I am stunned. Like all everyone else I'm glued to my tv right now following the reports of Michael Jackson's untimely death. I repeat, I am stunned.
Michael Jackson, when he was with the Jackson 5, was one of my first celebrity crushes. I learned what being a fan of someone meant by idolizing Michael and the J5 as a kid. The first concert I ever attended was a Jackson 5 concert. I was in third grade and I screamed like all those "silly" girls I'd seen in old footage of Beatles concerts. Now the boy who made me act a fool is a dead man. I just can't believe it.
I can't say anything else. This is just so sad. As a single dad I hope Michael had made provisions for the care of his three children in case of his death. I pray those kids will be well cared for and protected. Again, this is just so sad. No more "Billie Jean". No more "Thriller". We won't see that kind of creative genuis for another generation. What a loss; what a loss. There really is nothing left to say.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Happy Fathers' Day!
Happy Fathers' Day to all you Dads out there! I want to express my sincere admiration and respect for all you guys who are lovingly and responsibly doing a job that too often goes unappreciated in our modern culture. Well, here's one girlie who appreciates you. Keep up the good work, dudes! God bless ya!
No Apology Necessary...Again
A couple of days ago the Senate passed a resolution apologizing for slavery. The House did the same thing back in July of last year. When I heard the news about the Senate's resolution on "The O'Reilly Factor" I was disgusted and angry. I felt like screaming, as Diane Keaton did in that pivotal scene in "Godfather, Part 2", "This must all end!"
When are we going to stop this nonsense?! THERE IS NO NEED FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO APOLOGIZE FOR SLAVERY!!!!!
Yes, slavery was a cruel thing, a gross injustice; but America wasn't the only nation to practice it. If apologizing for slavery is supposed to be about atonement and moral cleansing then every culture, nation, and civilization that has practiced slavery should issue a mea culpa. Both houses of Congress should pass resolutions calling on every guilty party to repent.
The Muslim world should be called on to apologize for its millennia long trafficking in African slaves. Africans should be called on to apologize for selling their people to the Arab Muslims and the European Christians. Native Americans should be called on to apologize for their involvement in slavery. Black Americans who are descendants of slave owning Blacks should be called on to apologize for their ancestors' transgression. The Egyptians should be called on to apologize for their enslavement of the Hebrews, and on and on it should go. Of course, this won't happen because apologizing for slavery isn't about atonement or moral cleansing. Apologizing for slavery is about getting power and creating socialism.
Repeated mea culpas for owning human beings perpetuates the myth that White Americans were unique practitioners of that sin. That myth keeps many Whites feeling an irrational guilt. Liberals then exploit that guilt to goad Whites into supporting massive government social programs which often disproportionately benefit Blacks and other minorities. Wealth redistribution is achieved without ever uttering the words "socialism" or "reparations". Marxist mission accomplished.
America, it's time to wise up. Continuing to stoke the fires of racial resentment does America no good. The only people who benefit from that are liberals whose power rests on minorities having a constant feeling of victimhood. It is in the name of those "oppressed minorities" that these liberals seek to establish socialism in America. Most Americans don't want socialism and know it's not needed to overcome racism. This country just elected its first Black president, and whether they love or hate Obama most people understand that his election was a great leap forward on the race front. And that's what we need to do: keep leaping forward. That's the only way to achieve MLK's dream of a society where we are judged by our character and not our color. I want such a society; the slavery hucksters don't. Which side are YOU on?
When are we going to stop this nonsense?! THERE IS NO NEED FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO APOLOGIZE FOR SLAVERY!!!!!
Yes, slavery was a cruel thing, a gross injustice; but America wasn't the only nation to practice it. If apologizing for slavery is supposed to be about atonement and moral cleansing then every culture, nation, and civilization that has practiced slavery should issue a mea culpa. Both houses of Congress should pass resolutions calling on every guilty party to repent.
The Muslim world should be called on to apologize for its millennia long trafficking in African slaves. Africans should be called on to apologize for selling their people to the Arab Muslims and the European Christians. Native Americans should be called on to apologize for their involvement in slavery. Black Americans who are descendants of slave owning Blacks should be called on to apologize for their ancestors' transgression. The Egyptians should be called on to apologize for their enslavement of the Hebrews, and on and on it should go. Of course, this won't happen because apologizing for slavery isn't about atonement or moral cleansing. Apologizing for slavery is about getting power and creating socialism.
Repeated mea culpas for owning human beings perpetuates the myth that White Americans were unique practitioners of that sin. That myth keeps many Whites feeling an irrational guilt. Liberals then exploit that guilt to goad Whites into supporting massive government social programs which often disproportionately benefit Blacks and other minorities. Wealth redistribution is achieved without ever uttering the words "socialism" or "reparations". Marxist mission accomplished.
America, it's time to wise up. Continuing to stoke the fires of racial resentment does America no good. The only people who benefit from that are liberals whose power rests on minorities having a constant feeling of victimhood. It is in the name of those "oppressed minorities" that these liberals seek to establish socialism in America. Most Americans don't want socialism and know it's not needed to overcome racism. This country just elected its first Black president, and whether they love or hate Obama most people understand that his election was a great leap forward on the race front. And that's what we need to do: keep leaping forward. That's the only way to achieve MLK's dream of a society where we are judged by our character and not our color. I want such a society; the slavery hucksters don't. Which side are YOU on?
Thursday, June 18, 2009
The Audacity!
When I was growing up "ma'am" was a term of politeness and respect. I couldn't address my grandmother as anything other than "ma'am". And Granny would not let me, my sister, or my brother say anything to other female adults without adding "ma'am". "Yes, ma'am", "No, ma'am", or "Excuse me, ma'am" was the rule. This taught us to respect our elders and the social superiorty they had over us. But those days are long gone. Today, "ma'am" is a term of derision, at least it is to Senator Barbara Boxer.
During a Senate hearing today, Brig. Gen. Michael Walsh had the audacity to call Boxer "ma'am" a few times. Offended, Boxer asked the general to call her Senator as she'd worked a long time to get that title. Uh huh. And Brigadier General Walsh didn't work a long time to get his title? I'm sure Walsh worked long and hard to get that "Brig. Gen." in front of his name, and I'm sure he endured far more rigorous trials for his title than Sen. Boxer ever did for hers. Besides, it's military etiquette to call your superior either "sir" or "ma'am". Uberliberal Boxer doesn't seem to know that. Surprise.
Sen. Boxer needs to drop that feminist chip she has on her shoulder. She should apologize to Brig. Gen. Walsh. He called her "ma'am" because it's the polite thing to do. She doesn't like "ma'am"? Perhaps she would've preferred slutty flight attendant. I'm just sayin'.
During a Senate hearing today, Brig. Gen. Michael Walsh had the audacity to call Boxer "ma'am" a few times. Offended, Boxer asked the general to call her Senator as she'd worked a long time to get that title. Uh huh. And Brigadier General Walsh didn't work a long time to get his title? I'm sure Walsh worked long and hard to get that "Brig. Gen." in front of his name, and I'm sure he endured far more rigorous trials for his title than Sen. Boxer ever did for hers. Besides, it's military etiquette to call your superior either "sir" or "ma'am". Uberliberal Boxer doesn't seem to know that. Surprise.
Sen. Boxer needs to drop that feminist chip she has on her shoulder. She should apologize to Brig. Gen. Walsh. He called her "ma'am" because it's the polite thing to do. She doesn't like "ma'am"? Perhaps she would've preferred slutty flight attendant. I'm just sayin'.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Blink!
After days of making light of his nasty "joke" about Sarah Palin's daughter, David Letterman has finally issued a real apology. He has blinked. Of course, he blinked under duress.
Pressure was mounting against Letterman, and it was starting to come from all sides. The National Organization for Women finally issued a statement criticizing Letterman's "humor", and even uberliberal Joy Behar voiced qualified sympathy for Palin on "The View" yesterday (I wonder what changed her mind). And today a politically mixed crowd of protestors gathered in front of CBS's headquarters and called for Letterman to be fired. A cross section of Americans is simply disgusted with dear ol' Dave.
It's always good to see their side of the political aisle cave, but on a certain level this controversy isn't about politics. The Letterman-Palin "feud" is about hypocrisy. We as Americans need to agree, once and for all, on a single rule of conduct vis-a-vis the families of politicians, and violators of that rule must be held to equal account. The families, and especially the children, of politicians should be off limits, period. We all must drop the nasty habit of excusing disparaging remarks when they're made against the families of those on the other side. Hopefully, Letterman's blink will help us do just that.
Pressure was mounting against Letterman, and it was starting to come from all sides. The National Organization for Women finally issued a statement criticizing Letterman's "humor", and even uberliberal Joy Behar voiced qualified sympathy for Palin on "The View" yesterday (I wonder what changed her mind). And today a politically mixed crowd of protestors gathered in front of CBS's headquarters and called for Letterman to be fired. A cross section of Americans is simply disgusted with dear ol' Dave.
It's always good to see their side of the political aisle cave, but on a certain level this controversy isn't about politics. The Letterman-Palin "feud" is about hypocrisy. We as Americans need to agree, once and for all, on a single rule of conduct vis-a-vis the families of politicians, and violators of that rule must be held to equal account. The families, and especially the children, of politicians should be off limits, period. We all must drop the nasty habit of excusing disparaging remarks when they're made against the families of those on the other side. Hopefully, Letterman's blink will help us do just that.
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Sarah Palin And The Wolves
David Letterman's recent nasty insult to Sarah Palin and her family has me wondering just what is it that the liberal hounds of hell have against that woman.
Sarah Palin is a conservative. She's pro-life, pro-gun rights, supports the traditional family, and doesn't believe in big government social programs. Lots of women share those views, yet Mrs. Palin alone is a lightning rod for hateful personal attacks from the hateful Left. Why do the progressive wolves hate her so?
I think liberals hate Sarah Palin so much precisely because she's a woman. Liberals believe that certain constituencies belong exclusively to them. Women are one of those constituencies. Not only do leftists believe that they alone care about women, they also believe that women owe them blind allegiance. If a woman starts to think for herself and dares to step off the liberal/feminist plantation she will have hell to pay. Just ask Sarah.
For the Left, Sarah Palin isn't just a person, she's a symbol of all those independent thinking women--and other minorities--whom the Left strenuously tries to marginalize. Minorities who don't toe the leftist party line are a grave threat to progressives because they undermine one of the Left's main sources of power: obediently liberal minorities. That's why liberals are so committed to identity politics.
In order to win, liberals need the minority vote and to get that vote they need for minorities to think primarily in terms of racial or gender self-interest. When women or Blacks go into the voting booth, liberals need for them to ask, Which candidate will do the most for me as a woman or a Black person. That question must overrule all other concerns the female or non-White voter has. If that happens the liberal candidate--usually a Democrat--will get the minority vote because liberals have convinced minorities that they are the only ones who can deliver the racial or gender goods. Also most minorites have been convinced that voting Democrat is crucuial to being an authentic member of their respective groups. And then along comes Sarah Palin.
Sarah Palin is a feminine rebel, a woman who doesn't let her genitalia determine her politics the way the Left says they should. She chose her own opinions, values, and beliefs and apologizes to no one for doing so. Mrs. Palin's courageous conservatism tells other women that they, too, can escape the ideological/political prison of the Left. And that's why she's such a threat to the progressives. The insults and nastiness spewed against Sarah Palin and her family are liberals' desperate attempts to destroy her and protect their power. Sarah Palin, though, is strong; being a conservative woman in these politically correct times proves that. She will stand firm and she will prevail, of that I have no doubt.
Sarah Palin, 10; the wolves, 0.
Sarah Palin is a conservative. She's pro-life, pro-gun rights, supports the traditional family, and doesn't believe in big government social programs. Lots of women share those views, yet Mrs. Palin alone is a lightning rod for hateful personal attacks from the hateful Left. Why do the progressive wolves hate her so?
I think liberals hate Sarah Palin so much precisely because she's a woman. Liberals believe that certain constituencies belong exclusively to them. Women are one of those constituencies. Not only do leftists believe that they alone care about women, they also believe that women owe them blind allegiance. If a woman starts to think for herself and dares to step off the liberal/feminist plantation she will have hell to pay. Just ask Sarah.
For the Left, Sarah Palin isn't just a person, she's a symbol of all those independent thinking women--and other minorities--whom the Left strenuously tries to marginalize. Minorities who don't toe the leftist party line are a grave threat to progressives because they undermine one of the Left's main sources of power: obediently liberal minorities. That's why liberals are so committed to identity politics.
In order to win, liberals need the minority vote and to get that vote they need for minorities to think primarily in terms of racial or gender self-interest. When women or Blacks go into the voting booth, liberals need for them to ask, Which candidate will do the most for me as a woman or a Black person. That question must overrule all other concerns the female or non-White voter has. If that happens the liberal candidate--usually a Democrat--will get the minority vote because liberals have convinced minorities that they are the only ones who can deliver the racial or gender goods. Also most minorites have been convinced that voting Democrat is crucuial to being an authentic member of their respective groups. And then along comes Sarah Palin.
Sarah Palin is a feminine rebel, a woman who doesn't let her genitalia determine her politics the way the Left says they should. She chose her own opinions, values, and beliefs and apologizes to no one for doing so. Mrs. Palin's courageous conservatism tells other women that they, too, can escape the ideological/political prison of the Left. And that's why she's such a threat to the progressives. The insults and nastiness spewed against Sarah Palin and her family are liberals' desperate attempts to destroy her and protect their power. Sarah Palin, though, is strong; being a conservative woman in these politically correct times proves that. She will stand firm and she will prevail, of that I have no doubt.
Sarah Palin, 10; the wolves, 0.
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
The Next Charlton Heston?
It's hard to believe this man is Angelina Jolie's father. Actor Jon Voight delivered a powerful speech against Barack Obama at last night's GOP Senate/House Fundraising Dinner. Bucking Hollyweird's Obama cult, Voight courageously let both barrels fly at Dear Leader, positioning himself to become the standard bearer of resolute conservatism on the hostile Left Coast. I don't know if Jon Voight is the next Charlton Heston, but if being Charlton Heston was a political office Voight would have my vote! People, lend this man your ear and know that there IS sanity and patriotism in Tinseltown.
Friday, June 05, 2009
Remember
Tomorrow is the 65th anniversary of D-Day, the largest amphibious invasion of any piece of terrority in history. On June 6, 1944 hundreds of thousands of Allied troops, primarily American, stormed Fortress Europe to begin delivering the death blow to Hitler's evil empire. I wanted to honor the brave young men who gave their all--meaning, for many of them, their lives--to restore and defend freedom's light in the world. I was going to write a post but tonight on "Hannity" a clip was shown of Ronald Reagan's speech at Normandy on the 40th anniversary of D-Day. That clip was so moving that I found the whole speech on YouTube and decided to post it on my blog. Here is the heartfelt tribute to the heroes of Normandy, delivered the way only the Great Communicator could. Listen, be proud, and get your Kleenex.
Monday, June 01, 2009
Politically Correct Murder
Yesterday, Kansas late term abortionist George "Tiller the baby killer" Tiller was gunned down while attending church. Today, two soldiers who'd just completed basic training were shot outside of a Little Rock, AR, military recruiting center. William Long, 24, died; Quinton Ezeagwula, 18, was wounded. Here are two shootings that can reasonably be called acts of domestic terrorism. Guess which killing will most outrage liberals? If you guessed the killing of the soldier, you're wrong.
Soldier William Long was shot to death in front of the Army/Navy Career Center by Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, formerly Carlos Bledsoe. Police believe that Muhammad was religiously as well as politically motivated. With a name like Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, y'think?
After Tiller's execution the Left immediately went into full rage mode. Blogs and the MSM, especially NBC and its cable network MSNBC, attacked virtually everyone right of center. Tiller's killing was called an act of "domestic conservative terrorism" and "Christian terrorism". The pro-life movement, predictably, was hung in virtual effigy and "The O'Reilly Factor" host Bill O'Reilly was blamed for the killing because he dared to expose Tiller's nefarious doings. For the Left, every opponent of abortion and every critic of Tiller is as guilty of his assassination as the man who actually did it. That's what happened after the shooting of George Tiller, late term abortionist.
And after the shooting of American soldier William Long? NOTHING. The Left was as silent as falling snow. Why? Because the murder of William Long was a politically correct murder. William Long was a white American soldier; his killer was a black American convert to Islam. For liberals the killing of an American by a Muslim is ok because they see Muslims as victims of America. The killing of an American soldier by a Muslim is even more acceptable to the Left. It fits into their whole "chickens coming home to roust" narrative.
Simply put, liberals love abortion and hate the American military. One less abortionist, and the prospect that more babies will be born as a result, horrifies them. But one less American soldier is just fine. It means one less cog in the imperialist American machine. So killing Pvt. William Long is acceptable to the Left. It may be murder but it's politically correct murder.
Soldier William Long was shot to death in front of the Army/Navy Career Center by Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, formerly Carlos Bledsoe. Police believe that Muhammad was religiously as well as politically motivated. With a name like Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, y'think?
After Tiller's execution the Left immediately went into full rage mode. Blogs and the MSM, especially NBC and its cable network MSNBC, attacked virtually everyone right of center. Tiller's killing was called an act of "domestic conservative terrorism" and "Christian terrorism". The pro-life movement, predictably, was hung in virtual effigy and "The O'Reilly Factor" host Bill O'Reilly was blamed for the killing because he dared to expose Tiller's nefarious doings. For the Left, every opponent of abortion and every critic of Tiller is as guilty of his assassination as the man who actually did it. That's what happened after the shooting of George Tiller, late term abortionist.
And after the shooting of American soldier William Long? NOTHING. The Left was as silent as falling snow. Why? Because the murder of William Long was a politically correct murder. William Long was a white American soldier; his killer was a black American convert to Islam. For liberals the killing of an American by a Muslim is ok because they see Muslims as victims of America. The killing of an American soldier by a Muslim is even more acceptable to the Left. It fits into their whole "chickens coming home to roust" narrative.
Simply put, liberals love abortion and hate the American military. One less abortionist, and the prospect that more babies will be born as a result, horrifies them. But one less American soldier is just fine. It means one less cog in the imperialist American machine. So killing Pvt. William Long is acceptable to the Left. It may be murder but it's politically correct murder.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)