Marital Rape Follow Up

A couple of days ago I posted a scenario titled, "Is it Rape?". I was careful to leave out any references to the gender of the people involved and defined their relationship as married with children.  I indicated in the scenario that the sex life of the couple was blah.  The implication being that was the motivation for the events in the scenario.

Marriage has existed as a concept far longer than any human government.  Traditionally the relationship is defined as one man and one women in a monogamous sexual cohabitation. Open marriages, polygamy and polyandry occur, but the majority of cases called "marriage" involve the concept of one man, one women in a lifetime monogamous relationship.  This definition has existed as an "ideal" even in cultures with wide spread homosexuality and polygamy.

In America, and most of the western world arraigned marriages are rare.  Most people choose who they marry.  However this has not always been the case.  Arraigned or semi-arraigned marriage is very common throughout history. 

In my scenario we had a married couple.  It doesn't matter why they married, if it was their own choice or by arrangement.  What matters is:

• Marriage by definition is a monogamous sexual relationship
• implicitly (explicitly in some cases) holding the promise of sexual gratification
• that they cannot seek sexual fulfillment with anyone else

That's why "marital rape" is/has been a legal impossibility for millennium.

What if I'm not, "in the mood".

Everybody reading this blog that's been married for any amount of time has had sex/put out when one of you wasn't "in the mood".  The experience isn't anybody's best effort in those cases. It doesn't matter if the "experience" is everything you both wanted (its not always gong to be).  The fact is it is something human beings need, even if we aren't always on the same schedule.

Marriage is the guarantee that your mate is going to meet your sexual needs, and you are going to meet theirs.  "In the mood" doesn't matter.  If you are married, don't you bear some of the responsibility for getting "in the mood".  If you know your spouse is going to want "IT" why not simply plan for "IT" in your daily schedule?

Don't I have a choice?

You had a choice right up until the day you got married.  After that no, you don't have a choice.

But isn't marriage more than sex on demand?

Of course it is.  Marriage is the blending of two lives together, in every sense, including propagating the species.  The concept of "marital rape" is a way to claim that one person can withhold the basis for marriage whenever they desire.  Its a way of saying "we are married in every sense that I find it convenient to be, and none of the ways I do not".

When one person controls the quality and quantity of sex the relationship is prostitution, not marriage.  If sex only occurs after/when certain conditions are met, its transactional prostitution.  It does not matter who the controller is and who is the controlled. 

Polygamy is one way of announcing to everyone that "she's not getting the job done" about the wife.  Why that is the case other people may not know, but a second wife or concubine is a clear indication of the first wife's lack of attractiveness/availability in the bedroom.

I find it interesting to note that the bible (which implicitly allows polygamy) prohibits the male form withholding sex from his wife(s).  A man was free to take more than one wife, but he could not reduce the marital provision for in material goods, or the sexual provision for the women he was married to.  I'm not aware of any other society that shared this principle. 

Heritage Not Hate

 Descendants of Dixie throw a huge bash, in Brazil.

It had all the trappings of a down-home country fair somewhere well below the Mason-Dixon line: Lynyrd Skynyrd medleys, mile-long lines for fried chicken, barbecue and draft beer, and a plethora of Confederate flags emblazoning everything from belt buckles to motorcycle vests to trucker caps.

But Sunday's party marking the 150th anniversary of the end of the American Civil War took about 5,000 miles (8,000 kilometers) south of the South, in a rural Brazilian town colonized by families fleeing Reconstruction.

For many of the residents of Santa Barbara d'Oeste and neighboring Americana in Brazil's southeastern Sao Paulo state, having Confederate ancestry is a point of pride that's celebrated in high style at the annual 'Festa dos Confederados,' or 'Confederates Party' in Portuguese.

Being Southern in the US  is somewhat vilified.  Being proud of your Heritage can be seen as racism.  People will mock the accent.  It's considered funny to talk about someone being married to their sister, etc. It hasn't always been that way.

 

Folks that are even slightly informed realize that the greatest traditions of the United States were embedded in southern culture.  It's not all NASCAR and grits.

The history of the Confederate migrants is one of the lesser-known stories of the Civil War, said Casey Clabough, author of the 2012 historical novel 'Confederados.' It's not even known for sure how many people made the arduous journey, Clabough said, with some historical accounts suggesting as few as 3,000, while others say there were as many as 10,000, predominantly from deep south states like Alabama, Louisiana and Georgia.

Most were lured by newspaper ads placed in the wake of the war by the government of Brazil's then-emperor, Dom Pedro II, promising land grants to those who would help colonize the South American country's vast and little-explored interior.

'They were seen as desirable, educated colonists,' said Clabough, adding the Confederados introduced the bull-tongue plow and other agricultural innovations to Brazil. 'And from the point of view of American Southerners who had just gone through this catastrophic conflict and were looking toward an uncertain reconstruction period, it certainly seemed attractive.'

 But, but slavery and racism:

Those who stayed ended up assimilating into Brazilian society, and very few of the Confederados' descendants speak English today. Some are racially mixed — as is common in this majority Black and multiracial nation.

Mixed-race guests at Sunday's party seemed unruffled by the omnipresent Confederate flag.

'To me it's a positive symbol of my heritage,' said Keila Padovese Armelin, a 40-year-old mother of two who describes herself as a 'racial milkshake.' ''For us, it doesn't have a negative connotation at all.'

Baltimore Burns.....Let it

Baltimore is burning.  So what?

I'm not able to work myself up into a sufficient level of give a crap to do a proper rant.  Sorry, I can't go there.  It's not that I don't care about the root causes of the decline of civilization, I do.  I have friends whose daughter moved there not too long ago.  I hope she is safe. 

We are told that Baltimore is burring because of white injustice.  I saw some of the press conference coverage of the mayor.  I didn't see a single white person affiliated with her administration.  I'm not sure how this is whitey's fault.  First mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, called the criminals destroying the city "thugs", then she apologized.  You don't want to hurt the feelings of rioting criminals, that might make them feel bad.

What's going on in Baltimore is the natural out come of half a century of Democratic policies and practices.  Expect more of it, not less.

Day at the Zoo

When a zoo’s gorilla dies, the zookeeper hires an actor to don 
a costume and act like an ape 
until the zoo can get another one. In the cage, the actor makes faces, swings around, and draws a huge crowd. He then crawls across a partition and atop the 
lion’s cage, infuriating the animal. But the actor stays in character—until he loses his grip and falls into the lion’s cage. Terrified, the actor shouts, “Help! Help me!” Too late. The lion pounces, opens 
its massive jaws, and whispers, “Shut up! Do you want to get 
us both fired?!”

A zookeeper is ordering new animals. As he fills out the forms, he types “two mongeese.” That doesn’t look right, so he tries “two mongoose,” then “two mongooses.” Giving up, he types, “One mongoose, and while you’re at it, send another one.”

A man is driving down the highway when he sees a shipping truck wrecked on the side of the road, and 25 penguins waddling around outside it. He pulls over and the truck driver tells him, “Quick! You’ve gotta take these birds to the zoo while I wait for AAA!” The man agrees and drives off with the penguins. After fixing his vehicle, the truck driver heads over to the zoo to make sure the penguins made it safely. There’s no sign of them. The truck driver panics and starts scouring the town for his missing penguins. An hour later he passes by the local cinema, when who does he see leaving the theater but the guy who said he’d help him, 25 penguins still in tow. “What happened!” the truck driver screams. “I told you to take them to the zoo!” “I did,” the man answers. “But I had a little money left over, so I thought I’d take them to a movie too.”

Is it Rape?

I want to propose a scenario:

A man and women get married, have children and are going through life in a "normal" manner.  They've been married for several years and the excitement has worn off and the sex is more drab than daring.  Lately even the drab has been rare.  They don't have a bad marriage, there aren't any "problems" or anything drastic, just infrequent and unsatisfying sex.

One Friday morning Spouse A tells Spouse B that they will be taking the children to their mothers for the weekend.  Spouse A orders Spouse B to not go to O'Malley's Pub for Happy Hour like normal because they have dinner reservations.  Spouse B dearly loves going to O'Malley's on Friday, but grunts in response.

Latter that day Spouse B takes off work at noon with the rest of the people in the office.  The boss is having a retirement party for one of the people in accounting.  They all go out to a local cocktail lounge for lunch and drinks.  Spouse B has several drinks and not feeling it would be a good idea to drive takes a cab home.

Spouse A comes to the door wearing nothing but a smile and proceeds to remove Spouse B's clothing and forcefully copulates with Spouse B on the couch.  Spouse A then fixes more alcoholic beverages and practically forces them down Spouse B's throat.  This drunken orgy continues over the weekend.  Saturday morning Spouse B wakes up to find their arms handcuffed to the bed and Spouse A on top doing things of a sexually explicit nature.

This process continues until Sunday when they have to sober up and retrieve the kids from grandma's.

Facts:

• Never at any point did Spouse B give written or verbal consent to Spouse A to engage in sex
• Spouse B was intoxicated and therefor unable to consent
• Saturday morning Spouse B was unconscious when sex began therefor unable to grant consent 
• Spouse A never requested consent
• Spouse A was a "selfish" lover and did not seek to pleasure Spouse B

Was what Spouse A did to Spouse B rape?

If not rape, some lessor form of sexual assault?

Does it matter if Spouse A is a women?

Go ahead and post an opinion in the comments.  I'm going to try to get out a follow up post latter in the week.

Another Prediction

Without a doubt this pic is the funniest thing Vox has posted in a long time.  It's funny because it's true.  I actually laughed till I got a tear in my eye imagining Yoda's voice saying the phrase.  This probably means I'm a very spiritually immature person.  Admit it you're doing a Yoda voice in your own head as you read it too.

I can think of sooo many situations that this would be the perfect response.  My prediction?  I don't know when, I don't know where, but I'm going to work this in some place, some how.

Prediction

The date of my writing this is April 23, 2015.  It's about 3:30 in the afternoon.  I'm scheduling the post to appear on 4/26/15, because I will be working that day and unable to post.

I just finished posting a rant about Churches facilitating illegal migration with public money, and then not liking it when they are told to do things that go against their religion.  There are several thoughts that popped into my head when I was writing that post.

1.  Christians are becoming almost useless in modern American culture.  Not because they don't have a contribution to make, but because they compromise with the culture instead of standing in contrast to it.

2.  The handful of Christians who are truly counter cultural in terms of faith and action are increasingly demonized and ostracized in the media and public forum.

3.  No other religious group is treated this way in America.

4.  The only religious group facing wide spread social persecution in America today are Christians.

5.  We are constantly reminded that the Constitution prohibits the Christian faith form receiving any public support or practice.  This rule does not apply to other religions which can be taught in the public schools. 

My prediction is that within my life time we will hear America's talking heads proclaim that it is acceptable to promote and practice Islam with public support and funding because the Constitution prohibits "Church and State" not "Mosque and State".  Worse they will do it earnestly and with a straight face.  Worst yet, Americans so dumbed down by public education and common core curriculum will buy the lie.

Out of Wack

I've blogged about this topic before.  This is a different case, and a different set of crazy.

Refusal to make cake for lesbian wedding will cost them $135,000

 Rather than ranting ad nauseum, I'll just bullet point some highlights from the article:

Administrative judge Alan McCullough for the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries said the Kleins violated an Oregon statute prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The lesbian couple will receive the funds for “emotional, mental, and physical suffering.”

Bureau prosecutors sought $75,000 for each woman – $150,000 total – during a hearing on damages in March. Under the current ruling, Rachel Bowman-Cryer should collect $75,000 and her “wife,” Laurel Bowman-Cryer, will collect $60,000. The couple testified in March to the emotional stress they attributed to their experience with Sweet Cakes, including the glare of media attention that followed.

What follows are my observations on the case:

• At the time of the "offense", gay marriage was not recognized under Oregon law and such a ceremony had no legal standing or intrinsic value according to the statutes of the state.
• How can a baker cause irreparable harm by not providing a cake for an event that cannot legally occur under state law?
• According to Law.com Equity is defined as: n. 1) a venerable group of rights and procedures to provide fairness, unhampered by the narrow strictures of the old common law or other technical requirements of the law. In essence courts do the fair thing by court orders such as correction of property lines, taking possession of assets, imposing a lien, dividing assets, or injunctive relief (ordering a person to do something) to prevent irreparable damage.  What is fair about suing a person for not giving you a cake that you didn't pay for?
• What actual harm occurred to the plaintiffs in this case?  According to the article part of the "emotional distress" was caused by the media attention brought on by their own complaint.  The bakery didn't force them to give press conferences.
• One of the outcomes from this incident has been that the Kleins have lost business relationships with other wedding service providers and clients.  Can they now sue these people for not doing business with them on the grounds of discrimination?  Arguably the Kleins have suffered financial, physical and emotional harm, to a greater degree than the lesbian couple.  It seems reasonable that they should be able to sue everyone else for not doing business with them under the same theory of "discrimination".
• Judge McCullough ordered that the Kleins be “rehabilitated” and “reeducated”.  
• For what?  Under the laws of the state of Oregon there was no such thing as gay marriage at the time of the alleged offense. 
• What gives the judge the authority to rewrite an individual religious beliefs?
• Since when is a judge above the Constitution, why does he get to establish and enforce his religious preferences on citizens? 

These gay marriage cases reek of a cheep publicity stunt.  They are more about getting attention for gay couples and some extra cash for lawyers than they are about defending any recognizable concept of "civil rights".

 

I can see one set of circumstances under which a gay couple would have a legitimate law suit.  It's a narrow situation but I believe legitimate.  Had a baker taken money for the cake and not delivered it because it was a same sex ceremony and/or had the same baker delayed telling the couple of their decision not to provide the cake they promised until it wasn't possible to get a replacement cake, then the gay couple would have a case.  The case would not be one based on the specialness of their sexual preference.  It would be a standard case of breach of contract. 

 

In such a situation, the bakers motivation for not preforming according to their explicit promise to do so could come into play when considering damages.  Even if such a circumstance did exist in the Kleins case (I don't believe it did) $135,000 for not providing a cake is an outrageous sum of money.     

 

GFF-Information, Please

When I was quite young, my father had one of the first telephones in our neighbourhood. I remember well the polished, old case fastened to the wall. The shiny receiver hung on the side of the box. I was too little to reach the telephone, but used to listen with fascination when my mother used to talk to it.

Then I discovered that somewhere inside the wonderful device lived an amazing person. Her name was, "Information Please," and there was nothing she did not know. "Information Please" could supply anybody's number and the correct time.

My first personal experience with this genie-in-the-bottle came one day while my mother was visiting a neighbour. Amusing myself at the tool bench in the basement, I whacked my finger with a hammer. The pain was terrible, but there didn't seem to be any reason in crying because there was no one home to give sympathy. I walked around the house sucking my throbbing finger, finally arriving at the stairway.

The telephone! Quickly I ran for the footstool in the parlour and dragged it to the landing. Climbing up I unhooked the receiver in the parlour and held it to my ear. "Information Please," I said into the mouthpiece just above my head. A click or two and a small clear voice spoke into my ear, "Information!"

"I hurt my finger," I wailed into the phone. The tears came readily enough now that I had an audience.

"Isn't your mother home?" came the question.

"Nobody's home but me," I blubbered.

"Are you bleeding?" the voice asked.

"No," I replied, "I hit my finger with the hammer and it hurts."

"Can you open your icebox?" she asked. I said I could.

"Then chip off a little piece of ice and hold it to your finger," said the voice.

After that I called "Information Please" for everything. I asked her for help with my geography and she told me where Philadelphia was. She helped me with my math. She told me my pet chipmunk, which I had caught in the park just the day before, would eat fruit and nuts.
 
Then there was the time Petey our pet canary died. I called "Information Please" and told her the sad story. She listened, and then said the usual things grown ups say to soothe a child. But I was unconsoled.

I asked her, "Why is it that birds should sing so beautifully and bring joy to all families only to end up as a heap of feathers on the bottom of a cage?"

She must have sensed my deep concern for she said quietly, "Paul, always remember that there are other worlds to sing in." Somehow I felt better.

Another day I was on the telephone, "Information Please."
"Information," said the now familiar voice.

"How do you spell fix?" I asked.

All this took place in a small town in the Pacific Northwest. When I was nine years old, we moved across the country to Boston. I missed my friend very much. "Information Please" belonged in that old wooden box back home and I somehow never thought of trying the tall, shiny new phone that sat on the table in the hall.

As I grew into my teens, the memories of those childhood conversations never really left me. Often in moments of doubt and perplexity I would recall the serene sense of security I had then. I appreciated now how patient, understanding, and kind she was to have spent her time on a little boy.

A few years later, on my way west to college, my plane put down in Seattle. I had about half an hour between planes. I spent 15 minutes or so on the phone with my sister, who lived there now. Then, without thinking what I was doing, I dialled my hometown operator and said, "Information Please."
Miraculously, I heard the small, clear voice I knew so well.

"Information."

I hadn't planned this, but I heard myself saying, "Could you please tell me how to spell fix?"

There was a long pause. Then came the soft spoken answer, "I guess your finger must have healed by now."

I laughed, "So it's really still you," I said. "I wonder if you have any idea how much you meant to me during that time."

"I wonder," she said, "if you know how much your calls meant to me. I never had any children and I used to look forward to your calls."

I told her how often I had thought of her over the years and I asked if I could call her again when I came back to visit my sister.

"Please do," she said, "Just ask for Sally."

Three months later I was back in Seattle. A different voice answered, "Information."

I asked for Sally.

"Are you a friend?" she said.

Yes, a very old friend," I answered.

"I'm sorry to have to tell you this," she said. "Sally had been working part time the last few years because she was sick. She died five weeks ago."

Before I could hang up she said, "Wait a minute. Did you say your name was Paul?"

"Yes."

"Well, Sally left a message for you. She wrote it down in case you called. Let me read it to you." The note said, "Tell him I still say there are other worlds to sing in. He'll know what I mean."

I thanked her and hung up. I knew what Sally meant.

Separation of Church and State

I believe in the separation of church and state.  I also believe in the separation of state and church.  They aren't the same thing.  In the first, the church has the ability to dictate the policy of the state.  In the second the state dictates the action of the church.

Some members of the class political hold the "Separation of Church and State" as holy writ.  This is why you cannot teach elementary children "the golden rule" in the public school.  It is why so-called adults have a conniption when 3 or 4 Jr High school kids start a prayer club in the library after school.  Granted we don't have a Supreme Court ruling on if its OK to pray during an active shooter scenario in school, at this time.  Maybe someone should have taught that kid about "doing unto others as you would have them do unto you".

Having the state working with or in the churches is even more harmful.  For instance, ACLU demands Catholic groups pay illegals' abortions.  I'm not going to go off on the long established views of the Catholic Church on abortion.  It is their right to hold that position and they should not be forced to recant it.

The problem here is much deeper than RCC doctrine.  The problem is how did the Catholic Church ever find itself in a position to be forced into doing the governments bidding. 

The crux of the ACLU's legal position is that the RCC takes money form the government to provide services to illegal aliens, therefor they have to provide all the services the government dictates.  The ACLU is basically correct.  The RCC agreed to be another brainless stooge advancing big brothers agenda the second it started accepting public funds.

Wait, what about Christian charity?

I'm all for charity, Christian or otherwise.  Charity is when you take your own money or pool money from other likeminded people to do a good work.  When you take government money to do a job, you are a bureaucratic sub-contractor.

But we're a church, we have our beliefs, our faith, our.....

Blah, blah, blah.  You sacrificed your sanctimonious doctrinal purity the day you accepted government money to fill a government contract.  You can tell yourself that you've been doing it for God, but really you've been doing it for D.C.  Which is almost the same thing.  They think of themselves as god, and prefer that you worship them anyway.

But, Res, aren't you against abortion? 

Oh yes I am.  I can make a case for not paying for them from the public purse that has nothing to do with the Catholics.  Any women who shows up in America pregnant should be immediately put on a plane out of the country.  It will be far cheaper for everyone if she is.

That's not the point here.  The point is that the Roman Catholic Church, and several other church and para-church groups signed up for this.  They did so with a gleam in their greedy little eye and a big smile on their collective faces. 

This plot to facilitate the destruction of America by "helping illegals" was hatched by the Republicans under GWB.  He didn't call it a plot to destroy America by boasting illegal migration.  He called it "The Faith Based Initiative".  Republicans and so-called Christians jumped on the socialist bandwagon with gladness and thanksgiving.

They said: "Let the churches handle social services" and "they can do it better" and "Hispanics will feel better going to their own church for help".  The biggest lie was, "it will be a win-win". 

It's time for American churches to stop being the governments agent for social change.  Quit taking money to facilitate the radical degradation of this country. 

If the government didn't pay for it, how would we get money to help illegals?

I don't know.  How about using your own resources or doing fund raising?

Nobody would give us money to move more illegals here if we asked for it.  Only the government would dream up funding this kind of program.

EXACTLY.

Libertarian Revisionism

One of my well documented complaints against the Libertarian movement is what I call the 3 "P"'s.  Another is what I view as personal historical revisionism.  Here is a prime example:

I Made a Very Bad Mistake  Josh Holmes regrets joining the army.

Apparently Joshua Holmes joined the army is now and forevermore will be irreversibly butt hurt over the experience.  Boo Freaking Hoo. Lew Rockwell, which I read several times a week, is known for being anti war.  I'm OK with that stance and as a rule I think the US military policy should revert to what George Washington advised us to do.  Butt out of other peoples business. 

My beef is simple.  Josh volunteered for the US Army.  Nobody made him go.  I don't know what Josh's reasons were.  Maybe he wanted someone to foot the bill for college.  Maybe he wanted to see the world.  Maybe he wanted to do something manly to demonstrate that he was grown up.  I don't know all his reasons, but I do see his action.  He joined the army.

What's more he did two tours in the sandbox.

Which tells me no matter what he claims now, after his first trip he wanted a second one.

The army is an organization designed to kill people and break things.  That's what they do, they're the army, not the girl scouts.  Although under Obama I can see how there could be some confusion.  I don't think anyone is confused about the mission.  In fact I think his support for that mission is why Josh signed up.

Now that its over Josh feels bad about getting his college benefits for free.  Not exactly free, he had to do some stuff that he now regrets.  He just doesn't regret it enough to turn down his GI Bill or Vet Benefits. 

Has Google found the Loch Ness Monster?

I get a kick out of so called cryptozoology.  I don't know if any of it is true or not, but its fun to watch "experts" talk about stuff that they are specialists in that doesn't actually exist, at least not that they can prove. 

Google is in on the act now too.

What if Google did find the Loch Ness Monster?  I mean actually discover that there is a reptilian creature living in the lake?  What if that creature was some variant of dinosaur, nearly extinct, but still living?

I think it would be great fun to watch the scientific community go nuts over a discovery like that.

Still on My Diet and Excercise Program

Wife: "I look fat. Can you give me a compliment?" Husband: "You have perfect eyesight."

A man goes to a bar and sees a fat girl dancing on a table. He walks over to her and says, "Wow, nice legs!" She is flattered and replies, "You really think so?" The man says, "Oh definitely! Most tables would have collapsed by now."

What's the Point?

NAACP urges 'black people' to take up arms

“We’re going to study law,” he said. “What our rights are. We also want to be looking at our constitutional rights in carrying weapons. All police encounters need to be recorded. It’s unfortunate it has to be that way. But it has to be that way.”

That's worked so well before.  I mean that remark sincerely.  What worked, and how well, depends on what your agenda is. 

I'm of two minds on this.  On a surface level I think law abiding blacks (and everyone) should have guns.  They can do that now, so there isn't any big story in telling people to get a CCW permit.  Lew Rockwell has been encouraging people to video the police for years.  So why make a big deal out of it now?

To learn that answer we need to go back to 1966.  What happened in 66 that matters today?  Glad you asked.
 
From Wikipedia

The Black Panther Party or BPP (originally the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense) was a revolutionary black nationalist and socialist organization active in the United States from 1966 until 1982, with its only international chapter operating in Algeria from 1969 until 1972.

Initially, the Black Panther Party's core practice was its armed citizens' patrols to monitor the behavior of police officers and challenge police brutality. In 1969, community social programs became a core activity of party members. The Black Panther Party instituted a variety of community social programs, most extensively the Free Breakfast for Children Programs, and community health clinics.

Go ahead and read the Wiki on the Black Panthers its sympathetic to the organization but informative.  One of the BIG and I mean HUGE things the BPP did was encourage armed "observation" of the police.  They wanted and sometimes organized large militant mobs of blacks with guns who "interacted" with white cops (most cops in the 60's were white).

Does that sound similar to what's happening today?

So what was the result of this brave new way of checking white power?

Gun Control Act of 1968

That's right, when blacks start talking about roaming the streets in armed mobs (something any racial group is legally able to do) Democrats (historically the party of slavery and racism) freak out and start passing laws to keep things in check.

Don't just take my word on that.

Gun Control Timeline

BTW I picked a liberal website for that link.  Notice any patterns?  Every time it looks like blacks are going to get and carry guns there is enough fear in white America that a law will get passed to try to keep everyone "safer".

The NAACP has traditionally been an anti-gun organization.  Why the sudden change, or have they really changed?

What are we going to do?  We are quickly moving towards a white minority in America with combined browns and blacks being a majority.  Are blacks really afraid of whites or is it something else?

This Day in Hisotry

Earlier this month I had a chance encounter with a liberal anti-gun Jew.  The conversation had an ironic twist when I mentioned I had a Rabbi and he decided to bow out of his tirade.  The logical point and historical example I wanted to make to him was from an event that happened in World War II.

On this day 72 years ago,  April 19th 1943, Polish Jews demonstrated to the world the reason why the right to keep and bear arms is a requirement for individual liberty and basic human rights.

Commentators on the Holocaust don't spend a lot of time on the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising.  I think this is a shame.  Perhaps the reason they don't is because from a military perspective the Jewish resistance lost the battle.  This is a shame because Warsaw is one of the proudest moments in Jewish history since Masada.

The "Final Solution" to the problem of the Jews in Poland was the death camps.  Prior to sending them there the Germans sent around 800,000 of them into a Jewish quarter of Warsaw known as the Jewish Ghetto.  Since this area of Warsaw was Jewish prior to the occupation many Jews living there had prewar homes in the neighborhood.

As part of turning the Jewish quarter into a pre concentration camp holding pen, the Germans confiscated, food supplies, radios, firearms and everything else they deemed dangerous for the Jews to have.  Not everyone complied. 

Zydowska Organizacja Bojowa, means Jewish Fighting Organization in Polish. The Z.O.B., led by 23-year-old Mordecai Anielewicz started with a few guns, and a small amount of  ammunition.  Some guns were hidden from German confiscators, some smuggled into the ghetto by the Polish resistance and some purchased from the Polish Army.  Some of the weapons were home made.  Sometimes these weapons worked sometimes not.  Sometimes they had ammunition but usually not enough.

On April 19th the order came to clear the Ghetto.  This was the eve of Passover and most of the Jews were not prepared for military action.  The Z.O.B. had been encouraging Jews to resist any efforts to be put on the trains. 

Caught unprepared, only four ZOB fighting groups were able to mobilize in reaction. The first armed resistance occurred when a 17-year-old girl named Emily Landau flung a grenade into a cluster of SS men from a rooftop on Gesia Street, killing or wounding a dozen of them. From Historynet.com

It is worth your time to read the entire account.

Depending on your source of information, between 400 and 1,000 Jews fought the Nazis in the Warsaw Ghetto.  Instead of taking 3 days to clean out the Ghetto, it took the Nazis 28 days.  Incidentally it only took 38 days for the Germans to conquer the nation of Poland.  1,000 men and women with almost no guns or other military supplies were able to fight off the best Army in Europe for nearly a month.  When they lost, it was because of superior numbers, better supplies and air support and artillery. 

We shouldn't say the lost.  They died.  They were not defeated.

Little was known in the US about the Warsaw Jews, at the time.  I think the reason has to do with the fact that it was a big war and there was a lot going on.  I doubt anyone in the Allies or the USA had much of a chance to do anything for them.  What if they had?

What if instead of a hodge podge of homemade and second hand weapons they were equipped with the same guns that American civilians could buy at that time?  What if they had a stash of ammo on par with what a hobbyist has in the US?

I recognize that at the time anyone in the US could have owned a Browning 50 cal machine gun.  For arguments sake lets confine the math to just two guns: The Grande Rifle, and the Colt 1911.  Lets confine our other figures to what a firearms hobbyist might have on hand.  Lets also assume that no one saw the war coming so there weren't any "gun nuts" stocking up on guns and ammo.

OK so we know that a maximum of 800,000 Jews were sent to the Ghetto.  Lets say that only half that number actually lived there.  Further lets assume that only half that number owned one (or more)of the fine American firearms I've already mentioned.  200,000 potential gun owners owing (again for arguments sake) an average of 2 guns apiece.  That works out to 400,000 guns.  Assuming half that number are hand guns.  We end up with 200,000 handguns, and 200,000 rifles. 

What about ammo?  Guns are useless without it.

Only about one third to one half of the folks who shoot reload so lets assume that everyone only has a years supply of loaded ammo on hand.  I'm going to call that 200 rounds per rifle.  1000 rounds per hand gun. 

We can't forget the reloaders all together.  Lets say they have either loaded or the capacity to load 1000 rifle and 5000 pistol.  Lets also assume the retailers have 1/8 of a years supply of ammo on hand.

You can do the math yourself but the supply of rifle ammo would be over 100,000,000 rounds and the pistol supply would be over 500,000,000 rounds.  Again this is at America hobbyist levels of ownership and supply, not what a country that suspects that it might be invaded would try to accumulate.

Lets rerun the Warsaw scenario with that level of armament.  The Nazis never had 500,000 men in the country of Poland at one time.  200,000 Jews armed with 1 rifle and 1 pistol each with only 10 boxes of ammo for each gun plus a small ammo cache for resupply.  I think the outcome would've been fewer people loaded on the trains from the get go.

Liberals can do the same kind of math I just did.  That's part of the reason they are so big on restricting supply of guns and ammo.  Liberals want to control the army and enforce their will on the people.  Guns and ammo in the hands of citizens tend to keep armies in check.  I understand why liberals want this outcome.  I don't understand why Jews are so eager to help them achieve it.  History shows what happens when citizens have the ability to fight back.  I think we should help civilians own guns and ammo.  The results are more positive than when they don't.

Employment Advice

Quick Thought on Jeb

Jeb urges Republicans to OK Obama's AG pick

NEW YORK – As Senate Republicans delay a vote on Loretta Lynch attorney general nomination, GOP presidential candidate Jeb Bush is urging confirmation, arguing President Obama deserves the right to appoint his own team without partisan opposition.

My first thought was "see no difference between Repubs and Dems".  That's probably the case, but not for the usual reasons.  This isn't a case for the business as usual betrayal of voters by republicans in the name of bipartisanship.  This is more self serving than that.

The Bushs and the Clintons  have nearly identical corporate sponsors.  That fact is fairly well known.  They also have nearly identical governing philosophies.  Again no surprise there.  Hillary is likely going to be the Democratic nominee for president.  She stepped aside for Obummer and they owe her a run.  No doubt she's got enough dirt on everyone to get that run anyway.

Jeb Bush doesn't have the chops to beat Hillary in an election.  He never has and he never will.  Bush must have some back channel info that Lynch is going to investigate Hillary.  He probably thinks that her investigation will serve to derail her presidential run.  That is what Jeb is hoping will eliminate Hillary from the presidential race and improve his chances at ascending the cherry blossom throne.  He needs to dry up her campaign contributions to increase the available pool for himself.  To do that he needs sponsors to see her as a poor bet early on in the process.

GFF-PBJ

Restaurant owner leaves message for 'dumpster diver'

“To the person going through our trash for their next meal, you’re a human being and worth more than a meal from the dumpster. Please come in during business hours for a classic Pb&j, fresh veggies, and a cup of water at no charge. No questions asked. – your friend, the owner.”

I used to work in the restaurant business and I can appreciate how an owner or manager would feel coming out to the dumpster and finding trash scattered all over.  Don't kid yourself.  This sort of thing is pretty common, even when the economy is good.  Offering a free meal isn't how most of us would solve the problem either.

Then I got to thinking that a PB&J isn't really that great of an offer for lunch.  Then I checked out her Face Book page P. B. Jams.  They specialize in PB&J.  It's the best thing on their menu and what they are famous for.  I guess when you offer your best, that's as good as it can get.

I saw a comment of the FB page.  Nick Furlong said: "If I'm ever in Oklahoma City, I will be eating at your restaurant because of this."  I also saw the sandwich menu on FB.  I've never in my life paid to have someone make me a PBJ.  Never.  I certainly haven't paid for one with a starting price tag of $6. 

If I'm in OKC I'm going to make it a point to go to PB Jams, and order two sandwiches.  I'll get a grilled one for me and have them leave one on layaway for someone else.

Racist or Not?

The year is 1914.  The place is Podunk Mississippi.  We are at Rufus and Wynona Johnson's home.  The Johnsons are home with their three young children.  Mr. Johnson doesn't own his home, its provided to him by his employer, Great Southern Railroad.  That explains how he is one of only about 120 people in Podunk who have electricity. 

Mr. Johnson has been with the railroad since he turned 13 years old.  He's done nearly every job that a black man is allowed to do, and several that are reserved for whites.  The bosses all know this and they don't care.  Rufus is well like by everyone on the road, black and white alike.  He has forgotten more about the road than any three other men know and he keeps things running and in good order.

He even saved the railroad from wrecking two trains.  He saw that the tracks hadn't been switched properly and a Freighter form Biloxi almost collided with the Express to New Orleans.  Now everyone knew that, that no-good drunk Donny Donahue had switched the tracks on account of him saying he always wanted  to see a wreck and cause he was drunk again at 7:30 in the morning. 

Now, Rufus didn't say how the tracks got switched.  He said he didn't see it happen.  Which, like as not was true, but everyone knows Donny did it.  Rufus didn't even say that everyone knew it was Donny, he just kept it under his hat.  If he did that cause Donny's daddy is the station master over at Madison or because he didn't see who done it we don't know. 

Everyone at Great Southern thought that Rufus deserved a reward on account of saving those people from dying and the all that freight from getting wrecked, so the railroad done went out an bought the Johnsons a brand new RKO Deluxe Radio in the pecan cabinet.  It's the finest radio anyone ever saw and it cost $7.43 and they had to send all the way to Nashville to get it.

The Johnson's sure are proud of that radio.  It's the nicest thing they ever owned.  They've been having folks over to listen to it near every night.  They've had everybody from the rail yard over, black and white alike and everyone agrees its a right fine radio.

Till last week that is.  That's when a white man wearing a all white gown and a white pillow case over his head with the eyes cut out broke into their house while they was listening to the radio.  He said no nigger needed to have such a fine radio and he was taking it.  That's what he did too.

Now, everyone knows it was that no good drunk Donny.  Rufus didn't say Donny did it.  He said he couldn't rightly say on account of him dressed up as the Klan and all.  Sherriff Coburn wasn't fooled none by Rufus not knowing.  Part of that is on account of their ain't no Klan in Podunk.  Part of it is on account of Donny was seen by half the town driving with the radio in the back of his buggy.

Sherriff Coburn went out to Donny's house and saw the radio setting in the front room so he asked him about it.  Donny said he bought the radio.  So the sheriff asked him how it sounded and could he have a listen. Well Donny couldn't turn the radio on cause Donny ain't got no electricity in his house.  So the Sherriff arrested him for holding up the Johnsons.

At the trail Judge David Duke said he agreed that Donny is no good but that he wasn't going to send him go work the Parchman Farm.  Which just means send him to the pen, but they still call it the farm cause it used to be that.  Don't matter none no how.  David Duke ain't gonna send no white man to no jail for robbing a black man.  Donny only hit Rufus over the head and beat on Wynona a little, it wasn't like he shot them or anything.  Just cause he did it in front of their little ones don't account for much they're just niggers after all.

The judge had some words for the Johnsons too.  Seems David Duke thinks they are getting a bit uppity.  He was some sore at them because their little girl says she's afraid of white folks especially if they are wearing all white.  He told them that it wasn't right for black folks to be afraid of white folks just cause one bad one broke into their house and stole their stuff.  Judge Duke said it wasn't like they burned a cross on their lawn or anything.  Besides Donny only said he was going kill them.  He didn't really kill anybody or anything.

Is Judge David Duke a racist?  Answer in the comments.

Wait, wait, before you do that change a couple of things about the story.  Like this:

Black Judge Gives Black Home Invader Probation, Attacks White Family for Racism

A black judge, offended by a white family’s concern that their toddler was frightened of black men after a violent home invasion and robbery, publicly shamed them and let off the convicted man with mere probation.

Judge Stevens, who is also black, reacted to the Grays’ concerns by calling them racists.

“I am offended… I am deeply offended that they would be victimized by an individual and express some kind of fear of all black men,” he said. He said it was understandable that the three-year-old was upset — “she can’t help the way she feels” — but he attacked the parents for “accepting that kind of mentality and fostering those type of stereotypes.”

The Grays asked the judge to give Wallace a more serious sentence: “If holding a little girl at gunpoint gets you probation, then our system is flawed,” the girl’s father said.

Stevens ignored their pleas and sentenced Wallace to five year’s probation, saying he “deserved the opportunity to redeem himself” for violently invading the Grays’ home, terrorizing their daughter, and stealing their property.

Later, Stevens took to Facebook to publicly shame the victims of a home invasion after giving Wallace merely probation for burglary and robbery with a handgun. It was the mother’s secret racist views that made the toddler terrified of black men, not the formative memory of being terrorized at gunpoint by violent criminals:

This link has a video of judge Olu Stevens remarks.

Racism is just another word for whites not likening it when blacks rob them at gun point.  A black judge given a brother the wink and a nod and no time in jail for jack'n some crackers, sheet nigga that's just keep'n it real.  Word!

If a white judge had done the same to a white crook, for robbing a black family at gun point, Louisville would already have been burnt to the ground.

Tax Time

H&R Block rep's Note: Sometimes a story comes to our attention that needs no polishing or enhancement to make it a good Block tax story. This is one of those. It is a real letter submitted to the IRS in 1995 in the midst of the previous year's weird and bizarre denial of dependents, exemptions, and credits. We believe the letter speaks for itself.

Dear Sirs:

I am responding to your letter denying the deduction for two of the three dependents I claimed on my 1994 Federal Tax return. Thank you. I have questioned whether these are my children or not for years. They are evil & expensive. It's only fair that since they are minors and not my responsibility that the government (who evidently is taxing me more to care for these waifs) knows something about them and what to expect over the next year. You may apply next year to reassign them to me and reinstate the deduction. This year they are yours!

The oldest, Kristen, is now 17. She is brilliant. Ask her! I suggest you put her to work in your office where she can answer people's questions about their returns. While she has no formal training, it has not seemed to hamper her knowledge of any other subject you can name. Taxes should be a breeze; next year she is going to college. I think it's wonderful that you will now be responsible for that little expense.

While you mull that over, keep in mind that she has a truck. It doesn't run at the moment so you have the immediate decision of appropriating some Department of Defense funds to fix the vehicle or getting up early to drive her to school. Kristen also has a boyfriend. Oh joy. While she possesses all of the wisdom of the universe, her alleged mother and I have felt it best to occasionally remind her of the virtues of abstinence, and in the face of overwhelming passion, safe sex. This is always uncomfortable and I am quite relieved you will be handling this in the future. May I suggest that you reinstate Joycelyn Elders, who had a rather good handle on the problem.

Patrick is 14. I've had my suspicions about this one. His eyes are a little close together for normal people. He may be a tax examiner himself one day if you do not incarcerate him first. In February, I was awakened at three in the morning by a police officer who was bringing Pat home. He and his friends were TP'ing houses. In the future would you like him delivered to the local IRS office or to Ogden, Utah? Kids at 14 will do almost anything on a dare. His hair is purple. Permanent dye, temporary dye, what's the big deal? Learn to deal with it. You'll have plenty of time as he is sitting out a few days of school after instigating a food fight. I'll take care of filing your phone number with the vice principal. Oh yes, he and all of his friends have raging hormones. This is the house of testosterone and it will be much more peaceful when he lives in your home. DO NOT leave any of them unsupervised with girls, explosives, flammables, inflatables, vehicles, or telephones. (I'm sure that you will find telephones a source of unimaginable amusement, and be sure to lock out the 900 and 976 numbers!)

Heather is an alien. She slid through a time warp and appeared quite by magic one year. I'm sure this one is yours. She is 10 going on 21. She came from a bad trip in the sixties. She wears tie-dyed clothes, beads, sandals, and hair that looks like Tiny Tim's. Fortunately you will be raising my taxes to help offset the pinch of her remedial reading courses. Hooked On Phonics is expensive so the schools dropped it. Good news! You can buy it yourself for half the amount of the deduction that you are denying! It's quite obvious that we were terrible parents (ask the other two) so they have helped raise this one to a new level of terror. She cannot speak English. Most people under twenty understand the curious patois she fashioned out of valley girls/boys in the hood/reggae/yuppie/political doublespeak. I don't. The school sends her to a speech pathologist who has her roll her R's. It added a refreshing Mexican/Irish touch to her voice. She wears hats backwards, pants baggy and wants one of her ears pierced four more times. There is a fascination with tattoos that worries me but I am sure that you can handle it. Bring a truck when you come to get her, as she sort of "nests" in her room and I think that it would be easier to move the entire thing than find out what it is really made of. You denied two of the three exemptions so it is only fair you get to pick which two you will take. I prefer that you take the youngest, I still go bankrupt with Kristen's college but then I am free! If you take the two oldest then I still have time for counseling before Heather becomes a teenager. If you take the two girls then I won't feel so bad about putting Patrick in a military academy. Please let me know of your decision as soon as possible as I have already increased the withholding on my W-4 to cover the $395 in additional tax and to make a down payment on an airplane.

Yours Truly,
Bob

Note: The taxpayer in question added this caveat at a later date: "Rats, they sent me the refund and allowed the deductions."

My Rabbi

I had an interesting conversation this last week.  The man claimed to be a Jew.  He sort of looked Jewish, but didn't have a Jewish sounding name.  He said he was a Jew, and he is in "the biz" as they say.  Seemed like a generally nice guy.

The conversation started off with his commenting on the gun culture in Wyoming.  He let me know he was very knowledgeable about "firearm proliferation issues".  I was at work.  He was a customer.  I remained engaged in the conversation but uncommented about almost everything he had to say.

When he got to the part about crime rates I cut him off.  I said something about how high rates of gun ownership and racial homogeneity generally resulted in a non-violent society.  I was smiling and being very cocktail party pleasant.  His eyed narrowed and his breathing seemed shallower than it was just seconds before.  I could tell, he wanted to go all out liberal on me.

His problem was where to start.  I had given him no ammunition.  I hadn't disagreed with anything he had said.  I hadn't even taken the bait when he was talking about political parties.  Literally nothing I said in our conversation to this point allowed him a solid insight to my personal or political views about anything.  I had for all intents and purposes indicated that 1.) gun ownership was good and 2.) racial diversity was bad.

I hadn't planned this masterful turn of conversational events.  I had pissed off a liberal, without saying anything politically incorrect.  I just wanted to keep from saying anything that would be reported back to the powers that be as a negative reflection on me, but still maintain some rhetorical dignity.

The liberal, Jewish, anti-gun, show biz SJW just knew that he had a racist, gun owning, 4x4 driving, redneck, SOB on his hands.  I could tell he wanted to verbally rip me to shreds and demonstrate his enlightened liberal world view.  He didn't have an opening.  I hadn't actually said anything racist or even impolite.  I just said that lower racial diversity and high gun ownership resulted in less violent crime.  I knew, that he knew, that both statements are true.

That's when I started having fun.

He went after the racial issue tooth and claw.  He brought up everything he could think of to get a response from me.  I mean everything.  Immigration, illegal immigration, Hispanics in general, Asians, Blacks, Indians.  I didn't respond to any of it, other than to affirm that he was speaking to me.

He decided to prove how American multi cultural he was.  He lived in CA now, but he had lived in the deep south, and more importantly Montana, so he knew all about "our culture", "out here".

Here in white trash, red neck fly over country, its considered polite when someone tells you they are from a place to ask them some specifics.  Its just common stuff like where did you go to school or do you remember the old drive in, or did you know so and so.  It's conversational and considered good manners.

So when he said he was from Montana, I asked where.  Now I used to live in Montana, but I didn't happen to say that.  What I said was "oh where in Montana, my Rabbi is from there".

I don't look Jewish.  I don't have a Jewish sounding name.  When I mentioned I had a Rabbi his mouth fell open and stayed that way.  He looked at his watch.  He stuck out his hand for me to shake.  I guess he remembered he had someplace to be.  He said he hoped he saw me next time he came to town and we exchanged pleasantries.

I have never seen a liberal shut up so fast.

Rabbi B,

Thank you for engaging my questions on Judaism.  Thank you for your instruction.  Thank you for sending me your liturgies.  Thank you for your help in my studies.  I'm still working my way through the Neusner book and should probably write a  report on it.  Most importantly thank you for being ""my Rabbi".  If I knew how much fun it is having a Rabbi for a friend when talking to liberals, I would have gotten one years ago.

Home at Last

My in-laws left this morning.  Life is getting back to normal.  With the exception that my kids are in a funk over the loss of Grandma and Grandpa in their daily routine.  My daughter, AKA Drama Queen, doesn't know how she can go on.  She can't think, she can't do anything, especially her lessons.  Grandma isn't here and she just can't go on.  I am informed that she might be able to do her school work if only grandma were here.  This seems odd to me.  After the first week of their visit we decided to declare a spring break from home schooling, because no one seemed to be able to think with the grandparents here.

I on the other hand didn't have to knock on my bathroom door before going in, or get semi dressed before leaving the bedroom, so I'm happy.  Tonight when I get off work, I'll be able to come home and watch TV if I want.  I never do, but its nice to know that I can without waking anyone up.

If it seems like I'm putting ease of bathroom access ahead of my children's happiness I'm not.  It's just nice to get back to normal.  I will say this, my mother in laws visit has resulted in a much cleaner house.  Mrs. Ipsa didn't inherent any of her mothers cleaning genes.  I'm not complaining about that either.  Her mother has woken me up at 2:30 am by running the vacuum cleaner in the bedroom I was sleeping in.  Given the choice between a extra clean house and a full nights sleep, I'll take the sleep.

I should be able to get some posts in this week.

Quick Thought

Who is to say that the laws that are being proposed today to protect Christians form gay activist terrorism won't be used tomorrow to persecute Christians by Islamic terrorists?

One of the foundational principles of the United States was individual freedom.  When we start creating special classes of individuals, and special laws to promote or prevent some behavior that is currently en vogue or opprobrious, we set in motion precedent for the future.  Who is to say where this precedent will take us?

The principle is what is at stake in such matters.  If a legislature can pass a law requiring Christians to help homosexuals celebrate their preferred lifestyle; then what is to stop them from passing a law to require gays to do the same for those they may disagree with?  If special legal conditions exist for Christians, then what is to stop Sharia law from being enforced by the nations courts?

I believe outright discrimination practiced openly, publicly and proudly is preferable to the foreseeable consequences of creating special classes of legal entitlement. 

Yes I am arguing for discrimination, any sane person would and should.

If the government is able to enforce laws against Christians over making Gays a cake then they are able to enforce laws against Christians, Jews, Hindus, Atheists, Straights or Gays etc that other groups may prefer.  Under Sharia law anyone not professing and preforming according to the particularities of the en vogue Islamic denomination can be beheaded.  This includes EVERYBODY. 

Which is a better outcome: being able to sue someone for their deeply held religious belief that you don't like because it makes you feel bad, or having someone chop your head off because you don't share theirs?

How are you going to eat your rainbow colored, wiener shaped, butt sex pride wedding cake with no head?

How about this instead?  If someone doesn't want to do business with you, for whatever reason, do business with someone else.  Instead of agitating for more ridiculous laws that limit freedom, spend your time and money on something more useful like, not bothering other people over your choices.  Is there such a shortage of gay wedding planners that your must have a Christian provide you with their products and services?

America doesn't need more laws.

America needs more respect for individual freedom, and a good healthy dose of "grow the F#¢k! up already".

Note to Christians, quit trying to get the government to protect your "specialness" too.  America hasn't been a Christian nation for over 40 years.  Yes it was once.  Yes our laws were once based on biblical principles.  It's not anymore.  Time to focus either on spiritual revival and personal evangelism or a legal strategy based on getting the courts to enforce the principles and protections already on the books.  Inventing new "faith based" laws won't do anyone any good after the Muslim population hits about 24% of the total population.  They are willing to riot, rape and kill to get what they want.  Do you really want to establish a legal precedent for the United States Government to openly and deliberately persecute Christians?

Doctor's Visit

A pretty young woman, visiting her new doctor for the first time, found herself alone in a small waiting room. She began undressing nervously, preparing herself for the upcoming examination. Just as she draped the last of her garments over the back of a chair, a light rap sounded on the door and a young doctor strode in.

Coming to an abrupt halt, the doctor looked his nude patient up and down carefully.

"Miss Jones," he said finally, "it seems quite obvious to me that until today you have never had an eye examination."


I guess the new patient was an eyeful.

Gregg

I doubt you have time or an interest in surfing the net any more.  In the off chance that you care much about anything happening on earth or that it is even possible to check in, this is for you.

Deus meus, ex toto corde pænitet me ómnium meórum peccatórum, éaque detéstor, quia peccándo, non solum pœnas a te iuste statútas proméritus sum, sed præsértim quia offéndi te, summum bonum, ac dignum qui super ómnia diligáris. Ídeo fírmiter propóno, adiuvánte grátia tua, de cétero me non peccatúrum peccandíque occasiónes próximas fugitúrum. Amen.

Réquiem ætérnam dona eis, Dómine, et lux perpétua lúceat eis.  Requiéscant in pace. Amen. 

May your sins be forgiven.
May your sorrow and pain be no more.
May you rest in heaven forever.

May you look down and laugh at my posting a Catholic prayer on my blog in your honor.  Since God's right there handy maybe you'll take his word for some of what I've told you over the years.

50 Years Ago Today

I used to listen to Paul Harvey on the radio.  There was something about his semi-southern sounding voice and straight forward speaking that rang true.  Even as a kid I enjoyed "The Rest of the Story".

50 years ago today he aired this bit of wisdom:


Listen and weep.

GFF-Obituary Edition

If you were to write your own obituary what would it say?

Emily Philips wrote her own, and they published it, which is too bad because I never knew her and she sounds like a great person.  I've known women like her.  I liked them.  I assume I would have liked her.  An excerpt:

So…I was born; I blinked; and it was over. 

It pains me to admit it, but apparently, I have passed away. Everyone told me it would happen one day but that's simply not something I wanted to hear, much less experience. Once again I didn't get things my way! That's been the story of my life all my life.

The whole thing is here.

Memento Mori


OK I admit its not a chipper post.  Your eyes may mist a bit if you read the whole thing.  I'm glad there are women known affectionately as "nana banana".  The world is a better place when playing "get my hinny" is a childish game and not sexual innuendo.

There is something simply "good" about plain folks doing average things.  "Just one more, and no more" is something a kid says to get a cookie.  That moment is worth baking a thousand batches of cookies to hear.  Good Folks are average folks doing good stuff.

The world is a better place because of grandmas and cookies and games of get my hinny. 

Tyranny Of The Trany

It occurs to me that our nation is morally and mentally upside down on the issue of what is ridiculously referred to as "civil rights".

There are of course no such things as "civil rights" as no right can be totally enforced in a "civil" manor.  Neither are there rights of a so called "civilization".  There are only natural rights and property rights.  The first set of rights are a prerequisite to human existence and the second to human interaction.  "Black rights", "women rights", "immigrant rights" "LGBTG rights" etc. are all artificial constructs of, or perhaps logical subdivisions of natural and property rights.  

Why then do a have a segment of our society that enjoys in manufacturing "rights" solely as a method of enforcing their particular world view on others?  I'm not a fan of same sex "marriage".  I won't try to hide my objection to the issue or my negative view on the matter. 

Neither will I hide my utter contempt for the people promoting LGBT tyranny.  For generations any non heterosexual relationship was viewed in a range that went form slightly askew to evil and perverse.  Today we are told that all peoples preferences in all matters should be treated with respect and tolerance.  The principle of "what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their homes" should be private is repeated in a tone and fervor resembling holy rite.

Be ye tolerant of those whom do things ye do not.  Be ye compassionate of which ye find reprehensible.  Be ye a good sport and turn ye a blind eye.  Thou shalt not appear even slightly judgmental of things in the popular culture.  It is it's own religion.

When a man decides to marry a man, we are told that it is a good thing.  Why? Blank out. There is no good answer.  Something about love and civil rights and mumbled unintelligent platitudes.

The one and only thing we are told we can object to, is someone who objects to celebrating or at least facilitating the event.  So what happens if a person who believes its impossible for a man to marry a man says they are unwilling to provide flowers or a cake or perform the ceremony?

That person is treated as some sort of evil, oppressive villain.  Cart them off to court!  Take away their home!  Steal their bank account! Off with their head! DO IT NOW!

Gleefully done in the name of tolerance and a diverse society.

Some old lady bakes cakes and decorates them real pretty, or she is real good at arranging flowers.  She also has a honestly held religious/philosophical belief that marriage is (as it has been defined for millennium) only between a man and a women.  Because it violates her faith she says she can't take the job.

She loses the profit from the sale.  She also may lose the customer as a client in the future because until the gay marriage that person used her services.  Other people may hear of her stand and decide to take their future business elsewhere to someone they view as less bigoted. 

She wasn't a bad sport about it.  She turned the job down and helped the client find someone to do what they wanted.  She wasn't unkind or impolite.  She was true to her principles.

Free trade can only occur when a willing seller finds a willing buyer.  What if one is unwilling, for any reason?  In that case a transaction can only occur under violence or the threat of violence.

Is that what the LGBT community wants?  Men with guns forcing little old ladies to bake cakes and arrange flowers.  Is the florist's hand trembling because she fears going to hell or is it because the SWAT team is pointing guns at her to enforce a court order?

Make no mistake about it, all laws are enforced at the point of a gun.

Is that the kind of "civil" rights Americans want?

Hello Muther

Dear Ma & Pa,

Am well. Hope you are. Tell brother Walt & brother Elmer the Marine Corps beats working for old man Minch by a mile. Tell them to join up quick before maybe all of the places are filled.

I was restless at first because you got to stay in bed till nearly 6 a.m., but am getting so I like to sleep late. Tell Walt & Elmer all you do before breakfast is smooth your cot and shine some things. No hogs to slop, feed to pitch, mash to mix, wood to split, fire to lay. Practically nothing.

Men got to shave but it is not so bad, they git warm water. Breakfast is strong on trimmings.

Like fruit juice, cereal, eggs, bacon, etc..., but kind of weak on chops, potatoes, ham, steak, fried eggplant, pie, and other regular food. But tell Walt & Elmer you can always sit between two city boys that live on coffee.

Their food plus yours holds you till noon, when you get fed again. It's no wonder these city boys can't walk much. We go on "route" marches, which the Platoon Sergeant says are long walks to harden us. If he thinks so, it is not my place to tell him different. A "route march" is about as far as to our mailbox at home. Then the city guys gets sore feet and we all ride back in trucks. The country is nice, but awful flat. The Sergeant is like a schoolteacher. He nags some. The Capt. is like the school board.

Majors & Colonels just ride around & frown. They don't bother you none. This next will kill Walt & Elmer with laughing. I keep getting medals for shooting. I don't know why. The bulls-eye is near as big as a chipmunk and don't move. And it ain't shooting at you, like the Higgett boys at home.

All you got to do is lie there all comfortable and hit it. You don't even load your own cartridges.

They come in boxes. Be sure to tell Walt & Elmer to hurry & join before other fellers get into this setup & come stampeding in.

Your loving daughter,

Gail