Is this what you expect a refugee to be like?

Sonia Perez D. wrote an article designed to evoke our sympathies for the "refugees" from Central America. Her story was about Elsa Ramirez, one of the few who's been deported back home.

Elsa is a widow with a child. How could we be so cruel? She's suffered immeasurably -- her brother was killed in a family feud (I suppose that would have happened wherever her family lived); another brother was killed when he went to "collect on a debt" (I am reminded of the way the mob collects on debts -- perhaps this is why he's dead); her husband was a cocaine smuggler making up to $4,000 a day until a criminal more powerful than he took him out (it doesn't sound like he was a small-time dealer, does it?).

Now Elsa is afraid for her life. If you lie down with the dogs, Elsa, you rise up with fleas. Your case is like the U.S. ghettos -- is it Honduras that makes the criminals, or the criminals that make Honduras what it is? If it's the latter, then we don't need you here -- you won't get away from the criminal life -- you'll only spread it wherever you go.

"Mother fears killers will come stalking." The Dallas Morning News; July 24, 2014; p. 4A.

Here we go again!

The bleeding hearts are all upset because Joseph Wood "gasped" and lingered for a couple of hours after he received his lethal injection in Arizona for murdering his ex-girlfriend and her father. They claim that such a death is cruel and unusual and are calling for an end to this method of execution. As far as I'm concerned, a firing squad accomplishes the job quickly and cleanly. We could just go with that.

Wood was administered a combination of a sedative and a painkiller. Texas uses a big old dose of pentobarbital, and so far, there's not been a problem with the criminal lingering. Or a big old dose of Propofol seemed to work quite well on Michael Jackson.

"Inmate dies 2 hours after execution begins." The Dallas Morning News; July 24, 2014; p. 2A.

Was that a subtle dig?

The George W. Bush Library is hosting a display of fashions by Oscar de la Renta. Gowns and other ensembles worn by Laura Bush and the Bush twins are featured.

I thought Laura Bush's comments were quite interesting:

"When you are first lady, there are certain fashion rules -- unspoken or unwritten, but you're aware of them always. A first lady must look appropriate at all times, lovely but not too flamboyant. . .Oscar knows what first ladies should wear and what would look good on them, but he also knows what would be the most appropriate and the most dignified and the most elegant. And he knows the way anyone would want the first lady of our country to be seen."

In light of that quote, do you wonder that Oscar de la Renta is one of the only famous designers that Michelle Obama has never worn?

Perhaps it's because Mr. de la Renta calls them as he sees them. He criticized Michelle for wearing a cardigan to meet Queen Elizabeth. "You don't. . .go to Buckingham Palace in a sweater," he said.

Michelle, herself, in a Vogue interview said she had a great sense of fashion. We'll let you be the judge. By the way, can't wait to see this fashion display at the Obama library.

Looks like something Granny wore to the church social

I don't care where she's been, a First Lady should never be seen in public

looking like she's headed for the welfare office.

Words fail me.

The shoes are $425 sneakers.

Perhaps she should have spent less on the footwear

and more on the Target clearance rack clothes.

Really? A mid-riff t-shirt and a high waist

skirt put together out of quilt scraps? Can you see Laura Bush wearing this?

The Cadillac with the furry dashboard and fuzzy dice

was parked outside in the Presidential parking space.

Looks like my first home ec sewing project.

 

Bo the dog and Michelle the . . . First Lady.

Mr. Essie May titles this one "Bo walking the dog."

 

Now would you like to see what a real First Lady looks like?

 

Classy

Tailored

Chic

 

Elegant

 

Smart

 

Stylish



Sophisticated

 





Not hard to see which one likes Oscar de la Renta, is it?





http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/07/michelle-obama-oscar-de-la-renta_n_3403989.html

Maybe so, maybe not.

Demonstrators outside the Mexican consulate in Austin carried signs that said, "We are all immigrants."

Not true -- I was born here to U.S. citizens, who were born here to U.S. citizens, who were born here to U.S. citizens -- I can take it back to prior to the Revolutionary War.

Even if it were true that we are all immigrants, we certainly are not all illegal aliens. Most of us have no problem with welcoming immigrants to this country. We only have a problem with those who think the laws don't apply to them. Think about it -- if they believe they don't have to abide by the laws to get here, why should we believe that they will keep our laws once we let them stay?

"Number of kids crossing river slows, officials say." The Dallas Morning News; July 19, 2014; p. 3A.

Whose logic is flawed?

James V. Lee of Ft. Worth says he asked this question on Facebook: "What do you think would happen if Christians actually prayed for President Obama?" He says no one answered the question. He says not answering a question is taught as a logical fallacy in essay writing.

So is starting with a false premise, James. You make the false assumption that Christians are not praying for Obama. You ask the classic "When did you stop beating your wife" question. He says those who won't answer the question he poses are just pushing their own agendas. What do you think you're doing, James, by posing such a biased question to begin with? Why didn't you just ask, "How many of you who are Christians are praying for Obama?" If that question is avoided, you might have a point.

But I'll freely tell you, James, that I pray for Obama every day. I pray that God will touch the elected leaders of this country, our President in particular, and that He will lift up the righteous and bring down the wicked. And if that prayer offends you, James, it tells us which side of the equation you think Obama falls on.

"Dodging the question." The Dallas Morning News; July 20, 2014; p. 3P.

What could I do?

Poor little Jonathan Ramsey was starved to death by his father and stepmother. They wrapped his little body in a sleeping bag and took him to a remote area and put him in a creekbed. He was found about six months later. His father has been convicted, and now the stepmother is awaiting sentencing for her conviction.

But, bless her heart, she's a victim, too! She says there was little she could do to rescue the child who was locked in a filthy closet (a closet she walked past numerous times a day) and fed nothing but bread and water. Little she could do? How about call CPS? How about call the police? How about call 911? How about take the child to the neighbor's when the father wasn't there? If none of that was possible (and I don't buy that it wasn't), she could have fed him when she stuffed her own face. From her mug shot, she doesn't look any too mal-nourished.

Her attorney says she wanted to call, but the father wouldn't let her. Well, gosh! I guess he didn't! Criminals don't usually sit passively by while their victims call the police. But was he with her 24 hours a day? She says he punished her daughter from a previous marriage by withholding food from her. Then she goes on to describe him as "a good father." What is wrong with this woman?

She was in email contact with the boy's natural mother, and she told her the child was better off not talking to her. I'm sure they didn't want him talking to her! Why didn't she give some clue in the email that the child was being tortured and starved?

No, this "victim" deserves not one ounce of sympathy. What she deserves is to be locked up in a small room with no windows. She deserves to be fed three times a day -- one slice of plain bread and 8 ounces of water each time. And that's a whole lot more than she fed that little boy.

"Stepmother defended in starvation." The Dallas Morning News; July 17, 2014; p. 1B.

Have mercy, Judge -- we're poor little orphans!

Federal Judge Cormac J. Carney has ruled that the death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment because it takes so long to implement it. And why does it take so long to implement it? Because the condemned prisoners keep filing appeals!

Kind of like the boys who killed their parents then begged for mercy because they were orphans. The inmates are running the asylum!

"Judge blasts death penalty in California." The Dallas Morning News; July 17, 2014; p. 4A.

If for no other reason . . .

I wouldn't vote for Wendy Davis if for no other reason than that her donor list includes:

• Barbra Streisand
• Marlo Thomas
• Matt Damon
• Holland Taylor (who wrote and starred in a show about Ann Richards)
• Willie Nelson
• Steve & Amber Mostyn (ambulance chasing millionaire lawyers who have given her cash and air fares worth $738,000 -- no one spends that kind of money unless they're getting something in return)
• Service Employees International Union ($250,000 -- this is the union that was forcibly deducting union dues from the Medicaid benefits of disabled adults who were being cared for at home)
• Planned Parenthood (supported with your tax dollars, more than $100,000 of which was donated to Wendy Davis. How is it that a Conservative non-profit can't mention politics, but Planned Parenthood can?)

I wrote the other day about Preston Van Leeuwen from California who was offended that Rick Perry was recruiting business in California. Well, Preston, I don't much care for all your Hollywood types trying to influence our governor's race -- for all the good it will do them. Despite all her money, at this point, Wendy's chances aren't looking too good.

"Hollywood cash flowing to Davis." The Dallas Morning News; July 17, 2014; p. 3A.

Yes, I do have a right to be judgmental!

Ryann Lavy of Grapevine takes issue with those of us whom she judges to be judgmental. She says that she was hot stuff as a teenager -- she made A's, had an iPhone and nice clothes. Little did she know, she says, that in a few years she would be stuck alone, pregnant with twins, and trying to find enough money for food for the next week. (I guess those twins "just happened" through no fault of her own, and there was no father who had a responsibility to come up with the money for food for the next week.)

She says it could happen to anyone, and she wishes people would understand that it's not our place to judge. I'll agree with you Ryann. What you do on your time and with your money and your morals is your business and none of mine. But that changes when you expect me to provide your housing, your food, your medical care, your iPhone, and to take care of your illegitimate children. What you do with my money gives me the right to judge how you spend every penny you have.

Ryann says that the world would be a more pleasant and easier place to live if people didn't judge. Really, Ryann? More pleasant and easier for whom?

"Judging others' hard times." The Dallas Morning News; July 15, 2014; p. 8A.

Ask Malia and Sasha.

Remember when Jimmy Carter discussed nuclear proliferation with 13-year-old Amy? Remember when Obama changed his mind on same-sex marriage? He said that Malia and Sacha were responsible for it, because they don't understand why same-sex parents should be treated differently.

"It doesn't make sense to them and frankly, that's the kind of thing that prompts a change in perspective," Mr. Obama said.

Asking kids who don't have a clue seems to run in liberal families. When something doesn't make sense to your child, you don't change your perspective -- you teach your child why it does make sense. I'm sure a lot of children would tell their parents they don't see any sense in going to school. Does that mean the parents should change their perspectives and let them stay home and watch cartoons?

At any rate, Mary Jo Beebe seems to take her child rearing (or should we say parent rearing) cues from the two worst Presidents in this century. She asked her 8-year-old granddaughter for advice on what the country should do about all the illegal kids. Her granddaughter says the adults in our country should help them.

And Mary Jo seems to have ended the conversation there. Perhaps she should have asked the child specifically how the adults should help them. Perhaps she should have asked the child where the money would come from. Perhaps she should have asked the child where we're going to house all these children and who's going to feed them and educate them.

Mary Jo says we must help these children instead of being brutish and uncaring. It is evil, she says, to think that we need to deport them. Will you be home around 10 o'clock in the morning, Mary Jo? We'll be dropping off your dozen between then and noon.

By the way, I did a little Google search on Mary Jo. She's apparently some sort of religious nut akin to a Christian Scientist. That tells you how logical her thinking is. 

"Heed a child's heart." The Dallas Morning News; July 5, 2014; p. 16A.

I have a suggestion.

I wrote yesterday about how secure our borders are. I have a suggestion that just might kill two birds with one stone. Obama seems to like trading criminals, so here's what we do.

For every child that sneaks across our border, we pull a criminal out of our overcrowded prisons. When we have a plane full of convicts, we fly them to Guatemala or Honduras or wherever in proportion to the number of illegals coming from that country. We dump them out at the airport.

That solves our overcrowding problem and frees up our prisons to be used as orphanages for the children we're taking care of. Those children will not, under any circumstances, be returned to family members. They will be housed, fed, and educated in these orphanages until American families adopt them.

In one fell swoop, we get rid of hardened criminals and we humanely provide for the children whose parents don't care enough about them to take care of them themselves. The children will no longer be illegal when they are adopted by American families, so that solves the assimilation problem. Where will these American families come from? We start by contacting every person who has said that we can't send these children back. He will be given at least three children, maybe more if his financial position allows it.

And that, my friends, is how it should be done.

Fret not -- our borders are more secure than they've ever been.

Harry Reid says emphatically that our borders are secure (but Harry Reid also says that paying taxes is voluntary). The White House says that today, border security is stronger than it has ever been. Tell that to the mother of the 9-year-old child who was molested by Israel Andrade.

Andrade, a stranger, broke into their Parker County home and fondled the child. He tried to coax her to go with him, but she screamed and he fled. They followed his footprints and discovered him at a nearby house with the child's underwear stuffed into his jeans.

What do we know about Andrade? He was deported in 2003. He was deported in 2004. He was deported in 2009. He was deported in 2010. That's one man who made it across the border at least five times.

So let not your heart be troubled -- Obama says our borders have never been more secure. . . that's if you don't count the more than 50,000 children who've been able to get by that tough security in recent months. And all the Israel Andrade's out there.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/immigration/border-security
"Deportee is jailed in attack." The Dallas Morning News; July 14, 2014; p. 4B.

How many can we put you down for?

All the atheist bleeding hearts are having a ball casting stones at Christians who think all the illegal children should be sent back to their home countries.

Amanda Davis of Coppell says you can't be a Christian if you believe our borders should be secured and these children should be sent away. She quotes Jesus who did, indeed, say, "Suffer the little children to come unto me." (By the way -- She didn't quote that part about not judging whether or not people are Christians). But Jesus never said, "All the moms and dads in other countries should hire coyotes and send their children to Israel and you should tax the people to provide their medical care, their educations, their food, and their housing." And what did Jesus do with those children after he talked with them and blessed them? Well, one can only assume that He sent them back where they came from, because, so far as I can tell, there is no more mention of them in the Scripture. They didn't have a bunch of high chairs at the last supper. Amanda, as is usual with those of her ilk, has taken the scripture completely out of its context.

At any rate, Amanda, since it is a sin to turn these children away, we'll be depositing a dozen of them on your doorstep tomorrow. I Googled and saw that you live in a pretty nice two-story brick house. If I have the right one, it's worth a pretty penny, too. Uh-oh! Guess you also missed that verse about selling all you have and giving to the poor. See, Amanda, it's a dangerous thing to selfishly use scripture to promote your liberal agenda. You just might get caught in your own trap.

"Suffer the children." The Dallas Morning News; July 8, 2014; p. 10A.

From the TOTA File

I have the WIST file (Wish I'd Said That), the ITIMTU file (I Think I May Throw UP), and now I'm adding the TOTA file (Theater of the Absurd).

The first entry from the TOTA file is a political cartoon by Jimmy Margulies. He shows the newscaster with a map highlighting Syria and Iraq behind him. The newscaster is saying that a religious state has been declared in Syria and Northern Iraq. The frumpy tv viewer holds a newspaper with the headline, "Hobby Lobby Birth Control Ruling." She says, "and the U.S. workplace."

Seriously? He's comparing muslim rule to Hobby Lobby's right to decide whether or not to pay for certain forms of birth control for its employees?  He's comparing beheading women for getting an education to Hobby Lobby paying for only 16 kinds of birth control instead of 20? He's comparing stoning women for being Christian to some woman buying her own morning after pill? I'm not sure, but I suspect that Islam allows no birth control at all. He's comparing that to U.S. employers exercising their religious liberty?

Think about it this way: with the court's ruling, Hobby Lobby has a choice, as do its employees. If the ruling had gone the other way, Hobby Lobby would have had no choice. Quite possibly, their employees would have also lost any choice as far as working for them, because the owners had intimated that they might close rather than compromise their principles.

Which of those sounds like an extremist religious state to you?

Those poor, poor, adults who can't cope -- no wonder they stomp toddlers to death.

Jacquielynn Floyd has written the most ridiculous thing I think I've ever read. Despite her protestations that she's not, she seems to be excusing the animal who repeatedly punched, slammed to the floor, and stomped on a 19-month-old baby. When he finally succeeded in killing the child, the mother (and I use the term very loosely) helped him cover up his crime and went with him to bury the body. She told the police he "didn't mean to" do it. I know accidents happen, but how can you not mean to slam a baby's head against the floor more than once, then stomp on her little stomach, then punch her in the face until she's dead? If the child had one blow to the head and no old injuries, I just might believe that the guy accidently dropped her. I'm sure it's happened before. It could even happen twice. My mother used to tell me about how she let me accidentally roll off the bed one day, and she was so upset and rattled by it that she let me roll off a second time. But this isn't a case of a well-cared for child being accidentally or even negligently injured. This is a case of a willful, angry, violent attack.

Jacquielynn says that it's clear that these people don't understand how children behave or the unique demands of being a parent. I'm not sure what she means by "unique" demands. Billions of parents over the years have reared children, and I daresay most of them have had comparable experiences. She says that the pattern of abuse is of immature parents who just can't cope with crying and dirty diapers. No, Jacquielynn, immaturity has nothing to do with it -- I've seen lots of immature parents, and though they don't always make the wisest decisions, they still love their children and would never in a million years torture them. No, Jacquielynn, these aren't victims who can't cope -- these are despicable, mean, unfeeling people who hate the children who are in their way, and so they decide to get rid of them and inflict as much pain as they can in the process. They deserve no "he just couldn't cope" sympathy!

"When adults can't cope, children die." The Dallas Morning News; July 12, 2014; p. 1B.

You got it, Pard!

Preston Van Leeuwen of San Luis Obispo, California, wrote a letter to The Dallas Morning News. I guess he thought he was being funny, but maybe he really is this ignorant.

He says that Governor Perry's ads in California encouraging businesses to relocate to Texas were offensive to him, because they've had a devastating economic downturn. Well, duh! When 1960's throwback Jerry Brown is your Governor and your businesses are over-taxed and over-regulated, and your tax burden is second only to New York's, you're surprised that there was a devastating economic downturn?

He was offended by the Texas tourism industry when it ran ads in California touting Texas vacations. So does that mean we should be offended that those Hollywood types expect us Texans to go see their movies and watch their TV shows? Does that mean they won't advertise going to Disneyland or Yosemite or touring movie star homes in Texas? But then the kicker comes -- old Preston and his wife and friends are planning on coming to Texas. Can you folks out in California say, "Hypocrite"?

Preston is prepared, though, for the backwoods. He says they've already been warned not to mention words like Nancy Pelosi, Barbra Streisand and gay marriage. They've been told they shouldn't make fun of Governor Perry's glasses or point out that Texas had more executions last year than Yemen. You got it, pardner! But go ahead and talk about the executions, Preston. We're quite proud that we execute those who deserve it -- the only thing we're ashamed of is how few get the needle and how long it takes to get through all their appeals.

Old Preston says that, on second thought, he thinks he'll just cancel his trip. Suits us, Preston. We don't like Pelosi-Streisand-queer lovers around here who are so panty-waist they don't figure it's nice to execute animalistic criminals. As for the Gov's glasses -- the man evidently sees things a whole lot better than you do. Maybe you should get a pair.

"A trip to Texas? Really?" The Dallas Morning News; July 13, 2014; p. 2P.

Want a sex change operation?

If you want a sex change operation and can't afford it, just wait until you're old enough to draw Medicare. A review board of the Department of Health and Human Services has ruled in favor of a 74-year-old who wants to have the surgery. In doing so, it says that requests for sex reassignment surgery cannot be automatically denied. Aren't you glad your tax dollars are paying for such vital services?

"Medicare to cover sex reassignment." The Dallas Morning News; May 31, 2014; p. 7A.

Who slept with who here?

The National Park Service is in the process of installing markers at "places of importance to the history of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans." The initiative is for the purpose of including them "in the national narrative" and (here's the scary part) "components of education."

I would like to make a suggestion for the first two markers -- Sodom and Gomorrah.

"Sites' role in LBGT history to be noted." The Dallas Morning News; May 31, 2014; p. 7A.

Target is playing both sides.

Target has "respectfully requested" that its customers not carry their firearms, concealed or otherwise, in its stores. That's fine. I'll just shop where I can carry my licensed concealed weapon. But wait -- further into the article, we see that "Target will not post signs outside stores and has no further plans to advertise its position on the issue."

That means that in Texas, it will still be perfectly legal for me to carry my concealed gun into Target, because according to the law, if they don't want me to bring my gun in, they must have a sign posted telling me I can't bring it in. And I will do just that. I don't intend to be a passive victim of some crazy idiot who decides it will make a statement to shoot everybody in the Target store.

So does Target not know the law, or are they just trying to play both sides against the middle?

"Leave guns at home, Target asks shoppers." The Dallas Morning News; July 3, 2014; p. 1A.

Why should she have to defend it?

I'm sure most of you have seen the brouhaha over Kendall Jones of Cleburne posting legitimate photos on her Facebook page. Kendall is a cheerleader at Texas Tech (for right now, anyway -- I expect the university will cave to the pc folks and kick her out). She leads an exciting life. She has been to Africa on wild game hunts, and the photos are from those adventures.

Of course, all the people who don't know what they're talking about are outraged. How dare she post pictures of hunting! The title of one article about this case of intolerance was "Tech cheerleader defends photos." Why should she have to defend something that is neither illegal nor immoral? Would they prefer she post pictures of herself carousing in a bar? Would they prefer she post pictures of herself passed out drunk? Or high on drugs? Or scantily clad?

Facebook removed the photos, but, according to their terms of service, there is no reason she shouldn't be able to post them. Kendall has received death threats, including this really classy one from some reality "star" I never heard of: "This _______ Kendall Jones killed this beautiful creature so she post a selfie! That lion is an endangered species .. breaks my _______ [heart] not to mention he had a family .. I wish I can fly to Africa and shoot her ugly _____." The blanks are gross profanity. By the way, doesn't this brilliant woman exhibit wonderful English skill?

Kendall has not filed charges against her, and I love her logical response: "It's not that we aren't taking these threats seriously - we just feel that these are baseless and uneducated threats." Kendall also responded to those who are demanding that her Facebook page be taken down: "If you don't like or agree with what I am doing, then don't be on my page."

You go, Kendall! There are many people out here who understand that a few hunters do more for conservation and preservation of endangered species than all the ignorant PETA and reality stars put together.

Just for the record, can someone point me to some of that liberal tolerance?

"Tech cheerleader defends photos." The Dallas Morning News; July 3, 2014; p. 3A.

What kind of parents are they?

Today's topic is the influx of illegal aliens we are being forced to deal with, because Obama wants "immigration reform." They keep saying our system is broken. What is broken is not the system, but the lack of enforcement. If we enforce the laws we have, we won't have a problem with immigration.

But my real focus today is on the parents of the thousands of children who are arriving here alone. What kind of parent sends his 8 or 9 year old child across a desert alone? I don't get it. The Obama reason is that they are in danger from drug cartels, gangs, etc., but that's been the case for a long time. What officials who have been brave enough to speak are telling us is that 90% of those they've interviewed have said they came here because it was advertised in their countries that if they could get here unaccompanied, they could stay. In fact, the first thing they do when they cross the border is to look for a border agent. Some families are sending the children ahead, then hoping to make an illegal entrance themselves.

Gilberto Ramos was a teenager from Guatemala who didn't make it. His body was found in the Rio Grande Valley. He was 15 years old when he told his mother he wanted to come. She says she relented and armed him with a rosary for safe passage. Gilberto's older brother lives illegally in Chicago, and he's the one who encouraged Gilberto to come. They found a coyote for $5,400, so I have to wonder just how impoverished this family really is.

And now guess who's paying to send Gilberto's body home? We are. If we can pay to send a dead boy home, why can't we pay to send all these live children back to where they came from?

"Teen made trek to aid ill mom." The Dallas Morning News; July 3, 2014; p. 3A.

Wrong, Mr. Love

Stephen Love of Northwest Dallas needs a course in history. He says that "federal taxes are the means by which inequities between the states are addressed."

They may be used for that, but like much that is going on today, that was never the intent for federal taxes. Federal taxes are to fund the federal government in its mission of defense and promoting the general welfare (and that's not "welfare" as we use the word). According to Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the Constitution:

The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.

Thomas Jefferson said that "The laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. Congress is not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please; but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union. In like manner, they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose."

In 1824 Chief Justice John Marshall described a further limit on the General Welfare Clause in Gibbons v. Ogden: "Congress is authorized to lay and collect taxes, &c. to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States. ... Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States."

We live with a bunch of tax-happy legislators funding illegitimate government programs with our money. Our forefathers, including Jefferson and Marshall, are spinning in their graves.

"Tea party's folly on taxes." The Dallas Morning News; June 30, 2014; p. 10A.



 

What about gay pride?

Last month was gay pride month. All the proud queers were out of the closet and proud of it. Most large cities had gay pride parades. They pranced and they strutted and they wore outrageous revealing clothes (if they were clothed at all) and they waved their rainbow flags and proclaimed that their evil was good and Christians were evil. 

It just so happens that our Sunday School lesson this past week was on pride. Here's what God has to say about pride:

• Pride goeth before destruction and a haughty spirit before a fall.
• The wicked, through the pride of his countenance, will not seek after God: God is not in all his thoughts.
• The fear of the Lord is to hate evil: pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, and the froward mouth, do I hate.
• Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness. . . [If you recall, Sodom had it's own version of gay pride parades.]
• God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.

They may be proud and loud now, but one day, every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.

Just when you think you've heard it all . . .

Your tax dollars are being well-spent. A recent study related hurricane fatalities to the name of the storm. Yes, they think the name of the storm is an indicator of how many people will die.

The authors of this important study (I'm being facetious here in case you didn't catch it) examined 1000 people in six different tests. They determined that they were "generally" more likely to evacuate from an oncoming storm with a masculine name than from a storm with a feminine one.

I don't know for sure what this says. I guess it's either that people are even more stupid than I thought, or that researchers are grasping at straws to get those grant dollars and we are stupidly giving them to them.

"Woman, they name is deadly." The Dallas Morning News; June 3, 2014; p. 4A.

Eat at Big Earl's!

May I encourage you to eat at Big Earl's in Pittsburg, Texas? They sound like a great bunch of folks. Here's a link to Earl's website:

http://www.bigearlspittsburg.com/

If you Google Big Earl's, though, you'll come away with the impression Earl runs a gay bar. It's social media backlash from the perverts, because Big Earl's daughter told a couple of queers who had engaged in rubbing each other's thighs in the restaurant not to come back, because Big Earl's doesn't serve fags. This was after the "couple" had finished their meal and paid. She didn't call them fags until they tried to argue with her and cause a scene. Big Earl says he expects his customers to behave appropriately for a family restaurant, and he has had a sign on his front door ever since he opened:

Welcome to Big Earl's where

men act like men,

women act like ladies,

no saggy pants.

We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone.

 

So why would two queers go into a place with a warning like that and flaunt their perversion? For the publicity, of course. What's the first thing the two queers do after they've left the restaurant? They call the TV station, of course. Would you like to hear the stupid question the reporter asked Earl? "What do you mean by 'men act like men and women act like ladies'?" The mere fact that someone doesn't know what that means shows you how deep in degradation this country is -- even in East Texas!

 

"Talking Points." The Dallas Morning News; June 1, 2014; p. 1P.

ما هو جيد لإوزة هو جيد لذكر الإوز.

Mariam Saleh lives in Doha, Qatar. She is leading a campaign to make foreign women residing in that country "cover up." She says a steady influx of foreigners is threatening to uproot their customs and traditions.

 

How many times have we seen muslim women in the U.S. refuse to uncover their faces according to our customs and traditions and even our laws? I can't cover my face or wear a head covering when I have my driver's license photo made or when I go through airport security, but they can.

 

The title of this blog is in Arabic just for Mariam. I'm not sure if the translation is correct or not, but we would say, "What's good for the goose is good for the gander."

 

"A modest request." The Dallas Morning News; June 15, 2014; p. 19A.

Who is responsible for a 10-year-old child?

If you had a little girl who was 10 years old, and the family went to a park with which they were not familiar, would you let the child wander off on her own? Especially if the park were in a metropolitan area?

Ebony McGee and Antoin Lockett say it's all the city's fault their child drowned. They were on a family outing to Walter E. Luedeke Park when the child went off on her own and either fell or jumped into a retention pond. They have filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the City of Balch Springs.

Lockett says the fateful day was the first time the family had visited the park. They allowed the child to go off down a trail with "Follow me" signs. Lockett says the pond was hidden from his view by a hill. "I didn't even know a pond was there," he said. Not knowing what was there is all the more reason for him to have made sure an adult was with her! The parents say the child was "very responsible" and would not have entered the pond if "No Swimming" signs had been posted. Maybe so, maybe not -- she was 10 years old.

I just can't imagine taking a child to an unfamiliar place and allowing her to strike out on her own out of my sight. Forget the pond -- don't these people know that child predators often find their victims at parks?

The family should receive nothing from the city, and, in fact, should be investigated themselves for the wrongful death of a child they were neglecting.

"Parents sue after girl drowns at park; city reviewing lawsuit." The Dallas Morning News; June 19, 2014; p. 1B.

Just FYI

The government does not track the number of political refugees in this country who rely on social services. We have admitted about 67,000 Somalis in the past ten years, so I'm guessing that we've added about 67,000 Somalis to the welfare rolls in the past ten years. And that's just from one country.

I'm curious as to why the government can't track this number when it can track all our phone calls, our income, and who knows what else. However, I must admit, this is the same government that can't seem to keep up with Lois Lerner's emails.

"Mayor protests refugee influx." The Dallas Morning News; June 24, 2014; p. 4A.

Uhhhhh - could it be because they're criminals?

Texas officials are blaming the heat and the lack of programs for rampant crime in the Texas prison system. They're even blaming it on keeping violent convicts in prison longer.

My first thought was that crime is rampant in the prison system because . . . well, they're criminals, aren't they? If they were nice folks, they wouldn't be in prison. Duh!

"Prison crime still rampant." The Dallas Morning News; June 24, 2014; p. 3A.

What is the national problem that should be priority 1?

If someone asked you what the priority of the Obama administration should be, what would you say? The economy? Terrorism? The IRS scandal? The VA scandal? The truth about Benghazi? Securing our borders? Releasing enemy prisoners? Welfare fraud?

According to VP Joe Biden, it's none of those. He said that across U.S. government agencies, officials have been instructed to make the promotion of gay rights abroad a priority.

Doesn't that bring you great confidence in the direction our nation is going?

"Biden urges global unity on gay rights." The Dallas Morning News; June 25, 2014; p. 4A.

We got that one out of the way!

Obama has captured Ahmed Abu Khattala, and I guess he thinks that puts that little issue to rest. At least according to Tom Brewer of Mesquite it does.

Tom has a letter to the editor in which he praises Obama for hunting down and capturing "the" culprit responsible for the attack. I don't know why that's so great -- several of the news organizations tracked him down months ago and did interviews with him.

Tom exults that "the" terrorist is in our custody and is heading to the U.S. for trial. He should be headed to Gitmo as an enemy combatant.

My problem is with Tom's continued use of the definite article. From what I saw, there were more terrorists than just Ahmed there that night. What are we doing to catch them?

"Kudos to Obama for capture." The Dallas Morning News; June 22, 2014; p. 2P.