September 04, 2015

Kentucky Clerk not Guilty in My Opinion

Jack Kemp

I think she broke no state law and was thus illegally arrested. She "broke" federal law - written by the Supreme Court. The court can name no state statute that she violated. The state even has a law on the books stating marriage is between a man and a woman.

Guys, the vaugely worded articles and mentions of the governor wanting her in jail confused me. Judson Phillips, editor of Tea Party Nation, says she is in a federal lockup. Now the politicla showtrial can begin.

from Judson Phillips:

Kim Davis is just following the lead of her Dear Leader Obama. She voted for him twice and is still a member of the Party of Treason. There is a double standard in America. Conservatives are expected to accept and follow any bad law passed by Congress or decided by the Supreme Court, while liberals are free to ignore them.

Barack Obama ignores immigration laws, Obamacare or even the national debt. The Supreme Court ignores 230 years of precedent and Federalism to create a right to homosexual marriage. California Governor Jerry Brown ignores millions of voters who decided Proposition 8, which stated that marriage was between one man and one woman, and refused to defend the law.

Why should Kim Davis be any different from other Democrats?

The real casualty here is the rule of law.

The real casualty is the Constitution.

When Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and the other members of the Party of Treason are free to pick and choose the laws they are going to obey, why can’t Kim Davis? Why can’t the rest of us? If Obama isn’t going to follow the law on Immigration, why can’t the rest of us decide we aren’t going to follow tax laws?

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:28 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 302 words, total size 2 kb.

A Fight Worth Having; Political Prisoner in Kentucky

Dana Mathewson

A good lawyer should be able to defend her on First Amendment grounds, don't you think? The gays can't force their religion on her.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:27 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 35 words, total size 1 kb.

Are Liberals Bigger Drug Users?

Dana Mathewson

In a conversation with a friend of mine in New Hampshire, I opined that liberals, as a group, were probably heavier users of "recreational drugs" than conservatives, and made the remark that "I couldn't say how it related as far as a cart-and-horse matter." In other words, would frequent drug use damage your brain enough to turn you into a liberal?

I pointed out how a number of churches where I played were involved with AA programs, but that First Universalist Church (a wholly-owned subsidiary of the DNC as far as I could tell) was the only one with a Marijuana Anonymous program.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:26 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 111 words, total size 1 kb.

September 03, 2015

Transforming the Present Republican System into Monarchy

Timothy Birdnow
Writing to express the displeasure of the Commonwealth of Virginia toward the Alien and Sedition Act, James Madison wrote the following:

"That the General Assembly doth also express its deep regret, that a spirit has in sundry instances, been manifested by the federal government, to enlarge its powers by forced constructions of the constitutional charter which defines them; and that implications have appeared of a design to expound certain general phrases (which having been copied from the very limited grant of power, in the former articles of confederation were the less liable to be misconstrued) so as to destroy the meaning and effect, of the particular enumeration which necessarily explains and limits the general phrases; and so as to consolidate the states by degrees, into one sovereignty, the obvious tendency and inevitable consequence of which would be, to transform the present republican system of the United States, into an absolute, or at best a mixed monarchy."


"That this state having by its Convention, which ratified the federal Constitution, expressly declared, that among other essential rights, "the Liberty of Conscience and of the Press cannot be cancelled, abridged, restrained, or modified by any authority of the United States,” and from its extreme anxiety to guard these rights from every possible attack of sophistry or ambition, having with other states, recommended an amendment for that purpose, which amendment was, in due time, annexed to the Constitution; it would mark a reproachable inconsistency, and criminal degeneracy, if an indifference were now shewn, to the most palpable violation of one of the Rights, thus declared and secured; and to the establishment of a precedent which may be fatal to the other."

End excerpt.

His complaint bears a strangely modern feel to it; the United States government has metastasized, grown bloated with powers neither granted nor enumerated by the Constitution but seized by creative interpretation of the language of the document. America has indeed become a "mixed monarchy" with a power-mad Executive Branch simply reaching it's hand to grasp whatsoever it pleases, with a Congress making laws based not on what is permissible under the Constitution but what is politically expedient, and with the Supreme Court engineering tyrannical social reconstruction via the expansion of certain general phrases to fundamentally reconstruct the meaning of our Constitution.

Take, for instance, the Affordable Care Act; proposed by the Obama Administration, pushed through Congress by a strictly partisan vote, a vote that only happened through deceit (the Senate vacated the entire House bill and substituted it's own using the same name and number as the House to get around the rule that spending bills originate in the House of Representatives) and bribery (the Cornhusker Kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, etc.) This overarching expansion of imperial power by the President and his supermajority in congress clearly tortured the Constitutional language, stretching the necessary and proper clause well beyond it's elastic limit and asserting that Congress may not be restricted in any fashion whatsoever where taxation occurs - an idea that is utterly abominable and would have Madison - father of the Constitution - rolling over in his grave.

SCOTUS, ruling of the ACA, expanded the powers enumerated in Article I, Sec. 8 of the Constitution to include taxation of any individual just for existing - and not to pay down debt nor to finance national security. The key word "promote the general welfare" was magnified into an absolute power, a monarchical imperative. SCOTUS completely ignored every and any argument from enumerated Constitutional rights (not to mention those rights not enumerated - which are equally valid, as the Constitution restricts the power of the U.S., not of the citizenry). That the citizens have the right to not be forced to labor for another against their will (slavery) was ignored. So too was the right to privacy that SCOTUS imputed to the Constitution to enact abortion. So too was the Tenth Amendment limits imposed on the U.S. This ruling turned 120 plus years of American legal protections on it's head.

Gay marriage, too, has been one of these classic examples of twisting the meaning of "certain general phrases". Marriage is a general phrase with a specific meaning, yet SCOTUS, in another classic split ruling, redefined it to mean a general contractual relationship between people as opposed to the specific definition of a man and woman binding themselves contractually for the purpose of procreation and raising a family. Having twisted the meaning of the word, the Court then found that homosexuals were not being granted equal protection under the law. Strange; by extending equal protection where it had never been (homosexuals are as free to marry as anyone, and always had been, just not each-other, at least not each-other and expect society to celebrate their union) they abridged the First Amendment protection against the prohibition of the free exercise of religion. Now Christians are being forced to celebrate a practice that is against their moral and spiritual code. An enumerated right has been obliterated by government under the auspices of protecting a right to something that has never been considered a right.

Not to be outdone by James Madison, Thomas Jefferson wrote a similar resolution opposing the Alien and Sedition Act for Kentucky. Here is an important point:

"...That if those who administer the general government be permitted to transgress the limits fixed by that compact, by a total disregard to the special delegations of power therein contained, annihilation of the state governments, and the erection upon their ruins, of a general consolidated government, will be the inevitable consequence: That the principle and construction contended for by sundry of the state legislatures, that the general government is the exclusive judge of the extent of the powers delegated to it, stop nothing short of despotism; since the discretion of those who adminster the government, and not the constitution, would be the measure of their powers: That the several states who formed that instrument, being sovereign and independent, have the unquestionable right to judge of its infraction; and that a nullification, by those sovereignties, of all unauthorized acts done under colour of that instrument, is the rightful remedy: That this commonwealth does upon the most deliberate reconsideration declare, that the said alien and sedition laws, are in their opinion, palpable violations of the said constitution; and however cheerfully it may be disposed to surrender its opinion to a majority of its sister states in matters of ordinary or doubtful policy; yet, in momentous regulations like the present, which so vitally wound the best rights of the citizen, it would consider a silent acquiesecence as highly criminal ..."

End excerpt.

America has reached the point where the general government has become the exclusive judge of the extent of the powers delegated to it, and that, in Jefferson's opinion, is despotism. Certainly the imposition of the ADA and homosexual marriage through the erosion of language and assertion of authority by the central government over the individual states - many of which have laws against both - have de facto dissolved the individual states into mere provinces, completely overturning the 10th Amendment which asserts that the rights not expressly granted the United States government are reserved wholly to the states or the People. Now neither are being given a choice.

Instead, we have a SCOTUS decision that is forcing business people to perform acts in violation of their religious beliefs and consciences. We have an elected clerk in Kentucky facing catastrophic fines and possible jail time for enforcing state law over the SCOTUS edict. Nowhere is marriage mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, and the Tenth Amendment makes it clear that the state has the right to define the meaning of the term. SCOTUS grossly overstepped it's boundaries.

That isn't stopping even some good conservatives from making the fundamental error of assuming what SCOTUS says is the final word. In fact, one writer suggested the clerk is behaving in a way not fundamentally different from a Muslim airline stewardess who refuses to serve cocktails on flights. That these two cases are not in any way similar, with the clerk having been elected by the people prior to the SCOTUS ruling and with her trying to uphold state law while the stewardess was hired with serving cocktails as one of her job duties seems lost on some. The reality is, the stewardess really has no right to legal complaint, the clerk is doing her job as she was deputized by the good people of Kentucky to do. And she is about to be made a huge example of by the forces of despotism.

It is time we stop surrendering our rights to the will of those in government. The Kentucky clerk has every right to refuse to grant these licenses. She can and should follow the law of her home state. If Kentucky changes the law then she must either issue them or resign, but until then she has the right to refuse.

Jefferson and Madison would both approve of at least the spirit of her actions.

SCOTUS granted itself the right to judicial review and to interpret the Constitution. Chief Justice John Marshall simply asserted this authority in Marbury v. Madison, and SCOTUS has held itself in imperium ever since. But this was not the intent of the Founders; in Federalist 78 Alexander says of the Judiciary:

"This simple view of the matter suggests several important consequences. It proves incontestably, that the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power1; that it can never attack with success either of the other two; and that all possible care is requisite to enable it to defend itself against their attacks. It equally proves, that though individual oppression may now and then proceed from the courts of justice, the general liberty of the people can never be endangered from that quarter; I mean so long as the judiciary remains truly distinct from both the legislature and the Executive. For I agree, that "there is no liberty, if the power of judging be not separated from the legislative and executive powers."2 And it proves, in the last place, that as liberty can have nothing to fear from the judiciary alone, but would have every thing to fear from its union with either of the other departments; that as all the effects of such a union must ensue from a dependence of the former on the latter, notwithstanding a nominal and apparent separation; that as, from the natural feebleness of the judiciary, it is in continual jeopardy of being overpowered, awed, or influenced by its co-ordinate branches; and that as nothing can contribute so much to its firmness and independence as permanency in office, this quality may therefore be justly regarded as an indispensable ingredient in its constitution, and, in a great measure, as the citadel of the public justice and the public security. "

End excerpt.

And yet the Judiciary has become a political arm, making new laws on it's own behalf and working hand-in-glove with the other branches. Take John Robert's view of the role of SCOTUS:

"If the statutory language is plain, the Court must enforce it according to its terms. But oftentimes the meaning -- or ambiguity -- of certain words or phrases may only become evident when placed in context. So when deciding whether the language is plain, the Court must read the words "in their context and with a view to their place in the overall statutory scheme.” FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 529 U. S. 120, 133. Pp. 7–9.


When read in context, the phrase "an Exchange established by the State under [42 U. S. C. §18031]” is properly viewed as ambiguous. The phrase may be limited in its reach to State Exchanges."

End excerpt

And Roberts then immediately took to rewriting the law to make it pass muster, rather than SENDING IT BACK TO CONGRESS for a rewrite by the lawmakers.

Granted, Roberts voted against the gay marriage decision, but one must ask by what metric the Supreme Court rules on laws? Roberts is eager to rewrite liberal laws, the liberal justices are eager to overturn ones they do not like. Either way we wind up with massive judicial overreach.

America's central government is becoming a nation of men and not laws. It is no longer a federal system, but rather a central autocracy with the illusion of federalism left in place to keep the natives from getting restless.

But the natives are restless, and a steady, firm refusal to obey the dictates of the central authority is becoming the only alternative to the encroaching tyranny. Given the awesome power of the U.S. military we are not going to see a revolution fought with guns as our forefathers prosecuted successfully; rather, it must be a rebellion that is small, with the simple push of individuals like Kim Davis, that county clerk who just said no to the imperial government. It will be through nullification - not the grand nullification of John C. Calhoun but the gentler sort, with individuals refusing to obey edicts but sticking to their oaths and to the laws approved by their fellow citizens. It's a restoration of the right law, not a rebellion.

We are the defenders of the Law. They are the ones in rebellion here.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:46 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 2235 words, total size 15 kb.

NOAA Meteorologist Breaks Omerta

Timothy Birdnow

David Dilley, former NOAA meteorologist, breaks Omerta and explains how the government uses funding and career advancement to pressure scientists to promote Global Warming.

According to Dilley:

"Many former research department heads, such as Dr. Reid Bryson (known as the Father of Climatology), openly state that research grants are driven by politics, and in order to receive a government grant you have to play the game. Topics for grants go with the political wind.

In the mid 1990s government grants were typically advertised in such a way to indicate that conclusions should show a connection to human activity as the cause for anthropogenic global warming. The result: most of the research published in journals became one-sided and this became the primary information tool for media outlets.

According to some university researchers who were former heads of their departments, if a university even mentioned natural cycles, they were either denied future grants, or lost grants. And it is common knowledge that United States government employees within NOAA were cautioned not to talk about natural cycles. It is well known that most university research departments live or die via the grant system. What a great way to manipulate researchers in Europe, Australia and the United States."


"Not only governments manipulate, but so do some universities in order to protect their grants. A perfect example happened in 2012 when I contacted the Eagle Hill Institute in Steuben Maine USA to see if they would be interested in a climate change lecture. It should be noted that the institute has very close ties with the University of Maine. So I indicted that my lecture would involve information on natural climate cycles, and they responded saying, "That is fine.” Then In May of 2013 they asked me to speak at their lecture series on June 29th – an invitation that I accepted. They even consequently advertised the event and posted it on their online calendar.

All seemed well as I prepared for the lecture. But then came the manipulation and suppression of views. Just four days prior to the lecture, three people from the University of Maine viewed our web site ( The next morning, just 3 days prior to the June 29th lecture, I received an email from Eagle Hill stating that my "lecture is canceled due to a staffing shortage”. Upon checking their web site, the calendar did show my lecture as being canceled, but carried the notation that "we hope to have a different lecture on the 29th”.

So what happened with the staffing shortage? A news service called "The Maine Wire" interviewed the President of Eagle Hill, and he said that the University of Maine "felt some people in the audience may be uncomfortable hearing Mr. Dilley’s lecture”.

End excerpts.

In the 1970's the National Science Foundation assumed funding for a wide swath of research, taking many projects from the Defense Department's Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and created an interconnected network of research labs, university projects, and governmental agencies. By the dawn of the '80's the NSF had achieved dominance in research funding. Interestingly enough, this was the genesis of the Global Warming scare as well. The NSF finances 20% of all research in the United States.

There is also considerable funding from other governmental agencies, such as the EPA, the Department of Energy, the Department of Defense, NOAA, NASA, and a host of others. Science, which was primarily funded by private organizations or foundations in days gone by, is now primarily a tool of government. Oh, yes, there are foundations funding research too - like the Packard Foundation, a very left-wing entity, but the real master is the U.S. government. Remember, he who pays the bills is the boss.

And Global Warming offers a huge tool to empower government over the individual and the autonomy of local and state governments. It was too good to be true.

As a result, there is constant pressure to promote and advance the hypothesis. Universities, a bastion of leftism that no longer even attempts to remain above political ideology, pushes the theory.

Michael Crichton, in his novel "State of Fear" wrote brilliantly on the way this thing works; government and others in the elite category seek to control the populace through fear and are forever promoting catastrophic scenario to get the public on board with what they want to do. The universities are the incubators, where the intellectual firepower - the pseudo-scientific research and arguments are laid out - and then the media dutifully reports the "findings" in the most hysterical manner possible. Creating a false groundswell, government then "reluctantly" enters the fray, establishing policies and making regulations and laws to address the "problem" - a problem the government wanted to create in the first place.

Crichton had planned to write a novel about global warming. Doing his research he came to understand the end-time game being played on the general public. He was correct.

Science follows the data. Science looks at Nature as she is, and draws conclusions based on what is there. It does not editorialize. What we have in this country, and what has been a growing problem, is a pseudo-science; political ideology masquerading as science. We've had that for decades in the social sciences, which were created by leftists to promote their belief system, but it has infected the hard sciences as well, and now we face politics in places where politics has absolutely no business. It is no wonder America is in decline.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:58 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 922 words, total size 6 kb.

Obama Gets His Iran Deal

Dana Mathewson

(Spit) You'd know it'd be somebody like her. Should have a rule they can't vote after they announce their retirement.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:08 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 28 words, total size 1 kb.

Why Liberals are Pompous Fools

Dana Mathewson

This is sort-of tongue in cheek, but makes sense at the same time. The comments (yes, Ken, I read all that were there at time of sending) are funny and some are quite "deep."

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:07 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 42 words, total size 1 kb.

Obamanable Snowman

Dana Mathewson

Surprised Zippy knows the area exists.

"While visiting Alaska and becoming the first American president to enter the Arctic Circle, President Obama announced Tuesday he would speed up the acquisition of icebreakers to help the U.S. Coast Guard navigate an area that Russia and China increasingly see as a new frontier."

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:04 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 56 words, total size 1 kb.

Fewer Private Sector Jobs Stump Economists?

Dana Mathewson

Fewer than expected by WHOM?

"The U.S. private sector added 190,000 jobs in August, missing Wall Street forecasts for the creation of 201,000 jobs, according to payroll processor ADP."

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:00 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 38 words, total size 1 kb.

September 02, 2015

The Hillary Strategy; Straight out of Saul Alinsky

Timothy Birdnow

Rush Limbaugh says he had an epiphany. He has been puzzling about the strategy behind Hillary Clinton and the steady drip of damaging news about her server problems, and when some of the e-mails pulled from her private server proved to be, well, dull as drying paint, he realized that this is an actual strategy to make this a non-issue.

According to the transcript from The Rush Limbaugh Show:

"RUSH: Okay, folks, I have figured out this e-mail scam. I know exactly what's going on here. I know exactly what the strategy is 'cause it's working on me. Ah, this is so predictable. We've seen it before.

Greetings, and welcome back. Great to have you. Rush Limbaugh here behind the Golden EIB Microphone. Telephone number is 800-282-2882. And e-mail address,

Here's what's happening here, folks. I'm going through the latest news accounts of the latest dump of Hillary e-mails, and about halfway through the story, I say, "You know what, I don't care anymore. I'm getting bored. Nothing's happening here. They're just releasing a bunch of stuff. It is meaningless." You know, all of these e-mails that we're reading about today, Boehner's an alcoholic, all this crap, doesn't have a thing to do with anything. These are part of the e-mails that she did not delete. These are the things that she submitted that she wants everybody to see.

And this drip, drip, drip. I'm sorry, folks, I was wrong. This drip, drip, drip is not Obama trying to destroy Hillary. The drip, drip, drip is trying to bore the American people. They get tired of hearing about it because nothing happens. It's not interesting other than this inside-the-Beltway gossip stuff. There's some tantalizing things in there, some titillating things that are supposed to make everybody go, "Ooh, ooh, ooh," like David Brock trying to talk her into impeaching Clarence Thomas. Or Sidney Blumenthal asking her to promote his idiot son's ranting against Israel. Or the fact that Tim Geithner's lousy with document curation, which we already know, but none of it is about anything that matters, and accordingly, nothing happens here."

End excerpt.

I'm a little surprised Rush didn't figure this out before now. It is the same tactic the Clinton's employed during the Monica Lewinsky affair. It was the same tactic Clinton has used with every scandal in his Administration; the Bimbo eruptions, the rape allegations, the pot smoking, etc.

Clinton is a master at defining deviancy down, taking a shocking revelation then, through a patient, systematic attack on the fundamental premise that made it shocking, turning the scandal into a boring "no big deal" Of course, this requires fundamentally altering the moral landscape, but that is what liberals do, after all.

Why did you hit yourself in the head with a hammer? Because it feels good when you stop. Or, an even better analogy, why did you hit yourself in the head with a hammer? To make your toe hurt less. This is the approach of the Clinton crime syndicate, to toss out spectacular accusations and pull many back in order to say "see, nothing there!" It worked with impeachment; even George Stephanopoulis though Clinton was going to be impeached and removed from office. By the time the spin machine was through Ken Starr was the villain and Clinton a victim.

It goes back to Saul Alinsky Rule 10: "If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a
positive." Hillary knows the e-mail scandal is bad, bad stuff, but if she keeps piling it on people will grow weary of it, will in fact begin feeling sympathy for her. Hillary was a huge devotee of Saul Alinsky, and she understands his modus operandi. She'll keep pushing a negative if she can, lest people actually look at what those negatives really are.

The GOP should learn from this. I argued this very point during the Ted cruz filibuster and the government shutdown; if the GOP had stayed the course they could well have wound up breaking through and having this be a plus for them. Of course, they chickened out, terrified of the polling data they were seeing.

You do not penetrate but shallowly into enemy territory, said Sun Tzu.

So, Hillary is going to play this by the Alinsky playbook. If our side had any sense we would do likewise.

Sadly, our side never has any sense.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:10 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 746 words, total size 5 kb.

Liberalism Created the WDBJ Killer

By Selwyn Duke

Barack Obama won’t be saying, "If I had a psycho son, he’d look like Vester Lee.” But he might as well. Because Vester Lee Flanagan II, the bigoted maniac who murdered the WDBJ reporter and cameraman Wednesday on live TV, was a philosophical offspring of the Left.

It’s well known now that Flanagan was a professional victim, nurturing grudges against all and sundry based on his "status” as a homosexual black man. He had an axe to grind with white women because they supposedly made racial statements to him, and against black men because they supposedly directed anti-homosexual remarks his way. And it didn’t seem as if he liked anyone very much.

Of course, most of the bigotry he perceived from others was in his head, a function of his own prejudice, inculcated via decades of liberal indoctrination. When you dislike others, you view them through tinted lenses and ascribe negative motivations to everything they do. Where a fair-minded individual might interpret a comment as innocuous, simply a misunderstanding or an example of the issuer merely having a bad day, you see malice. "Of course it was racial! That’s the way white people are.” And, "That had to be ‘homophobic’ in this society, which macro and microaggresses against everything that I am!” (of course, certain things are supposed to be stigmatized). These notions, again, were put in Flanagan’s mixed-up head by liberals and liberals alone. They disgorge hateful, pure and utter nonsense such as microaggression theory, "white privilege,” critical-race theory and 1000 other things designed to divide with lies. It is evil.

Flanagan had described himself as "human powder keg,” but what was he so angry about? He lived in the most prosperous nation in the most prosperous time in man’s history; he could walk into any supermarket and avail himself of thousands of delicious foods from the world over at reasonable prices, a luxury that would have made the jaws of people existing in former ages drop. He was living, as we all do, in Shangri-la. But his attitude was hardly inexplicable.

To paraphrase G.K. Chesterton, "Goods look a lot better when they come wrapped as gifts.” Everything is a gift, but the Left teaches just the opposite: to have a sense of entitlement, to believe you’re owed, to ever and always view our very large glass as half empty. Some have asked, quite naively, how it is that despite Flanagan’s pathetic performance as a reporter, he was hired by more than one media outlet and given chance after chance to right the ship. Well, golly gee, Cletus, it’s a mystery.

Flanagan was clearly an affirmative-action hire, enjoying the daily-double victim status of being black and homosexual. And that was part of the problem: too much was given to him on a silver platter — because of liberalism.

There have been many articles in recent years about how college graduates today enter the workforce with unrealistic expectations about their economic self-worth and starting salary. We hear about how so many of them can’t tolerate criticism and rejection; act as if their own feelings are inordinately important and should command respect; and how they lack a sense of propriety, a grasp of their place in a workplace’s hierarchy. As a consequence, they may barge into an office to vent their feelings, even if it’s neither the time nor the place.
This is all the result of liberal parenting, of the psychobabble disgorged by the likes of Dr. Benjamin Spock. It’s no wonder many young people today have little sense of just hierarchies — their permissive liberal parents didn’t establish a just hierarchy in the home. Instead, they acted as if their family was a dysfunctional democracy and junior a special-interest group that political correctness dictated must be coddled and catered to. Junior seldom heard the word "No!” uttered in exclamatory fashion; junior seldom had to delay gratification; junior got participation trophies just for showing up. He was treated as a little prince around whom the world revolved. He was marinated in "self-esteem” pap in schools, telling him how great and special he was. The result? Junior and many of his peers (not that he imagined he had any peers) grew up to be narcissists.
As for Flanagan, it has been reported that his refrigerator was covered with pictures of himself. We know what this means. A mother may display numerous pictures of her children because she loves her children. And a man would display numerous pictures of himself because…?

It all reminds me of the Satan character’s line in the film The Devil’s Advocate: "Vanity is my favorite sin.” "Pride” is probably even more accurate. But it all gets at the matter’s heart. We don’t need some hard and fast psychological diagnosis here. Whether Flanagan was most correctly characterized as a "narcissist” or just a self-centered, entitled jerk, the bottom line is that his state was attributable to a philosophical disease, a disordered way of thinking that masquerades under an ideological banner:


Of course, liberals will blame guns. This is partially because, unlike with Dylann Roof, they can’t blame Confederate flags or 19th-century statues. But it’s also because they’re incapable of putting the blame where it really belongs: the man in the mirror.

Guns don’t kill people. Liberalism does.

 HYPERLINK "" Contact Selwyn Duke,  HYPERLINK "" follow him on Twitter or log on to  HYPERLINK ""

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:43 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 909 words, total size 6 kb.

MO Trans h.s. kid causes uproar with female students

Jack Kemp

From the NY Times:
Missouri Teenagers Protest a Transgender Student’s Use of the Girls’ Bathroom

A transgender high school student in Missouri is facing backlash from her peers after requesting to use the girls’ bathrooms and locker room.
More than 100 students at Hillsboro High School, about an hour south of St Louis, walked out of class on Monday in protest.

"I’m hoping this dies down,” said Lila Perry, the 17-year-old who began identifying as a girl publicly in February. "I don’t want my entire senior year to be like this.”

Ms. Perry, who began feeling "more like a girl than a boy” when she was 13, said school officials gave her permission to use the girls’ facilities as the new school year began.

The district’s superintendent, Aaron D. Cornman, issued a statement saying the district "accepts all students no matter race, nationality/ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation.”

The student protest came on the heels of a school board meeting on Thursday attended by so many parents it had to be moved to a bigger location.

"My goal is for the district and parents to have a policy discussion,” said Derrick Good, a lawyer who has two daughters in the district and wants students to use either facilities based on their biological sex or other gender-neutral facilities.

He worked with the Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian advocacy group, to draft a "student physical privacy policy” and submit it to the district, which has about 3,500 students.

Ms. Perry previously used a unisex faculty bathroom, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported.

Mr. Good said he got involved after hearing about a female student who encountered "an intact male” in the girls’ locker room

"It’s a violation of my daughters’ rights to privacy to not have a policy,” he said.

The protesting students assembled outside the school for about two hours. Mr. Cornman said he did not believe any of them were penalized.


Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:43 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 339 words, total size 6 kb.

Pope to Allow Nearly Everyone to Absolve Women of Sin of Abortion

Dana Mathewson

Words fail me. Almost. Just which side of the aisle is this mope working, anyway?

"During the Jubilee, all priests will be able to absolve faithful of the sin of abortion during confession, Pope Francis said Tuesday."

End excerpt.


It is astonishingly bad policy, but perhaps not for the reasons most people would think.

See, any priest can forgive abortion during a confession any time. That is not at all unusual;a priest can forgive any sin, no matter how heinous, and has to keep quiet about it. Jeffrey Dahmer could go to a Catholic priest and receive absolution. Hitler could have. Anyone could or can, provided they are Baptised.

What's wrong here is the Pope is going to allow people who aren't considered priests in full Communion with the Church to administer this absolution. This is a very serious breach of Catholic doctrine. The article mention some of the Old Catholics (a group that rejects the authority of Rome but was, until a few decades ago, doctrinally Catholic but have since then introduced heresies that cannot be ignored.) It has always been understood that the Sacrament of Reconciliation must be performed by a priest in good standing with the Church. Pope Francis just waived that requirement, meaning pretty much anybody can now hear confession.

It's pretty staggering.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:41 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 240 words, total size 2 kb.

Copy of Koran Predating Muhammad?

Dana Mathewson

Well, well. If this is true, I wonder whose ear Satan was whispering into - if not Mo's? There were certainly enough perverts in the Arab world.

"British scholars have suggested that fragments of the world's oldest known Koran, which were discovered last month, may predate the accepted founding date of Islam by the Muslim prophet Muhammad."

End excerpt.

A NOTE FROM TIM; It would be mete they would find a forward to the text stating "this is for satirical purposes only." or "Copywrite; the Onion, all rights reserved".

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:40 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 97 words, total size 1 kb.

Smartest Woman in the World

Dana Mathewson

(Shakes head sadly) This is the woman thousands of liberals are convinced is the smartest woman in the world. Sure speaks loudly about their opinion of women, doesn't it?

"Members of the State Department's information technology team were among those who were unaware that Hillary Clinton was using a private e-mail address during her time as America's top diplomat, the latest release of messages from the former secretary of state's private server revealed late Monday."

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:40 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 83 words, total size 1 kb.

Lest We Forget the Clintons...

Dana Mathewson

Lest we forget. . .

> Martha Stuart went to jail over insider trading. Wonder what Hillary will get for her emails? Or Mendez for his corruption or Rangle for his tax evasion?
> So the Clintons weren't so bad, eh?
> If you're under 50 you really need to read this . If you ’ re over 50, you lived through it, so share it with those under 50. Amazing to me how much I had forgotten!
> When Bill Clinton was president, he allowed Hillary to assume authority over a health care reform. Even after threats and intimidation, she couldn’t even get a vote in a democratic controlled congress. This fiasco cost the American taxpayers about $13 million in cost for studies, promotion, and other efforts.
> Then President Clinton gave Hillary authority over selecting a female attorney general. Her first two selections were Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood – both were forced to withdraw their names from consideration. Next she chose Janet Reno – husband Bill described her selection as "my worst mistake.” Some may not remember that Reno made the decision to gas David Koresh and the Branch Davidian religious sect in Waco, Texas resulting in dozens of deaths of women and children.
> Husband Bill allowed Hillary to make recommendations for the head of the Civil Rights Commission. Lani Guanier was her selection. When a little probing led to the discovered of Ms. Guanier’s radical views, her name had to be withdrawn from consideration.
> Apparently a slow learner, husband Bill allowed Hillary to make some more recommendations. She chose former law partners Web Hubbel for the Justice Department, Vince Foster for the White House staff, and William Kennedy for the Treasury Department. Her selections went well: Hubbel went to prison, Foster (presumably) committed suicide, and Kennedy was forced to resign.
> Many younger votes will have no knowledge of "Travelgate.” Hillary wanted to award unfettered travel contracts to Clinton friend Harry Thompson – and the White House Travel Office refused to comply. She managed to have them reported to the FBI and fired. This ruined their reputations, cost them their jobs, and caused a thirty-six month investigation. Only one employee, Billy Dale was charged with a crime, and that of the enormous crime of mixing personal and White House funds. A jury acquitted him of any crime in less than two hours.
> Still not convinced of her ineptness, Hillary was allowed to recommend a close Clinton friend, Craig Livingstone, for the position of Director of White House security. When Livingstone was investigated for the improper access of about 900 FBI files of Clinton enemies (Filegate) and the widespread use of drugs by White House staff, suddenly Hillary and the president denied even knowing Livingstone, and of course, denied knowledge of drug use in the White House. Following this debacle, the FBI closed its White House Liaison Office after more than thirty years of service to seven presidents.
> Next, when women started coming forward with allegations of sexual harassment and rape by Bill Clinton, Hillary was put in charge of the "bimbo eruption” and scandal defense. Some of her more notable decisions in the debacle was:
> She urged her husband not to settle the Paula Jones lawsuit. After the Starr investigation they settled with Ms. Jones.
> She refused to release the Whitewater documents, which led to the appointment of Ken Starr as Special Prosecutor. After $80 million dollars of taxpayer money was spent, Starr's investigation led to Monica Lewinsky, which led to Bill lying about and later admitting his affairs.
> Hillary’s devious game plan resulted in Bill losing his license to practice law for 'lying under oath' to a grand jury and then his subsequent impeachment by the House of Representatives.
> Hillary avoided indictment for perjury and obstruction of justice during the Starr investigation by repeating, "I do not recall,” "I have no recollection,” and "I don’t know” a total of 56 times while under oath.
> After leaving the White House, Hillary was forced to return an estimated $200,000 in White House furniture, china, and artwork that she had stolen.
> What a swell party – ready for another four or eight year of this type low-life mess?
> Now we are exposed to the destruction of possibly incriminating emails while Hillary was Secretary of State and the "pay to play” schemes of the Clinton Foundation – we have no idea what shoe will fall next. But to her loyal fans - "what difference does it make?”
> Electing Hillary Clinton president would be like granting Satan absolution and giving him the keys to heaven!

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:39 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 787 words, total size 5 kb.

September 01, 2015

Fiat Chrysler GM Merger?

Dana Mathewson

Hey guys, this is interesting!

"Sergio Marchionne, chief executive of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, is keeping up his campaign to merge the automaker with General Motors"

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:11 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 32 words, total size 1 kb.

August 31, 2015

Look Who's Coming to Dinner (with John Kerry)

William Been

In the above article on the Allen West website, you will find relationships that demonstrate how critical the defeat of the Democrat Party is to the future of our country, specifically as determined by global policies. The Obama puppet master (Soros) hosts a secretive dinner with Iranian officials and the Vietnam traitor John Kerry who somehow has become the U. S. senator from Massachusetts. This is the same Iranian official that we see yukking it up with Kerry while "negotiating" the infamous Iran agreement that would certainly boost the Caliphate objectives of the Iranian Islamic leaders.

Does it not strike anyone as being significant that Mohammed's stepson Hussein was killed in Sourthern Iraq where the Shiites from Iran are playing an instrumental role in the current conflict with ISIS which was declared to be the JV team by Barack Hussein Obama who appointed John Kerry? When did Barry Sartoro become Barack Hussein and why? Does nobody care?

It has become crystal clear that national elections are no longer simply a struggle between liberal and conservative principles. Rather, national elections are now a struggle for the freedom offered to American citizens under God versus the totalitarian tendencies of Marxism, Socialism, Communism, and radical Islam. When will people recognize this? What will it take?

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:51 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 223 words, total size 2 kb.

Climate issues we do need to address

Paul Driessen

President Obama and his UN, Big Green and Climate Crisis Industry allies insist that we need to "fix our climate” – because carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions are overheating the planet and causing "unprecedented” weather, sea level and drought disasters. There isn’t an iota of truth to any of these assertions. From my perspective, what we DO need to fix is the climate of fraud and corruption in the global warming and renewable fuels bureaucracy and industry … and their destructive policies that kill jobs, dreams, birds, bats and people.

My article this week explores these issues, and offers solutions to the morass we have gotten ourselves into.

Climate issues we do need to address

We need to fix the climate of fraud, corruption, and policies that kill jobs, hope and people

Paul Driessen

Reeling stock markets across the globe hammered savings, pension funds, innovation and growth. US stocks lost over $2 trillion in market value in eight days, before rallying somewhat, while the far smaller Shanghai Composite Index lost $1 trillion in four days of trading, the Wall Street Journal reports.

Battered economies continue to struggle. Investment banks are pulling out of developing countries. An already exploding and imploding Middle East now confronts a nuclear arms race and human exodus.

Complying just with federal regulations already costs American businesses and families $1.9 trillion per year, the Competitive Enterprise Institute calculates. That’s more than all 2014 personal and corporate income tax receipts combined – and Obama bureaucrats issued 3,554 new rules and regulations last year.

EPA’s 2,691-page Clean Power Plan is designed to eliminate coal mining and coal-fired power plants – and minimize natural gas substitutes. The CPP requires that gas use can increase by only 22% above 2012 levels by 2022, and just 5% per year thereafter. On top of that, new natural gas-fueled generating units that replace coal-fired power plants absurdly do not count toward state CO2 reduction mandates.

That means millions of acres of new wind and solar installations that generate expensive, unreliable electricity – and survive only because of subsidies, tariffs, anti-fossil fuel mandates, and exemptions from endangered species, environmental impact and other requirements that block fossil fuel projects.

Anti-energy, anti-growth policies imposed in name of preventing "dangerous manmade climate change” impact everything we do. For minority, elderly and working class families, they bring soaring electricity costs, rising unemployment, unproductive lives on government assistance, diminished health and welfare, and shorter life spans. They hogtie economies and kill jobs, prolong and worsen economic quagmires, crush aspirations and opportunities, perpetuate poverty, and foster anger, unrest and conflict.

None of these hard realities seems to bother President Obama, though. In fact, he is determined to use the December climate conference in Paris to lock the United States into binding treaty commitments to slash the common folks’ fossil fuel use, CO2 emissions, economic growth and job creation even further.

Anyone who cares about living standards, lifting billions of people out of abject poverty, and reining in the power of unaccountable US, EU and UN bureaucrats needs to pay attention and get involved.

Earth’s climate is doing pretty much what it always has: responding to powerful natural forces, changing, and driving atmospheric patterns and weather events that benefit some, harm others and sometimes wreak devastation. It is not doing what gloom-and-doom computer models and headlines predicted.

We do not need to "fix” or "control” the climate. We couldn’t if we tried. We do need to fix the climate of fraud, corruption and destructive policies that kill jobs, dreams and people. We need to realize that most countries will not commit economic suicide. They may sign a climate treaty – but for reasons that have nothing to do with environmental protection … and only if their obligations are distant and ephemeral.

Mr. Obama has said from the outset that he would use executive decrees to "fundamentally transform” the United States and ensure that electricity prices "necessarily skyrocket.” He has kept his word.

He and his friends in the UN, EU, Big Green and Climate Crisis Industry have also made it clear that they intend to use the Paris conference to negotiate the future distribution of the world’s wealth and resources, determine what economic growth and living standards are "ecologically feasible,” and transform the global economic development model: replacing sovereign nations and free enterprise capitalism with global governance and decision-making based on "sustainable development” and "dangerous manmade climate change” mantras. 1992 climate conference organizers even said saving the world requires that they cause "industrialized civilization to collapse.” They intend to keep their promises.

Impoverished people in developing countries reject this agenda. They want sustained development, not sustainable development. They want decent jobs and modern houses, hospitals and living standards.

Thus, under the proposed Paris treaty, only developed countries will be required to slash fossil fuel use. "Poor” nations (including China, India, Brazil, Indonesia and Russia) will not be obligated to reduce their carbon-based energy use or carbon dioxide/greenhouse gas emissions by any specific amounts or dates – though some say they "intend to try” to reduce emissions or may present non-binding targets some years from now. Most will dramatically increase their oil, gas and coal use, and CO2/GHG emissions.

The real bribe to induce poor nations to sign a new treaty is a binding commitment that increasingly less developed, less energy-powered, less rich countries will give "poor” nations (or at least their ruling elites) $100 billion per year in climate adaptation, mitigation and reparation payments. That’s to cover damages that developed nations have supposedly inflicted on Earth’s climate. FRCs (Formerly Rich Countries) will also be required to give "poor” nations advanced energy and other technologies, at no cost.

Even more insane, the entire basis for this agenda, this treaty, these commitments and non-commitments, is bald assertions – driven by garbage in/garbage out computer models and deceptive, fraudulent science – that humanity faces "unprecedented” global warming, rising ocean, weather and other calamities.

About the only unprecedented event in the past century is that no category 3-5 hurricane has hit the USA in nearly a decade. Climate alarmists refuse to discuss that. Their other assertions are pure fiction.

Claims that 2014 was the "hottest year on record,” and July 2015 was "the hottest July” since "at least 1880,” are based on city and airport temperatures that are always several degrees higher than those at nearby rural sites. (Satellite data show no warming for 18 years.) The "superheated planet” alarums involve hundredths of a degree: less than the margin of error. They are based mainly on only 1,200 measuring stations for Earth’s entire surface – with few in the coldest regions, and millions of acres of missing data simply extrapolated from urban numbers. The "hottest ever” charade also assumes reliable temperature data exist for the entire USA and planet all the way back to 1880! It defies belief.

(For more examples of climate scare deceit, see Climate Hype Exposed, Heartland’s Top 10 Global Warming Lies, the Aussie temperature scam, the Gore-a-thon analysis, and much more.

Imagine your life without electricity, or only when it’s available, or costing so much you can’t afford it and your now-bankrupt former employer couldn’t afford either. Imagine the EPA and UN controlling the juice that powers everything in your life: transportation, manufacturing, communications, entertainment, life after dark, life in hot and cold weather, the enormous infrastructure and energy demands that feed your smart phone. No wonder Google scientists finally admitted renewable energy is a pipedream.

Too many environmental laws no longer focus on protecting the environment. They have become bureaucratic weapons to protect chosen industries and destroy those connected to carbon-based fuels.

Denying people access to abundant, reliable, affordable hydrocarbon energy is immoral – and often lethal. It is an unconscionable crime against humanity to implement policies that pretend to protect the world’s energy-deprived masses from hypothetical manmade climate dangers decades from now – by perpetuating energy deprivation, poverty, malnutrition and disease that kill millions of them tomorrow.

Letting this climate fear mongering continue also means fewer jobs, more welfare, lower living standards, and deteriorating health and welfare – except for ruling elites. But so far too few politicians, candidates, clergy and business leaders have shown the courage to speak out – even as every Democratic would-be successor to Mr. Obama seems hell-bent on going even further than he has on all these policies.

Our next president and congress must focus on job and economic growth, and overall human welfare. They must review and roll back destructive regulations, root out the fraud and corruption, and restore honesty, transparency and real science to our political and regulatory system.

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­Paul Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power - Black death, and coauthor of Cracking Big Green: Saving the world from the Save-the-Earth money machine.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:47 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1488 words, total size 11 kb.

O'Malley Says Dem Debates Rigged

Dana Mathewson

ALL the GOP candidates need to pick up on O'Malley's "immigrant hate" remark and throw it back in his face. Hard!

"Two top Democratic candidates in the 2016 White House race suggested Friday night that party leaders have rigged the debate schedule in favor of frontrunner Hillary Clinton"

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:46 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 56 words, total size 1 kb.

<< Page 68 of 608 >>
95kb generated in CPU 0.04, elapsed 0.1315 seconds.
32 queries taking 0.1025 seconds, 189 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.