Say it ain’t so, Joe.


I have to pause right there for a moment. “Shoeless” Joe Jackson never said that famous line:

I guess the biggest joke of all was that story that got out about “Say it ain’t so, Joe.” Charley Owens of the Chicago Daily News was responsible for that, but there wasn’t a bit of truth in it. It was supposed to have happened the day I was arrested in September of 1920, when I came out of the courtroom. There weren’t any words passed between anybody except me and a deputy sheriff. When I came out of the building this deputy asked me where I was going, and I told him to the Southside. He asked me for a ride and we got in the car together and left. There was a big crowd hanging around the front of the building, but nobody else said anything to me. It just didn’t happen, that’s all. Charley Owens just made up a good story and wrote it. Oh, I would have said it ain’t so, all right, just like I’m saying it now.

So, with that settled, we can get on to Joe for America. As readers know, I’ve been critical of JFM in multiple posts. However I do need to give that ultra-conservative site some credit for stretches of sanity. For example—and you can choose to believe this or not—I find myself on the same side with JFM on a number of issues:

Accused cop killer and one of the FBI’s most wanted fugitives Eric Frein has been captured alive, sources told ABC News tonight.

Both a federal law enforcement source and a Pennsylvania law enforcement source confirmed that Frein in custody.

It has been “a very good day,” the Pennsylvania law enforcement source said.

Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher, also known as “Joe the Plumber” is a conservative political activist. Joe for America is his blog:

The views expressed in this blog are my personal views and they do not represent the views or opinions of Chrysler in any way.

So all the posts are not by Joe Worzelbacher. In fact, looking down the string of current posts I see a variety of names. Apparently any number of people post to JFM. Which may explain this:

Noah’s Ark Has Been Found. Why Are They Keeping Us In The Dark?

I’m often amazed at our lack of knowledge about history. Ordinary people are hungry for this information, yet the organizations responsible to disseminate these facts seem to have an agenda to keep us in the dark. This is especially true when it comes to our ancient human history.

I won’t hold you in suspense with this article: The Ark of Noah has been found. It’s real. I’ll describe the evidence in some detail and end with the historical and religious implications.

Oh my God! Is this crusty old fossil still around?

Mark, Mark! Hold on for a minute. I can save you a lot of trouble, but you have to listen to me. It’s all quite simple. The fabled Ark of Noah is a myth, which is why we call it a fable. It’s a made up story. Noah is a made up person. All of this is from the Bible, which is an ancient book of mostly fiction.

There. I’ve gotten the word out, and we can safely put this bit of hysteria to bed.

Sorry, not quite:

Beverly Golato · Top Commenter · Manchester Community College, Manchester, CT

The biggest problem here is that scientists won’t confirm the discovery because then they would have to admit the bible was correct. Scientist are against God’s teaching and will always try and prove God doesn’t exist. The Discovery Channel is a little bias against religion so they are more than happy to repeat what scientists say. Scientists are important for research in almost everything except God’s teaching.

Oh no again. And Beverly Golato is a “Top Commenter.” I’m thinking that means she comments a lot on JFM, and her fact-deficient thoughts are picked up by thousands (if not millions) of readers. Ebola does not get this much of an assist.

Joe, tell us this isn’t so.

The Morrison Report

Image from Wikipedia

Image from Wikipedia

Yesterday was an embarrassing time for me—somebody mistook me for a conservative. Don’t be shocked. It’s not hard to figure out how I got on this person’s distribution list. For me to feed my continuing supply of nonsense it’s required that I subscribe to a number of nonsense sources. That would include the Discovery Institute, conservative outlets and religious newsletters. As a consequence I seem to have caught the attention of Peter Morrison:

My name is Peter Morrison, and I’m a conservative businessman living in Lumberton, Texas with my wife and five children. 

I currently serve as treasurer of the Hardin County Republican Party and recently served on the Lumberton ISD School Board. 

I believe deeply in the principles of limited constitutional government, the sanctity of life and that our state and nation should be run under Thomas Jefferson’s principle of “Equal Rights for All, Special Privileges for None.”

Be sure and enter your email address above to get my free newsletter.  It features engaging commentary about current events of interest to Texas conservatives and actions you can take to better our state and nation.

If you’d like to contact me directly, my email is

Although I did not previous visit Peter Morrison’s site and subscribe to his newsletter, I am now glad to be receiving it, no matter how I came to his attention. A few days ago I received an email from Morrison in a similar vein to this one that came just yesterday:

Subject: We Must Stop Legal Immigration
From: Peter Morrison Report (
Date: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 10:36 AM

Summary of this report:

Americans are increasingly fed up with illegal immigration, and rightly so.  If we want our grandchildren to grow up in an America our grandparents would recognize, we must stop amnesty, and we must insist that our elected leaders take real action to stop and reverse illegal immigration. However, illegal immigration isn’t the main factor when it comes to the radical demographic transformation that is drastically altering America’s culture and politics. It is legal immigration that is driving the changes that will soon give Democrats permanent control of national politics if we don’t do something, and do it fast. While stopping amnesty is our most pressing task, it’s only the beginning.  We must then work to bring legal immigration to a virtual halt, before America suffers the irreversible fate of turning into a one-party country.

Full report:

Illegal immigration is finally becoming a concern for millions of Americans who never thought about the issue before.  The hordes of illegal aliens, including tens of thousands of unaccompanied minors, who swarmed our border these past few months have brought the issue to the attention of the nation.  Even the average American who pays little or no attention to politics was shocked to discover that the greatest country in the history of the world has become a dumping ground for the offspring of the poor of Central and South America.  Word has evidently gotten out that any Third World parent in the Western Hemisphere who doesn’t feel like raising their kids can just send them north, knowing that Uncle Sugar will take good care of them.

While it’s nice to see average Americans finally starting to wake up to the threat of illegal immigration, it’s also very frustrating. That’s because, frankly, when it comes to the dangers of immigration, illegal immigration is only the tip of the iceberg.  Legal immigration is a much bigger problem, by far. Unfortunately, even most conservatives have no problem with legal immigration. In fact, many think it’s just terrific. Conservatives are generally clear-headed and logical thinkers, but when it comes to this topic, many simply resort to repeating “feel-good” platitudes.  “America has always been a nation of immigrants.”   “Immigrants come to America because they value freedom and liberty, so they’re natural Republicans.”

These platitudes are worse than meaningless – they’re completely false. There have been many decades during which America brought immigration to a virtual halt, because it was in our own best interests.  Yes, it’s a fact that historically, America has often welcomed immigrants, but not in unlimited numbers and not from Third World nations. Until 1965, immigration was largely restricted to people from Europe, where the vast majority of Americans had their roots.  The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 changed all that. Now, 90% of immigrants are non-European, and they’re coming here at the rate of about a million a year.  They’ve been doing so for decades, and that is the main reason why it has become nearly impossible to elect a Republican president.

Unlike illegal immigrants, legal immigrants can apply for citizenship.  During the last 50 years, tens of millions of them (including their children) have become citizens legally, and have started voting. If they were natural Republicans as so many conservative pundits and leaders have been telling us for decades, then the Republican Party should be getting stronger and stronger in national elections. What we’re seeing, though, is the exact opposite – George W. Bush barely squeaked into office in both 2000 and 2004, and Mitt Romney couldn’t beat the most radical left-wing president this country has ever seen.

With every passing year it’s getting harder and harder to elect a Republican president, and frankly, if things don’t change, in a few years it will be next to impossible.  That’s because immigrants, far from being natural conservatives, prefer the Democrats by about a two to one margin, and every year they and their descendants make up a bigger part of the voting population.  If America had the same demographic mix in 1980 as we have now, Ronald Reagan would have lost to Jimmy Carter.  If we’d had the same demographic profile in 2012 as in 1980, Mitt Romney would be president today.

The great patriotic leader Phyllis Schlafly issued a report that every conservative should read. In it, she clearly and irrefutably demonstrates that legal immigration is a mortal threat to conservatism.  One by one, she lays out the actual facts (which will be quite surprising to many conservatives) and exposes the feel-good platitudes for the dangerous lies they are. Here are some of those facts:

Every decade, some 11 million legal immigrants come to America.  Only 10% percent of them are from Europe; 75% of them are Asian or Hispanic. In general, they and their children vote 2-1 for Democrats.  62% of them support socialized medicine run entirely by the government; 69% support Obamacare. On one poll, 53% of Hispanic Americans said they have a negative view of capitalism.

When asked if they prefer a bigger government providing more services, or a smaller one providing fewer, 55% of Asians and 75% of Hispanics said they prefer a bigger government.  Most immigrants are poor, and many receive government handouts for many years after moving here.  Now, with African-Americans voting 9-1 for Democrats, and millions of Asians and Hispanics voting Democrat at 2-1 or higher, and 10 million of them moving here every ten years, it’s pretty obvious that it won’t be long before the majority of voters will be people who will never support any conservative principle or politician, under any circumstances.

Mrs. Schlafly was not exaggerating when she wrote:

“The key conclusion of the report is this: For conservatives, there is no issue more important than reducing the number of immigrants allowed into the country each year.”

Many people have forgotten that California used to be one of the most solid conservative states in America.  Its electoral votes went to Republicans for decades.  Thanks to immigration, both legal and illegal, California is now a permanent one-party Democrat state.  Barring some radical changes, the same thing will happen to Texas in a few decades.  When it does, conservatives can forget about ever again electing a president.

Making things even worse, many immigrants despise us and our children, even as millions of them flock here.  To them, we’re a bunch of racists who deserve nothing but their contempt.  They also have no attachment to our history and roots, and many of them couldn’t care less about the Constitution. When asked if the Constitution should take precedence over international law, only 37% of legal immigrants say yes. In another poll, only 50% of naturalized citizens said that our schools should teach children to be proud of America.   Making matters even worse is that every single non-European immigrant is entitled to affirmative action and other racial preferences the moment they get off the plane.  Not only will conservatives be outnumbered politically in the not too distant future, our children are going to grow up surrounded by people who have more rights than they do, and who despise everything they represent.

Phyllis Schlafly’s report is entitled How Mass (Legal) Immigration Dooms a Conservative Republican Party.  Some have accused her of fear mongering and exaggerating how bad things are. They are wrong.  In fact, if anything, she is understating the effects that legal immigration has already had on our country, and how much worse they will get if it’s not drastically reduced in the very near future. I urge everyone to read the report, and then contact your Congressional representative and Senators and demand that legal immigration be scaled way back immediately, so that our grandchildren won’t grow up in an alien and hostile culture.  All other issues pale in importance compared to rolling back immigration.

Please forward this report on to other conservatives. Also, please like the report on facebook to help spread the word!

The Peter Morrison Report


All right, all of that is interesting in so many respects. Let’s start with the subject line:

We Must Stop Legal Immigration

Yes, “we must stop legal immigration.” Legal immigration? Illegal immigration is bad enough, but we must stop legal immigration? I hope I’ve gotten that point across. Lest some readers are still missing the point, Peter Morrison, treasurer of the Hardin County Republican Party, who also previously served on the Lumberton (Texas) ISD School Board, wants to shut the borders. Don’t let any more people in.


I’m glad you asked. Morrison spells it out in his email. Picking a choice quote from among many: “I urge everyone to read the report, and then contact your Congressional representative and Senators and demand that legal immigration be scaled way back immediately, so that our grandchildren won’t grow up in an alien and hostile culture.”

I’m going to pick a little deeper and bring forth what may be the pertinent word: “alien.” People not like us. Please allow me to put up a contrived quote that might have appeared more than a hundred years ago:

We must stem this flow of immigrants, these aliens, else our way of life, even our very existence, will be threatened.

[Chief Sitting Bull, the Lakota Nation]

Yes, Mr. Morrison. If we continue to allow illegal immigration, even legal immigration, our grandchildren will be faced with growing up among people who do not look like them. Think like them. Act like them. Peter Morrison, meet Chief Sitting Bull.

Call me a left wing liberal if you want, but I oppose illegal immigration. Why? Because it’s against the law. I can’t insist that you obey the law about not using public funds to proselytize religion in our schools and then at the same time say it’s all right to break the law and enter this country without going through proper channels.

Of course we all know who else opposes illegal immigration. It’s the conservatives. It’s the Republicans. Just ask them.

No, they do not.

Conservatives, Republicans, favor illegal immigration when it suits their purpose. Four years ago I contracted with a home builder for a new home in San Antonio. We had numerous discussions, out of which came the fact that he is a committed conservative and a staunch Republican supporter. Is he opposed to illegal immigration? He better not be.

Since I moved in during October 2010 I have observed the construction of scores of new homes in the neighborhood by this builder. I have observed the workers building these homes. Many of them cannot speak the English language. The conservative Republican who sold me my new home cannot conduct his business without involving the illegal activity of employing undocumented workers.

Why are undocumented workers necessary for many American businesses? One simple fact stands above all other explanations. Undocumented, illegal, workers work cheaper. You can pay them less, because they need the work, and in most instances they cannot compete with American citizens simply because they are here illegally.

I have seen in television interviews American business owners explain that it’s not a matter of money. It’s that Americans will not do some jobs that illegal workers are willing to do. That’s bull shit. I will put that matter to rest right now. I’m retired, but suppose I were still in the work force and looking for a job. Would I take a job as a janitor? Some business owners say I would not and that it is not a matter of money. It’s because I find the job beneath me. Really? Pay me $50,000 a year, and I will take that janitor’s job. You say that $50,000 a year is too much to pay a janitor, and I say that I do agree it’s too much, but I also say we are now talking about money and not about what jobs Americans will or will not do.

In all of this I have whitewashed over Morrison’s ultimate concern. Immigrants are going to vote for Democrats, and we will never elect another Republican president.

Please do not be shocked when I say I would not feel comfortable with the possibility of having one-party rule for the next 100 years or even less, even if that one party is the Democratic party. Electing a Republican every now and then helps to keep my party of choice, the Democratic Party, from becoming a party of extremes.

But what of Morrison’s concerns that immigrants do not share his conservative values? Peter Morrison, meet Bobby Jindal. Meet Ted Cruz. Meet Marco Rubio.

Let me pause to concede one point to Peter Morrison. He’s sure that immigrants from Mexico and further south tend to vote Democratic. This appears to be correct:

The majority of Latinos favor President Barack Obama over GOP contender Mitt Romney, according to an exclusive Fox News Latino. There is, however, one glaring exception: Cuban Americans.

While 64 percent of Mexican Americans and 67 percent of Puerto Ricans said they would vote for the Obama/Biden ticket come November, only 39 percent of the Cuban Americans polled said they would vote for the Democratic side.

One part of Morrison’s message had a decidedly uncharitable slant:

Word has evidently gotten out that any Third World parent in the Western Hemisphere who doesn’t feel like raising their kids can just send them north, knowing that Uncle Sugar will take good care of them.

Others share this sentiment:

Good news America, tens-of-thousands of children in the country illegally are on their way to a public school near you for a taxpayer funded education and the Department of Education says they’re entitled it. More from Caroline May at Breitbart (bolding is mine):

The item is from and further quotes are from Breitbart. Breitbart quotes correctly from the government’s Department of Education. The Health and Human Services Department elaborates further:

When a child who is not accompanied by a parent or legal guardian is apprehended by immigration authorities, the child is transferred to the care and custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR).  Federal law requires that ORR feed, shelter, and provide medical care for unaccompanied children until it is able to release them to safe settings with sponsors (usually family members), while they await immigration proceedings. These sponsors live in many states.

Sponsors are adults who are suitable to provide for the child’s physical and mental well-being and have not engaged in any activity that would indicate a potential risk to the child. All sponsors must pass a background check. The sponsor must agree to ensure the child’s presence at all future immigration proceedings. They also must agree to ensure the minor reports to ICE for removal from the United States if an immigration judge issues a removal order or voluntary departure order.

HHS is engaging with state officials to address concerns they may have about the care or impact of unaccompanied children in their states, while making sure the children are treated humanely and consistent with the law as they go through immigration court proceedings that will determine whether they will be removed and repatriated, or qualify for some form of relief.

HHS has strong policies in place to ensure the privacy and safety of unaccompanied children by maintaining the confidentiality of their personal information. These children may have histories of abuse or may be seeking safety from threats of violence. They may have been trafficked or smuggled.  HHS cannot release information about individual children that could compromise the child’s location or identity.

So, it would appear that everything Peter Morrison, Town Hall and Breitbart are complaining about is true. Undocumented children who show up in this country are scooped up and cared for by government agencies which act to ensure they have shelter, food, clothing, protection, care and education, a lot of which is at public expense:

A new report puts the price of educating the thousands of illegal immigrant children who recently crossed into the U.S. at a whopping $761 million this school year — as some school systems push for the feds to pick up the tab.

The estimate comes from the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which issued a report on the 37,000 “unaccompanied minors” – who mainly are from Central America – after analyzing data from the Department of Health and Human Services and education funding formulas in all 50 states.

The numbers underscore the concerns critics have raised for months about the burden the surge is putting on local school systems and governments.

Am I outraged at this? Excuse me? This is what a civilized society is supposed to do. When we cease to care for children in need, ours or theirs, we are becoming a nation of troglodytes. But then, that’s being uncharitable to troglodytes. My best guess is the troglodytes cared for their children. That said, let’s examine the reality.

  • $761 million this school year
  • 37,000 “unaccompanied minors”

In trying to reconcile these two numbers I come up with $20,568 per student per year. This is what I found from The Washington Post:

There’s a particularly acute gulf visible in different regions. As the Census Bureau’s announcement noted, the nine Northeast states were among the 15 states spending the most per pupil; 18 states in the South and West were among the 20 states spending the least per pupil. New York spends the most per pupil ($19,552), more than three times the per-student amount spent in Utah ($6,206), the last state on the list.

All right, that doesn’t come out to $20,568, even for New York state, which is the highest. Considering the least spent is $6,206 per student the average has got to be much less than $20,568. So let’s get past this and agree that it costs thousands of dollars a year to educate a child for one year in this country. What of it? It’s worth it.

You think not? Go back to the 37,000 number. That’s supposed to be the number of “unaccompanied minors” that somebody’s complaining about. How does this number compare with other than “unaccompanied minors?”

In fall 2014, about 49.8 million students will attend public elementary and secondary schools. Of these, 35.1 million will be in prekindergarten through grade 8 and 14.7 million will be in grades 9 through 12. An additional 5.0 million students are expected to attend private schools(source). The fall 2014 public school enrollment is expected to remain near the record enrollment level of fall 2013.

Wait just a moment. I think I can do this calculation in my head. 37,000 is less than 0.1% of 49.8 million. Somebody is bleeding all over my Yahoo mail in box over a 0.074% blip in the education budget?

I think the bleeding over a 0.074% (that’s 0.00074) is not so much about the money as it is about the children. Some people just don’t like the children. These children are going to grow up and vote for Democrats. Really? Are you surprised? With conservative Republicans taking the kind of stand that Peter Morrison has, why would they ever vote for him? When did it become a politician’s job to work for self interest while ignoring the needs of the voters?

There may be more. It’s possible these children are going to grow up and not go to the same church as Peter Morrison:

AUSTIN – Some conservative Republican activists working to unseat House Speaker Joe Straus are circulating e-mails that emphasize his Judaism.

Several e-mails have surfaced in recent days that mention Straus’ rabbi and underscore the Christian faith of his leading critics in the House Republican Caucus.

“Straus is going down in Jesus’ name,” said one, whose origins were unclear.

Straus, R-San Antonio, “clearly lacks the moral compass to be speaker,” said another, written by Southeast Texas conservative activist Peter Morrison.

“Both Rep. Warren Chisum and Rep. Ken Paxton, who are Christians and true conservatives, have risen to the occasion to challenge Joe Straus for leadership,” Morrison wrote in his newsletter last Thursday, referring to two Republicans who are running against Straus for speaker.

Morrison, asked Tuesday if he intended to signal that Straus is unfit because he is Jewish, replied in an e-mail, “I was simply making factual statements about Rep. Chisum and Rep. Paxton.”

Morrison said his opposition to Straus is driven by issues, not religion.

Readers, there is much more to this than I can cover at one sitting. You have to be sure I’m coming back to this. Peter Morrison is not finished with all the ills that afflict our fair nation. And we are not finished with Peter Morrison.

Bad Movie of the Week


I don’t have a copy of the movie, so I’m going to have to post this review from memory. It’s Army of Darkness with Bruce Campbell as Ash Williams. First a little background.

This is a sequel to another film, also directed by Sam Raimi, titled Evil Dead 2. This is most frightening, because that name indicates there may have been an Evil Dead 1. Anyhow, in Evil Dead 2 Ash tangles with zombies and other weird critters in a cabin in the woods, and many people get killed. In the end Ash is the only survivor, and he finds himself drawn into a space-time vortex along with his car, a 1973 Oldsmobile Delta 88. Ash and the car get dropped into the year 1300 in the midst of some Medieval warriors engaged in a scuffle.

At the conclusion of Evil Dead 2 we see Ash with only his double-barrel shotgun and his chain saw, plus the car, and as a stranger appearing mysteriously in the midst of a scuffle among Medieval warriors he is immediately held suspect. That is until the warriors are menaced by a flying dragon, which Ash dispatches with his trusty two-barrel. He is then hailed as a hero. That was in 1987.

By the time Raimi directed Army of Darkness in 1992 there had apparently been a change of heart, because this movie opens with hero Ash in chains with some other battlefield captives. The plot goes in a straight line from there.

I will not recap the plot, but suffice it to mention:

  • Ash gets tossed into a pit with unmentionable critters and shoots his way out.
  • He uses his fresh flash of fame by ordering the release of the remaining battlefield captives.
  • He is treated as royalty in the castle of his previous captor, wined and dined, but declining the favors of the absolutely smashing Sheila (played by Embeth Davidtz). He later relents, with great gusto.
  • He directs the local wizard to invoke his powers to return him to the 20th century.
  • The wizard cannot do this without the Necronomicon Ex-Mortis, a book Ash first discovered in the cabin in Evil Dead 2.
  • Ash screws up his quest to recover the book, bringing down the wrath of the Deadites on his hosts.
  • Using his 20th century knowledge Ash helps defeat the Deadites, and the wizard returns him to the 20th century.
  • The end finds Ash continuing his fight against evil critters at his job in the hardware section of the local S-Mart store.

The production quality for this 22-year-old flick is impressive. All those Deadite critters and other special effects were managed without the wizardry available today.

The entire thing is played completely for laughs and could be a remake of The Crimson Pirate if you were to squint hard enough. The Medieval scenes do not resemble anything English, although all the Medieval characters speak with English or Sottish accents. If somebody had mentioned the setting was Medieval Spain instead of Medieval England, the entire thing would have been more believable. Not a totally bad movie, but bad enough to be included in this series posts without a smirk.

Bad Joke of the Week

Not yet

Not yet

Due to the popularity of the “Survivor” shows, Texas is planning to do one entitled, “Survivor, Texas-Style!”

The 8 contestants will all start in Dallas , then drive to Waco, Austin, San Antonio, over to Houston and down to Brownsville … They will then proceed up to Del Rio, El Paso, Odessa, Midland, Lubbock, and Amarillo. From there they will go on to Fort Worth and finally back to Dallas …

Each will be driving a pink Volvo with bumper stickers that read: “I’m a Democrat,”
“Amnesty for Illegals,”
“I love the Dixie Chicks,”
“Boycott Beef,”
“I Voted for Obama,”
” George Strait Sucks,”
“Hillary in 2012”
“I’m here to confiscate your guns.”

The first one to make it back to Dallas alive wins.

God Bless Texas!

Rock Solid

I am so very sorry

How can you tell you have a rock solid lock on your elected office? Apparently when nothing you do or say seems to matter.

First a short civics lesson. The Constitution requires that states have two representatives in the United States Senate (senators) and that they share in the House of Representatives from a pool of fixed size. That means populous states such as California, Texas and New York send a sizable crowd (Texas has 36) representatives to Congress besides their two senators. Slightly populated states, including Alaska, send the minimum of one.

The sole representative from Alaska is Don Young, who has held this position continuously since 1973, ever since the previous Congressman Nick Begich vanished in the wilderness in an aviation accident. Voting history shows a few close contests, but Young has held the office since, getting re-elected every two years—holding a solid lock on the position. One can only conclude there is something Alaskans like about Don Young.

You may wonder:

Zachary Grier, 17, a senior at Wasilla High School, asked Young during the assembly why he still opposed same-sex marriage, even after a court struck down Alaska’s ban on same-sex unions. Young responded by asking Grier, “What do you get when you have two bulls having sex?” When Grier answered that he didn’t know, Young told him: “A whole lot of bull.”

So, that is that. One can appreciate that Congressman Young’s party platform incorporates an aversion to homosexuality and is particularly in opposition to homosexual marriage. Supposedly it’s the religious thing. Young’s party picks up a lot of votes from religious hard liners who consider homosexuality to be sin and consider homosexual marriage to be a threat to the institution of (heterosexual) marriage. One might also appreciate that Congressman Young, though older than I am, still hangs onto a school boy mentality regarding a number of issues.

Loose talk, such as the foregoing, is possible for a politician running for re-election when there is an electorate of like mind set. However, Congressman Young could possibly benefit from the experience of others who seriously misjudged their base. As an example I may cite the case of Representative Todd Akin of Missouri running for the Senate two years ago. His unrehearsed remarks regarding legitimate rape bought him a sideline ticket to Washington politics.

Young’s remarks relating to a particular tragedy reveal additional disconnect:

Even more shocking, Grier said, was the way Young talked about suicide less than a week after a high school classmate took his own life. Young told the assembly of about 130 students that suicide was caused by a lack of community support, which angered a close friend of the deceased student. When the student interrupted Young to say that wasn’t true, the congressman called him a “smartass,” Grier said.

All right, high school students do not make up a large part of the electorate, but putting down a future member of the voting public with a crude remark is not the way to build a solid base of support. That Young still represents (for the present) Alaska is an indication of one or more of:

  • His usefulness far overrides any embarrassment he is causing.
  • Alaska voters are of the same mind set and are not embarrassed.
  • Don Young has stayed too long and has come to seriously misjudge the voters of his state.

We should not expect sterling character from our elected politicians, else the halls of Congress would echo the drop of a pin. However, consistent revelations of immature thinking should flash a warning to the electorate that somebody has overstayed their usefulness.

Just in Time for Christmas


People, this is just what we need. All right, maybe not exactly what we need. What really need is an attack by The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms, but that’s not about to happen soon.

So what we are getting, instead, is another round of mindless rattle from the anti-vaccine crowd:

The ebola pandemic began in late February in the former French colony of Guinea while UN agencies were conducting nationwide vaccine campaigns for three other diseases in rural districts. The simultaneous eruptions of this filovirus virus in widely separated zones strongly suggests that the virulent Zaire ebola strain (ZEBOV) was deliberately introduced to test an antidote in secret trials on unsuspecting humans.

The cross-border escape of ebola into neighboring Sierra Leone and Liberia indicates something went terribly wrong during the illegal clinical trials by a major pharmaceutical company. Through the lens darkly, the release of ebola may well have been an act of biowarfare in the post-colonial struggle to control mineral-rich West Africa

That was posted on the site:

Jeff Rense is an American radio talk-show host of the Jeff Rense Program, broadcast on US satellite radio via the Rense Radio Network and Internet radio.

Rense’s radio program and website,, cover subjects such as 9/11 conspiracy theories, UFO reporting, paranormal phenomena, tracking of new diseases and possible resultant pandemics, environmental concerns (see chemtrails), animal rights, possible evidence of advanced ancient technology, geopolitical developments and emergent energy technologies, complementary and alternative medicine among other subjects. In addition to articles critical of Israel and Zionists, the website also carries articles which defend Iran’s policies from its critics  and opposes anti-Iranian media bias.

[Some links deleted]

The site is host to additional bizarre postings. I did not go to the trouble to figure out what this is all about:


There are any number items of interest, including the following:



Somehow I am reminded of this site, which I have been following for several years:

(NaturalNews) If you need another reason to add more celery into your diet, researchers have now identified a compound in the vegetable that demonstrates anti-tumor activity. Effective against several types of cancer — including those of the pancreas, ovaries, liver, small intestine, stomach, lung and breast — apigenin has been shown in vitro to significantly inhibit cancer cell proliferation. Although this flavonoid is present in a variety of fruits and vegetables, celery is a particularly rich source of the compound.

The Natural News site and newsletter are operated by Mike Adams:

NaturalNews (formerly Newstarget) is a website operated by Mike Adams. It is dedicated to alternative medicine and various conspiracy theories, such as “chemtrails“, the alleged dangers of fluoride in drinking water, (as well as those of monosodium glutamate and aspartame) and alleged health problems caused by “toxic” ingredients in vaccines, including the now-discredited link to autism. It attracts roughly 7 million unique visitors per month.

It features guest authors such as anti-vaccinationist Joseph Mercola, and anti-vaccinationist and conspiracy theorist Jon Rappoport, and has featured interviews with Russell Blaylock, Sandor Katz, and others.

Its primary purpose is the promotion of alternative medicine and (often controversial) nutrition claims.

[Some links deleted]

Over the past quarter of a century the anti-vaccine movement has been growing in this country and in other places. including England:

U.K. public health officials are racing to contain a rash of measles outbreaksamong older British children that threatens to spread the highly contagious disease throughout the country. The budding epidemic has been linked to a debunked 1998 anti-vaccine study that caused U.K. vaccination rates against measles to plummet.

In 1998, a team of British scientists led by Dr. Andrew Wakefield published a widely rebuked paper that incorrectly linked the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine with autism. The study, which received widespread attention at the time, led many British parents to forgo their children’s MMR shots — something that is possible in the U.K. since schoolchildren aren’t subject to mandatory vaccination laws as they are in the United States.

Andrew Wakefield is a well-known anti-vaccine campaigner. Blogger Bob Park called the ball three years ago on the demise of Wakefield’s fraud-rich career. I posted Bob’s findings on the North Texas Skeptics site:

Autism: there is no vaccination against fraud.

In 1998, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, a British gastroenterologist and researcher, set off a worldwide panic with a Lancet article in which he identified the common MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) vaccinations as a cause of autism. There was a precipitous drop in the number of parents electing to vaccinate their children, and a corresponding rise in measles cases. Once considered inevitable, measles is a serious disease. In 2009, however, Wakefield was found to have altered patients records to support his claim. The Lancet immediately retracted his 1998 publication. The British General Medical Council ruled that Wakefield had acted “dishonestly and irresponsibly.” Investigative reporter Brian Deer has tracked Wakefield for years, turning up new “contributions” to support his “work.” Lawyers, smelling a possible “mass tort blitz that could make them very wealthy, were particularly generous. Class-action lawsuits in asbestos and tobacco, while justified, eventually benefited the lawyers far more than the victims. Wakefield was struck off the Medical Register and may no longer practice medicine in the UK. No matter, Wakefield now operates an autism clinic in Austin, Texas. Although he doesn’t have a medical license in the US, that won’t much matter in Texas.

Vaccination: public health may never fully recover.

An editorial in the British Medical Journal expressed the hope that the latest news will put an end to the anti-vaccine movement. We should be so lucky. Paul Offit, an infectious disease expert who wrote Autism’s False Prophets, and donated all royalties to autism research, is not optimistic. Wakefield is clearly seeking to portray himself as a martyr, and even has his own celebrity activist pleading his case to the public on programs such as Oprah, former Playboy model Jenny McCarthy who has an autistic child. The scientific community must learn to speak up publicly on issues of integrity.

Bob mentioned our own Jenny McCarthy:

Jennifer AnnJennyMcCarthy (born November 1, 1972) is an American model, television host, comedic actress, author, and anti-vaccine activist. She began her career in 1993 as a nude model for Playboy magazine and was later named their Playmate of the Year. McCarthy then parlayed her Playboy fame into a television and film acting career. She was formerly a co-host on the ABC talk show The View.

McCarthy has written books about parenting, and has become an activist promoting research into environmental causes and alternative medical treatments for autism. She has claimed that vaccines cause autism and that chelation therapy helped cure her son of autism. Both claims are unsupported by medical consensus, and her son’s autism diagnosis has been questioned.

[Some links deleted]

Most interesting are the activities of Jon Rappoport:

Jon Rappoport (born April 16, 1938) is an American journalist and author living in San Diego, California with his wife, Dr. Laura Thompson, with whom he does much work advocating alternative medicine. He studied philosophy for four years at Amherst College in Massachusetts, graduating in 1960. He has published the web site since 2001. He has been an investigative reporter for over 20 years. Rappoport has also authored several non-fiction books. Although his main focus over these years has been the power of the imagination and creativity, he is most often cited and interviewed as an authority on conspiracies and global elites, the work of the latter, as Rappoport sees it, in general being implemented through the seven global cartels, which he identifies as the government, military, money,intelligence, energy, media, and medical. Topics that he has reported on include medical fraud, deep politics, and health issues for newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe, including CBS Healthwatch, Spin, Stern and LA Weekly.

Rappoport is vice-president of the publishing house Truth Seeker Company, Inc. and authors and sells audio CDs on magic,past life regression and development of paranormal abilities.

[Some links deleted]

An excerpt from a posting on the Ebola crisis is illuminating:

Q: Among intelligent people, what’s the biggest barrier to understanding hoaxes pertaining to viruses?

A: Many people will tell you they see through the lies of consensus reality. They know all about them. But when you bring up a virus, and you say there is no reason to suspect a so-called outbreak is caused by a virus, they back away. They can’t imagine that kind of lie. They can’t conceive that such a lie is being told.

Q: Why?

A: They accept, as fact, what medical authorities tell them on that subject. Some people connect “the killer virus” with what they already know about high-level elites who are out to control and diminish and debilitate populations. So “killer virus” and “spreading destruction” fit that picture. Therefore, they automatically buy “the virus.”

In fact, and this is odd, there are people who categorically reject almost everything doctors and medical authorities tell them—but they choose to accept this one: the virus. They choose to believe that when the authorities say, “We have an outbreak and it’s caused by the Ebola virus,” it must be true. Very strange.

Q: The word “outbreak” is strong.

A: Yes. People, again, automatically, associate it with a virus. Movies play a role there. But when you stop and think about it, “outbreak” just means, if it means anything at all, that a number of people in the same general geo-area have become sick. A toxic chemical, for example, could cause that. A vaccine campaign could cause that.

Q: When a number of people who, say, live together become ill, the assumption is there must be a transmission of a virus from person to person.

A: Right. But that isn’t necessarily the case. It isn’t person A, then person B, then person C—it’s all of them being exposed to the same conditions. For instance, if you had 42 people all living in filth with no hope, no money, no job, and they were also exposed to a toxic chemical, and their bodies were breaking down from starvation, and they all became ill, would you call that “transmission?” Of course not.

Q: Considering US and European and African Ebola patients as a whole, don’t they prove that Ebola is caused by a virus and these patients caught the virus?

A: No. As I’ve demonstrated before, the most widely used diagnostic tests for Ebola (antibody and PCR) are unreliable, useless, and irrelevant. Therefore, to assume these patients have Ebola is unwarranted.

To say a patient has Ebola MEANS he tested positive on a reliable and relevant diagnostic procedure. It doesn’t mean anything else.

All of this just in time for Christmas.

Too Hot to Trot

Victoria's Secret model Miranda Kerr

Victoria’s Secret model Miranda Kerr

When you’re hot you’re hot. When you’re not, then … Then you’re really OK.

This came up on The Five, a Fox News commentary program:

Fox News host Kimberly Guilfoyle believes that young, attractive women should be excused from voting so they could devote their time to online dating.

“It’s the same reason why young women on juries are not a good idea. They don’t get it!’ said the co-host of ‘The Five” on the right-leaning news channel’s daily talk show.

Guilfoyle, 45, who helped pay her way through law school modeling for a variety of retailers including Victoria’s Secret, said young, beautiful women don’t have the proper “life experiences” to have a say in who holds elected office.

Instead, they should only be granted the privilege after they’ve gained wisdom from raising children, paying bills or dealing with real-world issues like a mortgage and health care.

‘They’re like healthy and hot and running around without a care in the world,” said Guilfoyle.

“[H]ealthy and hot and running around without a care in the world.” You’ve got my interest already. But not vote? Where have I heard this before?

1. Women would be corrupted by politics and chivalry would die out
2. If women became involved in politics, they would stop marrying, having children, and the human race would die out
3. Women were emotional creatures, and incapable of making a sound political decision.

Of course, that’s not what Guilfoyle was saying. She was only saying that young, really hot, women should excuse themselves from voting. Ann Coulter was more recently saying this:

I think [women] should be armed but should not vote. No, they all have to give up their vote, not just, you know, the lady clapping and me. The problem with women voting — and your Communists will back me up on this — is that, you know, women have no capacity to understand how money is earned. They have a lot of ideas on how to spend it. And when they take these polls, it’s always more money on education, more money on child care, more money on day care.”

[Links removed]

First, let’s hope this is not a trend. That’s because this sort of thing, telling hot young women they should not vote, could be hazardous. Hazardous, that is, to those who choose to intone such advice. Take it from me. I have known a number of these hot young women. Had I dared to admonish one of them so, I could have expected dire consequences. How does having a four-inch spike heel driven through your thigh bone sound? That has got to hurt.

Let us suppose, just for the sake of argument mind you, that Guifoyle and Coulter are dispensing sound advice. Suppose a few years of maturity will reward hot young women with a deserved sense of judgment and an expanded world of wisdom. What should we expect to see?


Let start with Ms. Coulter. I have a copy of her book, Godless: The Church of Liberalism, which we have seen before:

Coulter’s latest book, Godless: The Church of Liberalism, hit the New York Times Best Seller List at number one on June 25th this year. If liberals are no longer squirming as much it could be because Godless takes an unfortunate detour into the real world and steps on some land mines that should be on everybody’s maps by now. It’s also a bunch of day-old bread.

Quotes from the book may illustrate the wisdom and maturity hot young women can expect attain with maturity:

Liberals’ creation myth is Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, which is about one notch above Scientology in scientific rigor. It’s a make-believe story, based on a theory that is a tautology, with no proof in the scientist’s laboratory or the fossil record—and that’s after 150 years of very determined looking. We wouldn’t still be talking about it but for the fact that liberals think evolution disproves God. [page 199]

Imagine a giant raccoon passed gas and perhaps the resulting gas might have created the vast variety of life we see on Earth. And if you don’t accept the giant raccoon flatulence theory for the origin of life, you must be a fundamentalist Christian nut who believes the Earth is flat. [page 214]

Darwiniacs do not have a single observable example of one species evolving into another by the Darwinian mechanism of variation and selection. All they have is a story. It is a story that inspires fanatical devotion from the cult simply because their story excludes a creator. They have seized upon something that looks like progress from primitive life forms to more complex life forms and invented a story to explain how the various categories of animals originated. But animal sequences do not prove that the Darwinian mechanism of natural selection caused the similarities. It is just as likely that the similarities are proof of intelligent design, creationism, or the Giant Raccoon’s Flatulence theory. The animal-sequence drawings allegedly demonstrating evolution by showing, for example, a little runt horse gradually becoming a grand stallion, are just that: drawings. [page 226]

Nor are intelligent design scientists looking at things they can’t explain: Quite the opposite. They are looking at things they can explain but which Darwin didn’t even know about, like the internal mechanism of the cell, and saying, That wasn’t created by natural selection—that required high-tech engineering. By contrast, the evolution cult members look at things they can’t explain and say, We can’t explain it, but the one thing we do know is that there is no intelligence in the universe. It must have been random chance, or it’s not ‘science’. [page 245]

It may be too much to hope that with maturity would come some scientific knowledge and an appreciation for rational argument. These quotes are cited in the entry for Coulter’s book in Wikipedia:

Coulter’s reliance on intelligent design and creationist sources for science, has prompted some critics of the intelligent design movement to analyze her claims. P. Z. Myers, countering Coulter’s claim that there is no evidence for the theory of evolution, points to the scientific literature that contains hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, of articles about various aspects of evolution. He also argues that Coulter has it backwards: The issue is not whether there is evidence that supports evolution theory, but whether there is evidence that is explained by evolution theory, since theories are explanations for data. In response to Coulter’s citing of Jonathan Wells‘ arguments concerning peppered moth evolution, Ian Musgrave argues that Coulter misrepresents the significance of the peppered moth experiments, makes a number of factual errors, and a “wildly ignorant misrepresentation of evolution.” James Downard criticized Coulter’s favoring of secondary sources over primary sources, saying “she compulsively reads inaccurate antievolutionary sources and accepts them on account of their reinforcement of what she wants to be true.”

Media Matters for America responded to Coulter’s “strawman” arguments against evolution by noting 11 types of “distortions” in her writing and going into detail explaining why her claims are false and contrary to science. A satirical account of Coulter’s take on evolution was written by probabilist Peter Olofsson, whose tongue-in-cheek argument was that Coulter had in fact written a veiled criticism of the intelligent design movement, much like Alan Sokal did to the postmodern movement in his famous hoax.

[Some links deleted]

I don’t need to stop with Guilfoyle and Coulter. Examples abound:

Few are more stridently conservative than Schlafly. Besides her noted political conservatism, she is a near fanatical anti-feminist. Wikipedia notes “In March 2007, Schlafly said in a speech at Bates College, ‘By getting married, the woman has consented to sex, and I don’t think you can call it rape.’”

And, I don’t need to stop here, but I will. What I may have demonstrated is that wisdom is not a necessary consequence of maturity. These women have demonstrated that adequately. Regarding whether hot young women can possess wisdom and solid judgment, there are ample examples to attest to it. Women like Guilfoyle who disagree may risk public ridicule. Men who disagree may risk a swift kick in the nuts.

Death of an Empire

On 6 August 1945 the first atomic bomb used in warfare exploded over Hiroshima, Japan, and the future was there for all to see. Some did not see, and three days later the case was made with finality when a second bomb exploded over Nagasaki. The Japanese Empire capitulated a few days later, and the worst man-made calamity in the history of this planet began to come to a close.

The introduction of the atomic bombs is generally considered to be the final stroke in the death of the empire, but its fate had already been cinched months earlier off the coast of the Philippine Islands. I was turning four and an empire was dying with the destruction of its navy in the most significant naval battle in this planet’s history. It was 23 October 1944, 70 years ago today.

From Wikipedia: The four main actions in the battle of Leyte Gulf: 1 Battle of the Sibuyan Sea 2 Battle of Surigao Strait 3 Battle of (or 'off') Cape Engaño 4 Battle off Samar. Leyte Gulf is north of 2 and west of 4. The island of Leyte is west of the gulf.

From Wikipedia: The four main actions in the battle of Leyte Gulf: 1 Battle of the Sibuyan Sea 2 Battle of Surigao Strait 3 Battle of (or ‘off’) Cape Engaño 4 Battle off Samar. Leyte Gulf is north of 2 and west of 4. The island of Leyte is west of the gulf.

Four years previous American General Douglas MacArthur had been in charge of forces in the Philippines. The Japanese Empire’s surprise attack at Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941 caught the American military off guard, and our battleship fleet in the Pacific was annihilated in a few short minutes. Given this notice, MacArthur made the same mistakes in the Philippines that had allowed the Pearl Harbor fleet to be destroyed, and when the Japanese attacked American forces a few hours after the Pearl Harbor attack, the United States Army’s air fleet was wiped out nearly completely on the ground. An invasion by Japanese ground forces later in December forced MacArthur to flee to Australia, leaving behind a force of American and Philippine troops to be overrun and captured. The American invasion of the Philippine Islands in October 1944 was MacArthur’s promised return to retake the islands.

Prior to the battle there was serious discussion as to where American forces should attack. Imperial forces had been driven to the far reaches of the Western Pacific, and vital Japanese interests now lay exposed. American occupation of either the Philippines or the island of Formosa would cut off Japan’s remaining sea link to the outside world. By chance an American pilot was shot down over the island of Leyte, where he was rescued by locals. They informed him that Japanese forces in the Philippines, and especially on Leyte, were weak. The report from this pilot confirmed the Philippines as the next target of the American advance.

Oct 20, 1944:
U.S. forces land at Leyte Island in the Philippines

On this day in 1944, more than 100,000 American soldiers land on Leyte Island, in the Philippines, as preparation for the major invasion by Gen. Douglas MacArthur. The ensuing battles of Leyte Island proved among the bloodiest of the war in the Pacific and signaled the beginning of the end for the Japanese.

The Japanese plan unfolded to defeat the American fleet defending this invasion, thus isolating our troops on Leyte. There was a lot of genius behind the plan, and it could have worked. Wrong moves by Japanese commanders coupled with extraordinary initiative by American naval officers in the critical Battle of Surigao Strait sealed the fate of the Japanese fleet and the Japanese Empire:

Shō-Gō 1 called for Vice-Admiral Jisaburō Ozawa‘s ships—known as the “Northern Force”—to lure the main American covering forces away from Leyte. Northern Force would be built around several aircraft carriers, but these would have very few aircraft or trained aircrew. The carriers would serve as the main bait. As the US covering forces were lured away, two other surface forces would advance on Leyte from the west. The “Southern Force” under Vice Admirals Shoji Nishimura and Kiyohide Shima would strike at the landing area via the Surigao Strait. The “Center Force” under Vice Admiral Takeo Kurita—by far the most powerful of the attacking forces—would pass through the San Bernardino Strait into the Philippine Sea, turn southwards, and then also attack the landing area.

This plan was likely to result in the destruction of one or more of the attacking forces, but Toyoda later explained this to his American interrogators as follows:

Should we lose in the Philippines operations, even though the fleet should be left, the shipping lane to the south would be completely cut off so that the fleet, if it should come back to Japanese waters, could not obtain its fuel supply. If it should remain in southern waters, it could not receive supplies of ammunition and arms. There would be no sense in saving the fleet at the expense of the loss of the Philippines.


Early on there were signs of success. The Japanese fleet from the north caught Admiral Halsey’s attention, and he went after them. Although he was largely successful at inflicting serious damage to Ozawa’s fleet, his force was absent from the critical battle.

Around 08:00 on 24 October, the Center Force was spotted entering the Sibuyan Sea and attacked by VF-20 squadron F6F-5 Hellcat fighters, VB-20 SB2C-3 Helldiver dive bombers, and VT-20 Avenger torpedo bombers from USS Enterprise of Halsey’s 3rd Fleet. Despite its great strength, 3rd Fleet was not well-placed to deal with the threat. On 22 October, Halsey had detached two of his carrier groups to the fleet base at Ulithi to provision and rearm. When Darter‘s contact report came in, Halsey recalled Davison’s group, but allowed Vice Admiral John S. McCain, with the strongest of TF 38’s carrier groups, to continue towards Ulithi. Halsey finally recalled McCain on 24 October—but the delay meant the most powerful American carrier group played little part in the coming battle, and the 3rd Fleet was therefore effectively deprived of nearly 40% of its air strength for most of the engagement. On the morning of 24 October, only three groups were available to strike Kurita’s force, and the one best positioned to do so—Gerald F. Bogan‘s Task Group 38.2 (TG 38.2)—was by mischance the weakest of the groups, containing only one large carrier—USS Intrepid—and two light carriers (the failure to promptly recall McCain on 23 October had also effectively deprived 3rd Fleet, throughout the battle, of four of its six heavy cruisers).

The decisive action came on the morning of 25 October, when the Center Force was spotted approaching the invasion beaches. There was an obvious mismatch, as the American fleet had only destroyers, cruisers and light carriers to defend the beaches. The American response was to send carrier aircraft into action against the Japanese and at the same time to generate a smoke cover to protect the major ships from Japanese naval fire. At that point destroyer commanders changed the course of the battle by charging the attacking Japanese capital ships. They ran headlong toward the attackers.

One of the pilots flying patrol after dawn alert that morning reported the approach of Japanese Center Force. Steaming straight for “Taffy 3” were four battleships (including Yamato), eight cruisers (two light and six heavy), and 11 destroyers. Johnston‘s gunnery officer—Lieutenant Robert C. Hagen—later reported, “We felt like little David without a slingshot.” In less than a minute, Johnston was zigzagging between the six escort carriers and the Japanese fleet and putting out a smoke screen over a 2,500 yd (2,300 m) front to conceal the carriers from the enemy gunners: “Even as we began laying smoke, the Japanese started lobbing shells at us and the Johnston had to zigzag between the splashes…. We were the first destroyer to make smoke, the first to start firing, the first to launch a torpedo attack….”

For the first 20 minutes, Johnston could not return fire as the enemy cruisers and battleships’ heavy guns outranged Johnston‘s 5 in (130 mm) guns. Not waiting for orders, Commander Evans broke formation and went on the offensive by ordering Johnston to speed directly toward the enemy—first a line of seven destroyers, next one light and three heavy cruisers, then the four battleships. To the east appeared three other cruisers and several destroyers.

As soon as range closed to within ten miles, Johnston fired on the heavy cruiser Kumano—the nearest ship—and scored several damaging hits. During her five-minute sprint into torpedo range, Johnston fired over 200 rounds at the enemy, then—under the direction of torpedo officer Lieutenant Jack K. Bechdel—made her torpedo attack. She got off all 10 torpedoes, then turned to retire behind a heavy smoke screen. When she came out of the smoke a minute later, Kumano could be seen burning furiously from a torpedo hit; her bow had been blown completely off, and she was forced to withdraw. Around this time, Johnston took three 14 in (360 mm) shell hits from Kongō, followed closely by three 6 in (150 mm) shells—from either a light cruiser or Yamato—which hit the bridge. The hits resulted in the loss of all power to the steering engine and all power to the three 5-inch guns in the aft part of the ship, and rendered the gyrocompass useless. A low-lying squall came up, and Johnston “ducked into it” for a few minutes of rapid repairs and salvage work. The bridge was abandoned and Commander Evans—who had lost two fingers on his left hand—went to the aft steering column to conn the ship.

This ferocious action so confused Admiral Kurita he thought he was being attacked by a superior force, and he retired his fleet. However, the action left the American carriers Princeton and St Lo sinking. Years ago I worked with Charlie Kee, who was one of the soldiers who had landed on Leyte. He told of the feeling of desolation as he viewed from the easter slope of the island American carriers sinking in the gulf.

From Wikipedia: USS Princeton burning prior to blowing up

From Wikipedia: USS Princeton burning prior to blowing up

From Wikipedia: USS St Lo blowing up

From Wikipedia: USS St Lo blowing up

This was not the last action of the Battle of Leyte Gulf, but by the end of the following day, 26 September 1944, the Japanese fleet was finished. The fight to eliminate Japanese forces from Leyte continued for another two months, and 3500 American troops were killed. The Japanese lost their entire ground force, 80,000. Few were taken alive. More bloody battles were to continue before Japanese forces were driven from the islands, but from October 1944 the Japanese Empire was cut off from supply by sea. The island nation could not supply its land forces on the Asian continent and elsewhere, and vital supplies could not reach the homeland. By the time Americans employed atomic weapons the following year people on the Japanese islands were eating grass.

Homosexual Agenda in Trouble


I reported on the Homosexual Agenda back in March:

A few days ago a Facebook friend posted a link on the feed about a war on Christianity. That encouraged me to engage in some skeptical analysis, which ended up drilling down on the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) and its leader Alan Spears. Alan Spears and Craig Olsen are authors of the book. I obtained a Kindle edition and promised to do a review. Here it is.

What the book is all about, if you have not already guessed by the title, is the homosexual agenda, said agenda being the principal threat to religious freedom. The book goes to ten chapters making its case, which I can summarize briefly: Proper Christians have nothing against homosexuals, themselves. Proper Christians just have a God-inspired objection to homosexual acts, e.g., sodomy and fellatio, supposedly involving people of the same sex, because acts between people of the opposite sex would be heterosexual and not homosexual. Come to think of it, proper Christians object to deviant sex even between people of the opposite sex. Homosexuality, we learn, is an acquired taste, and society needs to eliminate all situations that can promote acquiring this deviant attitude. Furthermore, homosexuals can unlearn their wrongful ways and revert to normal sexual lifestyles and live happily ever after. Finally, normal sex, even though it is defined as original sin in the Bible, is God’s plan for us and anything contrary goes against God and is a mournful sin.

Spears and Olsen may be gladdened to learn the homosexual agenda is in terrible trouble, being threatened by Michigan state representative candidate Jordan Haskins, who has previously worked to “fend off the homosexual movement” in Saginaw:

So thankful for what God has done in my life this year. He has turned me into an honor’s student when I was at Delta College. At Maranatha Baptist University, I made Dean’s List last Spring 2014. I am the Republican nominee for the 95th State House seat here in the great state of Michigan. I helped lead the effort to fend off the homosexual movement here in Saginaw along with some inner city pastors. These are all things that God has allowed me to add to my resume/ repotiore of my life experiences.
I can say I’ve done fast food, construction (electrical, dry wall, roofing, flooring, windows, insulation). I was an intern in the Michigan Republican Party’s field office here in Saginaw with a good buddy of mine. We traveled the 4th district together reaching out to voters. I am a precinct delegate. I am a member of the Saginaw County Republican Party executive committee.
God has totally turned me around from the stubborn teenage/ young person that I used to be. I can still be hardheaded at times, but that is because I don’t want to see people in Saginaw hurting and suffering anymore. I still believe that we can be a part of the Michigan comeback and I believe that as long as there are those that love God here, we can win souls and see God move in this city and state.

Homosexuals and their liberal allies are running scared in Michigan’s 95th State House District after the diligent efforts of Mr. Haskins. Sexual deviants and other liberals have reason to fear Haskins’ forthright and vigorous campaign, because, as he has noted, he is working closely with God.

As is the case for all defenders of the American morality, Mr. Haskins has his detractors. Principal among these would be the American system of criminal justice:

Haskins has a criminal history consisting of several misdemeanor and felony convictions dating to his teenage years. That history includes a prison sentence in Saginaw County Circuit Court for felony convictions tied to an uncommon sexual fetish he called “cranking” in interviews with police.

God may not be amused. God may want an explanation of the term cranking:

Haskins admitted to police that, on both occasions, he broke into the yard where vehicles were parked, incident reports from the Saginaw County Sheriff’s Department show. He said he pulled spark plug wires on sheriff, mosquito control and other vehicles parked there.

“Jordan would remove the spark plug wires and sit in the car and masturbate while the motor was sparking and making noises,” the police report states.

Haskins was charged with additional misdemeanor offenses related to a third incident at the mosquito control property in October 2010.

According to that incident report, Haskins again said that he damaged county vehicles by pulling spark plug wires to “masturbate while cranking the engine.” Deputies said he told them the act is a sexual fetish he learned about online.

Haskins told The Saginaw News that he has difficulty explaining what drove him to again and again repeat that behavior.

Most likely The Lord would have no trouble with Mr. Haskins’ peculiar proclivity, since it does not involve two people of the same sex—just one person of a particular sex and an automobile of undetermined sex.

Of course, that got me to thinking about what Mr. Haskins is in for if ever he is successful getting elected to the Michigan State Legislature. Then he will have an opportunity to learn about another activity with the cute name of “circle jerk.”

People Unclear


See what I mean? I’m constantly telling people that I’m not about to run out of this kind of stuff, and people like Fox News host Ainsley Earhardt are constantly coming forward to reassure me I’m still on track. Here is what Earhardt said recently:

Law abiding citizens who come to the South need to understand there is a culture in the South of disobeying the law. People from other parts of the country who come to the Sourh need to abide by our accomodation of stupidity.

Those are not Earhardt’s exact words, but she said the same thing, only using different language, which I will reproduce here:

Fox News host Ainsley Earhardt on Wednesday lashed out at atheists who had asked that Christian plaques be removed from public schools in Texas, saying that they “need to understand the culture” in the South.

And I think, growing up in the South, people in Wisconsin, these atheists in other cities need to understand the culture in the South, and how church is a very integral part of our childhood and growing up, and it’s a very important part for the Southern culture.”

I can attest to the truth of Earnhardt’s dismal view of the general level of intelligence in the South, in this case Midlothian, Texas. Although the region south of the Ohio River doesn’t have a lock on this kind of stupidity and lawlessness, at times it does seem to celebrate it inordinately. Recent examples abound. Here is just one:

The parents of a Buddhist student are joining forces with the American Civil Liberties Union to sue a public school board in north Louisiana, alleging their son was called “stupid” and given low marks for not adhering to Christian doctrine taught in his 6th grade science class.

Sharon and Scott Lane are the parents of three children enrolled in the Sabine Parish School System in rural northwest Louisiana. In a complaint filed Wednesday (Jan. 22) in U.S. District Court, the Lanes argue their son “C.C” became the “target of proselytization and harassment by faculty and administration” at Negreet High School when it became apparent he was not a Christian.

Illegal actions of the teacher involved and those of the school administration were so blatant that this case never went to trial. The school subsequently entered into a consent decree which requires the school to end religious proselytizing and to accomodate students of varied cultures.

The consent decree, a court order agreed to by both parties, ends a lawsuit filed in January by the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Louisiana on behalf of a Buddhist sixth-grader of Thai descent, “C.C.,” who was harassed by staff and students because of his faith.

“No child should feel that a teacher is trying to impose religious beliefs, and this agreement ensures that this will no longer be the case at Sabine Parish schools,” said Marjorie Esman, executive director of the ACLU of Louisiana. “We’re glad the school board worked with us to bring this matter to a quick and amicable resolution.”

Under the consent decree, the school board must end official prayers during class and school events, refrain from disparaging any particular faith, and prohibit staff from teaching creationism and other biblical doctrine as fact. The consent decree also protects students’ rights to express their faith and pray privately and of their own volition. To ensure that the consent decree is carried out properly and that the constitutional violations do not recur, the board will also conduct in-service training for staff on First Amendment issues and the effects of religious discrimination on students.

Meanwhile, up north in Mount Vernon, Ohio, science teacher John Freshwater taught religious-based creationism as science and engaged in Christian proselytizing in class. That chicken has finally come home to roost as recently announced by the NCSE:

The case began in 2008, when a local family accused Freshwater, then a Mount Vernon, Ohio, middle school science teacher, of engaging in inappropriate religious activity and sued Freshwater and the district. Based on the results of an independent investigation, the Mount Vernon City School Board voted to begin proceedings to terminate his employment. After thorough administrative hearings that proceeded over two years and involved more than eighty witnesses, the presiding referee issued his recommendation that the board terminate Freshwater’s employment with the district, and the board voted to do so in January 2011. (The family’s lawsuit against Freshwater was settled in the meantime.)

Nearly ten years ago the Dover, Pennsylvania, School District prepared to introduce Intelligent Design, a well-known religious concept, into the science curriculum. That ended with a suit brought by parents of students in the school. The suit resulted in a loss by the school district at heavy expense to the tax payers. The case was tried in federal court, and the trial judge additionally chastized members of the school administration for their perjured testimony. Judge John E. Jones III concluded in his 139 page decision:

  • For the reasons that follow, we conclude that the religious nature of ID [intelligent design] would be readily apparent to an objective observer, adult or child. (page 24)
  • A significant aspect of the IDM [intelligent design movement] is that despite Defendants’ protestations to the contrary, it describes ID as a religious argument. In that vein, the writings of leading ID proponents reveal that the designer postulated by their argument is the God of Christianity. (page 26)
  • The evidence at trial demonstrates that ID is nothing less than the progeny of creationism. (page 31)
  • The overwhelming evidence at trial established that ID is a religious view, a mere re-labeling of creationism, and not a scientific theory. (page 43)
  • Throughout the trial and in various submissions to the Court, Defendants vigorously argue that the reading of the statement is not ‘teaching’ ID but instead is merely ‘making students aware of it.’ In fact, one consistency among the Dover School Board members’ testimony, which was marked by selective memories and outright lies under oath, as will be discussed in more detail below, is that they did not think they needed to be knowledgeable about ID because it was not being taught to the students. We disagree. …. an educator reading the disclaimer is engaged in teaching, even if it is colossally bad teaching. …. Defendants’ argument is a red herring because the Establishment Clause forbids not just ‘teaching’ religion, but any governmental action that endorses or has the primary purpose or effect of advancing religion. (footnote 7 on page 46)
  • After a searching review of the record and applicable caselaw, we find that while ID arguments may be true, a proposition on which the Court takes no position, ID is not science. We find that ID fails on three different levels, any one of which is sufficient to preclude a determination that ID is science. They are: (1) ID violates the centuries-old ground rules of science by invoking and permitting supernatural causation; (2) the argument of irreducible complexity, central to ID, employs the same flawed and illogical contrived dualism that doomed creation science in the 1980s; and (3) ID’s negative attacks on evolution have been refuted by the scientific community. …It is additionally important to note that ID has failed to gain acceptance in the scientific community, it has not generated peer-reviewed publications, nor has it been the subject of testing and research. Expert testimony reveals that since the scientific revolution of the 16th and 17th centuries, science has been limited to the search for natural causes to explain natural phenomena. (page 64) [for “contrived dualism”, see false dilemma.]
  • [T]he one textbook [Pandas] to which the Dover ID Policy directs students contains outdated concepts and flawed science, as recognized by even the defense experts in this case. (pages 86–87)
  • ID’s backers have sought to avoid the scientific scrutiny which we have now determined that it cannot withstand by advocating that the controversy, but not ID itself, should be taught in science class. This tactic is at best disingenuous, and at worst a canard. The goal of the IDM is not to encourage critical thought, but to foment a revolution which would supplant evolutionary theory with ID. (page 89)
  • Accordingly, we find that the secular purposes claimed by the Board amount to a pretext for the Board’s real purpose, which was to promote religion in the public school classroom, in violation of the Establishment Clause. (page 132)

No, Ms. Earhardt, sane people coming into a region of chaos in this country do not have to accomodate lawlessness and idiocy. The American legal system protects us from the lawlessness, and public exposure and ridicule protects us from the idiocy. On that second point I am not always sure.

People Unclear


It’s beginning to appear I’m never going to exhaust the supply of this stuff. This latest is from psychiatrist Keith Ablow:

Ablow started by explaining that from his perspective “as a psychiatrist,” Obama thinks he’s a “citizen and a leader of the world” who doesn’t belong to one country and “perhaps least of all this country because he has it in for us as disappointing people. People who’ve been a scourge on the face of the Earth. And so for him to then say we’re going to seal the borders and protect Americans when in my view, in his mind, if only unconsciously, he’s thinking, ‘Really? We’re going to prevent folks suffering with illnesses from coming across the border flying into our airports when we have visited a plague of colonialism that has devastated much of the world, on the world? What is the fairness in that?’ I believe Barack Obama is thinking.”

He continued, speculating that the president believes America shouldn’t be immune to Ebola when “others are suffering, when we are a bad people.” As evidence of Obama’s supposed anti-Americanism, Ablow cited “the apology tour, having heard his wife say, you know, when they were campaigning that she hadn’t been proud of America until her husband was, you know, had his sights set on the presidency. With him, you know, attending a church where the pastor said ‘God Damn America’ and the rest of it. It all fits, doesn’t it? … How can you protect a country you don’t like? Why would you?”

Of course, I find this to be most depressing news. Imagine. Our president is “anti-American,” and we’re just now finding that out. Call me a left wing liberal if you want, but had I possessed this information earlier I would not have voted for Obama. Certainly not twice.

Left wing liberal that I am, I’m going to give this item some Skeptical Analysis. Let’s start with “just who is Keith Ablow?”

Ablow was born in Marblehead, Massachusetts, the son of Jeanette Norma and Allan Murray Ablow. Ablow attended Marblehead High School, graduating in 1979. He graduated from Brown University in 1983, magna cum laude, with a Bachelor of Science degree in neurosciences. He received his Doctor of Medicine degree from Johns Hopkins Medical School in 1987, and completed his psychiatry residency at the Tufts-New England Medical Center. He was Board Certified by the American Board of Psychiatry & Neurology in psychiatry in 1993 and forensic psychiatry in 1999.

While a medical student, he worked as a reporter for Newsweek and a freelancer for the Washington Post and Baltimore Sun and USA Today. After his residency, Ablow served as medical director of the Tri-City Mental Health Centers and then became medical director of Heritage Health Systems and Associate Medical Director of Boston Regional Medical Center.

[Links deleted]

Those seem to be rock solid credentials. Maybe we should listen to what Dr. Ablow has to say. Of course, that would include some of this, again from Wikipedia:

Ablow has made a number of controversial statements, including psychological assessments of various celebrities he has never examined, that have drawn criticism from other practitioners in his field as well as from various organizations and groups which were offended by his comments. Ablow has stated in an article on the Fox News website that years ago he “resigned in protest” from the American Psychiatric Association, which is the governing body that sets the standard of practice in the field of psychiatry and publishes the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). In the article, he did not state what he had been protesting about, but expressed his disagreement with various entries in the DSM.

Articles by Ablow later clarified that he worried that the American Psychiatric Association had stood silent while the psycho-therapeutic skills once learned by psychiatrists were left out of current training regimens. He also agreed with leaders in the field like Paul McHugh, MD, and Phillip Slavney, MD, that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (published by the APA) was oversimplifying human experience and pathologizing it.

In April 2011, Ablow wrote a health column for which criticized designer Jenna Lyons for publishing an advertisement in the J. Crew catalogue in which she was depicted painting her young son’s toenails hot pink. Ablow wrote that gender distinctions are “part of the magnificent synergy that creates and sustains the human race”. The column sparked a controversy around his claims that painting a child’s toenails pink could have an effect on their gender identity and led to accusations of overreaction, as was reported upon by numerous news media sources. Ablow refused to back down, even re-posting the column on his Facebook page.

During the 2012 Republican primary, Ablow wrote a column arguing that Newt Gingrich’s three marriages actually made him more qualified to be president. He wrote: “When three women want to sign on for life with a man who is now running for president, I worry more about whether we’ll be clamoring for a third Gingrich term, not whether we’ll want to let him go after one.” The column was criticized, with Rod Dreher of The American Conservative commenting thusly: “Oh for frack’s sake. At some point, you have to wonder when shamelessness crosses the line from character defect to psychopathology. If only Dr. Leo Spaceman were a Republican, he could have a lucrative career on Fox.”

Ablow later clarified that his position was that one’s private sexual life should remain private and that dissecting the sex lives of public figures was counterproductive and salacious.

On August 12, 2014, as a guest co-host on the Fox News show, Outnumbered, Ablow criticized the weight of First Lady Michelle Obama, stating, “she needs to drop a few [pounds].” Ablow continued his attacks on an August 21, 2014 segment, telling the women panelists on the show that they also need to lose weight.

On October 9, 2014, concerning the Ebola outbreak in West Africa, Ablow opined on Fox News that he believed the president “may literally believe we should suffer along with less fortunate nations. And if he does, that is a very dangerous psychological stance from which to confront Ebola”. [25] He also claimed that President Obama was not protecting the United States from Ebola because his “affiliations” and “affinities” were more with Africa.  His Ebola comments drew criticism, including from Fox host Greg Gutfield of The Five.

[Some links deleted]

Oh, rats! It is possible that between graduating magna cum laude from Brown University and the present Dr. Ablow has lost a few brain cells. This is potentially a tragedy of the first order.

The Media Matters item additionally relates Dr. Ablow’s take on the president’s inner psyche:

ABLOW (AS OBAMA’S “PSYCHE”): “You miserable people have destroyed so much in the world in terms of good things, and now you’re going to build a wall? Really? To insulate yourself from things that are devastating other nations when your gains are ill-gotten? And the very fact that you can build a wall — you’re using wealth that you never should have had to build it. This is just another manifestation of you didn’t build that, business. Right? You didn’t build the right to make yourself immune from something that is devastating a country with lesser resources.”

Some of you reading Dr. Ablow’s remarks naively—taking them at face value—have possibly become concerned over his current condition and his prospects for future employment. Put your mind at ease. Dr. Ablow, while not necessarily stabilized, is safely secure regarding his employment prospects. For those concerned about his future, The Washington Post has wonderful news for you:

Fox News contributor Dr. Keith Ablow, who recently accused President Obama of performing poorly against Ebola because of his “affinities” with Africa, was signed to a new contract with the network in late September, Fox News has confirmed to the Erik Wemple Blog. A Fox News contributor since 2007, Ablow has a history of making some of the more out-there statements on a network whose commentary frequently lifts eyebrows.

Though Ablow’s renewal came before his comments on President Obama and Ebola, it came after Ablow posited that the purpose of last summer’s World Cup was “to distract people. This is like Rome . . . I can see why Obama would love the World Cup.” He also told Stuart Varney of Fox Business, “It’s a little too convenient when we have a president who, I contend, has it in for Americans, and we elected him because we were fearful at the time — we better elect someone who’s not very patriotic because, God, we could have terrorists attack us for being Americans. OK, so, we did that.”

Fox News fans out there, keep watching. Skeptical Analysis fans, keep reading. There’s sure to be more to come.


Number 4 of a Continuing Saga


No, I can stop any time. Just as soon as the House of Graham shuts down their idiocy machine:

“Even though America is just as wicked as Sodom and Gomorrah ever were, and as deserving of the judgment of God, God would spare us if we were earnestly praying, with hearts that had been cleansed and washed by the blood of Christ,” said Rev. Graham in his commentary for Decisionmagazine, published by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association.

“The problems of the world will never be settled unless our national leaders go to God in prayer,” he said. “If only they would discover the power and wisdom that there is in reliance upon God, we could soon see the solution to the grave problems that face the world!”

Our leaders need to “go to God in prayer?” Really? You mean like this?

Born from an especially brutal al Qaeda faction, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has grown from relative obscurity in recent years to overshadow its extremist patrons. It now terrorizes large swaths of Syria and Iraq, has become the target of the largest U.S. military operation in Iraq in years and, with the public, cold-blooded execution of multiple Westerners, dominates headlines the world over.

Reverend Graham, these people pray on their knees five times a day. And, yes, it is the same God of Abraham that you pray to.

The story from provides additional commentary from the Reverend Graham:

Rev. Graham then noted numerous instances from the Bible where people “turned the tide of history by prayer.”  For example, he notes, Elisha prayed and a young man was raised from the dead; Jesus prayed and Lazarus rose from the dead; the thief on the cross next to Jesus prayed and Jesus told him he would go to paradise that day; John Wesley prayed and religious fervor grew in England, and the same happened with Johnathan Edwards in Northampton.

I appreciate Reverend Graham’s observation concerning “numerous instances from the Bible where people turned the tide of history by prayer.” Here’s one from Ezekiel 9:

He cried also in mine ears with a loud voice, saying, “Cause them that have charge over the city to draw near, even every man with his destroying weapon in his hand.”

And behold, six men came from the way of the higher gate, which lieth toward the north, and every man a slaughter weapon in his hand; and one man among them was clothed with linen, with a writer’s inkhorn by his side. And they went in and stood beside the brazen altar.

And the glory of the God of Israel had gone up from the cherub, whereupon he was, to the threshold of the house. And He called to the man clothed with linen, who had the writer’s inkhorn by his side;

and the Lord said unto him, “Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and set a mark upon the foreheads of the men who sigh and who cry because of all the abominations that are done in the midst thereof.”

And to the others He said in mine hearing, “Go ye after him through the city and smite. Let not your eye spare, neither have ye pity.

Slay utterly old and young, both maids and little children and women; but come not near any man upon whom is the mark; and begin at My sanctuary.” Then they began with the elder men who were before the house.

And He said unto them, “Defile the house, and fill the courts with the slain. Go ye forth.” And they went forth and slew in the city.

And it came to pass, while they were slaying them and I was left, that I fell upon my face and cried, and said, “Ah Lord God! Wilt Thou destroy all the residue of Israel in Thy pouring out of Thy fury upon Jerusalem?”

Then said He unto me, “The iniquity of the house of Israel and Judah is exceeding great, and the land is full of blood and the city full of perverseness; for they say, ‘The Lord hath forsaken the earth, and the Lord seeth not.’

10 And as for Me also, Mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity, but I will recompense their ways upon their heads.”

11 And behold, the man clothed with linen, who had the inkhorn by his side, reported the matter, saying, “I have done as Thou hast commanded me.”

Let’s see how that compares:

ISIS just released a video showing what they claim are Iraq’s Army POWs captured by ISIS, driven away in truck loads and then shot them all dead. The video caption stated that there were 1,500 individuals. The video shows their end being shot at point blank in several horrific mass slaughters reminiscent to what we see during Nazi Germany. The young teens begged for their lives as they were made to curse Al-Maliki but to no avail while they were forced to chant “long live the Muslim nation”. …

Glory be the power of God.


Number 3 of a Continuing Saga

I am so very sorry

Getting in a rut? Not I. Somebody else is:

The Rev. Franklin Graham said Monday that “activist judges” are to blame in the legalization of gay marriage.

Graham, son of the Rev. Billy Graham and CEO of Samaritan’s Purse and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, was specifically referring to his home state of North Carolina. Sixty-one percent of the state’s residents, according to the Christian Post, were against same-sex marriages but a federal judge in the state recently overturned the ban on the practice anyway.

“It’s sad when a judge is able to overrule the will of the people,” Graham told WCNC Charlotte, an NBC affiliate, on Monday. “This is a democracy, and the people spoke, and we’re seeing that activist judges across the country are overturning the will of the people. We saw that in California. We’re now seeing it here in North Carolina now. I don’t know what will take place.”

So, “Activist judges” are overturning the will of the people. “This is a democracy, and the people spoke …” Yes they did. And the judges overruled the people. The judges overruled those people who opposed homosexual marriage. The judges did not overrule these people:

The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments. The amendment addresses citizenship rights and equal protection of the laws, and was proposed in response to issues related to former slaves following the American Civil War. The amendment was bitterly contested, particularly by Southern states, which were forced to ratify it in order for them to regain representation in Congress. The Fourteenth Amendment, particularly its first section, is one of the most litigated parts of the Constitution, forming the basis for landmark decisions such as Roe v. Wade(1973), regarding abortion, and Bush v. Gore (2000), regarding the 2000 presidential election. The amendment limits the actions of all state and local officials, including those acting on behalf of such an official.

[Some links deleted]

Please note, Reverend Graham, the 14th Amendment was enacted principally because of the actions of people in your state, North Carolina. This amendment was ratified in the manner required by the Constitution. Your state refused to ratify it but subsequently relented when Congress passed a law requiring former Confederate states to ratify before being re-admitted into the Union. It was your state, Reverend Graham, that had an issue with the first section requiring equal protection under the law. It is equal protection under the law that the people of your state apparently still reject.

Please, Reverend Graham, don’t tell us that you and the people of your state wish to return to the good old days prior to 1861 when all people were not afforded equal protection under the law.

And may Jesus have mercy on your soul.


Number 2 of a Continuing Saga


What do you do when there is only one word for it? Hence the title:

( – Rev. Franklin Graham, head of the international Christian aid group Samaritan’s Purse and son of world-renowned preacher Billy Graham, said that given all the “bad news” about the killing of Christians by Muslims in some countries, and attacks on Christians by the media and the government even in America, he cannot “help but wonder if we are in the last hours before our Lord Jesus Christ returns.”

“As I read the news, I can’t help but wonder if we are in the last hours before our Lord Jesus Christ returns to rescue His church and God pours out His wrath on the world for the rejection of His Son,” said Rev. Graham in a post on the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association (BGEA) website.

“I don’t know if we have hours, days, months, or years—but as Christians, God calls us to take the truth of the Gospel to the ends of the earth,” said Graham.  “Our job is to warn sinners of the consequences of sin and show them that God is loving and gracious, willing to forgive if we come to Him in repentance and faith.”

“[H]ours, days, months?” That ought be frightful news. I can only hope it’s not. I was counting on the “years” part. I still have not voted against Republican candidates this year. Should The Lord come and take me before I have a chance to vote against Greg Abbott I would be most disappointed. And if that happens, you can believe The Lord will hear about it from Barbara Jean.

But wait. What am I thinking?

“Lord Jesus Christ returns to rescue His church and God pours out His wrath on the world for the rejection of His Son?” This is a joke, right? I mean, this one has been around for longer than ever Methuselah had years. It’s a well-known myth:


See what I mean?

The Reverend Graham, should he be serious about perpetuating this myth, must first be required to explain the foregoing. In the mean time he will kindly excuse me if I decline to surrender my intellectual integrity in favor of his vivid imagination.

Before leaving this topic, dwell for a moment on its venue:

Cybercast News Service (also known as is an American news website founded by L. Brent Bozell III and owned by Media Research Center, Bozell’sReston, Virginia-based organization. was founded by L. Brent Bozell III on June 16, 1998, under the name Conservative News Service and the domain name According to Bozell, the website would “report news …not touched by traditional television news outlets” and “fill the growing news void left by the establishment media in their chase for the sensational.” On its first day of operation the website had 61,000 hits.

The name “” was first used on June 15, 2000.

As of 2007, described its role as serving an audience which puts a “higher premium on balance than spin.”

[Edited for continuity plus some links deleted]

Finally, Reverend Graham has this more to say:

“In our own country as well, there is great opposition to the church of Jesus Christ,” he said.  “We see this throughout the media, the entertainment industry, government, and politics.”

Rev. Graham continued, “Jesus warned His disciples in Matthew 24 when they asked Him about the signs of the end of the age. He said there would be wars and rumors of wars, famines, earthquakes, and pestilence. He told them, ‘Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name’s sake.’”

I have searched out the matter of “great opposition to the church of Jesus Christ” in this country. This opposition appears to consist mainly of the following:

  • Not joining the church
  • Not attending the church
  • Leaving the church
  • Refusing to allow use of public funds to proselytize for the church
  • Refusing to incorporate biblical scripture into our legal framework
  • Speaking out when people like the Reverend Graham put out absurd comments like those above

To all of these I plead guilty. May Jesus have mercy on my soul.

Chicks on the Right

Marina Baer earns marks in the fine art of propagandizing

Teenager earns marks in propaganda

I was running low on inspiration this morning, so I reverted to one of my less honorable tactics. I trolled a former conservative Facebook friend to see what she was posting. Of course, there was a lot of useful stuff, but inevitably I came across one of these:

‘I Don’t Trust You’: 14 Year-Old Confronts School After Her Dad’s Arrest for Breaking 2 Min. Rule

This is really hot stuff. It would appear these conservatives are onto something. Some skeptical analysis may be in order. Let’s see the referenced item. This is from IJReview:

‘I Don’t Trust You’: 14 Year-Old Confronts School After Her Dad’s Arrest for Breaking 2 Min. Rule

When concerned father William Baer spoke up about a salacious book at a Gilford, N.H., school board meeting and then overran his allotted time of two minutes, police led him out in handcuffs. His daughter Marina Baer confronted those who stood by while a police officer arrested the man for “disorderly conduct”:

“I just watched my father get arrested because he broke the two minute rule, at a board of education meeting. This just shows that you resort to force at the first turn of conflict and I am appalled. So I don’t trust you, I haven’t, and I honestly don’t feel safe around you people.”

The book in question, 19 minutes, contains graphic sexual content, such as a lurid phrase about intercourse, “Semen, sticky and hot, pooled on the carpet beneath her.” Apparently, this is what happens to parents who object to such content being taught by “liberal” educators nowadays – they get led out in handcuffs.

People, this is hot stuff. And what a spunky teenager she is—calling out the oppressive liberal officialdom over their jack-booted tactics. It is so like these left-leaning administrators to foist sexually explicit readings on small children and then use police oppression to quash any objection to their shadowy agenda and to discipline at the slightest pretext anybody who opposes them.

In the interest of skeptical analysis I did a quick Google search on Miss Baer’s words, “‘I Don’t Trust You’: 14 Year-Old Confronts School After Her Dad’s Arrest for Breaking 2 Min. Rule,” and came up with these hits on the first page of results:

That is so damning of the school board and their police tactics. And it is so commendable of Miss Baer for protesting her father’s arrest over the slightest of infraction.

There’s a problem. Call me skeptical if you wish, but something smelled of the whole thing. I’ve never been arrested before, if you don’t count my “arrest” by some firemen five years ago, and I’ve been around for a long long time. What I have seen is that police have much better things to do with their time than to arrest somebody for going over their alloted time. So I dug deeper. Only a little deeper. What I found is something that all those conservative postings in the top Google search result failed to mention some minor details:

He confronted school officials about the passage during a comment period at Monday’s board meeting.

According to a video of the meeting published on YouTube, the school officials cut off Baer after his allotted two minutes to speak were over.

He later piped up as another man addressed the issue.

After a heated back-and-forth with a female official, Baer was approached by a cop and told to leave.

He refused, saying, “I guess you’re going to have to arrest me.”

He was cuffed and charged with disorderly conduct.

“He spoke out of order,” Gilford Police Lt. James Leach told WMUR-TV.

“Someone else was given the floor and was speaking. He interrupted them and continued after being asked to stop.

“He was then asked to leave and refused to leave unless he was arrested, so he was arrested.”

While disrupting the meeting the man was told to leave by the policeman, and he refused. The man told the cop, “you’re going to have to arrest me,” and that’s what the cop did. Amazing!

Also amazing is the near-professional employment of deceptive discourse practiced by a person of such youth. Marina Baer boldly faced the board and told them she could no longer trust them. For the sake of the camera she falsely stated that her father was arrested for breaking the 2-minute rule, when in fact he was arrested for disrupting the meeting and refusing to leave. Then, without waiting for anybody to challenge her, she turned and left. This kid is going places.

My conservative former Facebook friend has done this kind of thing before, and it appears to be addicting. She picks up on a salacious right-wing posting and then reposts it. No drilling down to get the facts behind the story. It looks good. It looks anti-liberal. So she posts it. This is the same person who likes to use the term “sheeple” to describe liberals. When I turned the phrase around a few weeks ago I was suddenly unfriended. There may be a term for this, a name. “Ring and run” is what came to mind at the time.

The Ride of the Valkyries


Actual air force in action

Cue the dramatic flight music. Blood and Sand is about to become blood and blue sky.

ISIS is coming. And this time they mean business:

Islamic State (Isis) is takings its first steps towards building an air force by training pilots to fly captured fighter planes, according to a group monitoring the conflict in Syria.

Isis is using lots of tanks, armoured personnel carriers, artillery and Jeeps taken from the Syrian and Iraqi armies but this is the first report that it has planes in the air.

Isis, which took the US by surprise this year with its rapid territorial expansion in Syria and Iraq, has three Russian-built MiG jets, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), which appears to have a good network of observers on the ground and has often proved reliable in the past.

This is alarming. ISIS, the company known for beheading Christians and other unsavory people, is getting twentieth century armament. Unfortunately, this is the 21st century.

What I also hear is these fighters, generally pictured as nomadic desert tribesmen with Kalashnikovs, are being trained by former Iraqi fighter pilots to fly these things. That I find most interesting. I had the occasion 23 years ago to witness the Iraqi Air Force in action, if only through DoD memoranda, and it was not a pleasant picture for the Iraqis. During the opening minutes of the First Gulf War Iraqi pilots came up to meet the coalition attackers. In the remaining minutes the Iraqi Air Force, what remained of it, took every opportunity to get its aircraft into neutral Iran.

Do I consider having fighter aircraft to be a plus for ISIS? Truly not. Lest anybody thinks otherwise, pause to reflect on some reality.

  • The United States spends multiple millions of dollars training a fighter pilot.
  • A modern jet fighter, once acquired through purchase or theft, becomes a financial liability. I’ve seen a quote “Around 1990 an F-16 was about $6000/flight hour;”I think that is much too light. About 1982 I was on a program that figured to use a government helicopter. The feds were going to charge us $4000 an hour. I don’t believe the price has gone down any since then.
  • You don’t need just pilots. You need ground support. You need somebody who can keep these systems airworthy.
  • You need fuel, you need weapons, you need other expendables.
  • You need cover.

What may appear to some to be a mighty arm of the air for ISIS is more like a deadly anchor. ISIS may want to think of itself as an Islamic state, but what they really are and what they are likely to remain is a roving band of malcontents with purloined hardware. To date their best plan for seeing the next sunrise has been to be somewhere else when and if the sun ever does come up. While it’s parked on the ground a modern fighter jet most gives an organization like ISIS is something it does not want, and that thing is a set of map coordinates. Should ISIS be so unwise as to get one of their fighters into the air, they will then possess what the United States military calls target practice.

Whether we have admitted it or not, the United States has been in a cold war with Bashar al-Assad’s Syrian government for some time. There have been a number of reasons this war has remained cold instead of becoming hot, but some of those reasons are evaporating. Weeks ago it would have given us great pleasure to take down some of al-Assad’s military assets, but the cold war-hot war thing was getting in the way. That partly went by the wayside a few weeks ago when ISIS captured a Syrian military airfield, along with some modern aircraft. Since these assets no longer belong to Mr. al-Assad, it has become more digestible for us to deduct them from inventory. Possibly for good strategic reasons, we have not done that.

All this will change if ISIS applies power to its newfound toys. Likely the reason these aircraft still have their paint is we and the coalition against ISIS have more interesting targets. All that will possibly change if an ISIS, or any, pilot fires these babies up and heads for the runway.

¿Por qué no te callas?

This handout picture from the Venezuelan

I got a big laugh out of this a few years back when it happened:

(English: “Why don’t you shut up?”) was said by King Juan Carlos I of Spain to Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, at the 2007 Ibero-American Summit in Santiago, Chile, when Chávez was repeatedly interrupting Prime Minister of Spain José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero‘s speech. The phrase became an overnight sensation, gaining cult status as a mobile-phone ringtone, and spawning a domain name, a contest, T-shirt sales, a television program, and YouTube videos.

[Some links deleted]

What particularly regaled me was Chávez calling the previous Spanish prime minister “fascist.” I wondered immediately whether Chávez ever looked up the definition of the word:

Fascists sought to unify their nation through an authoritarian state that promoted the mass mobilization of the national community and were characterized by having leadership that initiated a revolutionary political movement aiming to reorganize the nation along principles according to fascist ideology. Fascist movements shared certain common features, including the veneration of the state, a devotion to a strong leader, and an emphasis on ultranationalism and militarism. Fascism views political violence, war, and imperialism as a means to achieve national rejuvenation, and it asserts that stronger nations have the right to expand their territory by displacing weaker nations.

[Some links deleted]

What Chávez did not seem to realize was how much his own country exemplified a fascist state.

I had some fun since poking jokes at Chávez:

I recently posted an item that to some might have appeared critical of the sovereign nation of Venezuela. President Hugo Chávez had just died, and I invoked the image of the Argentinian regime of Juan Peron by way of comparison with modern Venezuela. There are differences, but the similarities are striking. In the aforementioned post I noted that Chávez spouted on liberty but paid tribute to the likes of Fidel Castro, Muammar Gaddafi, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Bashar al-Assad and Kim Jong-un. Needing a visible evil to leverage popular support, Chávez chose an obvious target, the United States. His conspiracy theories abounded:

Since last year heir apparent Nicolás Maduro has been running things, apparently without any enormous changes in attitude. Science magazine reports:

For Venezuelan academics, speaking out is risky business

When Ángel Sarmiento discovered that eight patients had died of an unidentified fever in less than 2 weeks in Maracay, the capital of Aragua state in Venezuela, he did what he was supposed to do: sound the alarm. In a press conference on 11 September, the president of Aragua’s College of Physicians revealed the spate of deaths and declared, “We don’t know what we’re facing.” But instead of applauding Sarmiento, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro accused the physician in a televised speech on 17 September of fomenting “psychological terrorism” and instructed his attorney general to open a case against him. Sarmiento fled the country a few days later.

Call me a left wing liberal if you want, but I can’t find a much better definition of a fascist state than this. And this is not an isolated example. Writer Lizzie Wade continues:

The episode continues to reverberate in Venezuela, where intellectuals consider it a signal of the central government’s disdain for science and the medical establishment. “What they want is to silence all of us,” says Feder Álvarez, a pediatrician and secretary of Aragua’s College of Physicians. “They’re not just persecuting Ángel. They’re persecuting the medical community.”

Scientists, too, feel beleaguered. Objectivity and critical thinking—key values of science—“are very much at odds with the prevailing winds” in Venezuela, says Ricardo Hausmann, a Venezuelan economist who teaches at Harvard University. Last month, Hausmann found himself accused by Maduro, again on national television, of conspiring against the government after publishing a syndicated op-ed about the country’s dire economic straits titled “Should Venezuela Default?” Hausmann worries that if he were to return to Venezuela, he could face months or years in prison, even before standing trial.

Within the country, scientists must cope with byzantine rules. The central government wants “control over every step” of an experiment, says a university-based molecular biologist who requested anonymity. For ecological fieldwork, collecting areas must be strictly specified in advance. For experiments of any sort, researchers must fill out forms every 6 months articulating the progress they’ve made toward predetermined goals, with little flexibility to follow new threads, the biologist laments.

What the government of Venezuela seems to be saying to scientists is ¿Por qué no te callas? That is, if you want to stay out of jail.



I stake out a number of conservative outlets, just to pick up on any salacious or incriminating items I can use to hammer Democrats, free thinkers, atheists and liberals in general. While waiting for something to come along I do from time to time pick up something of interest:

Franklin Graham: Obama is Waging an “Anti-Christ” War Against God

See what I mean? You never know what’s going to turn up once you start listening.

“Anti-Christ?” “War Against God?” Who would have suspected? I decided to read more:

Franklin Graham: Some Administration Officials Are ‘Anti-Christ’

Well, that wasn’t so interesting, after all. Not President Obama, just “Some Administration Officials” are anti-Christ. It would appear those people at Conservative Tribune (“In Defense of Western Civilization) went a little overboard in declaring the president is waging an “anti-Christ war against God.”

Actually, I suspect it goes deeper than that. It’s likely “some administration officials” are Jews. As we know, even nearly 2000 years after the Resurrection Jews have not come to accept Jesus of Nazareth as the Christ. I’ll bet those Jews in the Obama administration are “anti-Christ.” Let’s not get into the Muslims, Hindus and such who may also be in the Obama administration.

But, you may ask, how does this “anti-Christ” manifest itself? I’m glad you asked. I dug deeper.

Some of the people working in the Obama administration and in the White House are trying to “completely secularize our military” and are “hostile to Christians,” to the point that they “are anti-Christ in what they say and in what they do,” said Christian evangelist Franklin Graham, the son of world-renowned preacher Rev. Billy Graham.

Franklin Graham made his comments during a Mar. 24 interview with Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Council, which published an updated report on religious persecution in the U.S. armed forces this month.

Imagine that. The United States Military, given the task of ruthlessly killing enemies of this country is being denied the mantle of the Prince of Peace. What’s the world coming to?

Once again, I am asked to drill down into the stack of nested references:

What follows is a list of discrete events presenting a larger picture of the threat to religious liberty that now exists in America’s armed forces. The examples provided represent only a portion of the concerted efforts to scrub the military of religious expression, through which the chilling effect of punishment and potential career destruction lie at the back of everyone’s mind.

To view and download this entire document please click this link

OK! So there’s a list. Let’s look at the list:

Casey Weinstein – 2004
United States Air Force (USAF) Academy grad (1977) and attorney, Michael “Mikey” Weinstein’s
son, Casey, was a USAF Academy cadet at this time. Casey complained that flyers that were
placed on all cadets’ breakfast plates advertising Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ.
Distribution of the flyers stopped after that. (In 2005, Mikey Weinstein founded the Military
Religious Freedom Foundation [MRFF], headquartered in Albuquerque, NM).1

This is only the first item in “the list.” I will give this one a little scrutiny before I go on to other points.

Wait! Something is amiss here. This is from 2004. I’m not to sure that Barack Obama was working for the United States Government at the time, much less having his administration wage an “anti-Christ war on God.”

Wait again! We’ve already heard of Michael Weinstein:

Reviled by the radical fundamentalist Christian far-right, Mikey has been given many names by his enemies including “Satan”, “Satan’s lawyer”, “the Antichrist”, “That Godless, Secular Leftist”, “Antagonizer of All Christians”, “Most Dangerous Man in America” and “Field General of the Godless Armies of Satan”.

Apparently whatever Michael Weinstein is doing he must be doing something right to get these people on his case. “The list” explains more:

Weinstein emerges as a major critic of the USAF Academy – February 19, 2005
Mikey Weinstein emerged as a critic of the Air Force Academy and appeared on Good Morning
America. Weinstein warned: “What you’ve got is a lusty and thriving religious intolerance that is
objectively manifesting itself in prejudice and discrimination and is obliterating the First
Amendment, civil rights and the US Constitution.” According to Weinstein one group in
particular posed a risk at the Academy: “There are senior people that view evangelical
Christianity at the Air Force Academy the way that you and I would view gravity. Pick up a pen
and drop it and it falls on the desk. Well, it just exists, it’s gravity.”2

Air Force Superintendent General John Rosa responds – February 19, 2005
After apologetically telling the Good Morning America audience that misdeeds had taken place
at the Academy, the Superintendent, General John Rosa, presciently warned of an overreaction
that could threaten religious liberty.3

Weinstein complains about USAF Academy course on religious sensitivity – May
In response to critiques from Weinstein and others, the Air Force created a task force to review
the religious climate at the Academy. The Air Force sent a warning about “religious respect” to
all installations worldwide, and the Academy started a course, “Respecting the Spiritual Values
of All People” (RSVP) that, as described by the Washington Post, made a good-faith effort to
correct problems at the school. Weinstein called this effort “putting lipstick on a pig” and
blamed the religious climate on “a leadership that encourages the evangelicals and tolerates bias.” 4

The Weinstein saga has since continued:

A significant MRFF victory arrived in 2011 when the US Air Force, in response to a Freedom of Information Act request submitted by the Foundation, revised a training course taught to nuclear missile launch officers which included quotations from Werner Von Braun and also cited Christian Just War Theory, among other materials. This led to Mikey coming under attack from various opponents, including radio shock jock Michael Savage (Weiner), who mocked Weinstein’s name as “Mickey Whine-stein” while asking “Why do you hate Christians, America, and the military, when, was it not for the Christians and the military your ancestors would have been turned into [something edited out]?” Savage also noted that “What Weinstein doesn’t know was if it was not for the warrior mentality of the Christians he hates so much, who rescued his ancestors from the ovens of Bergen-Belsen and Auschwitz, Mickey Whine- [something edited out] wouldn’t be here plaguing the United States of America.”.Weinstein responded in a Newsletter to his audience, noting that Savage’s “stupefying rant” was “a rabidly ad-hominem, personal assault… which should serve as a particularly revealing clue as to the psychological state of this specimen, a professional bottom-feeding hyena who earns his daily bread by foaming at the mouth and spreading extremist hysteria which he likely doesn’t even believe himself.”

[Some links deleted]

Allow me to sum this up. Weinstein is not a Christian. He’s a Jew. His two sons are Jews. Both experienced official Christian proselytizing at government expense while attending the United States Air Force Academy at Colorado Springs in Colorado. Both endured anti-Jewish comments, including “how it felt to kill Jesus.”

OK. This is definitely taking an anti-Christian turn. I mean, if you’re not allowed to put Jews in their place, then what are you doing calling yourself a Christian. And it all happened on Obama’s watch. Back before he was elected.

This is a great list. It’s from the Family Research Council by Tony Perkins and is titled A Clear and Present Danger: The Threat to Religious Liberty in the Military (March 21, 2014 Edition). In case this ever gets deleted from the FRC site I’ve archived a copy on this blog for your reading enjoyment.

I swear, this document is a treasure. I picked another item almost at random, and I will share it here:

Department of Defense training materials suggest conservative viewpoints are
“extremist” – August 22, 2013
A Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act request produced Department of Defense (DOD)
anti-discrimination training materials implying that some conservative organizations are “hate
groups.” Students were told to be aware that “many extremists will talk of individual liberties,
states’ rights, and how to make the world a better place.” The documents repeatedly cited the
leftwing Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) as a resource for identifying “hate groups.” One
document suggested that the American colonists who rebelled against British rule were
members of an “extremist movement.”75

That’s obviously anti-Christ. I think. Call them left wing if you want, but the SPLC has been dealing with the KKK and other extremist groups for longer than many of its critics have been around. The American colonial rebels, they were an extremist group? Throwing other people’s property into Boston Harbor is not a Sunday school homework assignment.

Oh, Christ, I forgot one thing. This business about Jesus being the son of God and dying for our sins and then being resurrected and eventually ascending into Heaven—it’s well known to be a myth. In the end, the President, bless his black heart, is being accused of working to make the United States military less myth based. I should add, less myth based than it otherwise would be.

Save Jesus

Save Jesus

Obama, Obama, Bo-bama

Before I start this I need to let readers know I’m a big fan of the current president. I voted for him twice, and have given money to his campaign. Actually, it goes deeper than that. Ever since the Republican Party became the Party of God and not the party of the American people, I have resolved to never vote for anybody Republican until they change their ways. Truth be known, I would vote for a wounded rhinoceros before I would vote for a candidate running that tainted sticker.

That past, it’s time for me to make fun of the Democrats. These guys really are a lot of fun if are willing to just go with the flow and enjoy the comedy.

Notice! If you give money to a political party you will never be lonely again. I gave a measurable amount two years ago, and the effect was addicting. Democrats won significantly where it mattered, and a message seems to have gone out to (some) Republicans. Ted Cruz, I’m not talking about you.

So, comes this year’s election cycle, and the email is coming. Phone calls and hard copy, as well, but not in any way like the tsunami of email. For your reading enjoyment I’m going to just post some samples:

  • Oct 15 at 6:34 AM
  • John Blanton

All gifts today TRIPLE-MATCHED
(Limited Time Only)

John — Here’s the latest:

  • The race for Congress is a DEAD HEAT.
  • Republicans are outspending us by over $3 MILLION just this week.
  • But we can cut the Republican ad advantage — the TRIPLE-MATCH has just been opened.

That means your donation right now will be TRIPLE-MATCHED! That’s just the momentum boost we need to fight Republicans’ Obama-bashing attacks. Please make sure we don’t miss this opportunity!

Republicans or Democrats could win the race for Congress. It’s being decided right now!

Remember if we hit our goal: Your donation of $5 right now will be matched up to $15! Your donation of $50 right now will be matched up to $150!!!

Step up now. The triple-match is only available for a limited time only.

John Blanton

Suggested Gift: $5.OO


Chip in $5 immediately >>
Chip in $35 immediately >>
Chip in $50 immediately >>
Chip in $100 immediately >>
Chip in $250 immediately >>
Or donate another amount >>



All right. that was just the first email I received on 15 October. On that day I received a total of 15 solicitations of a similar nature. All emphasized a critical nature of some sort, and most, but not all, displayed prominently links advising me to “Chip in $5 immediately” or something similar. For my readers’ safety I have deactivated these links. Clicking on any one of them would take you immediately to a page that automatically debited my credit card. Rather, to a page that would have debited my card had I been foolish enough to give my credit card number to a political party.

Had I been a sensitive soul I would have been galled at emails I received containing the statement “NO DONATION,” indicating I had so far been unresponsive and had not yet given any donation. This after spending more money on the Democrats this year than I spent on Barbara Jean (not counting the new car).

This was a part I found most humorous. These are the guys currently in power. These are the guys we are counting on protecting us from ISIS and Ebola. These are the guys with their hands on the launch button. These are the guys we are counting on to protect us from the Party of God. My thought on that was appropriately, “Heaven help us.”

But more seriously, I had no problem figuring out the problem. These are the same guys who screwed up the Obamacare Web site, so is it any surprise they can’t figure out the same person they are sending Dunn notices by email is the same person who has written them multiple checks drawn on my personal account.

Sorry to say, that bit of fun has come to an end. The Democrats are not as totally incompetent as I had hoped, and the email I am now getting is noting my previous contributions. Maybe after they gain control of the Senate with the help of my donations they will get down to the serious business of the two, count them, two Ebola patients in this country.

And may Jesus have mercy on our souls.

Bad Joke of the Week

Not yet

Not yet


Men Are Just Happier People — What do you expect from such simple creatures?

 Your last name stays put. The garage is all yours. Wedding plans take care of themselves. Chocolate is just another snack…

You can be President. You can never be pregnant. You can wear a white T-shirt to a water park. You can wear NO shirt to a water park.

Car mechanics tell you the truth. The world is your urinal. You never have to drive to another gas station restroom because this one is just too icky.

 You don’t have to stop and think of which way to turn a nut on a bolt. Same work, more pay. Wrinkles add character. Wedding dress $5000. Tux rental-$100.

People never stare at your chest when you’re talking to them. New shoes don’t cut, blister, or mangle your feet. One mood all the time.

Phone conversations are over in 30 seconds flat. You know stuff about tanks. A five-day vacation requires only one suitcase. You can open all your own jars.

You get extra credit for the slightest act of thoughtfulness. If someone forgets to invite you, He or she can still be your friend. Your underwear is $8.95 for a three-pack.

 Three pairs of shoes are more than enough. You almost never have strap problems in public. You are unable to see wrinkles in your clothes. Everything on your face stays its original color.

The same hairstyle lasts for years, even decades. You only have to shave your face and neck. You can play with toys ALL YOUR LIFE.

One wallet and one pair of shoes — one color for all seasons. You can wear shorts no matter how your legs look. You can ‘do’ your nails with a pocket knife. You have freedom of choice concerning growing a mustache.

You can do Christmas shopping for 25 relatives On December 24th in 25 minutes.

Men Are Just Happier People


If Laura, Kate and Sarah go out for lunch, they will call each other Laura, Kate and Sarah. If Mike, Dave and John go out, they will affectionately refer to each other as Fat Boy, Bubba and Wildman.


When the bill arrives, Mike, Dave and John will each throw in $20, even though it’s only for $32.50. None of them will have anything smaller and none will actually admit they want change back.

When the girls get their bill, out come the pocket calculators.


A man will pay $2 for a $1 item he needs. A woman will pay $1 for a $2 item that she doesn’t need but it’s on sale.


A man has six items in his bathroom: toothbrush and toothpaste, shaving cream, razor, a bar of soap, and a towel.

The average number of items in the typical woman’s bathroom is 337. A man would not be able to identify more than 20 of these items.


A woman has the last word in any argument.  Anything a man says after that is the beginning of a new argument.


A woman worries about the future until she gets a husband. A man never worries about the future until he gets a wife.


A woman marries a man expecting he will change, but he doesn’t. A man marries a woman expecting that she won’t change, but she does.


A woman will dress up to go shopping, water the plants, empty the trash, answer the phone, read a book, and get the mail. A man will dress up for weddings and funerals.


Men wake up as good-looking as they went to bed. Women somehow deteriorate during the night.


Ah, children. A woman knows all about her children. She knows about dentist appointments and romances, best friends, favorite foods, secret fears and hopes and dreams.

A man is vaguely aware of some short people living in the house.


A married man should forget his mistakes. There’s no use in two people remembering the same thing!