By:  Pat Austin

SHREVEPORT –  The 2017 New Orleans mayoral race qualifying period has closed with a total of 18 candidates, only three of which are considered major candidates.

As most are aware, New Orleans has been the center of much turmoil and negative attention in the past few months. During Landrieu’s term crime has risen dramatically and what is different about that is that it is now in the tourist areas around the French Quarter which has never been more dangerous than it is right now.

The Confederate monuments controversy has also pulled a great deal of attention to the city both positive and negative, depending on your perspective of the issue. At the very least, removal of the four historical monuments has made the city a little less unique and has pulled Landrieu’s attention away from more pressing matters, like police staffing, infrastructure, and crime.

The major candidates in the October 14 primary are “former Civil District Court Judge Michael Bagneris, City Councilwoman LaToya Cantrell, and former Municipal Court Judge Desiree Charbonnet.”  Crime is certainly going to be the top topic in this election.  “Crime is ravaging our city,” said Bagneris, who first ran for mayor in 2012. “Crime is up because police manpower is down, and criminals know it.”

There are no Republicans on the ballot:

Fellow businessman Frank Scurlock, who announced at about the same time as the “Big 3,” also could get a little traction using his own financial resources from his inflatable bounce house empire and his public opposition to the removal of the Confederate monuments to carve out a niche.

Scurlock is one of six white candidates in the field to lead a city with a population that is about 60 percent black. Eleven of the candidates signed up as Democrats, three are running as independents, and four others are running without a party affiliation. There are no Republicans on the mayoral ballot.

As of today, there have been 100 murders in New Orleans this year and countless shootings, muggings, assaults, and other violent crimes.

The primary is October 14 with a November runoff; Landrieu will remain in office through May. According to pundit Stephanie Grace:

[Landrieu] hinted that he hopes to help guide the choice of his successor, perhaps through the political action committee he has set up. While he hasn’t endorsed a candidate, Landrieu has bemoaned New Orleans voters’ history of focusing on change and has advocated for philosophical and policy continuity from his administration to the next.

This race will be closely watched throughout the state as many who have objected to Landrieu’s Confederate monument position have vowed not to visit the city until he is gone.

If a Landrieu clone is elected that tourism ban may continue.

Pat Austin blogs at And So it Goes in Shreveport.

My Pinned tweet

Which of you wishing to construct a tower does not first sit down and calculate the cost to see if there is enough for its completion? Otherwise, after laying the foundation and finding himself unable to finish the work the onlookers should laugh at him and say, ‘This one began to build but did not have the resources to finish.’

Luke 14:28-30

I saw something on twitter that really caught my attention on Sunday

Now this kind of idiocy has been so common that it’s become as unremarkable as the background picture of the author in question, who suddenly decided the wisdom of his twitter account should be reserved for like minded individuals, perhaps other research scientists into genetics,

For a long time I figured the best thing was to ignore this stuff, after all who wants to get involved in this idiocy when we have real life to deal with. The fastest way to get dirty is to join a pig in the mud and ridicule can sometimes be a cruel thing and cruelty is contrary to christian charity. It’s a free country and if for example some dope thinks he’s Napoleon Bonaparte and chooses to live accordingly that’s his problem and not my business

But I’m thinking lately that letting these folks off easy was a mistake, it was not only wrong, but cruel and unchartable both to the person in question, but to ourselves and society.

By letting this stuff go on, particularly in a universities and in our media without challenge we have been like the man who when dealing with a spurious claim doesn’t bother to show up in court and is shocked when he loses because he’s presented no evidence to contradict his foe’s weak case.

Suddenly instead of ignoring the guy with the cocked hat and his hand in his breast you find yourself first ostracized and then punished if you don’t shout Vive L’Empereur whenever he passes by.

Suddenly the damage from this delusion is not confined to one idiot, but is suffered by society.

This is what we’ve done by not fighting the culture war, by not calling out the phony outrage, the phony gender business, the overstated claims concerning racism and sexism, by ceding the field we’ve allowed error to take hold and become destructive because said delusion is taught to the young and the impressionable who now become invested in it.

There was a time when I was young when if you saw for example a black doctor or a woman lawyer, you KNEW said person was exceptional. You knew they had to overcome barriers both legal and social to get where they were. As the old saying went, they had to be twice as good just to get the chance to achieve.

Both a change in the laws and a change in the cultural acceptance of the injustices that made those barriers have removed them, and rightly so.

Unfortunately many realized that there was power and profit in the grievance industry. It didn’t matter if a cause wasn’t just or an actual cause for grievance didn’t exist there was money to be had and political power to mobilize so damn it if there wasn’t a real cause we’d make one.

We’ve actually reached the point where people attending universities of higher learning whose annual cost is above the medium income in the richest most powerful country in the history of history, who are easily part of the top 1% most privileged people not only in the world now, but in this history of all humanity claim grievance if all things are not exactly what they want.

We’ve reached a point where enforcing the law is considered oppression, even in the neighborhoods where those who break the laws hold the people in fear and the body count becomes outrageous.

We’re at the point where simply biological reality is considered “hate”, segregation is considered progress and any suggestion that once should be taking personal responsibility for ones bad decision and actions is the ultimate insult.

This can’t stand.

We have to be willing to stand up and say “enough” and to fearlessly proclaim truth no matter how much pushback we get. We have to have the courage to scorn the attacks and press on. We have to have the courage of our convictions and express them loudly and in public, not only for ourselves and our children, but for those who are attacking us, whose feelings and sensibilities are offended by what we say.

Who is the better Doctor, the one who tells a patient they are well even if they are seriously ill or the one who diagnoses the disease and prescribes a painful regimen to cure them?

Who is the better parent? The one who lets their child drink and drive to make them happy or the one who sets rules to keep their kids safe and punishes them if they are broken.

Who is the better priest? One who declines to call sin “sin” as to not offend even if that path leads to destruction or the one who shepherds his flock correcting them toward the path to eternal life?

Does love win when you tell a comfortable lie vs a hard truth? I think not. You can’t head in the right direction without an accurate map and if you’re in the car and you know the driver is going the wrong way saying nothing will just get everyone lost.

I think reality is worth fighting for, do you?

Update:  Corrected a grammar error or two


This blog is a venture in capitalism which depends primarily on readers to pay me and my writers. You so you can help finance this by picking up my new book Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) prayer is now available at Amazon

A portion of every sale will go to WQPH 89.3 Catholic Radio) or show your approval by Hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

and if you really want to help for the long term consider subscribing and get my book as a premium


Choose a Subscription level



And as I’ve said before if you can’t spare the cash we will be happy to accept your prayers.

Today Doctor Who decided to take the final step in their long sjw path and go full Ghostbusters.

Jodie Whittaker has been announced as Doctor Who’s 13th Time Lord – the first woman to be given the role.
The new Doctor’s identity was revealed in a trailer broadcast at the end of the Wimbledon men’s singles final.
The Broadchurch star succeeds Peter Capaldi, who took over the role in 2013 and leaves in the forthcoming Christmas special.

As you might guess all of the usual suspects are overjoyed, it’s being hailed a breakthrough and there doesn’t seem to be a single voice in dissent.

Well as person who has followed the series religiously and as the only person in history to question a future US president at a press conference wearing a Doctor Who Scarf, let me bluntly say what I suspect a lot of other people would like to say but dare not if they want to ever work for the BBC again.

I dissent.

This is a bad idea, in fact for reasons I’ve already written about it’s a horrible idea not only in the short term but for the entire franchise long term. for the 1st time ever kids can go online and find celebrity nudes of the Doctor, isn’t that special?

I’m not going to reiterate all the various reasons from my old post but I am going a step further.

I not only dissent, but after 41 years I’m done.

It’s not a step I take lightly, this is something that has been special to me for over four decades. It’s a fandom I shared with my sons and celebrated together. All three Doctor Who scarfs I own are gifts from friends or family.

Now I know that since the series came back there has been a bit of a sjw agenda that has been pushed since the 2nd half of the 1st season. As the years have gone by it’s become more and more open but I let it go, first because I was so pleased to see the series back, then because I thought David Tennant was great, then because I thought Matt Smith was the best thing to happen to the series since Tom Baker, then because Peter Capaldi had given the character depth and then because Michelle Gomez was just so good as Missy and she and Capaldi worked so well that you wanted to see what happened next.

The actual reality is that I loved this show and even as it tried to nudge me away or suggest that I and my values were unwelcome I clung to it because of what it meant to me and mine. In a world becoming increasingly hostile it was my last my childhood escape that decades later was still intact.

So why would a female Doctor make the difference? Why would that escape be gone. The answer comes from this remark from the new show runner is why:

Chris Chibnall, New Head Writer and Executive Producer says : “After months of lists, conversations, auditions, recalls, and a lot of secret-keeping, we’re excited to welcome Jodie Whittaker as the Thirteenth Doctor. I always knew I wanted the Thirteenth Doctor to be a woman and we’re thrilled to have secured our number one choice. Her audition for The Doctor simply blew us all away. Jodie is an in-demand, funny, inspiring, super-smart force of nature and will bring loads of wit, strength and warmth to the role. The Thirteenth Doctor is on her way.”

and this from the BBC:

It was always unlikely that the Doctor would continue to be white and male, especially as the BBC has committed itself to greater diversity on its programmes.

Casting the first female Doctor is something many viewers have been calling for. And strong female-led stories have been successful on the big and small screen in recent years, in films ranging from The Hunger Games and Star Wars to Wonder Woman, and in TV series like Game of Thrones.

The BBC will be hoping today’s announcement will not just excite viewers, but will also demonstrate that the time travel show has firmly moved into the 21st century.

Do you see the point here. We’re not making the Doctor a woman because it will improve the dynamic of the series, we’ve not choosing a woman because it will enhance the narrative, it’s not about the younger kids who watch or the 50 year plus history.
We’ve not even choosing Jodie Whitaker (an OK actress) because she was the best thespian for the job. No dammit we’re going to make the Doctor a woman because Chris Chibnall wants the Doctor to be a woman, the BBC wants the Doctor to be a woman (perhaps that’s why Chibnall was chosen) and we’re all going to prove how modern and diverse we are so dammit that’s how it’s going to be!

In other words it’s the SJW agenda being shoved in my face.

Well BBC it’s your show and Mr. Chibnall you’re the boss, and you have the right and authority to do with your show as you see fit.

Me I’m the viewer. I’ve got a limited amount of time and a limited amount of money to invest in my entertainment and in this 21st century world that you are boasting of moving into I have a plethora of entertainment choices to invest my time and money in.

And I choose to no longer invest in the Doctor Who franchise, either the new series or via Big Finish.

My Congratulations Mr. Chibnall, my congratulations BBC, my congratulations Ms. Whitaker, you’ve managed to do what age, marriage, children and all the difficulties of life over four decades have not been able to, you’ve made Doctor Who just another TV show to me and made me no longer be invested in the character of the Doctor.

Now I can see the blowback comming in fact Ms. Whitaker take on the role suggests the form it will take:

What does it feel like to be the first woman Doctor?
It feels completely overwhelming, as a feminist, as a woman, as an actor, as a human, as someone who wants to continually push themselves and challenge themselves, and not be boxed in by what you’re told you can and can’t be. It feels incredible.

7) What do you want to tell the fans?
I want to tell the fans not to be scared by my gender. Because this is a really exciting time, and Doctor Who represents everything that’s exciting about change. The fans have lived through so many changes, and this is only a new, different one, not a fearful one.

Scared? How DARE you suggest that my or anyone else’s objections are based on fear, either of your gender or of change. You are a performer, you make your living giving performances for your customer base the viewer. It is for the customer to choose to stay or go based on their entertainment preferences

And I choose to leave.

Now Mr. Chibnall is a good writer (Boradchurch season 1 & 2 are excellent season 3 so far meh) and Ms. Whitaker is a passable actress so I don’t doubt that there will be some interesting stories, in fact I predict that the first half Ms. Whitaker’s first season will do quite well ratings wise, maybe even well in terms of merchandising, however I suspect by the 2nd season it will be Sylvester McCoy and 1989 all over again, but the BBC will do their best to ignore it because they can’t let the first female doctor fail. They’ll retain quite few of the older viewers and a good part of the cult fan base, but in the end instead of national and international institution that gets kids and their families and hold them for generations, it will become just another BBC Drama.

It’s a shame but hey, it’s not a big deal, after all it’s just a TV show.

Closing thought: How long do you think it’s going to be before assorted sjw groups decide they are aggrieved because the Doctor is a white woman rather than a black man or a black woman or an asian man, or a muslim woman or a transgender woman who defines as a gender yet unknown. Or perhaps Mr Chibnall will have Whitaker’s doctor define herself as a man or something else to keep the SJW crowd happy?

I don’t know and frankly I don’t care, not my problem anymore.

Update: That didn’t take long

New FEMALE Doctor Who Jodie Whittaker NUDE modelling and bath scene from Venus

Just what the series needed a Doctor that boys who aren’t gay could masturbate to.

Meanwhile Colin Baker weighs in

I would remind the esteemed Mr. Baker that this is the attitude that led to the show being cancelled the first time, on the plus side, it’s arrogance is completely in character in terms of what the 6th doctor would say.

By John Ruberry

Donald J. Trump may not be going through a witch hunt, but he’s surely the only president to face so many attempts to remove him from office.

What follows is a brief summary of the plots.

Shortly after his surprise win over Hillary Clinton, Democrats and their media wing tried to delegitimize his triumph by claiming that Russians, meaning of course Vladimir Putin, hacked the election results. To date no evidence has emerged of a single vote changed because of Russian interference. And the liberals also claimed that Trump colluded with the Russians to win the presidency.

In December, shortly before the Electoral College met in the 50 state capitols and the District of Columbia, a group of has-been Hollywood celebrities calling themselves Unite for America released a video asking Republican electors to vote for someone other than Trump. Another group, the Hamilton Electors, also unsuccessfully made a similar call out to the electors.

The Electoral College didn’t punt–Trump won the most electors.

The following month a smattering of Democrats tried to convince Congress not to certify the Electoral College results. A few days after Trump was inaugurated a leftist group sued him, claiming that Trump was in violation of the obscure emoluments clause in the Constitution because a representative of a foreign government, might, just might, stay at a Trump Organization hotel. Remember, just a few days later. Besides, the president removed himself from running the company.

In May there was a spike in impeachment calls after the president fired FBI Director James Comey, citing obstruction of justice. Late last month Trump Tweeted about the MSNBC show “Morning Joe,” drawing attention to a facelift of co-host Mika Brzezinski.

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.jsWhich led to calls by Democrats to have Trump removed from office under the 25th Amendment, calling into question his mental health.

Blogger with a man claiming to be Trump

The latest impeachment dustup centers on his son, Donald Trump Jr., meeting with some Russian operatives last summer, which have brought new life to the collusion charges. Let’s dial this back. Trump’s son met with some Russians, so the president should be removed from office. Trump Jr. met with those Russians. Not the president. If that makes sense to you–then you are probably a leftist.

Let’s not forget the regular stoking of the ouster flames with the regular calls for Trump to release his tax returns–although there is no legal requirement for any president to do so.

You know what? All of this sounds like a witch hunt to me.

Or, as Lou Dobbs said on Fox Business last week, “This is about a full-on assault by the left–the Democratic Party–to absolutely carry out a coup d’etat against President Trump, aided by the left-wing media.”

Yep. A witch hunt. Definitely.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

Since the day I accidently discovered that the Vatican pulled the Bible from their web site I’ve been racking my brain for a logical reason why in the internet age Rome would decide that Sacred Scripture had no place at Vatican online and would instead choose to send people searching for scripture to the sites of local authorities.  There are in fact arguments one can make for the change

One can suggest that it’s a lot less work to send people elsewhere  handle a dozen different languages on the site, except of course that they site already existed. One can argue that the Holy See doesn’t want to endorse one “official” version when there are several good translations there but that could be handled by a banner disclaimer.  One might even suggest that it solves the problem of the Psalms which were put up with only a single link meaning that you had to either start at Psalm 1 and go forward or Psalm 150 and work backward which while it would be a pain to fix could not be more than a couple of days work at the most for even the least competent programmer.  One could even claim this is part of the shepherds getting closer to the sheep by pushing traffic to the sites of local

Unfortunately there is one logical conclusion that given the divisions that have rocked the church since Amoris Laetitia makes the most logical sense.

Say you are the Bishops of Malta have decided to interpret the controversial parts of Amoris Laetitia as loosely as possible when it comes to admitting those practicing unrepentant Mortal Sin to communion when scripture inconveniently says this

For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was handed over, took bread, and, after he had given thanks, broke it and said, “This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”  For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes.  

Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord.  A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup.  For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.

1 Corinthians 11:23-29 (via USCCB Site)

Rather than trying to make specious argument to counter 2000 years of tradition and a clear translation on the Vatican Site might it not be easier to eliminate such a passage online, footnote it to redefine it while one commissions a different translation that rephrases these inconvenient passages to push toward your flock.  It might take some time and cost some money but once it’s done then you can claim that what was once universally considered mortally sinful is no big deal and point to “scripture” to prove it.  You might even get to the point where those pointing out Mortal Sin and considering it unacceptable behavior would be accused themselves of sinfulness for doing so.

Of course a Bishop or an Episcopal Conference doing such a thing would be endangering not other the souls of their parishioners but their own souls as Christ emphatically states in Matthew:

Whoever causes one of these little ones* who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. Woe to the world because of things that cause sin! Such things must come, but woe to the one through whom they come!

If your hand or foot causes you to sin,* cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter into life maimed or crippled than with two hands or two feet to be thrown into eternal fire.

And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter into life with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into fiery Gehenna.

Matthew 18:6-9 via USCCB

Then again the Bishops in question can always decide to re-interpret that passage too

Now you might say “DaTechGuy that’s just paranoia.”  I’d like to think you’re right but I’m old enough to remember that it was just 20 years ago here in America that people from Nancy Pelosi to Bill Clinton were insisting that anyone suggesting legalizing Civil Unions would lead to Gay Marriage was crazy and less than tens years ago that anyone suggesting gay marriage would lead to laws where you can be punished for not allowing people with a penis to use the ladies room would be a nut.  And I would further remind people that there are not only many priests who are publicly pushing to redefine sin but we have the example of the collapse of churches like the Episcopal church of the US to know what redefining sin leads to for a church.

Horrible Exit Question:   Does the Vatican and Pope Francis consider this possibility a bug or a feature of leaving the Bible off the Vatican site.

by baldilocks

Today, a friend of mine posted this Facebook exchange.

(I edited the names because I’m not interested in getting any of these people trolled – even the one who deserves it.)

Maneesh, as many may have surmised, is an American of Indian descent.

Sadly, this kind of response is common to those of us Americans with brown faces and non-European surnames. Ask me how I know.

Well, I’m glad you asked.

Actress Lupita Nyong’o–another famous member of the Luo tribe of Kenya. She’s not a Muslim.

Got it mostly when I tried to tell conservatives that the Luos of Kenya–my tribe and Obama’s alleged tribe–were 90% Christian and that the tribe was not an Arab tribe, nor a “slaver tribe” of all the rest of the tribes in the region; that was the prevalent Bravo Sierra.  Also, I received the Muslim-apologist treatment when I tried to tell people that Kenya’s 2008 Civil Conflict was not some sort of epic battle between Christianity and Islam, but a mundane tribal war. These notions have been the Fake News of nearly a decade.

Funny, none of the people who pontificated as Kenya experts back then give a rat’s furry backside about the country now.

I’ve had a long time to ponder the negative reactions of the very few of my fellow Americans to my name and my heritage. Most of it is fear of Islam. Justifiable, but people need to get a grip and stop pushing away fellow Americans who are allies and whose “funny names” are not an indication of their religious allegiance.

And here’s a notion that I don’t think I’ve ever put on screen. An online acquaintance who, quite correctly thinks that accusations of racism are overblown, wondered a few years ago which, if any, aspects of American slavery still affect Americans who are black in this century. I didn’t get the chance to answer then, but I’ll answer now: most black Americans have surnames of European origin. It’s so nearly universal that we don’t notice it anymore, not even me. Therefore, when some black chick named Ochieng pops up, it’s a curiosity and, sometimes it instills unconscious fear in those who are already afraid. Think this through.

All I know is that the Spirits of fear, violence, and tribalism are on the upswing in our country. I, however,  think it’s up to those of us who refuse to let those spirits master us to speak up, to understand, and, most of all, to pray without ceasing to the Lord of Hosts.

(Thanks to Christine)

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel tentatively titled Arlen’s Harem, will be done one day soon! Follow her on Twitter and on Gab.ai.

Please contribute to Juliette’s JOB:  Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or hit Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism!

So I’m a Millenial. Well, or a Xennial (or maybe an Oregon Trailer!) since I’m a bit older, or maybe something else. But in this crazy world, I can identify as a Millenial, so that should be good enough for you, and you’ll just have to accept me as I am.

I work with lots of younger Millenials. I like them, and I think most of the Millenial criticism has more to do with coming from broken families. But I’m seeing a few trends that seem to be unique to this upcoming generation. More importantly, I worry that these are holding people back when they have to work with older people.

Continue reading “How Millenials hurt themselves socially”

Yesterday my oldest turned 26 and thus my 26th year of Parenthood is now compete.  Here are a few things I’ve learned.

Just because they have your face your kid isn’t you: Both environment and heredity naturally will play a part in how your kids develop but he reality is your child isn’t you and even if you have the same face (as me and my oldest do) they are not you so don’t assume they will think and react like you automatically.

Children learn by example, not by command: Despite my reputation as “the hardest working man in the blogosphere” I can be both lazy and sloppy, particularly at home (I can hear my wife nodding even in her sleep right now) and both of my sons have picked that up. If there are things you want your kids to grow up being the best way to help that along is to be them.  If there are things you don’t want them to be avoid being them yourself.

Choose your friends/relatives wisely: Who you associate with when your kids are young will make a difference. If you want your children to grow up to be respectful, sober, God fearing and honorable, don’t surround yourself with people who are not these things. I was blessed that my very devout Catholic mother retired just as our 2nd kid was born and she and her 3 devout sisters born from the 1910’s to 1921 spent a lot of time with my sons.  That did a lot to shape them.   Do you have an older relative who is pious and moral? Invite said relative to the house and visit them with your kids. Do you have one who can build things when you can’t?  Visit them too. Is there a relative who is a libertine, a drunkard, a druggie? Keep them as far away as possible.

Time (and the culture) are against you…: You have a real short time to really influence your child before the culture and the internet grab them, make that time count so you are their go to choice for values. Teach them to be good God fearing honest and honorable men or women first and the rest 2nd. They can always learn new skills and trades but it’s hard to learn how to be good if you’re not.

…and is also the most valuable gift you have to give: The thing your kid wants the most from you is your time, presence and approval. Give them every moment of time you can spare (and even time you can’t).  Even if you aren’t doing stuff with them being near or in the same room so they can see you means a lot.  You can always earn more money but your time on earth is limited, make it count.

Make rules early…: If you want limits on your kids you need to set them right away make the rules when they are young and they are likely to keep them and make sure not only them but their friends know them. For example once my kids hit their pre-ten years and started having friends over I made the rules if I had to leave the house: No Booze, No Drugs No Sex and made them (and their friends) repeat the rules. Even after they turned all turned 21 and the booze part was dropped everyone knew that if there was drinking I had custody of everyone’s car keys on demand. If everyone knows the rules up front they may try to bend them but will rarely break them.

…and enforce them ruthlessly: It’s vital to make sure they know that if your rules are broken punishment will come and fast. I don’t care if said punishment is a whack on the ass (highly effective in the early years) a toy or game, broken, thrown out or sold (that will get their attention really fast) a disconnected internet password (not as effective as it once was with so many open networks out there) or even standing in a corner. You need to enforces those limits even if said rules punish you. Kids aren’t stupid, once they know they can get away with stuff, they will.  Furthermore when they do right give them your approval.

YOU are the Parent act like one: Even now at age 26 my sons are only allowed to call me “Peter” in one specific instance (If separated in a crowd they can shout my name to get my attention since shouting “Dad” will make everyone look). You are not your kids friend, you are not your kids playmate, you are not your kids drinking buddy, you are your children’s authority figure and if you are going to have any chance to fight against a culture and a world that wants to use them for their own ends you need to keep that authority. Remember they are kids and no matter how much they protest otherwise or how much society tries to tell you otherwise they don’t know ANYTHING. They’re just as stupid as you were at their age.

Spoiled young likely spoiled forever:: As anybody know it’s much harder to build something than to break something and once broken it’s very hard to fix someone. If you spoil your child because it makes you feel better or because you don’t want to make hem cry or because you want them to just shut up, you and your child will pay for it for a very long time. Spoiling your child isn’t love, it’s a form of narcissism. Think of it this way are you better off with a doctor who tells you whats wrong so it can be fixed or one who says everything is fine so you don’t worry?

It’s not about YOU: Your kids is not your trophy to show off, or a prize to have, or something for your bucket list. From the moment your wife’s belly starts to grow your life isn’t about you, it’s about them. Your life, your budget and your behavior should reflect this and if it doesn’t you, your child, your descendants and even society itself will pay the price.

This is you primary job:  Once you have children your job and your duty is keep them alive and well as you teach them how to be a good adult who can survive on their own and function in the world. It’s not going to be easy, all the norms of a dangerous world are working against you and it’s very possible that you will fail, but it you do make sure it’s not due to lack of effort or attention.

Finally Love your children: St. Paul defines love thus:

Love is patient, love is kind. It is not jealous, (love) is not pompous, it is not inflated, it is not rude, it does not seek its own interests, it is not quick-tempered, it does not brood over injury, it does not rejoice over wrongdoing but rejoices with the truth. It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

1 Cor 13:4-7

In other words seek the best for your children, even if it’s not what they want at that time and even if it risks their temporary anger.

Do these things to the best of your ability and in my experience, you’ll like the results more often than not.

Update: Stacy McCain has some do’s and don’t too, this one is basic:

Isn’t it just common sense that, if you’re looking for advice on how to raise successful kids, you should ask someone with experience as a parent?

Excuse me for bragging on my kids, but if “the personal is political” (to quote Carol Hanisch’s famous feminist slogan) then my experience as a parent of six children ought to count for something in such arguments. Even if you consider that my wife deserves nearly all the credit for our children’s success, at least I can testify as a witness to her motherhood methods.

Happy Friday, friends of Da tech Guy Blog! Let’s go off the beaten dead Russia Russia Russia horse path and have a lil tour around the Dextrosphere for fun!

At last, the template for all those fake news anti-Trump stories has been found and now we know how they do it! See Diogenes’ for the details.

There is a CONTEST for the best Trump vs CNN memes at PolitOpinion, and you can win a thousand bucks if your entry wins! 

Businesses in Bar Harbor, Maine are finding themselves forced to hire AMERICAN workers due to a shortage of foreigners!

Compare and Contrast: Melania, Jackie, and Michelle

Related: FLOTUS Melania more popular than FLOTUS Hillary was! 

Even generally lefty biased Snopes has had its fill of anti-Trump fake news! See Don Surber for the story.

Just when you think feminists could not get any crazier, you learn that its now sexist to assign gender specific names to your pets based on what their biological gender is. Via Moonbattery:

No matter how insane their ideology, they always find a way to progress still further into lunacy — even when no normal person would think it could be possible, as with the transgender agenda. Now they tell us that it is politically incorrect to assign genders to pets. From the feminist revolutionaries at Medusa Magazine:

Pets cannot speak for themselves. They cannot tell you that they are being misgendered. It’s important not to make assumptions about what gender your animal is based off of its sex.

Hold on, it gets even crazier:

Sex and gender are separate things and are in no way intertwined. The sex of your pet is irrelevant. The only time you need to concern yourself with the sex of your pet is when you spay or neuter it (and this begs the question of whether or not we should perform operations on our pets without their consent). Animals can have diverse genders just like humans, and they can have diverse sexualities also.

Owners are advised to give their pets gender-neutral names and use gender-neutral pronouns. You wouldn’t want to offend your pet, which might be a trans-pet.   MORE

Kid Rock is running for Senate, and that apparently has Fauxahontis feeling uneasy.

ISIS is getting its butt kicked.

Governor Moonbeam jumps the shark.

Leftists cheer Paul Ryan’s getting rid of a “sexist” rule that Nancy Pelosi was apparently fine with when SHE was Speaker of the House.

I hope you all enjoyed the links and that you have a lovely weekend.

*******

MJ Stevenson, AKA Zilla, is best known on the web as Zilla at MareZilla.com. She lives in a woodland shack near a creek, in one of those rural parts of New York State that nobody knows or cares about, with her family and a large pack of guardian companion animals. 

Yes, I know you’re busy and don’t have time to read, and this list is so hoity-toity you could puke, but please bear with me.

We are enduring a long-term warn against Western culture and values. Universities are throwing out rigorous curricula for victimology “studies” while making sure any dissenting views are not merely discouraged but downright expelled. Not even the long-gone Puritans are safe.

And the sad thing is that those who value Western culture are frequently unfamiliar with it.

Enter the Western canon: A list of the world’s literary tradition since antiquity, divided in four eras,
A. The Theocratic Age: 2000 BCE-1321 CE
B. The Aristocratic Age: 1321-1832
C. The Democratic Age: 1832-1900
D. The Chaotic Age: 20th Century

That’s four thousand years of literature.

The list itself has an interesting history, and it came about from the publishers of Harold Bloom’s book The Western Canon: The Books and School of the Ages. Bloom’s book presents his (emphasis added),

arguments for a unifying written culture, it argues brilliantly against the politicization of literature and presents a guide to the great works of the western literary tradition and essential writers of the ages

That is, Bloom was arguing against the politicization of literature in 1994, twenty three years ago. As Wikipedia correctly describes,

Bloom argues against what he calls the “School of Resentment“, which includes feminist literary criticismMarxist literary criticismLacaniansNew HistoricismDeconstructionists, and semioticians.

In practical terms, reading literature has now become a form of guerrilla warfare against Marxists, deconstructionists and their destructive pals.

So where to start?

You may have read a few already without realizing it, such as the Bible, which the Vatican recently removed from its website, Dickens’s A Christmas Carol, which is part of his Christmas Stories, or Orwell’s 1984. So browse through the list and pick one you haven’t read. Many of the books are available for free in Kindle editions.

Once you do, commit fifteen minutes a day to reading it. If you are able to listen while you commute, most of the titles are available in audiobooks for free at your local public library.

If you like to watch movies, Shakespeare plays have come to life on film for over a century. I recommend Much Ado About Nothing for a comedy, and both of The Hollow Crown series for the tragedies.

(A caution: Watch the movie, read the book doesn’t always work. Beowulf was a disaster.)

If you prefer to build up your list, start with short books.

You can’t win a war if you don’t understand what you’re fighting for. I suggest you start with reading from the Western canon to focus your understanding.

Fausta Rodríguez Wertz writes on U. S. and Latin America at Fausta’s blog