The lovely and intelligent Michelle Malkin put out a call for Photoshop parodists! And I answered the call, though Photoshop is not my usual medium.
Here’s the contest:
With the approval of First Nutritionist Michelle Obama, McDonald’s is getting rid of caramel apple dip, reducing the French fries portion, and adding more apples to its Happy Meals offerings.
Okay, all my wonderful Photoshop friends and readers. I know you can come up with better designs than mine. Send me your best Unhappy Meal makeover images and I’ll post the best! Winner of the contest gets a Sonic gift card.
1. First, before we say anything else, absolutely the first response of every Christian without exception must be unqualified condemnation of the horrific, disturbing, and profoundly sinful actions Breivik took last Friday. As I’ve written before, on occasion I’ve been frustrated when moderate Muslims fail to condemn acts of terrorism as loudly and unequivocally as possible; yet I understand how Muslims resent that the American public associates them with terrorism and looks to them for a response. The implication is that the moderates are somehow accountable for the actions of the fringe, and it’s incumbent upon them to distance themselves from the madmen who detonate school buses and attack summer camps.
I’ve been surprised by how many virulent athiests/agnostics on the internet have made the empty claim that no Christian has condemned the actions of this monster. I can’t think of anyone who hasn’t! Still, this accusation will remain because the accusers want to believe it. Continue reading →
Let’s have a party!!! Use this card to drink your way to agreement with Obama’s debt ceiling arm-twisting!! Don’t worry if it doesn’t make perfect sense…
It was put together a bit hastily, almost as if we were driving our country over the cliff or something?! Perhaps we should have invested more thought and planning into it, but hey, we’re turning it over to the Twitter community to supervise and carry to fruition.
Take a drink for every phrase Obama uses in his speech. If you get a whole row, either down, across or diagonally,chug-a-lug!
Just what is Anders Behring Breivik? The news media is now labeling him a conservative Christian right-wing extremist, and the leftist blogophere is savoring every moment.
But labels often hide lazy generalizations.
With this monster, he left us a generous manifesto to let us peer into his motives for his evil deeds. What do they tell us about Anders?
In the Oslo terrorist’s Manifesto, Rupert Murdoch’s media empire is identified as one of the problems with Europe:
The situation is similar in Western Europe. In the UK, News International (a companymostly owned by Rupert Murdoch) owns several newspapers (including The Times and The Sun), Sky Television (a major European satellite operator), Star Television (covering Asia) and publishers like Harper Collins.
In 1998, Rupert Murdoch owned 34% of the daily newspapers and 37% of the Sunday newspapers in the UK. Successive UK governments have allowed his empire to grow in return for his media’s support. (pg. 381)
So is it the right-wing who hates Rupert Murdoch? The American Left is already trying to pin the awful events in Oslo on the Right, including ridiculous assertions that Sarah Palin was admired by the murderer.
Why not pin the blame on those who spout hate rhetoric against Rupert Murdoch? Al Gore’s cable channel set their semi-rational attack poodle Keith Olbermann on Rupert Murdoch’s testimony before the British inquiry into the News of the World scandal. Maybe his hate rhetoric inspired Breivik?
Anders Behring Breivik, the Olso Terrorist monster, propagated a Manifesto with the following passage:
Getting around is necessary, oil is not. Considerable efforts should be made to further develop high-power Lithium-Ion batteries. The goal should be to aim for oil independence. This will not only save the environment; it will completely devastate many Muslim countries economically which will weaken the ongoing Islamic imperialism. (pg. 1199)
So should we drag out the pitchforks and light the torches and go after Al Gore for his crazed environmental rhetoric that obviously inspired this monster?
What we should do is recognize that anyone who slaughters children mercilessly the way Anders did is a psychotic madman.
Also a video showing not the explosion, but a minute of Oslo right before, and about 9 mins afterward.
In his ‘Knights Templar’ log, he writes the following among his last post:
I’ve also scheduled to meet my stepmom, Tove Øvermo, in March. She used to work as a director in Norwegian UDI (the foremost government organization tasked with approving applications and granting foreigners (mostly Muslims) legal permits). Ironically, UDI is a highly valued target for Knights Templar in Norway as it is an essential tool and facilitator for the Norwegian multiculturalist regime. However, I think she’s retired now, so she is currently not in danger of any KT attacks. Although I care for her a great deal, I wouldn’t hold it against the KT if she was executed during an attack against UDI, as she used to be a primary tool and category B traitor for the multiculturalist regime of Norway, high treason she should be familiar with. Tove, being very intelligent and committed in the advancement of her own career under the multiculturalist regime, is fully aware that she is a willing and participating subject/tool for the Multiculturalist Alliance in the indirect genocide of Norwegians through the continued Islamisation of Norway. Continue reading →
According to this Rational Skeptic post, Anders Behring Breivik, the terrorist Oslo murderer, sent his manifesto to like-minded associates prior to his massacre. The forward to his manifesto is after the video, which he was propagating to further his political goals.
I suggest watching it in full screen mode, as there are a lot of powerpoint-type slides that are supposed to be read.
After years of work the first edition of the compendium “2083 – A European Declaration of Independence” is completed. If you have received this book, you are either one of my former 7000 patriotic Facebook friends or you are the friend of one of my FB friends. If you are concerned about the future of Western Europe you will definitely find the information both interesting and highly relevant.
I have spent several years writing, researching and compiling the information and I have spent most of my hard earned funds in this process (in excess of 300 000 Euros). I do not want any compensation for it as it is a gift to you, as a fellow patriot.
Much of the information presented in this compendium (3 books) has been deliberately kept away from the European peoples by our governments and the politically correct mainstream media (MSM). More than 90% of the EU and national parliamentarians and more than 95% of journalists are supporters of European multiculturalism and therefore supporters of the ongoing Islamic colonisation of Europe; yet, they DO NOT have the permission of the European peoples to implement these doctrines.
The compendium, – “2083 – A European Declaration of Independence” – documents through more than 1000 pages that the fear of Islamisation is all but irrational. Continue reading →
The news outlets so far are very careful not to even mention motivation. Is it too early or to suspect Islamic radicals?
Is Islam a problem in Norway?
Head of the Progress Party (Frp) Siv Jensen thinks that the fight against radical Islam is just as important as the fight against Nazism.
“Throughout history we managed to fight totalitarian ideas like Nazism and later Communism. As a liberal I will always fight against such ideas and movements. Radical Islam is a dark and scary ideology and fighting it is our era’s most important struggle.”
This was inspired by the last Ricochet podcast, which I greatly encourage anyone to listen to – it’s funny and informative, with honest debates about current issues. I listen to each at least twice. Find the last podcast here.
Jonah Goldberg made the very provocative point that if we were really serious about taking out Obama in 2012, the McConnell plan is the best way to go about it. Of course, this will infuriate any puristcons who never ever ever want the GOP to waver EVER!! But, this would give whomever our nominee is the opportunity to run against Obama and the congressional Democrats AND Republicans, against ALL these compromises and dirty backroom deals.
That’s actually a really good point.
In any case, it struck me that what McConnell understands and what he’s trying to sidestep is any sort of “buy-in” from the Republicans. That is – ANY deal we make at this point means that if the economy continues to do poorly (and it most certainly will), we will be giving Obama the opportunity to drag us in at best, and blame us for all of it at worst.
SO, basically, “it’s a trap!!”
(if you don't get the reference, don't look it up. you'll never really get it)
The debt debate continues, with many twists and turns and just as many machinations. Here are some great sources to understand the issue, and provide a conservative response to liberal critics:
Michael Medved addresses the McConnell plan and why ol’ Mitch thought it was a good idea.
McConnell’s proposal seems to place showmanship over substance, politics over policy. If Republicans voted for it, they would seem to announce: “We’ll give Obama the debt increases he wants, and we don’t care how it busts the budget; our main concern is that we’re able to pin the blame squarely on the president and go on record as voting against it.”
Medved’s alternative answer is a sound one:
To avoid this outcome, the House of Representatives must act within a few days to pass its own version of a debt-ceiling increase—featuring major and immediate budget cuts, no tax hikes, and some form of spending caps or balanced-budget amendment. Send meaningful legislation to the Senate, which can pass its own version of more borrowing authorization, and then let the two houses negotiate with each other to put something on the president’s desk before Aug. 2. If Obama follows through on his veto threats, it will be harder for him to blame anyone else for catastrophic consequences.
One complaint from Obama that is repeated often and augmented in his captive media is that the Republicans have no plan. This is patently false, as they’ve already passed a budget in the house that was defeated in the Senate. Further, the reason that Boehner and Cantor demand actual detailed cuts instead of vague promises from the President is provided by a recent look into budget history:
In 1982, President Reagan negotiated a deficit reduction plan with tax increases that initially appeared to be $1 of taxes for every $3 of spending cuts. Guess what? The reverse was enacted into law, with $3 of tax increases for $1 of spending cuts. In 1990, President “No New Taxes” H.W. Bush negotiated a similar deal, with similar results. Democrats back-load spending cuts in the far out years, for tax increases today. Let’s look at today’s news. I guarantee that in Obama’s $4 trillion of deficit reduction, 90% of spending cuts occur ten years from now. Boehner and Cantor have learned an important lesson from history.
The best critique (as is often the case) comes our good friend, Charles “the KROWT!” Krauthammer:
All of a sudden he’s a born-again budget balancer prepared to bravely take on his own party by making deep cuts in entitlements. Really? Name one. He’s been saying forever that he’s prepared to discuss, engage, converse about entitlement cuts. But never once has he publicly proposed a single structural change to any entitlement.
He then provides his own answer, similar to Medved’s:
A long-term deal or nothing? The Republican House should immediately pass a short-term debt-ceiling hike of $500 billion containing $500 billion in budget cuts. That would give us about five months to work on something larger.
The president says he wants tax reform, doesn’t he? Well, Mr. President, here are five months to do so.
Will the Democratic Senate or the Democratic president refuse this offer and allow the country to default — with all the cataclysmic consequences that the Democrats have been warning about for months — because Obama insists on a deal that is 10 months and seven days longer?
That’s indefensible and transparently self-serving. Dare the president to make that case. Dare him to veto — or the Democratic Senate to block — a short-term debt-limit increase.
Jonah Goldberg shows how Obama is the real ideologue, all the while blaming the Republicans for being so.
Obama says that Republicans are rigid ideologues because they won’t put “everything on the table.” Specifically, they won’t consider tax hikes, even though polls suggest Americans wouldn’t mind soaking “the rich,” “big oil” and “corporate jet owners.”
But Obama hasn’t put everything on the table either. He’s walled off “ObamaCare” and the rest of his “winning the future” agenda.
The wretched part of it is that his narcissistic solipsistic rhetoric is working simply because the GOP is so bad at messaging, and the media is in Obama’s pocket. He says such idiotic things despite his being the worst transgressor of the invective he hurls at the GOP because no one questions him on it, and the GOP is terrible at arguing back.
I think we should get ready for the GOP to cave. If they perceive that the public is against them because they are bamboozled by Obama’s constant demagoguery and the media’s encouragement, there’s little reason for them to stick to principles that will get them tossed out of office.
I understand the whole liberal artsy mythos behind the idea of Lucifer, and how liberal intellectual elites see it as more of a personification of subconscious undercurrents of human tendencies to rebel against authority, than.. y’know, the guy with horns and a tail who hates God and plans for the destruction and damnation of humanity.
And who did Saul Alinsky dedicate this book to? The guy in the horns! No really!
“Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins — or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom — Lucifer.”
It reminds me of Aristophanes’ play, “The Clouds,” which ridicules Socrates and his school of philosophy. A son of the main character becomes a follower of Socrates and displays his erudite opinions to his shocked father (who paid for this training). The father goes along with all the zany ideas his son has swallowed until he gets to the proclamation that he can even hit his mother. At this, the father beats his son for his foolishness and incites a old school pitchfork and torch mob against the school of Socrates.
Sure, we can intellectualize our legends and common traditions, but at a certain point, shouldn’t some very elementary flags go up to warn us that we’re blithely rushing in where angels fear to tread? I should think taking on as an intellectual mentor someone who dedicates a work to Lucifer should be in that vein.
Maybe it’s just me.
I cling to my Platonic dialogues, but I cling to my Bible tighter.
Many people have noted the arrogance and condescension with which Obama addressed his peons today while trying to pressure Speaker Boehner and the Republicans into his skewed deal. To wit, I offer my interpretation of what he really means by saying we need to eat our peas.