Archive for the ‘Consider This’ Category

28
Oct

African American: Really Stupid Terminology

   Posted by: Interceder

African-American. African-American, African-American. We have had that terminology shoved on us for decades now. Can you define it?

Words mean something, so let’s deal with it. The first word to probably draw your attention was “stupid.” According to Dictionary.com:

adjective, stupider, stupidest.
  1. lacking ordinary quickness and keenness of mind; dull.
  2. characterized by or proceeding from mental dullness; foolish;senseless:

    a stupid question.
  3. tediously dull, especially due to lack of meaning or sense; inane;pointless:

    a stupid party.
  4. annoying or irritating; troublesome:

    Turn off that stupid radio.
  5. in a state of stupor; stupefied:
    stupid from fatigue.
  6. Slang. excellent; terrific.

For the purpose of this writing, I am intending definition number 3, “tediously dull, especially due to lack of meaning or sense; inane;pointless:.” (Hey, it’s my post, I get to choose. If you apply one of the other definitions, that is your responsibility, not mine.)

Now the second word of note. Merriam-Webster.com defines African–American as:
an American who has African and especially black African ancestors.
So, what have we done with that? Does it really make sense? I maintain it is pointless. I have never heard the term “Europeon-American,” yet we seem to have a whole bunch of them around. I believe there is a group of historical societies which trace the ancestry of the Founding Fathers, but I don’t believe I have ever heard the lineage declared to be “English-Americans.”
 
In France, do we have “African-French” or would that be a use for the term “African-European?” Even more baffling, since the purpose of the term “African-American” is to make a distinction, then on the African continent do they have “African-Africans” and “White-Africans,” or again, “European-Africans?” 
 
That seems to demand another question. Why is it not “American-African?” Do “African-Americans” have dual citizenship, one in Africa and one in America? It could make one wonder which is more important to the people who demand this terminology. It could seem that “Africa” is the emphasis of the term yet all of the benefits come from the fact they are Americans..
 
It is obvious the term “African-American” came from some “politically correct” (: agreeing with the idea that people should be careful to not use language or behave in a way that could offend a particular group of people – merriam-webster.com) fool who wants to make themselves feel better. What we really need is a term such as “Politician-American” we would have no doubts about their thought processes, however, we already have a shorter term for this group, that is “liar.”

fool – noun \ˈfül\

  1. : a person who lacks good sense or judgment : a stupid or silly person
  2. : a person who enjoys something very much
  3. : a dessert made with cooked fruit and cream or a thick sauce

(merriam-webster.com)

 
Of course we must include a caveat (: an explanation or warning that should be remembered when you are doing or thinking about something – merriam-webster.com) on this discussion because someone will be offended, so if you are offended by the term “African-American” or any other terms in this discussion… get over yourself.
 
Now, when will America have answers to these questions?


15
Jul

Any Accountability For Obama’s Czars?

   Posted by: Interceder

Have we heard one word about Obama’s czars since he enthroned them. Has ANY body done a check on what they are, and have been, doing?

Over the course of the last EIGHT (8) years we have paid out MILLIONS of dollars, per year, in salaries to these bureaucrats. However, despite the controversy at the time, if you do some checking, there has not been mention of them since 2008. One piece of information at that time was an article at Investigating Obama. It says:

Quote:

The Compleat* List of Czars
in American Daughter, by Nancy Matthis

Bypassing the authority of Congress, Barack Obama rules through czars — the beginnings of dictatorship:

  1. Afghanistan-Pakistan (Af-Pak) czar, Richard Holbrooke
  2. AIDS czar, Jeffrey Crowley [openly gay white man]
  3. Auto recovery czar, Ed Montgomery
  4. Behavioral science czar, position not yet filled
  5. Bailout czar, Herbert Allison Jr., [replaced Bush bailout czar Neel Kashkari, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Financial Stability confirmed by Senate]
  6. Border czar, Alan Bersin
  7. Car czar, Ron Bloom [Counselor to the Secretary of the Treasury , under Senate oversight]
  8. Climate change czar, Todd Stern
  9. Copyright czar, not appointed yet
  10. Counterterrorism czar, John Brennan
  11. Cybersecurity czar, position will be vacant on August 21st [upon the departure of Melissa Hathaway]
  12. Disinformation czar, Linda Douglass [This is a new media buzz since our earlier list, a response by pundits to the White House request for informants: see Glenn Beck and Lew Rockwell]
  13. Domestic violence czar, Lynn Rosenthal
  14. Drug czar, Gil Kerlikowske
  15. Economic czar, Larry Summers
  16. Economic czar number two, Paul Volcker
  17. Education czar, Arne Duncan
  18. Energy czar, Carol Browner
  19. Food czar, Michael Taylor [a former Monsanto executive, or, the fox in charge of the henhouse]
  20. Government performance czar, Jeffrey Zients
  21. Great Lakes czar, Cameron Davis
  22. Green jobs czar, Van Jones [who has a communist background]
  23. Guantanamo closure czar, Daniel Fried
  24. Health czar, Nancy-Ann DeParle
  25. Infotech czar, Vivek Kundra [Shoplifted four shirts, worth $33.50 each, from J.C. Penney in 1996 (source). His last day in DC government was March 4 but on March 12 the FBI raided his office and arrested two staffers.]
  26. Intelligence czar, Dennis Blair [Director of National Intelligence, a Senate confirmed position. He is a retired United States Navy four-star admiral]
  27. Latin-American czar, Arturo Valenzuela (nominee) [although this post is referred to as a czar, he is nominatied to be Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs and so is subject to Senate confirmation. Voting on his confirmation was delayed to clarify his position on Honduras. Watch WaPo’s Head Count to track status of confirmation.]
  28. Mideast peace czar, George Mitchell
  29. Mideast policy czar, Dennis Ross
  30. Pay czar, Kenneth Feinberg
  31. Regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein
  32. Religion czar, aka God czar Joshua DuBois
  33. Safe schools czar, Kevin Jennings [appointed to be Assistant Deputy Secretary of the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, a newly created post (that does not require Senate confirmation); openly gay founder of an organization dedicated to promoting pro-homosexual clubs and curricula in public schools]
  34. Science czar, John Holdren
  35. Stimulus oversight czar, Earl Devaney
  36. Sudan czar, J. Scott Gration
  37. TARP czar, Elizabeth Warren [chair of the [Congressional Oversight Panel for the Trouble Assets Relief Program; note that Herb Allison is frequently called the TARP czar]
  38. Technology czar, Aneesh Chopra
  39. Trade czar, Ron Kirk
  40. Urban affairs czar, Adolfo Carrion
  41. War czar, Douglas Lute [retained from Bush administration, married to Jane Holl Lute, currently a Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security]
  42. Water czar, David J. Hayes [a Deputy Interior Secretary and therefore subject to Senate oversight]
  43. Weapons czar, Ashton Carter [actually Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and so subject to Senate confirmation]
  44. Weapons of mass destruction czar, Gary Samore

Positions being planned:

  1. Income redistribution czar

  2. Land-use czar

  3. Mortgage czar, formally “consumer financial protection czar” (source)

  4. Radio-internet fairness czar

  5. Student loan czar, to oversee a program of mandatory service in return for college money (source)

  6. Voter list czar

  7. Zoning czar

End Quote

Does America know how many czars Obama has in place? Does anyone know how much money we are paying out to them? Does anyone know how much money we are paying out as a result of their bureaucracy?  Does anybody care?

Unfortunately, we have done too little and it is too late to deal with the graft of the Obama administration. Where will we go from here?

When will America realize the cost of government and decide to do something about it?



27
Jun

The Most Insidious Perversion

   Posted by: Interceder

According to Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary pervrrsion is defined as

sexual behavior that people think is not normal or natural

: something that improperly changes something good

: the process of improperly changing something that is good

The Oxford Dictionary says

The alteration of something from its original course, meaning, or state to a distortion or corruption of what was first intended:
all great evil is the perversion of a good
a scandalous perversion of the law

Those who declare themselves to be most tolerant are those who are dismissive of the principles and mores of the past centuries. These “tolerant” type are the perfect fit for the definition of perversion in that they are distorting the founding principles which built our country.

Where was God when the founders began? He gave us “unalienable Rights. But God continues to be removed from government and what has been declared to be “right” by Him has been abandoned.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. 

Where was the family in the expansion of the population? Who built and managed the farms? What was the dynamic of the family? What was the configuration of groups being sought to populate the towns to make them grow? But that family apparently is no longer an asset and has to be redefined.

To their disdain, the book most detested by the social activists has a passage which identifies them perfectly.

They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents,  foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless.  Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them. – Romans 1:29-32 ESV

The most guilty of this perversion are accountable to no one. Nine non-elected persons who have an agenda which continues to run unchecked. 

When will America decide the travesty has gone far enough?



7
Nov

God IS Dead

   Posted by: Interceder

Time magazine was quite prophetic in 1966 when it asked “Is God Dead?”

When will America admit it has finally arrived at a point where the answer to that question can be confirmed as “Yes.”

Read the rest of this entry »

22
Oct

“How Did Harry Reid Get Rich?”

   Posted by: Interceder Tags:

National Review Article
By Betsy Woodruff
Originally posted August 15, 2012

Try this thought experiment. Imagine that someone grows up in poverty, works his way through law school by holding the night shift as a Capitol Hill policeman, and spends all but two years of his career as a public servant. Now imagine that this person’s current salary — and he’s at the top of his game — is $193,400. You probably wouldn’t expect him to have millions in stocks, bonds, and real estate.

Read the rest of this entry »

11
Jul

The NAACP Is Racist.

   Posted by: Interceder

Mitt Romney will be speaking before the NAACP today. Will he address the fact that the NAACP is politically incorrect?

Read the rest of this entry »

17
Jan

Aren’t Conservatives Disgusted Yet?

   Posted by: Interceder

It seems every election cycle we get a new set of candidates crammed down our throats while there is another set of candidates who seem to actually represent what conservative Americans just might want in the office of President.

The present cycle seems to be no different, if not worse. “THEY” are telling us that only Mitt Romney has a chance to beat Barak Obama in the presidential dual. Meanwhile, Conservatives seem to prefer Rick Santorum.

Maybe… no… probably one reason “THEY” have a preference in who runs for the highest office in the land is because Mitt Romney is in that favored group of the Washington elite, the ‘THEY” who are really being allowed to make far too many decisions.

There is no need to go over the political differences of these 2 candidates. That is not the point here. There are plenty of sources for you to get information on what these men stand for.

The point is we are getting someone crammed down our throat again because ‘THEY” have chosen him, just as “THEY” chose John McCain in 2008. As far as I am concerned, part of the proof is John McCain has endorsed Mitt Romney.

No matter how offensive a candidate is to the conservative, the standard excuse for choosing a nominee seems to be”Is he electable?” And “THEY” continue to use that rhetoric to push their agenda on voters. The really, really pathetic part of the equation is that voters fall for it.

The big question should be… “What are the real differences in Barak Obama and Mitt Romney, besides the fact one has a “D” in front of their name and the other has an “R.” Either of these men are, at best, moderates.

Now, what if the voters stood up to the Washington inside crowd and actually voted their conscience rather than vote the way some political consultant told them. How did these pundits get such power?

If Rick Santorum is unelectable because he is “too conservative,” then Republicans need to let the entire citizenship of the United States make that decision in November. The alternative is the same as that in 2008 when the “in-crowd” told Americans that John McCain was the most electable Republican. Otherwise, it really seems we are just making a choice of whether we want an “R” or a “D” Progressive to continue the downward spiral of this country.

When will America take back the privilege to vote for a candidate based on their actual choice by conscience rather than on the opinion of some pundit?

 

12
Dec

A Quote You Won’t Hear In Washington

   Posted by: Interceder

You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away people’s initiative and independence.
You cannot help people permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves…. Abraham Lincoln

13
Oct

The Real Problem with Entitlements

   Posted by: Interceder

The origin of this message is unknown here, but it is nonetheless relevant.

Read the rest of this entry »

9
Oct

The United States for a Palestine State

   Posted by: OtherSources

Whenever you hear American presidents or the U.N. talk about forming a Palestinian state consider the following and watch this video:

A Century of Palestinian Rejectionism and Jew Hatred

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has launched an international campaign to achieve recognition by the United Nations for an independent Palestinian state. Abbas and his international supporters claim that only Israel (with the United States) stands in the way of this act of historical justice, which would finally bring about peace in the Middle East.

This video debunks the Palestinians’ claim and shows that Abbas has been lying about the origins and history of the conflict. Palestinian leaders have rejected partition plans that would have given them much more land for their independent state than the Jews were offered for theirs. Rather than being the innocent victims of a “dispossession” at the hands of the Israelis, the Palestinians rejected reasonable compromises and instead pursued their aim of getting rid of the only Jewish state in the world.

Read the rest of this entry »

css.php
WP-Definitions