'My Fair Wedding' Host David Tutera --
Dumping My Husband ... and We're Preggo with Twins | TMZ.com:
'via Blog this'
Aside from the squalid feel of the whole thing, that fact that two men would be associated with the phrase "We're preggo with Twins" is deeply creepy. Poor kids gonna grow up with this.
[And to be fair, let me say that, of course, this kind of skin-crawley scenario is not at all limited to gaydom. Straight men and women have been shaming our species since, well, Adam and Eve.]
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
From Saul to Paul
Enantiodromia.
From An Islamophobe To A Muslim: Arnoud Van Doorn,
Ex- Leading Member In Far-Right Dutch Politician Geert Wilders’ Party,
Accepts Islam - Carbonated.TV:
OMG. And it's not from The Onion.
It's a shame we don't have an apostate policy like The Religion of Peace.
Shall we call this Amsterdam Syndrome? (HT to Kathy Shaidle).
Is Ex Cathedra next?
'via Blog this'
PS. For you Biblically Challenged types, St Paul began his career as Saul of Tarsus, actively persecuting the followers of Jesus, then had his famous conversion experience on the road to Damascus and became Paul, the great apostle and fashioner of Christianity.
From An Islamophobe To A Muslim: Arnoud Van Doorn,
Ex- Leading Member In Far-Right Dutch Politician Geert Wilders’ Party,
Accepts Islam - Carbonated.TV:
OMG. And it's not from The Onion.
It's a shame we don't have an apostate policy like The Religion of Peace.
Shall we call this Amsterdam Syndrome? (HT to Kathy Shaidle).
Is Ex Cathedra next?
'via Blog this'
PS. For you Biblically Challenged types, St Paul began his career as Saul of Tarsus, actively persecuting the followers of Jesus, then had his famous conversion experience on the road to Damascus and became Paul, the great apostle and fashioner of Christianity.
Testing
Speaking of technology, I am trying to see if I can make a blog post using the microphone on my new iPhone. It's amazing!
Cyber Trek
Although I have not read Heidegger for a long time, I do recall one of his themes being the impact of technology on the human soul and culture. Amazingly prescient. When my laptop fails or when I lose my cellphone connection, I realize how much of a Six Million Dollar Man I have become, as have we all. A race of cyborgs, really. Even the flash mobs of feral Black yoofs (aka Obama's Children) use their wireless phones to arrange attacks.
The internet --one of the many things we have to thank Al Gore for-- has given me access to worlds I would otherwise have been entirely ignorant of. A mixed blessing. My wanderings have brought me into virtual contact with both Vegans of Color and the NorthWest White Republic, the inner sanctum of Mormon initiation rituals and the classics and details of Muslim sharia. I have easy access both to The Great Literature of the World and porn. I get to see and hear the (mostly deeply boring, sometimes astonishing) day-to-day details of transgenders transitioning and watch pirated movies and TV for free. With email, I can't remember the last time I actually wrote someone a letter or sent them a card through the post.
It has been very enlightening. With access to all sorts of information that my moral and intellectual superiors in the media don't want me to know, I have become far more conservative about even the most taboo of subjects than I would ever have imagined.
And I have also wasted huge amounts of time. But that is a character flaw of long standing, for which new technology has only given me different and more efficient means.
The internet --one of the many things we have to thank Al Gore for-- has given me access to worlds I would otherwise have been entirely ignorant of. A mixed blessing. My wanderings have brought me into virtual contact with both Vegans of Color and the NorthWest White Republic, the inner sanctum of Mormon initiation rituals and the classics and details of Muslim sharia. I have easy access both to The Great Literature of the World and porn. I get to see and hear the (mostly deeply boring, sometimes astonishing) day-to-day details of transgenders transitioning and watch pirated movies and TV for free. With email, I can't remember the last time I actually wrote someone a letter or sent them a card through the post.
It has been very enlightening. With access to all sorts of information that my moral and intellectual superiors in the media don't want me to know, I have become far more conservative about even the most taboo of subjects than I would ever have imagined.
And I have also wasted huge amounts of time. But that is a character flaw of long standing, for which new technology has only given me different and more efficient means.
Jus' cuz'
Long before his election, Obama's game was clear. All you had to do was look at his history and his record. My loathing for the man and all his works was settled in 2007, when I first heard about him. If you were a conservative type, even slightly right of center, it was clear as day what he was about.
But the real problem, and the reason Ex Cathedra has taken mental refuge in the fantasy of a post-American Alternative Republic, is that Obama is not the problem; he is fundamentally a symptom. The American electorate put him in office. Twice. After four years in office, with the country still in a disastrous state, they kept him there. That's the problem.
It indicates a change in the nation. Not just its demographics, which are deteriorating ever more towards Third World status, but its mind. Obama and his minions are the agents of this collapse, but they could not do it without the support of at least half the electorate. And, of course, the most troubling part is the 40% of Whites who pulled the levers for a man like this. We are over 70% of the electorate and we are the ones who give power to people who basically loathe us. That's the problem.
So when I am told that polls consistently show Americans to be powerfully resentful of the massive illegal immigration from Mexico, that they want it stopped, I think, "Then why did you vote for the fucker who you know is gonna keep it flowing?"
One of the scariest things I ever heard was when a priest said, many years ago, in reference to the appointment of a manifestly ill-suited new superior, "We get the leadership we deserve." Well, that's the problem.
--
Monday, April 29, 2013
What's the deal, bro?
Nothin' but Net: Collins' announcement drawing reaction | Fox News:
"I'm Black. And I'm gay."
What's with telling us what we already know by looking at you?
He's not the only one.
Is preceding the coming out speech with this racial marker supposed to...what?
Tell us that even though he's Black and Blacks aren't supposed to be gay, he is?
Or that he's a Racially Protected Victim, so don't increase his pain by being homophobic?
It's weird. Like the NJ gov's "I am a gay American."
'via Blog this'
"I'm Black. And I'm gay."
What's with telling us what we already know by looking at you?
He's not the only one.
Is preceding the coming out speech with this racial marker supposed to...what?
Tell us that even though he's Black and Blacks aren't supposed to be gay, he is?
Or that he's a Racially Protected Victim, so don't increase his pain by being homophobic?
It's weird. Like the NJ gov's "I am a gay American."
'via Blog this'
Ebony and ivory
Racial belonging, either claimed or assigned, is sometimes absolutely clear, but sometimes fuzzy. At the fuzzy points it becomes obvious that race is not only genetic and geographical, but also political and local, dependent on which categories you use and why you use them.
Barack Obama, for example, as much genetically White as he is Black, is Black.
So the borders can never be decided "objectively" and once-for-all, even by genetics.
But that does not make the categories meaningless, as some perfectionists like to pretend. If only objectively decided and hermetically sealed categories were real and important, we'd be reduced pretty much to writing mathematics.
IMHO, and for the sake of my fantasied Alternative Republic, you're White if your predominant genetic loading is from haplogroups in Europe.
That makes it clear for a lot of people.
But where does Europe end? That's a matter of convention, as many borders are. Since Whiteness is not only genetic but cultural and political, for my purposes, Europe (with the exception of parts of the Balkans) ends where Christianity ends and Islam begins. Russians and Armenians and Georgians are Europeans. Turks and Chechens and Khazaks are not.
In a Black vs White race riot, though, Dhokar Tsarnaev, Alan Dershowitz and me are all on the same side. At least as far as the Blacks would be concerned.
---
Barack Obama, for example, as much genetically White as he is Black, is Black.
So the borders can never be decided "objectively" and once-for-all, even by genetics.
But that does not make the categories meaningless, as some perfectionists like to pretend. If only objectively decided and hermetically sealed categories were real and important, we'd be reduced pretty much to writing mathematics.
IMHO, and for the sake of my fantasied Alternative Republic, you're White if your predominant genetic loading is from haplogroups in Europe.
White = European (or descended unmixedly therefrom).
That makes it clear for a lot of people.
But where does Europe end? That's a matter of convention, as many borders are. Since Whiteness is not only genetic but cultural and political, for my purposes, Europe (with the exception of parts of the Balkans) ends where Christianity ends and Islam begins. Russians and Armenians and Georgians are Europeans. Turks and Chechens and Khazaks are not.
In a Black vs White race riot, though, Dhokar Tsarnaev, Alan Dershowitz and me are all on the same side. At least as far as the Blacks would be concerned.
---
Visions of non-sugar plums
If Ex Cathedra finds the Seven Spokes in the Wheel of Liberalism, shall we say, unacceptable, what, in his Alternative Republic, would he put in their place?
Right now in the Empire of Lies, we are encouraged and/or required to embrace multiculturalism, feminism, redistributionism (the big three issues of race, gender and class), along with pacifism, transnationalism, secularism and environmentalism.
What would a non-multicultural, non-feminist, non-redistributionist, non-pacifist, non-globalist, non-secularist and non-environmentalist post-American country look like? (Obviously, there'd be more than one. Lots of folks obviously want to live in a Liberal nation, the more progressive the better. They'd have their own turf.)
Let's start from the end, with just a few strokes.
We now have a no-risk environmentalist mentality. If an activity presents any risk for the rest of the natural world --I say "the rest" because we are part of the natural world, btw-- we are forbidden to do it. In a non-environmentalist AR, resources would be conserved...for the sake of the people, not as a form of sacrifice to a Goddess we have violated. There being risk involved would not be enough to prevent using a resource that would benefit us.
Non-secularist? The AR would have no State religion, but it would recognize that its people's religious traditions --its culture--exist prior to it and that it is not the State's job to confine religious expression to the internal and private sphere. If minorities were made uncomfortable by that, too bad. The law should protect minorities from harm, not discomfort. No more making majorities dance to their victimist tune. Islam, an expansionist theocracy, would, of course, be most unwelcome.
Non-globalist? The point of having a nation is for the sake of the nation. Borders, you can bet, would be damn secure. (The blood red borders of the flag are not accidental.) Citizenship would be local and definite, not "global." Sovereignty would not be weakened. Even patriotism would be fostered. Immigration would be shaped to serve the nation's self interest, nothing else. The only "immigrant rights" a foreign invader would have would be 48-hours to show his papers; lacking that, immediate deportation. This nation would not be abstractly creedal, but rooted in soil and blood. In short, a normal country, serving a particular people who are genetically and culturally connected, not a rootless "creedal" nation.
Non-pacifist. Anyone who thinks that the State is not founded on violence is either a moron or a liar. The use of force is as necessary to human life as breathing or eating. So there'd be no fake apologies for it when necessary. The warrior virtues would be honored. There'd be hunting, corporal and capital punishment. The 2nd Amendment would be greatly expanded. Since the Alternative Republic would be monocultural, like Switzerland, it could have an armed populace, like Switzerland, without fear of out-of-control violence. All males would serve in the military as a condition for voting or being elected to office or having a government job.
Non-distributionist. There would actually be private property and the point of fiscal policy would be to create wealth for the nation's people. Tax law would be simple.
Non-feminist. Men and women would not be considered interchangeable. No law would require that they be so considered. (In fact, there would be hardly any anti-discrimination laws of any kind. Freely chosen association would dominate.) Marriage would be reconstructed for the sake of family stability, with divorce hard to get. Abortion would be restricted and abortionists severely punished. Women would not serve in the military except in an auxiliary capacity.
Non-multicultural. There would only be as much racial diversity as the cohesiveness of the nation could safely manage. Given the role of racial tension and the ideology of diversity as the prime destructor of the Old Republic, that would not be much. It would be dominated, by law, by the descendants of European Christendom. The lingo would be English. Since the political philosophy of the Alternative Republic would not be attractive to kinds of people who love the Nanny-Welfare-Managerial-Therapeutic Progressive model, most of this would be self-selection. It would turn into a new post-American ethnic group.
This is a horrifying idea to most of my contemporaries, as it once was to me. But why do we recognize that if a man and woman come to hate each other and make each other miserable all the time, it is far kinder they should separate and divorce because of their "irreconcilable differences", when the far greater and deeper and hugely more destructive "irreconcilable differences" between racial and ethnic groups is only supposed to make us try harder to live together in the same national house?
Now that I have sketched out the future on my keyboard, it's time for coffee.
---
Right now in the Empire of Lies, we are encouraged and/or required to embrace multiculturalism, feminism, redistributionism (the big three issues of race, gender and class), along with pacifism, transnationalism, secularism and environmentalism.
What would a non-multicultural, non-feminist, non-redistributionist, non-pacifist, non-globalist, non-secularist and non-environmentalist post-American country look like? (Obviously, there'd be more than one. Lots of folks obviously want to live in a Liberal nation, the more progressive the better. They'd have their own turf.)
Let's start from the end, with just a few strokes.
We now have a no-risk environmentalist mentality. If an activity presents any risk for the rest of the natural world --I say "the rest" because we are part of the natural world, btw-- we are forbidden to do it. In a non-environmentalist AR, resources would be conserved...for the sake of the people, not as a form of sacrifice to a Goddess we have violated. There being risk involved would not be enough to prevent using a resource that would benefit us.
Non-secularist? The AR would have no State religion, but it would recognize that its people's religious traditions --its culture--exist prior to it and that it is not the State's job to confine religious expression to the internal and private sphere. If minorities were made uncomfortable by that, too bad. The law should protect minorities from harm, not discomfort. No more making majorities dance to their victimist tune. Islam, an expansionist theocracy, would, of course, be most unwelcome.
Non-globalist? The point of having a nation is for the sake of the nation. Borders, you can bet, would be damn secure. (The blood red borders of the flag are not accidental.) Citizenship would be local and definite, not "global." Sovereignty would not be weakened. Even patriotism would be fostered. Immigration would be shaped to serve the nation's self interest, nothing else. The only "immigrant rights" a foreign invader would have would be 48-hours to show his papers; lacking that, immediate deportation. This nation would not be abstractly creedal, but rooted in soil and blood. In short, a normal country, serving a particular people who are genetically and culturally connected, not a rootless "creedal" nation.
Non-pacifist. Anyone who thinks that the State is not founded on violence is either a moron or a liar. The use of force is as necessary to human life as breathing or eating. So there'd be no fake apologies for it when necessary. The warrior virtues would be honored. There'd be hunting, corporal and capital punishment. The 2nd Amendment would be greatly expanded. Since the Alternative Republic would be monocultural, like Switzerland, it could have an armed populace, like Switzerland, without fear of out-of-control violence. All males would serve in the military as a condition for voting or being elected to office or having a government job.
Non-distributionist. There would actually be private property and the point of fiscal policy would be to create wealth for the nation's people. Tax law would be simple.
Non-feminist. Men and women would not be considered interchangeable. No law would require that they be so considered. (In fact, there would be hardly any anti-discrimination laws of any kind. Freely chosen association would dominate.) Marriage would be reconstructed for the sake of family stability, with divorce hard to get. Abortion would be restricted and abortionists severely punished. Women would not serve in the military except in an auxiliary capacity.
Non-multicultural. There would only be as much racial diversity as the cohesiveness of the nation could safely manage. Given the role of racial tension and the ideology of diversity as the prime destructor of the Old Republic, that would not be much. It would be dominated, by law, by the descendants of European Christendom. The lingo would be English. Since the political philosophy of the Alternative Republic would not be attractive to kinds of people who love the Nanny-Welfare-Managerial-Therapeutic Progressive model, most of this would be self-selection. It would turn into a new post-American ethnic group.
This is a horrifying idea to most of my contemporaries, as it once was to me. But why do we recognize that if a man and woman come to hate each other and make each other miserable all the time, it is far kinder they should separate and divorce because of their "irreconcilable differences", when the far greater and deeper and hugely more destructive "irreconcilable differences" between racial and ethnic groups is only supposed to make us try harder to live together in the same national house?
Now that I have sketched out the future on my keyboard, it's time for coffee.
---
Not political rocket science
In my Alternative Republic, citizens would have constitutional legal protections distinct from non-citizens. Due process for one group would not be identical to due process for the others.
If you were found in the AR as a non-citizen and were unable to provide proof of legal presence within 48 hours, you would be immediately deported. No appeal. That's for a first offense. Second time, a couple of years at hard labor, followed by another deportation. Third time you come in illegally, you don't leave.
If a country cannot --or will not-- control its borders, WTF is the point of having a country?
---
If you were found in the AR as a non-citizen and were unable to provide proof of legal presence within 48 hours, you would be immediately deported. No appeal. That's for a first offense. Second time, a couple of years at hard labor, followed by another deportation. Third time you come in illegally, you don't leave.
If a country cannot --or will not-- control its borders, WTF is the point of having a country?
---
Forest of gallows
RealClearReligion - Render Unto Bishops:
This kind of stuff makes me want to be an Anti-St-Paul. He was a persecutor of the Church who became a Christian. Me, a Christian who became a persecutor of the Church.
And before the forest of gallows, I'd like to make sure that each episcopal residence in America was provided with a dozen or so Mexicans, maybe two or three dozesn, to live in them with their Excellences. We can call them "undocumented occupants."
I think it would make a nice touch, all ecumenical like, if the ACLU joined their Excellencies in the forest.
'via Blog this'
What (the American bishops) call on their web page the "Catholic Church's position on Immigration Reform" is not orthodox teaching but tired left-wing clericalism.
This kind of stuff makes me want to be an Anti-St-Paul. He was a persecutor of the Church who became a Christian. Me, a Christian who became a persecutor of the Church.
And before the forest of gallows, I'd like to make sure that each episcopal residence in America was provided with a dozen or so Mexicans, maybe two or three dozesn, to live in them with their Excellences. We can call them "undocumented occupants."
I think it would make a nice touch, all ecumenical like, if the ACLU joined their Excellencies in the forest.
'via Blog this'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
