For those moments when we are offline…

…but feel compelled to compile words into something comprehensible, an offline writer. In this case, Windows Live Writer. I’ve been on the iMac for the most part the last few months, and liking it, but for those mobile times there is the Windoze contraption.

No need, really, to reply. Unless, of course, there is a compulsive need to do so, and we know some are wont to do. We know who you are. Oh yes.

There’s an offline writer being installed on the iMac, so there’ll be another one of these inanities thrown your way, humble reader (victim) of these scribblings.

Okay, I’ll shut up now. Offline test over.

Mongo sends.

Live Writer wants to insert something, so we shall. A sample, as it were, of someplace. Not this place, but some place.



A Date Which Will Live in Infamy

A Date Which Will Live in Infamy.

Let those of us who remember honor the devotion and sacrifice of that generation.

Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. – John 15:13

Never mind that DOMA is federal law, nor that West Point is federal property, same-sex marriage is all about New York…

…which, frankly, doesn’t surprise me all that much. Still, since when does the United States Military Academy condone blatant violation of federal law?

First same-sex marriage being celebrated Saturday at West Point’s Cadet Chapel

The 20-year-old Defense of Marriage Act still prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages. New York approved gay marriage in June 2011.

Alrighty then. Federal law prohibits gay marriage. New York says “screw the roolz”. New York wins. Right? Well, not quite. Seems the Defense Department had some bearing on the matter.

Obama in September 2011 ended the U.S. military’s so-called “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy that banned gays from serving openly. And the Pentagon issued a statement at about the same time allowing same-sex marriages at U.S. military facilities.

Hmm. So now the demise of “Don’t Ask, don’t tell” trumps federal law?

But wait! There’s more!

However, the Defense Department has made clear the policy change does not constitute its endorsement of gay marriage.

Huh? The old saying “talking out of both sides of your mouth” comes to mind. So does the old idea about trying to walk with your feet on both sides of the ditch. At some point you’re going to fall in.

Here’s the deal. I get it that Gays want to openly serve in the military. I get their wanting to get married and enjoy the same civil benefits (if that’s the correct way of expressing it). What I don’t get is how what they want can take place in open defiance of federal law. Same-sex marriage, whether any State condones it, IS a violation of federal law, and, given the existence of a federal law, no state may now contravene that law with their own allowing same-sex marriage. At least, that’s my understanding of the Tenth Amendment. I don’t know. Maybe I’m just too old fashioned and need to come into the modern world where we do as we damn well please. There are too many examples to list of how that could apply in one’s daily life, like creating one’s own speed limits while driving. Wouldn’t that be fun, cutting down our drive time to the market and back? Imagine how much more one could get accomplished in a day!

Another point of contention is that of the Defense Department not openly endorsing gay marriage. Umm, but you did, Mr. Secretary, by establishing a policy of allowing gay marriage at U.S military facilities. No double speak there. Yah? Really, this boggles my mind. Using an abstract interpretation of this policy, Midshipmen at Canoe U may now get married, because, well, federal law is ignored concerning gay marriage and we’re all about not discriminating on the basis of anything. Right? Screw the roolz, cause you made it okay. Right, Mr. Secretary? Mr. President?

I don’t know. Maybe I should have had a cup of coffee…anything…before sitting down to write this.

I’m sick and damn tired, however, of the government violating laws it established for the good order and conduct of the citizenry, and all because a tiny percentage of the population decides it wants what it wants and screw the rest of us. Four percent, to put a number on it, are motivating federal and state governments to shape policy that affects the rest of us. So much for my vote, and likely yours too. I mean, I didn’t vote for Obama. But he’s still going to be inaugurated in January, and I have to live with it. We all do, like it or not. Why, then, must we make exception for Gays? Why must we set aside properly established law for four percent of the population? Will it contribute to the greater good of mankind? Or our society?

Government, at all levels throughout the country, has opened Pandora’s box with gay marriage, suborning disobedience of the law and creating an environment where minority special interest groups may sway public policy, not for the good of all, but simply for the good of themselves. To any gay folk who might happen upon this rant, imagine, if you will, where this will take society from here on out. Imagine, if you will, what might happen if a tiny percentage of non-Christians start to bitch about Christians putting Christmas creches on display in public places.

Oh. Wait. That’s already happening. Happened last week…again…in Santa Monica, CA. An Atheist has a problem with creches. Christmas creche display is gone. The rest of Santa Monica’s population be damned, because one guy has problem with their traditions.

Okay. Never mind. Bad example.

Oh! Here’s one! How about Muslim groups looking to institute Sharia law in their communities, where anyone passing through has to abide by their laws? Veils over faces, ladies? Yes, because you’re in their town now!

No. Can’t use that one either. Seems Muslims somewhere in Michigan are already on a rant about doing just that. Detroit, was it?

Shall I go on?

Sorry, but I need coffee.

What we all need is clearer thinking about the way forward in this nation, and whether pandering to special interest groups is in the best interests of the nation as a whole.

Somehow, I think not. But that’s just me.

Or is it?

Two Ships. Too Late. Once again, overtaken by events

Troubled by the events of the last several days, this was penned in response.
Now, to take care of that bit of travesty mentioned at the end.

Okay. Hiatus is over, but this is a helluva way to get back into the game. #russianterrortactics…again

These bastards just don’t learn. Do they? Or is it because they see the impotent, give-a-shit, limp dick presiding in the White House? As I think about it, I’m moved to believe the latter. Vladimir Putin doesn’t give a rat’s ass about Barry Soetoro (He who calls himself Barack Obama, these days), and has had his Foreign Minister deliver what appears to be the bottom line to our Foreign Minister (Secretary of State) Hillary

Russia on Saturday soundly rejected U.S. calls for increased pressure on Syrian President Bashar Assad to relinquish power. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton tried to prod Moscow into supporting U.N. action to end the crisis in Syria and she expressed hope that Congress would repeal Cold War-era trade restrictions on Russia.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, after meeting Clinton on the sidelines of a meeting of Pacific Rim leaders, told reporters that Moscow is opposed to U.S.-backed penalties against the Assad government, in addition to new ones against Iran over its nuclear program, because they harm Russian commercial interests.

“Our American partners have a prevailing tendency to threaten and increase pressure, adopt ever more sanctions against Syria and against Iran,” Lavrov said. “Russia is fundamentally against this, since for resolving problems you have to engage the countries you are having issues with and not isolate them.”

“Unilateral U.S. sanctions against Syria and Iran increasingly take on an extraterritorial character, directly affecting the interests of Russian business, in particular banks,” he said. “We clearly stated that this was unacceptable, and they listened to us. What the result will be, I don’t know.”

Okay, first things firstest. repeal Cold War-era trade restrictions on Russia. Umm, how shall I respond to that? The Scorpion, upon asking the Eagle for a ride across the river, replied “Oh, I promise not to sting you!” We all know how that story ended…and why… To ask the scorpion not to be who it is and to not do what it does is counter-intuitive and foolish. Our guy, Ronnie, may have gotten Micha to allow for the tearing down of The Wall, but that doesn’t change the nature of the scorpion.

Moscow is opposed to U.S.-backed penalties against the Assad government, in addition to new ones against Iran over its nuclear program, because they harm Russian commercial interests.

Sorry, bucko, but in the same way Bill Gates and company don’t give a damn about Corell and Novell, we’re (that would be the USA) are not the least bit inclined to give a damn about the once powerful bunch of bastards who either committed or suborned the slaughter of tens of millions of human lives around the planet. That’s right. I said planet, not neighborhood. Yer lad Vlad has too many years under his belt as a Colonel in the once fearsome KGB, to be considered anything less than a threat to peace loving nations anywhere. In other words, dear reader, I consider Vladimir Putin to be the Scorpion King. He who is one dangerous Muther Hubbard.

Our American partners have a prevailing tendency to threaten and increase pressure, adopt ever more sanctions against Syria and against Iran,” Lavrov said. “Russia is fundamentally against this, since for resolving problems you have to engage the countries you are having issues with and not isolate them.

Yeah, well, our playground…our rules. As for engaging other nations, we’ve found that at gun point is usually best. To the contrary, the belligerent ones don’t usually take us seriously. Were it not for the Linebacker II operation in Vietnam, how many more years would we have toiled fruitlessly toward “peace with honor”? Kick someone’s ass up around their ears, and they’re generally more inclined to pay attention to what you’re saying.

There’s more, but you can read it for yourself. Palaver welcome.

On hiatus. Be back soon.

In case you’re wunnerin.

I knew there was a reason I liked this guy

A one term President who should have run for a second, but thought it best to live according to his beliefs.

President Calvin Coolidge

The point President Coolidge makes about “stand for a good deal more of its application”, has to do with our insisting on government letting us live and control our own lives. Some days we talk about a new Reagan showing up, but some days I think we need a new Coolidge.