Old but gold, today’s article comes from a December 2013 episode of the O’Reilly Factor. The subject: a federal judge’s ruling on polygamy in Utah.
Bill O’Reilly presents us the modern, toothless, “conservative” take on not conserving much of anything in America. Andrew Napolitano offers the unbrutal and hypocritical “libertarian” perspective on the erosion of our liberty.
Both men would rather appeal to their cow-brained demo than try and discuss the serious issues underlying our culture today. Of course.
Trigger Warning: Modern Realpolitik
Behold, the stupidest thing I have seen today… And it’s 2am. Dammit.
Trigger Warning: Jen Sorenson
1. Funny how “freedom” when dealing with human actors always becomes something inherently unequal. Jen ignores this. Of course. Jen instead projects a conception of freedom that involves reality catering to her wants. Of course.
I have been dragged through this debate so many times that the talking points have been ingrained into my neural pathways like the well worn action of Grandpa’s old Remington shotgun. For the record, I am pro-gun, but for infinitely simpler reasons than the typical pundit: I just like guns. To put this in liberalspeak, if two consenting gay adults wanna use a loaded AR-15 as a sex toy, that’s their business, and you religious bigots had better keep your intolerant noses out of their bedroom. The only thing they’re hurting is their alimentary canals and possibly the muzzlebrake on that Colt. Of course, to be fair, both pro-gun and gun control advocates make some predictably stupid points in this discussion, so let’s lock and load the primary examples of bad premises and shoddy thinking:
Do it faggot.
Source: George Takei
This “higher ground” amounts to spitting on religious doctrine in favor of the disgusting behavior associated with gay “culture.” Apparently it’s also not absolutism or religious if you are a female or “LGBT ally” that absolutely and religiously supports things that were better off secluded in dens of iniquity.
So, yesterday FEE published an article by Jeffrey Tucker. It was awful.
I am of the opinion that Mr. Tucker wears his bow tie much too tightly these days; it seems to be cutting off circulation to his brain. Or perhaps it’s all the Rentseekerwitz farts he’s been sniffing?
Whatever the reason, Tucker’s progressive softening of the mind has led him to embark on a campaign not only against his ideological fellow travelers, but against reality itself.
Jeff Tucker’s Libertarianism as a pastel Frankenstein
“Devout Catholic dad returns from Afghanistan to find his daughter is a porn star!”
The absolute worst thing about this link is the question posed within the article’s picture. Over a CATHEDRAL, no less.
To ask the question is to answer “no.”
It seems that recent media buzz surrounding the dramatic rise of the digital currency Bitcoin has attracted swarms of petulant and clamorous rent-seeking “social justice” parasites like flies to a midden heap. This should come as no surprise to anyone that understands the true nature and purpose of feminism and social justice activism. You can hardly expect these troublesome naggers to pass up what looks like a big, juicy pile of resources in the hands of young (mostly) heterosexual, privileged White (and Asian) men. Feminists have been eyeing both the IT industry and libertarian community as potential sources of rent for a while now, and Bitcoin represents an as yet untapped revenue stream.
The face of privilege
Trigger warning: Think Progress
According to an online poll from Simulacrum, the average user is a 32.1-year-old libertarian male. By users’ accounts, those men are mostly white.
Breaking that down, about 95 percent of Bitcoin users are men, about 61 percent say they’re not religious, and about 44 percent describe themselves as “libertarian / anarcho-capitalist.”
Looks like a perfect target.
Apparently Cadillac’s Olympics commercial has given our enlightened equals at Huffpo some fitful nights of sleep.
Carolyn Gregoire writes:
There are plenty of things to celebrate about being American, but being possessed by a blind mania for working yourself into the ground, buying more stuff and mocking people in other countries just isn’t one of them.
Whoa, slow down there, honey.
Western societal honor has been sacrificed upon the altar of the post-modern. That’s the simple fact of the matter. Honor is now foreign to the mind of the West, and there truly is no standard set for the Western individual. Why should we hold honor in such high regard? What is honor? Why was honor sacrificed?
In all corners of the Earth where honor can historically/presently be found, it is generally defined the same way regardless of culture or region. Honor is the eternal reputation of the self. It is not necessarily defined by intelligence, cunning, strength, speed, or talent. Honor is worthiness, loyalty, truthfulness, respect, being well-mannered, having discipline, and being humble. Ultimately, one of high honor was of high value to society, and held in high regard. Therefore, the actions of the honorable were something to pay mind.
The greatest of us once died for honor.