Previous 11 - 20 Next
In response to:

Uninstall Firefox

jb168 Wrote: Apr 08, 2014 9:10 AM
You are absolutely right on this one, Dennis! The egregious nature of the Eich purging and the visibility and vulnerability of Mozilla, as a major player in a huge market with lots of competitors, make this the ideal place for all who love liberty to take a stand. We should be able to drive Mozilla right out of business, with a great and decisive battle worthy of the name "culture war".
Hey wait! Didn't the Supreme Court rule that the NLRB is illegally constituted based on Obama recess appointments that were made when the Senate was NOT in recess? Why does any ruling by this NLRB hold any water?
In response to:

Pope Francis v. Obama

jb168 Wrote: Apr 06, 2014 8:59 AM
My favorite admonition of Jesus appears in Matthew (10:14) Mark (6:11) and Luke (9:5) (in case one should think it obscure). Here's the one from Mark: "And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, it shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgement, than for that city." Oh yeah, Jesus accepted everything, all right. But to a Clintonian word-parser, one could say that he did accept everything, in the sense that he accepted the reality that everything was what it was. That's different than accepting everything in the common sense of the term, i.e., accepting everything as good; hence the word "acceptable". So I share Kerwick's unease with this Pope's ambiguous style of speaking, and his deference to the Church teaching, that "is clear". Here's a question: If the teaching of the Church is clear, who need's a Pope?
In response to:

What’s a Little Vote Fraud?

jb168 Wrote: Apr 01, 2014 10:13 AM
It seems that the very public support of the likes of Sharpton for Melowese Richardson could be used effectively in the federal courts to prove that voter fraud is the very intention of those who oppose such legislation.
In response to:

What’s a Little Vote Fraud?

jb168 Wrote: Apr 01, 2014 10:13 AM
It seems that the very public support of the likes of Sharpton for Melowese Richardson could be used effectively in the federal courts to prove that voter fraud is the very intention of those who oppose such legislation.
In response to:

A Nation's Attempt to Survive Isn't Racism

jb168 Wrote: Mar 29, 2014 10:11 AM
This sort of "postmodern" thinking arises from what we might call the "Star Trek generation". Note that in Star Trek, even the entire earth is merely a small part of the "United Federation of Planets", that wonderful, ever tranquil and homogeneous socialist union. These Star Trek generation people (often referred to as "transnationalists") believe that nation-states per se are obsolete in their post -modern Fabian Socialist world. But that does not comport with human nature and the rest of natural law, so at some point in the attempt to unify the world that way, it will utterly fall apart, like trying to pack more than 238 protons and neutrons into an atomic nucleus. The only real question is how much energy will be violently released by the resulting multi-national fission reaction.
In response to:

Is Europe Cracking Up?

jb168 Wrote: Mar 25, 2014 10:56 AM
"It was predictable, it was predicted, and it has come to pass.", Yes, so why also say: "There is no single or simple explanation." Seems pretty simple to me. After all, such a worldwide movement (Note that various parts of various states out west in the US also want to secede) should find a simple solution in natural law. Is it not the natural consequence of big government? As governments aggrandize power and rule over greater and more diverse swaths of humanity, people naturally rise up as a consequence of their estrangement from their less and less representative governments. On the other side, the socialists who promote the greater and greater "unions" of peoples (like the EU and Democrats in the US) come from what we might call the "Star Trek generation". Note that in Star Trek, even the entire earth is merely a small part of the "United Federation of Planets", that wonderful, ever tranquil and homogeneous socialist union. These Star Trek generation people (often referred to as "transnationalists") believe that nation-states per se are obsolete in their post -modern Fabian Socialist world. But that does not comport with human nature and the rest of natural law, so at some point in the attempt to unify the world that way, it will utterly fall apart, like trying to pack more than 238 protons and neutrons into an atomic nucleus. The only real question is how much energy will be violently released by the multi-national fission reaction.
Putin is a dictator, but at least a patriotic one looking after Russia's national interest, in the face of Obama's "Ukrainian Spring", no unlike his "Arab Spring" that is working out so well. Putin moved to protect it's only year-round naval base and port at Sevastopol in the Crimea (which was part of Russia that was arbitrarily assigned to Ukrainian SSR by Kruschev in 1954). Do you not think that if Guantanamo Bay were the only ice-free base for the US Navy, that Cuba would not have become the 47th State after the Spanish-American War (right before AZ and NM in 1912)? Marder is right: Obama has now undone the Monroe Doctrine. And BTW, Putin also acted to protect Assad in Syria also to protect Russia's only Mediterranean port. And although Assad is regularly demonized in the West, it is he (like his father before him, and like other dictators such as Mubarak in Egypt) who protected the Christians and other minorities from the rape, pillage and murder by Islamic extremist mobs. Now, the "legitimate" government in the Ukraine (actually installed by a violent mob-led coup incited by the West against a corrupt and dictatorial--but duly elected President, like we have here) includes "Party of the RIght" extremists, allied with neo-Nazis and Chechen terrorists. A smart foreign policy would see Putin as the sort of dictator who, like Mubarak, provides an overall stabilizing regional influence, a good counterweight v. the Chinese, and importantly allied with us against the Islamists. (Remember how Putin tried to warn us about the Tsarnaev brothers?). Of course Putin is likely to reach further than he would have with a strong and sane US foreign policy (as opposed to the weak, yet provocative one we have now). So I don't think it's useful or correct to demonize Putin. (By way of full disclosure, I'm no real fan of Putin's ilk. My father grew up in the Ukraine and escaped the Soviets twice--1921 and 1923--to find his way to the USA, and I'm eternally grateful for that.)
In response to:

And the Band Plays On

jb168 Wrote: Mar 18, 2014 9:50 AM
Fomenting the "Ukrainian spring" of mob violence to topple a duly elected (even if he was corrupt and dictatorial, not unlike what we have now in Washington) was an act of provocation--not appeasement. And not unlike the "Arab spring's" chaotic aftermath, the vacuum has been filled with extremist, anti-Semitic (That's right, Greenberg: vicious neo-nazis are now part of the new "legitimate, democratic" government in Kiev, also allied with the Chechen Islamic terrorists.) elements. And Mr. Putin? Wasn't he the guy who tried in vain to warn us about the Tsarnaev brothers? Paul, your creative writing gift can turn dangerous in the service of knee-jerk, misplaced anachconistic anti-Soviet propaganda. Try starting with the facts.
To me, it seems more like Obama's "Ukrainian spring", is a European extension of his "Arab spring". The West foments mob violence to topple an admittedly distasteful, dictatorial and corrupt government, and in the vacuum that ensues, a worse actor takes its place. The Egyptian Army finally turned things around in Egypt, Putin put a stop to it in Syria (still a mess, though) and is doing likewise in Ukraine. At least the old guard was better in the protection of religious minorities; Christians in North Africa and Syria, Jews in the Ukraine. I'm no fan of Putin, but he's a way better head of state than the one we have in pursuing his country's national interest, and he would appear objectively to be more in the right in the present situation.
...and one more point about the stability of supporting dictators in the Mideast: Dictators like Assad in Syria and the military in Egypt were the bulwark supporting Christian minorities. Now, thanks to Obama's "Arab Spring", Thousand-year-old Christian Christian churches are being torched in Syria and Egypt (although hopefully, the resurgence of the army in Egypt is putting a stop to that there) and their congregations raped and murdered by gangs of Islamist "peace" lovers. So, on your North Aftrican vacation, Ralph, don't forget to wear your cross, so everyone knows you are a Christian.
Previous 11 - 20 Next