How did we get here?
It seems that we are drifting into unstable territory more and more everyday. Morally, financially, socially, every way we can imagine. We can no longer pray when we want to. Our constitution has been gutted. Our economy is in ruins with no way to recover - no matter what anyone says. Violent rhetoric increases everyday in the U.S. and violence breaks out in a different countries every week as these nations attempt to overthrow their governments. What is next for us? Is violence in the cards for us as an attempt to force an overbearing government back to it's constitutional foundings based on individual freedoms and civil liberties? Will the United States of America be added to the scrap pile of great nations that have been torn apart by government interpretation of individual freedoms that have been endowed upon us by our creator? Well, it seems that we may not have to wait much longer to see. Everything has been tied to money. Our economy has a profound effect on every other economy in the world. Nations around the world are flocking to gold as a safe haven for their money. What does this mean. Is our economic collapse inevitable?
How did you spend your 4th?
How did you get to spend your forth of July? I had the privilege to drive to Fort Benning GA and see my son on his 36 hour leave..... He has been in BCT since April 11th and is now entering his AIT phase until his graduation July 29th. As a father, I have never been so proud of my son than this weekend. He left in April a troubled kid and is now a very respectful man and soldier. They had a platoon competition while we were there and his won. I videoed their section and have posted a small clip of it to share... The still shot above is a close up from their demo in the video..If you ever wanted to know if the sacrifice our men and women make, along with their families, is it worth it? Just ask......You better believe it! HOOAH!!!!
If you'd like to see part one of this video... click here
So, I'll Leave It Up To You...?
I watched this live on TV as an impressionable 13 year old.
I yelled "They can't do that!".
My older brother said, "Well, they're doing it."
We've got to find a way.
This may, very well, be my last blog post...
The just man walketh in his integrity: his children are blessed after him.
Gays in NY still not satisfied
Shortly after demanding their right to marry, gays in NY are demanding their right not to marry.
Several companies in NY, IBM and Raytheon being two of the largest, are requiring couples who are currently receiving 'domestic partner' benefits to get married in order to keep receiving benefits. You wanted it, now you got it. You should be happy right? Not exactly.
I seems just days after winning their right to marry, the gay community is filing a law suit so that they don't have to marry.
This is the exact same thin that happened in Mass. The gay couples who didn't want to marry ended up moving out of state. OK, I guess.
Let me ask you this: My girlfriend and I have lived together for 15 years, why can't we get 'domestic partner' benefits? Because we are male and female? And not male and male? Or is it because we are not married?
Several companies in NY, IBM and Raytheon being two of the largest, are requiring couples who are currently receiving 'domestic partner' benefits to get married in order to keep receiving benefits. You wanted it, now you got it. You should be happy right? Not exactly.
I seems just days after winning their right to marry, the gay community is filing a law suit so that they don't have to marry.
This is the exact same thin that happened in Mass. The gay couples who didn't want to marry ended up moving out of state. OK, I guess.
Let me ask you this: My girlfriend and I have lived together for 15 years, why can't we get 'domestic partner' benefits? Because we are male and female? And not male and male? Or is it because we are not married?
Fourth of July Fun Facts
Of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence, 27 had seminary degrees. Not bad for a country supposedly founded by atheists, agnostics and deists.
Don't believe me? Go to your library and look it up.
Don't believe me? Go to your library and look it up.
"A RANDOM ACT OF KINDNESS"
Traveling Wilburys - End Of The Line (Official Music Video). Watch more top selected videos about: Traveling Wilburys
Leave it to San Francisco...
This November San Franciscans will have an opportunity to vote on a ballot measure to ban all circumcisions on newborns claiming the procedure "causes unnecessary pain to an consenting minor and violates a minor's constitutional rights."
If that sounds outrageous, that’s because it is.
Sponsors compare it to female genital mutilation. They claim they support “genital autonomy” and “male-genital-integrity rights.”
Again, if this sounds ridiculous to you, you should remember that this is San Francisco, the city that banned giving away toys with fast food and where you can’t even sell diet soda in some places.
You know, maybe they are right? Come to think of it, that circumcision really did hurt. In fact, I think about the traumatizing pain all the time. Oh wait, I was only a few days old and can't remember it at all. In fact, I didn't even know what it was until my teenage years.
So tell me why a procedure that 80% of American boys receive, a Jewish tradition over 3000 years old, should be banned?
Hey San Francisco, 1930s Germany called, they want their anti-semitic propaganda back.
If that sounds outrageous, that’s because it is.
Sponsors compare it to female genital mutilation. They claim they support “genital autonomy” and “male-genital-integrity rights.”
Again, if this sounds ridiculous to you, you should remember that this is San Francisco, the city that banned giving away toys with fast food and where you can’t even sell diet soda in some places.
You know, maybe they are right? Come to think of it, that circumcision really did hurt. In fact, I think about the traumatizing pain all the time. Oh wait, I was only a few days old and can't remember it at all. In fact, I didn't even know what it was until my teenage years.
So tell me why a procedure that 80% of American boys receive, a Jewish tradition over 3000 years old, should be banned?
Hey San Francisco, 1930s Germany called, they want their anti-semitic propaganda back.
Chris Wallace is a Jack Ass
I'm not sure how I feel about Mrs. Bachmann, but I know how I feel about Mr. Wallace after this stupid question. I actually watched the entire interview and was impressed with her cool, calm demeanor in the face of Wallace's continual interruption of her answers. And then this final one:
What is Facebook?
What is Facebook and how do you use it? And I don't mean "How does it work?" It's great for connecting. Some like to post 'blog style' with links and vids. Yeah, some probably stalk. With nearly 750M users, I'd say it's on its way to becoming the world's largest digital database of public domain personal profiles. In no short time it could become the new wikipedia-of-people.
This Is How I know Our Libya Involvement Is A Joke
In a word: Sudan.
If I recall correctly, our reasoning for entering the conflict in Libya was "to protect civilians." So if the leaders of Sudan are openly and indiscriminately bombing civilians, displacing up to 70,000 so far, shouldn't we at least be hearing about it from the President or the evening news?
The United Nations has reported heavy bombardment by North Sudanese warplanes during the past week in areas surrounding the towns of Kadugli and Kauda in the troubled state of Southern Kordofan, with planes dropping at least 11 bombs on an airfield close to a UN camp. The UN Mission in Sudan (UNMIS) said it was extremely concerned over the bombing campaign which, it said seems indiscriminate and has caused great suffering to local civilians and disrupted humanitarian assistance.
UNMIS reiterated its call all parties to the conflict to immediately allow access to humanitarian agencies, stop indiscriminate military attacks against civilians, and respect and protect them as required under international law.
If I recall correctly, our reasoning for entering the conflict in Libya was "to protect civilians." So if the leaders of Sudan are openly and indiscriminately bombing civilians, displacing up to 70,000 so far, shouldn't we at least be hearing about it from the President or the evening news?
For me.
It's not Sons of Anarchy, Sons of the Pioneers, The S.O.S. Band or whatever you requested, but it's something.
Why Is Lying Okay?
It seems the Anthony Weiner fiasco has brought to light once again a disturbing reality: the government can legally lie to the public. That's right, Anthony Weiner came right out on the Sunday media talk shows and lied right to everyone's face. Of course, the truth eventually came out which it always does. But what happened to him when it did? Nothing. Yes, a lot of pressure was put on him to resign, which he did, but he didn't have to. Plenty of his constituents wanted him to stay in office.
What do you think would happen if you or I lied to anyone in a government position? If you lied to the F.B.I, to the police, on your taxes, at the DMV, at the post office? Severe penalties would be imposed. And this goes for whether you are under oath or not. But yet anyone of these government officials including, Congress and the President, who are getting paid to serve you and I, could lie right to our face and suffer no real consequence.
This is very disturbing.
What do you think would happen if you or I lied to anyone in a government position? If you lied to the F.B.I, to the police, on your taxes, at the DMV, at the post office? Severe penalties would be imposed. And this goes for whether you are under oath or not. But yet anyone of these government officials including, Congress and the President, who are getting paid to serve you and I, could lie right to our face and suffer no real consequence.
This is very disturbing.
Announcement!!!!!!!!!
Hey all.... this has been in the works for quite sometime but the Georgia House Restaurant has taken over Chef Fred's.... The official take over date is July 15th. The restaurant will shut down beforehand for a complete clean and remodel. If you've never eaten at a GH, you will be pleasantly surprised. Everything is made on premises and absolutely delicious... Keep the date open.
Weiner will withdraw.... I mean resign
Congressman Weiner is to step down today and shrink from his government position ....Must have been the cold water reception he has been getting from everyone....... OK I have now gotten the puns out of my system...
The Myth of Overpopulation
Perhaps one of the most persistent and pervasive myths that have shaped the thinking of many people and, subsequently, public policy is the myth that the world’s population is spiraling out of control and that it will ultimately lead to catastrophic shortages of the essential resources necessary to sustain life.
This whole concept of “overpopulation” can be traced to Thomas Malthus, the British scholar and Anglican clergyman (albeit a very misguided one) who, without any specific knowledge other than his own speculations, predicted in 1789 that the planet’s rapid increase in population would soon outstrip the planet’s ability to produce food, resulting in massive worldwide starvation. Malthus’s predicted famine never materialized, of course; he could not have predicted the industrial revolution or the enormous impact subsequent technological innovations would have on our ability to produce food. Recall that today our federal government actually pays farmers not to grow crops due to the abundance of food produced on considerably less farmland than existed just a century ago.
Even the United Nations, historically a rabid advocate of population control, has conceded that the world’s current infrastructure is capable of supporting a worldwide population of more than 9 billion people. Furthermore, according to the most recent estimates, the planet’s population will most likely continue to climb from its current level until 2050, when it will peak at 9 billion; other predictions have the world’s population peaking at 7.5 billion in 2040. In either case, global population levels will begin a sharp decline sometime during the middle of the twenty-first century. Present fertility rates actually indicate a massive underpopulation crisis is coming, particularly among Western nations.
The question of overpopulation is not merely a topic for conversation; it is a burning matter of policy and action at the local, national, and international levels. Our national government is actually committed by law and by international agreement to reducing the worldwide rate of population growth.
Government officials, such as former Assistant Secretary of State for Global Affairs in the Clinton administration, Timothy Wirth, insist that this effort must also apply to the population of the United States. Wirth, as you may recall, was at the center of controversy when the Clinton administration decided to deport 13 Chinese women who sought asylum in the United States to avoid forced abortion under communist China’s notorious one-child policy. By offering asylum to these women, Wirth explained, “we could potentially open ourselves up to just about everybody in the world saying ‘I don't want to plan my family, therefore I deserve political asylum.’” Apparently, Wirth believes government-forced abortions and sterilization constitutes “family planning.”
Today, there are governments that compel their citizens to undergo sterilization and abortions, often with financial help from the United Nations and U.S. government-supported private agencies such as Planned Parenthood.
Motivated in part by the overpopulation myth coupled with Darwinism, Margaret Sanger, who in 1934 was the founder of the American Birth Control League (which later became Planned Parenthood), advocated contraception and abortion as means of “negative eugenics” in order to limit the population of what she termed “the lower races.” (Positive eugenics was the form employed by the Nazis in their attempt to eradicate the Jewish people.)
For this reason Sanger opposed helping the poor. Humanitarianism and philanthropy, she wrote merely “perpetuate constantly increasing numbers of defectives, delinquents, and dependents.… These dangers are inherent in the very idea of humanitarianism and altruism, dangers which have today produced their full harvest of human waste.” This same sentiment was common to Darwin and his early advocates, who saw Christian compassion as counterproductive to “natural selection” and human evolution. Recall the original full title of Darwin’s now-famous work, On the Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.
Ironically it was Thomas Malthus’s An Essay on the Principle of Population that had a profound impact on Charles Darwin and proved instrumental in the development of his theory of evolution. Darwin attests to this in his autobiography:
In October 1838, that is, fifteen months after I had begun my systematic inquiry, I happened to read for amusement Malthus on Population, and being well prepared to appreciate the struggle for existence which everywhere goes on from long-continued observation of the habits of animals and plants, it at once struck me that under these circumstances favourable variations would tend to be preserved, and unfavourable ones to be destroyed. The results of this would be the formation of a new species. Here, then I had at last got a theory by which to work.
The myth of overpopulation first put forth by Malthus, coupled with Darwinian theories that promote propagation of the “fit” and reduction of the “unfit,” has been instrumental in legitimizing abortion, forced sterilization, government subsidized contraception, and, in the most extreme cases, eugenics as practiced by the Nazis and others. (The term eugenics-meaning “good births”-was coined by Francis Galton, a cousin of Charles Darwin. Eugenics, he believed, would encourage more children from the fit, and fewer or no children from the unfit, with the ultimate goal of engineering the evolutionary ascent of man.)
In every case these false notions further serve to undermine the intrinsic value of every human being.
This whole concept of “overpopulation” can be traced to Thomas Malthus, the British scholar and Anglican clergyman (albeit a very misguided one) who, without any specific knowledge other than his own speculations, predicted in 1789 that the planet’s rapid increase in population would soon outstrip the planet’s ability to produce food, resulting in massive worldwide starvation. Malthus’s predicted famine never materialized, of course; he could not have predicted the industrial revolution or the enormous impact subsequent technological innovations would have on our ability to produce food. Recall that today our federal government actually pays farmers not to grow crops due to the abundance of food produced on considerably less farmland than existed just a century ago.
Even the United Nations, historically a rabid advocate of population control, has conceded that the world’s current infrastructure is capable of supporting a worldwide population of more than 9 billion people. Furthermore, according to the most recent estimates, the planet’s population will most likely continue to climb from its current level until 2050, when it will peak at 9 billion; other predictions have the world’s population peaking at 7.5 billion in 2040. In either case, global population levels will begin a sharp decline sometime during the middle of the twenty-first century. Present fertility rates actually indicate a massive underpopulation crisis is coming, particularly among Western nations.
The question of overpopulation is not merely a topic for conversation; it is a burning matter of policy and action at the local, national, and international levels. Our national government is actually committed by law and by international agreement to reducing the worldwide rate of population growth.
Government officials, such as former Assistant Secretary of State for Global Affairs in the Clinton administration, Timothy Wirth, insist that this effort must also apply to the population of the United States. Wirth, as you may recall, was at the center of controversy when the Clinton administration decided to deport 13 Chinese women who sought asylum in the United States to avoid forced abortion under communist China’s notorious one-child policy. By offering asylum to these women, Wirth explained, “we could potentially open ourselves up to just about everybody in the world saying ‘I don't want to plan my family, therefore I deserve political asylum.’” Apparently, Wirth believes government-forced abortions and sterilization constitutes “family planning.”
Today, there are governments that compel their citizens to undergo sterilization and abortions, often with financial help from the United Nations and U.S. government-supported private agencies such as Planned Parenthood.
Motivated in part by the overpopulation myth coupled with Darwinism, Margaret Sanger, who in 1934 was the founder of the American Birth Control League (which later became Planned Parenthood), advocated contraception and abortion as means of “negative eugenics” in order to limit the population of what she termed “the lower races.” (Positive eugenics was the form employed by the Nazis in their attempt to eradicate the Jewish people.)
For this reason Sanger opposed helping the poor. Humanitarianism and philanthropy, she wrote merely “perpetuate constantly increasing numbers of defectives, delinquents, and dependents.… These dangers are inherent in the very idea of humanitarianism and altruism, dangers which have today produced their full harvest of human waste.” This same sentiment was common to Darwin and his early advocates, who saw Christian compassion as counterproductive to “natural selection” and human evolution. Recall the original full title of Darwin’s now-famous work, On the Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.
Ironically it was Thomas Malthus’s An Essay on the Principle of Population that had a profound impact on Charles Darwin and proved instrumental in the development of his theory of evolution. Darwin attests to this in his autobiography:
In October 1838, that is, fifteen months after I had begun my systematic inquiry, I happened to read for amusement Malthus on Population, and being well prepared to appreciate the struggle for existence which everywhere goes on from long-continued observation of the habits of animals and plants, it at once struck me that under these circumstances favourable variations would tend to be preserved, and unfavourable ones to be destroyed. The results of this would be the formation of a new species. Here, then I had at last got a theory by which to work.
The myth of overpopulation first put forth by Malthus, coupled with Darwinian theories that promote propagation of the “fit” and reduction of the “unfit,” has been instrumental in legitimizing abortion, forced sterilization, government subsidized contraception, and, in the most extreme cases, eugenics as practiced by the Nazis and others. (The term eugenics-meaning “good births”-was coined by Francis Galton, a cousin of Charles Darwin. Eugenics, he believed, would encourage more children from the fit, and fewer or no children from the unfit, with the ultimate goal of engineering the evolutionary ascent of man.)
In every case these false notions further serve to undermine the intrinsic value of every human being.
