Seems like Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue.
It all began on Monday when Sen. Grassley was steamed about AIG bonuses. He suggested that AIG executives should resign or “commit suicide.” Not surprisingly, he apologized the next day by claiming that he didn’t mean suicide literally. → source
So, how can Grassley redeem himself? Easy! He throws himself a press event and utters the following sentence: “From my standpoint, it’s irresponsible for corporations to give bonuses at this time when they’re sucking the tit of the taxpayer.”
One thing is not quite clear to me. Does the sucking tit part come before committing suicide or as a result of it?
To say that Newt Gingrich, former Congressman and potential 2012 Presidential candidate, has lots of ideas for America is a monumental understatement.
Some of Newt’s ideas are refreshingly radical and yet suspiciously alarming at the same time. He would like to require exercise for school children, extend tax breaks to grocery stores that open in the inner city, give bonuses to food stamp recipients who buy fruits and vegetables, make students walk to school if they live close enough, and lots more. → source
Wow, for a die-hard Republican, he certainly walks a thin tight rope of socialism. Government mandates? Really? I wonder what Boss Limbaugh thinks of all this. Gee, I sure hope Newt doesn’t have to apologize!
Anyway, Newt has a fabulously unbelievable – and to some extent deliciously unthinkable – idea for reforming health care. He believes it’s time to consider paying teenage girls not to get pregnant. → same source as above
Yes, you read right! Pay teenagers to not get pregnant. Ironically, his plan does not include paying teenagers to not have sex. That would be too logical – and admittedly difficult to verify without a chastity belt. Just pay them for not getting pregnant . . . while they inevitably engage in sex.
Forgive my ignorance, but isn’t that what Republicans typify as socialism? Isn’t it an example of government hand-out? Can it not be construed as a type of affirmative action? Doesn’t it circumvent personal responsibility without incentivising by the government? Will it require a bail-out at the end?
Newt also believes that states should consider paying teenage girls who become pregnant to take prenatal vitamins to forestall paying additional health expenses for neonatal care down the road. → same source as above
Pay careful attention to the above paragraph: states should consider . . . Some one please leave me a comment and explain conservatism idea of less government to me. How do we the people end up with less government in our lives if, at the end, we shift regulations and mandates from the federal government to the states?
Talk about a power vacuum in the Republican Party. Actually, it resembles a rift in the Republican continuum.
Technically, Rush is a Conservative. You may not agree with his views but, like it or not, he’s a force in the American politics. He possesses political powers and capital that very few can match. He’s the de facto leader of the Conservative movement in America today. You don’t believe me? Name someone else. I dare you.
But watch out! He’s also a very intelligent, calculating, and revengeful individual.
He’s intelligent because he has invented the right combination of message, insult and vision to have gathered over 20 million die-hard and uncharacteristically loyal listeners. That’s not easy to achieve. No one can match him.
He’s calculating because he can do the math. In clear absence of a powerful, visionary and proven leader, the Republican party is in desperate need of direction. Limbaugh understands, all too clearly, that this is his chance to unite Conservatives and, hopefully, Republicans.
He’s revengeful because he has sent a clear message to all Conservatives and Republicans: you’re either with him or you’re against him. Wow, where have I heard that before! Cross Rush and he will destroy your political future. I listen to him a couple of times a week for about 15 minutes as I go to lunch, and his message has been exceptionally clear. Conservatives must unite and destroy liberalism at any cost.
Even Michael Steele has bowed to him in submission → source
Michael Steele told Politico on Monday: “I went back at that tape and I realized words that I said weren’t what I was thinking,” Steele said. “It was one of those things where I thinking I was saying one thing, and it came out differently. What I was trying to say was a lot of people … want to make Rush the scapegoat, the bogeyman, and he’s not.”
Rahm Emanuel
I will now pause so you contemplate Limbaugh’s power in amazement.
It is now clear to everyone that proving Rush is the leader of the right has been the Administration’s plan all along.
Rahm Emanuel must be happy; he got exactly the fight he was seeking. It’ll be a very dangerous and dirty fight. Rush is much more adept at it than Rahm.
I am so sick of Joe the Plumber. He’s everywhere. I’m saddened by how Republicans are eating up his every word and coughing up money for his pathetic book. He’s gone from a plumber to a conservative analyst and a role model. Wake up people. He’s just a plumber. He doesn’t know any better than you, me or anyone else. Trust me on this.
There seems to be no end to his appearances on mostly conservative shows. And boy, you know we are in trouble when Joe the nobody Plumber is more in touch with current events than media personalities such as Glenn Beck. On second thought, we are talking about Glenn Beck, so I recant my earlier statement.
On December 9 (yes, it’s old news, but interesting never the less), Glenn Beck hosted Joe on his radio show. Among other things, they talked about Hillary becoming Secretary of State. Here’s an excerpt of the transcript of that show from Glenn Beck’s own website:
JOE: “. . . Hillary Clinton, the whole deal with her as far as becoming Secretary of State. You know, it’s kind of against – well, it’s not kind of. It’s against the Constitution right now where it stands. But they’re talking about getting around it. You know, seems like every time they want to do something, if something’s in the way, they will get around it. What are we teaching our children? What are we teaching people, just even ourselves? You know, if something’s in the way, we’re going to get around it.”
The educated and the informed among us knew exactly what Joe was referring to. Hillary could not constitutionally accept the job of Secretary of State because, in effect, she (as a Senator) approved a salary increase for it.
GLENN: “Well, I think you are right on the money. I will tell you this in talking to one of my guys who’s deep in the Constitution, he’s saying that she can’t have two offices. That’s the problem. She can’t occupy the two offices and then two different branches, but it’s kind of iffy on that. It’s not really clear. And if she gets rid of her office, then it should be fine. But she couldn’t be a senator and Secretary of State. That’s the real problem there.”
No, Mr. Beck. The problem is not that Hillary wants to be a Senator and Secretary of State at the same time. And you don’t need one of your “guys who’s deep in the Constitution” to tell you that. You are clearly not staying current with political news and events. How in the world did you get a radio and TV show?
OK readers, I hope you’re depressed today. I truly hope that you’re in desperate need of a good laugh because I’m about to cheer you up. Get ready to laugh.
John H. Hinderaker is a lawyer and a conservative blogger at the Power Line weblog. In a recent post titled “The Importance of Being Careful“, Mr. Hinderaker felt compelled to provide President Elect Obama some free advice. Read the following excerpt for yourself and enjoy the irony.
Obama thinks he is a good talker, but he is often undisciplined when he speaks. He needs to understand that as President, his words will be scrutinized and will have impact whether he intends it or not. In this regard, President Bush is an excellent model; Obama should take a lesson from his example. Bush never gets sloppy when he is speaking publicly. He chooses his words with care and precision, which is why his style sometimes seems halting. In the eight years he has been President, it is remarkable how few gaffes or verbal blunders he has committed. If Obama doesn’t raise his standards, he will exceed Bush’s total before he is inaugurated.
I will now pause for a moment and allow you to pull yourselves together. Wipe those tears of laughter off your face.
You must be joking Mr. Hinderaker. President Bush is neither a skilled speaker nor a thoughtful one. Even many Republicans admit that much. To label George Bush as a dynamic and ‘precision’ speaker instantly reveals your own blind partisan and one-sided views.
Please allow me to assist you, Mr. Hinderaker, with presenting your case. Perhaps the message you really meant to convey was that Obama is a skilled speaker, but his message is void of meaning and substance. I’m positive that is the idea you attempted to communicate. However, you presented this thesis in the context of comparing Obama with Bush. In that regard, all roads lead to failure. President Bush is not only a horrible speaker, he lacks the ability to formulate his thoughts in a coherent manner. And worse, he utterly lacks the ability to connect with his audience. President Bush had 8 years to study President Reagan’s style and to learn from it. Bush failed.
Here’s one small sample in a sea of evidence that proves my point.
Joe “the plumber”. I’m so sick of still hearing about Joe the plumber. He even has a Wiki page now. Stop it people. The election is over already.
I won’t be able to forgive McCain or the Republicans for catapulting this irrelevant person and now immaterial concept into the American day-to-day conversation. The anxious Republicans, grasping at any straw in sight during the election season, latched on to Joe the plumber like stink on a monkey. They didn’t seem to care about Joe or his past. All that mattered was that Joe disagreed with Obama’s tax policy, calling it Marxist. For Joe, spreading the wealth around was not an acceptable plan.
Fair enough! But wait! Here’s some news flash the Republicans should have researched first. Joe ‘the Obama-is-a Marxist plumber’ was on welfare. Twice! How pathetic.
How’s that for spreading the wealth? Joe was and is confused. Accepting welfare from the government is spreading the wealth – my wealth, your wealth, taxpayers’ wealth. Well, I for one don’t want to spread my wealth around to anyone who doesn’t appreciate it. Joe is the first to be blacklisted. In fact, I want my portion of his welfare money back.
Hey Joe! Here’s some sound economic advice for you. If you go on welfare, you should shut the hell up. You have no right to talk about spreading the wealth. And here’s another news flash. Joe still has a tax lien of $1,200 against him in Ohio. → Source
McCain, during a rally, called Joe an American hero and his role model. Seriously? Someone should fire McCain’s campaign aids for not researching this well. Oh, wait, someone did fire his aids – the American people.
Also. Remember when McCain was looking for Joe during one of his rallies but could not find him? Well, that wasn’t Joe’s fault. He had told McCain’s aids that he’d be there between 9:00 am and 3:30 pm.
Finally, how is McCain’s approval of government bailout not wealth distribution? Defend it if you can. I dare you.
Dennis Prager, for those of you who don’t know him, is a Conservative radio talk show personality and a townhall.com columnist. At a recent appearance in Minneapolis, he made a very interesting claim. Watch this video.
In case you missed it, Prager said:
Equality, which is the primary value of the left, is a European value, not an American value . . . The French Revolution said Liberty, Fraternity, Equality. The American Revolution said Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.
Wow, which country do you live in Mr. Prager?
First, the Founding Fathers of our great country were . . . European! It is no surprise, therefore, to discover that some European ideas and values have trickled into the original vision of the new country that is now the United States of America.
Second, without the concept of equality:
Sarah Palin, as a woman, could not have served along side John McCain as a VP nominee.
Barack Obama could not have run for President, much less win an election.
A fetus could not be granted the same rights as a full grown human. See my earlier post on this.
You are not to enjoy the same rights as someone who is more wealthy than you.
Much of Christianity’s teachings don’t make sense.
God is unfair in his love of humans.
Third, it’s been widely reported that a European socialist once said: “Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth, upon this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.” He went on to become the first Republican-elected President!
Finally, the U.S. Constitution claims the following 2 points:
“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Notice the order in which the “truths” are presented in the second bullet point. Equality comes first. Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness are presented after equality as unalienable rights. In other words, equality is so obvious and “self-evident” that it is not necessary to list it as a right.
Perhaps next time you feel the urge to discuss American values, Mr. Prager, you can at least study the U.S. Constitution first.
A few days ago, I wrote a post about how much I dislike receiving calls from the 2 Presidential campaigns. I absolutely abhor all the non-sense and promises they convey in these messages. I even threatened to vote for Ron Paul if they continue their stupid, boring, and monotonous robocalls.
It appears that I’m not alone in having that sentiment. Politicians are beginning to get the message, and some have finally stepped forward with alternative solutions. Case in point: Zane Starkewolf is a Republican who’s running in California’s First District. He’s a really cool guy. Not only is he a self-professed “Green Republican” (what the hell does that mean? Is he not a Red Republican?), he is a ninth-level elven warrior from Dungeons and Dragons! Wow, that’s the embodiment of coolness.
He can’t be any more cool, can he? Apparently he can. His political robocalls are the bomb. Check this out.
Posted by jmjorat 
Seems like Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue.
Posted by jmjorat 
To say that Newt Gingrich, former Congressman and potential 2012 Presidential candidate, has lots of ideas for America is a monumental understatement.
Posted by jmjorat 
RSS Feed This Blog
