Thursday, January 31, 2013

The Struggles of Hormone Imbalance

Last Thursday I started taking hormones. I am basically starting from ground zero with having no hormones in my system for four months. My doctor started me on the lowest dose of estrogen and what I think is the lowest dose of provera. My emotions have been all over the chart. I feel like I've been on a roller coaster ride this past week. I've been sad to the point of crying for two or three hours, edgy or irritable, my heart feels like its racing a lot, and now I have a bit of insomnia again. Plus, men just don't get *it*, what I'm going through. Okay, my honey says that he does but he's clueless. I know this because of my husband's actions and words. It would be nice if I could just wave a wand and get back to being my old self, feeling normal. I guess I'm just going to have to give this time, more time than I thought.

I woke up this morning at about 3:30 a.m. and wasn't able to get back to sleep so I've been surfing the internet, praying and writing in my journal. The Lord sent me to Psalm 147. I am pretty sure that God is saying that He will heal me, heal my wounds and hurts inside of me. Plus, I think that God was saying to me that He will help to restore me to normal, or even better than my old normal. I praise God for his being with me as I go through my struggles. In addition I am so thankful to all the wonderful family and friends who have been caring for and supporting me while I go through such distress and hurts.

Praise for Jerusalem’s Restoration and Prosperity.

147 [a]Praise [b]the Lord!
For it is good to sing praises to our God;
For [c]it is pleasant and praise is becoming.
The Lord builds up Jerusalem;
He gathers the outcasts of Israel.
He heals the brokenhearted
And binds up their [d]wounds.
He counts the number of the stars;
He [e]gives names to all of them.
Great is our Lord and abundant in strength;
His understanding is [f]infinite.
The Lord [g]supports the afflicted;
He brings down the wicked to the ground.
Sing to the Lord with thanksgiving;
Sing praises to our God on the lyre,
Who covers the heavens with clouds,
Who provides rain for the earth,
Who makes grass to [h]grow on the mountains.
He gives to the beast its food,
And to the young ravens which cry.
10 He does not delight in the strength of the horse;
He does not take pleasure in the legs of a man.
11 The Lord favors those who fear Him,
Those who wait for His lovingkindness.
12 Praise the Lord, O Jerusalem!
Praise your God, O Zion!
13 For He has strengthened the bars of your gates;
He has blessed your sons within you.
14 He makes [i]peace in your borders;
He satisfies you with the [j]finest of the wheat.
15 He sends forth His command to the earth;
His word runs very swiftly.
16 He gives snow like wool;
He scatters the frost like ashes.
17 He casts forth His ice as fragments;
Who can stand before His cold?
18 He sends forth His word and melts them;
He causes His wind to blow and the waters to flow.
19 He declares His words to Jacob,
His statutes and His ordinances to Israel.
20 He has not dealt thus with any nation;
And as for His ordinances, they have not known them.
[k]Praise [l]the Lord!

Here is a Scottish Psalter I found.

Tuesday, January 29, 2013

How do you solve a problem like the low information voter?

Should we use the same type of philosophy and techniques as Christians or Jews do with unbelievers? How do we get the unthinkers to critically think? How do we connect with the gullible who believe what the MSM says? Those who believe the popular, majority opinion just cause? How do we effectively reach out to those who believe in big government and show them that common sense, liberty loving, limited government principles are in their best interest?
Mind Numbed Robot has some great insight on the state of our country and on paternal despotism and the low information voter: 

Like many of my fellow Awakened Americans, I was blessed to spend time over the holidays with family and friends, some whom belong to the less informed or ill-informed among us whose only news sources are the alphabet networks or random conversations with know-it-all leftists parroting the daily talking points. These encounters mainly serve to reinforce what I already perceive about our left-leaning opposition but at times shed some light on otherwise unthought-of nuances in the mindset of many leftists who at times exhibit the mental capacity of your common house plant or the occasional bird bath, but perhaps I’m being too harsh with house plants.CONTINUED 
This is my comment to bot's post:

The low information claims to be apolitical or not interested in politics but then they are political by choosing to believe statism over liberty. They don’t do the necessary research to understand the politics behind government policies or the human effects statism has had in the world. Or they think it will be different here in America. But for some reason the low information voter trusts those who give them handouts and sells their intelligence and souls to the statists who would give so little to them but take so much from everyone. If low information voters would only use the brains that God gave them to use. Oh yea, progressives and low information voters believe lets keep God out of everything, He has nothing to do with who I am today. He holds me down with his morality keeping me from doing as I please. I have come to find out that these people have had an issue with authority figures in their lives and that is the reason that they don’t want any moral boundaries in their lives or refuse to listen to God. Yet, these low information voters have pretty much made these statists out to be their Gods. Yet, one of God’s Commandments is to not worship false Gods or idols. The low information voters are the ones who are greedy and selfish, not the business owners in this country (at least for the most part, there are always a few bad apples in the lot). Oh my heavens I can’t believe I ranted that much. God Bless Bot. 

One way we that we can reduce the number of low information voters is to reform our education system and get people who believe in conservative/libertarian principles to be teachers at all the levels of schools. But somehow we need to reach the young adults on up who are raising the next generation(s) of voters.

Saturday, January 26, 2013

Hillary & Obama Administration Refuse To Acknowledge Truth, Problem and Know Thy Enemy

Angry Progressive Female - How dare you demand the truth! It doesn't matter! No matter what the truth must not be revealed. The consequences are worse than Watergate but why should anyone take responsibility? That's the progressive way, pretending to take responsibility without actually accepting responsibility for your actions. 

Hillary Clinton wants us to believe that it doesn't make a difference how our brave Americans died in Libya.  If it was really unimportant to this administration, no big deal to them, then they wouldn't have peddled some fallacious story for days about an Anti-Muslim video causing the deaths of four of our citizens. John at the Sentry Journal makes a number of great points in his post It makes a huge difference Hillary... .  You can also hear the heated exchange between Senator Ron Johnson and Hillary Clinton at Sentry Journal. The level of hypocrisy coming from this administration is unbelievable. You can be damn skippy positive that if this had happened on George W. Bush's watch then both the media and Democrat politicians would be all on this like glue to paper.

If Hillary & CO really wanted stop the next tragedy from occurring then they would be more than willing to try to figure out what caused the attack - whether the attack was planned or a spontaneous protest, which group(s) funded the attack and find out who actually carried out the heinous terrorist act which left four Americans dead. Hillary would admit that she and others within the State Department made fatal errors as far as security went within the compound in Libya so that they could fix their mistakes so hopefully this type of attack would be prevented in the future. If the reasons behind this attack were irrelevant they wouldn't have gone out of their way to demonize free speech, blame a video for the attacks instead of the actual perpetrators, and persecute a guy who made a video and go out of their way to ensure that he would be punished one way or another.

Heck, this administration refuses to even name who the enemy really is. First they refused to call the enemy Muslims or Islamic and now they refuse to even call acts of terrorism terrorism. If our government won't even name who we are fighting how are they supposed to know their enemy?

Sun Tzu says:
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself,you will succumb in every battle” 

John is correct. It matters. The truth matters.

Thursday, January 24, 2013

The Nine Orders of Angels & The Fall of Lucipher

At the blog My Daily Trek, Leticia wrote an excellent post on Demon Possession and Spiritual Warfare. In the comment section a liberal made the claim that demons don't exist. That is in effect saying that evil doesn't exist. If you don't believe in God it is nearly impossible to believe in evil or the Devil. Since Lucipher (a.k.a. Satan, the Devil) is a fallen angel I thought it appropriate to start with angels and then cover demons in a post later on. I am also posting a video on the fall of Lucipher below.

The Fall of Lucipher

Monday, January 21, 2013

Libertarian Video Games?

Peter Suderman of Reason has come up with a list of video games that may resonate with libertarians. Since I was a little kid I have enjoyed playing video games. I don't play much anymore but I may have to try a couple of these latest video games. Pac-Man is one my favorite games that I played while growing up. Do you have a favorite? Today I like playing the Mortal Kombat games. Are there any recently created games that you like to play?

These three interest me.

1. Fallout 3
A post-apocalyptic role-playing game set in a bombed-out, futuristic Washington, D.C. known as the Capitol Wasteland. Warring tribes of wannabe authority figures fight for control, thugs and scammers try to take your guns and your money at every turn, super-intelligent robots try to reengineer society, and the whole place is overrun with super-mutants. In other words, it’s a lot like the Washington, D.C. we all know and love today.Fallout 3 is also one of the most expansive, open, and darkly funny games ever made.
5. L.A. Noire
L.A. Noire offers a down-to-the-shoelaces recreation of Hollywood shortly after World War II. And where many open-world games allow and even encourage players to engage in freewheeling thuggery, this time the objective is enforcing order: Players take the role of an earnest police investigator moving up the ranks by solving cases. The game’s most intriguing innovation is the chance to conduct “interrogations” of suspects. The challenge is to determine, based on the suspect’s behavior, whether he or she is lying. But unlike most video game challenges, there’s no trick to mastering it. In the end, it’s a mix of thorough prior detective work and subconscious intuition. And even then, it’s easy to be wrong. The subjective nature of the game play highlights the uncertainty of much police work. Sometimes even good players—or cops—make big mistakes. 
6. Deux Ex: Human Revolution
Deux Ex: Human Revolution casts players in the role of Adam Jensen, a grim security chief at a biotech corporation that specializes in human augmentation. Set in a bleak, William Gibson-esque cyberpunk future, the game kicks off when anti-biotech militants break into the headquarters of Jensen’s company on the eve of a legislative hearing about biotech regulations. Jensen fends off the attackers but is injured and must be rebuilt with biological enhancements. From there, players must uncover the truth about the break-in against the backdrop of an ongoing debate about the safety and ethics of human augmentation. The game’s cast will be familiar to anyone who has followed such debates in real life—uncompromising anti-science radicals, moderates who favor regulation, self-interested political players, scheming corporate leaders, and apolitical scientists. The noirish story has no heroes, but it does subtly highlight the value of biological modifications. The key to winning: enhancing Jensen—and yourself. 

Friday, January 18, 2013

Twins Euthanized Because They Were Going Blind

Rebecca Hamilton of The Public Catholic asked a very good question in her article, Two Men Euthanized in Belgium Because They Were Losing Their Sight. 
 "The question: When you pass laws that make your doctor your executioner, how do you ever trust your doctor again?" 

Your doctor is supposed to heal you or try to to the best of his ability, not purposefully kill you. Euthanasia equals murder.  Could you trust your doctor if he was euthanizing patients? There is no way in heck that I could trust my doctor if he euthanized patients. 

With the news of these two men who were going blind authorizing their own assisted suicides because they couldn't bare to go blind because that would mean they couldn't see one another, this cements it firmly, we have now drastically slid fast down the slippery slope. The lack of human dignity for the human person has taken a new low.  In our Godless, secular society people think it is merciful to murder. This is pitiful and makes me extremely sad because these twins weren't even in any immediate medical danger. They weren't dying. So being uncomfortable and having a disability constitutes a person's right to death? What???? This is maddening.  This is absurd!! Every life is precious. It does not serve the common good for people to murder others for the harvesting of organs or for people to authorize their own assisted suicides. God is the author of all life and He alone has the authority to create and end life. It really ticks me off when people, especially scientists or doctors, play God with peoples' lives.

I have a visual impairment so this hits home for me. I would never think of ending my own life if something happened to my other eye and I went blind. Murder is the work of Satan and euthanasia is murder. Satan wants you to close off yourself to the goodness of God, to the possibility that even though you may be unable to see or have a disability you have a greater purpose to your life. You may be called to minister to those who are going through the same type of struggles or who have the same ailment as you do. You never know what God may do even if you have the faith of a mustard seed. But when a person chooses to and then goes through with assisted suicide they are closing the door to the power of the Lord's healing.

Here is one of my comments on Rebecca's article:

These twins didn’t respect the dignity of their own human bodies. Human life is precious and not to be discarded like garbage at a whim just because someone has a disability. The twins and doctor in concert with one another are acting as if they are God. They aren’t. That’s wrong. No person has the right to take another’s life just because he feels uncomfortable or he isn’t “perfect” or “normal” in his own eyes. God is the author of life and He is the only one who has the right to end life.

With the approval of the Vatican's Declaration on Euthanasia by Blessed John Paul II the value and dignity of every human life was affirmed. Here are the points made on the value of human life:

  Human life is the basis of all goods, and is the necessary source and condition of every human activity and of all society. Most people regard life as something sacred and hold that no one may dispose of it at will, but believers see in life some thing greater, namely, a gift of God's love, which they are called upon to preserve and make fruitful. And it is this latter consideration that gives rise to the following consequences:
1. No one can make an attempt on the life of an innocent person without opposing God's love for that person, without violating a fundamental right, and therefore without committing a crime of the utmost gravity.[4]
2. Everyone has the duty to lead his or her life in accordance with God's plan. That life is entrusted to the individual as a good that must bear fruit already here on earth, but that finds its full perfection only in eternal life.
3. Intentionally causing one's own death, or suicide, is therefore equally as wrong as murder; such an action on the part of a person is to be considered as a rejection of God's sovereignty and loving plan. Furthermore, suicide is also often a refusal of love for self, the denial of the natural instinct to live, a flight from the duties of justice and charity owed to one's neighbor, to various communities or to the whole of society--although, as is generally recognized, at times there are psychological factors present that can diminish responsibility or even completely remove it.
However, one must clearly distinguish suicide from that sacrifice of one's life whereby for a higher cause, such as God's glory, the salvation of souls or the service of one's brethren, a person offers his or her own life or puts it in danger (cf. Jn. 15:14).

Here the Vatican official specifically focuses on euthaniasia:

It is necessary to state firmly once more that nothing and no one can in any way permit the killing of an innocent human being, whether a fetus or an embryo, an infant or an adult, an old person, or one suffering from an incurable disease, or a person who is dying. Furthermore, no one is permitted to ask for this act of killing, either for himself or herself or for another person entrusted to his or her care, nor can he or she consent to it, either explicitly or implicitly. Nor can any authority legitimately recommend or permit such an action. For it is a question of the violation of the divine law, an offense against the dignity of the human person, a crime against life, and an attack on humanity.

It may happen that, by reason of prolonged and barely tolerable pain, for deeply personal or other reasons, people may be led to believe that they can legitimately ask for death or obtain it for others. Although in these cases the guilt of the individual may be reduced or completely absent, nevertheless the error of judgment into which the conscience falls, perhaps in good faith, does not change the nature of this act of killing, which will always be in itself something to be rejected. The pleas of gravely ill people who sometimes ask for death are not to be understood as implying a true desire for euthanasia; in fact, it is almost always a case of an anguished plea for help and love. What a sick person needs, besides medical care, is love, the human and supernatural warmth with which the sick person can and ought to be surrounded by all those close to him or her, parents and children, doctors and nurses.

The Vatican's Declaration on Euthanasia continues with an explanation on the meaning of suffering for Christians and the use of painkillers:

Death does not always come in dramatic circumstances after barely tolerable sufferings. Nor do we have to think only of extreme cases. Numerous testimonies which confirm one another lead one to the conclusion that nature itself has made provision to render more bearable at the moment of death separations that would be terribly painful to a person in full health. Hence it is that a prolonged illness, advanced old age, or a state of loneliness or neglect can bring about psychological conditions that facilitate the acceptance of death.
Nevertheless the fact remains that death, often preceded or accompanied by severe and prolonged suffering, is something which naturally causes people anguish.

Physical suffering is certainly an unavoidable element of the human condition; on the biological level, it constitutes a warning of which no one denies the usefulness; but, since it affects the human psychological makeup, it often exceeds its own biological usefulness and so can become so severe as to cause the desire to remove it at any cost.

According to Christian teaching, however, suffering, especially suffering during the last moments of life, has a special place in God's saving plan; it is in fact a sharing in Christ's passion and a union with the redeeming sacrifice which He offered in obedience to the Father's will. Therefore, one must not be surprised if some Christians prefer to moderate their use of painkillers, in order to accept voluntarily at least a part of their sufferings and thus associate themselves in a conscious way with the sufferings of Christ crucified (cf. Mt. 27:34). Nevertheless it would be imprudent to impose a heroic way of acting as a general rule. On the contrary, human and Christian prudence suggest for the majority of sick people the use of medicines capable of alleviating or suppressing pain, even though these may cause as a secondary effect semi-consciousness and reduced lucidity. As for those who are not in a state to express themselves, one can reasonably presume that they wish to take these painkillers, and have them administered according to the doctor's advice.
But the intensive use of painkillers is not without difficulties, because the phenomenon of habituation generally makes it necessary to increase their dosage in order to maintain their efficacy. At this point it is fitting to recall a declaration by Pius XII, which retains its full force; in answer to a group of doctors who had put the question: "Is the suppression of pain and consciousness by the use of narcotics...permitted by religion and morality to the doctor and the patient (even at the approach of death and if one foresees that the use of narcotics will shorten life)?" the Pope said: "If no other means exist, and if, in the given circumstances, this does not prevent the carrying out of other religious and moral duties: Yes."[5] In this case, of course, death is in no way intended or sought, even if the risk of it is reasonably taken; the intention is simply to relieve pain effectively, using for this purpose painkillers available to medicine.

However, painkillers that cause unconsciousness need special consideration. For a person not only has to be able to satisfy his or her moral duties and family obligations; he or she also has to prepare himself or herself with full consciousness for meeting Christ. Thus Pius XII warns: "It is not right to deprive the dying person of consciousness without a serious reason."[6]

We are called to offer up our sufferings in union with Jesus Christ.  This is called redemptive suffering.

Tuesday, January 15, 2013

Hypocrisy From Pro Gun Control Journalists

The Journal News and Star-Ledger journalists are totally fine with outing who owns and doesn't own guns in Westchester and Rockland Counties but when it comes to having their views being advertised on their front lawns for any person who rides through their neighborhoods to see then they don't want their views to be known. What a bunch of friggin hypocrites!

H/T Twitchy 

Friday, January 11, 2013

The Camp Of The Saints Linkaround

I apologize for the absence of posts this week but since Tuesday I have felt jittery, had a hard time thinking, had quite a few small headaches, kinda felt really tired to kinda weak, not myself feeling sorta like I'm in a fog or something and just know that something isn't right. After talking with a few people I believe it has something to do with the fact that I haven't started taking any hormones since my surgery.  Bob at The Camp Of The Saints is kind enough to allow me to link to his posts. Thanks so much Bob. 

Whatcha Ya Gonna Do When They Come For You: Decision Time 

What a Fascist Sounds Like 

Here is a snippet: 

It sounds exactly like New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
From Politicker, Colin Campbell reporting [tip of the fedora to the Drudge Report][emphasis mine]:
Yesterday, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and city officials unveiled a new initiative to limit supplies of prescription painkillers in the city’s emergency rooms as a way to combat what they described as a growing addiction problem in the region. Some critics, as documented by The New York Times, however, felt the move would unnecessarily hurt poor and uninsured patients who use emergency rooms as their primary care doctor. Needless to say, Mr. Bloomberg was not swayed by this line of argument.
The Naked Face Of Leftism: Pedophilia Unbound

Monday, January 7, 2013

Newtown: The Crux of the Problem

After the shooting massacre in Newtown, CT many asked why? Why did this happen? What caused this? Stephen M. Krason at Crisis Magazine says that the crux of the problem is only being discussed by a few commentators and is unlikely to be discussed by media or to enter the debates among politicians on the causality of this tragedy. He explains how progressives didn't let this crisis go to waste and were so insensitive to the victim's families after the tragedy that their demands for gun control started within days of the massacre. So much for having respect for the dead. Some on the Left didn't even allow the families' need for time to grieve and bury loved ones to deter their urgent need to push their ideological policy agenda. 

Mr. Krason said "Indeed, it seems as if gun control is the left’s singular solution. "  I don't see any evidence to prove otherwise. At least among the majority of progressives. 

Mr. Krason goes onto ask, "Why does the left fixate on gun control?" 

Krason goes onto give a possible reason for the Left's obsession with gun control. 

"Part of the reason may just be groupthink. This has been the position of the left for decades, so this is what a “progressive” should believe. At a deeper level, the readiness to blame guns for shooting rampages reflects the left’s general tendency not to view people as responsible for their actions. Just as corrupted and unenlightened institutions are the cause of all evil and human problems, so guns are seen as the cause of murders instead of the person using them. It also represents a domestic version of the attitude that the great international politics scholar Hans J. Morgenthau said typifies the simplistic, abstract-type thinking of many people about the problem of international peace. Just as some think that abiding peace will follow merely if certain changes are made to international law and organizations and if social science principles are properly refined and applied, so others think that gun violence and criminality will largely cease with good gun control legislation. If we—in our unlimited human wisdom—just tinker with things enough, we can solve even deep-seated, perennial problems."
Then, he goes on to point out the causes of tragedies such as what happened in Connecticut: 
"While we can never truly understand evil—the eminent priest-sociologist Paul Hanly Furfey spoke of “the mystery of iniquity”—it is not difficult to pinpoint the basic, broad causes of outrages such as the one in Connecticut. Five sweeping cultural developments of the past fifty or so years are crucial: the rejection of traditional religion, the subversion of sound morality, the breakdown of the family, the dissolution of solid communities that provided reference points and restraining and helping forces, and the proliferation of destructive, illicit drugs. During that period of time in America, mass murders—although not unknown before that—have become all too frequent occurrences.
"To be sure, mental illness is also in the mix. I am not a psychologist or psychiatrist. I speak only as a layman, but there are issues that logically present themselves. The young adult mass murderer in Connecticut was supposed to have serious mental problems. We will never know if he realized what he was doing, or if he truly had no control over his actions. Circumstances can often push a person who is mentally “on the edge” over the cliff. Was the fact that he was from a broken family, with his parents having been divorced, a significant factor in aggravating his mental condition? Would he have gone over the cliff if he had not grown up in a secular, amoral or immoral culture? Would he have engaged in brutal violence if he had not been influenced by  nihilistic, violent, destructive elements in popular culture through his absorption in playing violent video games?
"Is it unreasonable to think that the above cultural developments and the personal insecurity and social dislocations resulting from them might be factors in triggering mental illness in some cases?
"While deep-seated cultural decay, of course, is not easily or quickly addressed (even when there is a broad agreement about its causes), I do not want to imply that legal and public policy changes should not be part of the equation. While governmental action alone cannot change culture, let’s remember the important role that Aristotle, Aquinas and other thinkers said that law can play in helping to rightly form individuals and culture. As far as concerns gun laws, there may be an argument for more regulation. Second Amendment rights, like all rights, are not absolute. Still, it should be recognized that already considerable restrictions are in place and an objective assessment of their effectiveness is necessary (the gunman in the western New York murders was an ex-convict and killer who was forbidden by law to possess firearms, but he still had them). Secondly, a renewed debate is obviously needed about security in schools, college campuses (remember Virginia Tech), and other public buildings—including the question of self-defense measures. While I am inclined to think that firearms do not mix well with the academic atmosphere, teachers and other school personnel shouldn’t have to be sitting ducks. Catholics, by the way, should not believe that they are somehow in opposition to Church teaching if they don’t support gun control initiatives. This is a matter of prudential judgment, and the Catechism of the Catholic Church (#2264-2265) emphasizes the traditional teaching that one has a right to use the amount of force necessary—though not excessive force—to defend himself and those he is responsible for protecting."

Mr. Krason points out that Catholics can either be in favor of or opposed to gun control since the issue is a matter of prudential judgment. We have seen the effects that excessive gun control have had on cities like Washington D.C. and Chicago so instead of blindly following the "guns kill people" meme by progressives let's use our critical thinking skills and further investigate what we can do to change the violent attitudes and/or tendencies in our culture. Instead of shifting blame to the object (e.g. the gun) or to circumstances surrounding the horrible tragedy, we need to recognize that the responsibility lies with the guilty party. 

I disagree with some of the solutions that Mr. Krason offers. I will focus on his positions regarding mental health policies. 
He said, "It is time to reconsider deinstitutionalization, extreme confidentiality laws, and standards for commitment (while there were perhaps abuses in institutionalization policies in past times, the current “only if the person is a threat to himself or others” standard simply has been inadequate). At least one state even had the foolish policy of allowing a minor to “sign himself out” of a mental health facility that his parents placed him in once he turns fourteen. " 

I'm not sure which confidentiality laws he considers "extreme" or why he believes that the policy “only if the person is a threat to himself or others” is inadequate. He says "while there were perhaps abuses in institutionalization policies in past times."  Does he not realize that the danger of such abuse has never fully gone away?  Unfortunately, I have experienced an abuse of the “only if the person is a threat to himself or others” standard. 

In part due to the lack of funding there was forced deinstitutionalization of persons who really should have been kept in institutions, group homes, or better monitored while living on their own. Another reason for the push for deinstitutionalization was the deplorable, neglectful, and abusive conditions of a number of institutions. What are some ways that we can solve the problems in the mental health system and what can we do to better identify those who need help? 

Thursday, January 3, 2013

Flagrant lawlessness and ineptitude

Washington D.C. has strict gun laws. David Gregory is for stringent gun laws. Gregory was denied by the D.C. police permission to violate their strict laws and possess a gun magazine for show so that he could make a political point. David Gregory ignored the police and flagrantly waved a 30-round rifle magazine in front of the cameras as host on Meet The Press.

 The Wall Street Journal had an article defending David Gregory on the basis of freedom of the press. But does freedom of the press really include the right to break laws? Especially when you have been denied a request for an exemption from the application of the law from the police? And when this is the very type of strict gun laws that David Gregory supports? David Gregory supports this type of society where guns and their accessories like gun magazines are restricted but he believes that he is above the law. That is a consistent belief of the political elites - that laws don't apply to them. They believe that laws only apply to us ordinary folks.

 Have other citizens been held to the same standard that people like myself are demanding of the D.C. Police, that they enforce their stringent D.C. gun law against David Gregory? The answer is Yes.

 Now I am not for these laws. I agree with Emily Miller when she stated that these laws shouldn't be on the books. While I know that the 2nd Amendment isn't absolute, as far as there can be some limits to it, I believe that laws such as the ones in D.C. are way too restrictive and infringe on our 2nd Amendment rights. If D.C. Police's enforcement of their guns laws goes so far as to arrest a Veteran visiting the VFW who forgot that he had a few rounds of ammunition in his bag why shouldn't these laws be enforced with the same vigor against a person who outright flagrantly refuses to comply with the D.C. gun laws especially after having been denied special permission to do so by the D.C. Police?

Both the House and Senate Republicans are utterly inept spineless twits. They couldn't come together and hold firm on principle on either taxes or spending. It's obvious that the (except for a few) Republicans can't even convey principles of liberty to the American people because they don't believe in Reagan conservatism anymore. They don't believe in our Founders vision for America. They caved into President Obama and the Democrats and handed them a sweet deal. Republicans didn't get one iota of spending cuts. I do get that President Obama has all of the major networks to carry his water for him so to speak but the Republicans didn't even attempt to explain their position to citizens. Thomas Sowell recently wrote an article explaining why Republicans deserved to lose the election. The GOP has been nominating squishy types that believe in big government and don't really believe in conservatism so they are clueless about explaining and promoting conservative ideals.

Thomas Sowell says: 
Back in 1948, when the Democratic party splintered into three parties, each one with its own competing presidential candidate, Republican candidate Thomas E. Dewey was considered a shoo-in. 
Best-selling author David Halberstam described what happened: “Dewey’s chief campaign tactic was to make no mistakes, to offend no one. His major speeches, wrote the Louisville Courier Journal, could be boiled down ‘to these historic four sentences: Agriculture is important. Our rivers are full of fish. You cannot have freedom without liberty. The future lies ahead . . . ’” 
Does this sound like a more recent Republican presidential candidate? 
Meanwhile, President Harry Truman was on the attack in 1948, with speeches that had many people saying, “Give ’em hell, Harry.” He won, even with the Democratic vote split three ways.
But, to this day, the Republican establishment still goes for pragmatic moderates who feed pablum to the public, instead of treating them like adults.  
It is not a complicated argument.  CONTINUED 

Thomas Sowell is correct. This is not a complicated argument but yet most Republicans in Congress don't take the time to explain the argument for conservatism to the American people. Republicans ineptitude is staggering and pathetic.

This is my resume because I'm looking for a job


  Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania


Amore Management Company,  Monroeville PA
Landscaper June 2010 - September 2012

Boscov's Department Store,  Pittsburgh PA 
Sales Associate August 2006 - July 2008

Einstein's Bagels,  Green Tree PA 
Customer Service June 2006 - November 2006

Target,  Salisbury MD 
Seasonal Position Customer Service November 2005 - January 2006

Carrabbas Italian Grill,  Ocean City MD 
Hostess January 2005 - August 2005

The Book Warehouse,  West Ocean City MD 
Third Key March 2004 - April 2005

Homegoods,  Commack NY 
Seasonal Position Cashier October 2003 - February 2004

Giant Eagle Supermarket,   Robinson PA 
Deli clerk January 2003 - May 2003
Cashier February 2001 - September 2001

Dick's Sporting Goods,  Robinson PA
Cashier July 2002 - January 2003

Franciscan University of Steubenville,  Steubvenville OH 
SWOP January 1999 - December 2002
Made sure facilities on Campus were clean. Cleaned windows, bathrooms, classrooms, and other areas within campus buildings. Worked in the cafeteria serving food, cleaning tables, and kept the salad bar area clean and filled.

Holly Center, Salisbury MD United States
Student worker - clerical June 2000 - August 2000

Arby's Inc., Salisbury MD United States
Customer Service July 1995 - August 1997
Customer Service May 2000 - January 2001


2009 - 2010  Robert Morris University Moon Township PA 
 Coursework towards Political Science Degree 

2008 - 2009, Spring 2001 Community College of Allegheny County 
 Continuing Education

Franciscan University of Steubenville, Steubenville OH
Completed coursework towards Associate of Arts - General Education Sociology Major
Graduated with Associates Degree 2003

Saints Peter and Paul High School, Easton MD 
Completed coursework towards Enter Degree/Program
Graduated with Honors in 1995

MS Office Suite, Social Media (Facebook, twitter, tweetdeck, blogging)