All in the Family featured the curmudgeonly Archie Bunker. Archie was television’s most famous grouch, blunt, blustering, straightforward and untouched by the PC crowd. He was the archetype of the conservative male. Michael desprately tried to reeducate him, but he persisted in his breviloquence.

Looking back at the last 40 years, we realize: ARCHIE WAS RIGHT!


More on Trump

My coworker is a contradiction in terms.  She holds to several different ideas, about lots of subjects, that simply can't all be true.  This doesn't bother her at all.  She is against Trump.  She doesn't disagree with him about anything, she just doesn't like him.  He is, in her words, "a bully".

My coworker is also a devoutly religious person with what seems to be a real and genuine life long faith.  She recognizes Hillary Clinton as Satan's personal representative on earth.  Which is probably closer to the truth than anyone is comfortable admitting.

Which of the two candidates do you think she supports?  That's right Hillary. 

It's not like she disagrees with anything Trump has in his political platform.  She has firsthand experience with Muslims who have come to our town and caused problems.  She can't stand them and wishes someone would run them out of the country.  She's not big on Mexicans.  She hates and distrusts the federal government in a way only a multi generational Wyoming sheepherder can.  Every single thing Trump says he is for, she says she is for too.

She is cheering for Hillary.  She's going to vote for Hillary.  She thinks you should vote for Hillary too.  Because she doesn't like Trump.

I've given up talking with her about it.  I can't break through her old gray noggin with anything I say. 

Her: "Trump is going to start a trade war".

Me: "You mean we are going to start fighting back"?

Whatever our local paper says, that's what she believes.  There is no getting through because that's what she has been taught via the media.  I'd be ok with her take on the world if she said things like, "I agree with Hillary about..." or "I think Trump is wrong about..."  but those aren't options.  She hates everything Clinton stands for and that's who she is voting for, because the folks down at the paper don't like Trump.


What You Talk'n Bout?

A 9 year old boy in South Jersey got to go home early on his last day of school.  He even got a police escort and a review of his actions by the local prosecutors office.  What did he do?

Why police were called to a South Jersey third-grade class party

Go ahead and read the article.  They won't tell you what he did, or said that was so bad the police had to intervene.  The mom, a women named Stacy dos Santos gives us some clues.  Stacy lets us in on two facts, 1. the issue involved brownies and 2. her husband, the boy's father is from Brazil.

Before you get ahead of the story, they weren't that kind of brownie.  I had to do a quick Google translate just to double check myself.  Being a romance language, Portuguese uses the same word for black as Latin, Spanish, etc et al.  Can you guess what that word is?

What color are brownies?  I'll give you a hint, it ain't white.  The best brownies, the yummiest, richest, best tasting chocolate delight that boy or man can sink his shinny white teeth into, are the darkest, blackest ones.  That ain't racist.  That's a fact.  The more chocolate, the darker a brownie.  The better it tastes.  It's science, not eugenics.

There is nothing white or brown even, about a good brownie.  Unless of course you put a big scoop of Breyer's Vanilla ice cream on top of it, right after it comes out of the oven.  IF you do that you might as well go ahead and cover the ice cream with chocolate syrup.  If you don't, it proves you are a racist, or a diet Nazi.

What did the Hispanic kid say that cops had to come?  Was it "negros"?  I'm guessing here, and I may be WAY out of line, but I don't think the libtards that work in public schools get upset if someone says, "cracker"; even if its not snack time. 


BJW -- Cats

I telephoned the veterinarian's office to ask when I should take my three month old kitten in to be vaccinated for rabies. After a few initial questions, the woman who answered the telephone asked, "What is the kitten's name?"

"Demon," I replied.

"Demon? That's an odd name," she said.

"Maybe, but it's appropriate anyway."

I heard clicking of a computer keyboard, then she said, "Our records show that you have cats named Gato [which is Spanish for 'male cat'], Scamp, Stinky, and now you named one Demon. Is that right?"

"Yes, it is."

"You really don't like cats, do you?"


SCOTUS and Crimes Against Humanity

The SCOTUS ruling on the Texas and Texas style abortion laws came out this week.  As could be predicted they struck down the law.

The basic premise of the law is that in order to preform abortions in Texas and any of the states who copied the law, abortion providers had to meet a more stringent set of guidelines for the procedure.  These guidelines included things like: sanitary operating facilities, proper medical equipment and supplies being available during the procedure, and the doctors who preform the abortions being required to have admitting privileges at the nearest hospital to the clinic.

The abortionists were screaming that this substantially restricted their customers ability to get an abortion.  The court sided with them.

None of that is true.   People seeking abortions still had access to clinics.  They just weren't able to get the procedure preformed at price that maximized the abortion clinics profits.  All of those little things, like proper medical sanitation, equipment, emergency triage supplies, cost money.  That cost has to be paid by somebody. 

Making doctors have admission privileges to the local hospital served one purpose.  It ensured that in the event of complications arising from the procedure, the doctor would be able to facilitate immediate admission to the hospital.  It also did something else.  It screened out doctors who, for whatever reason, could get a license to practice medicine, but whose medical proficiency was in doubt.  Hospitals can evaluate a doctors skill set, their malpractice insurance and other criteria when determining who they are going to grant admission privileges to.   They don't have to let anyone with a medical license admit patients.

Which is why some of the abortion clinics were closing.  On one hand they had doctors whose skills as medical practitioners were so poor they couldn't get admission privileges.  On the other, the laws were improving the medical facilities and increasing the cost.

SCOTUS would rather have women get abortions in substandard clinics, provided by people with substandard medical skills, at a price that maximizes the providers profit margin, than slow down the death camps.  I saw an article stating that there are 69 black babies aborted for every white baby. 

Democrats.  The more things change, the more they stay the same.



This post isn't going to go into details. I wanted everyone that is aware of what happened in my life this year to know that I am being blessed.  We are still a long way from finished with the situation.  Life is definitely stressful.  God is taking care of me.

I'm not going to put out information publicly so give me a call or email if you want the particulars.  Know that I am very grateful for your friendship and prayers.  Things are working out.


Freedom FROM Thought

When I was in school I loved the classes where the teachers let you get into controversial topics.  I had my first taste of this in high school.  The teacher's would assign the class to take sides on a controversial issue.  The topics would sometimes be political, or religious.  They were always be emotional.

The thing that was fun about these exercises was that you weren't being graded on if you won or lost.  You were being graded on your thought process and the way you structured your presentation.  The teachers always made that point up front.  You could take any side you wanted, but you were required to follow the rules of the assignment.

In college I found this style of education very beneficial as well as entertaining.  By the time I was an upper division undergraduate, case study was commonly used as part of the curriculum.  I loved it.  I also learned a great deal of practical application that I have actually used in the real world.

In the University of Northern Colorado they don't like it when you think unapproved thoughts.  They even have a University department that enforces thought conformity.

Professors investigated for presenting opposing viewpoints
Two professors at the University of Northern Colorado were investigated after students complained that they were forced to hear opposing viewpoints.
Apparently there are no grown ups working for UNC.  The teachers were the ones who got in trouble, even though one teacher made it clear that  he did not agree with the opposing point of view, but was merely presenting it as the other side of the argument.

That's right, the teacher was actually on the "right side" of the issue as far as the student was concerned.  The mere fact that the teacher acknowledged and confirmed the existence of an opposing point of view was the problem.

Anyone want to take a guess at what the topic under discussion in both cases was?  LGBT. 

It wasn't mentioned in the article but the traditional and until recently, medical view of LGBT people was that they suffered from either mental/psychological/emotional defect or disease or were predisposed to the lifestyle as a result of abuse or conditioning.  Got it?  LGBT is the result of mental disease or defect, not a genetic mutation.  The professor doesn't believe or teach that, but that is the opposing viewpoint.
"I would just like the professor to be educated about what trans is and how what he said is not okay because as someone who truly identifies as a transwomen [sic] I was very offended and hurt by this," the student wrote in their complaint.
From the other student:
"I do not believe that students should be required to listen to their own rights and personhood debated," the student wrote. "[This professor] should remove these topics from the list of debate topics. Debating the personhood of an entire minority demographic should not be a classroom exercise, as the classroom should not be an actively hostile space for people with underprivileged identities."
It's too hurtful to hear that other people don't agree with you about everything you do.  Wow!  They can't handle it if someone even mentions that there is a different point of view and they need the university to stop it.

It's almost like they suffer from a mental disease or defect or something.