I contributed to help make the Gosnell movie happen. You can, too. Go to www.gosnellmovie.com and you can help make an important movie happen. Hot Air has some important news about who is blocking the attempt to crowdfund, and two actors who have made youtube videos in support of the crowdfunding.
Archive for the ‘Character’ Category
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2014/04/16
Posted in abortion, Character, crime, Culture, Health Care, media, Personal Responsibility, Philosophy, politically correct, Politically Incorrect, politics, Pro-Life, society | Tagged: Gosnell movie, infanticide, Kermit Gosnell, Kickstarter, left-wing media agenda, mass murderer | 1 Comment »
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2014/04/03
As everyone who reads this site regularly knows, Perry Hood of Lewes Delaware is a lying /used female cleansing tool container/ who always ignores the facts as presented him in order to continue his malicious lie-filled attacks on anyone to the right of Mao tse Tung. He’s always spouting off about how there’s no evidence of voter fraud of any scale worth noting, and that Republicans only want to keep Democrats from voting, by use of “gasp” requiring an ID to do something! Well, Ed Morrissey just spanked Perry Hood real hard.
posted at 12:41 pm on April 3, 2014 by Ed Morrissey
What happens when voter-registration officials get updates on death certificates and records from other states? In North Carolina, they find massive voter fraud. As many as 35,000 North Carolina voters may have voted in another state in the 2012 election, and Republicans are claiming vindication for their efforts to tighten voter-ID checks[.]
35,000 cases of North Carolina voters registered to vote in other states, and quite a few of them availing themselves of the ability to vote in both states in the same General Election (2012). That’s just NC voters in other states. Imagine how the number would grow if each state did such an examination of voter rolls. And the Chicago Zombie voter system was spotted in NC as well — dead voters voting while dead.
Yes, Perry Hood of Lewes Delaware, when states require ID to vote, states flesh out lots of voter fraud. But lets stipulate your accusation that Voter ID is keeping the Democrat vote down. That would mean those Zombie voters (illegal and fraudulent as they are) and those double voters (illegal and fraudulent as they are) are Democrat voters voting fraudulently.
Since this is North Carolina we are talking about, I decided to see if the most beautiful North Carolina blogger had anything to say on the matter. And she did:
It’s fascinating, really. As the information was being tweeted out, liberals who have a vested interest in getting NC’s supposedly “toughest voter ID laws in the nation” tossed off the books on the grounds that they’re “racist” or something didn’t stop to consider anything but the fact that this seriously underminds (sic) their case. Keep in mind, they don’t even know if most of the people who double voted were Republicans or Democrats. In their mind, the law is racist and voter fraud doesn’t exist (except when the GOP wins elections, of course). Perhaps they assumed it was mostly Democrats who fraudulently voted in two different states and seek to change the direction of the debate. After what the left has gotten away with here and elsewhere over the last several decades come election time, can you blame them for going on the defensive?
Posted by Yorkshire on 2014/03/28
For what I saw as a Humorous (in a cynical way) was Obama’s (40%ish popularity) take on his meeting with the Pope (85% popularity) yesterday. The Vatican posted its take on the meeting also. One wonders if they actually in the same room??? Supposedly they were because, unlike Mooch, the Press was invited to take pictures. Frankly, I’ll take the Vatican’s version.
Only God knows for sure: Obama, pope differ on accounts of ‘social schisms’ talk
(midway through the article)
The Vatican, however, issued a statement after the meeting saying the president’s discussions with Francis and two other top Vatican officials focused “on questions of particular relevance for the [Catholic] Church in [the United States], such as the exercise of the rights to religious freedom, life and conscientious objection” — issues that have fueled divisions between Mr. Obama and the church.
Although Mr. Obama wanted to highlight his bond with Francis over questions of economic inequality and helping the poor, Obamacare’s mandate for employers to pay for birth control gained more attention. (Sounds like CROSS-Talk, so to speak)
The president clearly wanted to benefit from the global popularity of the pope. Their meeting was a highlight of Mr. Obama’s foreign trip that ends Friday in Saudi Arabia, but it was at an awkward time for the president.
Posted by DNW on 2014/03/20
Sometimes a rat fight can be rather amusing. Just try not to let them know you’re watching, much less laughing.
Now I admit that I’ve inadvertently ruffled rat fur in the past. I did it on another blog by making – years after the fact – what were by any rational standards temperate and measured remarks about the object lessons available from that infamous Greensboro, North Carolina gunfight which took place between Neo-Nazi’s looking for revenge and self-professed Maoist revolutionary types trolling for a second-round public confrontation with them.
There were those among that blog’s readers who were especially outraged that I looked askance at the speechifying activities of one of the ideology drunk Maoist participants; as her husband lay on the ground with the top of his head shot off.
Quivering with indignation they fumed – or pretended to fume – that I was dancing in the blood of fellow Americans. That’s “fellow” and “Americans” in quotes of course, since we are talking here about Nazi-types on the one hand, and totalitarian disciples of a mass murdering Marxist dictator on the other. Listening to self-described leftists wave the American flag over the bodies of its enemies while hysterically shouting about human decency was pretty much worth the price of admission alone.
Anyway, those who are unfamiliar with that particular historical event – the gunfight not the years later blog eruption – can research it all for themselves, or make a beginning by clicking on this link.
However the rat fight I have in mind here, is not between two species of rat, but a more all in the lefty-family type of brawl. And thus far there have been no known fatalities, though there has been the usual obscene speechifying.
Will rat blood be shed by rat? I doubt it. We can probably rest easy on that point.
Gee … what more can one reasonably say?
Posted by Yorkshire on 2013/12/18
Army to Cut Up to 4,000 Captains and Majors
18 December 2013
The U.S. Army is sending roughly 19,000 active-duty captains and majors to a screening board for early separation this spring, the Army Times reported. Up to 20 percent of those screened — approximately 3,800 officers — could be scheduled to leave the service by the Officer Separation Board and Enhanced Selective Early Retirement Board.
Officers with fewer than 18 years of federal active service will have their screening process done by OSB, and those with more than 18 years of service will see the E-SERB, according to the Army Times.
Posted by DNW on 2013/12/10
Do you prefer Obama or Obama lite?
U.S. News and World Report has an article that reminds us of the catastrophe that is likely to ensue when a morally degraded population tries to exorcise certain social demons through political self-flagellation.
Remember all those excitable and emotionally immature Republicans who were big supporters of Colin Powell? Remember experiencing the dizzying feeling that they were driven vastly less by what freedom compatible policies and ideology Powell was known to embrace, than the fact that he served as a blank screen upon which they could project their moral redemption fantasies?
In rather obvious search of someone who could stamp their “I’m not a racist” ticket, they giddily latched onto Powell in a paroxysm of hand flapping wish fulfillment.
If you asked them what his positions were on critical political issues, they couldn’t say. They could not, because he cannily would not. Fortunately for the Republican party, saner heads realized this. Well, more or less, given the fact that an almost equally destructive John McCain somehow became the party’s nominee.
Of course it was not too long before Powell felt drawn to demonstrate where his real allegiances lay; and it was not with freedom. They lay with Obama who he endorsed for president, and with the collectivist social manager class with which he identifies as a part.
Probably should not have been much of a surprise. Not everyone who seeks a career in the U.S. military is a libertarian constitutionalist sacrificing his personal daily liberty in order to guarantee it for the larger political community. Powell’s silence should have been a warning. Just like John Roberts’ should have been. But wish fulfillment Republicans have long been in the habit of assuming that just because people don’t speak up, they are somehow fans of liberty. Kind of strange and actually incoherent a thought if you reflect upon it for a moment: “X is so much a fan of freedom he fears to exercise it personally lest he be deprived of the opportunity of defending it at some future date …”
Yeah, just look how well that assumption has played out …
Now Powell, the closet-leftist-masquerading-as-a-closet-conservative is helpfully advancing the cause of freedom and self-direction by advocating the introduction of an even more comprehensive form of fascistic-leftism, than Obamacare: with what is euphemistically called a “single payer system”. As we a all know Single Payer is actually a government payer system wherein you get tagged for the medical expenses of the obnoxious through taxes; meaning that even the option of your striking back against a fascist system like ObamaCare through civil disobedience or economic subversion, becomes hardly possible. “A new poll shows 28 percent of uninsured Americans intend to pay a fine rather than enroll in a plan. as required by the Affordable Care Act.“
But Powell likes a system with no functional opt out. It worked for him.
” ‘I don’t see why we can’t do what Europe is doing, what Canada is doing, what Korea is doing, what all these other places are doing,” Powell said at the Dec. 5 event. “I am not an expert in health care, or Obamacare, or the Affordable Care Act, or however you choose to describe it, but I do know this: I have benefited from that kind of universal health care in my 55 years of public life.’ “
He doesn’t see what the problem with fascism is. He likes it in fact.
What moral subspecies of man are these collectivists?
Unconditional, redistributive, no escape social “solidarity”. What worthwhile person would want such a shit life, or demand it of everyone else; and why?
Hell on earth for edified men; emotional paradise for the “last man” … the soulless man of nothingness.
Maybe that explains it.
Posted by Yorkshire on 2013/11/30
I know just enough about the market to be scary. I know buy low, sell high. Utilities are mostly good, and stay away from steel and most American autos and airlines. BUT, over on Modern Survival Blog I saw this chart: http://modernsurvivalblog.com/the-economy/major-stock-market-crash-in-january/
To say the least, I don’t like the chart for what it shows, but I like the blog site. Ken Jorgustin does a good job. Hopefully the circuit breakers at the NYSE Work.
But what I fear the most is the potential chaos this could cause. And after watching the would be Emporer, he would quickly make this an issue to call for country changing edicts all centering around a power grab. BTW, there is always a touch of cynicism and paranoia, or else why write on the Blog?
Posted by Yorkshire on 2013/11/25
Someone speaks some sense.
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2013/11/20
37% you say? Hm, it actually doesn’t seem like 37% of the people I meet are complete morons or absolute pieces of sh**. Maybe I should make up a ‘worthless p.o.s. idiot test’:
1. Are you entitled to an income just for being alive?
2. Are you entitled to healthcare just for being alive?
3. Do you believe your gender, race, ethnicity, or combination thereof entitle you to preferred treatment in any aspect of societal interaction, i.e. preferences for hiring, housing, public assistance etc., or deference in ordinairy social interactions?
4. Would you refuse miltary service, or other public service, to qualify for the above “entitlements”?
5. Are you of sound mind and body but not actively seeking employment?
6. Do your engage in non-contraceptive-use extra-marital sex while without the means to independently (free of public assistance) raise a dependent child?
If you answered “yes” to any of the above questions, you are most likely a “worthless p.o.s. idiot”.
And you probably still think Obuggerme is just swell.
(typos in original)
Sadly, far too many people have rejected the US Constitution and would say “yes” to one or more of those questions.
Posted by DNW on 2013/10/29
Before I forget: Another reference to a conversation with the mail lady.
Concerning liberals, and rape, and what they – or some of them – really believe about the integrity and inviolability of the human person.
I might have mentioned before that we have this rather outspoken mail carrier. She’s generally cheerful, very left-liberal, not shy about saying so, and armed with all the usual talking points you would expect from someone for whom progressive media sources constitute the information gold standard.
Though it escapes me at the moment how the topic of the exploitation of women came up, it did. Or rather she brought it up.
Probably something about the abuse and physical exploitation which females are commonly acknowledged to suffer in the so-called third world.
I agreed with her by and large. I said so. In fact I went further. I said that rape should be absolutely intolerable. I said that it constituted a crime beyond the pale. “Yes!” she exclaimed.
“You have an absolute and inviolable moral right to your physical integrity,” I said.
“Absolutely! ” she said. “And,” she added, ” many people expect these women to bear the child of a man who has beaten and degraded them! You can’t expect a woman to allow that monster’s offspring to grow in her womb, can you?”
“You have an absolute right to your own body then? We agree on that?” I asked.
“I’m glad you feel that way” I said. “Would you agree that rape should be a capital crime?”
“Oh, our justice system …” she began.
“Well hypothetically then, in a case where there was a brutal physical attack, a forcible act, …”
“There’s always doubt” she said “look at the cases where …”
“Ok, let’s limit ourselves to the question as to whether you believe that you would have the moral right to kill – a justification – in order to stop an ongoing act of violent rape being perpetrated on yourself, if: a, it was the only way to stop it, and b, you had the means, to assuredly do so.”
“If my kids were …”, she started.
“I’m not talking about your kids.”
“Well, do you mean, later?”
“Stop!” I said. “Forget any scenario involving the legal system and mistaken identities. Forget about after the fact self-help acted out in cold blood, if that is what is also disturbing you. “I’m asking you, you personally, as a “progressive female” if you would use lethal force on a brutalizing rapist in process, if that was the only way to get him to cease, and if you were sure to be successful in doing so. Hell, and assume it’s lawful to do so, if that helps you to come up with an answer”
“Uh, well, uh … wellllll, uh I have to think about that. I’ll get back with you later.” she said as she sidled out the door.
Virtually identical to the words she used the last time we had this kind of a conversation. That now makes two of those “I’ll get back with you later”s she’s never gotten back with me on.
Leftists, do have different interpersonal boundaries. And for all their shrillness and squawking about domination and violation and exploitation, they, some of them, seem to think that the last thing they should be required to do, is to take an absolute stand on the only absolute locus of self which they have.
What integrity then, is it that they are trying to preserve, if they will not preserve their own?
And if they will not preserve their own if they can, why should anyone else take the care and trouble to do so for them?
Credit: The image of the two postal workers is from Ilana Cohn’s “thefunclub” parody of a USPS public service announcement featuring Tonya and CiCi, found on Cohn’s YouTube channel. It’s a bit rough for a family style blog, so I won’t link directly. Depending on your sensibilities, it might be said to be hilarious.
Posted by DNW on 2013/10/11
Or a deliberate joke.
The image immediately below, despite what you may think, is not a Photoshop prank. At least as far as I can determine.
It’s been on many news sites, and I don’t think news organizations would deliberately do artificially, what it appears nature has done on its own, just in order to mock a conscienceless criminal.
That image, now displayed above, is a seemingly authentic photo of the felon who was running a criminal conspiracy in the city of Detroit; frantically pillaging it as it sank further into ruin with his vaunted “Pay to Play” city contract program. That person would be his gargantuousness, the ex and self-styled “Hip Hop” and “anointed by God” Mayor of Detroit, Kwame Whateverhismiddlenameis Kilpatrick.
Now, this is an obvious Photoshop style joke of one of Kwame’s friends and admirers.
While this image below, is an obvious cartoon, and merely reminiscent of the real image at the top.
This isn’t to say that his Hip Hopness was without friends in high places.
“I want uh, I want to first of all acknowledge your great mayor Kwame Kilpatrick; who has been on the front lines …[applause] … has been on the front lines doing an outstanding job uh .. gathering together the leadership at every level in Detroit uh to bring about the kind of renaissance that all of us anticipate .. uh .. for this great city and uh he is a leader not just here in Detroit, not just in Michigan, but all across the country people look to him. Uh we know that he is going to be doing astounding things for many years to come … uh it’s … I’m grateful to call him a friend and a colleague, and uh I’m looking forward to a lengthy collaboration in terms of making sure Detroit does well in the future …” The Prez.
Mr. Kilpatrick got a prison sentence of 28 years for his latest conviction.
Many are already taking bets as to when Obama will pardon him.
Got a guess?
Oh here is another image of a politically active lefty.
Since I did a double-take at one guy’s head, and another guy’s hair, you might expect I’d mock this guy’s looks too.
But that would be too cruel. After all, we have standards on this blog which are extended, and prevent unnecessary cruelty, even to morally deconstructed appetite entities like modern liberals. Well, at least the Christians writing on this blog do. I have not yet decided whether I am going to join them, or not.
And quit staring at his nose.
It’s rude, and has nothing to do with why he became a liberal.
Posted by DNW on 2013/10/07
A Troll has demanded an explanation.
We all know what trolls are. They generally speaking are attention seeking, manipulative neurotics, sometimes ideologically committed, and presumably found on the Internet.
But they actually existed before the advent of the Internet, and one still runs into them in real as opposed to “virtual” life.
Out in the real world they are usually given labels such as, interfering users, jealous schemers, spiteful meddlers, annoying crackpots, social nuisances, or the like.
On rare occasions, their relentless emotional needs and the drive to satisfy them, lead the Troll into positions of considerable political power or social influence. Once there, their amoral-ism and boundary-less will-to-power-over-others, is likely to wreak more havoc and human damage than they ever could hope to achieve while their noxious influence was confined to some local neighborhood.
Trolls, whether encountered in real life or in a virtual, all share a number of what are by now familiar ploys or gambits which they use in the hope these manipulation techniques will bring them what they want.
This includes the presumption of a right of affiliation, as the context for delivering their casual insults; charges of hypocrisy, or double standards (unfair discrimination) when they are called out; displays of indignation; feigned victim-hood; attempts to intimidate those who resist; and the very common Troll technique of leveraging the moral generosity of the principled man back against him.
Verbally, they engage in equivocation, deceit, constant redirection, and/or any other behavior which will protract and obscure rather than clarify and resolve a specific question.
Clearing the question away, is not their intention.
Their focus is always on maintaining contact with the other as “provider”.
For what they seek is not the freedom to access the material world in order to extract what they want from it, but the social privilege of accessing other persons – made compliant one way or another – in order satisfy their urges.
The difference the Internet makes in their game is that it constitutes an electronic barrier between the Troll Personality and the targets of their attention. Blogs don’t serve liquor, they are private, open to limited participation by invitation – generally by default at first – only, and not subject to government regulation. At least not yet.
Nonetheless, a view of Internet practices makes clear that the Internet troll and the modern liberal, (read collectivist) in their insatiable hunger for a piece of the lives of others are essentially one and the same. The Internet troll and the Modern Liberal being merely two manifestations of the same general species, observed while operating in different environments.
What individual trolls sometimes achieved in their neighborhoods, and what the Troll Party has now managed in politics through insinuating itself into the administration of our Federal Government, the Troll Horde now wish to complete by ensuring that they may intrude themselves into every human interchange or transaction that piques their interest or excites their avarice: And to do so on their own terms, and in a way that gives them appropriatve control, be the realm virtual or real, social or political.
This is not to say that a Troll might not be telling the truth about its own views. That is to say it, or they, may be accurately describing their own states of mind when they say that it is wrong to cut them out of your intellectual life, because, say for instance the First Amendment to the Constitution of the Federal Government of the United States, prohibits Congress from making any law “abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press …”.
They may in fact be so mentally twisted by their needs and their lack of inhibitions in satisfying them, that the techniques I described above have become their unconscious nature. Practice of deceit and manipulation became second nature, second nature became first nature. Eventually nothing is left but a Troll nature where a man’s nature once stood.
Let’s take the specific example of a complaint over the stifling of “free speech”, as our illustrative paradigm.
In a recent accusation over his expulsion from this blog, Mr. Perry Hood has written:
“Regarding free speech, must I remind you that blogs make use of the internet of which you have neither ownership nor control? Thus, what aspect of free speech do you folks not understand. Have anything I’ve written constitute a personal threat made to any of you? Of course not. So I ask again, what is it that you folks fear from me? I would really like to know.And then, again, there is DNW, who by virtue of his hidden identity, forthrightly reveals mine. Don’t lecture me about values, DNW!”
Let’s look at some of the elements above.
Mr. Hood says, “ Regarding free speech … blogs make use of the internet of which you have neither ownership nor control.”
We notice here that:
1. He now entirely sidesteps the Constitutional issue upon which he had been generally hanging his claims. He must abandon it, since there is no issue of Congress making a law abridging his freedom of speech, when someone in the neighborhood kicks him off their front porch.
2. He attempts to redraw his accusation in terms of control of the Internet.
3. But no one is trying to control his access to the Internet.
4. He introduces the idea of ownership, (of the Internet) in order to refute it.
5. But no one has claimed private ownership of the Internet.
6. He attempts to stake a public claim to blogs which are private, by saying that they are found on the Internet which is not privately owned.
7. But by this il-logic he might as well argue that he may ride in your car because you drive it on the highway, or live in your house because it is on a public street, or molest your children because they attend a public school.
Mr Hood then goes on to say, “Thus, what aspect of free speech do you folks not understand.”, speciously implying as I mentioned earlier regarding the Troll mind-set, a “ presumption of a right of affiliation as the context for delivering the casual insult”. In other words, his Constitutional gambit bankrupt, his Internet framing proven irrelevant, he must now “presume” a right of affiliation and access where none is in evidence.
Mr. Hood goes on to ask, “ Have anything I’ve written constitute [sic] a personal threat made to any of you?”; while assuming that the obvious answer is, as he tells it, “ Of course not.”
However, because we have had long experiences with Mr. Hood on the Common Sense Political Thought blog, as well as on the First Street Journal blog, we immediately notice that what he says is not true. Which is why he was on thin ice before he was ever granted an exemption and allowed to make any comments here in the first place.
Mr. Hood has, as we all know, had his privilege of participation on the blogs above mentioned and numerous other blogs repeatedly suspended or banned for just that kind of behavior: personal threats.
What apparently grieves Mr. Hood, is that after calling us traitors, and refusing to intellectually justify the supposed moral claims he lays against others as a pretext for calling them treasonous, he was not afforded the 20 or so warnings and advisories, and “second chances”, which he usually gets.
He was given two. Which was two more than the number to which he was entitled.
But when a man labels you as treasonous for resisting his attempts to appropriate the lives of yourself and your family, and then doubles down when called on it, what point is there in further talk?
The Internet is wide open to Mr. Hood. Let him build himself a cozy fire with the means already given to him by someone else, and attract who he can with the wafting aroma of his roasting cant, envy, and malice.
If any do drop by, he is welcome to their company, and to their intellectual and emotional companionship.
Oh, I almost forgot. The Troll asks, “So I ask again, what is it that you folks fear from me? I would really like to know”
The answer to the question, though revulsion rather than fear is the right idea, involves having any portion of your life repeatedly wasted on a project which you know from long experience is pointless and foolish before you embark upon it: that is to say, the project of repeatedly attempting to reason with an entity which has deconstructed itself into a sometimes wheedling, sometimes demanding, sometimes threatening appetite, but never right-reasoning man.
Does that answer the question?
Perry, you called your own shots. You made yourself into what you now are. You showed us what you are through demonstration, and told us through affirmation.
What is there that is left to say?