Wolraich/BossGuy: Best of dag Nominations
Ramona: It's Still Torture
Okay, the problem may lie in the fact that I do not deserve that much.
I admit that three wives would agree in that assessment!
And of course, there is a value judgment with regard to what the word 'deserve' AND WHAT it means.
I probably deserve a death sentence, depending upon the judicial context.
But I swear I shot those guys in Reno for a reason!
So I am hesitant to ask for what I deserve!
Hell, I mean the great emancipator in the sky might just toss a goddamn coin because I messed things up so badly!
Now I do find myself on the front page of this esteemed blog site, quite serendipitously (is that a word? I mean I spend a lot of time deciding whether or not my scribble is really a word but I digress) from time to time.
And, once a month the Dagblog Gods wish to make me a headlined blogger.
I mean it's uptop and all and it has a red line thingy and so that is advertising as far as I am concerned.
I have to digress, once again (I like to digress actually, it gives me my best responses) , but the single best line I have ever written in my entire worthless life was actually edited by the Gods of Dagblog. I mean, Donal esplained it all in chat one weekend and all. Hahahahahahahaahahaha
The line in question all had to do with the issue of Oedipus and his unrelenting sexual pleasure with his own mother.....
But I digress...
How does one, in a sphere of Free Speech, claim authority?
This is not an easy question to answer, even given our penchant for SAT's and ACT's and free quizzes on the internet.
NOW TO THE MAIN SUBJECT AT HAND!
I marvel at how Free Speech actually works.
Hitchens can say: GODDAMN GOD!
Coulter might say: GODDAMN MINORITIES.
Rush can say: I DO NOT LIKE BLACK FOLKS OR MEXICANS OR BARACK THE MAGIC NEGRO.
I can go on and on.
But Hitchens made a lot of money with his message and Coulter makes a lot of money with her message and Rush makes more money than God with his message.
It's the money not the media for chrissakes and that makes the real message.
Here are some messages from 2011 that astound me! And remember, I am 61 years of age and heard Governor Wallace exclaim: Segregation now, Segregation for ever! Besides the line: I shall never be out-niggered again.
D'Souza, a member of an upper Indian Caste remarked, after underlining the fact that slavery could not have been that bad since slaves were property and that there was some message dictated from our DNA to protect our property:
Slavery is usually portrayed as constant torment, but Mr. D'Souza finds that "slaves were, in material terms of diet, health, and shelter, slightly better off than northern industrial workers, and far better off than workers in much of Europe." As he points out, "no free workers enjoyed a comparable social security system from birth until death." Moreover, life expectancy for slaves was only slightly lower than that of their owners. When slave owners had really dangerous work to do, they hired Irish navvies rather than risk their valuable property. Mr. D'Souza notes that when Frederick Douglass visited Ireland in the 1840s he was appalled at conditions there and wrote that he was almost "ashamed to lift my voice against American slavery." Mr. D'Souza concludes: "In summary, the American slave was treated like property, which is to say, pretty well."
And what better protection might an individual experience than that of actually being a prized chattel! Of course chattel is hardly prized more than real estate (depending upon the market). Just ask any office fellow living behind a screen!
Ann Coulter said:
"Our blacks are so much better than their blacks," she said, speaking of Democrats. "To become a black Republican, you don't just roll into it."
Roll into it? Roll into tons and tons of cash I suppose!
Herman Cain said:
Don’t blame Wall Street, don’t blame the banks. If you’re unemployed and you’re not rich, it’s your own fault.
Of course, 17% unemployment is the fault of the 17% unemployed.
Appearing on CBS’s “Face the Nation,“ Gingrich said there is a ”fundamental assault on our liberties by the courts.” He defended his previously stated position that the president and Congress should have the authority to ignore court rulings they disagree with, and that in the case of extremely controversial decisions, lawmakers should have the power to subpoena activist judges and have them defend their rulings.
When host Bob Schieffer questioned how such a subpoena could be enforced, such as whether he would send a Capitol Hill police officer to forcibly bring the judge in, Gingrich said yes.
Make the kids clean our toilets, fire all the union janitors and arrest errant judges.
Boy, how much more could a guy love his Constitution!
[I]t would be enforcement: Enforcement both at the border but also by the [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] agents. Right now the ICE agents -- those are the agents in the interior of the country who are tasked with enforcing the law -- they are not enforcing them and we also have sanctuary cities now where they don't enforce the laws on deportation. I think that what we simply need to do is to start enforcing the laws which we are not doing and begin the process of deportation," she said.
I would just add that it would be much easier if the Feds would call for a brand new census and those without proper papers would have to wear a star upon their outer clothing noting their 'illegal status.'
Then Arpaio could just pick them all up and put then in tented gulags until such time as busses could properly package them and send them to Mexico!
“The reason that people don’t talk about it like I do is that you are vilified by the mainstream media, by Hollywood, by the educational establishment, all of the levers of power,” Santorum said. “Even the conservative media when it comes to these issues are hesitant to talk about them, it’s not polite conversation.”
Santorum pointed to the landmark case, Lawrence v. Texas, where the U.S. Supreme Court overturned sodomy laws that were used to imprison gays and lesbians.
“And I stood up from the very beginning back in 2003 when the Supreme Court was going create a constitutional right to sodomy and said this is wrong we can’t do this,” Santorum said. ”And so I stood up when no one else did and got hammered for it. I stood up and I continue to stand up.”
Santorum added, “I do not believe that sexual orientation should be added to hate crimes, but let me be honest, I don’t believe in hate crimes, period.”
I believe that property rights should be protected. Your right to be on TV is protected by property rights because somebody owns that station. I can’t walk into your station. So right of freedom of speech is protected by property. The right of your church is protected by property. So people should honor and protect it. This gimmick, Chris, it’s off the wall when you say I’m for property rights and states rights therefore I’m a racist. That’s just outlandish.
And to claim that George Wallace was racist....well that is just outlandish!
“I’m going to Washington D.C. to save this country and put the values back into the White House. Faith, family and freedom. That’s what this election’s really about."
Well, except there is ample evidence that this fruitcake screws anything that walks.
well that's all I got folks!