FMeekins's blog

Will Admiral Ackbar Replace School's Confederate Mascot?

Students at the University of Mississippi are campaigning to make Admiral Ackbar from “Return of the Jedi” the school’s new mascot.

The school banished its old mascot Old Reb, an elderly Southern gentleman in Confederate garb, because of "negative connotations of the old South".

If the Rebel Alliance had the same backbone as these radical multiculturalists, Vader and Palpatine would have conquered the galaxy without even having to build a Deathstar.

Frankly, there is no pleasing these malcontents.

If you have a minority mascot, those with too much time on their hands throw hissy fits.
If you have a White mascot that is anything other than a milksop on par with Al Franken's Stuart from Saturday Night Live, they throw a hissy fits.

Once they select Admiral Ackbar, let's see how long that lasts before they cave to the demands of the Islamosupremacists for finding the character offensive.

For the ignorant out there, the word "Ackbar" looks in Latin script (an alphabet also soon likely to be abolished since it is used to formulate the languages of most Eurocentric cultures) to the Jihadist battle cry of "Allah Akbar" and, most likely as in the case of Judaism, shellfish are deemed ceremonially unclean in this faith as well. Admiral Ackbar is essentially nothing other than a giant talking shrimp or lobster.

Those irritating and useless as to their levels of erudition will squeal like little school girls, since they clearly can't be real men, that the two words are nothing alike.

Since when has a good terrorist ever let that get in the way of a bombing or riot?

Some will no doubt remember when Burger King altered a logo simply because it looked too similar to an Islamic symbol and banks across Europe have stopped giving children piggy banks out of fear of offending their Levantine overlords.

About the only mascot that perfectly captures the spirit of leftist academia these days is the Nothing referenced in "The Neverending Story" since that is the amount of freedoms we’ll have left once the interests of every conceivable ethnicity with the exception of the White race is pandered to in the end.

by Frederick Meekins

Ministers Get The Bejesus Knocked Out Of Them

And no, the headline is not about a form of religious persecution.

A number of churches are turning to Ultimate-Style fighting as a way to attract young men back to the pews.

Eventually, as in the case with so-called "Christian tattoos" (ones added after conversion rather than prior too), one will be categorized as not being devoted enough to the Lord if one is not willing to have one's body mutilated in this manner.

If pastors really want to draw in testosterone oozing crowds, why not have two chicks whacking on each other? But that goes too far some may respond.

How so? It is no more immoral to have two women fighting each other without legitimate cause as two men. And in this day of anything goes and sloppy theology, any undue titillation that results could simply be explained and celebrated as the God-bestowed appreciation of the female form inherent to any red-blooded American male.

If churches want to be serious about luring actual manly men back to their congregations how about more songs and lessons that emphasis objective doctrinal or historical content rather than the lyrical equivalent of Jesus blowing in your ear as is the case with many of these praise and worship choruses as well as providing study opportunities where one is free to share what's on one's heart if one feels led to but one is not branded as a heretical individualist if one decides not to.

by Frederick Meekins

Female Chauvinist Wants Men Kicked Out Of Congress

If a male member of Congress said they could get more done if women and other assorted minorities were sent home since these tend to be the demographics that tend to think the government owes them a living even if they could provide it for themselves, we'd never hear the end of it.

If Leftists are going to constantly make a hullabaloo over the propagation of stereotypes, one of the inferences of Rep. Carol Shea-Porter must be addressed.

In her remarks she insinuates that only the female members of the legislative body have been responsible for taking care of family.

It should be pointed out men that go out to work each day are also taking care of their families.

Anyone that argues otherwise should support the abolition of child support laws along with government welfare handouts and see just how long children thrive without any kind of material and nutritional sustenance.

This brings us to yet another observation.

It is safe to say that most of the female members of Congress did not come from the ranks of scrubwomen earning minimum wage.

As such, many no doubt possess professional backgrounds where they actually placed their careers over and above that of their children.

Rep. Shea-Porter (with her hyphenated last name indicating that her identity derived from her role as wife and mother is not sufficient for her) can pull the public leg all she wants; however, it is most likely the babysitters and nannies that have taken care of the children of the female members of Congress.

Thus, when this November rolls around, we should toss out both genders also irrespective of how the plumbing is hooked up.

By Frederick Meekins

Female Chauvinist Wants Men Kicked Out Of Congress

If a male member of Congress said they could get more done if women and other assorted minorities were sent home since these tend to be the demographics that tend to think the government owes them a living even if they could provide it for themselves, we'd never hear the end of it.

If Leftists are going to constantly make a hullabaloo over the propagation of stereotypes, one of the inferences of Rep. Carol Shea-Porter must be addressed.

In her remarks she insinuates that only the female members of the legislative body have been responsible for taking care of family.

It should be pointed out men that go out to work each day are also taking care of their families.

Anyone that argues otherwise should support the abolition of child support laws along with government welfare handouts and see just how long children thrive without any kind of material and nutritional sustenance.

This brings us to yet another observation.

It is safe to say that most of the female members of Congress did not come from the ranks of scrubwomen earning minimum wage.

As such, many no doubt possess professional backgrounds where they actually placed their careers over and above that of their children.

Rep. Shea-Porter (with her hyphenated last name indicating that her identity derived from her role as wife and mother is not sufficient for her) can pull the public leg all she wants; however, it is most likely the babysitters and nannies that have taken care of the children of the female members of Congress.

Thus, when this November rolls around, we should toss out both genders also irrespective of how the plumbing is hooked up.

By Frederick Meekins

A Twitterian Analysis Of The State Of The Union 2010

Obama certainly looks down his nose in a condescending manner. Why do I hear "KNEEELLLLLLLLL BEFORE ZOD!!!" from Superman II in my ear?

In opening the State of Union, Obama mentioned the Speaker of the House, the Vice President and the American people. What, no acknowledgement of illegal aliens? Obama apparently is not as tolerant as made to appear.

Isn't Chris Matthews forgetting that Obama is Black more offensive then Harry Reid saying "negro dialect"?

By invoking Bull Run & the Bloody Sunday of the civil rights movement in the State of the Union, Obama implies disagreement with him is racist.

Obama claimed he took office amidst growing government debt. It's getting even worse under him.

Biden certainly seemed gleeful about hosing the banks. Biden looked like a bobblehead the way he couldn't keep his neck still.

Guess we’ll see at tax time if Obama is blowing smoke up our rears about not raising taxes.

If Obama is supposedly one of the greatest orators of world history surpassing Bush’s limited elocutionary abilities, why did he use the word “cops” rather than “police”?

President plans to toss $30 billion here; $30 billion there. Reminds me of the Simpsons bit about Internet stock.

And what if the job bill Obama demands “without delay” is delayed?

I guess all that clean energy technology China is inventing was the cause of all that smog at the Beijing Olympics.

Will Obama really allow offshore drilling or is this a phantom promise like clean-coal technology?

Pelosi’s grin is scarier than the Joker’s.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Naplotano applauds like a lethargic Walrus.

Why does Obama pronounce “Colooombia” with an Hispanic accent?

If everyone needs a college education since Obama decrees that high school is no longer enough for career success, won’t college become as worthless when the government “gives” it to everyone?

Why should future government workers have their student loans forgiven sooner than those in other occupations?

Obama promised to make mortgages more affordable. Didn’t steps like this cause the housing and banking crisis to begin with?

Frau Obama is to lead a purge against childhood obesity. May start out as pleas to exercise more, but will likely end with the government monitoring what youngsters eat, threatening to remove from parental custody those not within established guidelines, and eventually the program will be expanded to include adults. As a former porker now out to change the world, Huckabee will likely endorse this as he also thinks your weight is the government’s business.

If Bush’s prescription drug program was expensive, wouldn’t Obamacare be even more so?

If we are freezing government spending with the exception of outlays related to national security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, is that really freezing any government spending at all?

Why is $250,000 considered ostentatiously rich?

Obama's said "The more that TV pundits reduce serious debates to silly arguments, big issues into sound bites, our citizens turn away." This really means that to disagree with Obama is subversive. Look for more attempts at resurrecting the Fairness Doctrine in the name of diversity, national security, and assorted communitarian drivel.

Are Obama's comments about pundits spreading cynicism "respectful". Why don't these "turn people away from the process"?

It is claimed that the military will be out of Iraq by the end of August. Expect the next Iraqi uprising to begin the first of September.

When Obama's claims the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department is once again prosecuting civil rights violations and employment discrimination, does this include cases on behalf of White people whose rights in the workplace are trod asunder? If the case of where the charges of voter intimidation were dropped against Black Panthers threatening White folks on election day 2008, it is highly doubtful.

While our values "allowed us to forge a nation made up of immigrants from every corner of the globe", those values did not originate from every corner of the globe. Like it or not, those are largely Western in that they are predominately Judoe-Christian and Greco-Roman.

Obama should be ashamed if he accepts the donation to Haiti from the 8 year old boy. Notice how Obama did not recommend people send their charitable donations through a private organization instead.

America still faces a potential Obama dictatorship. His attitude towards the Supreme court is quite chilling. Now leftists are condemning Justice Alito for not taking his rump kicking with a "Please sir, may I have another."

Congress needs to get a handle on this presidential executive order thing irrespective of the administration issuing these decrees or our Republic is through.

In the Republican response, Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell used "her" as a universal pronoun. If one is not using designations for both genders, "him" is the grammatically correct one to use.

Fox News counted 86 rounds of applause. I tabulated 93 instances of clapping. Some of it seemed more subdued than in previous years.

Karl Rove claimed Obama said "I" 96 times. Reminds me of that scene in the series finale of the original Prisoner. In my college days, one usually got points deducted for overuse of the first person personal pronoun. At least Bob Dole had the decency to begin his sentences with "Bob Dole".

by Frederick Meekins

Environmentalism Not About the Earth But About Control, Part 2

Those still not convinced should ask themselves before they run off and join such groups how much control they want to cede over their lives to the beneficence of the collective. For once one signs over the very right to ownership to one’s dwelling and possessions, where does it end?

Willing to relinquish rights to the conjugal affections of your spouse to the group? Don’t snicker.

In many cults, those not willing to surrender their spouses to the group are labeled as being insufficiently devoted to the group or "too individualistic" in orientation. Interestingly this allegation is invoked increasingly in the churches of today as they totter ever closer to the edges of apostasy and unbelief.

Those enamored with their own smug progressivism will claim such excesses are more characteristic of the religious mindset. Secularists would never stand for such outrages and the infringement on the most basic of relationships?

Think so do you? Though he might have started off religious, before the last drop of Kool-Aid was slurped, Jim Jones' position on the Scriptures and the beauties of socialism had more in common with the National Counsel of Churches than Moral Majority or the Christian Coalition. And for those that think Marx is the cat's whiskers, what do they have to say about this thinker's proposal that the individual family and private marriages should be abolished?

And even if one happens to have a proclivity to these bizarre living arrangements without all the kinky wifeswapping and such, on what grounds does one object when these compounds lay claim to your children? Some of these COMMUNITIES conspire to undermine familial bonds between parents and offspring in a group setting or by minimizing the time parents spend alone with their biological progeny.

Yet one does not have to be locked away on some dope-smoking commune to be influenced by this kind of childrearing mentality. The perspective is already prevalent throughout the social welfare establishment that children do not belong to the parents but rather to the COMMUNITY as manifested by the state. If anything, a child enjoys a status barely above that of a library book since the parent is granted permission to enjoy the child for a time but forced to surrender the youngsters to the state on the terms of the state as evidenced in laws establishing lower and lower ages for mandatory preschool and bureaucratic homevisits.

With America's relative prosperity, citizens are pretty much able to ignore such kooks. But what will happen when these lunatics acquire more and more power unto themselves and connive to impose their cherished deprivations upon the rest of us?

For if these neo-primitives have their way, you won't even be permitted to procure the same quality of sustenance to which you and your family are accustomed. Rather, you will be compelled to gnaw on the twigs and shrubs beneath your very feet if you are fortunate to be deemed worthy enough of the privilege of continued existence.

For a while now, it has become popular in eco-socialist circles to whine incessantly about how far food must be transported to reach the masses of humanity. Instead of marveling at the bounty and variety of food available year round and in the most hostile of climates, environmentalists lament this fact.

Anybody that is anybody these days has a website (I wonder if the ones run by these people function on moonbeams and fuzzy thoughts since the rest of us are suppose to cutback on electricity), an organization, and a cadre of propagandists to spread the message. The mass starvation racket (or the inconvenient food syndicate) is no different.

One such outfit fomenting this hooey is Slow Food USA, described as “supporting and celebrating the food traditions of North America.” Let me point out they are not referring to a burger, fries, and a Coke.

The organization’s executive director Erika Lesser (“lesser” is the amount of food you’ll be eating if her organization has its way) gave a lecture titled “Live Slow: On The Path To A Delicious Future”. Those in attendance were invited to “Join the slow food table on biodiversity issues and the benefits of good, clean, and fair food." This ought to be considered because, "Education in taste is the first step towards transforming consumers into co-producers who can help safeguard food traditions and the health of the environment. By choosing wisely and eating with pleasure, you --- as well as your community and the planet --- can reap the delicious and healthful rewards of responsible coproduction.”

From that litany, the primary thing that stands out is how the consumer will be “transformed” (New Age socialistic euphemisms meaning revolution imposed from above whether you want to participate or not) into a “coproducer”. In other words, it is the intention of this to drag you out into the fields for a little conscripted labor.

For some reason, upon reading about being transformed into being a coproducer, I can’t get out of my head images of what I’ve read about the placards that use to hang on the gates of the concentration camps run by the Nazis reading “Work shall make you free” or how the Khmer Rouge use to march the people out to labor in the rice paddies. You know, the entire reeducation through labor bit (or as it is called today, “community service”).

Though slow food fronts disguise themselves in an agrarian or proletarian cloak, as with most that make playing unscrubbed revolutionary their life’s work, the movement is quite elitist in nature. For example, on the website the organization laments the advent of low-cost chickens consumed by the masses.

Rather, the group advocates more expensive breeds. Most likely since the consumption of meat will be limited to the revolutionary vanguard whereas those of us deemed to possess a consciousness of insufficient awareness and sensitivity will be compelled to simply piddle in the dirt for a root or a grub; but we will probably be forbidden that as well since disturbing the soil to even a miniscule extent will be an example of the butterfly affect that could lead to an erosion-based environmental disaster.

As with most of the other groups mentioned in this epic epistle, Slow Foods USA has a phobia about people doing things by themselves. This is for pretty much the same reason the Nazis did not want people listening to the radio alone. When you are alone, you are more likely to be critical since in that context you are more apt to pay attention to the message rather than taking cues on how you are to respond from those around you.

Rather than eat alone, the socially responsible are obligated to join and take their gastronomical orders from a group called a “Convivium”. Since everything to these people is group and movement oriented, if food is now to go in one end in the presence of the group, I guess it won’t be long until one will be obligated to have the remnants emerge at the other end in the presence of the COMMUNITY. After all, only those with something to hide want privacy we are constantly reminded by the radical communalists.

Use to be, one ate meals with one’s family. Maybe if these hags had not aborted themselves into sterility, supper time would not have had to be turned into an act of COMMUNITY service measuring one’s devotion to the good of the cause.

Slow Food USA prides itself on being everything fast food is not. Thus, one good thing about the movement is that the shrill biddies comprising the membership might be forced back into the kitchen where hussies with too much time on their hands belong and won’t have enough energy to undertake their idiotic activism.

As stated, left to themselves and cordoned off from the rest of us, these radicals would not present all that much of a problem. However, as with other useful idiots manipulated by the elites, these halfwits play a vital role in bringing an end to life as we know it when they form strategic alliances with the other mouthpieces of perdition for the purposes of getting the American people to surrender their freedom with a wink and a smile.

To the regular American blissfully ignorant of the ideological struggle being waged all around, television news outlets and correspondents exist to convey in an objective manner information of use and importance to concerned citizens. However, often these communicators and the interests they represent are as partisan as those blatantly seeking to persuade you as to the veracity of a particular opinion.

Prominently featured in the top half of page 10 of the 2006 edition of the Green Festival program was an advertisement for a panel discussion conducted by WRC-TV news personality Wendy Rieger. From the text, the reader learns that Rieger’s “Going Green segment features green lifestyles and products.”

However, had Rieger earned a reputation for grilling adherents of this movement and exposing the fallacies in the arguments endangering the nation’s very standard of living, it is doubtful she would be given a place, the promotional literature categorizes, as on the “main stage”. Furthermore, if Rieger is snuggling under the mulch with environmentalists, how can we be sure the remainder of her reportage is not as slanted?

Would the Green Festival allow a correspondent more critical of the celebration’s claims to ascend the rostrum such as John Stossel or Rush Limbaugh? Tolerancemongers will snap, “But its a private function and the organizers are not required to invite anyone they don’t want.”

And they are absolutely correct. Perhaps we should remind them of that as these Reds drag out notions such as the Fairness Doctrine in the attempt to silence Conservative talk radio.

Conversely though, if we are suppose to trust some dyed-blonde newsgirl in the green movement's pocket, would those having no problem with that be as quiet if some newsgal was in Jerry Falwell’s back pocket getting chummy with the Moral Majority gang at one of those kinds of shindigs? The aging beatniks do not consider what they believe to be a bias as anyone that does not believe as they do will be carted off to electroshock therapy once they ascend to unrivaled power.

Some will dismiss this clarion warming, claiming it has gone all over the map and too far afield. However, Francis Schaeffer once pointed out that a shortcoming of the Judeo-Christian mind and thus the conservative worldview as an extension of that perspective is the failure to view reality as a single comprehensive unit.

As such, if the free peoples of the earth give a foothold to these Communitarians in one area, by curtailing our innate liberties in that particular area, it won’t be that long in terms of the totality of history until we will have surrendered all the areas that make life worth living. If today we allow these so-called “guardians of the earth” to alter driving patterns and the like, what will prevent them in the future from coming back to take our cars and even our homes away all together?

by Frederick Meekins

Environmentalism Not About the Earth But About Control, Part 1

For decades, American motorists have been subjected to propaganda insisting that they either need to drive less or give up safe, comfortable automobiles in favor of what amount to motorized coffins in order to preserve natural resources and environmental quality. Now that this policy goal is pretty much on the road to being implemented, the elites running our lives are not content to sit back in the glow of their accomplishment but are rather laying the groundwork for the next phase in their grand dream of limiting the free movement of the American people.

One would think the increasing popularity of electric and hybrid automobiles would please transportation planners and social engineers. However, as most realize somewhere along life's journey, getting what you want is not always what you expected.

For while hybrid cars might cut back on emissions and fuel consumption, they also take a bite out of gas tax revenues. But instead of tightening their belts and learning to make due with less as they counsel you when you complain about rising fuel costs, government planners are now conniving to pass the hardship on to you by altering the way transportation taxes are assessed.

Currently, such taxes are gathered in about the fairest way possible (a concept seldom associated with taxes) by collecting it in an innocuously private manner from those cautious enough to pay in cash at the bump based upon how many gallons acquired. However, from a plan being considered in Oregon, motorized Americans will have to contend with another governmental intrusion into their lives of Orwellian proportions.

Instead of collecting taxes on each gallon purchased, revenuers plan to install censors at gas stations capable of reading the global positioning systems to be installed in nearly all vehicles and, from that, tabulating how far a vehicle has been driven or into what zones they have motored. Proponents of the program claim citizens have nothing to fear from Big Brother since the system would only tabulate mileage rather than specific itinerary.

However, one does not have to be a Ray Bradbury to realize what a dystopian road this is headed down. For even if the sensors do not log precise destination, they are still capable of relaying to authorities --- even if they are “just” tax authorities, who can actually make your life more miserable than actual police as these activist accountants assume greater control over areas of your life once considered beyond the purview of just and legitimate government such as religious doctrines and where you have been.

Even more disturbing, these tracking devices are being designed to catalogue at what time of day you drive. That way the state will be able to charge you an additional fee for daring to drive at the times of day our government slavemasters would prefer we stay off the road.

While they are at it, why don’t they go ahead and add similar devices to our toilets as well to punish those that have more bowel movements than our betters in government think we ought since such functions contribute disproportionately to greenhouse gases and are often a sign that the chronically flatulent might be eating too high up the food chain. Those embracing their place as good little minions of the New World Order will probably respond, “But this discouragement of motorized travel is legitimate since one is using roads provided by the COMMUNITY and by definition the COMMUNITY determines what it considers the terms of use”.

Those thinking that they will be left alone if they use public transportation and sit quietly in their homes are in for a rude awakening that will probably arrive when they are dragged kicking and screaming to the relocation camp in part for the sake of the environment. For the totalist state is not content simply to tell you how to live once you step out into the broader COMMUNITY. It also wants to tell you in what kind of structure in which you may live out the existence its institutions have been beneficent enough to grant you as well as in many instances what manner of things you may do once you close the door.

Across the pond in Merry Ole England, according to a CNSNEWS.com story titled “UK May Tax Environmentally Unfriendly Houses”, beatnik rabble in the Green Party there have been at the forefront of efforts to introduce taxes on what their ilk have labeled “environmentally damaging behavior”. However, such penalties are for more than spitting on the sidewalk or tossing litter from the car window. Foremost among these fees include increased property taxes levied against homes not deemed green enough as well as on automobiles and on those daring to travel by air.

It must be remembered that the power to tax is the power to destroy. One member of the Conservative Party observed such taxes would disproportionately impact the poor and the elderly since these demographics are more likely to reside in domiciles not meeting energy efficiency expectations.

What better way to seize the property of the population’s undesirables (namely members of the lower middle class) than to tax them out of their homes and to herd them into governmentally approved relocation compounds such as those into which Hurricane Katrina victims were shunted. Here, these people were deprived of their constitutional rights to such an extent that they were forbidden from speaking with reporters. One gets around the raw nerve of eminent domain altogether if taxes are raised so high that residents are either forced to sell to developers or have their property seized by default.

Speaking from Tokyo as the elites will continue their lives of global travel while the common person will be corralled and branded like cattle going to slaughter, one British legislator (quite a ways from his homeland I might point out to the geographically illiterate) said, “Sometimes the changes will be painful. But leadership means facing the great challenges, even if the decisions are difficult.”

Shame the Eurocrats can’t display the same degree of courage to stand against the tide of radical Islam sweeping across what was the cradle of Western Civilization. I guess they have no qualms about turning Granny out into the streets since she isn’t likely to strap on a carbomb.

Don’t be fooled. Those such as the politician above making these kinds of statements won’t make a single personal change. Do you honestly believe the likes of Prince Charles and Queen Elizabeth over there and the Bushes, Gores, and Kennedys over here are going to give up their multi-mansion estates to live in some I-Pod shipping-container sized apartment the rest of us will be expected to live in with a stupid grin slapped across our faces for the sake of the revolution?

Not only do the elites plan to snatch your homes from you in the name of conservation, they also want to regulate within your own living space --- or rather the one they plan to assign to you once they have succeeded in placing title to all property in the hands of the state or whatever institutional arrangement through which they plan to administer relinquished holdings.

Speaking before worshipful UN functionaries, Al Gore (whose ballooning waistline and burgeoning facial jowls indict him for consuming a greater percentage of the earth’s resources then what he would permit the working slob) claimed according to a 9/6/06 Drudge Report that “cigarettes are a significant contributor to global warming.” The same could be said about the former Vice President’s ever-fattening lip. Drudge ends this dispatch by noting that Gore closed his homily harping on his political future and by hawking a book he had written (no doubt printed on paper that could have contributed more to the cause of Mother Earth if it had remained a tree).

Interestingly, Al Gore is not the only eco-pimp using the environment to turn a trick or two. One would think the purpose of an environmental festival would be to discuss the environment. However from the program (printed on the remains of a slaughtered tree) for Green Festival 06 in Washington DC, it seems that the natural world was pretty much tagged on as an afterthought as the focus seemed to be radical politics with ageing hippies continuing to spread their filth and debauchery.

For example, from the schedule of speakers, one wouldn't be surprised to see Karl Marx to show up on the dais. Former Mr. Jane Fonda, Tom Hayden (who's nearly as old as Marx), was scheduled to speak on the topic of "Alternatives To War & Empire". Activist Medea Benjamin was docketed for the oration titled "We Have The Power To Stop The War In Iraq". Another scheduled homily was titled "The Power Of Storytelling: Changing The World".

What in the name of Sheol does any of this have to do with enjoying nature or marveling at furry woodland creatures? Nothing whatsoever, ladies and gentleman.

Before all is said and done, those that address such covens will no doubt make those in attendance feel guilty for simply being alive (especially if you happen to be White) and for enjoying the blessings that come from living in the greatest country on earth. And if it wasn't, why are all these immigrants self loathing liberals want to grant unrestricted access to our bounty keep trying to break in, and perhaps even more importantly, end up forcing you to partake in their life of squalor.

Foremost on the agenda was the confiscation of your own individual domicile and privacy. One seminar was titled "Community Without Walls".

But as one wise soul observed (it might have been Chesterton), don't take down a fence unless you know why it had been put up. Walls and fences, contrary to leftist opinion, are very positive things as they confirm identity as an individual by demarcating what is mine and what is not mine (namely yours).

It is the purpose of such a lecture to erode the concept of individuality and private property by manipulating those in attendance to be an "active participant in one's neighborhood." That may sound all warm and fuzzy, but in a "community without walls" where those living have forgotten legitimate boundaries and limitations, it usually ends up being invoked as an excuse to get involved in the business of others that is no one else's concern and as an excuse to bring sanctions occasionally bordering on the violent against those not opening every detail of their lives to the scrutinizing oversight of the COMMUNITY.

Some might conclude that, even if these plans were true, they are so far down the road that we will not have to worry about it during our lifetimes. And even though I cannot give an exact date as to when these communalistic horrors will transpire when what you slave away for will no longer be yours to enjoy as you wish, but as sure as I draw breath and write this, I can assure you the plans are being set into motion to revolutionize the American way of life.

In the future, it won’t be enough to let these flakes cordon themselves off in their own compounds where whacky ideas, loose morals, masculine women, and effeminate men will be the order of the day. As I’ve said before, it is their intention to drag the rest of us down into Third World squalor.

One of the exhibitors at the Green Festival was the Federation of Egalitarian Communities. The description for this organization reads as follows in the 2006 promotional brochure: “The Federation of Egalitarian Communities is a network of communal groups spread across North America, from small agricultural homesteads to village-like communities to urban group homes.”

It has been a few years since the 1960’s, so perhaps a few readers (a significant percentage of whom like myself didn’t even trod the earth at that time) need to be reminded what exactly a commune is. A commune is a living arrangement where the residents do not own their respective domiciles outright but rather in common with the group (or rather those designated as the representatives of the group) making decisions on behalf of the members.

While it may sound all warm and fuzzy, seldom do such living arrangements end happily. At best, most participants part ways with hurt feelings and at worst they often end in bloodshed as typified by the Jonestown and Heavensgate tragedies or when the principles are applied society-wide as was the case in the Soviet Union and Red China.

By Frederick Meekins

Environmentalism Not About the Earth But About Control, Part 1

For decades, American motorists have been subjected to propaganda insisting that they either need to drive less or give up safe, comfortable automobiles in favor of what amount to motorized coffins in order to preserve natural resources and environmental quality. Now that this policy goal is pretty much on the road to being implemented, the elites running our lives are not content to sit back in the glow of their accomplishment but are rather laying the groundwork for the next phase in their grand dream of limiting the free movement of the American people.

One would think the increasing popularity of electric and hybrid automobiles would please transportation planners and social engineers. However, as most realize somewhere along life's journey, getting what you want is not always what you expected.

For while hybrid cars might cut back on emissions and fuel consumption, they also take a bite out of gas tax revenues. But instead of tightening their belts and learning to make due with less as they counsel you when you complain about rising fuel costs, government planners are now conniving to pass the hardship on to you by altering the way transportation taxes are assessed.

Currently, such taxes are gathered in about the fairest way possible (a concept seldom associated with taxes) by collecting it in an innocuously private manner from those cautious enough to pay in cash at the bump based upon how many gallons acquired. However, from a plan being considered in Oregon, motorized Americans will have to contend with another governmental intrusion into their lives of Orwellian proportions.

Instead of collecting taxes on each gallon purchased, revenuers plan to install censors at gas stations capable of reading the global positioning systems to be installed in nearly all vehicles and, from that, tabulating how far a vehicle has been driven or into what zones they have motored. Proponents of the program claim citizens have nothing to fear from Big Brother since the system would only tabulate mileage rather than specific itinerary.

However, one does not have to be a Ray Bradbury to realize what a dystopian road this is headed down. For even if the sensors do not log precise destination, they are still capable of relaying to authorities --- even if they are “just” tax authorities, who can actually make your life more miserable than actual police as these activist accountants assume greater control over areas of your life once considered beyond the purview of just and legitimate government such as religious doctrines and where you have been.

Even more disturbing, these tracking devices are being designed to catalogue at what time of day you drive. That way the state will be able to charge you an additional fee for daring to drive at the times of day our government slavemasters would prefer we stay off the road.

While they are at it, why don’t they go ahead and add similar devices to our toilets as well to punish those that have more bowel movements than our betters in government think we ought since such functions contribute disproportionately to greenhouse gases and are often a sign that the chronically flatulent might be eating too high up the food chain. Those embracing their place as good little minions of the New World Order will probably respond, “But this discouragement of motorized travel is legitimate since one is using roads provided by the COMMUNITY and by definition the COMMUNITY determines what it considers the terms of use”.

Those thinking that they will be left alone if they use public transportation and sit quietly in their homes are in for a rude awakening that will probably arrive when they are dragged kicking and screaming to the relocation camp in part for the sake of the environment. For the totalist state is not content simply to tell you how to live once you step out into the broader COMMUNITY. It also wants to tell you in what kind of structure in which you may live out the existence its institutions have been beneficent enough to grant you as well as in many instances what manner of things you may do once you close the door.

Across the pond in Merry Ole England, according to a CNSNEWS.com story titled “UK May Tax Environmentally Unfriendly Houses”, beatnik rabble in the Green Party there have been at the forefront of efforts to introduce taxes on what their ilk have labeled “environmentally damaging behavior”. However, such penalties are for more than spitting on the sidewalk or tossing litter from the car window. Foremost among these fees include increased property taxes levied against homes not deemed green enough as well as on automobiles and on those daring to travel by air.

It must be remembered that the power to tax is the power to destroy. One member of the Conservative Party observed such taxes would disproportionately impact the poor and the elderly since these demographics are more likely to reside in domiciles not meeting energy efficiency expectations.

What better way to seize the property of the population’s undesirables (namely members of the lower middle class) than to tax them out of their homes and to herd them into governmentally approved relocation compounds such as those into which Hurricane Katrina victims were shunted. Here, these people were deprived of their constitutional rights to such an extent that they were forbidden from speaking with reporters. One gets around the raw nerve of eminent domain altogether if taxes are raised so high that residents are either forced to sell to developers or have their property seized by default.

Speaking from Tokyo as the elites will continue their lives of global travel while the common person will be corralled and branded like cattle going to slaughter, one British legislator (quite a ways from his homeland I might point out to the geographically illiterate) said, “Sometimes the changes will be painful. But leadership means facing the great challenges, even if the decisions are difficult.”

Shame the Eurocrats can’t display the same degree of courage to stand against the tide of radical Islam sweeping across what was the cradle of Western Civilization. I guess they have no qualms about turning Granny out into the streets since she isn’t likely to strap on a carbomb.

Don’t be fooled. Those such as the politician above making these kinds of statements won’t make a single personal change. Do you honestly believe the likes of Prince Charles and Queen Elizabeth over there and the Bushes, Gores, and Kennedys over here are going to give up their multi-mansion estates to live in some I-Pod shipping-container sized apartment the rest of us will be expected to live in with a stupid grin slapped across our faces for the sake of the revolution?

Not only do the elites plan to snatch your homes from you in the name of conservation, they also want to regulate within your own living space --- or rather the one they plan to assign to you once they have succeeded in placing title to all property in the hands of the state or whatever institutional arrangement through which they plan to administer relinquished holdings.

Speaking before worshipful UN functionaries, Al Gore (whose ballooning waistline and burgeoning facial jowls indict him for consuming a greater percentage of the earth’s resources then what he would permit the working slob) claimed according to a 9/6/06 Drudge Report that “cigarettes are a significant contributor to global warming.” The same could be said about the former Vice President’s ever-fattening lip. Drudge ends this dispatch by noting that Gore closed his homily harping on his political future and by hawking a book he had written (no doubt printed on paper that could have contributed more to the cause of Mother Earth if it had remained a tree).

Interestingly, Al Gore is not the only eco-pimp using the environment to turn a trick or two. One would think the purpose of an environmental festival would be to discuss the environment. However from the program (printed on the remains of a slaughtered tree) for Green Festival 06 in Washington DC, it seems that the natural world was pretty much tagged on as an afterthought as the focus seemed to be radical politics with ageing hippies continuing to spread their filth and debauchery.

For example, from the schedule of speakers, one wouldn't be surprised to see Karl Marx to show up on the dais. Former Mr. Jane Fonda, Tom Hayden (who's nearly as old as Marx), was scheduled to speak on the topic of "Alternatives To War & Empire". Activist Medea Benjamin was docketed for the oration titled "We Have The Power To Stop The War In Iraq". Another scheduled homily was titled "The Power Of Storytelling: Changing The World".

What in the name of Sheol does any of this have to do with enjoying nature or marveling at furry woodland creatures? Nothing whatsoever, ladies and gentleman.

Before all is said and done, those that address such covens will no doubt make those in attendance feel guilty for simply being alive (especially if you happen to be White) and for enjoying the blessings that come from living in the greatest country on earth. And if it wasn't, why are all these immigrants self loathing liberals want to grant unrestricted access to our bounty keep trying to break in, and perhaps even more importantly, end up forcing you to partake in their life of squalor.

Foremost on the agenda was the confiscation of your own individual domicile and privacy. One seminar was titled "Community Without Walls".

But as one wise soul observed (it might have been Chesterton), don't take down a fence unless you know why it had been put up. Walls and fences, contrary to leftist opinion, are very positive things as they confirm identity as an individual by demarcating what is mine and what is not mine (namely yours).

It is the purpose of such a lecture to erode the concept of individuality and private property by manipulating those in attendance to be an "active participant in one's neighborhood." That may sound all warm and fuzzy, but in a "community without walls" where those living have forgotten legitimate boundaries and limitations, it usually ends up being invoked as an excuse to get involved in the business of others that is no one else's concern and as an excuse to bring sanctions occasionally bordering on the violent against those not opening every detail of their lives to the scrutinizing oversight of the COMMUNITY.

Some might conclude that, even if these plans were true, they are so far down the road that we will not have to worry about it during our lifetimes. And even though I cannot give an exact date as to when these communalistic horrors will transpire when what you slave away for will no longer be yours to enjoy as you wish, but as sure as I draw breath and write this, I can assure you the plans are being set into motion to revolutionize the American way of life.

In the future, it won’t be enough to let these flakes cordon themselves off in their own compounds where whacky ideas, loose morals, masculine women, and effeminate men will be the order of the day. As I’ve said before, it is their intention to drag the rest of us down into Third World squalor.

One of the exhibitors at the Green Festival was the Federation of Egalitarian Communities. The description for this organization reads as follows in the 2006 promotional brochure: “The Federation of Egalitarian Communities is a network of communal groups spread across North America, from small agricultural homesteads to village-like communities to urban group homes.”

It has been a few years since the 1960’s, so perhaps a few readers (a significant percentage of whom like myself didn’t even trod the earth at that time) need to be reminded what exactly a commune is. A commune is a living arrangement where the residents do not own their respective domiciles outright but rather in common with the group (or rather those designated as the representatives of the group) making decisions on behalf of the members.

While it may sound all warm and fuzzy, seldom do such living arrangements end happily. At best, most participants part ways with hurt feelings and at worst they often end in bloodshed as typified by the Jonestown and Heavensgate tragedies or when the principles are applied society-wide as was the case in the Soviet Union and Red China.

By Frederick Meekins

Welfare Skanks, Obama Effigies & French Thought Police: Headline Potpourri #12

Albert Mohler's sidekick Russel Moore denounced the Obama Effigy as "Satanic". Was this theologian as outspoken in condemning similar outrageous attacks against other political figures such President Bush and Sarah Palin? More importantly, would he now care to speak out against the Founding Fathers for similar protests against King George during the Revolutionary War, or is this form of protest only immoral when directed against a Black person?

New York City health officials in a pamphlet are teaching junkies the proper method for shooting up dope. Yet it must be pointed out that this is the jurisdiction where scholastic bakesales are on the verge of prohibition and where, if city officials had their way, table salt would be frowned upon apparently more now than hard narcotics.

French thought police plot to invade private homes. This is to be done in the name of preventing "psychological violence" by criminalizing robust domestic verbal disagreements. However, what advocates of this law might not be telling you is that, to the left-leaning man-haters out there, this offense consists of little more than simply disagreeing with a woman, verbally boring into a woman during a spat started by a woman, or merely speaking to one when they've basically told you to shutup.

It should be interesting to see how this law plays out. For you see, France is being overrun by Islamic immigrants and it is part of their religion to beat their wives and even kill them when they get out of line. Since France is a Western European social democracy, in most instances these multiculturalists lack the spine to declare that a foreign culture is in the wrong. Therefore, what will happen will be that the Muslims will continue to do whatever it is they do to their women and it will be the European male that will be further denuded for fear of criminal prosecution.

A major university is in a tizzy that only 20% of bicyclists are women. It is amazing the kinds of things that will set the Leftist mind into a hand-wringing depression. Before it is all over with, men will be chewed out for doing even environmentally conscious things.

A second grader was suspended and ordered to have a psychological evaluation for drawing a picture of Christ upon the cross for an assignment about what reminded the student about the holidays. Had the lad placed his art work in a vat of urine he could qualify for a government grant or, if he peed on it himself, he could get his own HBO sitcom. School officials claim the child is guilty of drawing a "violent picture". Newsflash, boys --- unless you want them emasculated and docile --- draw violent pictures. With China on the move around the world and the Towelheads constantly on the rampage, these scholastic sisses better pray boys keep drawing violent pictures if they want this great country to survive as the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.

Congress is investigating if scholastic admission standards are lowered for men. Did they investigate when the criteria was lowered for assorted minorities? And for that matter, is Congress also going to investigate young men having to pay higher insurance rates when even insurance agents today will admit the contemporary female is as every bit as scatterbrained as her male counterpart? And even if they weren't, doesn't the emphasis on "egalitarianism" dictate in the name of fairness the same price irrespective of how the one's plumbing is hooked up?

Mark Steyn, filling in for Rush Limbaugh, reported a blogger was arrested for refusing to reveal his income to airport security. Is nice how our government harasses actual Americans defending their privacy while allowing terrorists and illegals free access to the United States.

Rush Limbaugh can't grasp why don't Americans just pay their hospital bills out of their pockets or on easy payment installment plans. Maybe this would be a possibility if we each made $20 million a year like he does.

A public service announcement is encouraging skanks in favor of Obama's healthcare proposal to withhold carnal favors from those opposed to the legislation. If nothing else, at least these fiscal parasites might diminish their strain on the gene pool for a while.

In the 12/18/09 edition of "Science", the fury hominid on the cover is heralded as the "Breakthrough of the Year". However, a note on the table of contents clarifies how the creature is only a "possible human ancestor".

An openly lesbian degenerate has been elected as an Episcopal bishop in California. We all sin, but why should we heed the call to righteousness by someone that doesn't even feel shame for their flagrant shortcomings but rather wallows in them with pride. But then again, about the only things still labeled sins these days is insisting that sin exists, failure to become a mindless drone of the COMMUNITY, and for thinking America as envisioned by the Founding Fathers is not the source of all the worlds troubles but rather one of the few places where most of these ills are kept reasonably at bay.

Oral Roberts has died. Will Holy Rollers consistently say he lacked faith, or is that a condemnation thrown only at we lesser Christians?

Obama cancelled lunch with the King of Norway. The monarch is likely too Caucasian as you can’t get much whiter than the Norwegians. The President certainly has no problem bowing before the Japanese Emperor or other exotic despots.

A Nigerian has tried to blow up a jetliner by setting his crotch on fire. Wonder how long until his wife sends an email pleading for support where she promises a return on your initial investment if you'll only hand over the details to your bank account. More importantly, was "Goodness Gracious Great Balls Of Fire" playing on the Nigerian terrorist's I-Pod.

Irritable Bowel Syndrome may be enough to run passengers afoul of airline security. If passengers can't use the bathroom an hour before landing because terrorists might sneak in there to hatch their plots to blow up jets, what is to stop them from now going in the lavatory an hour and a half before landing? Your are just as dead if they blow you apart at 30,000 feet or as you descend over the tarmac.

The gunman that shot up the Holocaust Museum has died in prison. Good riddance.

by Frederick Meekins

Obama Nazifies Christmas

Some may claim that this headline is a little strong. But if one goes back and studies history, one finds that Hitler also deemphasized the religious aspects of Christmas in deference to a generalized "winter holiday".

This was only Obama's first Christmas in the Oval Office. Yet the President has already tried to de-Christ Christmas in at least two instances.

It has come to public's attention that the White House considered not putting up its Nativity display. Instead, plans were considered for a "more inclusive" Christmas.

G.K. Chesterton said "Religious liberty might suppose to mean that everybody is free to discuss religion. In practice it means that hardly anybody is allowed to mention it." So in the vain attempt to feign a posture of expansive sensitivity, the Obama administration was on the verge of excluding those who had someone sitting on the throne of their hearts other than Barack Obama.

The President provided more insight into his theology at the lighting of the National Christmas Tree on the Ellipse just beyond the White House. Obama said, "Tonight, we celebrate a story that is as beautiful as it is simple. This story of a child born far from home to parents guided only by faith, but who would ultimately spread a message that has endured for more than 2000 years --- that...we are each called to love one another as brother and sister."

That is only part of the story. While Christ did come into the world to teach us that we are to love one another, more importantly, that love is only possible as a result of the part of His message that Obama deliberately omitted. That is that Christ came into the world to die for our sins and to rise from the dead so that whosoever would believe in Him would have everlasting life.

However, Obama is not even content to allow Christians to bask for a moment in the glory of a watered down version of their holiday as something unique this particular belief system has given to the world. He has to take that away from them as well, and in so doing, Obama reveals the most dangerous aspects of his worldview.

Obama continued, "While this story may be a Christian one, its lesson is universal. It speaks to the hope we share as a people. And it represents a tradition that we celebrate as a country --- a tradition that has come to represent more than any one holiday or religion --- but a season of brotherhood and generosity to our fellow citizens."

It is interesting and revealing to compare Il Duce's minimalist recognition of Christmas and the Christian message as merely a generalized world religion with "universal themes" with him being all a flutter earlier in the year during the White House Ramadan celebration over the contribution of Islam to civilization. Of this faith, Obama said, "Islam as we know is part of America. Like the broader American citizenry, the American Muslim community is one of extraordinary dynamism and diversity. On this occasion, we celebrate how much Muslims have enriched America and its culture in ways large and small.”

What is it exactly that Islam has done for America? One might make a case that the Muslim world played a role in preserving the collected learning of Mediterranean civilization during the Dark Ages.

But that was about a thousand years ago. How much longer are they going to slide by on this accomplishment and hold it over our heads? Though many Muslims live respectable and unassuming lives, for the most part Islam has become more of a liability than an asset to the United States.

At this point in his administration, one has to admit that Obama has not yet crossed the line to become a Hitlerian figure. However, there are a number of mechanisms in place such as expansive versions of COMMUNITY service and a litany of advisors with an appallingly low view of individual human life such as Cass Sustein, John Holdren, and Ezekiel Emanuel that would easily allow for the transition into such a nightmare scenario should a fortuitous calamity just happen to transpire.

For even though Nazi Germany will forever serve as a warning as to the ultimate outcome of ethnic hostility and suspicion allowed to fester out of control unchecked, this was far from that regimes only shortcoming. A common characteristic of all forms of collectivism is a fundamental hostility towards God as the ultimate authority and a propensity to subordinate the traditional accoutrements of religion to the state as a result of this presupposition.

For example, in an address at Georgetown University (an explicitly religious institution of higher learning), Obama, like a vampire unable to look upon a cross, demanded that images or references to Christ be covered over with a black cloth. Even more disconcerting is the commentary compliance with this request makes regarding the spineless nature of contemporary Christianity. Though it might have cost them the photo op, university administrators should have told Obama to go to Sheol (or perhaps at least Purgatory since this was a Catholic school).

One can assume that how one’s Christmas tree is decorated is a reflection of the things an individual holds most dear. For example, a perfectionist will have a tree where the ornaments are all the same and placed at uniform distances all just so. Someone that places a high value on family and memories will have a hodgepodge of treasures spanning the decades that barely go together aesthetically yet bring tears of joy to those that hold such knick-knacks dear.

One must, therefore, ask what does it mean when someone allows an ornament of Chairman Mao and one of their own visage superimposed upon Mount Rushmore placed upon a tree under that person’s authority? Some might dismiss the matter, saying that there are all kinds of eccentric decorations (after all, I have a Garfield bike reflector from a box of 1980’s cereal on my tree).

However, one cannot help but be a bit more concerned when one learns that the queerly decorated tree (there is also a transexual ornament dangling from its branches) is found in the White House? For victims of the public school system, Mao was the Communist Chinese dictator whose regime killed even more that Hitler’s did.

So isn’t this the equivalent of placing a swastika atop of the tree? This is even more disturbing when it is considered in conjunction with the ornament of Obama’s countenance elevated to Mount Rushmore status.

Anyone that would place a Mao ornament upon a tree no doubt admires those wielding absolute power who do not care at all how many lives are destroyed in the attempt to remake reality in compliance with some ideological vision. Anyone of political significance allowing an ornament with themselves added to Mount Rushmore on their tree believes that they ought to be the one to remake society.

From an objective historical standpoint, what we know as Christmas grew out of originally pagan celebrations that were imbued with new meanings as society came to embrace more explicitly Christian values and perspectives. It is thus only natural that, as society slides downward morally, the one heralded by the reprobate as something akin to a post-Christian messiah would want to metaphorically see himself in the manger rather than the Christ that reminds each of us just how far short we all fall of glory of God.

by Frederick Meekins

Syndicate content