A Short Quiz

Let me ask a few short quiz questions. The answer is either OWS (Occupy Wall Street) protesters or Tea Party protestors. Here are the questions (followed by the answer).
1. Which group has had more working hours in their lives? A: Tea Partiers
2. Which group paid more taxes last year? A: Tea Partiers
3. Which group received less government assistance last year? A: Tea Partiers
4. Which group has the most privately-employed members? A: Tea Partiers
5. Which group had no rapes or murders at their rallies? A: Tea Partiers
6. Which group had politicians that declared membership in their group? A: Tea Partiers
7. Which group did not disrupt the lives of hard-working Amercians? A: Tea Partiers
8. Which group showered between rallies? A: Tea Partiers
9. Which group cleaned up after themselves whenever they held a rally? A: Tea Partiers
10. Which group did not have the support of Van Jones, Maxine Waters or Nancy Pelosi?
A: Tea Partiers (after all, who would want the support of these three, really?)
So there you have it. That's the entire quiz. Do you sense a trend here?

OWS

I recently attended a summit for those involved in the American Cancer Society's Relay for Life. It was great to be around so many people who are donating their time and efforts to raising money for such a worthy cause. These are quality people.
Then I have to hear about these knuckleheads involved in Occupy Whatever. Clogging up streets, interrupting the lives of hard-working Americans, trashing local parks, not to mention the rapes, shootings and violence they bring with them. What a contrast. Imagine if these OWS folks put these efforts into something worthwhile. They could really achieve something great. Instead they take the lazy way out. But then, they don't have jobs, they live off of us taxpayers and they're not well informed. Too bad.

Soccer?, really?

Hard to believe it's been almost four months since I last posted here, but I'm back, ready to criticize, condemn and complain. Hey, this is my blog and I can do whatever I want. At least until Obama and his left-leaining cronies shut me down.



So today I read that FIFA selected Qatar to host the 2022 world cup soccer games. Two things come to mind: 1) Bad choice and 2) who cares?

1) Bad choice: Who in the heck wants to play or watch soccer in 100+ degree heat? No one with any common sense. And this country has only two big cities, Doha and Al Rayyan with populations of 1 million and one-half million respectively. This is where all those fans will converge? What a mess. Then to top if off, it's in the middle of the Persian Gulf - a hotbed of politcal unrest. Is their plan to suspend Sharia law during the games? Oh my, what will the human rights people say? When the other primary choices were the U.S. and Australia, the choice of Qatar is just plain dumb. But then again, this is FIFA we're talking about.



2) With all that said, I have to ask, "Who cares?" Despite the efforts of so many, soccer is just not an American game. Too low scoring, games that end in ties, rules that don't make sense (offsides?) and no hands!! This is just not the American way. Leave soccer to the 5-12 year olds. Let everyone else who cares go to Qatar for vacation in 2022. Enjoy yourself.

'Social Media' My Right Eye!

As an IT professional, I've lately been bombarded with information about social media and how my company should be using it. Granted, I do like a lot of the different channels and I personally use several of them on a regular basis. But one thing I've determined - they are anything but 'social'. In fact, they should be renamed 'Unsocial Media'. They all encourage us to hide behind a keyboard and monitor or sit in front of a TV and most times communicate without ever really seeing a person. How social is that?

And I'm not just talking about Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and the like. What about XBox Live, Netflix, plain ol' e-mail or for that matter, cable television. What have all these electronic channels done to us as a people? I believe they all contribute to us being more unsocial with one another.

Now don't get me wrong because as I said, I use many of these on a regular basis. But why do these seem to be so addictive, drawing you in and keeping you there for hours. How many times have you sat down to check your e-mail and ended up spending hours clicking on meaningless links just because they happened to pop-up in front of you? I usually check my Facebook once a day but I see friends on there with multiple entries throughout the day. I mean every time their stupid cat makes a cute face or they're going out for ice cream with their BFF, it gets mentioned. I call it channel-suck because all these different channels are sucking our lives away, keeping us from actually being social. As Garth says, "It's sucking my will to live!"

Let's not let the very media that helps us communicate turn us anti-social. No channel-suck for me.

From the Associated Press:
***********************************************
WASHINGTON - Some Democratic senators say they don't feel a need to accept all of their churches' teachings.
Dick Durbin of Illinois, who's Catholic, told reporters that he believes it's more important to follow his conscience than church doctrines on issues like abortion and birth control.
Durbin and New Mexico Senator Tom Udall, who's Mormon, both say they're comfortable remaining members of their churches despite doctrines they don't believe and would like to change.
***********************************************
So what I hear these guys saying is that their churches are not true, that they teach some principles of truth but overall, their church is just another church amongst a bunch of others who teach some good things but not everything they teach is true. Is that what they mean to say? If that's the case, they should rescind their membership in their church and find something they do believe in. When it comes to God, you're either all in or all out. And if this report is true, these two are not in.

Atheist Nonsense

Here's a story that appeared 7/17/10 on the Newscore website:

U.S. Atheists Reportedly Using Hair Dryers to 'De-Baptize'
American atheists lined up to be "de-baptized" in a ritual using a hair dryer, according to a report Friday on U.S. late-night news program "Nightline." Leading atheist Edwin Kagin blasted his fellow non-believers with the hair dryer to symbolically dry up the holy water sprinkled on their heads in days past. The styling tool was emblazoned with a label reading "Reason and Truth." Kagin believes parents are wrong to baptize their children before they are able to make their own choices, even slamming some religious education as "child abuse." He said the blast of hot air was a way for adults to undo what their parents had done.
"I was baptized Catholic. I don't remember any of it at all," said 24-year-old Cambridge Boxterman. "According to my mother, I screamed like a banshee ... so you can see that even as a young child I didn't want to be baptized. It's not fair. I was born atheist, and they were forcing me to become Catholic."

Besides the sheer stupidity of this, there are a couple of obvious questions that come to mind. First, if baptism means nothing, why do you need to 'symbolically' dry it up? If it means you just got wet, why do you feel the need to reverse that? Calling this move 'Reason' simply cracks me up. It certainly tells me a lot about this Kagin knucklehead.

And what about Mr. Cambridge Boxterman? You were born atheist?? Really. I didn't know you could be born atheist, I thought it was a decision one made after careful consideration. Tell me, can you also be born a Democrat, a Liberal, a left-wing looney? And the fact that, as a baby, you cried when you were baptized is certainly a sure sign that you didn't want to be baptized, just like you cried when you were fed, had your diaper changed, were given a bath or put to bed. You obviously didn't want those things either, right? That evil mother of yours forced these things on you.

Living on earth and not believing in God is like driving an F150 pickup but denying the existence of Ford.

The NEA ..... Again

Last year about this time, I blogged about the stupidity of the NEA and how they spend their time. This year they were in New Orleans and over the past year they have gotten even stupider (is that a real word?). This year they have recognized a new caucus - The NEA Drag Queen Caucus. Yes, that is a real caucus. Check it out at:
http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/nea-handbook-recognized-caucuses.pdf
Of course, this caucus joins other valuable caucuses within the NEA like:

Bourbon Caucus
Caribbean Caucus
Campers Caucus
Gay & Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Caucus
No Cocktail Left Behind Caucus
Princess Caucus

Yes, all valuable groups within the NEA who are addressing pressing problems within the education world. Ya, right. NEA, how 'bout you start this caucus:
God-fearing, America-loving, child-caring, traditional-family-believing Caucus.
Oh, I forgot. You'd actually have to have someone in your group that believed in these things to start the caucus. Oh well, it was a nice thought.