Category: Uncategorized

From NRO:

A 19-year-old accused of causing his teenage girlfriend to miscarry two fetuses by stepping on her stomach was convicted Monday of two counts of murder.

Gerardo Flores received an automatic life sentence because prosecutors did not seek the death penalty, which was available under the state’s 2003 fetus protection law.

Erica Basoria, 17, acknowledged asking Flores to help end her pregnancy; she could not be prosecuted because of her legal right to abortion…

I’m pleased that the young man was rightly found guilty of murder. But I think it is an absolute travesty that the woman who was arguably a party at least as responsible was not.

So much for equal rights.

The Sports Guy’s Intern on Michael Vick:

Pretty good rundown of the best and worst NFL draft picks over the years. Of course, picking Bradshaw over Vick as the best overall number one is a joke. Four Super Bowl rings, you say? Please. We’re talking about Mike Vick, the greatest football player of all-time; the modern day Troy; the man who will lead us all to victory against the rise of the machines; quite possibly the most remarkable human being who’s ever lived or ever will. Mike Vick eats Super Bowl rings for breakfast, and then spits them back out because they aren’t refined enough for his palate.

I nearly swallowed my tongue reading that. THE MAN WHO WILL LEAD US ALL TO VICTORY AGAINST THE RISE OF THE MACHINES. Yeah, but he still sucks as a quarterback. I just wish I played in a fantasy league where someone was dumb enough to believe the hype.

LITTLE BROTHER: “Why can’t I join your league? I’ve won my league three years in a row!”

VOX: “Because you won in a league where the first pick was Kordell Stewart.”

During last year’s presidential campaign, John F. Kerry was the candidate often portrayed as intellectual and complex, while George W. Bush was the populist who mangled his sentences. But newly released records show that Bush and Kerry had a virtually identical grade average at Yale University four decades ago.

In 1999, The New Yorker published a transcript indicating that Bush had received a cumulative score of 77 for his first three years at Yale and a roughly similar average under a non-numerical rating system during his senior year.

Kerry, who graduated two years before Bush, got a cumulative 76 for his four years, according to a transcript that Kerry sent to the Navy when he was applying for officer training school. He received four D’s in his freshman year out of 10 courses, but improved his average in later years.

Kerry was quite the looker too. Is there ANYONE who seriously believes our system is meant to bring the best and brightest to the fore?

Rallymonkey sees the opportunity for a federal grant:

Another story about the military mishandling the Koran in Guantanimo today. Yahoo reports that a soldier splashed it with urine. Why is this even news? Whatever happened to this equation? Holy Item + Urine + Federal Money = Art

I always find it interesting how these bold, unflinching rebel artists somehow only have the courage to urinate all over Christianity. Where is Scorcese’s Last Temptation of Mohammed? Where are the portraits of the prophet’s wives painted in elephant dung? Where, for that matter, are the Hollywood terrorists that aren’t Nazis, still plotting nefariously, lo, these sixty years post-mortem.

For all that the artistic Left cries wolf about fears of a Christian theocracy, they know full well that they’re full of Marian painting material. If their fears were genuine, they wouldn’t dare do as they do today.

Cowards.

From dictionary.com:

Science: The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.

Well, at least the evolutionist True Believers have the latter down. One and four are totally absent, while two and three mutate more rapidly than anything proposed by the grand faith itself.

I barely consider economics to be an actual science, but at least there are some replicable experiments that can be performed which reliably support its basic laws. Perhaps you can’t test C+I+G+(x-m) very effectively, but you can test the Law of Supply and Demand and you’ll always receive the same result if you control for variables.

In fact, I suspect that Biblical principles are more reliable than evolutionary principles, albeit in a distinctly different arena. Spare the rod with 100 children, apply it firmly to another 100 and the firm foundation revealed by the experiment will have more genuine scientific support than Darwin’s landmark defense of racial eugenics.

As with democracy, no one actually believes in evolution. This is clear by the way that its supposed champions always shy away from the straightforward applications of its logic. Ironically, if recent demographics are any guide, the survival of the fittest points very strongly to a world without college-educated feminists, Europeans or atheists, all evolutionary dead-ends who cannot be troubled to reproduce themselves.

Paul Jacob points out a pair of uncompassionate liberals:

When Kerry was in a tough 1996 race for his U.S. Senate seat, Jeff Jacoby reported, “During the previous six years, it turned out, Kerry had given less than $5,000 to charity — a minuscule seven-tenths of 1 percent of his gross income for the period.”

The Democrats’ 2000 standard-bearer, Al Gore, proved no better. His 2000 tax return on an adjusted gross income of $197,729 listed charitable donations of $353. When eyebrows were raised, Gore’s spokesman explained, “Contributing financially to charitable organizations is certainly noble and should be encouraged and is something that the Gores have done when the resources were there. However, to truly judge a person’s commitment to helping others, you need to consider what they have done with their lives and how they have spent their time — and by that standard the Gores are extraordinarily committed.”

And yet, both men love to tell you how much they care… and imply how morally superior they are. What a pair of despicable jokes. Anyone dumb enough to have supported these charlatans should be deeeply, deeply embarrassed.

A Republican comments on libertarian issues over at the Gargler’s:

We oppose the involuntary treatment for mental health by health officials or law enforcement.

Homeless person bothering you? Tough, he’s got just as much a right to free speech as you.

It will, of course, be interesting to see how Republicans will defend the involuntary mental health treatment of millions of children thanks to George Delano’s Leaving No Child Behind. Furthermore, would anyone seriously wish to argue that a lack of home ownership negates First Amendment rights?

We hold that human rights should not be denied or abridged on the basis of nationality and welcome all refugees to our country.

We don’t need no steenkin borders!

I disagree with the Libertarian party on this issue. Of course, so does President Bush and the entire Republican establishment. So, there’s just not any points to be scored here for either party.

Government control over money and banking is the primary cause of inflation and depression.

Let’s trade seashells instead!

Seashells have more inherent value and retain it better than the valueless paper and digital bits currently used. Bll’s statement demonstrates what should be an embarrasing level of ignorance with regards to economics and monetary reality.

Activities which do not affect anyone but the actor have been criminalized by government on the basis of encoding a particular morality into law.

Woo-Hoo! Kiddy porn for everybody!

So the production of kiddy porn doesn’t affect anyone? That’s an interesting assertion that would appear to border on pedophilia. And then there is the rights violations inherent in using photographic representation of an individual without his consent, especially if the individual concerned cannot legally give such consent.

The repeal of all laws prohibiting the production, sale, possession, or use of drugs, and of all medicinal prescription requirements for the purchase of vitamins, drugs, and similar substances;

And you think there’s a problem with anti-biotic resistant stuff now? And how exactly will you determine if what you’re taking is what you think it is?

The problem with antibiotic-resistant bacteria is that people DON’T take drugs when they should, not the other way around. As for the second point, how do you determine if your Cheerios or your Sam Adams is what you think it is?

End all “no-fault” insurance laws, which deprive the victim of the right to recover damages from those responsible in the case of injury.

Far better to tie things up in court for years.

Considering what judges do when you leave them time to legislate from the bench, yeah, I would say that’s a win-win situation.

We oppose the issuance by the government of an identity card, to be required for any purpose, such as employment, voting, or border crossing.

M’Kay. And you’ll stop election fraud… how?

The same way it isn’t stopped today. Not that it really matters which side of the bi-factional ruling party is in power at the moment, as it’s only a matter of time before those illegal alien votes is worried about will count for seats in the American Parliament.

Children always have the right to establish their maturity by assuming administration and protection of their own rights, ending dependency upon their parents or other guardians, and assuming all responsibilities of adulthood.

So no more child labor laws, etc. Oh, and forget grounding your teenager, that’s infringing on their rights.

So much for reading comprehension. That right only exists if your teenager has emancipated himself – as he can already do – and is no longer dependent upon you. Why would you even think of trying to ground someone who has already moved out and successfully established his own household?

I guess because you’re a neosocialist Republican who believes that control over other individuals is justified as long as you’re exerting it for their own good, that might make sense.

From WND:

According to the theory of evolutionism, Chittick said dinosaurs died out about 70M years ago, long before the first appearance of man on Earth. However, Chittick said he believes there is compelling evidence that dinosaurs existed during the same period as man.

He explained the word “dinosaur” is included in a dictionary for the first time around the year 1841, and before that date, the word dragon referred to dinosaur-like creatures.

In addtion, he said, in approximately 1930, archeologists found human footprints included in stone next to fossilized dinosaur tracks in Glenrose, TX. Though he explained scientists have not determined the origin of the tracks, or whether the human prints occurred at the same time as the dinosaur fossil tracks, archeologists have identified tracks of men and dinosaurs found together in Arizona, Russia and all over the world. Chittick said drawings of dinosaur shapes found in the caves of Europe, and in drawings by the Supi Indians, of the Grand Canyon region, lend credibility to dinosaurs existing during the same period as man.

Chittick said dinosaurs started life by hatching from an egg and continued growing as long as they were alive. Therefore, some were huge giants, though most were the size of a sheep or a German Shepard dog. Scientists describe dinosaurs as cold blooded, he said, though the triceratops was a mammal.

He also said references in historical literature often include dragons and there is scientific evidence that a sudden global event decimated the dinosaurs’ large population, which had ranged all over the world, including the Antarctic, prior to that event.

Chittick said, according to an article in Science News Week, dated March 26, 2005, scientists recently discovered dinosaur bones with soft tissue still attached, including blood vessels, and Chittick explained this modernizes the existence of dinosaurs to less than 10,000 years, because blood cells cannot exist longer than that.

I’m curious about this. What is true? Is this guy a sham scientist or does the evolutionist faith have a basis in genuine experimental science on par with Scientology? According to contemporary science, do blood cells live longer than 10,000 years? If not, and if it is true that blood vessels from dinosaurs have been discovered, then how can anyone possibly claim that dinosaurs died out billions and billions of years ago?

Wait a minute, that’s Carl Sagan. Anyhow, I became skeptical about the conventional story of our origins long before I became a Christian, so if we can spare the usual “science is too complex to be required to provide reasonable answers to religious nuts” sideshow, I’d appreciate it.

I sort of hope this guy is wrong, though. I find the Darwinian faith rather more palatable than the notion of thirty-inch spiders with six-foot long legs.

From HCS and Gen’s Pad:

“I have to admit, it wasn’t something I had planned on,” Alderman Joe Baldi said of his competition. Mr. Baldi was one of three board members who voted in January to reduce the residency requirement to one year. Ms. Dougherty vetoed the motion.

The matter found its way to court when Mr. Young sued the city in an attempt to overturn the three-year requirement. He said the requirement, which would have barred him from a spot on this year’s ballot, was unconstitutional.

The courts agreed.

“The Judge said “no residency requirement” is most appropriate despite the wishes of the residents,” Ms. Dougherty wrote in an e-mail. “It will be up to the people to decide who is best able to manage the City’s issues, if the Judge allows that.”

Mr. Baldi said he hadn’t expected the matter to go this far. “Reducing the residency requirement was what I had in mind,” he said. “It never occurred to me that you’d have somebody who is not a resident applying (to run for mayor). I don’t even know what to call that.”

If it’s “inappropriate” to insist on a three-year residency requirement, why would a one-year requirement be any more acceptable? This is a small scale example of what we are seeing on a national level. Naturally, this concept of using the Constitution against the concept of citizenship and sovereignty begs the question of how there can even be such a thing as a constitution if the entity for which the constitution supposedly provides a foundation is deemed, on a fundamental level, to not exist.

The mental gyrations which the constitutional revisionists in the judiciary are willing to engage in order to justify their movement seldom cease to astound me.