It just hit me a few minutes ago that having a blog with this name without somehow "honoring" this guy was just an egregious oversight on my part.
Friday, June 19, 2009
Thursday, June 18, 2009
This Week in Liberalism
Bill Maher said Obama needs to be more like Bush. He may have been high when he said it, but he said it.
Obama's defended the Defense of Marriage act (that was almost as fun to type as it is to read), and the gays are getting pissy.
All this coming on the heels of Roseanne trashing Obama a couple of weeks ago, and NOW reprimanding Letterman last week.
It's kind of fun to sit back and watch them eat their own, isn't it?
Obama's defended the Defense of Marriage act (that was almost as fun to type as it is to read), and the gays are getting pissy.
All this coming on the heels of Roseanne trashing Obama a couple of weeks ago, and NOW reprimanding Letterman last week.
It's kind of fun to sit back and watch them eat their own, isn't it?
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
What's wrong with this picture?
Who does this?
What woman, knowing full well that she's going to attract attention, goes out shopping in...whatever the heck that is? A t-shirt with ribbon? Tights? Let's just call it...very casual.
But gets dressed up to work in her garden?
I'm so glad we have so many magazines and television outlets to tell us how stylish and sophisticated she is. Otherwise, I would have been confused by this.
What woman, knowing full well that she's going to attract attention, goes out shopping in...whatever the heck that is? A t-shirt with ribbon? Tights? Let's just call it...very casual.
But gets dressed up to work in her garden?
I'm so glad we have so many magazines and television outlets to tell us how stylish and sophisticated she is. Otherwise, I would have been confused by this.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
A Rant on the Letterman Incident
Now that the Letterman/Palin Incident has finally, maybe been resolved (There are still people lining up protests to have Letterman fired, even though Palin accepted his apology), there are a couple of points I would like to make.
1) I think conservatives need to be careful about how they express outrage when somebody says something stupid. Letterman needed to have his feet held to the fire, or whatever the expression is, when the joke was made about Willow. Which it was, because of its setup, even if that wasn't the intention. But when the excuses were made that Letterman meant Bristol, "Oh, and that makes it better?" was a poor argument. Like it or not, she's the child of a public figure who is legally an adult. That makes her a legitimate target.
I'm not saying it's right to go after her, and I'm not excusing crude comments to be made about her, but it's the reality of the situation.
Further, I don't think it's such a hot idea to try to dictate what jokes people can and can't make about adults. Then you get into being politically correct, and conservatives are supposed to hate that. It's like this: we get cheesed when we're not allowed to criticize Democrats. So we try to keep liberals from attacking Republicans. Instead, the better angle would probably be to criticize liberals and tell them to stick it when they tell us we can't say certain things. Which brings me to my next point.
2) People tried to silence Letterman and missed a golden opportunity to teach moderates and undecideds a valuable lesson: liberalism doesn't exist without double standards.
People made the argument, "Well, if a comedian said those things about the Obama girls, there'd be hell to pay!" It's true, but why talk hypotheticals when there's plenty of evidence to point to that shows the left's hypocrisy?
For example, I have a liberal friend who posted this to her Facebook. Some of her comrades joined in her outrage.
But did she make a peep about Letterman? No. Did she say anything when Playboy published the rape article about conservative women recently? Nope. Did she offer anything on what's happened to Carrie Prejean? Only silence. But make a joke about Queen Obama, and the alarms sound!
Step one is to point out supposedly liberal causes, such as tolerance and equality, and then use these exhibits to demonstrate liberals only care about them when it comes to other liberals. Step two is to say Rusty DePass was only making a joke. It's humor, you can't hold him accountable to it. When someone calls b.s., then you point out Letterman's first excuse, Jamie Foxx's excuse, anything Bill Maher would say if he had anything remotely resembling a conscience, etc.
Sure it's a b.s. excuse. Look who's always spouting it!
Conservatives need to quit lowering themselves to liberal "standards" by trying to play their games. You don't promote freedom by telling people what they can't say. You can't fight the left's fire with fire without burning yourself. Liberals are wily that way. Instead, it's better to point out their hypocrisy, win people to your side, and then hit them where it hurts the most: the ballot box.
As far as Letterman, like I said: if you're making jokes about minors or advocating rape, then you deserve to have your butt handed to you on it. But when he calls someone a slut, don't try to shut him up. If he thinks that, he should have the freedom to say so. I should also exercise my freedom to call him an idiot, point out how tacky he is, and watch something else. If enough people do the latter, he'll either change or we won't have to put up with him anymore.
1) I think conservatives need to be careful about how they express outrage when somebody says something stupid. Letterman needed to have his feet held to the fire, or whatever the expression is, when the joke was made about Willow. Which it was, because of its setup, even if that wasn't the intention. But when the excuses were made that Letterman meant Bristol, "Oh, and that makes it better?" was a poor argument. Like it or not, she's the child of a public figure who is legally an adult. That makes her a legitimate target.
I'm not saying it's right to go after her, and I'm not excusing crude comments to be made about her, but it's the reality of the situation.
Further, I don't think it's such a hot idea to try to dictate what jokes people can and can't make about adults. Then you get into being politically correct, and conservatives are supposed to hate that. It's like this: we get cheesed when we're not allowed to criticize Democrats. So we try to keep liberals from attacking Republicans. Instead, the better angle would probably be to criticize liberals and tell them to stick it when they tell us we can't say certain things. Which brings me to my next point.
2) People tried to silence Letterman and missed a golden opportunity to teach moderates and undecideds a valuable lesson: liberalism doesn't exist without double standards.
People made the argument, "Well, if a comedian said those things about the Obama girls, there'd be hell to pay!" It's true, but why talk hypotheticals when there's plenty of evidence to point to that shows the left's hypocrisy?
For example, I have a liberal friend who posted this to her Facebook. Some of her comrades joined in her outrage.
But did she make a peep about Letterman? No. Did she say anything when Playboy published the rape article about conservative women recently? Nope. Did she offer anything on what's happened to Carrie Prejean? Only silence. But make a joke about Queen Obama, and the alarms sound!
Step one is to point out supposedly liberal causes, such as tolerance and equality, and then use these exhibits to demonstrate liberals only care about them when it comes to other liberals. Step two is to say Rusty DePass was only making a joke. It's humor, you can't hold him accountable to it. When someone calls b.s., then you point out Letterman's first excuse, Jamie Foxx's excuse, anything Bill Maher would say if he had anything remotely resembling a conscience, etc.
Sure it's a b.s. excuse. Look who's always spouting it!
Conservatives need to quit lowering themselves to liberal "standards" by trying to play their games. You don't promote freedom by telling people what they can't say. You can't fight the left's fire with fire without burning yourself. Liberals are wily that way. Instead, it's better to point out their hypocrisy, win people to your side, and then hit them where it hurts the most: the ballot box.
As far as Letterman, like I said: if you're making jokes about minors or advocating rape, then you deserve to have your butt handed to you on it. But when he calls someone a slut, don't try to shut him up. If he thinks that, he should have the freedom to say so. I should also exercise my freedom to call him an idiot, point out how tacky he is, and watch something else. If enough people do the latter, he'll either change or we won't have to put up with him anymore.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
On Abortion Conscience Protection
I get regular e-mail from WallBuilders, which is an organization dedicated to preserving American history, especially the moral and religious aspects of it. They're great, and I highly recommend checking them out. This is a letter that went out last week from their founder, David Barton, regarding conscience protection.
----------
President Obama has announced that he will rescind the conscience protection for medical workers that currently provides them legal protection for refusing to violate their conscience by participating in abortions.
Significantly, the Bible makes the rights of conscience a repeated subject of emphasis, with thirty references in the New Testament alone. The warning is even issued that if an individual "wounds a weak conscience of another, you have sinned" (I Corinthians 8:12). Christians were therefore instructed to respect the differing rights of conscience (v. 13). (See also I Corinthians 10:27-29.)
The rights of conscience have long been a cherished characteristic of the American civil fabric, and America's Framers openly praised these protections:
No provision in our Constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience. THOMAS JEFFERSON, SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION
Consciences of men are not the objects of human legislation. WILLIAM LIVINGSTON, SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION
Security under our Constitution is given to the rights of conscience. JOHN JAY, ORIGINAL CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE U. S. SUPREME COURT
Government is instituted to protect property of every sort. . . . [and] conscience is the most sacred of all property. JAMES MADISON, SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION
Today, the safeguards for the rights of conscience now appear in forty-seven state constitutions. The President's decision to rescind these protections places him in direct opposition to four centuries of America's civic and religious leaders.
We have just finished a piece that addresses conscience protection from a Biblical and historic perspective. You can read this piece online, or download it . Please share this information with friends and encourage them to contact their elected officials, urging them to preserve conscience protection for medical workers.
Protection for the rights of conscience is just one more reason that Biblical Christianity is so beneficial to a culture and why its principles must be preserved in public policy.
God Bless!
David Barton
----------
Later in the week I'll aim for a few posts that are more lighthearted. Between politics and personal life, there's enough "heavy" stuff that I'd like to focus on something funny for awhile.
----------
President Obama has announced that he will rescind the conscience protection for medical workers that currently provides them legal protection for refusing to violate their conscience by participating in abortions.
Significantly, the Bible makes the rights of conscience a repeated subject of emphasis, with thirty references in the New Testament alone. The warning is even issued that if an individual "wounds a weak conscience of another, you have sinned" (I Corinthians 8:12). Christians were therefore instructed to respect the differing rights of conscience (v. 13). (See also I Corinthians 10:27-29.)
The rights of conscience have long been a cherished characteristic of the American civil fabric, and America's Framers openly praised these protections:
No provision in our Constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience. THOMAS JEFFERSON, SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION
Consciences of men are not the objects of human legislation. WILLIAM LIVINGSTON, SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION
Security under our Constitution is given to the rights of conscience. JOHN JAY, ORIGINAL CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE U. S. SUPREME COURT
Government is instituted to protect property of every sort. . . . [and] conscience is the most sacred of all property. JAMES MADISON, SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION
Today, the safeguards for the rights of conscience now appear in forty-seven state constitutions. The President's decision to rescind these protections places him in direct opposition to four centuries of America's civic and religious leaders.
We have just finished a piece that addresses conscience protection from a Biblical and historic perspective. You can read this piece online, or download it . Please share this information with friends and encourage them to contact their elected officials, urging them to preserve conscience protection for medical workers.
Protection for the rights of conscience is just one more reason that Biblical Christianity is so beneficial to a culture and why its principles must be preserved in public policy.
God Bless!
David Barton
----------
Later in the week I'll aim for a few posts that are more lighthearted. Between politics and personal life, there's enough "heavy" stuff that I'd like to focus on something funny for awhile.
Monday, June 8, 2009
Recognition
I'm sure I've referenced the site before, but IMAO is a blog I check multiple times on a daily basis. Frank and his associates are funny and they're spot on with their humor and observations. If you've never been to their site, check it out at imao.us.
In addition to a new, recurring feature that's a favorite of mine, "Capitalist Propaganda" (some of which was posted here), they've also been featuring awards given from other bloggers. I would also like to recognize them for their tireless work in promoting common sense.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
