Ever since the nomination of President Trump the media began to recycle those tired old clichés.  I’m sure you know the ones I’m talking about.  The most often recited claims are that all those on the political right are Fascists and those same people are all bigots.   Neither of those claims is remotely true but that does not stop the media from spreading them.

A thorough analysis of the first claim will prove it to be factually and historically flawed.  At the historical root of this claim is a tiny bit of truth.  Dating back to before the French Revolution, members of the Fascist party did sit on the right side of parliaments in Europe while the Socialists sat on the left side.  This artificial model, based on seating arrangements alone, is the historical basis for this claim. There is no commonality between the political philosophies of the European Fascists and the political philosophies of the right-wing political movements that exist in the United States.  The framers of the Constitution created their own model to describe the political spectrum, one that is based entirely on fundamental truths about the nature of government.  Using this model, which has been called the founders model, you can accurately place any form of government or political philosophy on the political spectrum based on its actual characteristics.  W. Cleon Skousen discussed the founders’ model in great detail in his masterpiece “The 5000 Year Leap.”

The founders’ model measures the size and scope of government for any given philosophy.  On the absolute right of this model is no government.  What results with no government is anarchy because people are not perfect; some injure others and interfere with the fights of others.  A certain level of government is needed to prevent this from happening.  On the left is an all powerful totalitarian government where no freedom exists.

The first constitution of the United States, the Articles of Confederation, created a government that was too far to the right.  This government was too limited and anarchy resulted.  The framers of the Constitution sought to correct this by creating a government a bit more to the left.  The government created by the US Constitution was powerful enough to prevent anarchy but limited enough to prevent it from interfering with the rights of individual citizens.  The fundamental characteristics of this government were: all government power rested with the people, a small and limited government of enumerated powers, a clearly spelled out written constitution, government power distributed between many levels, a free market economy, maximum freedom, and a focus placed entirely on individual rights.    The philosophy fully embraced by the framers of the Constitution when they wrote the Constitution is Classic Liberalism, which is the opposite of Modern Liberalism.  Classic Liberalism and the Constitution are to the right of center on the founders’ modem.

Right leaning Libertarians are the closest modern equivalent to classic liberals.  Conservativism is more to the left on the founders’ model because that philosophy wants the federal government to intrude more when it comes to social issues.  This move to the left results in a government large enough to move the needle just to the right of center.  Conservatives believe in individual rights, a constitutionally limited government, and free markets.  They however try to use the federal government to ban those practices that they find morally unacceptable.

Here is how Merriam Webster’s online dictionary defines Fascism.  As you can see Fascism is primarily characterized by a strong totalitarian central government, collective rather than individual rights, and a market that is not free at all.  Fascism in near the absolute left of the founders’ model.  Unlike Fascists, Conservatives believe in free speech so they do not silence those they disagree with.  Also conservatives do not focus on race.  Conservative favorites include Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, Allen West, and so many other African Americans,

Socialism and Communism are both farther towards the absolute left of the founders’ model.  They feature more totalitarian government, more collectivism, and less freedom.  Modern Liberalism and Progressivism have a lot in common with Fascism, Socialism, and Communism.  Liberalism and Progressivism both feature much larger and oppressive government, less freedom, collective rights rather than individual rights, and a much less free market economy.  Also these philosophies focus extensively on race with identity politics.

Intolerance and bigotry are not the exclusive domain of the political right unfortunately the media continuously makes that claim.  Intolerance and bigotry are tragic human failings that encompass the entire political spectrum.  Because the political left believes in much larger governments intolerant and bigoted people on left can do more harm.  Hitler was a fascist therefore he was a left winger.  The Nazi Party was the National Socialist German Workers Party, sounds very left wing to me.

All hate groups such as the Klu Klux Klan and neo Nazis are labeled right wing but are they?  Democrats formed the Klan during reconstruction.  Most Klan members are Democrats.  The Southern, slave holding States were controlled by Democrats along with the Southern states during Segregation.  As I stated earlier Nazis were on the political left.  The Neo-Nazis advocate for the same National Socialism therefore they are also on the left. This article shares my assessment.

The Tea Party, which is the most right wing of all political movements based on its political philosophy, was vilified right from the start as a mob of racists and bigots.  There was never any proof of these accusations.  There were racist signs seen at Tea Party rallies but these racist signs made up roughly 3 percent of all Tea party signs, that is according to the a New York Times survey.

We must correct these incorrect statements whenever possible.

Marshall Rooster Cogburn: …you can forget about your duty.
Eula Goodnight: Your own General Lee thought it was the most beautiful word in the English language.
Marshall Rooster Cogburn: What the devil do you know of General Lee?
Eula Goodnight: That he was a christian gentleman who was soundly whipped in the field by Yankees!

Rooster Cogburn 1975

As a general rule I’m opposed to playing games with history and reality. History is what it is and a lot of trouble happens when you try to fiddle with it for the sake of an agenda. That basis also is sufficient to oppose removing the confederate monuments in the south, much better, in my opinion to put up other monuments near and/or with them and explain how and why these folks thought what they thought, why they choose to fight and what the general condition of both American and world culture was so people understand how a nation’s decision to kick the slavery can down the road for 60 years led to a destructive Civil War. And given our current situation lessons on how to avoid such a war might be a pretty good idea.

But there is one more point that I think overrides all of these considerations in my mind and should be taken into account by all those self righteous virtue signaling folk trying to use this to raise their own political profile by playing the “triggered” card.

There were hundreds of thousands of Union causalities in the civil war. According to the US Parks service over 340,000 died (over 110K in battle). Furthermore another 275,000 were wounded meaning tens of thousands of US soldiers spent the rest of their lives maimed because of the various generals honored by those statues and the troops who served under them.

Yet not only didn’t those Union Soldiers begrudge the south honoring those who tried to kill them or succeeded in crippling them, but the elected representatives of the Union survivors not only felt no need to force the removal of said monuments but were perfectly happy to vote honors in those directions even though:

  1. The southern states never at any time held a congressional majority
  2. The Union vets and their children were a significant voting block that drove elections nationally for decades.
  3. After the Civil war no southerner occupied the White House until every single Civil War Vet from both sides was dead and said southerner (LBJ) only became president due to Kennedy’s assassination.

Why didn’t they care? I suspect it was because they understood that the south had lost the war and lost it big time.

Again turning to park service numbers out of a population of 5.5 non slaves the south suffered over 483,000 casualties, nearly a tenth of the entire population. Over 194,000 confederate soldiers came home wounded and when they did come home they found cities destroyed, their countryside practically picked clean by the armies that had slaughtered and maimed their military age population and found that their wealth had been drained faster than a sink unclogged by liquid plumber.

The Union vets and their children were wise enough to understand that no monument even if carved of the best marble or stone whether in a city square or on the side of a mountain could change the fact that the south in general and the southern armies in particular were thoroughly and utterly defeated.

To my mind if the children of those union soldiers, not to mention the men themselves who were targeted for death and destruction by the subjects of those figures depicted in those statues, weren’t offended enough by them to force their removal how much less of a claim do we have generations later to be so offended that those monuments must go?

Let em keep their rocks.

Update: A pretty good counter argument here


To say I was disgusted by this AP story is an understatement but I’d like to remind everyone who shares this disgust with where we are what made this possible:

It was made possible when Democrats in the 90’s insisted that “civil unions” would not lead to gay marriage and Republicans Insisted there was no need for a constitutional amendment on marriage (they were lying)

It was made possible by a single vote in the Massachusetts Supreme Court that had been stacked with ultra liberals by folks like Bill Weld.

It was made possible by an ambitious republican pol who after being willing to throw his pro-life credentials off the bus to be elected was willing to quietly accept this ridiculous ruling without fighting back for fear it would harm his presidential election and fundraising chances.

It was made possible by a Democrat party so rightly afraid that the first black president might lose re-election without LGBT dollars that their vice president dragged him kicking and screaming out of the “closet” of support.

And finally it was made possible because Black Pastors and black churches all over the country, given the choice of following Christ or following Obama after he came out in favor of Gay Marriage overwhelmingly choose Obama.

What do all of these things have in common? The desire to gain or retain political power over the desire for truth.

All of this took less than one generation. That’s all the time it takes to lose a culture when people are too cowardly to fight for it.


The Layoff bleg continues. with e days to go we’re stuck at $1515 away from the goal to make August dedicated to the blog, the new radio show and events.

This blog is a venture in capitalism that depends primarily on readers. 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.

Sheldon Cooper:But you do bring up an interesting point. I don’t have to break new ground here, I’m sure much of the research already exists.
Leonard Hofstadter: No! no, my point is, if you want to learn how to make friends, then just go out to a coffee shop or a museum. Meet people. Talk to them. Take an interest in their lives.
Sheldon Cooper: That’s insane on the face of it. Come on.
Leonard Hofstadter: Where are we going?
Sheldon Cooper: You’re driving me to the mall. I’m going to acquire a book that summarizes the current theories in the field of friendmaking.

The Big Bang Theory The Friendship Algorithm 2009

This piece at Stacy McCain’s site concerning Emma Lindsay has really stuck with me:

She dated a series of boyfriends until she was in her mid-20s, at which point she decided she was actually bisexual, spent three years dating lesbians and, as she has said, convinced herself she was a victim of “the heteronormative brainwashing of society.” However, Ms. Lindsay’s lesbian relationships turned out the same way as her earlier relationships with men — i.e., failure — and, after a two-year romantic hiatus, she decided to subject herself once more to the insidious forces of patriarchy. What is her likelihood of heterosexual success, at age 32, if she always failed with men when she was younger? Or to look at it from a different angle, why would a man be interested in a woman who has not only been rejected by all her previous boyfriends, but has also been deemed an unsuitable partner by lesbians?

This latest shift seems about the desire for a child and has left her with a problem the quest is not going well because apparently the people she is meeting just aren’t as considerate as she is:

When I date people, I devote a lot of effort to making their lives better. When I’m with women, I read about health issues that effect lesbian demographics (higher rates of breast cancer, obesity, and depression.) When I’m with men, I read about health issues that effect straight men (coronary issues, blood pressure, and emotional issues esp. around anger.) When I date people of color, I research POC health/discrimination/etc. issues, especially issues around dating white people (mental/health effects of internalized racism, institutionalized racism, the types of micro-aggressions I may be likely to commit.) When I date people with less money, I pay for shit. When I date people who are messy, I organize their shit (even though I’m also really messy.) When I date people with physical limitations, I massage their shit (weird Emma past: I went to massage school.)

Her efforts have all come down to two choices in her quest for motherhood:

As far as I can tell, I have 2 options. Option 1 is “trapping” some guy into having kids with me because he lacks the self awareness to plan for it himself. This would also involve taking his last name, doing most of the housework while contributing 50% to the earnings, and faking my orgasms so he doesn’t have to feel emasculated by his lack of sexual prowess.

Option 2 is having kids by myself.

It would involve some sacrifices, like probably not living in San Francisco. However, every time I go on a date with some man-child, I become more and more convinced that those sacrifices are probably the less bad option.

Stacy sums up this conclusion here:

Her proposed “Option 2” — pay for donor sperm, “becoming a single mother by choice” — is a childish threat: “If you don’t play by my rules, I’m going to take my uterus and go home.” To which the world’s male population will generally react with a shrug of indifference.

“Damaged goods,” they’ll say, and if Emma Lindsay were an isolated exception, a lone kook howling at the moon, perhaps I’d shrug, too. Yet the fact is that Ms. Lindsay is part of a tide of human wreckage washing up on the shores of our sin-sick society, the flotsam and jetsam created by the disintegration of America’s formerly Christian culture.

While I agree this entire situation reeks of the disintegration of America’s Christian Culture I think Stacy is missing a key point concerning Miss Lindsay’s screed a consideration that is completely ignored in her calculations.

The good of her child.

You can look high and low, but in all her critiques of the various men she is considering none of said critiques include:  Would this man be a good father?  Would he put our child first?  Would this man be a good role model for our child?

Nor does she seem to be all that concerned about what she would bring to the table.  She talks about having to give up San Francisco and alludes to other unnamed sacrifices but nowhere is the realization that once you have children your life and your commitment belongs to them.  Their well-being, their education, feeding them, clothing them, steering them along the right path.  All of this considerations would seem to be job one.

Where is all her research on what makes a healthy and happy child who will grow up to be a responsible member of adult society?

In the days of my youth, these considerations went without saying, today with the sex act completely divorced from its actual function of procreation it seems her MIT education has not prepared her to ask this completely obvious question.

There is good news however for Miss Lindsay.  She has access to an excellent resource on this subject, as evidenced from an earlier piece of hers concerning the moment the general public discovered her writing:

Then, the day after, I got 75 thousand views, and I called my parents.

“Are you ok?” they asked, “How are the trolls? Are you getting trolled?” Then, “Why did you never tell us about this? You know you can tell us anything.”

She  has (or at least at the time of that writing did have) two parents who are apparently there for her.  I’d suggest sitting down with these parents and having a long talk with them on the subject.  They will almost certainly give the best advice they can on this decision and can do so with practical examples from both their and her own experiences.  And while I may or may not agree with what said advice might be, I’m certain it will flow from their unconditional love for their daughter.

Me I’d sum things up in two sentences:  The secret to a successful marriage is putting up with each other foibles during the 95% of the time when nothing too exciting (good or bad) is going on.

As for Parenthood; The secret to being a good parent is loving your child enough to be willing to enforce an unpleasant rule or speak an uncomfortable truth even when it hurts.

No Charge


The Layoff bleg continues. with 5 days to go we’re $1515 away from the goal to make August dedicated to the blog, the new radio show (shows?) and events.

This blog is a venture in capitalism that depends primarily on readers. 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.

I spoke to Sr. John Dominic Rasmussen of the Dominican Sisters of Mary at the Catholic Marketing Network

She was a tough interview to get, everyone seemed to want to speak with her, finally I had to pack up my equipment and go to her booth to get the job done.

I loved what I saw here not just the cute animated videos of Sister…

1: Why Educate in Virtue? from Dominican Sisters of Mary on Vimeo.

(it’s odd to see Sr. animated but trust me she is just as animated in person)

…but pages on the individual virtues like Modesty

MODESTY
MEANING

  • Purity of heart in action, especially in regards to dress and speech

LOOKS LIKE

  • Dressing in an appropriate manner
  • Dressing in private
  • Not bragging about talents, achievements etc.
  • Not being eager to talk about yourself
  • Not trying to be the center of attention in word or action

SOUNDS LIKE

  • I will wear this skirt because it isn’t too short or too tight.
  • I need some privacy.
  • Silence

and Circumspection

CIRCUMSPECTION

MEANING

  • Careful consideration of circumstances and consequences

LOOKS LIKE

  • Pausing to think
  • Thinking before acting
  • Praying before acting
  • Asking for advice from an older, trusted person

SOUNDS LIKE

  • I should wait before I respond.
  • Let me think about that.
  • Jesus, help me to do what you would do.
  • May I ask you for advice about something?
  • Let me think about what I should do.

By an odd coincidence just a few minutes after I published my youtube interview with Sr. I saw linked at Stacy McCain’s website this PJ Media story about the education that Planned Parenthood wants to deliver instead:

Planned Parenthood thinks your child needs to know about transgenderism and masturbation at the tender age of three. The Daily Wire reports:

In new guidelines  issued on the official Planned Parenthood website, the  federally subsidized corporation explains how parents should talk to their pre-schoolers about gender roles, sexuality, masturbation, and transgenderism, even offering tips on how to tell if your toddler “is transgender or gender nonconforming.”

Advice from the guidelines includes:

Be mindful of how you talk around your kid, too. Talking to (or in front of) your daughter about growing up and having boyfriends or marrying a man (and vice versa) sends the message that girls are supposed to like boys, and boys are supposed to like girls, and that anything else is wrong or not normal. While kids this young don’t know their sexual orientation yet, assuming they’re straight could make them sacred to come to you or feel bad about themselves later. This can lead to mental health issues, unhealthy relationships, and taking more health risks when they reach their teenage years.

So, along with freaking parents out over potentially triggering a mental illness in their child, Planned Parenthood provides the litmus test for determining whether or not your child is transgender.

The most frightening words from that piece are “Federally Funded”.

Stacy McCain sums it up pretty well

Amazingly the same people who insist that removing federal funding from Planned Parenthood’s attempts to teaching 4 year olds about Masturbation and transgenderism is a sign of hate would scream bloody murder at the thought of the Federal government funding Sr. John Dominic’s Education in Virtue curriculum.

So I ask the obvious question? If you are a parent Which program would you want your young child to be in so they would grow up to be a responsible and sensible adult?


This blog is a venture in capitalism that depends primarily on readers. 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.

Tuesday I was reading an excellent piece at the NY Post by Salma Zito on Canadian’s opinions concerning President Trump when I saw this piece highlighted on the side that made my jaw drop

My first reaction is “you’re kidding me” alas they’re not.

An internet vlogger has stunned viewers with the reason she let her best friend sleep with her boyfriend.

YouTuber Lena Nersesian, who calls herself Lena The Plug, told her 900,000 subscribers she wanted her friend Emily to have sex with Adam so she can “try his penis.”

Yes, you’re reading that right, the story continues

Adam was pretty happy to take part in the online experiment,

Break out my “shockda face”

although he said he was feeling the pressure to “perform.

Yeah I can imagine a million people watching two woman critique you would put the pressure on

The girls are then seen in skimpy outfits twerking for Adam — who has his own YouTube channel — before he joins them on the bed.

After the girls had sex with him — off camera — the threesome discussed their antics in X-rated detail.

I’ve got nothing to say to Adam, I was young and stupid once and the odds of me at that age having the good sense to decline his girlfriend’s “generous” offer would have been even smaller than the odds of me ever getting said offer,  so instead let me address myself to the young ladies in question in the interest of explaining realities that their parents apparently never bothered to.  Let me lead with a cold hard practical facts of life.

If you seeking internet fame based on sexuality you might draw plenty of hits and perhaps make ad revenue off but  eventually time age and the lessening shock values starts working against you.

Consider what I wrote about former Pippi Longstocking star Tami Erin a few years back (content warning) when she went from complaining about a sex tape, to pushing the sextape to Touring with Hustler mag.  For a time the numbers looked promising for the 39 year Ms. Erin.

Thanks to the new found male interest in the former child star her web site ranking has jacked up by 700,000 spots in Alexa Rank over the last few months and will likely break the top 2,000,000 rank before the year is out. I suspect her twitter following will rise as well easily reaching 10,000 by years end.

Alas four years later at Age 43 despite her movie fame, the neutral objective fact that she is still an extremely attractive woman, and her increased ahem exposure,  her twitter feed sits at 7650 and her web site’s Alexa ranks is 16,211,767 (down 2,848,489 spots), about 15,800,000 places behind this old fat guy in a twelve foot scarf whose parts nobody is interested in viewing.  This is not a surprise as I said at the time:

There are already plenty of  younger more voluptuous women ready and willing to carry themselves more provocatively than Ms. Erin.  It won’t take long for the novelty to fade and then the stray lesbian kiss, topless shot or swing around a pole will not be enough to retain the interest and procure the monies of the MichaelDick73’s JDogg77’s and Machette42’s of the world.

That’s the point when she is going to have to go a bit farther and then a bit farther again until a search for Tami Erin will turn up results on a niche category of older woman doing X, Y and Z on porn sites around the world.

Her threesome video drew millions of hits but what happens then, when the public’s interest in  Miss Nersesian’s assets fade, after all it won’t take long for a new younger woman, just as busty and willing to display her assets on youtube for the crowd that has already seen her’s

Does she move from mentioning a threesome off camera to having one on camera, do you add a 3rd woman or perhaps a second man?  Based on her twitter feed (very NSFW and not linked here) that’s apparently not a problem, but the farther you go the more you suffer from the laws of diminishing returns.

Now as I mentioned before I was once young and stupid and it’s only because of the lack of a public internet at the time that the mistakes of my generation are not viewing fodder our/my children and grandchildren as yours are, but while someone can’t change the past you can shape the future.

So to Miss Nersesian I say this:  Ask yourself where you want to be in five years or ten years in terms of a job, a relationship/husband and a family and then ask yourself if threesomes on youtube are going to get you there?

Frankly the answer to the question of how to get where you need to be was given by a Jewish Carpenter to a woman in a similar situation whose judges walked away in shame.

Then Jesus straightened up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”  She replied, “No one, sir.” Then Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you. Go, (and) from now on do not sin any more.”

John 8:10-11

If you give him a chance Christ will be happy to welcome you and you won’t have to take off a thing.

Perhaps you might laugh at that idea now but you’ve got a long life ahead of you and Christ will keep trying.  I’ll add you to my daily prayer list and we’ll let the Holy Spirit do the work.


This blog is a venture in capitalism and as you might guess we draw a tad less traffic than young busty women in threesomes, which is a slight disadvantage when you depend primarily on readers to pay yourself and your writers. 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.

“Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”

Queen of Hearts, Alice in Wonderland

“When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”

Humpty Dumpty, Through the Looking Glass

Our Constitution is meant to provide the framework within which a government that “derives its just powers from the consent of the governed” can function to “ensure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.” Of course, our society is ordered to provide another institution apart from government to protect our posterity: the family. As society has recognized for millennia, the family unit serves the invaluable purpose (one of many) of providing parents to protect children from, among other things, making bad decisions that could have lifelong consequences.

In Massachusetts, we do not allow a child to drive until he or she is at least 16, to vote or serve in the military until 18, or to drink alcohol until 21. We all agree that children are not able to make important decisions for themselves until their brains and bodies have matured enough and they have experienced enough in life to have the proper context in which to evaluate consequences. So how is it possible that the Legislature is debating a bill that would give prepubescent children the legal ability to decide that they are the “wrong” gender?

There are actually two identical bills being debated by the Joint Committee on Children, Families and Persons with Disabilities, Senate Bill 62 and House Bill 1190, both titled “An Act relative to abusive practices to change sexual orientation and gender identity in minors.” Now, of course, no one is in favor of “abusive practices” used on children, no matter what the circumstances, but the bills’ supporters, based on their testimony from last week, seem to think that any counseling aimed at helping children who suffer from gender dysphoria or homosexual attraction is, by definition, abusive.

As Andrew Beckwith, president of the Massachusetts Family Institute, has correctly pointed out, if the proponents are concerned about the use of electroshock therapy or other clearly abusive practices, then the bill should outlaw those therapies explicitly. But to claim that counseling a child to feel comfortable in his own body is abusive, while prescribing hormones that could lead to permanent sterilization or physically mutilating a healthy body is not, is just Mad-Hatter-crazy. This bill is set up to do the exact opposite of what its sponsors falsely claim it is intended to do.

So we find ourselves facing the very real possibility that the legislature will pass a bill that severely limits the rights of parents to decide what is best for their children, and the Free Speech and Religious Liberty rights of counselors and pastors who would seek to help children escape from these misguided feelings, even if the feelings are unwanted. I have a source in the State House who tells me that the committee chair is disinclined to attach a criminal penalty to the legislation, as if that would somehow make it okay. It would not.

We must oppose this misguided bill. If you are a Massachusetts citizen, I urge you to contact your State Representative and Senator to make your voice heard. At least they haven’t yet tried to take that right away from us.

Harry Baker: Do whatever you want, live like a bum.
Alan Baker: Why am I a bum?
Harry Baker: Are you married?
Alan Baker: No
Harry Baker: Then you’re a bum

Come blow your horn 1963

This story from the NY Post got me laughing:

When Scott, a male model who says he’s in his 30s, kicks off the Hamptons high season this weekend at his Sag Harbor waterfront house, the unattached hunk won’t have any reservations about hooking up with women he hardly knows.

“I had a vasectomy a few months ago. Having a house in the Hamptons and being fairly well-off, I’ve encountered some problems — women try to get pregnant,” said Scott, a regular on the society scene who earns a cool half-million a year.

He recalled sex partners who have lied to him about being on birth control. “It’s a trick. [They say] ‘I love you, [we] don’t need a condom.’ ”

Scott — who describes himself as “Tarzan with light eyes” — typically beds up to 10 different women per summer and estimates that 20 percent of the single ladies he encounters are looking to trap a rich guy with a baby.

The goal? At the very least: 18 to 21 years of child support and, in some instances, a green card for the mother, since their child would be born in the US

It the culture that I was brought up with, the proper description of these guys would be a “bum”. And apparently these poor abused rich bums are horrified at the prospect that sex might have consequences and so it’s time to go under the knife:

 

“This extortion happens all the time. Women come after them. [They get pregnant and] want a ransom payment,” said Shusterman. “Some guys do an analysis of the cost — for three days of discomfort [after a vasectomy], it’s worth millions of dollars to them.

“I never see a poor guy [asking] for a vasectomy,” he added. “Rich guys are a population that’s abused a lot.”

Just ask John, a 34-year-old bachelor who had the procedure this month. (He asked that his name be changed for professional reasons.)

The real-estate developer and Upper West Side resident — who said he can have a different sex partner in the Hamptons every weekend — doesn’t want a repeat of last summer, when a woman he met at a party tried to pull a fast one after sex.

 

Now let’s forget the fact that this operation isn’t going to protect these guys from the various sexually transmitted diseases and the like, let’s also forget that the fact that the longer you wait to reverse a vasectomy the lower the chances it can be reversed and let’s concede Glenn Reynolds point that the women who do this are dishonest and dishonorable but the bottom line is the confirmation of this line by Stacy McCain at Medium.

Once you separate sexual behavior from its procreative function, so that “sex” is no longer about men and women forming permanent pair-bonds for the purposes of raising families, everything goes haywire. If “sex” is merely about hedonism, and if we can only discuss “sexuality” and “gender” as amorphous intellectual abstract concepts based on our emotional moods, then we can expect endless confusion and misery to follow.

But there’s more to it than that. If you look at the rules of Judeo-Christianity as taught and as written for thousands of years before our friends on the left and in academia got ahold of them, you figure out very quickly that said rules were not about punitive restrictions of a dictator demanding his subject follow his whims, but were about a loving father knowing what’s best for his children’s well being and happiness and steering them in the right direction.

Now don’t get me wrong, I’m a man just like the rest of these guys and I’d be lying if I didn’t wish that after 29 years of marriage I did as well in a year as these guys do in a couple of weeks, but I’m also old and wise enough to know how this will end, almost certainly with a woman much like the ones they are currently dodging in love with their money rather than themselves and if they are VERY lucky able to reverse their operation to have a family late in life who will stay just long enough to make sure the divorce settlement is to their liking.

but barring such luck it’s much more likely they will find themselves paying off student loans of woman’s studies majors for company while going long on Viagra futures as father time asserts himself.

Again this is not a question of a punitive result, it’s the logical ending to relationship goals based on hedonism.

Now if these fellows had been looking for a spouse early, they would not only have a readily available sexual partner but would likely have one whose affections were not based on the profit motive and a family to rejoice with him in success, comfort him in failure and when their later years came they would have family that would love them unconditionally.

Again this is not about rules or regulations this is about reality and in the end no matter how much money you have, reality will assert itself and no matter how little sympathy I have for these fellow, reality will have even less.

If these guys are smart they will stop looking for hookup and start looking for a wife, if not, may they be happy with the choices they make, because they’ll be living with them forever.

For many years I’ve been attempting to raise the alarm about the loss of our rights and our freedoms.  You would expect that my posts would be met with outrage by my Facebook friends or Twitter followers, who should have notice the same erosion of our rights. You would expect most of my friends would share my concerns.  Unfortunately that is not the case at all.  Most often my post is met with silence and apathy.  Occasionally I get into arguments with friends who side with those who are robbing us of our freedoms.  At times I do get discouraged but I refuse to give up.  For inspiration I reflect on a quote by that great philosopher Tim Allen from the movie Galaxy Quest: “Never give up, never surrender.”

Most people are not aware of what they’ve lost.  Very few schools teach civics any more.  Instead they teach the politically correct, liberal revisionist interpretation of the Constitution.  Our founding principles have been completely dismissed by our education establishment in the name of the tired liberal cliché: they were originated by a bunch of white supremacist, slave holders.

Instead of the virtues of our founding principles and our remarkable Constitution, educators now praise that deeply flawed and deadly political philosophy known as socialism.  Instead of championing free speech, students are now taught that their feelings are far more important than everyone else’s rights.  Individual, God given natural rights have now been replaced by collective rights granted to us exclusively by the government.

It is not just teachers that are brainwashing entire generations.   Hollywood and the rest of the entertainment industry are also guilty. Whenever a conservative or a libertarian comes out of the political closet they are ostracized and denied future roles.  Liberals enjoy a virtual monopoly over the entertainment industry and they use that monopoly to spread their liberal ideals. .

Liberals also enjoy a virtual monopoly over the news industry.  With this last election the American news media lost the vast majority of its remaining credibility.  They are now poling about the same as leprosy.  Despite these miserable poll numbers it is nearly impossible for one person to compete with the avalanche of biased news.  That’s the biggest problem I face.   I’m just one person trying to spread a message that a sizable percentage of my right of center Facebook friends agree with.  Unfortunately they remain silent.  They do not share my posts or share similar posts even though they are just as unhappy as I am with the state of things.  I get into epic debates with my liberal friends but never receive any backup from my conservative and libertarian friends.  If you have friends like me that try to spread the word please help them by sharing their posts and helping in the debates.  That could make a huge difference.

I try to experiment with different ways of getting my message out on Facebook.  Another quote I draw inspiration from comes from Clint Eastwood in the movie Heartbreak Ridge: “improvise, adapt, overcome.”  I try to not only inform, but also entertain my friends.

Facebook and Twitter are not my outlets for spreading my Constitution message.  I created a very successful website Constitution Mythbuster.   Please check it out.  WordPress make it easy to start your own website, please do so, the more conservative and libertarian websites that exist, the better.  I would very like to thank Da Tech Guy for the opportunity to spread my message of freedom and constitutional principles on this website.

O’Reilly: Don’t you ever say that again about your fathers, because they are not cowards. You think I am brave because I carry a gun; well, your fathers are much braver because they carry responsibility, for you, your brothers, your sisters, and your mothers. And this responsibility is like a big rock that weighs a ton. It bends and it twists them until finally it buries them under the ground. And there’s nobody says they have to do this. They do it because they love you, and because they want to. I have never had this kind of courage. Running a farm, working like a mule every day with no guarantee anything will ever come of it. This is bravery. That’s why I never even started anything like that… that’s why I never will.

The Magnificent Seven 1960

“You [have to] work your ass off, that’s the only way.

Kate Hudson 2014

One of the things that has plagued me though my life has been thoughts of the various plights of the world’s peoples.

It always seemed to me the example of America and Americans were a blueprint. You have a nation that over its two centuries of existence exhibited the path to the easiest and best possible life for human beings, a life so good that millions rushed to come here over the decades and within two generations and were generally rewarded by the sight of their children and then their grandchildren living better than they ever dreamed they would.

A big part of this comes from the American system whereby justice was not dependent on bribery of officials the ability to improve one’s situation by hard work, complemented by free speech, free religion and a representative government all made possible by the two bedrocks of western civilization:

  1. English common law with the principle of the equality of all people before said law
  2. Christianity with the principle of the equality of all people before God.

When I looked upon the world, their unwillingness to adopt these two ingredients I’ve thought about the cultural and historical reasons why these things have not been done but in the end there is one ingredient more important than any other.

Courage.

Not in the sense that you might think, There are plenty of people willing to taking or deliver a blow or even risk their lives to fight, but I’m talking about a particular type of courage, the courage to endure monotony for a goal.

Most great endeavors take not only a lot of work but the willingness to do said work repeatedly, over and over, laboriously, without reward directly in front of you.

If you think of the World War 2 generation they had such courage.  The willingness to work a factory, to go door to door selling, to work 12-15 hours a day in a business six days a week to make it work, to do these unexciting things day in and day out without excepting help from anyone else, willing to endure setback after setback without public complaint until success comes.

Think of the arab states, they have the one advantage that Israel does not, population in abundance, imagine if instead of unthinking hatred against the jewish state they simply concentrated on making their population the best educated, the hardest working and the most dedicated people toward improving their own lot and the lot of their children.

If this was the case nothing would be beyond their reach and within three generations they would look on the Jewish state and laugh at the idea that there was any reason to fear them.

The same holds true of all populations if instead of spending energy blaming others for their plight (and expecting reparations for the same) a simple dedication to self improvement  would change the world.

But now this has become an issue here in the US as well, particularly among the left.

Think of the gender police, think of the race police, think of the “resistance”what do they have in common?  They live by the excuse, the blame of others and seek revenge or restitution.  After all why even put in the effort if the deck is so stacked against them, or so they think, not considering that those who came before them 750 & 150 years ago had much more going against them and advanced.

How did they do so?  By having the courage to endure the monotony of effort without expecting a quick fix.

The man or woman who works 10 hours at a job to make sure there is food on the table, who makes sure their children are doing the right thing and carries no without caring a jot if the government plans to help or not has more courage than shouting “No Justice No Peace”.

And until that cultural lesson is released they will become stagnant and jealous wondering why the world is so against them.

It’s always been a sad thing to see this type of thing abroad, it’s even sadder to see it happen here, but as long as there are those who can gain profit or power from this situation, it will continue.