Layoffs since Obama took office

UPDATED 11/10/2012 (All layoffs reported here are just since Obama's re-election, nearly 30,000 lay-offs since election day)

“Daily updates on job losses under the 0bama administration.”
http://www.dailyjobcuts.com/

“After Obama Victory – Ohio Businessman Reads Prayer to Staff Then Lays Off 156 Employees”
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/11/after-obama-election-ohio-businessman-reads-prayer-to-staff-then-lays-off-156-employees/

“PICKET: Companies plan massive layoffs as Obamacare becomes reality”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2012/nov/8/picket-companies-plan-massive-layoffs-obamacare-be/

“Employers react to Obama victory …by cutting jobs”
http://www.ijreview.com/2012/11/21739-employers-react-to-obama-victory-by-cutting-jobs/

Utah Company blames Pres. Obama for 102 workers laid off
http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=22890041

Papa John’s forced to cut employee hours.
http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/state/john-schnatter-papa-johns-ceo-obamacare-likely-to-raise-costs-employees-hours-being-cut

More companies affected by Obama re-election: Reported since election day.

(Company Name - Number of lay-offs)
Update: DuPont Co in Richmond VA - 64
TMX Group Ltd. - 100
Penn Refrigeration - 40
Wilkes-Barre PA - Layoffs Possible
Standard Bank Group Ltd. - up to 15% of Staff
The Art Gallery of Windsor ( International ) - 12
American Coal - 54
New Energy Corp. Indiana - Idles 40
Mills Manufacturing NC - 68
TECO Coal Corporation - 90
Energizer Holdings Inc - 1,500
Update: Exide Technologies in Laureldale - 150
Southeastern Container - 15
Update: UtahAmerican Energy Inc - 102
The SCA plant in Barton - Plans Staff Reductions
Plexus Corp - Contract Loss Could = Layoffs
Yakima Regional Medical Center Washington - 10+
Crouse Hospital Syracuse NY - 70 Jobs

Eagle-Tribune in North Andover - 21
Ameridose LLC - up to 650 Layoffs
EMD Millipore St. Charles - Some Layoffs
Groupon - 80
Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne - 100
Slidell La. - Warns of Possible Layoffs
Westinghouse Anniston - 50
Research in Motion Ltd. HQ - 200
Lightyear Network Solutions - 12+
The Providence Journal Co. - 23
Hawker Beechcraft - 240 Layoffs + Facility Closings

Boeing - 30% of Executives at Defense Unit
CVPH Medical Center - 17 Pink Slips
U.S. Cellular - 980
Commerzbank ( German ) - up to 6,000 Layoffs Poss.
Spanish airline Iberia - up to 7,000 Possible
Momentive Performance Materials - 150 Temp, Layoffs
Brake Parts LLC - 75
Gameforge Berlin - 20
Vestas Wind Systems - 3,000 More Job Cuts
Husqvarna AB - 600
ING - 2,350
Ericsson ( Sweden) - 1,550
SRA International Inc - 222 in Arlington Va.
PerkinElmer - 66 Layoffs During 3rd Quarter
Majestic Star Casino and Hotel - About 80
Center for Hospice / Palliative Care NY - 40 Temp. Layoffs
Bristol-Myers - 480 Sales Related Jobs in NJ
Update: the Lower Bucks Hospital - 30
Oce North America, Inc. CT - 135
Updated: Corning in Erwin NY - 100
United Blood Services Gulf region - 10% of Workforce
The Atlantic Lottery Corporation ( International )- 16

Daily Job Cuts - Layoff News , Job Layoffs 2012 / 2011 , Bankruptcy, Store closings, Business Econom

Headshrinkers Badmouth Pilgrims

On the masthead page of the Nov. 2012 issue of Monitor On Psychology, there was a cartoon published.

In this illustration, one Indian says to another, "That was nice, but I don't want to make it in a regular thing."

Seated in the background are the Pilgrims.

It is no doubt hoped readers will conclude this was a depiction of the first Thanksgiving Day feast in the New World; but given the state of the education system, that might be too much to hope for.

Some will likely laugh, relating to how they themselves have endured numerous dinners and parties this festive time of year they didn't mind attending but would rather not have to endure again in the future if given a choice.

However, the Monitor On Psychology is a flagship publication of the American Psychological Association.

This front organization seeks to turn either every depravity known to man into a mental illness the individual has no control over or excuse it in some fashion altogether.

Therefore, would these otherwise political correct leftists have published a cartoon where a Pilgrim forefather made a similarly snide remark about not wanting the Indians over again any time soon?

by Frederick Meekins

Concerning The Existence Of God

Upon leaving the confines of the Earth's atmosphere and entering the vastness of space, Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin is alleged to have remarked, "Where is God?" This was said out of a sense of mockery that the Lord of the universe could not be found in the final frontier rather than an honest inquiry from a soul awed by a majesty of the cosmos.

Several decades later, God might very well reply, "Where is the Soviet Union?" That nation, once referred to as the "evil empire" because of the threat it posed to human freedom, has become a shadow of its former self. This former superpower decayed from its own internal rot resulting primarily from the regime's rejection of the Judeo-Christian worldview as epitomized by that state's promulgation of revolutionary Communism.

Had Colonel Gagarin and his Soviet comrades been more willing to approach the issues in a more objective manner without the rose colored glasses of their Marxist ideology (perhaps "red" would have been a more fitting characterization) and without suppressing the conclusions that such evidence leads to, the world might have been sparred a Cold War costly in terms of both dollars and human lives. Even now nearly two decades later, the world still struggles to forge a global order and stands ready to fall into international chaos at any possible moment.

Despite what some political conservatives and Pentagon officials might think, the mentioned illustration should not be construed as arguing that the former Soviet Union was the sole source of evil operating in the world throughout the era of its infamous existence. Rather, that one nation merely came to symbolize what happens when man tries to expunge the evidence and knowledge of God from the society and its way of life through the use of violence and intimidation of its citizens. For while the Soviet Union and its kin in the Communist orbit may have perfected the outwardly horrific and bloodthirsty ways of suppressing eternal truths, the democratic West was itself busy finding ways to live as if God did not exist.

It could be argued that the methods used throughout Western society to suppress knowledge of God's existence are in one manner more sophisticated than those employed by the secularist's counterparts behind the Iron and Bamboo Curtains. For where the totalitarian Marxist utilized torture in the form of physical violence and coercive psychological manipulation, his Western counterpart simply made God irrelevant by declaring that, while belief in God was acceptable for those too weak to live without Him, this character flaw was to remain a private issue and not to impact the public marketplace.

Phillip Johnson in "Reason In The Balance" characterized this as a primary tenet of naturalism, the belief that the physical world is all that exists in the closed system of the universe and that man can only look to himself for any kind of values (8). Applying the Protagorean ethic of man as the measure of all things with the satisfaction of natural desires as the highest objective, contemporary man has lived up to this lofty goal with all the zeal, fortitude, and ingenuity over which the secular humanists deified the species in the first place --- with a trail of corpses and chaos laying in the social wake.

No sphere of human endeavor has remained untouched from this effort to remove God and His standards from civilized life. These trends illustrated themselves no better than in the field of sexual morality.

According to Cal Thomas in “The Death Of Ethics In America”, the metaphorical death of God and the abolition of His standards causes those adhering to a naturalistic outlook to see the divinely sanctioned rules governing this sphere of existence as an illusion to be ignored by the liberated individual. Yet in a surprising twist, those same individuals holding to a do-your-own-thing kind of ethic change their tune when it comes to doing one’s own thing when it comes to religion, especially if the belief under consideration is traditional Christianity. According to a New York Times poll, a significant number of young adults believe that belief in God is a personality disorder and that theists cannot cope with reality (Thomas, 93).

However, the rules governing these intimate behavioral matters and their Creator are not illusions to solidify the power of an authoritarian priesthood or to comfort the psychologically imbalanced. These precepts were in fact promulgated with the goal of protecting the ultimate happiness and welfare of the beings made in the image of their loving Creator. Mankind ignores these standards at his own peril --- with abortion, venereal disease, and broken hearts the rewards of such folly.

Thomas points out that sexually transmitted diseases now rank as the primary form of communicable disease (93). However, even these kinds of terrifying consequences barely phase the calloused anymore. One student matriculated in a school near Thomas remarked, “We’re not going to get pregnant....If we slip up, we’ll get an abortion (105).”

To fall into sin is tragic and lamentable. To do so with such a callous attitude surely invites judgment. And when that day arrives, the God dispensing it will not be so easily dismissed.

Despite humanity’s attempts to stifle knowledge of its infinite Creator through the calculated disbelief of the atheistic philosopher or the wanton apathy of the hedonist drunken on assorted carnal pleasures, there is little that can be done to totally obliterate the knowledge of God’s existence since this truth is written across the very fabric of the universe and abides in the hearts of men if only they would open themselves to it. Despite this centuries-old effort at suppressing this knowledge, untold masses are seeking after a higher power in record number.

Unfortunately, the same effort once aimed at dethroning the God of the universe has now turned on the rational thought process created by this very same God. The postmodernist movement argues that, at best, objective reasoning does not exist and, at worst, it is a White male imposition designed to foster the dominance of the patriarchy.

This detachment from reality and commonsense often ends in disaster as those with enfeebled mental powers regularly fall for spiritual counterfeits offering their own false answers. An example of this occurred when Marshall Applewhite convinced his followers to commit suicide so that they might find salvation with extraterrestrials circumnavigating the galaxy.

In many instances, the so-called “Christian church” is not much better. Some branches have veered off into a liberalism bordering on agnosticism and atheism. And even some claiming to adhere to a more literalistic form of worship have fallen for dangerous heresies resulting in aberrant beliefs regarding God.

In “Christianity In Crisis”, Christian Research Institute President Hank Hanegraaff warns that one’s conception of God is just as important as having one in the first place. Hanegraaff shows the destruction that can result from thinking not tethered to God’s revelation in Scripture.

One typical example of this faulty theological thinking can be found in television minister Kenneth Copeland who said God “....stands somewhere around 6 feet 2 inches, in the neighborhood of a couple of hundred pounds and has a hand span of nine inches across (Hanegraaff, 121).” Copeland, however, was not preaching on God's incarnation in the person of Jesus Christ. He was, in fact, making these statements regarding God the Father, who according to John 4:24 is a spirit who must be worshipped in spirit and in truth.

These faulty theological formulations do not confine themselves to the seminary classroom. Rather, they filter down to impact man's view of himself and his relation to the divine Creator. For example, many of these prosperity teachers have demoted the sovereign God into a cosmic department store manager by promoting the doctrine that God is to grant the Christian's every earthly desire whether or not that is in the best interest of the individual making the request or in accordance with God's ultimate will. In so doing, they create an undo emphasis on material wealth when in fact Proverbs 30:8 says, "Give me neither poverty nor riches, but give me only my daily bread."

So what is a soul searching for the truth of God or someone seeking to lead someone to the realization m this era such as Alvin Plantinga and Jean-Paul Sartre. The crux of this debate centers around the dispute of whether or not the forms produced by human thought correspond to an objective reality existing apart from the mind.

For example, some conjecture, because someone can think of a perfect God who must exist since existence a perfection, does that mean such a God really exists? Theologian John Frame believes so, arguing that mental forms do correspond to objective realities.

Frame writes, "Our idea of a perfect triangle is not derived from a specific object of the senses, but it must correspond to something real; else it would not be useful as a criterion (116)." Put another way, the ontological argument bears a resemblance to the innate knowledge possessed by each person regarding God's existence mentioned in Romans 1:19-21.

But while this proof may have entertained the Western world's most formidable minds, it has been pointed out that few have been brought to faith through it. At best, it can clarify one's thinking and re-enforce one's position once they have made a decision for theism in regards to these matters.

Perhaps the best known of these theistic proofs is the cosmological argument. In essence, the cosmological argument holds that every affect has a cause which itself is the affect of a previous cause. Yet this chain cannot go on forever therefore, this chain of causality must have a mover complete in itself, an unmoved mover who is God.

This argument has gained added weight in recent times with the advents of the fields of thermodynamics and quantum mechanics. The first points to the need for a Creator and the second establishes the need for His preservative influence.

Thermodynamics argues that a closed system will move towards maximum entropy (a scholarly euphemism for disorder and energy loss) in a finite amount of time. This really socks it to the litany harped by metaphysical naturalists such as Carl Sagan (who claimed that the cosmos is all that was, is or ever will be) that the universe is of an infinite age.

Had the paradigm employed by these weighty academics been true, the reader would not have been able to read this sentence nor the writer able to compose it. The universe would have ground to a halt sometime in the infinitely distant past since, by definition, the amount of time needed for an infinitely old universe to have run down would have elapsed infinite ages ago.

This reality points to a startup point --- a moment of creation if you will --- be it the Big Bang or God speaking the ornaments of the cosmos into existence where they now sit on the celestial sphere. Surprisingly, many Evangelical Christians are now coming to grips with some kind of interpretation regarding the Big Bang theory which they once viewed as suspicious and scientists who once looked to it with cyclical modifications to fit their notions of naturalistic universal renewal are fleeing from it with the speed once reserved for seven-day Creationists discussing the matter.

Related to the revelation of thermodynamics in that sense that it is a scientific theory with divine implications is the esoteric field of quantum mechanics, which warns that there is more to the seemingly deterministic clockwork nature of the universe than meets the eye. According to quantum mechanics, the substance of the universe does not operate in compliance with the Newtonian certainty perceived by the senses but is rather a realm where on the subatomic level a wide range of possibilities exist.

George Bernard Shaw remarked, "Everything happened because it must." Quantum mechanics responds that a particle event is as likely not to happen as happen.

Yet, if such an absolute haphazardness were the case, would not the nightly news be filled with stories of individuals discombobulating into non-existence from the loss of their very molecular cohesion? This gulf between absolute determinism and particle anarchy allows for a creator who holds the cosmos together at all times. Colossians 1:17 says, "...and by him all things consist." This is a reference to the role played by God in the maintenance of creation.

Taken together, the ideas of therbecomes. For example, pseudo-scientists are at a loss to explain how random chance could bring about complex organic life as it now walks the earth into existence when the chances randomly aligning the twenty amino acids properly in order to form one cell of hemoglobin is reported to be 1 in 10 to the 603 power. And mind you, this is for only an organism as complicated as a single cell.

How then, without reference to a Creator is the rest of the complexity accounted for? Did the viceroy butterflies convene a conference to decide that they would mimic the coloring of the monarch butterflies in order to be avoided by dimwitted predators because the monarch is toxic?

Phillip Johnson points out in works such as "Darwin On Trial" and "Reason In The Balance" that evolution takes as much faith to believe in (if not more so in the light of the evidence) as some form of creation theory. And despite their academic hegemony, the proof evolutionists point to supporting blind chance, unlike the God being argued for in this discourse, does not exist.

The beginning of this paper elaborated in some detail how the world flounders across the stage of contemporary history without the illuminating insight of divine guidance. Related to this is what is known as the moral argument for the existence of God.

Throughout the past two centuries, mankind has striven to retain some sense of morality without reference to the Divine Legislator. And the results have been disastrous.

The role of morality in light of atheistic assumptions was set down by Marquis De Sade who had the “foresight” to realize that, without God acting as a cosmic policemen, all acts that were natural in that they could be carried out by an individual being permissible. The new golden rule became do it to others before they could do it to you.

Anarchy, though, is not the only social threat in an atheistic system. In a situation where God and His precepts are not seen as absolutes binding upon conduct, dictatorship becomes an even greater likelihood as those with a lust for power are no longer burdened by ethical restraints and the people willingly hand their inalienable liberties over to such despots in an attempt to regain some kind of social order, Draconian though it may be.

Even if the sociological climate is not as repressive as Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia (regimes epitomizing the brutalities resulting from political systems inherently hostile to God), what right does anybody have to tell anybody anything if God does not exist? If the Black man is not made in the image of God, what’s so wrong with slavery as it obviously results from his own innate inferiority in the Darwinian survival of the fittest.

Francis Schaeffer once remarked that, if God does not exist, it does not matter whether one helps an elderly lady across the street or pushes her into oncoming traffic. Yet this moral chaos is clearly not the intended moral order. Even those not enrolled in an Evangelical seminary realize that genocide of noncombatants is wrong. No one but the most rabid Skinhead or fanatical Palestinian supports Hitler’s pograms against the Jews.

In "The Abolition Of Man", C.S. Lewis refers to this universal morality as "the Tao" or "the Way" (12). Even though the way the Way is implemented changes as man's understanding of it grows, the Tao itself represents God's universal standards and any reform of the Way as understood by finite human beings must come from within by its loyal adherents. To do so from without amounts to tyranny because those crafting the moral ethos in such an environment will only end up codifying their own arbitrary inclinations as law. With society increasingly marked by crime and arbitrary rule, the moral argument for God's existence will grow in poignancy as millions will grow weary of liberty degenerating into license and justice perverted into political expediency.

While the classic theistic proofs and other arguments such as that for moral values are intellectually formidable, they are merely a starting point as their conclusion could eventually lead to a deity wearing any number of sectarian hats ranging from historic Christianity to deism to Islam depending on the spin put on the proofs. Furthermore, most of the proofs fail to comment on whether or not the deity arrived at intimately cares for the human creation apart from setting up some kind of legal framework, making Him more akin to some kind of metaphysical traffic cop holding the universe together like some kind of subatomic Elmer's glue.

While quite persuasive, these arguments are just that, arguments, not unlike those bandied about night after night on Fox News debate programs where issues are never resolved and the highest goal being to get a rouse out of the opposition. The theistic proofs also bring to mind the Wisdom/Flew parable mentioned by John Warwick Montgomery in "The Suicide Of Christian Theology" where the theist argues that, while God’s handiwork can be deduced through the magnificence of creation there is no concrete way to point out God to those that doubt (89).

It is because that these arguments present a somewhat distant God that there must be a source to bridge the gap. For man steeped in sin to care about God, he must know that God care for him because before such an awakening man is so full of sinful pride to concern himself with his relation to the Creator. The proof of that love and the reality of God’s existence was made certain in the incarnation and redeeming work of Jesus Christ.

Despite the power of the theistic proofs, one cannot come to a knowledge of salvation through them alone. In order to give this intellectual starting point a solid foundation, one must turn to this God’s personal revelation, the Bible.

Wheaton Professor of Biblical Studies Gilbert Bilezikian in "Christianity 101" points out that the Bible never tries to prove the existence of God but assumes it as a given (25). However, Scripture does contain internal indicators as to why it can be trusted. For starters, the Bible is historically accurate.

Paul Little of Intervarsity Fellowship in "How To Give Away Your Faith" quotes archaeologist Nelson Gluek as saying, "No archaeological discovery has ever contraverted a Biblical reference (Little, 77).” In fact, the Bible had the historical record straight long before modern historians as evidenced by the controversy surrounding the Hittites, an ancient people once thought mythological but eventually proven an historical reality. Since the Bible has proven itself historically accurate and capable of providing a code of conduct cognizant of human nature, there is little reason to doubt the existence of a God who reveals Himself in its pages and preserved them so that man might come to know Him through this special book.

But perhaps the greatest proof of all regarding the existence of God is His earthly manifestation in the person of His only begotten Son Jesus Christ, an act proclaimed in Scriptureht come to this knowledge. It has been seen that some of this knowledge can be arrived at through common logic.

For example, through the theistic proofs man can conclude that a God exists through an analysis of the creation. The fact that man can engage in this intellectual quest at all points to a rational Creator seeking to imbue His most cherished creations with a finite portion of His own rationality. The scientific understanding of the cosmos also points to God's existence. Even the most simple components of the universe testify to a complexity beyond human comprehension. This is even the case with the so called "simple" organisms such as bacteria and viruses.

Even more importantly, this complexity testifies that God is not beyond the pale of legitimate conceptual discussion. Mortimer Adler argues that, if man can expound on theoretical constructs such as black holes and subatomic particles without having directly experienced them, then God is therefore not necessarily off limits conceptually.

The contemporary social climate testifies to God's existence as civilization becomes more chaotic with anarchy and tyranny gaining ground simultaneously. Without Scriptural principles under-girding the nation's laws, one can kill their child through abortion but can be sent to jail for disciplining the child should the child be privileged to see the world outside of the birth canal.

Despite the power of these proofs to any unprejudiced individual with any degree of mental acuity, the best proof for God's existence is His revelation to man in the form of Jesus Christ as detailed in Scripture. The only begotten Son of God, whose claims cannot be legitimately dismissed by His enemies, predicted His own resurrection in Matthew 12:39. And unlike the false prophets, hucksters, and shysters who refuse to subject their claims to verification, the risen Christ was authenticated by over 500 witnesses. One of these witnesses was so skeptical that he insisted on sticking his hands into the Lord's wounds in order to be convinced otherwise.

One's alignment in the debate of whether or not God exists is the most important position one will ever take as it will ultimately impact every facet of one's existence. And while this decision is ultimately up to the individual in consultation with the Holy Spirit and cannot be made for them by longwinded apologists attempting to persuade them, they should know that their final decision in these matters will dramatically impact their eternal destinies. There is much more at stake in this conflict than where one will be spending Sunday morning.

By Frederick Meekins

P*rn Addiction at Crisis Level

Over 50% of American men are addicted to pornography. This is a crisis, since the effects of porn damage everyone around the addict, including the addict himself, who loses his memory and ability to concentrate. Women, if your man seems distant, it is probably not because he is "mysterious," but because he has a secret addiction to porn.

Read the abridged article at WND (formerly WorldNetDaily) 

The full, unedited version is below.

More than 50% of men now look at pornography regularly, thanks to easy access and constant bombardment of images on the internet. No one wants to talk about it. Society generally looks the other way at pornography, dismissing it as harmless “men's entertainment.” The reality is that it is extremely addictive, and along with the addiction comes life-destroying side effects. It puts the addict into a creepy bondage that affects the lives of those around him or her. It is not a victimless crime. It has become a chilling epidemic that is ruining the minds, families and jobs of possibly half the men in the country. Everyone has a family member, spouse or friend whose life is full of problems due to this addiction.

Viewing pornography overstimulates a neurochemical in the body called dopamime. In men, it mixes with testosterone and builds up an adrenaline rush. After repeatedly looking at porn, a tolerance is built up, and it becomes difficult for ordinary romantic experiences to provide pleasure. Men lose interest in real romance. Musician John Mayer has publicly admitted that his pornography habit is so strong he prefers to stay home with it instead of spending time with a real woman. Some men end up forcing the pornographic acts they watch on their unwilling wives in order to try and become interested in them again. The rise in men's erectile-dysfunction aids is no doubt due in part to the increase in pornographic addictions.

The kind of addiction created by porn is akin to drug users needing stronger and stronger drugs in order to achieve the same feeling. Addicts seek out increasingly hardcore porn to try and satisfy their addictions. Ironically, they don't seek out more hardcore porn in order to obtain more pleasure, but because they are obtaining less pleasure. Several studies have come out revealing that pornography addicts have the same brain changes as drug addicts. It radically alters the structure of the brain, as the pleasure parts of the brain become more dominant, literally turning into a “one-track mind.” The structural brain changes have been compared to brain damage. Addiction to pornography destroys intelligence, ruining the ability to concentrate and causing forgetfulness. It reduced one engineer's ability to hold down any job except at minimum wage level.

The American Society of Addiction modified its definition of addiction to include pornography last year, stating that it can be associated with the "pathological pursuit of rewards." Pornography is an extremely difficult addiction to cure, because recovery involves withdrawal symptoms like irritability, concentration problems, and even flu-like symptoms. It takes 6-12 weeks after stopping to be able to enjoy normal romance fully again.

The internet has allowed for the creation and sharing of an endless stream of pornography, making it easier to get trapped. Men cannot surf the web or log into their email accounts without seeing ads and emails with air-brushed provocative women inviting them to click. 25% of internet searches are related to pornography. They're not all men, either, one-third of all who look at porn on the internet are women. 20,000 pornographic videos are produced each year in the San Fernando Valley, 90% of all pornographic videos.

The most disturbing part about pornography addiction is that it can lead to child pornography. When an addict cannot get the same feeling any longer from regular pornography, the addict may turn to child pornography. Child pornography is increasing; between 2005 and 2009 there was a 432% increase in child pornography movies and images.

Another terrible consequence of porn is it can lead to rape. Clinical psychologist Dr. Victor Cline, author of Pornography's Effects on Adults & Children, found that almost half of the rapists he studied used pornography to arouse themselves before they sought out a victim to rape. Dr. M.J. Goldstein studied sex offenders and found that many of them acted out the sex acts they watched in pornography on their victims. Most admitted that watching pornography increased their desire for deviant activities. Serial rapist and killer Ted Bundy has said that his pornography addiction progressed through stages.

Porn creates images of women that are not based in reality. Most porn stars are deeply troubled, and a high proportion are sexual abuse survivors. Many ex-porn stars are now speaking out about how how terrible the industry really is. It is not glamorous, the average male porn star makes $40,000 annually. There are 15 new cases of STDs reported in the adult movie business every week. One porn star has said that 99.9% of the industry has herpes. Another porn star said the industry only tests for HIV, not other STDs. Another one said they are all on drugs, that is “an empty lifestyle trying to fill up a void.”

Shelley Luben, a former porn actress, now speaks out against porn. She exposes the truth the porn industry hides, “The porn industry wants YOU to think we porn actresses love sex. They want you to think we enjoy being degraded by all kinds of repulsive acts.” The pornography industry renamed itself to the “adult entertainment industry” in order to create the perception that it's just entertainment. It's not, it is extremely damaging to the wives and children of the man “being entertained.” Culture theorist and author Jackson Katz describes how porn hurts regular relationships, “It normalizes the men's pleasure-taking as it sexualizes the woman's degradation.”

The epidemic has seeped into the workplace, hurting workplace productivity. A Nielsen report found that 29% of working adults access adult websites form work computers. Considering that viewing porn is a fireable offense, this is evidence of how severely addictive porn is.

Men who are addicted to pornography frequently defend their addiction by claiming they have “needs.” However, pornography has not been around or easily accessible until recently. Cavemen got by just fine without it.

Communities used to be able to zone adult stores away from sight. With the advent of the internet, any attempt now to regulate pornography raises cries of censorship. Yet the Supreme Court's rulings over the past 60 years holding that pornography is protected free speech drew arbitrary lines: obscenity – which includes extremely hardcore pornography - can still be banned.

Dr. Patrick Carnes, who researches sexual addictions, has found that most sexual addicts come from dysfunctional families, with the root of their addictions based in childhood. Instead of dismissing this unhealthy addiction as “free speech,” society should help pornography addicts understand that their behavior is not normal, and they need to take steps to correct it, such as joining a 12-step support group or using self-help at websites like yourbrainonporn.com. Addicts are not using pornography for “entertainment,” but to mask their emotional problems. Porn does not liberate men, but puts them in virtual bondage. Their unhappiness is still there, their relationship problems are still there, and they risk damaging their lives further as the addiction increases. Sadly, most pornography addicts are probably unaware they have an addiction, thanks to society telling them that it is just “men's entertainment.”

There needs to be a shift in cultural attitudes regarding pornography. Ironically, it is women who are responsible for instituting this laissez-faire attitude towards porn. Feminists in the 1960's ushered in a sexual revolution, which said that anything goes, free love, free sex. This was self-defeating to feminists, since porn eroticizes male supremacy. Sexologist Alfred Kinsey also contributed to society normalizing porn. He performed research on subjects that included a high percentage of pedophiles, inmates, sex offenders, pimps and prostitutes, but told everyone his subjects were “average” Americans. He claimed his results proved that men need deviant sexual behavior and that it is normal. His findings were widely adopted in schools and universities and by psychologists, even though it became well-known later that he was a deviant himself who welcomed the sexualization of children.

Former porn actress Luben tells men they must stop, “The truth is there IS NO fantasy in porn. It’s all a lie.” She asks men, “We want you to throw out our movies and help piece together the shattered fragments of our lives.”

Christians can speak up against pornography from a moral basis. The Bible calls it a sin. In Matthew 5:28, Jesus said that looking at a woman lustfully is the same as the sin of adultery. 2^nd Peter 2:14 speaks to the addiction aspect, “They commit adultery with their eyes, and their desire for sin is never satisfied.” Christian leader James Dobson produced a report for the Attorney General's Commission on Pornography under President Reagan, where he explained how pornography has gone from airbrushed naked models to serious perversion, due to addicts needing more stimulation. “This is the world of pornography today, and I believe the public would rise up in wrath to condemn it if they knew of its prominence.” It is over 25 years later and pornography is more prevalent and disgusting than ever. Why hasn't the public risen up against it? Because half of the men in our society are addicted themselves.

Car Free Day Foreshadows Vehicular Tyranny

Often in their attempt to engineer our lives whether we want them to or not, contemporary liberals have a tendency to hand down any number of psychosocial laws or principles since most of them view us as little more than animals to herd into a corral. It seems that their behavior is often just as predictable.

For example, one of the cardinal principles to understanding contemporary liberalism is that the policies that they initially enact as voluntary will ultimately be enforced as mandatory..

Gaining in popularity in large cities and metropolitan areas across the United States is an occasion called “Car-Free Day.” It is pretty much as it sounds. For no other reason than that they have duped most into believing that they are better than everybody else, social planners have told us that we are suppose to voluntarily forego the use of our personal automobiles for a day in favor of public transportation and bio-locomotion (forms of transit such as walking where we want to go or riding a bike).

Eventually, this will go from occasional and voluntary to mandatory and permanent. Some will denounce such a conjecture as typical conservative and conspiracy fearmongering.

But is it? It seems more like rational analysis of the mass media.

In a Washington Examiner column titled "Car-Free In DC In Your Future", Harry Jaffe makes this very proposal. Specifically he contends, "Why not make Pennsylvania Avenue from the White House to the foot of the U.S. Capitol car-free on Sundays? Imagine the inaugural route, America’s Main Street, a peaceful parade of strollers, bikers, and walkers.”

Another law of human nature is that what is called for (especially when the demand involves extending control over the lives of other human beings) is never enough.

Those opposed to the automobile won’t be satisfied with Pennsylvania avenue closed on Sundays. Eventually the call for it to be closed everyday will go out and ultimately this policy will engulf larger and larger portions of the city.

Such a policy could very well come to engulf much of the population of the United States. Impossible, the skeptical scoff. But once again, is it?

Already in the most blighted portions of Detroit and in Katrina-devastated New Orleans, a protracted campaign of systematic low grade depopulation has been underway for sometime. For instead of sending in SWAT teams to interdict and remove criminally recalcitrant segments of the population, municipal authorities need only deny those utilities necessary to enjoy a technologically advanced standard of existence.

The argument is made that too many resources would be expended to maintain or repair such infrastructure. Residents would be relocated to areas of higher population density where police and bureaucratic operatives do not have to exert themselves to as a great of an extent (we wouldn’t want to interrupt those coffee breaks and doughnut runs). The abandoned properties would be reforested or whatever the lovely sounding word of the month happens to be for infringement of property rights in the name of the environment.

Yet another law regarding how liberals tend to behave manifests itself in regards to the car free issue. That is none other than that liberals tend not to abide by the rules imposed upon and the deprivations expected of the rest of us.

For example, one enthusiastic supporter of Car Free Day so much so that he extended the festivity to an entire week is Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick. In 2011 on the very first day of the commemoration, however, he was caught riding in an automobile wherever it was he needed to go.

Those that have surrendered their free thought in return for what Mark Levin refers to as the proverbial government cheese will respond, “But a governor is so much more important and must get wherever it is that he needs to go in a safe and timely manner.”

But in terms of your own life and in the lives of your family members, aren’t you just as important and in many ways even more so than the assorted governmental figureheads and functionaries?

For example, if you are fired for getting to work late or too far geographically from the places of gainful employment, is this governor going to put food on your table? If you are unable to get to your progeny quickly after school, will the youngsters be given a police escort home to ensure they are not victimized by child predators?

Celebrations are about much more than having a good time. Such commemorations also convey the values those holding them want to build civilization and morality around.

For example, Mother’s and Father’s Day uplift the importance of children honoring their parents as well as parents providing the kind of nurturing care deserving of such respect. Christmas and Easter remind that there is a God who so loved the world that He gave us His only begotten Son. And in its own dark way, Halloween reminds that we only get to enjoy the life in this world for a brief while so we had better get thinking about what lies beyond.

Throughout much of the modern and now into the postmodern era, the value of the individual has been increasingly downplayed. It is only to be expected that the celebrations commemorating what these epochs herald as the ideal would reflect as such.

By discerning this, the astute patriot is better able to comprehend and counter these exact threats to our liberty.

by Frederick Meekins

Students Punished For Knowing More Than Teachers

A number of high school students were suspended for ingesting energy mints on the grounds of their Perkin, Illinois high school.

The thing of it is, the confection is perfectly legal as it consists primarily of caffeine.

Thus, they are technically no worse than popular energy drinks. But despite learning this, school administrators intend to let the suspensions stand.

The Superintendent insists the suspensions are justified because the students "displayed gross misconduct for taking an unknown product."

The students could have full well know what they were taking.

This is all bureaucratic smokescreen and euphemism that the students are being punished for knowing more than the teachers and for exercising their own judgment apart from certified state authority.

Eventually, this kind of reasoning will be applied to anyone that ingests anything other than the school-provided lunches.

After all, how can teachers be absolutely certain those brownies brought from home don't contain a little flavor enhancing "greenery"?

by Frederick Meekins

Random Observations As We Race to the End of the Mayan Calendar

by John Harris

“You Didn’t Write That”

A few weeks ago, President Obama committed the infamous gaffe (allowed to leak through the media because The Fourth Estate could not itself discern any problem with his sentiments) of announcing that none of us has ever accomplished anything on his own. I noted at the time in my weekly ramble that Mr. Obama had neither written his own speech nor “evolved” his own ideas on the subject, because I had heard the same spiel four decades ago as an undergraduate. In my Economics class, however, the lines of dependency clearly led to other workers, not to a huge state bureaucracy; and while the work force is indeed public-sector in a socialist republic, Obama’s engineers had originally intended the facilitators in the allusion to be guys with wrenches and shovels, not desk jockeys.

I serendipitously ran across the following passage this week in a short story, “El Hijo del Camino”, composed by Jacinto Octavio Picón for his collection, Cuentos de mi Tiempo. The central character has labored at dozens of blue-collar jobs for years when, in the course of doing some drudgery or other, he blunders into a lavishly decorated room. He grows yet more dazzled when the most beautiful woman he has ever seen parades through the glittering space on her way to a regal entertainment, dressed to the hilt. These are his thoughts (in my translation):

The young man, ignorant and uneducated, incapable of analyzing what he was experiencing—yet a man, when all was said and done—felt the temptation and the anxiety that a ripe fruit produces when placed before a child’s mouth.

At first he remained suspended in a spasm of surprise, then he murmured to himself with the speed of thought that everything contained in this wondrous precinct and everything embodied in the beauty of this extraordinary woman had been passed during its birth, in one way or another, through his own hands. Coal wrenched from the bowels of the earth and converted into torrents of light… crystal molded in the furnaces that had seared his throat… iron forged in the fires where he had scorched his fingers… silks synthesized from substances that had poisoned his lungs… everything—he had contributed to all of it! And none of it—nothing—was for him!

It was then that Lucy appeared to his desire as a marvelous creation in which he had put the bone of his bone and blood of his blood until he had produced a fusion of all human riches. Why did she not belong to him by right? Were they bound to live eternally close together and separated at the same time, like a courtesan and her slave? What cruel law was handling him thus? Who was its author?

Of course, the encounter doesn’t turn out well for our protagonist. Chased out of the mansion for pawing over this child of privilege, he returns with a bomb, is caught, and ends up on the scaffold. And by proxy, he could be said to have built the scaffold, too! All the work and none of the reward… do you get it now?

Cuentos was published in 1895. That’s EIGHTEEN-ninety five. Progressivism, as we readily see in studying its life cycle, progresses at the speed of a molasses glacier.

Thirty Percent or Forty-Seven?

In a piece that I wrote a couple of weeks ago, I speculated that probably one American in three is an immovable Obama supporter. I had no hard stats upon which to base my claim—only personal experience. Two members of my immediate family will vote for an extended Obama reign, beyond the shadow of a doubt; or the second will, at any rate, if he can only bring himself to get out of bed and venture into the land of live people for a few minutes. The first, whose support is granite-hard, is actually voting for a self-serving construct in which Obama’s silhouette occupies a keystone position. If he did not exist, she would have to create him—and he indeed does not exist as she imagines him, and so she has indeed created his legend, his eidon: the Platonic idea of The Enlightened One. That the egotistical pustule which encases her civic-consciousness is eminently vulnerable to the lancet of clear thinking explains why no one can engage her in a political conversation (no one, that is, except other emotional cripples in her tiny pool of public service employees, among whom she is certain to find only confirmation). A sudden access of sane understanding would force her to overhaul her entire existence.

Such people are the truly invincible foe, from Mr. Romney’s perspective. He misidentified them in drawing his calculations from “objective statistics” that reflect the number of Americans on the dole. His faux pas, to the extent that he made one, was therefore to assume that a single mother of three who depends upon taxpayer handouts for survival is fully comfortable with that arrangement. I and many others believe that he was mistaken in this assumption. Again, I just have a hunch: but I strongly suspect that a black unwed mother with no high school diploma is far more likely to leap at the chance of altering her situation than a white college-educated spinster professional who simply cannot survive psychically if she doesn’t believe herself smarter and better than everyone else on the block.

Sometimes Romney is too much of a businessman. He needs to pull his head out of his figures occasionally and ponder the dark mysteries of human nature. It really isn’t the economy, Mitt—not at rock-bottom. It’s the values.

Collateral Damage in Operation “Nuke First Amendment”

What do slain border agent Brian Terry and slain ambassador Christopher Stevens have in common, besides being dedicated and courageous public servants? Little to nothing, let us hope.

But the question is increasingly being asked, by Sean Hannity and others, “Why was Ambassador Stevens unguarded on the eve of his death? Why is it that even the Navy Seals murdered at his side had not actually been designated to protect him?” At best, we may assume that calculations liberally seasoned with criminal naiveté and incompetent stupidity were at fault—something about as well proportioned to reality as Gabby Giffords’ open-air event without security in one of the nation’s most dangerous cities: some lunacy in that proportion, but raised by the power of ten or twelve.

Agent Terry himself could be said to have fallen victim to the same gross incompetence. There was certainly nothing personal in his being “set up to die” by the minions of Attorney General Holder. Yet someone was indeed supposed to die. Several someones, or several hundred nobodies—ordinary Mexican and U.S. citizens who would become nameless statistics, and whose sheer number would cause a public outcry against the easy availability of legal firearms. The result was to be an abrogation of the Second Amendment. Those of us who no longer believe in the Easter Bunny and Obama’s Stash know that perfectly well. Holder needed bodies, and Terry was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

So what about Stevens? Things haven’t been going particularly well for Campaign Obama, whatever you hear from Scott Pelley and Wolf Blitzer. Currently, the uproar from the few credible journalists that remain in our crumbling culture concerns why the Administration failed to respond to numerous warnings about imminent trouble on the 9/11 anniversary. But what if the trouble had been fully, accurately anticipated and the response planned long in advance? What if the response we saw was the one planned?

Administration spokes-zombies have certainly been reiterating the “Islamaphobe Christian fundamentalist hate-speech video” as the culprit just as if they were repeating the rehearsed line of a play in which a fellow actor had forgotten his part. Maybe he would remember his words if they kept mouthing theirs. What if the forgotten line was supposed to run something like, “Romney… Romney did it. Romney’s people… they do things like this, all the time!”

What if American embassies in Arab countries had to go up in smoke so that American voters could see how dangerous the First Amendment is with so many crazed, venom-spitting Christians on the loose? What if the embassies and their personnel had to be left unguarded so as to create the maximum detonation to draw the maximum of attention from the American electorate?

In that case, Christopher Stevens was collateral damage, just like Brian Terry. The engineers of occasions like these, recall, are ideological descendents of that luminary who famously informed posterity that you need to break some eggs to make an omelet.

May both of these young men find eternal peace in the embrace of a loving God.

Can We Please Stop Paying Them to Kill Us?

While I’m on the subject of the Middle East… Rand Paul has desperately been trying to terminate our billion-and-a-half bucks of aid to Egypt, opposed first by senate Democrats but lately, and more stubbornly, by his own party. Why should we pay them to kill us? Why should we pay any of them? Why are we giving guns, instruction, and money to people in Iraq, Pakistan, and now Egypt and Libya who will end up using our munificence to murder our sons and daughters? We romped through this suicidal dance with the Zetas in Mexico, assuming that they were an elite force loyal to their government rather than a bunch of unmoored young men with no conscience and empty pockets. For that matter, we did the same thing with Mao’s Communist rebels throughout World War Two—arming them to the teeth, that is (and pouring goods and money into Stalin’s lap), over Chiang Kai-shek’s frail cries for prudence and restraint. How many Americans did we lose in Korea and Vietnam? How many tens of millions of innocent bystanders were destroyed as they tried to till their native soil?

Two counter-arguments always float to the surface like the wormy debris of a sunken ship. One is that our enemies will descend into whatever vacuum of influence is left by our withdrawal. Bob Beckel always invokes the Chinese for this villainous role (in patent contradiction of his side’s railing against xenophobia and in support, apparently, of colonialism). Would the Chinese really like to have Central Asia and North Africa? I say we put a shiny red bow on both of them. These “nations” need to hammer out their own millennial problems until they tire of braining each other and of inviting foreign adventurism through their gross ineptitude. I feel for their women and children… but you don’t make an abused wife’s life easier by smacking her husband for beating her. You’ll probably get her killed. As for the oil that, I presume, represents the football not to be fumbled to China under any circumstances… maybe we should just concentrate on keeping China out of oil fields in the Western Hemisphere, and go full-speed-ahead with fracking.

Of course, Objection Two is Israel. If we pull out of the Arab world and leave it to grow up or self-destruct, what will become of our Israeli allies? This is a very strange protest to be hearing in 2012, when the winner of a recent Nobel Peace Prize is smoking Muslim bad guys from the stratosphere like Bill Cody picking off buffalo. Why do we need boots on the ground when we have drones in the air? The one piece of real estate that truly needs pedestrian patrolling for our national security is our southern border. Israel has enough nukes to stare down all of her rude neighbors at once, Arab Muslims have never been so united against Jews that they can long abstain from killing each other, and our own high-tech defense systems can be operated from a concrete bunker in Kentucky as long as we don’t sell all of our secrets to the Chinese and defund all of our programs to buy El Supremo a life-membership in the Oval Office.

We need to bring our troops and citizens home, withdraw from the U.N., form a new series of alliances based on our interests and our values, and then invite other nations into the game when and if they decide to behave like adults. We need to stop paying dysfunctional societies to kill our children.

Bring on the Polls—Make My Day

If I could ask Santa for one early Christmas present, it would be the continuation of these ridiculous polls that show Barack Obama enjoying an insuperable lead. The designers of these Willie Wonka phone-a-thons think that conservatives will grow demoralized and stay home on Election Day… but the result stands in polar opposition to the intent. Conservatives, instead, are pouring their hard-earned money into closely contested races, including Romney’s (which would otherwise be a very tough sell to them). They will also crawl to their polling places in November even if Black Panthers break both their legs. The other side, meanwhile, is already temperamentally disinclined to alight from its collective gluteus maximus for any sort of public commitment. They belong to the 47%, remember, who have grown accustomed to having life delivered to their doorstep. (I said “belong to”—I didn’t say that the 47% consists solely of their ilk.) The polls are giving them a comfortable, rational excuse just to stay home and play on Facebook.

PLEASE continue this, ladies and gentlemen of the Fourth Estate (and you, too, NBC employees). You’re making my day, and maybe saving our century.

Will Security Goons Now Harass As You Disembark?

It sounds like a ludicrous claim. But the 80’s cartoon G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero might just be the Rosetta Stone to understanding early 21st century culture and politics.

In the series, the troops of the terrorist organization determined to take over the world are referred to as “vipers”.

It seems those using that same name are on the verge of threatening human freedom here in the real world. However, now it seems it might not be so easy to tell the difference between those claiming to be good guys and the bad guys.

Americans have begrudgingly grown accustomed to TSA operatives in the name of airline safety inflicting an assorted array of abuses upon travelers ranging from having to remove shoes, to being forced to drink the breastmilk intended for their infants, the public spilling of colostomy bags, and to hearing their toddlers scream at the top of their lungs as the tots are molested by security apparatchiks placing their hands where anyone else would be placed on an offender registry and forced to live their remaining days under a bridge.

Those endorsing such violations against personhood callously remind that those not wanting to endure such indignities for the sake of the COMMUNITY are perfectly free to avoid and forego air travel. However, if a pilot program underway in Houston conducted by so-called “Viper Teams” gets off the ground and goes nationwide, thosbe justified in authenticating the validity of one being in the country), Americans have pretty much been conditioned into handing over any bit of information requested by someone flashing a badge or reciting a litany of letters as to what agency they happen to be with.

In this particular incident, the law enforcement shakedown didn't prevent a single act of terrorism as passengers were accosted after getting off the bus. Had their intentions been mayhem and destruction, the act would have been perpetrated long before that point.

Since these interventions were conducted at the end of their respective journeys, another serious question must be raised. What if after passing through some kind of mechanical surveillance system to get on board the bus, one is still not granted clearance to actually enter the vehicle until police or what ever other government official might be running things at some undetermined point down the timeline have determined one's grounds for seeking the use of public transportation is justified?

For example, want to go see the newest Hunger Games movie? Sorry, your clearance only authorizes you to use public transportation for occupational related purposes. You have not been categorized as sufficiently valuable to the COMMUNITY to enjoy recreational privileges.

Those conditioned into embracing everything they have been told will respond that, if one does not want to "freely" give an accounting to those administering the public transportation system, then simply don't use public transportation. However, such advice is not as simple to adhere to as it sounds.

Under the banner of any number of lofting sounding initiatives such as Agenda 21, Sustainability, Live Where You Work, and Duel Use Zoning that make you want to hurl chunks upon merely hearing them, the areas into which the remaining human beings granted continued existence are to be herded will be redesigned in such a way as to at first inconvenience those relying on private transportation but eventually outright forbidding access to individual civilian vehicles whatsoever. This can be seen even today on college campuses that force motorists to park in lots on the distance outskirts, to the banishment of traffic from Times Square in New York, to police checkpoints in the Big Apple that forbid entrance to automobiles carrying single passengers.

Some might think “fine.” If it takes cordoning oneself off as much as possible to avoid harassment by security operatives and seldom leaving one’s property or wherever it is one will be permitted to reside as bureaucratic regulations grow increasingly obtuse and the dictatorial impulse more pervasive, that is what stalwart patriots would set their minds on the attempt at doing. However, though logic would dictate that those conscientiously avoiding public forms of conveyance and interaction should be left unaccosted by those insisting it is their obligation to determine the legitimacy of the motives of those locomoting across communal causeways, social engineers have often expressed an even greater desire to interfere in the lives of those that quietly disentangle themselves from the tentacles of Leviathan.

For example, in the case of Wikard vs. Filburn, the Supreme Court ruled that a farmer that grew his own crop for private consumption not directly participating in interstate commerce was still subject to administrative oversight under that much abused clause of the Constitution because whatever he produced for his own consumption would adversely impact the interstate market. Thus, judges and bureaucrats with no scruples about restricting the expansion of government power could apply this already warped precedent to argue that those going out of their way to avoid not only public transportation but the public altogether are not only undermining national security but rather social cohesion as well.

Those with limited imagination might find the above scenario too abstract or farfetched . Fine.

One doesn't have to project that far along possible timelines to make the point. Already, steps are being taken to set the foundations for a milieu where those trapped within won’t be punished for actual crimes but rather for simply staying to themselves or forced to interact with others against their will.

For example, to many suburbanites, the epitome of domestic tranquility is a sizeable backyard surrounded by a privacy fence into which one can retreat with one's family following a lengthy and grueling workday. However, under the rubric of a movement some refer to as "New Urbanism", COMMUNTIY planners and sympathetic architects would deny the homeowner this sliver of elusive seclusion.

Instead, each homeowner is to have thrust upon them a front porch. It is insisted that this feature prompts interaction among residents not for the purposes of fostering friendship but rather COMMUNITY.

Even a number of perspectives within Christianity have gotten onboard. Some still believing in Heaven as the blissful destination in the Afterlife insist that, if you don't want the neighbors up in your business now, you likely won't be one of those joining the Saints in glory. Among the Emergent Church types downplaying the existence of Heaven, your unwillingness to fanatically embrace the herd consensus likely means you have no place in the this worldly "Kingdom of God", which sounds disturbingly like a form of religious socialism.

Proponents insist that such environmental tinkering will supposedly bring out the best in human nature, resulting in a new golden age. However, without regeneration in Christ and even with that the individual is left with too much residue of the sin nature, it is advisable to retain a respectable degree of distance apart from those outside the immediate nuclear family and a few select friends. All such social manipulation will accomplish will be to fester a variety of behavioral pathologies to the surface.

For example, one particular acquaintance resides in an area where most of the dimwits have been duped into embracing the blather about the joys of gathering on front porches for endless hours of self-denunciation and reeducation. Some years back, as my acquaintance was restoring a classic automobile, the tranquility of the summer's evening was shattered with, "WHAT THE F--K IS HE DOING WITH THAT CAR?"

You will note that the offense against the COMMUNITY was not that such language would be utilized to inquire as to what a member of the collective was doing. Rather, the deed to denigrate was that of an individual pursuing his own interests rather than subordinating himself to the preferred activities of the group.

This would not be the last incident where the protections of communal support would be denied to those not so much out to destroy the COMMUNITY but who would rather retain most of their identity distinct and apart from that unit of social organization. Because a relation of this particular person had expressed on a public forum a sentiment countervailing the prevailing leftwing consensus within the disputed municipality, my associate and his family had a car window smashed on more than one occasion.

When the neighbors assembled to gleefully gawk at the misfortune, my associate was informed that people did not like his family anyway. At the heart of conservatism and libertarianism, adherents of these related perspectives do not require that those residing in close proximity to them respond with tidings of affection and camaraderie. However, what is required is that they respect your property and possessions whether they like you or not.

The vitality of liberty is a precarious thing. It is seldom lost overnight. Rather, it slowly slips from our grasp as we often compromise with those assuring that what they are snatching from us is really for our own welfare and protection.

by Frederick Meekins

Nominate a political activist who has not received recognition for this $25,000 award

Many patriots work behind the scenes, and often without the incentive of a paycheck, to change policy and ideas for freedom. You can honor an individual whose work defines entrepreneurial public policy and makes a difference for freedom by nominating him or her for the Krieble Foundation’s Unsung Hero Award.
The winner of the Unsung Hero Award will receive a cash prize of $25,000 and recognition at State Policy Network’s Annual Meeting in Amelia Island, Florida.
Criteria for nomination:

• Nominee is a policy entrepreneur who has not received many accolades for his or her accomplishments
• Leadership resulted in a victory that reduced the size or scope of government and made a difference for freedom
• The outcomes recognized are transformative and truly innovative
• Story can serve as an example of success and inspiration to other activist groups
• Reduction in size and scope of government can be replicated in other parts of the country

To nominate an Unsung Hero you know, please fill out this form.
The deadline to nominate a hero is October 10, 2012.

from http://spnam2012.org/unsung-hero/

Howard Stern exposes Obama supporters 2012

I don't even like Howard Stern but this had me choking up laughing. He asks these uninformed Democrats questions that are completely set up with false premises; the opposite of the truth, but these people are so set in their opinions they would rather spout off on how much they like Obama even though they do not know much about him or Romney. None of the people he interviews know that Osama bin Laden is dead. He asks them if they like Obama because he is pro-life (yes). He asks them if they like Obama's vice-presidential pick Paul Ryan (yes). He asks them if they don't like Romney because he's a Muslim, or if it bothers them that Obama is a Mormon (no). He asks them about McCain and Palin running again this time and they all have opinions about that.

Popologetics: Popular Culture in Christian Perspective

Source: amazon.com via Frederick on Pinterest

What Else Would Drudge Like Done The Red Chinese Way?

On his website, Drudge had a picture of a Chinese athlete holding her gold medal.  Beneath it, the headline simply read "Domination."

However, at that point in the games, did a few more gold medals with other medal counts being near equal with the United States constitute "Domination"?

Perhaps Drudge ought to emphasize the price in terms of human dignity and liberty expended to achieve that slight advantage.

As someone that depends on the free flow of ideas and unhindered access to the Internet, one would think Mr. Drudge would be a little more guarded in his enthusiasm for the Red Chinese way of doing things. 

It is a shame.  Olympic officials and enthusiasts fly into an outrage over a number of athletes realizing that the way to get ahead might not be by really putting their best foot forward; yet very little is done to condemn a system that produces athletes in facilities barely better than high tech slave labor camps where the parents of the inmates are so afraid of diminishing the glory of the state that they conceal the hardships and tragedies befalling family members.

by Frederick Meekins

Return to Prosperity

<div style='padding-bottom: 2px; line-height: 0px'><a href='http://pinterest.com/pin/148689225168305723/' target='_blank'><img src='http://media-cache-ec6.pinterest.com/upload/148689225168305723_qXmpIkDk_c.jpg' border='0' width='328' height ='500'/></a></div><div style='float: left; padding-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px;'><p style='font-size: 10px; color: #76838b;'>Source: <a style='text-decoration: underline; font-size: 10px; color: #76838b;' href='http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0034DGPH2/?ref=cm_sw_r_pi_dp_cOriqb1V9EJMR'>amazon.com</a> via <a style='text-decoration: underline; font-size: 10px; color: #76838b;' href='http://pinterest.com/fmeekins/' target='_blank'>Frederick</a> on <a style='text-decoration: underline; color: #76838b;' href='http://pinterest.com' target='_blank'>Pinterest</a></p></div>

William F. Buckley Jr.: The Maker of a Movement by Lee Edwards

Source: amazon.com via Frederick on Pinterest

The Tyranny of Cliches: How Liberals Cheat in the War of Ideas

Source: amazon.com via Frederick on Pinterest

Batman Shooter A Neuroscientist That Went Haywire

It seems that the Batman Shooter may be a neuroscientist that went haywire.

So will the media issue numerous exposes and reports how this individual had likely been subjected for years to evolutionary dogma how human beings are nothing more than an accidental conglomeration of chemicals and electricity?

Leftists will remark that such insinuations are offensive and irresponsible.

But are such claims any more so than those of ABC news correspondents hoping that the act of terror was Tea Party related?

Such an insinuation was bandied back and forth between Brian Ross and George Stephanopolous.

If the gunman had been named Abdul Hassan, would this journalistic outlet had latched onto the first one they could find especially if an activist with the local chapter of CAIR?

Thinking from more conservative voices was no less muddled.

Responding as additional information was made available to the general public, Brain Wilson of WMAL radio remarked it was good news that it seemed likely that the shooter was a “lone wolf” not connected to international terrorism.

But how is a victim any less mangled or dead if shot by a loner or by someone more inherently group oriented such as a member of a gang or terrorist organization?

Sophisticates will opine that this deed does not rise to the level of terrorism.

But why not?

When I first took an interest in this subject over twenty years ago, terrorism was defined as an act of violence committed for the purposes of garnering attention to get people to alter their behavior or shift their perceptions.

If not terrorism, what else do you call an attack with the purposes of attaching forever in a sick and twisted way one’s name to one of America’s most beloved cultural icons and literary characters?

by Frederick Meekins

Southern Baptists Contract A Derivative Of Obamamania

It has been said that Evangelicals are five to ten years behind the rest of the culture in terms of embracing fads and trends.

That seems about right.

Last election cycle, a plurality made a considerable fuss over and selected a candidate for the Presidency of the United States primarily because the individual claimed to be Black.

Now it seems movers and shakers within the Southern Baptist Convention have been whipped up into a similar frenzy.

Of the election of Fred Luter to the highest office in that particular ecclesiastical association, the Dean of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary Russell Moore gushed, "To have the son of slaves now leading this denomination as it reaches the world with gospel is a sign of God's mercy."

So as a man well over 100 years of age, Rev. Luter is looking remarkable fit and vital.

Moore continued on in a vein of self-deprecation that would make most Jews blush, “This denomination was once described...as ‘white as a tractor pull’.  It that’s the case, the denomination will not, and should not, survive.”

Over the centuries, most to hold the Papacy have hailed from the Caucasian end of the racial spectrum.  So should critics call for the end of that institution because it has not lived up to some arbitrary notion of racial diversity?

More importantly, the formulation of Moore’s response to this question put to him is quite revealing and exposes a number of assumptions.

What exactly does “white as a tractor pull” mean anyway?

Are not Whites allowed to have a form of entertainment inherent to their particular culture?  Does Moore intend to criticize forms of recreation that tend to appeal to Black folks but not Whites?

Likewise, will this same spirit of condemnation be brought to bear against Black Baptist bodies that do not enact outreach and set aside opportunities particularly aimed towards White people?

For overall, one will find it is probably more likely that a Black person will advance within the ranks of the Southern Baptist Convention than for a White person to advance very far within predominately Black ecclesiastical administrative organizations and associations.

If the Rev. Fred Luter was elected from a truly Biblical perspective, not a single word would be mentioned about his color.  Instead, all that would be said is that he is the most qualified man for the position from the standpoint of his Christian character and his aptitude to apply sound theology to the challenges facing American culture today.

by Frederick Meekins

I Will Be Speaking at a Repeal Obamacare Rally in Boston Tomorrow

The Greater Boston Tea Party has organized a Repeal Obamacare rally tomorrow afternoon and I have been invited to speak. Details here.

Obama Administration Apologizes to Pakistan

The day before the Fourth of July, the Obama Administration saw fit to apologize to Pakistan. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton apologized for the November 2011 NATO airstrike which resulted in the deaths of 24 Pakistani soldiers. In return, Pakistan agreed to reopen NATO supply lines to Afghanistan that had been closed following the incident.

To read the rest of this post, please check out The Spectacle Blog.

Andy Griffith, R.I.P.

Actor and TV icon Andy Griffith passed away today. A cause of death has not been released. He was 86.

To read the rest of this obituary, please check out The Spectacle Blog.

D-Train Makes His Last Stop

Dontrelle Willis announced his retirement from baseball yesterday. The southpaw had been pitching with the Norfolk Tides, the Triple A affiliate of the Baltimore Orioles. He is only 30.

To read the rest of this post, please check out The Spectacle Blog.

Yitzhak Shamir, R.I.P.

Former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir died yesterday after a long battle with Alzheimer's. He was 96.

To read the rest of this obituary, please check out The Spectacle Blog.

Thoughts on Morsi Demanding U.S. Release Blind Sheikh

As you may know, Egypt's new President Mohamed Morsi has called upon the United States to release Omar Abdel-Rahman (a.k.a. "The Blind Sheikh") during his inaugural speech. The Egyptian born cleric is currently serving a life sentence for his involvement in planning the first WTC bombing in 1993 and planning terrorist attacks against other landmarks mostly situated in New York City.


It doesn't scare me that Morsi would call for The Blind Sheikh's release. That should come as a surprise to no one. But what scares me is that it isn't inconceivable that U.S. officials could one day release him in some kind of misguided attempt to appease the Muslim Brotherhood. If the Brits were prepared to release the Lockerbie bomber then what is to prevent the U.S. government from releasing Abdel-Rahman?