August 20, 2010
— Geoff The AoSHQ team, and Ace in particular, have been hitting on all cylinders lately. But a few posts among the Morono-neighbors
Car-in finds fault in the rationale for those outrageously expensive and annoying ARRA signs. Why so racist, Car-in?
Eddiebear only knows one curse word, but he knows it really, really well. And when he's worried about his daughter's future in a land despoiled by failed liberal policies, he gets quite expressive. (Not particularly SFW.)
NiceDeb is one of the blogs supporting the "10-Buck Friday" fund-raising campaign again, where every week reader are encouraged to donate $10 to a conservative candidate. This week it's Delia Lopez (OR-3).
And of course it's BBF at The Hostages (where the first "B" = "Big" and the "F" = "Friday." [For those with other interests: they also host Humpy Hunk Day or Hunky Hump Day or some such thing on Wednesdays.]
Posted by: Geoff at
10:26 AM
| Comments (33)
Post contains 149 words, total size 1 kb.
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/26762
The show runs from 6 - 9 PM. A full report will be published at 6PM tonight concurrent with the Northeast Intelligence Network broadcast and will consist of detailed info that has not been discussed previously elsewhere.
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at August 20, 2010 10:30 AM (mHQ7T)
Posted by: I'm Video Professor, try my CDs at August 20, 2010 10:30 AM (uFokq)
Posted by: I'm Video Professor, try my CDs at August 20, 2010 10:32 AM (uFokq)
Posted by: I'm Video Professor, try my CDs at August 20, 2010 10:36 AM (uFokq)
The AoSHQ team, and Ace in particular, have been hitting on all cylinders lately.
Yes. they sure have. Most gratifying.
Alternately: Fukkin'-A
Posted by: maddogg at August 20, 2010 10:36 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: alexthechick at August 20, 2010 02:29 PM (eRjGt)
Why? There is no substitute for the real thing, no matter how many coats of paint you spray on.
Posted by: maddogg at August 20, 2010 10:37 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: I'm Video Professor, try my CDs at August 20, 2010 10:37 AM (uFokq)
Posted by: I'm Video Professor, try my CDs at August 20, 2010 10:38 AM (uFokq)
(hint, hint)
Posted by: AmishDude at August 20, 2010 10:38 AM (T0NGe)
Hey now, no pointing out reality in opposition to my insanity. That's just mean.
Posted by: alexthechick at August 20, 2010 10:40 AM (eRjGt)
Dammit, don't tell me that! I already have enough problems.
Posted by: Chevy Volt at August 20, 2010 10:41 AM (T0NGe)
Why yes, Ace and the cob loggers have been firing on all cylinders lately. My favorite was last evening's epic thread about how best to decimate the dhim party for generations. One of these rah, rah, positive threads a couple times a week until the mid-terms would be wunderbar and no doubt get Ace scads (technical term) of new readers. It's the same reason Rush is successful, he's a happy warrior with a funneh streak, and that's what that thread was. Who doesn't like positive AND witteh?
I was depressed as hell over everything last night until I saw that thread. Positivity. Positivity. Positivity. Keep poundin' 'em, Ace.
Posted by: RushBabe at August 20, 2010 10:45 AM (a3Z62)
Posted by: carin at August 20, 2010 10:52 AM (H37Gq)
I like the idea of the "10-Buck Friday" fund-raising campaign. Only problem is all the e-mail, junk mail, and PAC solicitations you get afterwards, its tiresome and often gives me pause before hitting the tip jaw.
Posted by: dananjcon at August 20, 2010 10:53 AM (pr+up)
Posted by: joncelli at August 20, 2010 10:56 AM (RD7QR)
So since there is a lotta loose shit going on in this thread...what happened to kemp. Someone put me some knowledge. Bannings are like car wrecks, you REALLY wanna know how it happened.
Posted by: dananjcon at August 20, 2010 10:57 AM (pr+up)
Posted by: CUS at August 20, 2010 11:00 AM (wOGfT)
20 I'm wondering if the use of cob loggers is deliberate up there at August 20, 2010 02:45 PM
Probably. Who started that a few months ago, anyway?
Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at August 20, 2010 11:12 AM (Yq+qN)
That's as old as about 5 minutes after the first time the word coblogger was first used.
Thanks for the BBF link, Geoff. And for any of you Twitter users, in addition to religiously following every tweet from Ace and the crew, you can follow The Hostages @TheH2.
Posted by: Andy at August 20, 2010 11:18 AM (5Rurq)
Posted by: alexthechick at August 20, 2010 02:29 PM
Naaah. As long as your plumbing is indoor and not outdoor, you got it goin' on, alexthechick.
Besides, experience tells me that women who say anyone is "prettier than I could ever hope to be" are usually Teh Hawt.
Posted by: MrScribbler at August 20, 2010 12:24 PM (Ulu3i)
Posted by: alexthechick
Agreed and when they wear womens clothing they look so much better because they don't have hips.
Unless they are into the whole teddy bear thing.
Posted by: mpfs at August 20, 2010 12:25 PM (iYbLN)
That's simply wrong as a matter of fact--as well as of policy. The law can and should prohibit many kinds of sexual activity. The last time I checked, adultery, for example, was still a crime in Maryland, Virginia, and D.C.
Incest, bestiality, rape, and other forms of sexual abuse are all still illegal (at least this week).
Here's the problem with our contemporary approach to homosexuality: our culture cannot support a policy of toleration--toleration meaning leaving alone what we strongly disagree with. In our culture, it seems, it's either complete prohibition or total acceptance. (It reminds me a bit of R.J. Neuhaus's dictum: where orthodoxy is made optional, it will eventually be proscribed.)
This is how we go, in a matter of a few years, from a situation where half the states outlaw sodomy to a federal judge saying the Constitution not only permits but actually requires SSM.
Here are the reasons I oppose any public recognition of homosexuality:
(1) It's unhealthy. This has been documented a thousand times over. The AIDS crisis was driven by an ocean of unsafe homosexual practices. But instead of AIDS ushering in a new Victorian era, as a sensible society would have had it, instead we've had a further weakening of sexual morality.
(2) Homosexuality is not a purely biological or genetic phenomenon. Twin studies have proven that (if it were purely genetic, then all identical twins would share the same sexuality--but they don't). That means that there is a huge cultural component to it. If the culture supports it, then there will be more of it. Young people who are in an unsteady state with regard to their sexuality can very easily be tipped on to the wrong side.
(3) Homosexuality as a political movement has in the last few years made it its goals to attack the bedrock institutions of society: marriage and the military, the very institutions that protect women and children on the one hand and the nation on the other. Excuse me if I oppose those who threaten me and mine.
(4) Public acceptance of homosexuality and SSM permanently alters the understanding of marriage as the primary means of reconciling the sexes and of providing for the orderly procreation of children. I don't say that homosexuals led on this front: the acceptance of contraception, abortion, and divorce led the way, but SSM seals the deal. There's no going back from that change--short of apocalypse now.
(5) Lastly, there is a theological point: Acceptance of open homosexuality and SSM is basically a proclamation of atheism. It is a repudiation of all traditional religious belief about the distinctive and complementary nature of the sexes and about the universal moral law--the law of nature and of nature's God. It is the establishment of unbelief and the disenfranchisement of the majority of religious believers in this country. Won't I now be a thought criminal when I teach my children that homosexuality is wrong and SSM is a tragedy and a fiction?
Posted by: Leo Ladenson at August 20, 2010 12:32 PM (mAm+G)
Posted by: CoolCzech at August 20, 2010 12:50 PM (tJjm/)
Posted by: CoolCzech at August 20, 2010 12:58 PM (tJjm/)
Well, fine then. Let the culture work it out. Keep it the hell away from government. Let culture dictate to government, not vice versa.
Posted by: DarkLordOfTheIntarWebs at August 20, 2010 01:25 PM (IkEhE)
Posted by: sauropod at August 20, 2010 01:37 PM (GPm6P)
Because that worked so well in the 60s. Abolish Jim Crow? "Property rights!"
Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at August 20, 2010 04:03 PM (mHQ7T)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.1835 seconds, 161 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: alexthechick at August 20, 2010 10:29 AM (eRjGt)