Only the Losers

Erdogan bombs Kurds in Turkey

Another twist in our war against Islamic State. The government of Turkey bombed the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK) in southern Turkey on Sunday in retaliation for attacks on Turkish forces. It’s the first time in two years Ankara has bombed the Kurds.


There was no immediate comment from the military on the report that it bombed Kurdish positions, once a regular occurrence in southeast Turkey but something that had not taken place for two years.

Hurriyet said the air strikes on Sunday caused “major damage” to the PKK. They were launched after three days of PKK attacks on a military outpost in Hakkari province near the Iraqi border, it added.

“F-16 and F-4 warplanes which took off from (bases in the southeastern provinces of) Diyarbakir and Malatya rained down bombs on PKK targets after they attacked a military outpost in the Daglica region,” Hurriyet said.

It said the PKK had attacked the outpost for three days with heavy machine guns and rocket launchers. The general staff said in a statement it had “opened fired immediately in retaliation in the strongest terms” after PKK attacks in the area, but did not mention air strikes.

Another event, Susan Rice, our National Security Adviser announced Sunday that Turkey was allowing the US to use some of their airbases to fight ISIS.  Turkey promptly reputed that statement. 
Who would fight a war where every ally is bound to resent and hate you no matter what you do?


  1. Putting on my spelling bee cap…..

    As I help people LOSE weight, I am sensitive to the oft misspelled LOOSE.

  2. Have no idea why you are concerned with ISIS. CDC Director is on right now with another press conference with yet different talking points from yesterday, which were different from the day before that.

    None of this matters. Greatest national security threat =

    • Our greatest National Security threat is the Federal Government 🙄

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Climate Change is going to kill me at this rate.

      The balmy fall weather has eliminated my excuse to finish my egress window retrofit until some other day.

      In short, I am busting my hump shoveling dirt and starting to lay retaining wall blocks tomorrow. Along with massive weeding, raking, fixing, etc from 7 years of neglect.

      It is also causing me massive mental stress as I feel I should be standing on the river someplace with fly rod in hand.

      Damn Global Warming.

      Almanac is calling for SEVERE WINTER. In these parts it might not start until Christmas but could still be a doozy. Lil JAC was born during the first serious snow of the year, just before Christmas. Four, count em…..4, FEET of snow that night. ONE NIGHT.

      Place is coming along so Anita, Kathy, V.H. I will have room if you want to take a road trip next summer. Then again, I am looking forward to that chair on the porch at Anita’s cabin.

  3. Just A Citizen says:

    BF talks about Govt losing legitimacy.

    When this type of headline becomes common and regular on the primary networks we will be close to the tipping point.

    Meanwhile, look for the MSNBC’s of the world to cover her backside, just as the Fox’s of the world cover their “player’s” backside.

  4. Just A Citizen says:

    Black Flag

    from your discussion with David:

    “….and so on. In history, there hasn’t been an example where an established government measured in decades of minor imposition grew until it became murderously oppressive. The people after such a time, would never stand for such.”

    Sir, you have some “splainin” to do with that one. I guess the USA has not reached the threshold of “murderously oppressive” yet!

    • David Skekabim says:

      Consider the difference between all the violent revolutions and nonviolent revolutions throughout history.

      All of them are examples of ruling authority losing legitimacy.

      The violent revolutions were a result of ruling authority clinging to power through force, whereas with the nonviolent revolutions, authority ultimately accepted the will of the people.

      Without an effective means of peaceful discourse and reformation, violent revolution is inevitable.

    • I would say so far the US government is selectively oppressive, not murderously. It’s pretty rare the IRS kills someone for not paying taxes. BLM came very close with Bundy, so it’s moving closer & closer….

  5. You should read the NY Times piece too-I’m with the author, you really can’t have it both ways-there were no WMD’s-they had all been destroyed and were of no significance to oh by the way-all the WMD’s in Iraq are dangerous and we are now concerned that the terrorist groups will get them and hurt people.

    October 15, 2014
    Despite What You May Have Read In The Papers, The Iraq War Was Not About An Active Weapons Program
    —Gabriel Malor

    The NYTimes has published a particularly despicable piece on the Iraq War. Here’s the link, if you must. Now, let me start by saying there are parts of this piece that are noteworthy, and those parts recount acts of valor and duty by U.S. service members. That’s not the despicable part. The despicable part is how the NYTimes writers have twisted what happened to these service members to their own end of rewriting the Iraq War.

    According to the NYTimes, chemical weapons of mass destruction were indeed found in Iraq during the war as has been a simmering, off-again-on-again open secret. But the NYTimes says these were not the chemical WMD that President Bush said would be found:

    The United States had gone to war declaring it must destroy an active weapons of mass destruction program. Instead, American troops gradually found and ultimately suffered from the remnants of long-abandoned programs, built in close collaboration with the West.

    The New York Times found 17 American service members and seven Iraqi police officers who were exposed to nerve or mustard agents after 2003. American officials said that the actual tally of exposed troops was slightly higher, but that the government’s official count was classified.

    The secrecy fit a pattern. Since the outset of the war, the scale of the United States’ encounters with chemical weapons in Iraq was neither publicly shared nor widely circulated within the military. These encounters carry worrisome implications now that the Islamic State, a Qaeda splinter group, controls much of the territory where the weapons were found.

    The first sentence is an absolute lie, uttered at Bush 43’s expense, and made to justify the terrifying conclusion, laid at Obama’s feet, in the last sentence.

    This NYTimes piece has an overarching political goal: to cement forever the lie that the Iraq War was directed solely at stopping an active weapons of mass destruction program in Iraq. As we know, the military never found an active weapons program, which makes this a particularly compelling slander.

    Well, okay. Let us say that it is compelling for anyone stupid enough to believe it, which, shockingly, includes far too many people who actually lived through the event and have conveniently forgotten now. I am flabbergasted at the number of people who immediately repeated this lie on Twitter who I know were alive and well and watching the run-up to the Iraq War, just like me.

    So let me remind you about the actual casus belli for the Iraq War.

    In 2002, when Saddam Hussein was doing everything he could to foil the UN weapons inspections teams about his existing weapons caches (the ones the NYTimes just “found” in its hit piece). You might recall, the U.S. was enforcing no-fly zones over Iraq at the time and attempting to ensure that Hussein remained disarmed. Hussein, for his part, was attempting to obscure both what he was capable of doing and what WMD, particularly biological and nuclear, remained to him. He was well-known, of course, for using chemical weapons against his own people and against the Iranians. Of particular concern going forward were his nuclear plans and the possibility that he would sell or give weapons to terrorists with Western ambitions.

    On September 12, 2002, Bush went to the UN to plead with the useless world body to actually enforce sanctions and impose thorough weapons inspections. Nowhere in his speech will you find a claim that Hussein had an “active weapons program,” as the NYTimes writers would now have you believe. Rather Bush talked about finding Hussein’s old weapons and deterring his hope to once again restart his weapons programs:

    United Nations inspections also reveal that Iraq likely maintains stockpiles of VX, mustard, and other chemical agents, and that the regime is rebuilding and expanding facilities capable of producing chemical weapons.

    And in 1995 — after four years of deception — Iraq finally admitted it had a crash nuclear weapons program prior to the Gulf War. We know now, were it not for that war, the regime in Iraq would likely have possessed a nuclear weapon no later than 1993.

    Today, Iraq continues to withhold important information about its unclear program — weapons design, procurement logs, experiment data, an accounting of nuclear materials, and documentation of foreign assistance. Iraq employs capable nuclear scientists and technicians. It retains physical infrastructure needed to build a nuclear weapon. Iraq has made several attempts to buy high-strength aluminum tubes used to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon. Should Iraq acquire fissile material, it would be able to build a nuclear weapon within a year. And Iraq’s state-controlled media has reported numerous meetings between Saddam Hussein and his nuclear scientists, leaving little doubt about his continued appetite for these weapons.

    Later, Bush gave one of the speeches he will no doubt be long remembered for, the “Axis of Evil” State of the Union speech, in which he again noted Iraq’s old weapons. Note well: He didn’t accuse Iraq of having an active weapons program.

    Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror. The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax, and nerve gas, and nuclear weapons for over a decade. This is a regime that has already used poison gas to murder thousands of its own citizens — leaving the bodies of mothers huddled over their dead children. This is a regime that agreed to international inspections — then kicked out the inspectors. This is a regime that has something to hide from the civilized world.

    States like [Iran, Iraq, and North Korea], and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. They could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred. They could attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic.

    So we see that by 2002, Bush is raising over and again the same concern about Hussein’s Iraq: that it had weapons of mass destruction and it had the ambition to use them and it had a desire to foil attempts to destroy them and it had terrorist allies willing to use them.

    Let me emphasize what is not present, if that’s possible, in either of these speeches: the claim that Hussein had an active weapons of mass destruction program. That is not in there and, please, click through and check my math. It simply wasn’t the basis of the case for war that Bush made to the American public.

    The next major speech in Bush 43’s run-up to war would be his ultimatum speech on March 17, 2003. This was Hussein’s last chance to alter course. Bush 43 put Hussein, our coalition partners, and the American public on notice that enough was enough.

    But, and this is important, an active weapons program made up no part of Bush 43’s ultimatum. It wasn’t active development of WMD that drove the U.S. to war. Rather, it was the same problems Bush 43 had identified the previous year: old weapons, the demonstrated ambition to develop new ones as soon as our backs were turned, and the possibility that Hussein could pass them to terrorists with Western aims:

    Over the years, U.N. weapon inspectors have been threatened by Iraqi officials, electronically bugged, and systematically deceived. Peaceful efforts to disarm the Iraqi regime have failed again and again — because we are not dealing with peaceful men.

    Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised. This regime has already used weapons of mass destruction against Iraq’s neighbors and against Iraq’s people.

    The regime has a history of reckless aggression in the Middle East. It has a deep hatred of America and our friends. And it has aided, trained and harbored terrorists, including operatives of al Qaeda.

    The danger is clear: using chemical, biological or, one day, nuclear weapons, obtained with the help of Iraq, the terrorists could fulfill their stated ambitions and kill thousands or hundreds of thousands of innocent people in our country, or any other.

    So you find again—and I’m sorry for repeating this so many times, but it seems that it has been forgotten—the three themes of Bush’s war plea: Iraqi resistance to disarmament, Iraqi ambition to arm once more, and terrorists. Those were the casus belli for the Iraq War. Not solely an active weapons program, as the NYTimes would have you believe.

    Progressives deeply invested in the lie during the Bush years that no WMD were found in Iraq. Bush gave many reasons for the war, but progressives seized on just the presence of WMD and then pretended it was the only reason for war. We’ve known they’ve been wrong about the lack of WMD for many years now. But, upon the chance that ISIL will find and use any remnants of WMD, however, progressives have had to modify their story even more.

    Now, progressives have finally admitted that Hussein’s stockpiled weapons were found during the Iraq War, but claim these were not the weapons Bush said would be found. This is just one more lie. And they’ve compounded it with another lie: that the sole reason for the Iraq War was an active weapons program.

    As I have demonstrated from Bush’s own contemporaneous words, an active weapons program was not the sole reason for war. In fact, an active weapons program was not even mentioned in the multiple speeches Bush delivered to the American public and to an international audience.

    Do not let the NYTimes get away with its false history of the Iraq War. The war was not made solely based on claims of an active Iraqi weapons program. It was made because, as President Bush explained repeatedly to the American public: Saddam Hussein possessed old weapons of mass destruction, desired to evade inspections so as to keep them, hoped to restart his weapons programs in the future, and could pass weapons to terrorist groups with ambitions to harm the West.

    • Don’t know but this is like how they want us to stay out of their bedrooms..until we do..then we’re bad for that. I don’t think they know what they want…except to find something to be victimized about. Hopefully the pastors won’t is Texas after all.

    • VH….first, you have to understand the mentality of Houston. That said….you now have an openly activist lesbian mayor who is going to attempt to suppress religious freedoms…

      Let her do it…..this is a progressive mantra that labels all progressives. Under the disguise of “progressive”, this movement is more restrictive than anything we have ever seen. It disrupts and takes away freedoms and limits rights in the name of equality, And the people buy it. Houston is trying to mimic New York and you have the same problem New York City now has…..the tax base is moving out…..not because of high taxes but because of its change and all that will be left in Houston will be the government freeloaders.

    • David Skekabim says:

      I am no legal expert, but it appears as if it is marginally legal. The only apparent legal argument that can I can see to be made, is that it interferes with a mode of worship and/or right of conscious as per Section 6 of the Texas State Constitution.

      Either way, I think the irony is a bit humorous. For a very long time, the religious folks have been controlling things to impose their will upon many others. Now they are getting a taste of their own medicine and do not like it one bit.

      Personally, I will argue that they’re free to believe as they choose and ‘fag-bash’ all they want, so long as they do not violate others.

    • Pastors will go Impromptu with no written sermon. That solves one issue. Deny any recording devices, it’s private property. Make church a private, members only type establishment. There are many ways to tell the govt to pound sand.

      • IF this stands, the same must apply to Mosques as well! Bet that will shut the Democrats down 😀

        • I’m just trying to figure out on what basis they ordered the supoenas-If I understand correctly someone sued the state because they threw out the petition-it wasn’t even the pastors who were suing-what does their sermons or communications have to do with whether or not throwing out the petition was legitimate or not?

  6. Heartwarming, Powerful, I’d pick sad, very, very sad and delusional-what is with all the next time we meet BS- This woman may well be able to decide she isn’t gonna have this child-but she really doesn’t have the option of having the SAME Child the next time around. Maybe someone who supported her decision should have told her that she was justifying her decision based on a lie.

    Media Enjoy ‘Heartwarming,’ ‘Powerful’ Letter from Mom to Baby She Will Abort
    By Katie Yoder | October 14, 2014 | 2:15 PM EDT
    Share it Tweet it More Sharing Services

    As if we needed more evidence that pro-choice means one choice.

    An anonymous Reddit user, scaredthrowingaway, posted to the online news platform a letter to her unborn baby whom she plans to abort. In the note entitled “I am getting an abortion next Friday. An open letter to the little life I won’t get to meet,” the young mom wrote, “I am sorry that this is goodbye. I’m sad that I’ll never get to meet you.” The media, in typical fashion, celebrated the letter as “heartwarming,” “powerful” and “brave.”

    The Reddit letter read:

    Little Thing:

    I can feel you in there. I’ve got twice the appetite and half the energy. It breaks my heart that I don’t feel the enchantment that I’m supposed to feel. I am both sorry and not sorry.

    I am sorry that this is goodbye. I’m sad that I’ll never get to meet you. You could have your father’s eyes and my nose and we could make our own traditions, be a family. But, Little Thing, we will meet again. I promise that the next time I see that little blue plus, the next time you are in the same reality as me, I will be ready for you.

    Little Thing, I want you to be happy. More than I want good things for myself, I want the best things for the future. That’s why I can’t be your mother right now. I am still growing myself. It wouldn’t be fair to bring a new life into a world where I am still haunted by ghosts of the life I’ve lived. I want you to have all the things I didn’t have when I was a child. I want you to be better than I ever was and more magnificent than I ever could be. I can’t do to you what was done to me: Plant a seed made of love and spontaneity into a garden, and hope that it will grow on only dreams. Love and spontaneity are beautiful, but they have little merit. And while I have plenty of dreams to go around, dreams are not an effective enough tool for you to build a better tomorrow. I can’t bring you here. Not like this.

    I love you, Little Thing, and I wish the circumstances were different. I promise I will see you again, and next time, you can call me Mom.


    In his response, Jezebel’s Mark Shrayber gushed over the “brave, honest letter.” He explained how, “Even when [abortion is] the right choice, there’s can be a lot of pain involved.”

    “Beautiful and heartbreaking,” he concluded.

    Similarly, The Huffington Post’s Nina Bahadur deemed the note a “powerful open letter.” And “this Reddit user,” she hyped, “is not alone in wanting to share her abortion story.”

    Cosmo’s Lane Moore highlighted the “heartwarming letter” as “an important reminder to people who are anti-abortion of the myriad thoughts and emotions many women experience when preparing for an abortion.”

    Pro-lifers, she said, “often accuse women who choose to have abortions of being emotionless robots who have not given any thought to the decision they are making (something anyone with half a brain knows that is untrue).”

    After reading the “incredibly brave post,” Blue Nation Review’s Sarah Burris went into attack mode. “The right loves to create a narrative of young girls who want to go to a rock concert on an evening and not give birth so instead they just have a late-term abortion,” she wrote.

    She continued, “They like to pretend it’s all selfish women who want to kill a fetus and if they only force women to listen to a heart beat or see a blurry photo of a speck that she’ll somehow be able to afford it, or have the capacity to protect the child from an abusive father.”

    But wait. Hasn’t the pro-abortion left just spent months telling us there’s nothing even “difficult” about the choice to abort? That the right to abort is “a deeply affirmative value?” That ending an innocent life makes a boffo plot line for a sitcom and the centerpiece for a date-night romantic comedy?


    Pro-lifers were a bit more consistent in their responses, including The Blaze’s Billy Hallowell and’s Steven Ertelt, who described the letter as “heartbreaking” and “heart-wrenching.”

    In response to the myriad shows of support on Reddit, the anonymous mom later posted:

    “Thank you, thank you, thank you. It is hard. I feel sick and awful for not wanting something that, at the same time, I want so badly. But I feel better knowing I’m not alone and now that I see it all written out, there’s less madness bumping around in my head, which is nice. Thank you, again.”

    But, dearest Reddit user, know that there is another choice you can choose – and that you will not be alone, should you choose it: life.
    – See more at:

  7. You have to admire the fuzzy math from the CDC….

    Dallas: Nothing to worry about, it is just an isolated case. No chance of it spreading.

    Dallas nurse now has it……CDC says it doesn’t count because SHE MUST HAVE not followed protocol.

    UH OH…..three more have tested positive and all of them followed CDC protocol.

    So, the new math is….1 + 0 = 3.

    Sort of like the voting issue….3 dead people equals 6 votes.

  8. Another interesting note……it seems that the WMD’s were in Iraq after all……they have been found, apparently….waiting to read the official report. Nothing nuclear….all chemical.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      And let’s not forget the Iraq official’s claim that some of the WMD’s were smuggled out to Syria on Russian planes, prior to the start of war.

      Then we see WMD’s used in Syria a decade later. Yet nobody has mentioned the possible connection.

  9. David Skekabim says:

    Florida Officials Cannot Ban Satanic Temple’s State Capitol Holiday Display, Says Americans United
    Policy Violates Free Speech And Church-State Separation, Watchdog Group Asserts

    Oct 15, 2014

    Officials in Florida may not ban the Satanic Temple’s holiday display at the State Capitol in Tallahassee simply because they find it offensive, says Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

    In a letter to the Florida Department of Management Services sent today, Americans United warns officials that they must not repeat a decision from 2013 that excluded the Satanic Temple from the rotunda of the State Capitol.

    The rotunda is legally considered an open forum for speech, and private groups in December often erect holiday-themed displays at their own expense. In 2013, the rotunda housed a nativity scene, a “Festivus Pole” and a rendering of the Pastafarian Flying Spaghetti Monster.

    But officials rejected the temple’s proposed display, which would have shown an angel falling from the sky into flames, accompanied by Bible verses and the message “Happy Holidays from the Satanic Temple.”

    On Dec. 18, 2013, the department notified the Satanic Temple that its application had been denied, saying, “The Department’s position is that your proposed display is grossly offensive during the holiday season.”

    Americans United Executive Director the Rev. Barry W. Lynn said state officials violated the temple’s rights.

    “Government officials have no right to determine what is ‘offensive’ when it comes to religion,” Lynn said. “If public space is open to all, that must include groups that some people may not like.”

    AU’s letter reinforces this point. It reads in part, “Members of the religious majority are sometimes offended by the beliefs of religious minorities, and vice/versa. But the Satanic Temple is not required to censor itself in order to take advantage of a forum supposedly open to all.”

    AU’s letter asserts that the state, by excluding the temple’s message from an open forum, has violated the free-speech rights of the temple, its freedom of religion and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

    The Satanic Temple describes itself as a religious organization dedicated to principles of empathy, personal autonomy and empirical reasoning. In early December of 2013, the temple submitted an application to put up a holiday display that it said would “contribute to the plurality of the community by representing the spirit of goodwill from other faiths.”

    The temple is re-submitting its application early this year so that any problems can be resolved ahead of time. Americans United is representing the temple in this matter.

    Given the approach of the holiday season, AU’s letter requests a response within 14 days.

    “The First Amendment applies to all religions, not just popular ones,” said AU Senior Litigation Counsel Gregory M. Lipper. “Since it has opened the Florida State Capitol to private speech, the state must include everyone, even those whose religious beliefs it finds ‘offensive.’”

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Here is the flaw in their argument, from the legal perspective. Buck can chime in here if he disagrees, or if he agrees. Either is welcome.

      “Government officials have no right to determine what is ‘offensive’ when it comes to religion,” Lynn said. “If public space is open to all, that must include groups that some people may not like.”

      The Govt most certainly does have the “right” to determine what is “offensive”.

      That determination must be based on the display, however, and not simply the group doing the display. So the argument here is mixing two different issues.

      The question is how does the display offend the broader community during the “holiday season”. Flaming angels could certainly be viewed as more directly offensive than a spaghetti monster. The latter being sarcasm and the former being a more direct attack on public values.

      The only legitimate issue here is “freedom of speech” but the courts have long held that freedom of speech is not absolute. Something the atheists and others keep forgetting.

      But then when has it stopped the left from arguing one point one day and a different point the next. All in the name of “the ends justify the means”.

      • David Skekabim says:

        Here is the flaw in your argument, from the legal perspective.

        Government is a service to the community, and is tasked with protecting the rights of citizens, and not to decide what is considered ‘offensive’ in matters of faith.

        Florida State Constitution clearly states that;

        SECTION 3. Religious freedom.—There shall be no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting or penalizing the free exercise thereof. Religious freedom shall not justify practices inconsistent with public morals, peace or safety. No revenue of the state or any political subdivision or agency thereof shall ever be taken from the public treasury directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution.

        SECTION 4. Freedom of speech and press.—Every person may speak, write and publish sentiments on all subjects but shall be responsible for the abuse of that right. No law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press. In all criminal prosecutions and civil actions for defamation the truth may be given in evidence. If the matter charged as defamatory is true and was published with good motives, the party shall be acquitted or exonerated.

        From Section 3; “Religious freedom shall not justify practices inconsistent with public morals, peace or safety.”

        Unless you can define a standard of “PUBLIC MORALS”, you cannot make that argument. And since there is no such thing, the argument cannot be made. What is ‘offensive’ is a matter of individual taste. If you want to suggest that flaming angels are offensive, the same argument can be made for any religious symbolism.

        If anything is against ‘public morals’, it is the denial or failure to protect religious freedom and expression.

        “The question is how does the display offend the broader community during the “holiday season”.”

        What or whose “Holiday Season”?

        “The only legitimate issue here is “freedom of speech” but the courts have long held that freedom of speech is not absolute. ”

        On what basis would justification of denying a flaming angel and “Happy Holidays” message be? Is it somehow a threat to public safety? Was it actually on fire? …as in a fire hazard?

        • Just A Citizen says:


          There is no flaw in my argument. It is LEGAL PRECEDENT.

          My argument recognizes the reality of the Govt’s stated view. Yours rests on what should be, not what is.

          And Federal Law trumps the Florida Constitution. SCOTUS has ruled that freedom of speech is not absolute, when it comes to Govt’s right to control speech. Whether this case fits those exceptions is dependent upon the facts and its relationship to “norms”. Which of course are in and of themselves subject to the whim of the court.

          All you are doing is repeating the caveats I presented, although more pointedly. You are not refuting my argument.

          • David Skekabim says:

            ” There is no flaw in my argument. It is LEGAL PRECEDENT. ”

            You apparently have no real argument. Pleas specify.

            ” My argument recognizes the reality of the Govt’s stated view. Yours rests on what should be, not what is. ”

            What is, is The Florida Constitution. I thought it was pretty clear.

            ” And Federal Law trumps the Florida Constitution. SCOTUS has ruled that freedom of speech is not absolute, when it comes to Govt’s right to control speech.”

            If the basis of the argument is that freedom of speech does not apply, I again ask, what is the basis for denial?

            ” Whether this case fits those exceptions is dependent upon the facts and its relationship to “norms”. ”

            Arguably, there is no real such thing as a “norm”. …But… the norm can be argued as being religious freedom and expression.

            ” All you are doing is repeating the caveats I presented, although more pointedly. You are not refuting my argument. ”

            I slaughtered your argument. That is why you are fumbling with bullshit.


            • Just A Citizen says:


              I suggest you read my original comment once again. You have slaughtered nothing.

              SCOTUS has previously established that it is within the perview of Govt to determine what is “offensive”. That is the base from which the review will proceed. Then the standards for how this was decided will be reviewed. It must pass the arbitrary and capricious test.

              To help you out, please note that I did not comment nor express my opinion on the broader case. Only the guys flawed arguments he presented to the press.

              • David Skekabim says:

                Fair enough.

                But the principle of the argument still stands. What you and/or SCOTUS are essentially saying is that it has the right to determine what you find offensive. …which is a clear disregard for individual opinions and/or right to conscience.

                If a government body decides to deem a particular establishment of religion as normalcy while simultaneously deeming another/others as abnormal or offensive, is that not in violation of several state constitutions and/or the US Constipa …err …um..Constitution? Is it not a clear violation of the freedom of religion and expression?

                Do the churches in Houston not have a right to express their disapproval of gay people, because the local government has decided gay bashing is abnormal and offensive?

                “They were focused on political speech and dissent against Govt power. Not your right to stand on a corner and piss on a statue of Jesus.”

                Are you equating Satanist’s equal expression of religion to pissing on a statue of Jesus?

                If their right to religious expression is denied/violated, and they petition against it or express dissent, is this not what they intended to protect?

            • Just A Citizen says:


              One more thing for you to ponder. The FRAMERS did not intend “freedom of speech” to extend to all speech. They did not condone pornography as protected. I doubt they would have viewed flaming angels or the nativity as protected either.

              They were focused on political speech and dissent against Govt power. Not your right to stand on a corner and piss on a statue of Jesus.

            • Just A Citizen says:


              Yes, your argument on principle stands. But it has been overthrown by the Courts. Just as many principles have been overthrown.

              However, your claim that there is no such thing as a “public norm” regarding what is offensive is not true. Such norms do exist and have for centuries. While what is an offense may differ for a given individual, the collective view of the vast majority do in fact establish public norms regarding many things, including what is considered offensive. Simply declaring it as “individual taste” does not negate the reality that such collective norms have and will continue to exist. Such “norms” are in fact part of the Anarchist argument for why we do not need Govt. People will regulate themselves. This includes enforcing what they view as “acceptable behavior”.

              So the remaining question is how does this concept fit when you have a Govt. Why cannot a “local” Govt establish laws that enforce “local behavioral norms”? Is not the “local” Govt elected to represent the goals and values of the “local” community??

              And it is not MY view or argument on the principle. I was simply stating what the legal precedence is thanks to SCOTUS and the other wizards in black robes.

              I was also trying to make a larger point about the hypocrisy of the left. Arguing here that freedom of religion and freedom of speech apply to protect their flaming angel (Florida), while using the courts to try and force pastors to shut up about homosexual behavior (Houston).

              • So what is the answer or what is the correct reading of the Constitution when it comes to these issues-absolute freedom per David’s argument might well protect freedom but the civilized part of civilization would die. Which is why absolute freedom as defined by those of the anarchist persuasion will NEVER be accepted by the people.

              • David Skekabim says:

                “Yes, your argument on principle stands. But it has been overthrown by the Courts. Just as many principles have been overthrown.”

                Indeed. Which is part of why I am one to be ‘lawless’.

                “However, your claim that there is no such thing as a “public norm” regarding what is offensive is not true. Such norms do exist and have for centuries. While what is an offense may differ for a given individual, the collective view of the vast majority do in fact establish public norms regarding many things, including what is considered offensive. Simply declaring it as “individual taste” does not negate the reality that such collective norms have and will continue to exist. Such “norms” are in fact part of the Anarchist argument for why we do not need Govt. People will regulate themselves. This includes enforcing what they view as “acceptable behavior”.”

                Again, fair enough.

                But (you knew that was coming), …I would argue that is not applicable in the case of the flaming angel because it’s not unreasonable or outside of social or legal expectations of decency. It’s not like the flaming angel is done in bad taste or being offensive. It’s not like it’s pissing on Jesus while masturbating Mohammed and smacking Buddha with the other hand.

                Nope. To deny it is simply a case of religious bigotry and/or intolerance.

                ” So the remaining question is how does this concept fit when you have a Govt. Why cannot a “local” Govt establish laws that enforce “local behavioral norms”? Is not the “local” Govt elected to represent the goals and values of the “local” community??”

                It can, but if it is done in a way that violates the law of the land or is a violation or denial of rights, it has no place locally any more than it does nationally (or anywhere really). And if there are enough Satanists to support such a statue, then it can be argued that it is indeed normal as per the local culture.

                And what happens if a bunch of Satanists moved to the town in question? Do they shift the legally established norm in favor of Satanism? Is that fair to the other religions? How would they go about determining what the norm is? …take a poll so the majority wins?

                I could go on, but you see how an unprincipled argument can be easily shredded. (Classic example of a slippery slope)

                “And it is not MY view or argument on the principle. I was simply stating what the legal precedence is thanks to SCOTUS and the other wizards in black robes.”

                Duly noted.

                ” I was also trying to make a larger point about the hypocrisy of the left. Arguing here that freedom of religion and freedom of speech apply to protect their flaming angel (Florida), while using the courts to try and force pastors to shut up about homosexual behavior (Houston). ”

                I very much agree with the hypocrisy argument. I personally find it annoying the idea of coercing people into baking gay wedding cakes and whatnot. It is equally unprincipled and violating as any theocratic position.

                Although it is sometimes a little humorous to see the theocrats have to eat their own garbage. What gets me though, is seeing how many still don’t ‘get it’ because they simply cannot see past their own wants/needs.

              • David Skekabim says:

                “So what is the answer or what is the correct reading of the Constitution when it comes to these issues-absolute freedom per David’s argument might well protect freedom but the civilized part of civilization would die. Which is why absolute freedom as defined by those of the anarchist persuasion will NEVER be accepted by the people. ”

                What exactly are you suggesting, V?

                I see a principled argument in favor of religious freedom as very civilized. How is it uncivilized to allow equal and peaceful expression of religion?

                And how is Anarchism uncivilized? True anarchy is actually VERY civilized, much more so than government.

              • David Skekabim says:

                Another thing worthy of noting is that the flaming angel was accompanied by bible verses and a “Happy Holidays” message. Which, I would think, is actually in concert with Christian beliefs ( a very acceptable ‘norm’).

                And when you get right down to it, Satanism is partially Biblical based anyway, and can be argued as an alternate interpretation of The Bible.

                It isn’t really so much different than giving praise to Mary as the Catholics do.

              • 🙂

                Did that sound like I was suggesting something-I thought it was pretty apparent that I was making a statement based on my opinion. But tell me David-what kind of society do you think we would have if “we the people” have no input on what we as a society want to promote as morally acceptable?

              • Your second post-no comment beyond:

                Oy vey

  10. Just A Citizen says:

    Anyone care to identify the fallacy of the argument presented in this?

    Anyone care to predict how many left wing brain dead will parrot this article and the data as proof of why we need Govt healthcare and why Republicans are evil??

  11. Just A Citizen says:

    Morning thought.

    Given the left wing’s plethora of reports decrying the rich getting richer, and their howling about how the past falls in the stock market were proof of how privatizing social security would be a disaster due to the loss of wealth, I wonder…………………..

    Will they start talking about how the wealth gap has been drastically reduced the past week, thanks to the drop in the Stock Market??

    Will we soon see stories from Daily Kos and Huff Po on the poor rich people who have lost over 10% of their “wealth” in less than a week??

  12. Howdy Ya’ll 🙂

    My neighbor just reported that he saw a news report on TV that Obama is signing an Executive Order to…..get this, round up all the homeless in Las Angeles who have respiratory issues and placing then in……FEMA camps. Of course this could be a “may do this if Ebola gets worse” report. Still trying to locate an article on the subject.

    Let’s say for the sake of discussion that this is true. What would your position be?

    • Just A Citizen says:


      If true I would be OPPOSED.

      However, I’ll bet my bottom dollar the report is BS. Probably a distortion of some other order that may have already been issued regarding emergency response.

      • I would be opposed as well. Neighbor is not a CT type at all. Just a good farmer. I didn’t understand the LA connection (Dallas maybe), BUT, this is something that has occurred (rounding up the homeless and putting in FEMA type camps) in an East coast city (One of the Carolina’s) last year. He did specify Obama. I’ll be watching to see what comes out about it, if anything (could be someone on TV just sharing an opinion and misunderstood).

        I’ve been spending lots of time bow hunting and dealing with our private road drain that some moron plugged up (I’ll be dealing with him tomorrow). It’s been nice being away from politics for a bit, but still peek in 🙂

        IMHO, this Ebola issue will/is much worse than they are telling people. With my experience in decontamination systems and operations at hospital’s, someone isn’t telling the truth. This disease is mutating (for lack of a better term) to being airborne and/or longer life span outside the body (where touching a doorknob then rubbing eye could infect you). Ebola is a worse case decon activity with immediate quarantine. Basically, top level decon suits, patient in isolation, those with same area contact would be quarantined (including all hospital personnel involved. This was an ugly thought when we were training.

        Some whispers about spreading Ebola that I’m hearing from friends at hospital. May be transferred 10 days prior to symptoms occurring. May be spread through saliva mist (while talking) and disease may live outside the body much longer than believed. Saliva mist may also remain airborne for quite some time. Amount of saliva mist needed for contamination may be quite low and may also enter through eyes. ALL of this is NOT being reported. It may be more or less dangerous. The most obvious thing, the Feds can’t be trusted to tell the truth. Here, we are not doing anything out of the ordinary and will not make any changes unless it gets really ugly. Nobody is expecting it to get bad (local hospital friends), but are prepared and dealing with the issue based on training. Nobody should panic, the flu is still far worse an issue than Ebola. BUT (Anita 🙂 ) be prepared in the event you may be quarantined in your home for 3 weeks or more. While very, very, unlikely, preparation is vital for any emergency situation.

        JAC, good luck on all your work on the homestead!

  13. Just A Citizen says:

    Not exactly a major confidence builder but at least this should provide some “sanity” to the panic, along with a little dose of science.

    “Similar to many things with the Ebolaviruses, their ability to survive outside a living organism is not well-known or studied. Most viruses, contrary to popular belief and the characteristics of bacteria, cannot survive long against the raw elements. The usual influenza or cold virus will survive outside living tissue for about three days, but other viruses, namely HIV, can only make due for a couple of minutes. Ebola is certainly a hardy virus and might be able to make it for over a week but no less than three or four days. So the range is anywhere from three to ten days in all likelihood. The reason viruses die so quickly outside (and bacteria do not) is because, when hit with high-energy electromagnetic waves (for instance, sunlight), they break apart with their abyssal level protection. Since viruses do not actually “eat,” they cannot starve, and they do not get too cold (but can get too hot, for their proteins denature; why did you think we get fevers?). In general, very little is known about Ebola. Even how it is transmitted is unknown. “

    • In all the news coverage I have seen so far, I have yet to see UV lights used to kill contaminated clothing or surfaces. You can’t kill the virus while it’s in the body, but nearly 100% can be killed outside the body.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        I have seen many pictures of medical workers going through the “dip tank” treatments. I have not seen one story on what the chemical is that is in those “dip tanks” or how it “KILLS” the virus that might exist on clothing.

      • The hospital in Ohio that I worked at would have a portable shower that medical staff would go through. What your seeing on TV is a joke (and a very bad one). NOBODY should be deconning themselves. The end result of decon would be a naked body being covered by a clean towel in a clean area.

    • Had a very short conversation with a relative who was in town a few days ago and who works for the CDC.

      I was asking about that virus D68-but another person heard us and asked about Ebola-he said- that we have had small outbreaks of ebola through the years and they were easily controlled but for some reason, this time, their normal steps weren’t working. Unfortunately, it really wasn’t a time for long conversations-so that’s as far as the conversation went.

  14. Operation Inherent Resolve

  15. Ebola thoughts…

    CNN will soon have to change their name to the Ebola channel.
    CDC and POTUS assured us Ebola would not come to the USA.
    Then that it would not spread.
    Then that the health workers failed to follow proper procedure.
    Trained health care professionals failed to protect themselves in the best environment.
    what’s going to happen to the 3,000 troops Obama sent to treat Ebola victims in Africa?
    Will all 3,000 follow proper procedure 100% of the time in a hot, hostile environment?

    • David Skekabim says:

      ” Will all 3,000 follow proper procedure 100% of the time in a hot, hostile environment? ”

      I certainly hope so.

    • Health and Human Services
      2013 Budget $875B
      2014 Budget $960B
      2015 Budget $1.02T.

      • President Obama proposed to cut the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) funding in his fiscal year 2012 budget proposal.

        The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is currently blasting out ads accusing Republicans of voting to cut CDC’s Ebola-fighting capabilities in February 2011 by voting for a bill to cut $60 billion from the federal budget, including from the CDC, in anticipation of the fiscal year 2012 budget battle. The House passed the bill on Feb. 19, 2011, but the bill never passed the Senate.

        But the Obama administration proposed to cut CDC funding, including for public health preparedness and response, in its very own budget proposal released the very same week as the House vote.

        Obama’s original budget plan for fiscal year 2012 cut funding for a CDC public health emergency preparedness program by $72 million. The proposed cuts would have taken money away from municipal and state health departments to hire health workers and monitor for public health hazards and disease outbreaks.

  16. Just A Citizen says:

    Interesting graph of voter turnout as a percentage of eligible voters since the mid 1800’s.

    I find the correlation between the increased political divide/tensions and the increase in turnout from the low points very curious.

  17. Just A Citizen says:

    Hooray for KC.

    Like I said………lots of GRIT.

  18. David Skekabim says:

  19. David Skekabim says:


    ” But tell me David-what kind of society do you think we would have if “we the people” have no input on what we as a society want to promote as morally acceptable? ”

    I read this as a contradictory statement. There is no ‘we’. There is no ‘our’ morals.

    We’re 7.7 billion individuals sharing a planet. Anything beyond what is universal among ALL of us cannot be implemented in a social order in the context of ‘we’. least not without conflict.

    When we try it, we end up with issues like as per this very discussion. It is counter-intuitive to our nature. As it stands, we are fighting amongst Christians and Satanists and gays and leftists and righties and etc etc etc etc etc…

    It pits us against each other for competition of who gets to force who into what.

    If we based things solely on universally beneficial ideas as per our nature, then it would be about respect for individual rights and whatever relevant responsibilities, and you would not have these types of conflicts. It instead would be more like the Satanists and the Christians and gays and whoever getting along, working together in celebration of themselves and each other.

    People would still group up with those who are like-minded. The difference is that they would not be competing for force. They would have to be tolerant. Competition would not be for force but rather in the market place or a friendly softball tournament or something.

    I could go one and on with this, outlining a lot of specifics, but I would be here typing for a long time.

    That’s why I try to preach love instead of such an outline. It is the ultimate or final solution. It is where all practicality and peace and god converge. If we would focus on how to love, it would all fall into place. With love comes respect and responsibility to each other, and everything we need to live in harmony.

    It is not only efficient and effective, but it feels good too. So why the hell not?

    • So I’m just going to have to embrace my ebola neighbor and e-dog because otherwise I would just be intolerant. Allow them to fly around the world infecting everyone. Is that how it works? Do you see why there needs to be at least some minimum standards?

      • David Skekabim says:

        Believe me, I know it is difficult. I openly struggle with it myself. But we HAVE to support each other and learn to get along. We have to fight against all that is holding us down.

        When you come up with stuff like that, it saddens me. It tells me that you are resistant, that you do not want to break free from your prison of fear.

        • No, David. I acknowledge that in a world of 7 billion that I will never be free. If I had my own island, it could be the way you suggest.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      You need to explain the following in more detail. As well as the conflict it creates with your premise that there is no WE when it comes to morality.

      “If we based things solely on universally beneficial ideas as per our nature, then it would be about respect for individual rights and whatever relevant responsibilities….”

      In particular, “beneficial ideas” intimate some “collective agreement” on what those ideas are and how they will be identified.

      • David Skekabim says:

        Understand individualism, and respecting and valuing individual rights. That must be the premise. Start there. Do not deviate.

        The specifics of how you manage that are only limited by the constraints of human nature and your imagination and willingness to work toward something peaceful.

        Don’t try to define it according to whatever normal frame of reference you are used to. Do not put it in the context of coercion. Just simply work toward peace and truth and what is right. And do your best to show others what you learn.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          The world you live in was created by Human NATURE. That is the REALITY.

          So claiming that if we just all live according to our Nature will somehow cause peace and love is myopic.

          Discounting “normal frame of references” sounds like rationalizing the notion that WHIM will get us to Nirvana. Or even worse, the answers are “supernatural” because the “normal” is not allowed.

  20. David Skekabim says:

  21. I don’t know what to even say about this.

    Students at Women’s College Reject Transgender Student Govt Candidate for Being a ‘White Male’
    by Warner Todd Huston 16 Oct 2014, 4:46 AM PDT 32 post a comment
    The complicated world of gender re-assignment and racism has bitten the politically correct campus at the all female Wellesley College, as a student born female but choosing to become a man has been denied a spot in student government for being a “white male.”

    The 144-year-old women’s college in Boston Massachusetts is caught in a controversy and on the horns of a self-imposed, liberal dilemma. How does a politically correct, all female college satisfy the need to accept the transgendered but also fulfill the liberal need to indulge a few racial quotas that also seem to exclude men?

    The problem is laid out by Ruth Padawer of The New York Times in a Wednesday piece that explores the plight of a Wellesley student who chose the name “Timothy” upon entering the college.

    Timothy, a white transgender student, was fully accepted by his self-chosen male title and had found fellow students amenable to calling him by male pronouns. But then Timothy made a fateful decision to run for student council for the position of multicultural affairs coordinator, or “MAC.”

    Timothy discovered that a Facebook campaign was launched calling on students to abstain from voting. If enough students refused to vote for Timothy–the only one on the ballot for the position–he would be disqualified for the position by failing to get the minimum number of students to vote for him.

    So, why was this campaign started? Was Timothy not a girl, turned male, a duly recognized transgender person? Are the students against the transgendered?

    The NYT found the answer to that question.

    “It wasn’t about Timothy,” the student behind the Abstain campaign told the paper. “I thought he’d do a perfectly fine job, but it just felt inappropriate to have a white man there. It’s not just about that position either. Having men in elected leadership positions undermines the idea of this being a place where women are the leaders.”

    So, despite the long-time claims of the women’s college that the transgendered are fully accepted, they really don’t want them in leadership because they identify as men. And, being white, Timothy had two strikes against him.

  22. Just A Citizen says:

    V.H. and Anita have both claimed that people will never accept Anarchy. I agree but I think we should explore the reasons. At least the reasons I think it will never work. These are not as big as the ideas of Social Norms or a National Moral Standard. They are in fact more local and “common sense”, if you will.

    Lets start with sewage/sanitation. Here is how many places handled the issue before we had centralized sewage facilities.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Now let’s take the next step, as it relates to water quality (above) as well as access to water. In this case for religious experiences ( :wink:).

      What makes this possible? Govt LAW. Where common law dominates, that is private property rights are supreme and go to the center of the river, public access to water is restricted. So much so in some places that use of such water is impossible.

      Now I realize that some in the USA grew up with that situation. But many of us did not. We will NEVER accept such restrictions on our Right to Movement along “public” waterways.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Let’s take a look at how things happened before centralized laws, like “city planning” came along. When development was the closest to the Anarchist model. Below is a plat map of Missoula, Montana from the early 1900’s. Note there are Four separate plat layouts. One of which is completely contrary to those surrounding it. You can imagine how this developed into a mess with respect to street traffic, sewer/water and utility Rights of Ways, etc.

      These issues have been handled at great expense to tax payers, because the original “developers” did not LIKE each other. They would not compromise or reach agreement because of their DISLIKE of each other.

      Now consider that the elevation changes from one side of the town to the other are in the hundred foot plus level. Making multiple sewage systems very impractical if not impossible. After all, it only takes one land owner to halt the sewer lines installation, under the Anarchy model.

      • JAC,

        I’m gonna post this here because it points out to me anyway the need for government as well as the dangers of the government being more interested in controlling every situation rather than fixing the problem.

        Fundamental Concepts: The Tragedy of the Commons [WeirdDave]
        —Open Blogger

        This one is not going to be very long, because it’s an easy one. Tragedy of the Commons is the name given to a theory that if a group of people share a resource, it will eventually be plundered and rendered useless. Overfishing of the Grand Banks is a commonly cited example. Selfish people will overuse the resource, ruining it for everybody. This concept is the basis for a good deal of leftist political thought, it is the reason that they want to put government in charge of everything. They are right, up to a point, but as usual they miss the mark completely in an attempt to bring everything under the thumb of government.

        Let’s start with an example:

        Suppose there is a herd of buffalo. Nobody owns it, it’s just there. The people of the nearby town go out and shoot buffalo when they need or want one. Some people shoot two or three of the animals because they want to stock up, some people shoot the buffalo and just take a favorite part, leaving the rest to rot, some people just shoot them for fun. Pretty soon that herd is gone and the people have no more buffalo and they start to starve.

        The statist sees this and his solution is to create a governmental agency to manage the buffalo herd. Hunting licenses are required, and the Buffalo agency issues bag limits. Pretty soon the Buffalo Agency takes some land to keep it’s buffalo on. One year a PETA drone is elected head of the agency and no permits are issued, so the herd grows uncontrolled. That won’t do, so a biologist is brought in to manage buffalo breeding. Wolves show up to feed on the weak and young of the herd, so now the Buffalo Agency hires some of the hunters that it won’t let shoot the buffalo to shoot the wolves. The people are starting to starve again, so the Buffalo Agency starts a program to humanely butcher selected older buffalo and sells the meat. They then start a Buffalo Cultural Festival to celebrate all things buffalo related (and to toot their own horn), and so on. The Buffalo Agency, which was established simply to keep the buffalo from being hunted to extinction, now employs half the town. The buffalo? Well, they’re still there, but now they’re almost an afterthought.

        A conservative looks at this situation and immediately spots the flaw in the statist’s logic. He knows that a basic tendency of any governmental agency is to first protect it’s authority, and then to expand it. Contrary to the simple logic of the left, the Buffalo Agency’s fundamental focus isn’t the efficient use of the buffalo (although that’s the excuse), it is the efficient use of it’s own POWER. The buffalo are being managed, but not efficiently, and the Buffalo Agency is now spending more of it’s time and money on things that have nothing to do with the herd at all. (Let’s be topical. Change “Buffalo Agency” to “CDC”, “buffalo” to “control disease” and all the rest to “rabbit massage”, “gun control” and “studying fat lesbians”. Hmmmmm.)

        No, a conservative looks at the problem of unhindered buffalo slaughter and knows that the correct solution is to privatize the buffalo herd. If ownership of the herd is given to the hunters themselves, they now have two opposing incentives which balance each other out. Their first incentive is to hunt the buffalo and sell the meat. They do this to keep the town fed, and to make a living themselves. Countering that incentive, they also must manage the herd efficiently so that it remains viable so that they can keep on feeding the town and supporting themselves. They may do some, or even all, of the things that the Buffalo Agency did in the first example, but they will only be able to do them through voluntary transactions, and they won’t have the ability to enter into any of these transactions unless they are effectively and efficiently performing their two primary duties-maintaining the herd and harvesting it in a smart manner. The Buffalo Agency uses it’s authority to take land, the Hunters Co-Op has to turn enough profit to buy land. The Co-OP won’t have to hire hunters to kill wolves, paying them with tax revenue, they’ll do it themselves. They may establish a Buffalo Festival, but again, only if they can afford to pay for it. And so on.

        The Tragedy of the Commons is the basis for a good bit of Marxist economic theory, but as we have seen, it is utterly flawed when applied to human beings (as is the rest of Marxist economic theory). The Tragedy of the Commons is just another fallacy.

        Here endeth the lesson.

  23. Just A Citizen says:
  24. Just A Citizen says:

    Now for an example of where “local” Govt laws have gone to far and could be scaled back or eliminated.

    This begs the question, are any laws really needed? Should not the property owners be allowed to decide if they want to take in a guest for a night or more? If you have an extra bed room why is it of anyone’s concern who sleeps in that bedroom and whether they are paying you for the room??

  25. Just A Citizen says:

    Why is the economy still seem sluggish?

    After reading another left wing economist’s view on the need for increased Govt spending the other day I thought I would try to find a better answer. His premise was that Germany’s “austerity” showed that cutting Govt spending was the cause of their current shrinking economy.

    So first I googled up the data on German spending and guess what? Yep, it is near the all time high. Spending the past few years has flattened but was preceded by massive increases. The only way to make a case for “austerity” requires using Spending/GDP. Which of course is not a measure of austerity, but the percentage the Govt LOOTS from the general economy. So if Govt spending increases at a lesser “rate” than GDP is increasing you get AUSTERITY according to the nutpegs writing for HuffPo and Daily Kos.

    The Keynesian argument is that more govt spending on stuff will cause employment to clime and give more people money to spend, which will cause businesses to expand. But what and where should such spending occur in order to spur this growth??

    We have been subjected to 6 years of howling about the need to spend on clean energy and infrastructure. Yet despite increased spending in these areas we do not see related economic growth. So maybe there is a different hole than the one the Govt trolls are spouting off about.

    Well here is an interesting graph showing existing and new home sales over time. I went back to when the last Malaise was in effect.

    Now just maybe, the Dems and the Obama administration have been looking in the wrong place. Just sayin……………

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Well hell, it won’t pull up the graph I created. So to see the comparison go to the bar at the top of the graph.

      Change the beginning date of the data range to 1980

      Then click on “compare”.

      Select United States.

      Then under indicators, scroll down to find “existing home sales”. Select this and a new graph will appear with both Existing and New Home Sales from 1980 to 2014.

  26. David Skekabim says:

    @ JAC

    VH, Anita, Gman, others, you may appreciate this too.

    My whole life, I have been randomly doing something called Clair-cognizance and Clair-sentience, especially during the early parts of my puberty.

    Claircognizance is defined as “Clear knowing”, You get a strange sensation or energy that lasts a few seconds accompanied by a thought. You just simply ‘know’ something. It just comes to you.

    Clair-sentience is a little different. It is similar, only it comes to you through a medium of some sort, like feeling vibes from something existent or tangible.

    To demonstrate through example;

    Once when I was about 11 years old, I had ran away from home, and was staying at a friend’s house. I was standing on the street near the sidewalk between a couple of parked cars when it hit me. I got real jittery and picked up on the exact bearing range and intent of a policeman about a block and a half away out of sight or grasp of any of the 5 senses. I turned around and stared at the end of the street waiting for him to pull around the corner. About 15 seconds later, he indeed pulled onto the street. And he was looking for me alright.

    That is Claircognizance.

    An example of Clair-sentience, is once where I was able to find a house I had never been to, simply by ‘feeling out’ the trail, as if I was feeling someone else’s previous presence on the same path. It could also be something like looking at a list of information, and one of the things kinda stands out on some other level. It could be from a picture or article of clothing or whatever that holds something ‘informative’.

    I have never been able to control it or understand it too well. It is just something that hits me when I need it.

    A couple of years ago, I started doing these things on a very very powerful level. I was experiencing periods where I was doing it almost at a constant. It took a toll on my state of mind and sanity. It basically fried every neuro-transmitter in my brain in a way that I had to sleep a lot and craved a lot of milk and sugary things. It was very intense and exhausting. I could only stay awake for a few hours at a time, and ate a lot of kid’s cereal. It was the only thing I could eat without getting nauseated.

    I was doing some really weird shit. I felt or channeled a woman known as Madeleine Talmage Force, as well as Marie Antoinette, maybe King Louis, and/or something else from late 1700’s to early 1800’s central Europe. Also something a couple hundred years earlier. There was also something masculine from WAY back that I cannot pin down. I only know it was from far back, maybe as early as 2-4K years ago. I even think I may have channeled parts of The Bible, specifically the book of Isaiah.

    It was just so strange that I can hardly describe it. If you go back and see some of my posts, it reflects what I was going through. I could only express it through abstract and/or symbolic means. There was a period where I stopped posting for the better part of a year because I was basically too nuts to do so. I could barely think straight. I have only come to feeling ‘normal’ in recent months, although I still do it a little bit here and there.

    ( A couple of years prior to that, someone here had actually asked me if I had ever done those types of things. Indeed I had, but I deflected the questions because I was unable to explain how they knew that about me. I have had a lot of people over the years know things about me they should not. You know who you are, and if you’re reading. I think you at least owe me a clear explanation. You scare the shit out of me when you and others do that sort of thing. )

    Anyway, where I am trying to go with this…

    The most significant part of that period in my life, of all those things I was doing, was a message that I got similar to how the above example of the policeman worked, ..only it was coming from beyond this planet. It was sort of like omnipresence within our solar system, for lack of a better description.

    It was something, a consciousness, an intelligence of sorts. It wasn’t voices or any such psychosis-like thing. It was a presence of some kind. It was gentle but firm. And it had a message.

    The message was simple, that we had better get ourselves in order and learn to get along. That something was coming, and that there would be a sorting of some kind. It absolutely scared the hell out of me. Whatever it was, I don’t think it cares about our egos, or complaints, sexuality, race or religion or nationality, political idealism, social or financial status, or any such trite labels we assign to ourselves.

    And whatever it was, it finally let go of me, seemingly out of mercy. I cannot say for sure what or how or even the legitimacy of what I experienced. But I know I don’t really want to fuck with whatever it was. It’s bigger than me.

    So, JAC, when you claim to have ‘made it’, arguing reason, then citing the need for things like infrastructure or a set of rules or governance, it tells me you don’t understand. Because if you had experienced what I did, you would take a humble stance and know that all you can do is try to do right, and that ultimately, it is not your call to make.

    Take that as you will. I am not so sure how else to put it.

    And Anita, JAC, if it makes you feel any better, I am not so sure I will make it either. In fact, I am probably in deeper shit than anyone right now. At least it feels that way.

    In addition to that, I have been digging, and I have been discovering some pretty amazing things, tangible things, evidence that I can share. I am still trying to figure it out. I see it clearly, and I know what it says, but I am still having a difficult time accepting it. I am clinging tightly to my denial, and I really need some assistance in explaining it.

    I know someone[s] out there is reading who knows as much or more than I do in regard to such things. I would really really like someone who already knows to physically come get me and take me somewhere secure in order to sort this out and get answers. Or at least provide me with a destination.

    Gman, you had made the offer and I am seriously considering it.

    My patience and tolerance for this existence is wearing thin, if not all but gone. I don’t know how much longer I will hold on before leaving.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      A key attribute of REASON is that you have to deal with reality. My descriptions or opinions on how to structure a community with or without Govt is a small thing. However, my thoughts on this are consistent with my view that we must work to eliminate as much “coercion” as possible from society.

      I do not see how recognizing the physical limits to laying sewer pipes undermines a greater understanding of the universe or our role in the larger scheme of things.

      As for your feelings of fear over your experience I suggest you look to the brighter side. You are not the only one to experience such things and they need not lead to madness. Perhaps you should apply a little of that Love feeling towards yourself once in awhile.

      • David Skekabim says:


        Thank you. That helps more than you may realize. I have felt a bit of stress for sake of not being able to explain my experiences. Truth and knowledge seems to alleviate it. I now have a little more perspective. I am closer to a better understanding.

        Part of what I was doing is transcending time on a metaphysical level. It is not like I was remote viewing, but more like tuning into something. It is almost like a sonar ping or reverberations, …like a pulse. Only it was some kind of fractal loop-like thing during some of it.

        I think part of it is side effects of some kind of future events having effected the past, and I am picking up on it, or perhaps from another realm (multi-verse). I have had to consider things beyond the normal forward moving linear perspective. I have had to learn to think in terms of ‘gonna did’ and ‘already will’.

        Time travel is real or will be. I have found compelling evidence/proof in the form of information traveling in loops. They’re everywhere. I can show the whole world, but I am afraid of how they will respond, as the context is a bit controversial to say the least.

        And there is apparently something very evil in play, a very sick game. People/visitors have been messing with me hard for about 20 years. And it REALLY REALLY REALLY pisses me off that they will not take a forthright approach.

        While I understand it is important not to reveal information that will cause one to deviate from events of the time-line, it is literally killing me, causing me a tendency to be suicidal as to escape it.

        I think I found my own trail before I laid it, or else someone has been marking their trial as if they were me. I don’t think they are my friends. I think there is more than one party. While one may be trying to use me as a tool to cause riots and civil unrest, the others are trying to drive me to suicide.

        I live for escape or revenge. Muther fuckers owe me 20 years and counting.

    • Gman, you had made the offer and I am seriously considering it.

      Offer still stands. Becoming one with nature may be your solution.

      • David Skekabim says:

        ” Becoming one with nature may be your solution. ”

        Indeed. Like you, I also enjoy nature.

        A quiet spot in the middle of nowhere is an ideal environment for a peaceful mental state.

  27. David Skekabim says:

  28. Just A Citizen says:

    Now which demographic group has been “disenfranchised” in recent Presidential Elections?

    Supposedly the voter ID and early voting laws are having a devastating affect on minority, aka BLACK, turnout. Really???????????????????

    Maybe that just aint so……….Just Sayin………………..

  29. Thought this would be fun. Look at pictures and then choose the following:

    1, Man with tie is from Obama administration there to make things all scary
    2. Man with tie is an Obama voter (nothing else needs to be said)
    3. The problem is more scare than reality
    4. Man with tie will be in hospital bed in 3 weeks
    5. Liberal education in action.

    • Watched the video a couple days ago and mostly thought risk was small to non-existent. Then you see him exchange something or shake hands with one guy in a haz-mat suit.
      But remember Obama told him he wouldn’t/couldn’t get Ebola in the US….

      • Heard on the news before I went hunting that it was protocol for communication reasons. This is a huge line of BS (or ignorance). We used small 2 way radios with ear piece and voice activated mic when in class A suits.

        Now back to your regularly scheduled program 🙂

  30. Remember us talking about how many people get their news from the Daily Show? Maybe we all should get our news from comedians. They are right as often as the networks….

  31. Just A Citizen says:


    Good morning Sir. Little Foggy here this AM.

    Note Malkin’s reference to Texas in their strategy. Perhaps something your Vet group should look into, if it hasn’t already.

  32. Just A Citizen says:

    I have finally seen a picture of the Satanist display in Florida that we were discussing yesterday.

    While the group is making a stink for purposes of insulting and provoking, the display itself does not appear to be “grossly offensive” or “offensive” at all. An angel falling from heaven towards a fire.

    I expect the Council will have to back off and let the display stand. As a few others have suggested, perhaps the Christians can then up the ante with some “explanation” on their Christmas display. You know, linking the fall of Satan to the eventual birth of Christ.

    Now for the irony of the Atheists arguing that the Govt must allow a Religious symbol in a public place. One more piece of proof that there is really little HONOR left. And none at all among the political activists.

    • David Skekabim says:

      Religious monuments, statues, displays, and symbolism, etc are only inanimate objects that violate no one. It’s not really about the ‘things’ themselves. That is trite and inconsequential.

      The battle is over principles of principalities, be it equality and freedom of expression.

      The problem is popular Christian Fundamentalist position and attitude of xenophobic intolerance, egocentricity and self righteousness. Otherwise, there would be no issue.

      I read articles every day about how Christian right wing fundies want it their way and only their way, …to hell with everyone else. They think that if it isn’t in line with their idea of Christianity, it’s wrong and shouldn’t be tolerated.

      There is a push to maintain an exclusively Christian society by force. It is counter-intuitive and contemptuous of the principles of a free society. The issue with the fallen angel display is just one more example.

      • I know I’m tired of hearing all the whining about it. I don’t find any religious displays offensive, none, regardless of religion. These whiners are just another example of people needing to mind their own business.

        • David Skekabim says:

          Like you, I am not personally offended by them. It’s whatever.

          I do try to be understanding of the Christian perspective though. I think there is a certain fear of what will happen if they are to let go of the predominant influence they’ve held for so long. It isn’t always so easy to step outside of your comfort zone.

          I mean, here you have a percentage of fundies who truly believe that gays, Satanists, Muslims, Pagans, or what have you, are in concert with evil and pose a potential threat to their way of life. However unreasonable or frustrating it is, I can at least understand it.

          Consider the story of Lucifer. He was a rebel who challenged God by questioning his position, and was consequently cast down. The whole idea was to reinforce obedience by demonstrating the consequences of doing so.

          The simple reasoning of some Christians is to reject anything antithetical to their idealism. Lucifer is exactly that, hence the ‘offensive’ nature of the display.

          Satanism is a lot about freedom, hence why Lucifer is a heroic figure worthy of praise. Satanists can use the very same argument of what is of an ‘offensive’ nature, citing that Christianity is about strict adherence and obedience.

          But they don’t. They simply want to equally exercise their freedom of expression, and arguably extend a token gesture by citing The Bible along with a “Happy Holidays” message.

          Ideologically, the conflict is mutually exclusive. But in principle, the Satanists are well within their right.

          • When you advocate for Satanism to be as mainstream as Christianity, then look around at what the results something like that ideology are in real time, then yeah, you end up with a pretty grim outlook on life. You have to stand UP for something. I DONT WANT TO SEE something like satanism take hold. Satan stands for evil, like it or not. Why allow that to be mainstream? I’m no expert on the doctrine, I don’t want to know. But it stands for evil. Throw the jihadis in the group, too. They’re evil. YOU are the one preaching about love thy neighbor. But you want to allow evil to exist. You’re fighting yourself. In the next breath you want to bash Christians,,,who stand for good. Why cant ‘good’ be mainstream and ‘evil’ be scorned? That’s the way it’s SUPPOSED to be. But it can’t be because you’re ok with evil existing. It’s no wonder you want off this planet.

            ……and you and Flag better not even try going with the ‘christians have started more wars’ thing on me either. Governments and jihadis do wars.

          • A gesture of what-by using a Bible verse they have tied their display to the Christmas celebration specifically as a religious event. And sense Christmas as a religious holiday celebrates the birth of Christ-Please tell me how it is anything other than inappropriate, intentionally offensive, and quite frankly has nothing to do with the actual holiday. I really question why Satanist or atheist should be allowed to put up a display that has nothing to do with the actual holiday. But is simply being used to denigrate someone elses display. Why may I ask should atheist put up a display that simply states they don’t believe in Christianity, in a place reserved for holiday messages, is that a Christmas or Holiday message. Does the space being opened to everybody mean the KKK can denigrate everyone as long as they do it with the words Happy Holiday attached.

            • Just A Citizen says:


              The problem is that the space is not “reserved for holiday messages”. It is a designated “public place”, where Free Speech is protected.

              Yes, its purpose is to insult or detract from the other displays. To try and provoke because they cannot stand the other displays being present. But it is still free speech.

              The issue as I see it is even deeper than Govt allowing or not allowing displays. It is that it has become acceptable, even expected, that jacksnipes like this will act out because they don’t like another person’s views or are “offended” by some public display.

              Yet another example of how a simple thing like good manners combined with tolerance is diminishing. Perhaps their “arrogance” gets in the way of their “ego” and “self interest”.

              Bad form on the part of the atheist and Satanist crowd.

              • I was under the impression that at a certain time of year people requested space specifically for Holiday displays, if I am wrong on this point, then I have some thinking to do -because I do respect freedom of speech.

                So what is the litmus test for being granted space in these free speech zones?

              • David Skekabim says:



                To suggest that the holiday season is exclusive to or revolves around YOUR religion is in full disregard of thousands of years of prior history and development of modern religion to include Christianity itself.

                It is an exemplary example of the popular xenophobic intolerant egocentric self-righteousness superstitious idiotic and bigoted simplistic and vastly ignorant myopic worldview in line with so many who cannot see reality because they have their heads firmly lodged deep within heir own assholes.

            • Just A Citizen says:


              It may be that the designation is for the Holiday Season, but such a designation can have zero restrictions except those allowed by the Florida Constitution and as set down in precedent by the SCOTUS. Once it is designated “public space” then free speech applies.

              Which means it would have to be shown to be vulgar and grossly offensive to the broad public. I don’t think it meets that criteria.

              • Maybe there’s some subtle nuance in your statements that I am missing. But I do not really see a difference between “reserved for holiday messages” or “a designation is for the Holiday Season”. It would seem that the first test of acceptance would be whether or not the message had anything to do with the designated use. Then one would apply the vulgar and grossly offensive test.

            • Just A Citizen says:


              There is no difference in the designation. The key point is that the Govt cannot dictate the purpose nor control speech in an area it designates as a public space open to speech.

              Once they designated this space they opened it to Free Speech.

              They cannot designate something “public space” and then claim it is “only for X or Y”. Especially if they use that control to prohibit certain players from being involved or certain types of speech.

              The display in question would meet your test anyway. The jacksnipes included the phrase “Happy Holidays”. So how is it not a holiday display?? Your offense rests entirely on your view of Christmas and its link to Christ. That should tell you right there why the attempt to prohibit the Satanist exhibit was wrong.

              By the way, I have read several commentaries on this revealing that this “Satanist” group is really an Atheist group. They use Satan and the appearance of supporting Satan as a means of attacking Christianity. They do not really worship Satan. They use his/her image solely to offend others.

              That would explain why the Atheist group intervened in the litigation on their behalf. They are really one in the same, at the core.

    • Lucifer descending into Hell-doesn’t it make you just want to shout Happy, Happy Holidays.

    • And remember, if you get this disease, travel quickly to Washington DC. Once the worst symptoms begin, panic wildly on the steps of the capital. Remember your proper panicking techniques so the media can add all of it to their BS. Of course, this is meant as satire, except the going to DC part, which may save millions of lives by ending the need for revolution. BWAHAHAHA 🙂

      Just be safe and limit travel that don’t need happen for awhile. Do your shopping when the least amount of people normally shop, etc. Common sense, not PANIC, is the name of the game. Turning off the news will help a lot too (FOX is horrible on this subject). Remember, the Swine flu was seriously overblown. Happy Hunting 🙂

  33. This woman is sick!! Remember, she’s the abortion-at-any-time candidate.

  34. Just A Citizen says:
    • I’m not exactly sure why but somehow this article seems to fit.

      ” Having an abortion left me with a sense of what a great power it is to be able to give life but also a sense that I can trust myself to use it carefully.”

      I think it is telling that she chose the word Power instead of responsibility.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        Yes, it most certainly does.

        Other words that might have fit: “support”, or “sustain”. I wonder if this is the outcome of the Lib movement of “empowerment”. The comment displays a disconnect with the actual process.

        Power is not a word usually associated with involuntary biology, which the carrying of a child to term would be. Power comes from cognition, in short by making DECISIONS to gain such “power” and then to use it or not use it.

        Thus she has taken the power to END a life. She has no power to give a life. Only the power to end it or not interfere with it.

        • Think about what you just wrote, woman have taken on “the power to End a life”. To decide who lives and who dies, to decide who is born, to decide the makeup of all humanity. Something so important decided based on emotion, economics, and some times pure selfishness. Sounds a lot different than a woman has the right to do what she wants with HER body.

          • Just A Citizen says:


            Excellent point. Time for some old JAC Awards………. The FIVE smileys.

            🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

  35. Just A Citizen says:

    Please share with all your Democrat friends who will start howling about how the CDC budget has been drastically cut and the Republicans are to blame.

  36. Good Morning…..Texas is fighting…………ID law is now in force for this election. Courts have ruled in favor of STATE’S RIGHTS……

    Houston mayor has been knocked down a few pegs but is still trying to say that sermons and speeches against LGBT are hate speeches but speeches and sermons in favor of LGBT and against conservatives are not hate speeches…she will get no where with that . What started this was when a lady took her 7 year old daughter into a women’s rest room and a 40 year old male was in there because” he felt more comfortable in a women’s rest room.” This is what started all the petitioning signing, in which the people got more than ten times the amount of signatures against transgender restrooms……..but the Mayor’s hand picked council said that the petition is not valid, no matter the number of signatures. Some pastors are using the pulpit just as the Mayor is using her office……so she has tried to silence them… is not working. In response, the pastors have sent the second amendment to the Houston City council as is thousands of Houston residents….now the mayor is saying that the sending of the second amendment is creating serious administrative problems at the City Offices and is trying to pass an ordinance requiting return addresses on mail. She is nuts…

    At JAC…….sorry about the the Cowboys coming into your Seahawk territory and coming out with a victory. SO far it looks like our new defense coordinator is doing well. We shall see.

    Have a happy day…… your new digs.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      Thanks for the condolences, although I doubt you are that sorry. The Boys capitalized on the weaknesses I had seen since the first of the year. I would not be surprised to see other Good teams capitalize as well. The Hawks have several cracks in their armor.

      And yes, I used the term Good to describe the Cowboys. Not only your defense but the offensive line is doing much better at giving Romo time to make better decisions.

      • What????? You could not tell my sincerity? Well……………………!

        Have to give the Boys credit…..Jones stayed out of the draft this year. He really wanted Manzell but was facing a huge backlash from fans….nobody in Texas wants “Johnny Football”…he is an arrogant, asinine ass hole. That said…the Cowboys did draft offensive linemen and a couple of good linebackers… has helped. Romo is not as good as they come if you give him time to throw the ball instead of run for his life…..However, getting the running game going is also good.

        Have a fine day, sir, and may the winds be at your back except when you are hunting.

        Remember…..never, under any circumstance, stand downwind of a spitting camel.

  37. Just A Citizen says:

    Cheaper oil means cheaper energy for CONSUMERS. You know, The People.

    Yet look at what the Govt Power is concerned about:

    I am sure this nutjob is not the only one whining about the drop in oil prices.

    Now, can someone explain how the USA Govt is responsible for the decline? The Govt is not pumping oil from shale, it is not even issuing new leases on oil reserves, shale or otherwise. Does the US Govt dictate production numbers to the Saudi’s? I know we try to cajole them at times, but they have shown a strong tendency to do what they want.

    • That’s hilarious. The US has a ban on exporting crude oil. It is only done in a swapping arrangement such as Alaskan west coast crude being swapped for Latin or ME crude delivered on the east or gulf coast. This saves on transportation costs. We do export finished products.

      I just attended a conference in Galveston. I got many requests for miniature ruggedized sensors and analyzers that could be used down hole to measure drilling mud and petroleum liquids and gases. This field has been hot for some time. Planning and construction are underway for new chemical plants, refineries, conversion facilities and port facilities to market US gas and oil products overseas. During past petroleum booms our economy has soared but this time we are just puttering along due to other economic drains on our economy enforced by this government. The industry is booming despite the best efforts of our government.

      I am not going to shed any tears over an OPEC dictator crying about his lost monopoly.

  38. David Skekabim says:


    Please forgive me for being so harsh in my words above. It is just that I get so enormously frustrated sometimes. I am doing it again today.

    I would say that I wish you could experience what I have been dealing with so that you may understand, but I don’t wish this on anyone.

    Again, my apologies.

    • It was an interesting chat about the Freedom of Speech in a public area during religious holidays. I have an idea that may work or may not, so opinions are certainly welcome.

      1. The Public areas designated for religious holiday displays will be limited to one religion at a time. The religious celebration display will be permitted for 2 weeks in length. Historical holidays will take precedence on the 2 designated weeks and will be based on oldest holiday first.

      2. Since Freedom of Religion is a guaranteed Right under the 1st Amendment. Non-religious groups do not celebrate religious holidays, therefore, during weeks that have no religious holiday displays, non-religious groups may display a non-religious holiday display.

      3. If a religious holiday celebration is longer than 2 weeks, displays may be at any 2 week period that does not over lap another religious celebration. Historical precedence will be the final decision of all disputes.

      4. Patriotic displays will be limited to 3 days. Historical precedence are final decisions in disputes. Foreign State holiday displays are permitted, when they do not overlap US or Religious celebrations.

      This needs much fixing, but it’s an idea that might work! Big question….which right should take precedence, religion or speech, when the celebration is based on religion?

    • Being passionate about a subject can lead us all to over-react. So you are forgiven- And thank you for not wishing bad experiences on me. I sincerely hope you find your way through this darkness that is hurting you.

      As far as the topic-I’m taking some time to think about the comments-will get back to you and JAC later. 🙂

      I do think the point JAC made that the State doesn’t have the right to designate areas of public lands for a specific purpose- once they are declared free speech zones-and I assume that it is the designating as free speech zones that make the difference in his reasoning. I’m just not sure I agree.

      • David Skekabim says:

        ” I sincerely hope you find your way through this darkness that is hurting you. ”

        Me too. But it isn’t what you may think it is.

        It is a constant struggle to not blow my brains out. The problem primarily rests on the inability to definitively explain what I am seeing. The issue is that I can only narrow it down to a few possibilities without the assistance of others who obviously know.

        Someone[s] know and can easily confirm it trough direct contact, but they refuse to do so, seemingly either because they do not take my suffrage and insanity seriously and instead find it amusing, or they are deliberately trying to drive me crazy.

        As soon as I have a definitive answer, …SNAP!, my insanity will be instantly gone. All someone has to do is contact me and conform A B C D E or F. It is that simple.

        I almost blew my brains out today for no other reason than to relieve the frustration. (YES I REALLY AM THAT DAMNED FRUSTRATED!!! ) I will probably consider it again tomorrow. I may even do so in a few minutes. I want to right now as I write this.

        In terms of the religious aspects. Religion is bullshit and means something else. If people are still fighting over trite nonsense like statues and gay people when they figure it out, it will not go well. I get very frustrated when considering this, even angry at Christians in particular for not being more reasonable.

        My anger came out on you earlier today, and I again am sorry.

        • David Skekabim says:

          Okay, … disregard the above. I think I just figured it out.

          I have been doing this weird thing where I get REALLY frustrated, as in unbearably frustrated to the point of madness. My spine gets all tingly and I get mad as hell. Then something will ‘click’ and it is alleviated.

          It is like a release of pressure on some kind of metaphysical level. It is just so damned bizarre.

          Anyway, usual, after a few minutes of waking up this morning, …it clicked.

          Three years of hell just went bye bye. My compass just stopped spinning. So, I gotta get the hell outta here.

          Don’t get wrapped up in all the religious nonsense. That crap is worse than TV and will not only rot your brain, but your soul is well. Just stay focused on love and truth.

          • Dave, Don’t get wrapped up in any religious stuff. I simply state my opinion. All these anti-religious groups don’t have a whole lot of standing, as religion is a protected establishment. While Free Speech is as well, check out my post above on the matter.

            I recently had an issue with a landowner blocking a drain line that goes under the private road we all use (and maintain). His last effort finally led to a large portion of the road overflowing during heavy rain onto his property (which he ignorantly thought he was stopping). That was the final straw for me, and a meeting ensued with the County Planning Commission. The end result is I flat told him that if he plugs the drain again, he’s going to jail, as it is not on his property and he does not have the agreement of the majority of landowners. He is the boisterous type who thinks he can intimidate people, he found out he was very mistaken as I destroyed every point he made with facts (he made some stupid claims). I was polite but firm, never raised my voice, never cussed. I had 5 other landowners on my side in the meeting, none had to say a peep. The Bottom Line, I dealt with the issue head on and within the law. I used my debating knowledge that I have gained a lot of from the folks here as well as my Union experience.

            As is the case with any situation, some people just may not quit and he may choose to plug the drain. I’ll call the cops and deal with it that way. Then, beginning next summer, their will be some serious skunk fights on his property and all the horrible smell will make it’s way into his campers, FOREVER! Nature has a way of being vicious. 😉 😉

            • David Skekabim says:

              That is a bit odd.

              Anyone who lives in a hilly region knows it is especially difficult to reroute water channels as there are less options. It’s just one of those things where you have to let it get through to where it needs to go.

              I don’t know the layout of the land, so it is difficult to say, but your neighbor doesn’t sound too bright.

          • David,

            God is my way out of the darkness, He is my love and truth, so you telling me not to get wrapped up in religion……. is telling me to undue the best thing that has ever happened to me, to give back my salvation, to lose my purpose, to lose my God given peace-and it isn’t even possible-I’m not capable of unlearning the truth of his existence.

            So if we’re giving out advise-maybe you should give him a try 🙂

            • David Skekabim says:


              You don’t have to listen to anything I say. Who am I anyway? For the most part, I am just a nobody turd stumbling my way through life trying to figure it out like anyone else.

              Whatever path you choose to find God is your individual prerogative. Whatever is best for you is right on.

              When I advise against religion, I don’t mean to advise against God. It is just that I see a lot of people being led astray by churches that have nothing to do with godliness. And that’s fine too. They can worship whatever and however they like, or nothing at all. It’s whatever.

              The problem is when people get all wrapped up into these cult-like mega churches or ‘Club God’ societies, and start pushing it on everyone else. They’re going on the presumption that they have some sort of exclusivity because they belong to this or that group. They get all self-righteous and make it all about money or politics or fear and hate, confrontations and anything BUT God, La Byblos, or the message of the holy man they worship.

              Up until a few years ago, I couldn’t have cared less about God or religion. My whole idealism was simple. ” I’ll try to live life right and figure it out when I die.” That was as far as I thought about it.

              Then one day it was as if God reached down and smacked be sideways crooked, upside down and inside out, set my soul on fire and inserted a war into my head. I had no clarity of thought whatsoever. It was like I saw everything at once. It was complete and absolute total chaos, unadulterated hell and beyond. And a big lesson in humility, although that part I don’t demonstrate too well.

              With regard to religion, my answer was to try to seek help from others to understand as much as I could, to try to figure out what I was doing, to try to get some kind of grip on reality. What I discovered is that no one knows what the hell they’re talking about,..especially me. And I’ve been griping about it ever since.

              The only thing that got me through it was the spirit of truth and search for love in whatever form I could find or grip to. Since the beginning of it, I have learned a great deal and am only now beginning to understand.

              The one consistent idea throughout all of it is that whatever is coming our way or wherever we’re going, we’re not ready because we still haven’t figured out how to get along. So, when I act like a total prick, please understand that I do so out of frustration in high hopes for humanity.

              Now, if I could only figure out how my name and birth got in La Byblos, I might actually get somewhere.

              Love ya, V

              Peace out.

  39. I wonder….Ebola is not dangerous to the US….but so far, 30 countries have banned all flights and visitations.

    • If it had started in Amsterdam or Copenhagen, the big O would have shut down all flights from Europe. What we have here is outright racism if one were to suggest shutting off flights from Africa.

      Noted in my recent jaunt to Europe that the European folks are actually pretty racist by their comments. Funny how we (the US) tend to condemn ourselves for the race thing as we break our backs driving nails into its coffin while the folks in Europe don’t really give a crap.

      • Oh yeah…the last time I was in Europe it was really pretty bad. All this crap you hear about Europe being so cosmopolitan is pure crap. In Germany, Belgium, and France, I found it very harshly racist. In Italy, not so bad…..but Turkey and Greece were absolutely mid-evil in their racism……except for the touristy areas….money was the name of the game no matter who or what race you were…..but away from that…pretty bad.

        • I might add that in Brussels….even the black soldiers of the American Forces were not allowed to sit in openly open areas of most restaurants. AND….in the NATO compound, where there were a variety of officer’s cubs, most were segregated. I also noticed a lack of, meaning none, black officers in any of the other countries. Not to say that there were none….but I did not see any.

  40. David Skekabim says:

    A Thai cutie with a sweet voice, right?


    • LOL…great voice and a great range as well.

      • David Skekabim says:

        I recently had a conversation about the public restroom ordinance in Houston. I made the point that if a pretty or feminine enough looking gay/trans-whatever ‘male’ went into a woman’s restroom, that unless they gave some obvious indication, you wouldn’t know the difference.

        Someone shared the above video. I just had to share with SUFA.

        I’ve seen many such examples of trans-gender ‘women’, who most men would be more than eager to take home with them if they didn’t know the difference. Which is a rather scary thought to consider.

        What if you met some beauty whom you had a strong connection with, fell in love with, had a great sex life with, only to later discover it used to be a man?

        What a cringe-worthy nightmare of a thought, eh?

        • Yeah…..but I can see where a woman and a young girl would have a problem with it. I just don’t think that I could handle that. Especially a 40 year old man that “just felt more comfortable”……not dressed up or anything but just felt more comfortable… does not make sense to me…….but I will admit to being old fashioned about some things.

          • David Skekabim says:

            I’m with you on that one. I only posted that as a thought exercise.

            It seems the only real solution would be to design public restrooms areas differently as to be individual and private.

            For example; If there were a hallway containing several individual units, simply marked with an indicator of occupied or empty.

  41. JAC…..not sure if the Cowboy’s are real….but if our running game stays intact….could be an interesting season.They still have some holes in the defense but appear to be somewhat….entertaining right now. Given the time Romo has to throw in the pocket….I think you and I could hit a receiver…but….we shall see.

    Ummmmmmm…..what happened to the Hawksters?

    • Just A Citizen says:


      Good morning Sir.

      My Hawks are suffering many injuries right now. But they did last year as well, yet responded. So talent is down some but mostly I think it is attitude. It also looks like the league has figured out Pete Carols zone defense. No pass rush to boot.

      I hate to say it but yesterday I felt the Refs actually took the game in the end. Not just the blown fumble call at the end, but the many holding and Pass interference calls that were NOT.

      Dallas looked for real yesterday. But then so have some other teams who now have several losses. I think if they stay healthy your Pokes will make a deep run for the Lombardi.

      • Yes..that was a blown call….but I also noticed that as I did the remote PIC and all the guy things with football on both Sat and Sun…..I noticed a great difference in the refs calling in both college and pro. Some refs threw a flag if you go close enough to touch someone….some did not throw the flag when beat to hell…..very interesting the variety in refs. It does not appear that there is a standard…..both college and professional.

        And holding calls are obviously subjective. LOL. However, the one thing that I noticed was consistent on both levels….on a pass, if the defender is turning and actually looking for the ball…and makes a play for the ball….you can get away with almost anything. The key is looking back for the ball.

        Very strange college games as well……

        • The Cowboys are for real, the stats show it clearly. The Seahawks offense is great, but, the defense has holes and teams have learned to beat the scheme. Sherman is good, but far from the best, they will get better on defense and contend. I don’t think the two teams in the big game this season are even on the radar yet!

          • Yeah…..I know. We are all holding our breath down here because Jerry Jones has been instrumental in snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory. This past draft showed that he backed off of the meddling and allowed his coaches to draft some quality players….not superstars but a plethora of good players….and some hungry ones. As I told JAC….if we had ten seconds to throw the ball, we could even find someone open. They are giving Romo pretty good protection this year….He actually has time to set up instead of taking three steps and getting creamed.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          Watched a few games late Sat and all day Sunday. I agree with your assessment of the referees. Especially on the Def Backs getting holding and PI calls. The PAC 12 is playing touch, while the SEC is playing WWF full contact.

          I liked the comments during the Stanford game. Their coach was quoted as saying “I don’t care what they call if they would just tell us what is wrong and right so we can coach properly”.

          That tells me the coaches also are getting frustrated with the inconsistency.

          Speaking of full contact sports, how is the border war going these days. Seems like your getting a little more attention from the MS media lately.

          • Yes, the SEC is allowed to try to get the ball….the Big 12 is a draw….some refs are calling a powder puff game and some are letting the teams actually play football….it is a contact sport and not a “gentleman’s” game. This is why Texas has really taken up ice hockey….at least the fists can still fly and contact is still allowed although I am seeing a lot of penalties called there as well to “open” the game up for more scoring.

            I do not care what they call either as long as it is consistent. But it is going to have to be consistent among all leagues….if a Big 12 or PAC 12 team plays a SEC team, they better have their “A” game on and that means no touch football….

            The border, alas…………..well, we are getting a little more attention. Not enough but a little more. Texas has been real good and New Mexico has adopted our procedures very much under the radar, being a democratic state…but the governor of New Mexico also sees reality. It appears that most of the flagrant stuff is being moved to Arizona and California. Texas has eliminated sanctuary cities….there are a few enclaves but they are dwindling.

            The SCOTUS, in their ruling on ID’s has also helped. ID’s are now required for just about anything. Using debit cards, credit cards, cashing checks…… cashing social security checks are requiring picture ID’s and a finger print. I hate all of this but I also understand reality.

            The new fight down here has nothing to do with “Anglos”. The new fight is between the black population and the Hispanic population over the freebies. The black population does not like being edged out and the gang violence is between them. The Hispanic caucus is being very successful at relocating state allowable assets to themselves. The one basic thing that I am beginning to see is that we have been very successful, as a State, to isolate the illegal entry from the legal entries. That is to say, the Hispanic population that is here legally does not like the special treatment that the illegal population is receiving…..especially in the tuition. A Hispanic that is a citizen and a State resident cannot get the educational breaks that the illegals get and that is creating a divide. So, what is happening, the Hispanic caucus is getting more and more conservative because they are recognizing the disparity and they are beginning to shun the party that supports illegal entry.

            It is going to be very interesting to see the census breakdown in this voting cycle. My prediction is that the black and aged population will show no decrease in voting but the Hispanic population will show a decrease because illegals will not be able to provide even one of 9 recognized voter ID;s……and school ID’s are not recognized. Going to be interesting.

            • Keep us posted on this. I see many of the things you talk about as potential major issues if played right. Ever notice that despite the whining of the so-called Hispanic leaders, nobody seems to even bother questioning Hispanics born here or legally here on their feelings regarding amnesty? My unofficial polls among my workers were , NO AMNESTY! They see these people as a threat to all they have accomplished. Another thing, the blacks with a declining percentage of population, will eventually have to deal with a Hispanic majority. Then, they will understand what becoming a second class citizen is really all about. The freebies will all be over for them. The cooperation between blacks and Hispanics up here has been of necessity. There is no love lost, none at all. Dark skinned Hispanics, even generations down the line do NOT identify as black.

              Always wondered why things like this are so easy for some to see but impossible for others. maybe that old definition of liberal vs conservative is accurate. Libs see things the way they want to them to be, conservatives see things the way they are. Delusional vs non delusional.

  42. Just A Citizen says:

    Another example of how the “militia” saved the people from those marauding outsiders…………………..NOT.

    Of course their Government failed them as well. But then Govt in that part of the world is not the Govt we have come to love and hate.

%d bloggers like this: