Saturday, December 31, 2005

Giant Amazon Women Exist!

Double lock your door tonight and hold your family a little closer.

Friday, December 30, 2005

Best CD's Of 2005

These are the CD's that I couldn't stop listening to this year.

1. Fiona Apple -- Extraordinary Machine I want so badly to not like Fiona Apple. It really isn't music I would normally go for. But I think the fact that her signature sound is so unique draws me to it. This cd is fun and the lyrics are so much more complex and creative then most of the yawn-inducing lyrics that come out these days. Make sure you listen to -- Not About Love.

2. Damien Rice -- O This is the best soothing acoustic folk CD that has come along in years. I love folk music. This CD fulfills that need for soft music and beautiful melodies. Damien Rice has a soothing tenor voice that matches the subtle guitar work. Make sure you listen to -- The Blower's Daughter, Delicate, and Cannonball.

3. Amos Lee -- Amos Lee Soul music is back! This is a truly brilliant album. Amos Lee has a great soul/folk sound that is rare. Go out and buy this album. It's an innovative sound. You know it's a good album when you have Norah Jones playing back up on a few of the tracks...they make a good combination. Make sure you listen to -- Keep It Loose, Keep It Tight and Seen It All Before.

4. Josh Groban -- Closer I can't help it, I love a great sounding voice and Josh Groban has just that. Some of the songs on here are corny but the majority are just beautiful melodies and great arrangements. Make sure you listen to -- Remember When It Rained and You Raise Me Up.

5. Fernando Ortega -- Fernando Ortega What can I say? I have been a fan of Fernando Ortega for a long time and he never disappoints. He has that smooth sound and gentle piano style that eases the mind. My favorite part about Fernando's albums is that he always puts a few standard hymns on there. The hymns are always done in the style that they were written and not dumbed down to try to appeal to a modern audience. Make sure you listen to -- All That Time, More Love To Thee, and Rock Of Ages.

6. David Gray -- Life In Slow Motion His last CD was over produced and boring. So he decided to totally redeem himself with this album. It's the best album out of Briton this year and the best folk/pop album this year period. Make sure you listen to -- Hospital Food and Ain't No Love.

7. Shane & Shane -- An Evening With Shane & Shane I can honestly say that modern day Christian worship music is close to bankruptcy. Most of the time the lyrics could be written by a 1st grader and the music is so void of substance that it's hard to get into a worshipful attitude even in church. This album restores my hope in worship music. Shane Bernard is so talented. His voice is pure sounding and his guitar skills are top notch. Most of the lyrics for the music that Shane Bernard brings are straight from God's word. In fact a lot of them are Psalms. That's what worship music needs. Truth comes from the Word. So often young songwriters rely on overly simplistic and repetitive lyrics...Not so with Shane & Shane and for that I'm grateful. Make sure you listen to -- Yearn, Psalm 13, Psalm 145, and Name Sake.

There were more CD's this year that I enjoy but I'll leave it at a top 7. Let's hope 2006 brings more good music.

Thursday, December 29, 2005

Ex-ACLU Attorney Wants
You To Stop The ACLU

Crossposted at

One of our contributors, Craig McCarthy, set up a petition to stop taxpayer funding of the ACLU, quite a while ago. We are trying to help Craig reach at least 25,000 signatures. We are not that far away.

Just two days ago, I put up as one of Stop The ACLU's best posts of 2005, my interview with former ACLU lawyer, mr. Reese Lloyd. I had no idea it would be such great timing.

Mr. Reese strkes again in a podcast with Congressman Hostettler.

Rees Lloyd made the comments in an online podcast hosted by Rep. John Hostettler, R-Ind., in which the two discuss the congressman's legislation, the Public Expression of Religion Act, or PERA (H.R.2679). The bill would prohibit judges in civil suits involving the First Amendment's Establishment Clause from awarding attorney's fees to those offended by religious symbols or actions in the public square – such as a Ten Commandments display in a courthouse or a cross on a county seal.

Lloyd, a California civil-rights attorney, is an officer with the American Legion who wrote a resolution passed by the national organization supporting Hostettler's bill.

As WorldNetDaily reported, Hostettler's proposal would amend the Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Act of 1976, 42 U.S.C. Section 1988, to prohibit prevailing parties from being awarded attorney's fee in religious establishment cases, but not in other civil rights filings. This would prevent local governments from having to use taxpayer funds to pay the ACLU or similar organization when a case is lost, and also would protect elected officials from having to pay fees from their own pockets.

Hostettler says some organizations have created a new civil liberty – a right to be protected "from religion, which is found nowhere in the Constitution, nowhere in the Bill of Rights." The Indiana congressman blames "a very select group" for "perverting" the original statute, including the ACLU, People for the American Way and Americans United for the Separate of Church and State.

"They use this statute to extort behavior out of individuals," the congressman said, citing the Indiana Civil Liberties Union threatening local educators. The group sent a letter to officials saying they would be sued and be forced to pay attorney's fees should any graduation prayers be offered at commencement ceremonies. The threat sent the message, Hostettler said, that individuals tied to school districts could be impoverished personally.

Said the lawmaker: "When officials see the potential threat of a lawsuit, they stop allowing children to write papers for English class – when they're asked to write about the most important person in their life and they decide to write about Jesus Christ."

Hostettler's bill would allow cases to move through the courts without public officials worrying about being held personally liable for thousands in attorneys fees.

"Let's let these cases go forward; let's let the courts decide what's constitutional and what's not, and let's not leave it up to the ACLU," he said.

Hostettler explained that while government entities can pay attorney's fees charged to individual elected officials, they don't legally have to, which puts the politicians on the hook.

Saying most taxpayers are in favor of allowing public religious expression, the congressman noted the irony of those same taxpayers being forced to pay the ACLU to sue their local governments.

"The current threat to public officials is very real; it's ongoing," Hostettler stated. "It's been the case for several years that public officials are scared to death to suggest any type of public recognition of our Christian roots. It's a problem that needs to be addressed in Washington, D.C."

PERA would prohibit damages, court fees and attorney's fees from going to plaintiffs in establishment-clause suits while keeping the original purpose of the civil-rights law, Hstettler says, to provide a means for those whose religious liberties have been blocked to find justice.

The congressman wonders why the ACLU would oppose his legislation since it still provides for "injunctive relief" – e.g., a court can rule in the ACLU's favor and force the removal of a Ten Commandments display – but takes out the monetary incentive for lawsuits.

"If they're not out for the money but are really out to preserve our civil liberties … then the ACLU should not be opposing my bill," Hostettler commented.

In the podcast, Lloyd decried the "terrorizing litigation tactics of the ACLU."

Said Lloyd: "Not only can the ACLU brings these suits and compel taxpayers to pay them to destroy the public display of our American history and heritage, but so can Islamist terrorists or Islamist sympathizers in our midst.

"All they have to do is walk into court, make their claim that they're offended by the sight of a cross or other religious symbol, and they're going to win the case because judges follow one another under stare decisis," or deference to precedent.

The judges would then order that fees be paid to the Islamists, Lloyd contends.

Lloyd said this issue came into focus for him when he witnessed the fight in San Diego, Calif., over a cross on a veterans' memorial on public land in the Mohave Desert.

"For me, that was the one step taken too far," Lloyd said. "Now, for the first time, the ACLU was attacking the very veterans who secured their freedom."

A civil-rights activist since the '60s, Lloyd worked with the ACLU in the '70s and was "very supportive" of the 1976 Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Act because it was a "noble attempt to assure that people who had legitimate civil-rights violations and injuries could secure legal representation."

Stated Lloyd: "The ACLU has perverted, distorted and exploited the Civil Rights Act … to turn it into a lawyer-enrichment act."

Lloyd says the American people are "oblivious" to how many millions of dollars in taxpayer funds are going to the ACLU each year.

The attorney pointed out many attorneys in cases brought by the ACLU are volunteers, so the fees the group is awarded normally do not go to reimburse an attorney but rather directly into the organization's coffers.

Hostettler's bill, which was introduced first in 2003 without success, currently has 35 co-sponsors in the House of Representatives and sits in the House Committee on the Judiciary.

The Center For Reclaiming America claims that they have over 100,000 signatures backing this bill. Honestly, I don't know what they are waiting on. If we can up our petiton from 19,000 to 25,000, I will personally take the signatures to Congressman Hostettler myself....I promise you. I only live two hours from D.C.

SIGN OUR PETITON TO STOP TAXPAYER FUNDING OF THE ACLU ....and spread the word as far and wide on this petition as you can!

Tuesday, December 27, 2005

Deep Thoughts On The Price Is Right

My favorite thing about the Price Is Right is when Bob Barker gets visibly frustrated at the contestants who take way too long to place their bid on stuff. They turn around and try to get feedback from the audience and that makes Bob furious. I cannot wait until Bob someday just snaps and some old guy, who is wearing a shirt that says "I'm 99 years old and I love Barker's beauties", gets a plinko chip across the head. Best rated PiR ever!

Sunday, December 25, 2005

The Passion Of The Liberal

I have always pondered the question of what makes a liberal tick. They will tell you that it is the plight of the common man that drives them but history and common sense will tell you that this simply isn't so. You have to be the right type of common man for them to care about you. If one doesn't fall at the alter of hedonism and relativism then they are the enemy of the liberal. You can see this in action when a black man is outed as a conservative. At that point they become "house negroes".

So if love for all mankind isn't their drive then what is?

The liberal is generally A-religious. This means that 9 times out of 10 they believe that after you die nothing happens. And the ones that believe in a God are usually Unitarian or at least all-inclusive which means they believe in everything and nothing all at the same time. So I'd conclude that liberals either believe that nothing happens when you die or they have no idea what will happen, which is just as scary a thought.

Therefore I believe the real passion of the liberal is a simple two word phrase: Don't die. That sums up their passion in a well defined nutshell.

This then explains why the liberal believes that nothing is worth fighting for. What is the point in fighting for freedom and democracy? Isn't it better to live under government rule then to be dead? Isn't it easier to ignore certain people group sufferings then to be killed trying to rescue them? After all, you can't help anybody once you are dead so you might as well just try to talk it out with you enemy. If you raise your voice to evil or take up arms against it then you might be killed.

But most conservatives have a different passion. Like Costner said in Open Range.. 'There are things that gnaw at a man worse than dying.' This is why we fight for freedom so quickly. We believe that this life is a gift and we should cherish it and take care of it, but there is something greater than us that holds within Him the power of life itself. Therefore we look forward to after death because we know that something better awaits after this life. Not every conservative believes this of course. And as a Christian I believe that only those that call and believe in Christ will get in to heaven. That's my passion.

Liberals refuse to fight the war on terror not because of a conscientious objection but because they are afraid. They are scared of losing the only thing that has worth to them, and that worth is a measly, dismal, temporary existence. This is the passion of the liberal. It's sad but true.

Friday, December 23, 2005

Fighting Off The Flu

Exciting news everyone. I will most likely be spending this Christmas in bed fighting the dreaded respiratory flu. Sweet! And last week I had the stomach crud!!

It's not a big deal. I'll just lay here, pray, and down some Airborne.

I have an anti-liberal post called The Passion Of The Liberal loaded and stay tuned!

P.S. Tracy I will not blame you if I get it.

Update: I have it. And no Tracy, I still don't blame you.

Thursday, December 22, 2005

ACLU Freedom of Information Request Would Gut NSA Program

Crossposted From Stop The ACLU

Apparantly it isn't enough for the ACLU that the NY Times leaked classified information that we are spying on international phone calls of suspected terrorist. They now want all details released! Whether they are just plain stupid, or actually want the enemy to defeat us, the document fails to say.


The requests submitted today seek all records about "the policies, procedures and/or practices of the National Security Agency for gathering information through warrantless electronic surveillance and/or warrantless physical searches in the United States …".... Information received by the organization will be made public on its Web site.

Rightwing Nuthouse says:

Words fail me at this point. The generosity of the ACLU to the deadly enemies of the United States is beyond belief. The only possible explanation for wanting to expose "all records about the policies, procedures and/or practices of the National Security Agency" with regards to the NSA intercept program is that the ACLU wishes to make it harder for the government to thwart a terrorist attack.

The reason I say this is because this FOIA request is not necessary if one wishes to take an absolutist position in defense of our Fourth Amendment rights. It's only purpose would be to sabotage the program. For once al Qaeda knows the details of how we keep track of them, it becomes much easier to develop communications strategies to thwart our attempts to monitor their activities.

If the ACLU is against warrantless searches, it is their duty to protest it in a responsible manner, one that would not harm national security so grievously. And please note there is nothing in the FOIA request that would seek to uncover who the government listened in on with the program. Doesn't that strike you as a bit odd? Rather than ask for the names of specific Americans who have been targeted, they instead seek to shut the program down by revealing its operational secrets.

I couldn't say it any better myself. There is no reason to release the details of the NSA program. Doing so would benefit no one but our enemies, and only endanger America further. This irresponsible position of the ACLU is reckless and crazy. But we have come to expect such traitorous behavior from the so called civil rights group. They oppose almost every effort our government has to fight terrorism with one hand, and defend our enemies with the other. I still can not understand why our government has not investigated the ACLU itself, they most definitely have probably cause to do so.

Isn't it ironic that the ACLU wants our government's secrets released so the enemy can see, yet they tell our enemies they have the right to keep their secrets from our interrigations?

Wednesday, December 21, 2005

The Year In Review Pt I

What has 2005 taught us....

* Never let your child sleep over at a ranch with a celebrity. Especially if that celebrity thinks he's peter pan.

* Ashlee and Jessica Simpson would sell their mother into slavery if it would earn them an extra dollar.

* Bono's Euro-mullet is a great comfort to many people.

* Reality shows will never have anything to do with reality.

* Even drugged out of his mind, Rush Limbaugh is smarter and more relevant than the leading democrats.

* Bush is Superman. Just go ahead and try and bring him down, it'll only make you look like a fool.

* If you're a woman, Oprah owns you. Fear her.

* Movies got much much dumber in 2005. All you have to do is put out a movie about two gay guys and you'll have yourself an academy award. I have one coming out about two gay librarians, the only question is on which shelf should I put my Golden Globe?

* Hollywood has lost any and all creativity.

* I miss Jimmy Stewart.

* Hillary Clinton believes in something called children's rights. That means that she thinks that as a parent you should be subject to your child. If they want to have an abortion at age 12 and not let you know...then who are you to say otherwise. And how dare you demand good grades of them.

* That same woman thinks she will be our next president. I think not.

* If you find a human finger in your Wendy's chili you might just be a winner. As if biting into a juicy digit weren't bonus enough!

* You can now get face transplants. You do realize that this means in 50 years everyone is going to look like Brad Pitt and Marilyn Monroe. I for one am leaning towards one of the Baldwin brothers.

* 1 in 4 British people are considered fat. That's quite a feat considering the food they eat over there. Now if we could only import some toothbrushes.

* Jimmy Carter is all up in everyone's biznass.

* Ronald Reagan owns you. He was the greatest president of the 20th century if not ever.

* Taco Bell makes new food products by simply rearranging beans, rice, and tortilla into different shapes...Brilliant!

* Truck stop bathrooms are a hotbed of nastiness.

* Bush can kill us all by changing weather patterns and causing floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, and certain bird flus of the Avian variety. Fear him.

* The democrats want us to lose in Iraq. They have no problem with deaths as long as it will increase their personal gain.

* New Orleans is not as buoyant as originally thought.

* Evolution and atheist activists are scared of any differing opinion. What they really fear is finding out what the purpose of life is. Their convience is at stake.

* Hollywood has lost any and all creativity.

* New York garage bands took over the music scene...Oh, a new band came out this week...let me guess, they sound exactly like The Strokes and Rolling Stone magazine says they are the next big predictable.

Ahh yes, I remember it well!

Monday, December 19, 2005

Best Movie Line Ever!!

Click here...This is Awesome!

The link comes from one of my new favorite blogs, The Peoples Cube. It's a great site and I highly reccomend it.

Saturday, December 17, 2005

Another Fake Controversy From The Democrats

Congress was well aware that Bush was using wiretaps after 9-11. Now they are gonna play dumb because they think it might hurt Bush....yawn. I for one am glad that Bush is doing it and I hope he continues to do it. The timing of the charges is so see through. They waited until the day after the Iraq elections to toss it out there. I proudly call that unpatriotic and I question the liberals' loyalty to this country...the pansies.

Thursday, December 15, 2005

ACLU's Patriot Act Opposition Conflicts Own Agenda

Crossposted from Stoptheaclu.


WASHINGTON - The American Civil Liberties Union today expressed disappointment with the failure of the House to protect the liberty and freedom of innocent Americans when that body adopted flawed legislation to reauthorize the Patriot Act. The White House and its allies had placed enormous pressure on lawmakers to adopt the proposal that now heads to the Senate.

The ACLU noted that the conference report fails to require individualized suspicion before people's financial, medical or library records can be gathered by the FBI, as unanimously adopted by the Senate.ACLU Website

This is nothing more than feeding unnecessary paranoia for those who live in a state of Orwellian fear. First of all, I can't understand why people are so afraid of someone seeing their library records. If it's a public library, it's a public record. That includes any library that accepts public funding, which means virtually all college and high school libraries as well. There is a check and balance involved, because before someone's records can be obtained only after being approved by a federal judge. It would be a total waste of time for the FBI to care what someone is looking at in a Library, unless some other act of theirs puts up a flag that an investigation should be warranted. The ACLU are using scare tactics, creating the fear of Big Brother invading the libraries, when in fact investigators in ordinary criminal cases have been able to gain access to library records long before 9/11. The Feds already had these tools for cases in domestic criminal activities, the Patriot Act only extends these tools to investigators to use against terrorists.

Alberto Gonzales writes in the Washinton Post
Those who voice concern that Congress is rushing to reauthorize the expiring provisions fail to recognize the oversight it has conducted. In 2005, Congress held 23 hearings focused on reauthorization and heard from more than 60 witnesses. The Justice Department was pleased to provide witnesses at 18 of those hearings, with more than 30 appearances by our experts. I testified three times, explaining the importance of the act, responding to concerns and directly addressing the act's critics. My testimony was informed not only by the successes of the act but also by my personal meetings with representatives from groups such as the ACLU and the American Library Association. During the reauthorization discussion, I asked that certain provisions be clarified to ensure the protection of civil liberties, and Congress responded.

For example, Section 215 of the act permits the government to obtain records on an order issued by a federal judge. I agreed that the statute should allow a recipient of such an order to consult a lawyer and challenge it in court. Further, I agreed that Congress should make explicit the standard under which such orders are issued: relevance to an authorized national security investigation. In 2001 one prominent Democratic senator agreed that the "FBI has made a clear case that a relevance standard is appropriate for counterintelligence and counterterrorism investigations, as well as for criminal investigations."

The president has said that our number-one priority is preventing another catastrophic terrorist attack. Congress must act immediately and reauthorize the Patriot Act before the men and women in law enforcement lose the tools they need to keep us safe.

It isn't suprising that the ACLU would be against this, after all we are talking about an organization that thinks Gitmo detainees have the right to remain silent when interrogated. However, for the ACLU to pretend they care about people's privacy is a joke. The ACLU have been against the Patriot Act since it was first introduced. There have been no verified civil liberties abuses in the four years of the act's existence. Where privacy matters are concerned, the ACLU's record is much more tainted.

Just last year, the ACLU came under fire over privacy concerns.

The American Civil Liberties Union is using sophisticated technology to collect a wide variety of information about its members and donors in a fund-raising effort that has ignited a bitter debate over its leaders' commitment to privacy rights.

Some board members say the extensive data collection makes a mockery of the organization's frequent criticism of banks, corporations and government agencies for their practice of accumulating data on people for marketing and other purposes.

Daniel S. Lowman, vice president for analytical services at Grenzebach Glier & Associates, the data firm hired by the A.C.L.U., said the software the organization is using, Prospect Explorer, combs a broad range of publicly available data to compile a file with information like an individual's wealth, holdings in public corporations, other assets and philanthropic interests.

The issue has attracted the attention of the New York attorney general, who is looking into whether the group violated its promises to protect the privacy of its donors and members.

"It is part of the A.C.L.U.'s mandate, part of its mission, to protect consumer privacy," said Wendy Kaminer, a writer and A.C.L.U. board member. "It goes against A.C.L.U. values to engage in data-mining on people without informing them. It's not illegal, but it is a violation of our values. It is hypocrisy."

The organization has been shaken by infighting since May, when the board learned that Anthony D. Romero, its executive director, had registered the A.C.L.U. for a federal charity drive that required it to certify that it would not knowingly employ people whose names were on government terrorism watch lists.

A day after The New York Times disclosed its participation in late July, the organization withdrew from the charity drive and has since filed a lawsuit with other charities to contest the watch list requirement.

The group's new data collection practices were implemented without the board's approval or knowledge, and were in violation of the A.C.L.U.'s privacy policy at the time, said Michael Meyers, vice president of the organization and a frequent and strident internal critic. Mr. Meyers said he learned about the new research by accident Nov. 7 in a meeting of the committee that is organizing the group's Biennial Conference in July.

He objected to the practices, and the next day, the privacy policy on the group's Web site was changed. "They took out all the language that would show that they were violating their own policy," he said. "In doing so, they sanctified their procedure while still keeping it secret."

The ACLU has no room to talk. They need to sit down and shut up. The Patriot Act is a vital tool for law enforcement to keep us safe. The Senate does not need to let this important legislation expire.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay at or Gribbit at You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 115 blogs already onboard.

Wednesday, December 14, 2005

The First Three Things I Would Do If I Were President...

* I would immediately begin pushing legislation that would do away and destroy the current tax code. It would be replaced with the fair tax. Lots of IRS workers would lose their jobs because the need for the IRS would be completely taken away. This would also lessen the influence that lobbyists would have on Washington.

* I would take a percentage of welfare funding and pump it into charities that work in poor neighborhoods. Food banks, clothing centers, and soup kitchens would become a bigger force then they are now. I'd find funding to start community centers that would be run on private donations.(With mammoth taxation a thing of the past this would be a realistic possibility) Other funding would go to religious organizations. In order to receive the funding the organization would have to put in time and/or money into the community surrounding them. Welfare would be much harder to obtain then it is today.

* I would seal off the Mexican and Canadian borders. Illegal entry into the U.S. would mean instant deportation. Anyone found to be in the U.S. illegally, no matter how long they've been here, would be deported. I would then make it much easier to enter the U.S. legally. A much more expansive foreign worker program would be established. I would make English mandatory learning for foreigners entering our soil, not for racist purposes, but because it's the only successful way to communicate properly as a nation. In keeping with my new border policies I would extend the Patriot Act.

Who knows, I may just be your president some day America...Probably not, but who knows?

Monday, December 12, 2005

Tookie Out Of Options

Here is a brief reason why Gov. Schwarzenegger's decision to deny clemency was a good one: Because Tookie Williams deserves to die because he was guilty of 4 counts of murder. The fact that Tookie deserves to die should bring no one joy. It's sad. But Tookie took 4 lives away from people that did not deserve to die. The murders occurred as Tookie was robbing them. He showed no remorse. Tookie deserves to die.
Tookie supporters are saying he deserves clemency because he saved so many lives because he reformed himself in prison and then wrote children's books encouraging them to stay out of gangs. The problem is that if Tookie is saved because he was reformed then suddenly every death row inmate is going to become Mother Teresa.
I actually believe that Tookie will save even more lives by being executed because potential gang members can follow Tookie's life to it's tragic conclusion and decide that this isn't the life that they want. If kids think that all they have to do is "reform" in prison, then that drive by might not seem so bad.
It's sad and unfortunate but Tookie deserves to die. I wish Gov. Schwarzenegger hadn't taken so long to make his decision.

Sunday, December 11, 2005

It's My Blogaversery

One year ago today I started this blog. I never expected to keep doing it. I thought it would be another thing I would start and then abandon. But here I am. I want to thank my loyal readers...all three of you! Plus I added a loyal reader 4 months ago that is my favorite loyal reader so far. She is an encouragement beyond words.

Now I can't stop blogging. I love it and I encourage everyone to try it. Some people told me it is a waste of time to blog. I disagree. I wouldn't trade my time I spent writing for this blog for anything.

Thanks again everyone. I'll see you back here on a daily basis!

Thursday, December 08, 2005

Operation Nativity

Jeus is the Reason for the Season

Every year we watch as the secularization of the birth of Christ happens around us. This year people are being preemptive, and its been quite successful. Kevin McCullough has started a campaign to send the ACLU Merry Christmas cards. Another effort is out there as well called Operation Nativity.

Dr. Charles Nestor, director of The Truth Matters, is announcing a project called "Operation Nativity" with the goal of having Christians across the country set up nativity scenes on their own property.

Nestor states, "It's that time of year again. We're not even out of October and already the forces are aligning to prohibit the public celebration of the birth of Jesus.

"December 25 is the day in our culture that is set aside to acknowledge and to celebrate that Jesus of Nazareth was born. For Christians it is more than a day of feasting and the exchange of gifts, it is a holy and solemn time to join our voices in unison as the angels proclaimed on the hillside to the shepherds, 'Glory to God in the highest.'

"I am calling for Christians everywhere to join me in Operation Nativity. While we continue to support the public displays, let's flood the country with nativity scenes on our own properties!

"Think with me what could happen if on lawns in every community, on business property, on church lawns, at Christian schools, on empty land, and literally everywhere you looked, there was the depiction of the scene that recognizes the birth of Jesus.

"Simple cutouts are available. Many already own lighted sets. It could be a family project, filled with opportunities to teach children about the events surrounding the birth of the Savior.Source

We are all for this, and encourage everyone to join in this expression of Christmas. And we want to take this idea and run with it! Decorate your blog for Christmas with a nativity scene, in support of religious expression, and as a sign of your support for stopping the ACLU. The ACLU will be busy this Christmas season, lets be prepared.

Please download the pics, and host them yourself...I can not afford the bandwidth of hotlinking. If you want to put the nativity scene pic in support of Stop The ACLU, and to decorate your blog for the Christmas season, copy the code below, and replace the URL of the pics with the downloaded pic that you host.

Merry Christmas ACLU

If you want to put the Homeland Holiday Advisory System, copy this code.

Holiday Advisory

If you decide to add these to your sidebar, spread the word with a post, and then let us know with a trackback! Here's to the Christmas holiday!

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay at or Gribbit at You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 115 blogs already onboard.

Wednesday, December 07, 2005

Is Maureen Dowd Necessary?

Wannabe feminist and New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd has written a book called Are Men Necessary?
The answer to her cute little book of course is yes. Without men Maureen Dowd be alive. Without men Maureen Dowd wouldn't have a job. Every accomplishment that Ms. Dowd has accomplished is in the shadow of a man that came before her. I'm not saying that to be sexist. I'm saying that because it's true. Men built the buildings that Ms. Dowd does her work in. Men started the businesses that Ms Dowd gets her goods and services from. Men put the satellites in the sky that allow Ms. Dowd to use her cell phone and her Blackberry. It's just silly to get angry about this because that won't change the fact that it's true. It's how society works. The hunter/gatherer in all of us men was there when we were born.
This doesn't mean that woman should ever be a second class citizen. On the contrary, women should be equal with men. Equal in the aspect that their role in society is just as important as ours is. Men know that we cannot live without women. We just don't have to become them to be equal with them.

Ms. Dowd simply is trying to conjure up the 'good ol' days' of radical feminism. These were the days when women started burning their bras. These were also the days that the abortion rates and the divorce rates took a huge spike north. Somehow when the radical feminist tossed out her need for men, she also tossed out her moral compass and let herself became #1. The problem with radical feminism is that it attempted to bring men down to the level of the woman. Woman roared and then basically tried to emasculate men. I doubt that Maureen is gonna be able to convince women to rise up again and try the same thing again.

So is Maureen Dowd necessary?
The answer of course is no. She is necessary as a human because all human life is precious. As a left wing commentator and talking head she is not necessary in the slightest. She works for the New York Times, which itself is unnecessary. If the New York Times was shut down today twenty more newspapers would rise up to take it's place with the same leftist bias. I'd say 85% of all media is left wing. Trust me, we don't need another left wing talking head.
As a feminist, again, Maureen Dowd is not necessary. As I stated above her brand of radical feminism is harmful to women and isn't going to be accepted by women living in rural middle America away from the sky rises of New York, This is the real American woman. The real American woman is someone who has a family and a husband. The real American woman balances family with career without trying to only look out for herself. She is equal with men because her goals are the same. Her goal is to give to her spouse and her children first before herself.(This should be the same goal for a man.) She doesn't have to bare-foot and pregnant. She doesn't have to stay home, she simply has to put herself after others. Maureen Dowd wants every woman to look out for #1. This is a bad strategy.
There are much less radical and more effective spokeswomen for females then Maureen Dowd. Phyllis Schlafly is a great example of a pro-woman, pro-family columnist that has a much better chance of reaching the real American woman.
So as a feminist Maureen Dowd isn't necessary.

Let's recap. Men: Necessary. Maureen Dowd: Unnecessary.

Nice try though.

Tuesday, December 06, 2005

Senator George W. Kerry

Ok, some people are way too good at photoshopping and need to get out more.

Monday, December 05, 2005

God and Truth

How can anyone not believe in God? This is one question that baffles my mind. I understand doubt, and I understand unbelief. In my weak moments I struggle with doubt and unbelief yet I feel God so clearly in my presence at times. So many people who are brilliant intellectuals claim they have searched for God and he is just not there, yet they are clueless to the fact that they are standing in the palm of his hand.
How can anyone look at a star and think that it got there by accident? The fact that you exist in the first place is direct proof that he exists. Ex nihilo nihil fit -- Out of nothing, comes nothing. If something exists, then someone must hold the power of existence within their being. This is a universal truth that is simply set aside in order to make room for a naturalistic view of our beginnings. Setting aside a truth is never a good idea.

Those truths are not new revelations. Thomas Aquinas wrote five proofs for the existence of God. He wrote these in the 1200's. The truth from his work Summa Theologia is extremely relevant, even today. I just wish that more of us as Christians would put down trendy, but grossly unbiblical books. And pick up a book from someone that was born before the last century. You'd be surprised what truths you can learn from those who have gone before us. That of course isn't to say that every author in modern days isn't truthful and compelling. I'm just worried that often the modern Christian can spout off cliches about how to be have a happy comfortable life yet has no answer to questions of how or why God exists or even why one should believe in him.

Saturday, December 03, 2005

Things You'll Never Hear People Say

"Well I guess you can sleep over at Michael Jackson's house, I mean he was found not guilty by a jury of his peers."
-- Any Parent

"I can't have a scotch now, we're at a children's birthday party."
-- Ted Kennedy

"Oh man, check her out, she is super hot."
-- Richard Simmons

"Turn off the lip sync track on this song guys, I think I'll sing this one on my own."
-- Ashlee Simpson

"No interviews please, I think I just need some privacy."
-- Cindy Sheehan

"And the Grammy for best vocal performance goes to.........Susan Estrich"
-- Grammy Presenter

"Hey guys, we can't release my new documentary yet, I haven't fact-checked it."
-- Michael Moore

"Hey guys, for our next album let's try something totally different"
-- Bono

Thursday, December 01, 2005

Do You Hate Starbucks As Much As I Do?

Before I start my rant let me say this. I occasionally give money to Starbucks. Maybe 20 bucks a year. So that being said let me tell you the reasons I hate Starbucks...

My hatred for Starbucks has nothing to do with being a corporation. I love corporations. They have worked hard before they were corporations to get where they were. Some hippies will get all up in your face and say that Starbucks is bad for the "mom and pop" coffee shops. That's a silly socialist argument because Starbucks at one point was one of those coffee shops that just happen to find success. Quit trying to punish success.

Ok, but here's why I do hate Starbucks...

Starbucks employees have the nerve to stick a tip jar on the counter, and even at the drive thru. Your one job is to mix stuff in coffee and give it to me, and then of course maintain a store. Millions of people work in mundane jobs like this everyday and Starbucks' employees for some reason complain about it more than I've ever seen. I'm convinced that Wendy's employees work harder. I read a blog from a Starbucks employee who says that we should tip him because, check this out...
we also do customers favors quite often (not charging for refills, not kicking you out when we are supposed to, letting people bring their pets in, etc).

Tipping makes us love you, and when we love you we make better drinks for you, give them to you faster, etc.
Can you believe that? We tip you so that you'll make better drinks for us? No, I don't think so. Starbucks charges us 4 bucks for a cup of coffee, and then they take their revenues and use that to pay employees who then get the product in my hands. As long as employees are making at least minimum wage then I feel no obligation to give you a penny. If it's too hard making coffee then maybe you should find new employment. You aren't exactly performing brain surgery.

I am a church janitor. It's a pretty thankless job. I perform a service for a church that not a lot of people would find very pleasant. I am under no dillusions about what I do, it's mundane work that pretty much anyone can perform with very little skill, but someone has to do it. Can you imagine if I mopped a bathroom and then walked around with a jar asking for tips? What if I carried some boxes out to an elderly lady's car for her...Would I then stick my hand out for an tip because "I did her a favor"? No I get paid to do a job. If I go above the call of duty, I do it because it's a nice thing to do. My reward is seeing people happy, and maybe even showing my employer that I can go further than what he asks.

That's the main reason I can't stand the place. I'd have to say I don't absolutely hate Starbucks. I know that maybe not all the employees are keen on the tip jar, so It'd be wrong for me to hate the employees..So instead I'll just dis the whole company for allowing the tip jars in the first place.

There are two other reasons I can't stand Starbucks...

* Their cup size system is obnoxious and annoying. I refuse to call a large a "venti" just because Starbucks puts that on their menu..It's silly and it adds to the elitist attitude that is floating around every Starbucks I've ever been in.

* The place is filled with hippies, metrosexuals, and, twixters. It's an environment that I neither understand or feel comfortable in.

But those two reasons are another post for another day.

And that's my anti-Starbucks post. Pick it apart