Support Leviticus 11:10 - Boycott Maine Lobster
On November 3, 2009, a small majority of the voters in the Sate of Maine decided that their secular state should be ruled by the book of Leviticus. They used the passages of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 to strip the GLBT residents of Maine of their basic civil right of marriage.
Since Maine residents believe that everyone in their state should be ruled by the book of Leviticus, and Leviticus 11:10 prohibits the consumption of shellfish, Maine Lobster is an abomination and therefore should be boycotted.
Conservative columnist suggests treason to solve the “Obama problem”
Obama Risks a Domestic Military Intervention
By: John L. Perry of Newsmax Magazine
There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America’s military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the “Obama problem.” Don’t dismiss it as unrealistic.
America isn’t the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened doesn’t mean it wont. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it. So, view the following through military eyes:
# Officers swear to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Unlike enlisted personnel, they do not swear to “obey the orders of the president of the United States.”
# Top military officers can see the Constitution they are sworn to defend being trampled as American institutions and enterprises are nationalized.
# They can see that Americans are increasingly alarmed that this nation, under President Barack Obama, may not even be recognizable as America by the 2012 election, in which he will surely seek continuation in office.
# They can see that the economy — ravaged by deficits, taxes, unemployment, and impending inflation — is financially reliant on foreign lender governments.
# They can see this president waging undeclared war on the intelligence community, without whose rigorous and independent functions the armed services are rendered blind in an ever-more hostile world overseas and at home.
# They can see the dismantling of defenses against missiles targeted at this nation by avowed enemies, even as America’s troop strength is allowed to sag.
# They can see the horror of major warfare erupting simultaneously in two, and possibly three, far-flung theaters before America can react in time.
# They can see the nation’s safety and their own military establishments and honor placed in jeopardy as never before.
So, if you are one of those observant military professionals, what do you do?
Wait until this president bungles into losing the war in Afghanistan, and Pakistan’s arsenal of nuclear bombs falls into the hands of militant Islam?
Wait until Israel is forced to launch air strikes on Iran’s nuclear-bomb plants, and the Middle East explodes, destabilizing or subjugating the Free World?
What happens if the generals Obama sent to win the Afghan war are told by this president (who now says, “I’m not interested in victory”) that they will be denied troops they must have to win? Do they follow orders they cannot carry out, consistent with their oath of duty? Do they resign en masse?
Or do they soldier on, hoping the 2010 congressional elections will reverse the situation? Do they dare gamble the national survival on such political whims?
Anyone who imagines that those thoughts are not weighing heavily on the intellect and conscience of America’s military leadership is lost in a fool’s fog.
Will the day come when patriotic general and flag officers sit down with the president, or with those who control him, and work out the national equivalent of a “family intervention,” with some form of limited, shared responsibility?
Imagine a bloodless coup to restore and defend the Constitution through an interim administration that would do the serious business of governing and defending the nation. Skilled, military-trained, nation-builders would replace accountability-challenged, radical-left commissars. Having bonded with his twin teleprompters, the president would be detailed for ceremonial speech-making.
Military intervention is what Obama’s exponentially accelerating agenda for “fundamental change” toward a Marxist state is inviting upon America. A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama’s radical ideal is not acceptable or reversible.
Unthinkable? Then think up an alternative, non-violent solution to the Obama problem. Just don’t shrug and say, “We can always worry about that later.”
In the 2008 election, that was the wistful, self-indulgent, indifferent reliance on abnegation of personal responsibility that has sunk the nation into this morass.
Misinformation and a lack of intelligence is a dangerous combination
Any parent who removes their child from school because the President of the United States is speaking to them is a sorry excuse for an American. And I disagree with those who say it’s because Barack Obama is black. It has nothing to do with race; it has everything to do with unfiltered, hypocritical partisanship, pure hatred and a lack of respect for the office of the President.
In their cubed Earth bizarro world, when the President says “work hard and stay in school,” the right hears “go have sex, we’ll pay for your abortion while our death panels kill grandma and grandpa.”
The right made excuse after excuse for a President who trampled on the Constitution for eight years, made up lies for an unjustified war that cost trillions of dollars and countless lives, used our government to incite fear in order to get re-elected, cut taxes when we couldn’t afford to do so, gave us rebates when they didn’t have the money, and virtually destroyed our economy. And the right is complaining about President Obama’s “stay in school” message to our kids?
I now see why right-wing whack jobs bring assault rifles to town hall meetings: when you lack intelligence and are misinformed, the only thing you can do is show how tough you are by making thinly veiled threats of violence.
Pathetic.
Top 10 Reasons Why Gay Marriage Should Be Illegal
- Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
- Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.
- Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.
- Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn’t changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can’t marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.
- Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britney Spears’ 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.
- Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn’t be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren’t full yet, and the world needs more children.
- Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
- Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That’s why we have only one religion in North America.
- Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That’s why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
- Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven’t adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.
Bush and Obama: The “N” Word…Nazi
One disturbing and growing theme during the health care debate has been that far right conservatives are panning Obama is a socialist/un-American/Nazi who wants nothing more than to kill your grandmother. Of course, we on the left find this laughable if only because we remember the bad-old-days of the Bush administration.
Indeed, many on the left panned Bush as a Nazi and unabashedly screamed it at the top of our lungs at protests and rallies. Now, with a new party in power and new social policies being put into place, it almost should come as no surprise that the right shouts over what is wrong with where this country is headed.
Now, it is a fact that neither Bush nor Obama are or were Nazis, but I really do feel it behooves us to examine which side of the shouting match was more accurate:
Responses to Terrorism:
Hitler - In response to the Reichstag Fire, Hitler successfully calls on then President Hindenburg to enact the Reichstag Fire Decree - an act that suspended most civil liberties in Germany and was a political tool used by Nazis to gain political power.
Bush - In response to the September 11th attacks, the Bush Administration successfully enacts the USA PATRIOT Act - an act that reduced civil liberties in the United States and was often used by the Republican Party as a political tool.
Obama - Though currently stalled, the Obama Administration is attempting to close the Guantanamo Bay Detention Center. The center holds prisoners of war for an indefinite period of time without receiving a trial.
Race:
Hitler - Subordination of various races, eventually leading to the Holocaust.
Bush - Questionable response to Hurricane Katrina leads the majority of African-Americans to question the Bush Administrations feelings toward race relations.
Obama - As the first African-American president, Obama often had to deal with race often and eventually spoke to the American people during his campaign about the issue in a frank and honest manor.
The Economy:
Hitler - Banned Labor Unions, initiated public works projects, placement of banks under strict government control.
Bush - Increased funding to the Department of Labor for the expressed purpose of enforcing the Landrum-Griffin Act, an act designed to monitor Union activity for legal wrong doing. During this time critics argue that new regulations are written to be intentionally confusing in order to make more unions violate the law.
Obama - Authorizes $144 Billion into public works projects in stimulus package and reenacts enforcement of post-depression era laws disregarded by the Bush Administration.
Foreign Policy:
Hitler - Withdrew from Geneva Convention, invaded countries without being provoked.
Bush - Unilaterally invaded Iraq after the United Nations stated that they would not support the war. Ignores various articles of the Geneva Convention stating that the war on terror was a new type of war where the old rules did not apply.
Obama - Starting the withdraw process of troops in Iraq and transferring many to Afghanistan, a war that the international community supports. International views of the United States have improved.
I am sure there are numerous examples that can be added to this…but I leave it up to you, dear reader, which president has followed more in Hitler’s goosestepping footprints?
Reposted from Blue in Red Zion.
The Party of Family Values
Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) has admitted to a series of affairs and dumped his first wife after she was disfigured in a car accident.
Former Congressman Mark Foley (R-Florida) sent explicit messages soliciting sex from teenaged boys who had formerly served as congressional pages.
Senator David Vitter (R-Louisiana), who acknowledged being involved with the so-called D.C. Madam and a hooker in New Orleans:
“Infidelity, divorce, and deadbeat dads contribute to the breakdown of traditional families.”
Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho), who was arrested for soliciting gay sex in an airport bathroom supported the Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, voted against a bill that would have banned job discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, and voted against expanding the definition of hate crimes to include sexual orientation.
Former Speaker Newt Gingrich was married three times and left his first wife when she was in the hospital with cancer.
Senator John Ensign (R-Nevada), who admitted to having an affair with the wife of an employee, and a member of the Promise Keepers (“Men of Integrity”):
“Marriage is an extremely important institution in this country and protecting it is, in my mind, worth the extraordinary step of amending our constitution.”
Governor Mark Sanford (R-South Carolina), father of four, who neglected his duties to fly down to Argentina to meet his mistress on Father’s Day weekend and made his staff lie about his whereabouts:
“I think it would be much better for the country and for President Clinton to resign… I come from the business side; If you had a chairman or president in the business world facing these allegations, he’d be gone.”
Rush Limbaugh Wants Ahmadinejad to Succeed
Rush Limbaugh has been very unapologetic in his assertion that he wants President Obama to fail. I’m assuming this would apply to foreign affairs as well as domestic policy. So does that mean Rush wants the tyrannical, freedom-crushing Ahmadinejad to succeed in Iran?
Answer: Yes.
My 10 Seconds of Fame
This occurred this afternoon when CNN’s Don Lemon read one of my tweets on air.
