Wednesday, July 27, 2016

Effective Ad...

Hot Lesbians ad 2 copy

This ad is effective because:
  1. It is true on all points
    1. Most western men do consider good looking women kissing HOT.
    2. In Saudi Arabia gays and lesbians are imprisoned or killed.
    3. Canada oil sand is readily available, locally.
  2. It gets attention
  3. Contains humor.
It is a shame they pulled it due to pressure from SJWs. Apparently an ad like this is more offensive to SJWs than the content of the ad, the fact that gays and lesbians are murdered in Saudi Arabia by the government. Talk about a lack of perspective...

Monday, July 25, 2016

Debbie Wasserman Schultz booed off the stage at FL delegation breakfast

Could not have happened to a nicer lady /sarc

Wednesday, July 20, 2016

Tuesday, July 19, 2016

Philosophy 101, question #3

If you are not offended by both of these:

Image result for free speech zone

Image result for gun free zone


Why?

Wednesday, July 13, 2016

The climate change consensus

Watch this video...


Also what the video does not discuss is that NO ONE denies that the climate is changing. That is what weather does, it changes from day to day. Where the various controversies reside are:

  1. How much actual influence has man had on the global weather compared to what nature can do on its own (compare say the most recent Mt. St. Helen eruption of air-born particulates and CO2 discharges with that estimated to be caused by man).
  2. Who is to say what the world's "ideal" weather is? Is it what the weather was like 5000 years ago or tomorrow? Who gets to decide which is best and best for whom?
  3. If environmentalists were serious about reducing fossil fuel use (to save the planet) they would be promoting more nuclear power, but they are not. If we reduce our usage of fossil fuels, that lost energy must be made up somehow. Wind, solar, etc. will not close that energy gap. Nuclear power is the only way (today) to replace the energy lost by reducing/eliminating the use of fossil fuels. Any environmentalist that is not for nuclear power is not serious.
  4. If "man made climate change" is really as dire as Al Gore, DiCaprio, and and all of these other "celebrity" environmentalists say it is, why are they NOT doing their part to help? Why are they constantly jet-setting all around the globe instead of appearing by Skype? If they were serious about wanting to save the planet and if things were really so dire, they would never fly by plane again. Al Gore would sell his house that consumes over $30K a year in energy and live more like George Bush.
They don't do that though, in part because they are "better" (i.e. morally superior because they CARE) than you and I. Due to their fight for the planet, they have earned the right (in their minds at least) to have a carbon foot print that is larger than some small towns. As with most socialists and/or fascists, they always think that they will wind up in charge and as George Orwell famously wrote, "Some animals are more equal than other animals".

Wednesday, July 6, 2016

Two in the heart and one in the head...

the rule of law is officially pronounced dead...

The Supreme Court fatally wounded the "rule of law" in 2012 by claiming a mandate was really a tax, even after the Government swore that it was not.

In a Surprise Ruling, Chief Justice Sides With Liberals to Uphold Insurance Mandate

While on life support, President Three-putt (Obama) continued to abuse the body of the law, while it was in intensive care by routinely exceeding his official powers (cause he has a phone and a pen). He was a teacher of Constitutional law after all, so clearly he knows what the President can and can not do (not that he cared at all - immigration non-enforcement, fast n furious, IRS attacking Tea Party groups, green energy pay-offs, interfering in local criminal matters, etc.) while Congress stood by and watched the abuse.

This week, the "Rule of Law" has now succumb due to a fatal head-shot delivered by the FBI in their finding that though "Crooked" Hillary did "a lot of bad things", it would not recommend indicting her.

After describing clear evidence of extensive mishandling of classified national security information, FBI Director James Comey announced that the FBI will not recommend indicting former secretary of state Hillary Clinton.

Comey acknowledged Clinton sent and received Top Secret emails that “any reasonable person” understands not to discuss on an unclassified system.

Comey also acknowledged her email system was housed on unclassified personal servers that lacked full time security systems. Indeed, nations and groups hostile to the U.S. could have hacked the system. Comey acknowledged “hostile actors” hacked individuals corresponding with Clinton on her unauthorized system. She also used her unsecured personal system outside of the U.S.—in places where sophisticated adversaries could hack her communications.

So, the Government has spent the last 8 years showing all of us that the rule of law means nothing, if you are in power. That those of the "favored" class are exempt from those antiquated words written on a 200 year old piece of paper. OK. Fine. You want to roll that way? Understood.

I wonder what the Government will do when those it governs no longer pay any attention to it or to its rules and laws? When the Government shows time and again that words don't mean what they mean, that "at this point, what difference does it make?". Ye shall reap as ye shall sow.

Update:



Remember, he said all that she did wrong and that there was to be no case BUT someone ELSE doing the same thing should not expect the same treatment...





Saturday, July 2, 2016

Logic bomb #1

The fact is that more rapes have been prevented / stopped by guns than by all of the "slut walks" ever held. Why don't more feminists support individual gun rights?

Feminists, instead of attending the next scheduled slut walk, why not go to the range, learn how to shoot, and arm yourselves?

Friday, July 1, 2016

Voter fraud example #22

An investigation by CBSLA2 and KCAL9 found that hundreds of deceased persons are still on voter registration rolls in the area, and that many of these names have been voting for years in Los Angeles.

Julita Abutin, died in 2006 but voted in 2008, 2010, 2012, and 2014.

For example, John Cenkner died in 2003, according to Social Security Administration records, yet he voted in the 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, and 2010 elections. His daughter told the station that she was “astounded” and couldn’t “understand how anybody” could get away with this.

But, but, but that JUST CAN'T BE cause the left / democrats keep telling us that there is NO voter fraud problem and that it is just those evil Republicans trying to disenfranchise minorities by wanting to require proper ID before allowing someone to vote.

Another voter, Julita Abutin, died in 2006 but voted in 2008, 2010, 2012, and 2014. According to CBS, the county confirmed they have “signed vote-by-mail envelopes” from Abutin since she passed away.

The mask is slipping and they don't even bother trying to hide their dishonesty any more. They know the media will help cover for them and [today at least] the DOJ is on their side.