Updating Our Terms

Obama has changed the name of Bush's global "War on Terror. " Now he's calling it the "Overseas Contingency Operation."


He's also recommended a few other minor alterations:


Abortion will be redubbed a "Life Extraction Technique."


Heavy taxing and spending: "Financial Flagellation."


Ebonics: "P-Diddy Palaver."


Terrorist: "Overwrought Dissenter."


Birth Certificate: "Optional Documentation."

Racism=Disagreeing with the Mulatto Messiah

Given that dipping into the Hollywood mind is often akin to wading barefoot through an open cesspool, this is a refreshing change of pace:

Angie Harmon is not afraid to come out and say she doesn’t like how President Obama is handling the job — but she’s sick of having to defend herself from being deemed a racist.

"Here's my problem with this, I'm just going to come out and say it. If I have anything to say against Obama it's not because I'm a racist, it's because I don't like what he's doing as President and anybody should be able to feel that way, but what I find now is that if you say anything against him you're called a racist," Harmon told Tarts at Thursday’s Los Angeles launch of the new eyelash-growing formula, Latisse. "But it has nothing to do with it, I don’t care what color he is. I’m just not crazy about what he's doing and I heard all about this, and he’s gonna do that and change and change, so okay … I'm still dressing for a recession over here buddy and we've got unemployment at an all-time high and that was his number one thing and that's the thing I really don't appreciate. If I'm going to disagree with my President, that doesn't make me a racist. If I was to disagree with W, that doesn't make me racist. It has nothing to do with it, it is ridiculous."

If It Ain't Dixie, It Just Won't Do

A fellow from Boston was in Alabama visiting family. One day he decided to take a walk around the area where his relatives lived to enjoy their fine, comfortable southern way of life-- something he was not accustomed to, being from the north.

While walking he happened upon a pit bull attacking a small child. His instincts took over, and he ran to the child's aid.

He grabbed the dog, pulled him from the child, and choked the dog until he was dead.

As the dead animal lay at his feet, a man came running over from the other side of the street. He announced that he was the star reporter for a big Alabama newspaper, and he would make the rescuer famous.

"LOCAL MAN SAVES CHILD FROM GRUESOME DEATH," the headlines would proclaim.

The would-be savior thought that this sounded great, but explained that he was not a local.

"Don't worry," said the reporter. "We'll just make it say: "ALABAMA MAN SAVES CHILD FROM GRUESOME DEATH."

"But I'm not from Alabama, either," the man said sheepishly. "I'm from Boston."

The newsman gave him a disgusted look and left in a hurry.

The next day the headlines of the newspaper read:

"YANKEE KILLS FAMILY PET."


--paraphrased from Reader's Digest

Looking Forward to It

A docudrama about Obama's (an Odrama?) life is coming to theaters near you in mid-July. In keeping with the tone of his books and public persona, the story unfolds within a fantasy framework.

Perhaps you've already heard the buzz.

It's called Harry Potter and the Half-blood Prince.

"Calling Criminals Lawbreakers is Un-American"

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has called raids by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, which is following laws established by Congress, "un-American."

Well, let's see: the laws were written by Americans, for the protection of Americans. So which part is un-American? Standing for law and order, instead of chaos? Fending off an invasion of millions who are taught contempt for us from childhood, and have no intention of assimilating? Not rewarding those who cheated their way in and whose first act upon entering our country was a violation of its laws?

I think Ms. Pelosi made a mistake. When she said "un-American," she must have meant the aliens, themselves, because a significant percentage meet that definition in legal fact, as well as in temperament.

In related news, Obama continues building upon his reputation as a clear communicator:

At a town hall meeting in southern California yesterday, Obama renewed his support for comprehensive reform, including a possible path to citizenship for law-abiding people who entered the country illegally, along the lines of the bill that stalled in Congress in 2007. (Emphasis mine)

Aren't exercises in defying the Law of Non-contradiction fun? "A" cannot be "non-A," just as one cannot be in the U.S.A. illegally and also call himself a law-abiding person. It's like being a shoplifter who's never stolen anything in his life.

This is what becomes of a person who embraces leftist, treasonous policies: his mouth becomes a geyser of literal nonsense.

GOP: We Don't Learn from Our Screwups; We Revel in Them

Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele is under fire from social conservatives for telling GQ magazine that abortion is an "individual choice" and homosexuality is not.

Despite declaring to GQ that women have the right to choose an abortion, Republican National Committee (RNC) chairman Michael Steele has issued a statement saying he has always been pro-life and supports a constitutional amendment to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Matt Barber, director of cultural affairs for Liberty Counsel and Liberty Alliance Action, says in Steele's interview with GQ, he "sounded like he was on the payroll of Planned Parenthood."

Barber admits he is also troubled that Steele told GQ that believing homosexuality is a choice is equivalent to saying, "Tomorrow morning I'm going to stop being black."


Some observations:

1. If Steele means that a person doesn't suddenly get up one fine day and say: "Hm, think I'll try the opposite sex for a while," I agree. I doubt that one chooses homosexual feelings or thoughts in the way that one chooses canned green beans over peas at the grocery store. However, I take issue with the notion that homosexuals have no control over how they act. Engaging in sodomy or its female counterpart isn't a whim, but a behavior. Suggesting otherwise implies that humans are mindless, rutting robots, enslaved to their genetic "wiring," or malfunction, in this particular instance.

2. Abortion is an "individual choice" in the same way that shooting my neighbor is an "individual choice." That I may choose a specific course of action says nothing about its moral goodness or abhorrence. If Steele believes that women have a right to kill their unborn children, then he is no believer in the ideal that humans--or even just Americans--have God-given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Perhaps he can explain how a person explores these rights, after being vacuumed from his mother's womb like so much refuse and tossed into a dumpster.

3. Steele's public backpedaling on abortion indicates that he's either a liar or a moron. How does he make the transition from supporting a woman's "right to choose," to claiming that he "has always been pro-life," and an advocate of overturning Roe v. Wade? Sounds like someone has no core principles. Or perhaps he simply tells people what he thinks they'd like to hear. Either way, he embodies the GOP's ongoing problem of blurring the demarkation line between itself and the Democrats. Republicans can't wait to lose the next election.

4. Notice how Steeleskull consolidates homosexuality and having black skin under the classification: "Things People Just Can't Help." As if there's no discernible difference between the color of one's skin and engaging in buggery. If I were black, I'd find this comparison offensive and intellectually feeble. By the way, equating the two is a typical tactic of the Left--those destroyers of the family, those wreckers of everything that once represented Christendom.

What's the substantial difference between Steele and a Democrat?

This Is a Test

In the event of an actual blog post, you will see words strung into more or less meaningful sentences and paragraphs, commenting on the socialist nightmare realm in which we now find ourselves mired, not unlike one who has tripped and fallen into a cesspool.

Please stay tuned to this channel for further updates.

He Black. He Eligible.

A U.S. senator has suggested that voters have made Barack Obama eligible to occupy the Oval Office, whether or not he meets the constitutional mandate of being a "natural born" citizen.

The comments from Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., came in an e-mail sent to a constituent shortly after the election, which just now was forwarded to WND.

The constituent had asked about Martinez's perspective on the issue on which WND and others have reported: claims made by dozens of lawsuits around the country that Obama might not meet the constitutional qualification for various reasons.

"Presidential candidates are vetted by voters at least twice – first in the primary elections and again in the general election. President-Elect Obama won the Democratic Party's nomination after one of the most fiercely contested presidential primaries in American history," Martinez responded.

"And, he has now been duly elected by the majority of voters in the United States. Throughout both the primary and general election, concerns about Mr. Obama's birthplace were raised. The voters have made clear their view that Mr. Obama meets the qualifications to hold the office of president," he wrote.


These days, the only time the GOP halts its implementation of Democrat policy is when its members actively defend Democrats against spiteful, audacious constituents. Why, the nerve of questioning Da Messiah's rightful messiahtude! I just can't understand why Repugnicruds didn't win big in the last election. Maybe it's because they were shilling for Obama instead of resisting him.

It seems that Martinez is too stupid or starstruck to comprehend the simple truth that, if Obama did not meet constitutional criteria for presidential eligibility, he never should have reared his saintly head in the primaries or the general election. If I cheat at cards and win big, will you afterward point to the number of people who slapped me on the back and praised my abilities as a defense of my duplicity?

What if Obama gained the presidency illegally, by lying to the American voters about his qualifications? What if such a revelation had received wide dissemination before the primaries?

"Who cares?" says Martinez. "Powah to da people!"

It's interesting how politicians who couldn't care less what American citizens think about anything suddenly become enraptured with voter opinions regarding Obama's messianic ministry.

What strikes me as odd about the whole situation is that Obama can settle the matter of his eligibility at one stroke by providing empirical evidence that he qualifies for the job. If you ask me for my birth certificate, I'll not break a sweat producing it for you--and it will be the entire document, not just the portion that I deem suitable for your peasant eyes. That Obama refuses to do so is the most singular aspect of this kerfuffle. I see two possible explanations for this: 1. He has a skeleton in his closet that he'd rather keep tucked away; or 2. His sense of entitlement to the presidency destroys all feelings of obligation to us silly proles.

Either way, it stands as lousy testimony for a president of the United States of America, speaking volumes about his character. Whether he likes it or not, Obama serves at the citizenry's pleasure. He has an obligation to the American people to answer this accusation and provide documentation proving the rightfulness of his position.

He is not a king, and contrary to popular belief, he is not a god, though I realize he and his acolytes would decry vehemently the latter claim.

Scientific Classification

Atheists and cephalopods.

File both under "Invertebrates."

All Hail the Conquering Hero!

When Americans were asked whom they admired enough to call their No. 1 hero, the majority of respondents answered "President Obama."

In the new online Harris poll, citizens chose Jesus Christ as No. 2, followed by Martin Luther King.

Others in the top ten, in descending order, were Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, Abraham Lincoln, John McCain, John F. Kennedy, Chesley Sullenberger and Mother Teresa, according to Harris Interactive.

The 2,634 respondents were not provided a list of names. Americans named their heroes spontaneously.

When asked to explain their choice of heroes, most responded with the following:

Doing what's right regardless of personal consequences: 89 percent

Not giving up until the goal is accomplished: 83 percent

Doing more than what other people expect of them: 82 percent

Overcoming adversity: 81 percent

Staying level-headed in a crisis: 81 percent

The same question was also asked in 2001 – except, in that year, Jesus Christ was the No. 1 answer. He was most often followed by Martin Luther King, Colin Powell, John F. Kennedy and Mother Teresa.


Just incredible. I wonder how many participants in the poll also were bailout recipients?

The herculean task of winning the presidency makes one an automatic hero, in the eyes of blithering idiots everywhere. I see no other conclusion to draw from this poll result, since Obunga has accomplished nothing of note, as president--unless one considers taking a wrecking ball to the economy a worthy accomplishment. A little over one whopping month into his power-grab, and he's a hero? I assume his very existence is mythic, what with the merging of racial chocolate and vanilla into the perfect incarnation of messiahtude.

So if stepping blithely into the Oval Office makes one a modern Perseus or Theseus, why single out Obunga for this distinction? Why not dub every president who ever served a legend for the fawning masses? What makes Obunga so special?

I'll answer that. It's because we live in the era of style over substance. We have thrown out circumspection and embraced a cult of personality. A winning smile and agreeable delivery of a few meaningless platitudes means more than the Constitution, more than our history and heritage, and more than the liberty that so many died in winning and keeping for posterity. And we are that posterity.

If you want examples of superficiality over profundity, look at the tv and music industries. Look at Capitol Hill and the White House. Look at Hollywood. It's like watching an exquisitely filmed movie with no plot. It is the spirit of anti-Christ.

Let's face it: as long as we're willing to buy tickets to Jackass, we'll never see another Gone with the Wind.

No Offense Intended When We Spit on You

A plan by Lawrence, Massachusetts, school Superintendent Wilfredo Laboy to make up a snow day by holding classes on Good Friday is drawing fire.

Good Friday, which falls on April 10 this year, is the day when Christians recall Jesus' death on the cross. Laboy says that day and June 25 and 26 could be used to make up for five snow days.

Good call. What makes more sense than having the chillun in skewel on the day honoring Christ's sacrifice for mankind, a day revered by millions? That's far more reasonable than making the kiddies attend on Martin Luther King's mistress's birthday. That might offend some venereal disease-riddled free-love advocate.

And we wouldn't want that.

Tasertag

My brother served a recent stint in the hoosegow as a reward for Exceptional Citizenship. A lump of pride fills my throat and wells my eyes as I type these words.

Anyway, he regaled me with an interesting story about an event that he witnessed On The Inside.

The guards brought in a man who was drunk and put him in a holding cell, alone. He began raising Cain, cursing and yelling at the guards. He also mooned them, when he thought someone might see and appreciate his better side.

Before I continue, let me assure everyone that no, the sot-in-question was not Teddy Kennedy.

Moving right along, a guard hollered at the man and told him that if he didn't shut up, he was going to come into the cell, and that the pickled offender wouldn't like that.

The man didn't take the hint, and continued his ruckus. So this representative of our city's finest opened the cell door, walked inside, and let him have it with a taser. He then gave him two pulses of electricity. The man stumbled back and sat down hard. Then the guard called in his cronies--for you see, it takes a whole gaggle of cops to subdue a man who is sitting on the floor and nursing the aftereffects of the Intemperance Movement and some therapeutic shock therapy.

The peace officers then removed him from the cell and dragged him none too gently into a different room, in which sat The Chair. The Chair stood bolted to the floor, waiting patiently.

Those who protect and serve put him in The Chair and immobilized all four of his limbs, as well as his torso. When he was good and comfortable, they then strapped a helmet to his head, with a stylish visor that nullified the occupant's eyesight. Sensory deprivation, kiddies. Don't try this at home.

Mr. Sloshed spent three-and-a-half to four hours in The Chair.

I understand that Jack Daniels brought it on himself. I also understand that the above goes beyond my definition of proper punishment--right into simple abuse. Think about it: the man made no attempt to harm himself or anyone else. He simply acted like a jackass by being rude and loud. Is his punishment fair compensation for such behavior?

I Lift My Taser Beside the Golden Door

Sovereign States

As the Obama administration attempts to push through Congress a nearly $1 trillion deficit spending plan that is weighted heavily toward advancing typically Democratic-supported social welfare programs, a rebellion against the growing dominance of federal control is beginning to spread at the state level.

So far, eight states have introduced resolutions declaring state sovereignty under the Ninth and Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, including Arizona, Hawaii, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and Washington.

Analysts expect that in addition, another 20 states may see similar measures introduced this year, including Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Nevada, Maine and Pennsylvania.

"What we are trying to do is to get the U.S. Congress out of the state's business," Oklahoma Republican state Sen. Randy Brogdon told WND.


I see this as a positive development. Anything that signifies a return to constitutional principles is for the betterment of our nation. However, if these congressmen take it far enough, they'll find themselves contending with those who worship at the altar of Lincoln; and their motto is: Fed take. Fed keep. Or Fed smash.

I want to see the Leviathan starve.

We may get that second "civil" war, after all.

Now That's Stimulating

I love those "stimulus" perks:

Shackling Religious Worship

Allowing Illegal Aliens Job Opportunities

I can think of nothing more beneficial to our economy than restraining religious speech and worship, and putting unemployed American citizens on a playing field where they must continue competing against illegal aliens. If that won't take our economy soaring back to 1980s levels, nothing will.

The One Who IS

Here's a good description of our God--the One True God--as taken from the book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Western Civilization, by Anthony Esolen:

It's fascinating to note what the God of Israel is not. He is not one god among many. He is not a god tied to a particular city or even culture (the prophets will see God, not Israel, as the ruler of all peoples). He is not a god of nature. He is not personified more than is necessary to make sense of his deeds to a half-barbarous people. We hear nothing of any amours or private life. He decides, but we never stumble upon him worrying, pondering, or reasoning with himself. His right arm is strong to save, but we never hear of his bending it, or cracking his knuckles. He does not move from place to place, like Hermes delivering messages from snowy Olympus. He forbids his people to carve any images of him, lest they confuse him with the power-broking kings around them, or with the beasts. The people are informed not that he looks like them (only with curly locks and a perfect torso), but that they resemble Him. He has made them in His image and likeness, and that cannot be a physically imaginable resemblance.

Who is this God? The revelation strikes like a thunderbolt. He is the God Who Is, beyond specification. He's not simply a maker, a muddler of slush and soil, who takes some always-existing stuff and molds it into trees and birds and people. He creates, because he wills it. Recall the scene in the Sinai, when Moses approaches the burning bush that is not consumed (Ex. 3). When God speaks to him from that bush, Moses asks him his name, something understandable, something to define or limit. The reply shatters expectations: "Tell them that I AM WHO I AM sent you." God does not say "I am the God of fire," or "I am the God of the mountaintop," or "I am the God of the sea." He says, "I am the God who essentially is." To put it in philosophical terms, as later Jewish and Christian thinkers would do, God is Being itself. The Jewish translators of the Septuagint (the Old Testament rendered into Greek in the second century BC) struggled with the name that transcends names. Ho on, they rendered it, The Being, the One whose nature it is to be, and in whom all things that exist have their being.

Just Give Socialism a Chance

I keep hearing people say "Let's just give him a chance," or "I hope he succeeds," regarding our newly-anointed Messiah of the Blessed Four-Year Expiration Date. I've even heard commenters say this at Vox's blog, of all places.

What in the heck is this crap supposed to mean?

Since His Messiahtude's stated positions entail the further entrenchment of pure socialism, why would one want to "give him a chance" or "hope he succeeds," unless one is a dyed-in-the-wool socialist?

I'm reiterating the points of people like Joseph Farah and even Rush Limbaugh, because they bear repeating, and correspond to my own thoughts.

One of Obama's first acts as President of the United States was to rescind an Executive Order of the Bush Administration, which stopped the flow of taxpayer funds to overseas dystopias for the purpose of aborting children. Setting aside the pesky inconvenience that our Constitution gives Obama zero authority toward funding trans-national baby-killing, his decision speaks volumes about the moral putridity his administration has in store for us.

Success--as defined and articulated by Obama, himself--means increased spending of taxpayer monies, heaping piles of dead babies, further government encroachment into your private life, enlargement of the "War on Terror's" ^TM scope, and pandering galore. By "change," Obama means expanding and building upon the Bush Administration's excesses. Why on Earth would I wish for his agenda's success?

Fervently hoping for Obama's "success" is like giving the benefit of the doubt to the torturer who applies hammer and tong to your wife.

Messianic Indulgence

It's interesting to me that a running theme in much of Obama's rhetoric is the need for sacrifice. He alluded to it in his inaugural address, as well as in speeches given around the nation.

What makes this theme remarkable is his apparent exemption when it comes to pinching pennies or persevering through hard times.

My understanding is that his inauguration pricetag was $150 million, much of which came straight out of the taxpayers' pockets. Compare this to Bush's in 2005, at $42.3 million, and Clinton's in 1993, at $33 million. All of these are ridiculous sums, considering that these ceremonies are nothing more than glorified parties. But Obama has taken such extravagance to a new level, the likes of which perhaps only an occupant of Versailles or Buckingham Palace might appreciate. Why didn't he just scream out "I AM THE STATE!" while hovering over his fawning acolytes on the National Mall? With a bill for the party at almost quadruple that of the last Oval Office Demigod, he's living like a king, indeed.

This smacks of hubris and entitlement, and it is neither subtle, nor a pretty thing to behold. While we are weathering a time of recession--and possible depression waiting in the wings--Obama is living high on the hog, and he expects you to buck up, down there in the mud.

So tighten the cinch on your belts just one more notch, folks, and prepare for the lean years ahead.

But fear not, for the Favored One, Obama and his Skin of Many Colors, will see you through those times of trouble.

Even if he has to make the sacrifice of wading through oceans of greenbacks to accomplish the task.

C.S. Lewis on the Importance of Knowing One's History

Most of all, perhaps, we need intimate knowledge of the past. Not that the past has any magic about it, but because we cannot study the future, and yet need something to set against the present, to remind us that the basic assumptions have been quite different in different periods and that much which seems certain to the uneducated is merely temporary fashion. A man who has lived in many places is not likely to be deceived by the local errors of his native village; the scholar has lived in many times and is therefore in some degree immune from the great cataract of nonsense that pours from the press and the microphone of his own age.--"Learning in War-Time," 1939, pp. 28-29

The Mulatto Messiah

A king descends upon us
From Windy City Shores.
Semi-chocolate sweet delight
He sprinkles as he soars.

Angels' wings are winnowing
As birds burst forth in song.
A muted roar of fealty
Restrains the smitten throng.

He touches on a hill-top.
Beatific is his smile.
He watches o'er the masses
And tarries for a while.

And as an upstart tasks him
On his birth location,
He gasps that one would test this
Righteous usurpation.

"Drive him from my sight!" he cries,
"And bruise him with a rod!
How dare he fling his spittle
At One less Man than God?"

He turns to his disciples:
"My children, all is well;
But if I rear you Heaven,
I first must raise some Hell."