Conservatives and Liberals really are grasping at straws. Ever since Pimp My Ride, pimping was redefined. Yes, selling a prostitute about is still pimping. It could also mean making better, spiffy, raising to a certain level, or (in these cases) put forward. No, not put forward sexually. If you think that, you should really stop ordering all that junk from Talk Radio.
I'll start with Olbermann. Although thinking of Gen. Petraeus as a prostitute (i.e. clown makeup and walking about the streets of Baghdad at night)does make me giggle, but Keith meant NOTHING like that. Truly, grasping at straws. And yes, another example of the nation worshipping the military.
What about David Schuster and Chelsea? The only reason this is anything at all is because (drumroll and Captain Obvious warning) she's a woman! Ho! No, I don't mean ho as in prostitute, but a joyous shout. Seriously, you nappy headed ho (not meant as a joyous shout).
Ack, I'm a miserable heretic...blasphemy against the military and a, like, totally dignified woman!
Anyway, they meant nothing sexual or seedy by it. People should get off their case. Now Hillary is in a fit of "grr WOMAN POWER!!!! OMGZ" and saying that the media is treating her badly. Aww, ain't that a sin? No, really, ignoring any annointed frontrunner in the media is a sin. That's why we had Rudy shoved down our throat for so long. Hillary isn't being ignored. She's just pissy that Obama has a chance. She has the favor of the MSM gods.
And no, I'm not a big fan of political incorrectness. I just happen to hate when people make mountains out of molehills.
Monday, February 11, 2008
Why da yoof luv Barack
Free (or cheap) college!
You think "Hellya! Eye Ken lerned reel gud!"
Who's going to pay for it? Taxpayers.
"Dud, jus, like...print money"
Like I said, damn it, taxpayers. Printing money=inflation. Inflation=idirect taxation!
"Hold yer horses, bucko! The government could set prices!"
Yes, we need far more government intervention. They are, truly, looking out for you. So, in conclusion:
1. It'll be paid for via direct taxation
2. It'll be paid for via indirect taxation
3. The college your dumb rear end will just become another community college.
Go Barack, go! Steal money! Counterfeit! Make Americans even dumber! But Everyone will cheer as America burns. Free money for you! Free college! Gotta get that edumacation in a college that I got in because I memorized a bunch of words that I forgot already! GOD BLESS THE SAT!!!!11
You think "Hellya! Eye Ken lerned reel gud!"
Who's going to pay for it? Taxpayers.
"Dud, jus, like...print money"
Like I said, damn it, taxpayers. Printing money=inflation. Inflation=idirect taxation!
"Hold yer horses, bucko! The government could set prices!"
Yes, we need far more government intervention. They are, truly, looking out for you. So, in conclusion:
1. It'll be paid for via direct taxation
2. It'll be paid for via indirect taxation
3. The college your dumb rear end will just become another community college.
Go Barack, go! Steal money! Counterfeit! Make Americans even dumber! But Everyone will cheer as America burns. Free money for you! Free college! Gotta get that edumacation in a college that I got in because I memorized a bunch of words that I forgot already! GOD BLESS THE SAT!!!!11
Sunday, February 10, 2008
MSM more or less admits that they know nothing
Yesterday on MSNBC, the anchorwoman got confused by:
1. Superdelegates
2. Delegates distributed by district (3 d's!)
3. Delegates being committed by word only.
For example, a delegate could support Mc100-years-in-Iraq but like Tax Hike Mike by the time the convention comes around. They should vote for McLol but could vote for the Huckster.
It was a glorious moment. For that one point in time, they admitted they were confused. Glorious!
1. Superdelegates
2. Delegates distributed by district (3 d's!)
3. Delegates being committed by word only.
For example, a delegate could support Mc100-years-in-Iraq but like Tax Hike Mike by the time the convention comes around. They should vote for McLol but could vote for the Huckster.
It was a glorious moment. For that one point in time, they admitted they were confused. Glorious!
The fightin' 14th
Here's the fellow running against Ron Paul:
http://www.chrispeden.org/
Keeping the idea of a "noble America" alive and...well...on life support. We can't cut funds to NASA! Those evil Chinese are going into space! We need to claim space for ourselves! We need to keep our honor by not surrendering to those Islamo-fascists! Fred Reed certainly knows what honor really is...
I believe he says Ron Paul believes 9/11 happened because of America whie he believes it's Islamo-fascist terrorists. No doubt terrorists did it, but they didn't do it because we're free or prosperous. Some may want to make us submit to their laws, but most of the radicalized Muslims really just want to be left alone. Don't we all? Well, except Americans. We don't mind being taken care of by the government.
Anyhoo, here's to Ron Paul's congressional campaign!
I'm waiting for "Catho-Fascism" and the Pope being called a Theocrat and Terrorist. Just think about it. He wants Catholic Culture to spread. He's against the US' interventionist wars (yes, he is Catholic Neocons) and might be in league with the terrorists! After all, he regularly talks to middle eastern countries! Even Iran!
http://www.chrispeden.org/
Keeping the idea of a "noble America" alive and...well...on life support. We can't cut funds to NASA! Those evil Chinese are going into space! We need to claim space for ourselves! We need to keep our honor by not surrendering to those Islamo-fascists! Fred Reed certainly knows what honor really is...
I believe he says Ron Paul believes 9/11 happened because of America whie he believes it's Islamo-fascist terrorists. No doubt terrorists did it, but they didn't do it because we're free or prosperous. Some may want to make us submit to their laws, but most of the radicalized Muslims really just want to be left alone. Don't we all? Well, except Americans. We don't mind being taken care of by the government.
Anyhoo, here's to Ron Paul's congressional campaign!
I'm waiting for "Catho-Fascism" and the Pope being called a Theocrat and Terrorist. Just think about it. He wants Catholic Culture to spread. He's against the US' interventionist wars (yes, he is Catholic Neocons) and might be in league with the terrorists! After all, he regularly talks to middle eastern countries! Even Iran!
Thursday, February 7, 2008
McCain is Pro-Life?!
He just said he's proud of his pro-life record.
Bombing civillians and being a war monger is pro-life? I never knew. I guess I'm pro-choice then!
Bombing civillians and being a war monger is pro-life? I never knew. I guess I'm pro-choice then!
Papa, you have the support of this Traditional Catholic!
Pope Benedict XVI has released the revised Prayer for the Jews. I've stalked around message boards and seen a mixed reaction on some and complete hatred on others.
I quite like it. Nothing has changed except the language. It's become softer, in a good sense. The way some are reacting you'd imagine it to be
No, it's basically the same in a more charitable language. It's not watered down. It's not a mush. It's the same prayer in a different tone. What the Pope ultimately did was change the words and not the content. It seems like they're trying to criticize anything the pope does that doesn't involve:
1. Lifting the Excommunication
2. Getting rid of the NO overnight
3. Have some sort of Godly power where he can hear every litergical abuse ever.
4. Everything in Latin. Everything. Inclusing the picnic (okay, I'm joking, but I'm sure there's a Sede or two that believe this)
5. Cannonizing Archbishop Lefebvre
Anyway, I quite like the prayer. I don't care about the circumstances.
I glanced over a post where the US Bishops praised the Pope and affirmed what the prayer said. Wasn't one of the complaints about the old prayer? There we go, same substance, different language, the Latin Mass is even more free!
Anyone reading this (yeah right): don't say that this makes non-SSPX Latin Masses phoney.
P.S.
I wrote this because of a post I saw where a protestant was praised for bashing the Pope.
I quite like it. Nothing has changed except the language. It's become softer, in a good sense. The way some are reacting you'd imagine it to be
Dear [insert god here],
Please let the Jews come into a Church, but if they don't, we'll let them be. Give Christians the strength to read the talmud and possibly convert.
Thanks!
No, it's basically the same in a more charitable language. It's not watered down. It's not a mush. It's the same prayer in a different tone. What the Pope ultimately did was change the words and not the content. It seems like they're trying to criticize anything the pope does that doesn't involve:
1. Lifting the Excommunication
2. Getting rid of the NO overnight
3. Have some sort of Godly power where he can hear every litergical abuse ever.
4. Everything in Latin. Everything. Inclusing the picnic (okay, I'm joking, but I'm sure there's a Sede or two that believe this)
5. Cannonizing Archbishop Lefebvre
Anyway, I quite like the prayer. I don't care about the circumstances.
Let us pray also for the Jews.
May our God and Lord enlighten their hearts, so that they may acknowledge Jesus Christ, savior of all men.
Let us pray.
Let us kneel.
Arise.
Almighty and everlasting God, who desires that all men be saved and come to the knowledge of truth, mercifully grant that, as the fullness of the Gentiles enters into Thy Church, all Israel may be saved. Through Christ Our Lord. Amen.
I glanced over a post where the US Bishops praised the Pope and affirmed what the prayer said. Wasn't one of the complaints about the old prayer? There we go, same substance, different language, the Latin Mass is even more free!
Anyone reading this (yeah right): don't say that this makes non-SSPX Latin Masses phoney.
P.S.
I wrote this because of a post I saw where a protestant was praised for bashing the Pope.
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Traditional Conservatism: Altar and Throne
I firmly believe that Altar and Throne governments are better than any other forms. The Cult of Liberty stands in direct defiance of this, and is always self-destructive. I hear people quote Ben Franklin imploring us to never give up liberty for safety. The ideas of liberty were new then. Perhaps early American liberty actually worked for a while, but French liberty degraded to bloodshed and hatred.
We must not give up liberty for protection and safety, but we shouldn't give up the Altar and Throne for liberty.
American liberty died during Lincoln's presidency, and quite possibly before then. Soon, protecting it became the reason the government should expand. One can't have liberty if they're poor, uninsured, jobless, etc. The very thing that was supposed to limit government made it expand.
Altar and Throne politics never did this. The state never expanded to a monsterous size to protect it.
I think it's the best position since the Church exists for two reasons. First and most important, the spiritual. The Church is in charge of the Salvation of Souls. Second, the secular. The Church has a power to limit government. I don't think it's a coincidence that France became dictatorial and violent after the French Revolution. It's certainly not a coincidence that dictators rose after the Papal States were destroyed. The 20th century was the Church's weakest period since She was persecuted in Rome. Communism and Fascism rose because the Church was not in place to keep a check on government powers.
Kings are rulers of their state, but they are all part of the "Kingdom of Christiandom" ruled by Christ the King.
There are three other forms Altar and Throne politics can morph into: Throne and Altar, Throne, and Altar.
Although I admire him quite a lot, Louis XIV tried to make France a Throne and Altar state. The king was above the Church. He led France out of the realm of Christiandom by allying with the Ottoman Turks. Modern day protestants try to make America into a similar state, although their government will be astronomically larger than the "absolute monarch." What this form ultimately does is divinize the state and/or the ruler.
America and most other Republics are Throne states. The Altar is completely out of the picture. As I've mentioned, America did fairly well but fell into tyranny. Without the Church, the State can grow into a parasite. It sucks away life and freedom from the host (the people). Like Throne and Altar, the state becomes divinized. Unlike it, though, it's a secular church with no checks and balance from an outside faith. They'll petition religioud leaders to support their endeavors but know that patriotism runs deeper than faith in most people.
Altar governments are the most dangerous. The ruler, state, policies, and laws are divine. People turn a blind eye to corruption because the rulers are either gods or prophets of a god.
And yet I upport Ron Paul who talks about liberty and the constitution. Why is this? Well, in the 18th century we would be opposed to eachother (I am an economic anarchist though). Like I said in my last blog post though, we are allied against the enemy-the Neocons. We both believe in limiting the power of the state. We both believe in peace. We just disagree on the way to keep it.
Nonetheless, he is the best candidate I've seen. I am proud that I voted for him and would do it again and again. I consider the Constitution Party and Libertarian Party my allies and would vote for one if I like them.
We must not give up liberty for protection and safety, but we shouldn't give up the Altar and Throne for liberty.
American liberty died during Lincoln's presidency, and quite possibly before then. Soon, protecting it became the reason the government should expand. One can't have liberty if they're poor, uninsured, jobless, etc. The very thing that was supposed to limit government made it expand.
Altar and Throne politics never did this. The state never expanded to a monsterous size to protect it.
I think it's the best position since the Church exists for two reasons. First and most important, the spiritual. The Church is in charge of the Salvation of Souls. Second, the secular. The Church has a power to limit government. I don't think it's a coincidence that France became dictatorial and violent after the French Revolution. It's certainly not a coincidence that dictators rose after the Papal States were destroyed. The 20th century was the Church's weakest period since She was persecuted in Rome. Communism and Fascism rose because the Church was not in place to keep a check on government powers.
Kings are rulers of their state, but they are all part of the "Kingdom of Christiandom" ruled by Christ the King.
There are three other forms Altar and Throne politics can morph into: Throne and Altar, Throne, and Altar.
Although I admire him quite a lot, Louis XIV tried to make France a Throne and Altar state. The king was above the Church. He led France out of the realm of Christiandom by allying with the Ottoman Turks. Modern day protestants try to make America into a similar state, although their government will be astronomically larger than the "absolute monarch." What this form ultimately does is divinize the state and/or the ruler.
America and most other Republics are Throne states. The Altar is completely out of the picture. As I've mentioned, America did fairly well but fell into tyranny. Without the Church, the State can grow into a parasite. It sucks away life and freedom from the host (the people). Like Throne and Altar, the state becomes divinized. Unlike it, though, it's a secular church with no checks and balance from an outside faith. They'll petition religioud leaders to support their endeavors but know that patriotism runs deeper than faith in most people.
Altar governments are the most dangerous. The ruler, state, policies, and laws are divine. People turn a blind eye to corruption because the rulers are either gods or prophets of a god.
And yet I upport Ron Paul who talks about liberty and the constitution. Why is this? Well, in the 18th century we would be opposed to eachother (I am an economic anarchist though). Like I said in my last blog post though, we are allied against the enemy-the Neocons. We both believe in limiting the power of the state. We both believe in peace. We just disagree on the way to keep it.
Nonetheless, he is the best candidate I've seen. I am proud that I voted for him and would do it again and again. I consider the Constitution Party and Libertarian Party my allies and would vote for one if I like them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)