LoL

HaHa! One of the better imports from England.

THE £50 LESSON

Recently, while I was working in the flower beds in the front yard, my neighbours stopped to chat as they returned home from walking their dog.

During our friendly conversation, I asked their 12 year old daughter what she wanted to be when she grows up. She said she wanted to be Prime Minister someday.

Both of her parents - liberal Democrat and New labour - were standing there, so I asked her, “If you were Prime Minister what would be the first thing you would do?”

She replied, “I’d give food and houses to all the homeless people.”

Her parents beamed with pride!

“Wow...what a worthy goal!” I said. “But you don’t have to wait until you’re Prime Minister to do that!” I told her.

“What do you mean?” she replied.

So I told her, “You can come over to my house and mow the lawn, pull weeds, and trim my hedge, and I’ll pay you £50. Then you can go over to the grocery store where the homeless guy hangs out, and you can give him the £50 to use toward food and a new house.”

She thought that over for a few seconds, then she looked me straight in the eye and asked, “Why doesn’t the homeless guy come over and do the work, and you can just pay him the £50?”

I said, “Welcome to the Conservative Party.”

Her parents aren’t speaking to me anymore.

The name that cannot be spoken

This is the thinking that is happening right now in Canada:

Part of Quebec’s “problem” with religion might be that it listens too closely to its secularist academic elite. An anecdote shows how at least some Quebec academics regard religion. I was asked by the Ottawa Citizen to write an article responding to the question: “What is currently the world’s most dangerous idea?” I questioned some of my law school colleagues as to what they thought; without exception, they all answered “religion.”
 

This is the attack that is taking place throughout the Western world. Unfortunately this attack is restricted to one religion, namely Christianity...makes you think doesn't it.

relative reality?

Novelist Phillip K. Dick defined “reality” as “that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go away.”

Life exacts consequences from choices. Take the object lesson of Detroit: governed for a generation by overspending, Liberal scoundrels and incompetents, groaning under Michigan’s heftiest per-capita tax burden and the country’s (!) highest home and commercial property tax. The result? Motown’s collapse.

The political Left, meanwhile, harrumphs and scratches its head, flummoxed by that city’s awfulness.

Re-BUTT-al

Its about time conservative academics start defending family values, well done Professor Adams.
http://clashdaily.com/2013/08/an-embarrassment-to-higher-education/

P C warfare

....Thus she revealed herself to be just another politically correct zealot, standing for the secular sectarianism of group rights.

For far from serving the whole of society, each such interest group exists to gain power over everyone else – and damns anyone who stands in its way.

Indeed, this is why ‘political correctness’ is not remotely liberal at all, but viciously oppressive. It is simply a mechanism for re-ordering the world according to a particular dogma – and thus inescapably stifles all dissent.

Innately hostile to traditional morality, it paves the way for a secular Inquisition in which today’s Torquemadas are the ideologues of such group rights – and it is Christians and other religious believers who are the heretics to be silenced by force.

It is, indeed, the principal weapon of unholy war wielded by the forces of militant secularism, which are intent upon destroying the Judeo-Christian basis of western morality.

It supplants traditional morality and the concepts of right and wrong, truth and lies by a creed which says in effect, ‘Whatever is right for you is right’.

It also seeks to replace patriotism and service to one’s country by serving ‘the community’. This is yet another slippery concept, which today can simply amount to membership of just such an interest group, which is in the business of elbowing out other interest groups in the greedy clamour for entitlements.

So the new Guiding promise is all about being true to me, myself and my beliefs, whatever they may happen to be. It represents the antithesis of duty to others. It says, more or less, ‘I promise to serve myself’.

It is a promise for a narcissistic, self-centred and morally vacuous age. (Melanie Phillips 27.8.13)

Barack O'phoney

Thomas Sowell on the phony Barack Obama:

Argentina has recently been demanding that Britain return the Falkland Islands, which have been occupied by Britons for nearly two centuries. In 1982, Argentina seized these islands by force, only to have British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher take the islands back by force.

With Argentina today beset by domestic problems, demanding the return of the Falklands is once again a way for Argentina's government to distract the Argentine public's attention from the country's economic and other woes.

Because the Argentines call these islands "the Malvinas," rather than "the Falklands," Barack Obama decided to use the Argentine term. But he referred to them as "the Maldives."

It so happens that the Maldives are thousands of miles away from the Malvinas. The former are in the Indian Ocean, while the latter are in the South Atlantic.

Nor is this the only gross misstatement that President Obama has gotten away with, thanks to the mainstream media, which sees no evil, hears no evil and speaks no evil when it comes to Obama.

The presidential gaffe that struck me when I heard it was Barack Obama's reference to a military corps as a military "corpse." He is obviously a man who is used to sounding off about things he has paid little or no attention to in the past. His mispronunciation of a common military term was especially revealing to someone who was once in the Marine Corps, not Marine "corpse."

Like other truly talented phonies, Barack Obama concentrates his skills on the effect of his words on other people — most of whom do not have the time to become knowledgeable about the things he is talking about. Whether what he says bears any relationship to the facts is politically irrelevant.
 

The last paragraph's instructive and is wonderfully representative of this shallow Alinskyite as it is of Australia's current prime minister (the wizard of oz) who is cut from the same cloth. Both say whatever is necessary to remain in power, they lie to the liars, spin to the spinners and both lie and spin about the truthful and behind all the fabrications they are shallow and superficial.
Superficial persons for a superficial age, perfect!

Wisdom of the ages

In 1837 Daniel Webster recognized the character of manipulative men in power when he said:

There are men, in all ages, who mean to exercise power usefully; but they mean to exercise it. They mean to govern well; but they mean to govern. They promise to be kind masters; but they mean to be masters. They think there need be but little restraint upon themselves. Their notion of the public interest is apt to be quite closely connected with their own exercise of authority. They may not, indeed, always understand their own motives. The love of power may sink too deep in their own hearts even for their own scrutiny, and may pass with themselves for mere patriotism and benevolence.
 

And from Todd Conrad in April of 2013:

 Let us hope that the internet and the free flow of ideas about freedom continue to hamper the planners and world-savers who intend to remake the world in their image and reduce us all under absolute tyranny.