Sex? I Could Have SWORN This Was About Personal Responsibility...

In perusing the headlines at memeorandum today, there was quite a bit of a stir about a comment Huckabee made regarding gays.

The comment causing such a stir from Meet the Press:

MR. RUSSERT: But when you say aberrant or unnatural, do you believe you're born gay or you choose to be gay?


GOV. HUCKABEE: I don't know whether people are born that way. People who are gay say that they're born that way. But one thing I know, that the behavior one practices is a choice.

It's very clear to me, in this instance, Huckabee is talking about personal choices and how one implements their own personal, behavior choices.

However, in an article entitled "No Sex For You", author Steve Benen, guest posting at Washington Monthly, descends immediately to sex--he sets up the strawman Huckabee is telling gays they have to be celibate. To quote:

I see. So, Huckabee doesn't actually care if someone is gay, he cares whether or not gays are celibate.

And here I thought his years of bizarre criticism of the gay community were a sign of intolerance. I've clearly misjudged him.

The comments section of this article get even sillier, with the "best" (tongue firmly planted in cheek) being this one:

Bruce:

You hit the nail on the head. I was wondering the same about mandatory English requirement everyone wants to impose on new immigrants. How free are we as a country if people have to be forced to learn another language?

Republicans love to talk about "freedom" but when you look at their policies you will quickly find out that they want to impose control on individual freedoms while liberating corporations from the burden of accountability. It boils down to freedom for the wealthy to do as they please.

Posted by: rational on December 30, 2007 at 4:04 PM | PERMALINK

From there, we go to Jeff Fecke at Shakespeare's Sister--his article name is "Sorry Homosexuals, No Sex For You"--same Huckabee quote:

Mike Huckabee thinks that God may have made homosexuals the way they are, and therefore, you'd best keep your legs crossed until death

and

For the record, shooting at reporters is perfectly cromulent behavior. Having sex with someone of the same sex as you? Awful. To be fair, Huckabee thinks all sex outside of marriage is sinful. He just doesn't think homosexuals should be able to ever get married. At least to each other.

The best comment from this place is here:

Unless they're publicly fornicating, how does Huckabee determine what their chosen behaviors are? Or is it like that WMD thing, you make a guess, condemn, and punish on the basis of what the judges imagine?


Man, this bigotry stuff needs to come with better instructions.
Kevin Hayden | Homepage | 12.30.07 - 7:15 pm | #

So. We see how someone commenting on what a person chooses to do in their own life can be completely twisted to fit someone else's agenda.

Nowhere did Huckabee take the comment to the sexual level. He was commenting on the choices people make--and putting responsibility for those choices squarely on the person themselves.

This is where the right and left have a significant divergence--the left has no concept of personal responsibility, no concept of personal accountability for their choices and actions. It's always someone else's fault: they were "born" that way, they "couldn't help themselves", they're "sick" and need another pill, or whatever--anything possible they can think of to excuse their personal choices and actions and attempt to exonerate their personal responsibility for those choices and actions.

With today's irresponsible MSM, however, we get half quotes, fake stories, lack of research, lack of follow through--but ultimately, the "lead" will always have something to do with sex. As it does here.

The liberals, the secularists, the atheists will continue to find a way to ridicule anyone of faith for their very faith. My belief regarding this is simply these people are afraid. They are afraid there is nothing else for them. They are perpetually angry because they know nothing else. They think life is supposed to be "fair". Life isn't fair. Anyone who states a truth, anyone who points out to them they and they alone are responsible for the choices they make in life, in any aspect of their lives, is going to be ridiculed.

And such we see here. I don't agree with a lot of what has come out about Huckabee. However, I don't see where he referenced a person's sexual behavior. He was asked a direct question. He answered it--honestly--in that he doesn't know if someone is born gay or makes that choice down the road. He followed up by stating a person's behavior is that person's choice.

Sex? This isn't about sex. This is about choices made and acted upon. The left just can't handle personal responsibility and being held accountable for their own choices. And so they have to set up a sexual strawman and fight that strawman.

Completely, utterly shameless, ridiculous and, frankly, nuts. They need to get some new mirrors, preferably mirrors not pilfered from the local carnival funhouse, but mirrors forcing them to face reality.

Cross posted at Grizzly Groundswell here.

Catch the Wave! at Memeorandum for more on this story.

Sphere: Related Content

The Fire in Fred's Belly

For a long time, a whole lot of us have liked the cut of Fred Thompson as a presidential candidate. So much so we BEGGED the man to jump into the race. Finally, FINALLY, he threw his hat in the ring and now, many of us (I'm admittedly an attention challenged, Type A personality who can't sit still for very long) question when we're going to "see" the fire of Fred "catch on".

While discussing Fred with my mentor during a break in study group one night, she asked me flat out why I liked Fred. At the time, I really couldn't answer with more than a gut feeling. She was correct in calling me out. That is one of the reason's I consider her my main mentor--she makes me stop and think. Then, she makes me go do my research and study. She may not like this comparison too much, but it's not meant to be offensive--in that regard, she is very similar to both my parents who insisted--prior to discussing ANYTHING--I and my siblings educate ourselves on any and all topics. Both my parents came from modest means to be significant forces in their respective fields, ultimately competing with each other for degrees (daddy won, but not by much); to them, education was the ONLY ticket to true freedom, independence and prosperity for without an education you could go nowhere. So, my mentor falls into the same category with my parents in this regard.

So, with my mentor's challenge spurring me on, I began to look into WHY I thought Fred would be the best candidate. I found a man surprisingly honest. A man who thought out his plans and outlined them in a coherent fashion. A man who offers no apologies for his past, yet who is unflinchingly honest about it. He says what he means. He doesn't beat around the bramble bush trying to be all things to all people.

For example, on the illegal immigration issue (since I live in a border state, this is something important to me), Fred has laid out a comprehensive, common sense plan for implementation.

From his site:

Securing the Border and Enforcing the Law

A fundamental responsibility of the federal government is to secure the nation's borders and enforce the law. The following policies and initiatives will put the nation on a path to success:

1. No Amnesty. Do not provide legal status to illegal aliens. Amnesty undermines U.S. law and policy, rewards bad behavior, and is unfair to the millions of immigrants who follow the law and are awaiting legal entry into the United States. In some cases, those law-abiding and aspiring immigrants have been waiting for several years.
   
   
2. Attrition through Enforcement . Reduce the number of illegal aliens through increased enforcement against unauthorized alien workers and their employers. Without illegal employment opportunities available, fewer illegal aliens will attempt to enter the country, and many of those illegally in the country now likely will return home. Self-deportation can also be maximized by stepping up the enforcement levels of other existing immigration laws. This course of action offers a reasonable alternative to the false choices currently proposed to deal with the 12 million or more aliens already in the U.S. illegally: either arrest and deport them all, or give them all amnesty. Attrition through enforcement is a more reasonable and achievable solution, but this approach requires additional resources for enforcement and border security:

Read more here.

But wait! There's more!

Fred also has comprehensive ideas laid out for:

National Security; the Federal Budget and Spending/Budgetary Reform; Tax Reform; Healthcare; Government Effectiveness; Building Strong Families; Education; Appointing Judges Faithful to Our Constitution; Energy Security and the Second Amendment. He also offers a downloadable, side-by-side comparison of where the GOP candidates stand on Family Values Issues; 2nd Amendment Rights and Crimes; Securing America's Borders and Fiscal Responsibility.

The entry page for all of these issues can be found here.

Overall, while there are a few things I disagree with, I like Fred as a candidate. I like how he is clear and concise on the issues. I like how he appears to think carefully before opening his mouth. I think he has a personally pleasing appearance, which, through his acting skills and his past political background, he is able to use to advantage when negotiating across a table, either with a recalcitrant SoH or another country's leader. He doesn't come off as a wimp and image is important when dealing with extremist loons.

I don't like how he seems to be moseying along, strolling through this campaign. But then, as I mentioned above, I'm an attention challenged, can't sit still for a second, Type A personality. If I'm not juggling a kazillion things at once, I feel as if I'm missing out on something.

I also keep forgetting Fred is, at heart, a born Southerner and Southerner's do things their own way and in their own time.

That being said, because the MSM doesn't understand this basic truth about Southerner's, they have labeled Fred as lazy. Then, as per their usual sloppy reporting, they set up imaginary strawmen to knock down and only provide half quotes, purposely designed to make Fred look as bad as possible.

Such is the case here. From The Campaign Spot we see the headline: "Fred Thompson, Knifed by Half-Quotes Again". From this article we learn the following:

This time their grumbling is directed at this account in USA Today:

BURLINGTON, Iowa — Fred Thompson said Saturday he does not much like the modern form of presidential campaigning and that he "will not be devastated" if he doesn't win the election.

"I'm not particularly interested in running for president," Thompson said, but rather he feels called to serve his country.

Now, that sounds pretty damning, particularly with Iowa and New Hampshire looming. However, the rest of the quote is here:

"I am not consumed by personal ambition," Thompson responded. "I'm offering myself up."

Given the volatile state of the world, the actor and former Tennessee senator said he was not "sure it is a good thing if a president has too much fire in his belly."

"I'm only consumed by a few things and politics is not one of them," he said.

Now, there's an old saying that absolute power corrupts absolutely. There's also an old saying about being wary of those who desperately want to hold positions of power (HRC come to mind anyone?). Read the rest of the article here; it's an eye opener of egos in the MSM.

From what I'm seeing from Fred, he has stated he will run his campaign his way. He has also shown he is not absolutely desperate to hold the position of POTUS, but having been chosen by the people, implored by the people to run, he will do the very best job he can, if he is elected. He has sat down, thought out the most important issues facing this country, and established his platform in a well thought out manner. He has plodded along at his own pace, and answered questions posed to him. He has refused to play the schoolyard games engaged in during the so-called debates. He doesn't hesitate to call people on the carpet when he thinks they're being asinine and when someone steps over the line with a question too personal, he lets them know it. He doesn't flip flop around. He doesn't screech--but he does calmly state where he thinks this country needs improvement. Then he offers the means for that improvement.

Remember the story of the Tortoise and the Hare? Well, Fred just may be that tortoise--slow and steady and eventually, win the race.

That is if he can get past the idiotic MSM determined to derail him.

But then, what else would one expect from ego driven, pampered, whiny, treasonous liberals who want nothing more than to see the demise of this country? What else could you possibly expect from a "profession" that can't follow it's own standards of conduct, rules and ethics (these people need a dictionary to look up the meaning of the word ethics), a "profession" increasingly showing it can't--or won't--report the full story because it can't be bothered to do the legwork necessary. A "profession" riddled with the likes of TNR (Scott Thomas Beauchamp), TIME Magazine reporters who criminalize our Marines on the unsubstantiated word of an al-Quaida operative (Haditha), reporters who report "roadside graves full of decapitated bodies" (bodies and graves that never existed) and on and on.

Do we really expect honest, unbiased reporting? Oh--wait--silly me! That would require integrity--something we KNOW the MSM lacks. And they certainly do NOT want to give any kind of fair coverage to a man with integrity--he might force them to do the jobs they don't want to do--or prosecute them for their treason and sedition (NYT anyone?).

The MSM has a lot to lose if Fred wins. Perhaps THAT should be the real story--the MSM's motive in falsely reporting and cherry picking on ANY of the conservative campaigns.

Catch the Wave!

Cross posted at Grizzly Groundswell here.

Sphere: Related Content

Myth vs Fact-Part 191

Myth	Fact
Islam: Religion of peace.	Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number153: Narrated 'Umar: The properties of Bani An-Nadir which Allah had transferred to His Apostle as Fai Booty were not gained by the Muslims with their horses and camels. The properties therefore, belonged especially to Allah's Apostle who used to give his family their yearly expenditure and spend what remained thereof on arms and horses to be used in Allah's Cause.
Tafsir

Please cross post! Archive available at Crusader's Armory.

Sphere: Related Content

Stop the ACLU! Weekly Roundup 12/26-12/30/2007

A short "week" here--I cut off the last round-up mid-week. No less important, though, are the issues brought forward in these past few days from Jay over at Stop the ACLU!, particularly regarding the run-up to the Iowa caucus.

Articles:

Proposed Blogburst for Fred Thompson (from Rick Moran at Rightwing Nuthouse)

ACLU Spokesperson: Mike Huckabee a Nasty Boy

Yet another issue (gay marriage) that Mike can't stick to an answer with. I really didn't want to defend him, but this quote is ridiculous. This has gotta be the quote of the day.

As Rita Sklar of the ACLU says, "He is hardly ever outright nasty. But he is suggestively nasty." Either way you cut it, though, Mike Huckabee's a nasty boy.

So now, being against gay marriage is "nasty"? My how the definitions have changed.

Hey Iowa! Huckabee Makes the List of Top Ten Corrupt Politicians
Judicial Watch put out their top ten most wanted corrupt politicians list. Several presidential candidates made the list including Rudy and Huckabee.

Videos:

Blogburst for Fred Thompson (a little late on my part, but better late than never)

Bhutto: Omar Shiekh Murdered Osama Bin Laden

This video of Bhutto saying Osama was murdered is definitely gonna make the conspiracy freaks go even more nuts. Anyway, this is the kind of stuff blogs were made for. Its definitely worth some discussion. Credit to Jawa

Mike's Major Huck Up: Pakistan Reason for Border Fence...But I Stayed in a Holiday Inn Express
He has had plenty, so why this one being the major one?...the MSM actually picks up on it.

Carl Cameron Explains How the Caucuses Work
For those like me that are not familiar with how Iowa politics and the cacuses process works this will be interesting and informative video where Carl Cameron explains the process.

Cross posted at Grizzly Groundswell here

Sphere: Related Content

Is There a Candidate Seriously Addressing ANYTHING Right Now?

Ladies and gentlemen, I've been on hiatus for my Christmas, spending time with my family, dealing with some personal crisis and whatnot. However, I've been keeping an eye on the news and the blogs and, frankly, I'm disgusted with our crop of candidates--both democrat and Republican.

Coming into the Iowa caucus, a perfect opportunity has presented itself for someone to step forward from both packs and distinguish themselves as the man we need to lead this country.

Yes, I purposely stated "Man"...I do NOT believe HRC is in any way qualified, now or ever, to lead this country, and frankly, would not be able to withstand her nails-on-chalkboard voice for any length of time.

If you want a torture method, tape an endless loop of her screechings and use that on detainees. While you're at it, superimpose pictures of Pelosi, Reed, Soros and the mushroom cloud over the screechings--the subliminal images alone should cause even the most insane jihadi to self-implode.

However, I digress.

Earlier this week, former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto was assassinated. Each of the candidates gave their obligatory condolence speeches, and some flubbed their message. Most "got it" right in that this is one more example of the extremism we are currently engaged in fighting (at least the Republicans did), while the democrats continued their whining about negotiations and discussions.

Now, the only attention I see is how Huckabee flubbed his message.

Okay--he flubbed his message. Big whooping deal.

Let's cut to the chase and reality here.

Since that day, not one candidate (that I can see or find) has addressed with any kind of seriousness, what actually HAPPENED and what that reality MEANS to us here in the US. And, yes, it DOES mean something here to us. Pakistan is a nuclear power. Bhutto was affiliated with the Taliban (Google it guys, before you start in on me--I'm not going to do your work for you). Pakistan, while shaky, IS an ally of the US.

So, how are these candidates going to handle something like this should they be elected? What are their plans? Surely they must have SOMETHING laid out for such an eventuality?

Like I said, the perfect opportunity to distinguish themselves from the pack. And not one, NOT ONE, has even made the effort. Instead, we're being treated to the same song and dance that's been force-fed to us throughout this disgustingly long campaign period.

Well, guess what?

I'm not voting for anyone on the democrat ticket because they're all a bunch of godless, power crazed loons who would offer up their grandmother's necks for the chopping block if it would further their agenda--or their children's necks. In a heartbeat.

I'm not voting for a former first lady who can't clarify her position as anything other than a spurned wife while in the White House, who believes in the Communist Manifesto, who has mastered the art of concealment and shredding while taking illegal money and who whines when she's asked a "difficult" question regarding policy--all before stripping both the Arkansas governor's mansion and the White House of furniture and goods at the taxpayer expense. A thief and liar. And someone who claims she didn't know about her husband's peccadilloes, someone so clueless, is not someone who has the necessary "instincts" to run a country.

I'm not voting for a closet muslim who refuses to give proper respect to either our flag or our national anthem, wants to "prove" his patriotism by this lack of respect, has no experience beyond a few years in Washington and editing the Harvard Law Review and who has no substance to fill his suit. However, he's become very good at land scams and insider trading.

I'm not voting for a metrosexual who has to hide behind his sick wife's skirts to fight his battles for him, who pledges to help the poor while indulging in spa days and $400 haircuts--and who pretends to channel the voices of distressed infants in their mother's wombs to juries.

I'm not voting for a man on his 3rd marriage who registers as a Republican yet acts like a liberal while bragging about his Catholicism and flaunting his disregard for his own faith--I don't care how he acted during 9/11--his personal life is a train wreck and if he can't get control of his personal life, how the HELL can he run a country?

I'm not voting for a man who claims to be a Christian minister, who again registers as a Republican yet taxes people outrageously and would give tax/college tuition breaks to illegals while ignoring the needs of American citizens, one who also dipped into public funds for his private spending. What IS it about that Arkansas water?

I'm not voting for a man who claims he's conservative--but his record shows it's only a "recent" conversion--after allowing same sex marriages in Massachusetts and flip-flopping on the abortion issue. Yes, he balanced the budget there. Yes, he ran the SLC Olympic games (under tremendous scandal). However, now he's decided to "parse" what he's "seen" as far as who marched with whom in the civil rights marches--and sounds much too Clintonian in his justifications (define "IS"). And, while trying to be all things to all people, he's decided to emulate another democrat, JFK, in his "belief" statement.

Well, people, I have many mormon relatives and friends. If the above weren't enough, I find, deep down, against all open-mindedness I thought I had regarding religion, I find I am indeed offended by the mormon belief system and can not, in good conscience, vote for THIS particular mormon. Most mormons are well meaning people--very family and community oriented, they pull together with each other during good times and bad. However, those who have reached a certain point in the hierarchy? I don't now nor will I ever trust them, whether they be named Romney or Reid.

I haven't ruled out voting for McCain--he was in fact my choice when he ran against Bush.

Time changes things, though. While McCain is an admirable man with many admirable traits, he isn't presidential material. His stance on immigration is wrong and he is intractable in that area. McCain-Feingold didn't do him any favors, either. Faced with the enemy we are facing--and will be facing for a very long time--he is not the hard-core leader we need because of his personal experiences as a POW. He would simply be ineffective and we need leadership, not ineffectiveness.

I haven't ruled out Thompson yet either; however, he needs to get off his butt and DO something. He has not shown the dynamics needed--dynamics we know are there--to convince people he would be an effective leader in this time of need.

Paul is a loon and Kucinich is right there with him--they need to take up residence together on that spaceship. Needless to say, neither is getting my vote. I MAY have considered some of Paul's policies before he showed his complete screwiness, but his simple isolationism in the face of the extremism we're fighting is completely disingenuous and guaranteed to put this country into instant third-world country status.

Then we have the wanna-be's, those who want to rule by proxy.

Those like Gore and his global warming hysteria. How can someone so blatantly anti-American, so blatantly broken by living in his father's shadow, so utterly spoiled and whiny, have such an impact on America? How is he able to pull the wool over so many people's eyes? Two reasons--one, they want to be fooled and two, they are just as spoiled, idiotic and whiny as he is and want to believe the world revolves around them. Unfortunately, he is dangerous to the economy of this country by his short-sightedness, hypocrisy and greed.

Get it through your heads, people--global warming is a scam--period. The earth has been going through warming and cooling periods since time immemorial. There's not a damn thing man can do to change it, short of sanctioning the sun, the axis tilt, etc. And that, realistically speaking, isn't going to happen. So, pull your heads out of your asses and instead of buying those carbon offsets to enrich Gore even further, invest in some common sense.

Now that's not to say you can't do things yourself to save yourself some money and help keep things nice--weatherstrip your home (saves on power bills), if you can afford it and you live somewhere it's feasible, invest in solar heating and cooling (I can't afford it or I would--living in the Southwest, we have an average of 300 sunny days a year), perform periodic maintennance on your vehicle, plan your trips to save gas--all of that is good and helps save money in the long run protecting YOUR resources while doing your part. But for heaven's sake, what's being advocated by Gore and his rabid, frothing band of fools is ridiculous at best.

Oh and along those lines? Who's going to disband the EPA? Because in order to wean ourselves off foreign oil, as all you libtards are screaming for, we're going to have to upset some caribou in Alaska, some fish in the Gulf and some deer in the Rockies. You plain can't have it both ways. Then we can be independent of foreign sources. While we're at it, who's going to monitor the mercury levels in the landfills when all those mercury filled lightbulbs (those we're going to have to use instead of incandescents) hit those landfills? Hmmm? Did y'all think about that?

All part of the rule by proxy greed of Gore and you lemmings have fallen for it.

All that being said, who is going to distinguish themselves by facing the situation in Pakistan? Who is going to address this issue? Who has a plan? Who will be the leader we need?

Who, then, will distinguish themselves as the "Leader of the Pack"?

Below is a link I happened to find while searching for an appropriate picture. It revealed to me my ideal candidate is none other than.....Duncan Hunter. Take a visit, take the survey. You may surprise yourself.

In the meantime, start demanding some seriousness from the candidates regarding foreign policy in the wake of the Bhutto assassination, the craziness of global warming, the issues of independence from foreign oil and the mercury alone in the landfills against the screeching of the church of gore--real issues, real answers.

Not this pablum you're insisting on force feeding us.

www.selectsmart.com/PRESIDENT

Cross posted at Grizzly Groundswell here.

Sphere: Related Content