From Saint Leo the Great
"Whatever is forced on you contrary to the Christian faith, whatever is presented to you contrary to the commandments of God, it comes from the deceptions of the the one who tries with many wiles to divert you from eternal life."
As is said in German, Denken daran.
Y.C.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Monday, July 6, 2009
TOLD YOU SO - ONE MORE TIME
Friends,
Check again my post, UNSWEET ARE SOME USES OF DIVERSITY, and compare to a news report today on riots in the west of China; "... ethnic minorities, who say they are being marginalized in their homelands as Chinese migrants pour in."
While you're at it, think about being marginalized in your own country one of these days.
Y.C.
Check again my post, UNSWEET ARE SOME USES OF DIVERSITY, and compare to a news report today on riots in the west of China; "... ethnic minorities, who say they are being marginalized in their homelands as Chinese migrants pour in."
While you're at it, think about being marginalized in your own country one of these days.
Y.C.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Friday, July 3, 2009
A TIMELY QUOTATION
I find quite relevant to the B.O. badministration's distortions and downright chicanery (as in suppressing scientific questions into the validity of their great dreams over saving us from global warming) the following quotation from G.K. Chesterton's The Everlasting Man. In this case the railroad was embracing evolution in the absence of scientific evidence.
"It is necessary to say plainly that all this ignorance is simply covered by impudence. Statements are made so plainly and positively that men have hardly the moral courage to pause upon them and find that they are without support."
Keep this in mind when experiencing the stampede to "do something" about global warming at any and all costs.
HAPPY FOURTH OF JULY!
"It is necessary to say plainly that all this ignorance is simply covered by impudence. Statements are made so plainly and positively that men have hardly the moral courage to pause upon them and find that they are without support."
Keep this in mind when experiencing the stampede to "do something" about global warming at any and all costs.
HAPPY FOURTH OF JULY!
Thursday, July 2, 2009
I AM WONDER FULL
One wonders how, in a country that became great by promoting the best through healthy competition, there ever **WAS** a New Haven firemen’s case and, even more so, how the devil it ever got to the Supreme Court. (Well, I guess, after all, jurisprudential incompetence and/or lunatic misconceptions account for that.)
One also wonders how a blockhead like Sotomayor, reversed FREQUENTLY by a sane Supreme Court, ever got to be nominated for that group or, in fact, to the oft-reversed chair she now occupies.
Finally, one wonders why it was that “no African-American and only two Hispanics were likely to be made lieutenants and captains based on …” a promotion exam. One wonders if they obviously inferior. One wonders how to account for that obvious inferiority. Anyone have a clue?
One also wonders how a blockhead like Sotomayor, reversed FREQUENTLY by a sane Supreme Court, ever got to be nominated for that group or, in fact, to the oft-reversed chair she now occupies.
Finally, one wonders why it was that “no African-American and only two Hispanics were likely to be made lieutenants and captains based on …” a promotion exam. One wonders if they obviously inferior. One wonders how to account for that obvious inferiority. Anyone have a clue?
Monday, June 29, 2009
SOMETHING OLD, SOMETHING NEW
I was so pleased with my nonce word, "badministration," for the government perpetrated upon us by the moron majority that I wanted to make sure it didn't elude your scrutiny.
Further, it occurred to me that "B.O." was the designation, according to Monopoly, of a railroad, and isn't that a significant coincidence?
Yves
Further, it occurred to me that "B.O." was the designation, according to Monopoly, of a railroad, and isn't that a significant coincidence?
Yves
ME'NAGE A - QUOI?
Busily redefining life, death, and lesser phenomena, B.O.’s badministration has not neglected the family. At least for federal benefits purposes, a pair of same-sex homosexuals is being proposed to count as one. (Not having read the fine print, I don’t know if a pair of different-sex homosexuals’ living together would qualify, but no doubt the likes of Pelosi, Boxer, Rangel, Reid, and Feinstein will tell us.)
What I’m wondering, though, is that if the transmogrification of the concept of “family” is to be made on the dimension of sexual deviation, why not include a man that has intercourse with a ewe or a woman, with a dog? In these cases federal benefits could be extended to cover veterinarian bills for the thereomorphic half of the union. As of this time, maternity benefits would not be reckoned, but with the biological strides this badministration will approve, even that sky may not be the limit.
Sublunary thinkers cannot even contemplate what other innovations B.O. & Co. may introduce; perhaps one federal employee, bunking with 5-6 other homo’s will be a family the taxpayers can subsidize.
Another question is what’s wrong with including a pair of men or a pair of women that do NOT do deviational acts with one another? Is it necessary to be disgusting in order to take? Under this give-everything-to-everybody excuse for a government, why would a normal pair of people be excluded? Wait! I just answered my own question – NORMALITY, OF COURSE, IS THEIR DEFECT!
What I’m wondering, though, is that if the transmogrification of the concept of “family” is to be made on the dimension of sexual deviation, why not include a man that has intercourse with a ewe or a woman, with a dog? In these cases federal benefits could be extended to cover veterinarian bills for the thereomorphic half of the union. As of this time, maternity benefits would not be reckoned, but with the biological strides this badministration will approve, even that sky may not be the limit.
Sublunary thinkers cannot even contemplate what other innovations B.O. & Co. may introduce; perhaps one federal employee, bunking with 5-6 other homo’s will be a family the taxpayers can subsidize.
Another question is what’s wrong with including a pair of men or a pair of women that do NOT do deviational acts with one another? Is it necessary to be disgusting in order to take? Under this give-everything-to-everybody excuse for a government, why would a normal pair of people be excluded? Wait! I just answered my own question – NORMALITY, OF COURSE, IS THEIR DEFECT!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
