Sheriff will used deadly force to protect unborn children.

I told you I believe in miracles.

I just didn’t know how much.

I don’t care much for politicians.  The democrats are a bunch of thievin’, lyin’, murderous thugs.  The publicans are often a bunch of spineless, compromising wimps.  It’s hard to know who to be disgusted by more.

Then, out of nowhere this guy runs for sheriff in Hillsborough County, New Hampshire.  He’s running as a Republican – but wait before you hate – he is promising to protect everyone in his county:

Szabo is running as a Republican for Hillsborough County Sheriff. But he injected a new issue in the debate when he sent out a press release saying he would arrest anyone performing an abortion.  He took it a step further when asked how far he’d go to stop one.

“Deadly force is the last thing law enforcement should be using, if a citizen’s life is in danger they should be protected,” says Szabo. “If there is no other choice, that’s what’s needed to protect the citizen.”

Democrats – being democrats and all – demanded that  “Every Republican officeholder and candidate in New Hampshire must condemn and reject this man and his beliefs.”  Republicans being the whipped wimps that they are – being republicans and all – took their instructions like real eunuchs, denouncing Szabo’s comments as “Irresponsible, outrageous, and inappropriate.”

What the publican response means in real English is, “it’s a damn good idea and it’s about time someone running for office in this country grew a pair and espoused a sound, legal, and moral basis for how he will govern.”  You’re welcome.

I’m not sure what Candidate Szabo’s chances of being elected are, but he’s the heavy favorite among those under nine months of age.

UPDATE:  His fell off too.

Send this article to a friend.

I Believe in Miracles.

I do.  I do.

Now you can believe in miracles too.

Send this article to a friend.

Father Disgusting.

Where, in hell, is his bishop?

Oh, I think I answered my own question.


And just in case there are any pesky contents of your stomach left, you can give the foul, sodomitic, puffy-red-faced “father” a full listen here.

Maybe he’ll get an invite from Cardinal Dolan and St. Francis Xavier parish.

Lord have mercy, Christ have mercy, Lord have mercy.

Send this article to a friend.

Yeah, what he said.

Someday, I’m going to be handsome, and even-tempered, and winsome, and . . .

Oh, nevermind.


Send this article to a friend.

It’s what’s for dinner.

For those that prefer cats to dogs.

Kung Pao Kitty

Send this picture to a friend.

Everyone wants to be like Jesus. Well, sort of.

Right now, we need a little John the Baptist action.

Cardinal Dolan is explaining (and defending) his decision to host the most wicked, vile, and murderous president in U.S. History at the annual Al Smith Dinner in New York.  In short, the Cardinal bases his decision on his desire to be more like Jesus, who was known to dine with some undesirables.

“In the end,” said the Cardinal, “I’m encouraged by the example of Jesus, who was blistered by his critics for dining with those some considered sinners; and by the recognition that, if I only sat down with people who agreed with me, and I with them, or with those who were saints, I’d be taking all my meals alone.”

The Cardinal’s decision, in my never-to-be-humble opinion, is a HUGE mistake – at so many different levels.  It’s also a really bad analogy:  Jesus didn’t provide photo-ops for Herod and only “dined” with Pilate at the point of a spear.

John the Baptist before Obama Herod.

Having said that, Cardinal Dolan, you go be like Jesus (or at least your permutation of Our Lord).  I’ll be praying for you.  But I’ll also be praying that a John the Baptist type will be at the dinner.

But Herod the tetrarch, when he was reproved by him for Herodias, his brother’s wife, and for all the   evils which Herod had done; He added this also above all, and shut up John in prison.        Luke 3:19-20

I know, I know. I should be more tolerant, more inclusive,  more dialogue-ish.  Cardinal, while you’re doing all that dialogue and tolerance thing (heaven forbid that you take your meals alone), remember that more can be accomplished with a kind word and a loaded gun, than a kind word alone. Just sayin’.

And if you want to see some more of Cardinal Dolan’s brand of inclusiveness, watch the video of the re-dedication of the St. Francis Xavier parish, which has distinguished itself for its “prophetic” sodomitic behavior (barf, wretch); boasts a Zen meditation group (more barfing); and, has a “prayer” posted on its website (“in response to local and national gay teen bullying: When I feel Hated Loving God, you made me who I am.”).

And if you like the barefoot, middle-aged, frilly woman dancing at the dedication of the parish, you’ll love the part where Cardinal Dolan – lookin’ all thoughtful and approving like – acknowledges the “LGBT” Catholics (around 5:30 into the video).

Sadly, about the only thing left out of the liturgy by Vatican II, appears to be barf bags.

Send this article to a friend.

Dumb and Dumberer: Jimmy Carter supports Obama by video.

Because some things are best handled from a distance.

Rattlesnakes, explosive devices, Barack Obama – just to name a few.

I know Obama’s support is slipping (neither far enough nor fast enough to suit me).  But one thing’s for sure.  He will always have the support of former President Jimmy Carter.  It’s the only way Carter can avoid being the worst president in U.S. history.

According to USA Today:

Former president Jimmy Carter won’t be attending the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, but he’ll address the gathering by videotape.

“Rosalynn and I regret that we will be unable to be at the Democratic Convention this year in Charlotte. However, we remain steadfast in our support for President Obama and the progress he will make in the next four years,” Carter said in a statement released by the Democratic convention.

So when you hear Jimmy say “four more years” he’s not addressing the crowd.  He’s praying.

Send this article to a friend.

Friday Olympic Fun: Call me, maybe.


Send this article to a friend.

Is it time to refresh the Tree of Liberty?

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to timewith the blood of patriots and tyrants.

Thomas Jefferson

I appreciate Ann Barnhardt.  She’s a take no prisoner kind of gal.  The pic of her brandishing a pink AR-15 is priceless; though, can’t say I’d ever do that to a perfectly good AR-15.  Sometimes she can get a little shrill and she is a tad more profane than I am willing to be in print (cutting me off in traffic is another story).  But all in all, she calls it like she sees it, doesn’t mix words and makes some very good points.

One of my recent posts was a paragraph from Thomas Paine’s pamplet Common Sense.  Paine was making the case for war to separate from England.  Though it was wildly popular when he wrote it – January 1776 – he did so anonymously out of fear of reprisals.  Just few months later a little document was signed that started off with the words:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

Ann is making the case, as I understand her, that anything less than a second declaration of independence is cowardice and accomodation of evil:

If you forced me to distill everything that is wrong with this culture down to one word, to find one word that covered almost every sin in one fell swoop, it would be cowardice. I look at western civilization and I see cowardice EVERYWHERE. It is in the eyes and hearts of every adult. Its stench permeates everything.

First, the definition. Cowardice is, when you boil it down, total self-absorption. Cowardice is putting your own immediate and superficial desires above everyone and everything else. Cowardice is indifference to your fellow man, and to God, and as we have already established, indifference, not hate, but INDIFFERENCE is the opposite of love.

The coward cowers and fails to act because he puts himself first, thus breaking the two Great Commandments simultaneously: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and soul AND thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. The coward gives both God and his neighbor the proverbial finger, pulls the covers over his head and retreats into his own navel, oftentimes rhetorically hiding behind the words “prudence” and “benignity”.

The word “Prudence” has been twisted by cowards into the lie that one should never act, but rather think and think and think ad infinitum until either they have talked themselves out of any action (which is always very easy to do) OR until someone else comes along and takes up the slack, thus making the question of their own action moot. In other words, STALLING.

Prudence is being able to discern the right, see the big picture and then DO WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. Many people think that they can “legally” dodge this by simply doing nothing. Ah, but they forget that to NOT act is to act, to NOT speak is to speak, to quote Bonhoeffer. It is impossible to avoid action, because inaction is itself an action. When prudence truly dictates that something MUST be said or done, inaction then becomes a sin, no matter how one might try to justify that inaction as prudence. That sin is called COWARDICE.

Benignity means “kindness”, which is not the same as “being nice” or even being liked. True kindness sometimes requires sternness, or even ferociousness. If you walked into a kitchen and saw a three year old child just about to drink from a bottle of drain cleaner, would you not ferociously dive at the child yelling, “NO!” in order to save that child from poisoning and burning themselves? Anything less would be unthinkable. How could one react with silent paralysis to a child about to drink poison? How would that be kind? How would that be benign? It wouldn’t. It would be malignant malefaction devoid of prudence and charity, and utterly cowardly.

You can read the rest of her post here.  She doesn’t link to particular articles on her site, so you’ll have to scroll to “On Cowardice”.

I’m not sure I agree with her – which doesn’t mean diddly; half the time, I don’t agree with myself either.  On the one hand, if the Founding Fathers had a legitimate beef with England sufficient enough to go to war, it would seem that we’ve got it now.  In spades.

Consider, just for instance, the complete gutting of the Fourth Amendment (which for the government educated, was supposed to keep private citizens secure in the persons and papers, blah, blah, blah), the National Defense Authorization Act, which removes any vestigal protection provided by what used to be called the separation of powers, and our beloved executive branch, which has already demonstrated its willingness to assassinate its citizens where ever they may be found – and without all that pesky due process stuff.

One of the things that the Founding Fathers considered – and wisely so – was the likelihood of success of the endeavor.  Paine went to great pains (sorry!) to include that in Common Sense.  We’re no where near that situation today.

Not only are we up to our beer bellies in apathy, affluence, and appearances, there is not – it seems to me – any way on the planet that the citizens could match the firepower of the federales.  (Despite the Second Amendment’s intention to the contrary.)  To say otherwise is to deny any lesson from what our benevolent benefactors in DC did to the men, women, and children at Waco.

So help me out here.  What’s the answer?  Right ones are preferred.

The Tree is looking a little withered these days.  Just sayin’.

Send this article to a friend.

Common Sense . . . again.

Thomas Paine penned the pamphlet Common Sense, anonymously at first fearing reprisals from the government he opposed on January 10, 1776.   Common Sense, signed “Written by an Englishman”, became an immediate success. In relation to the population of the Colonies at that time, it had the largest sale and circulation of any book in American history. Common Sense presented the American colonists with an argument for freedom from British rule at a time when the question of independence was still undecided. Paine wrote and reasoned in a style that common people understood. Forgoing the philosophy and Latin references used by Enlightenment era writers, he structured Common Sense like a sermon, and relied on Biblical references to make his case to the people.

Men of passive tempers look somewhat lightly over the offences of Great Britain, and, still hoping for the best, are apt to call out, “Come, come, we shall be friends again for all this.” But examine the passions and feelings of mankind: bring the doctrine of reconciliation to the touchstone of nature, and then tell me whether you can hereafter love, honour, and faithfully serve the power that hath carried fire and sword into your land? If you cannot do all these, then are you only deceiving yourselves, and by your delay bringing ruin upon posterity. Your future connection with Britain, whom you can neither love nor honour, will be forced and unnatural, and being formed only on the plan of present convenience, will in a little time fall into a relapse more wretched than the first. But if you say, you can still pass the violations over, then I ask, hath your house been burnt? Hath your property been destroyed before your face? Are your wife and children destitute of a bed to lie on, or bread to live on? Have you lost a parent or a child by their hands, and yourself the ruined and wretched survivor? If you have not, then are you not a judge of those who have. But if you have, and can still shake hands with the murderers, then are you unworthy the name of husband, father, friend or lover, and whatever may be your rank or title in life, you have the heart of a coward, and the spirit of a sycophant.

Liberty is a thing of the past in this country (read my posts on the National Defense Authorization Act if you doubt me).  By comparison Obamacare is the equivalent of ants in the potato salad at the church picnic.  But religious liberty is more specifically within the Executive Crosshairs.  For now.

Time for a little Common Sense today?

Send this article to a friend.