Pictures Of My Praying Mantis Babies

I know. I know. I have many mouths to feed. And lots of baby shoes to buy.

Baby praying mantises don’t need diapers, do they?

All attempts at humor aside, I’ve always been fascinated by praying (or preying) mantises. So I manufactured an excuse that I clearly needed to buy a few egg cases.

And what do you know, I was fortunate enough to capture the action as one of the eggs hatched!

If you have a lot of babies all at once, does that mean you get a lot of cigars?

This was an event that needed to be shared with the world, so like any proud “daddy” here are my new babies (you can click on it to see it larger):

Message For The GOP: Dog Shows Republicans How To Handle Democats

Okay, maybe I’m reading too much politics into everything. But I sure wish Republicans would take after this pooch in their ability to deal with their adversaries:

Yep.  Definitely reading too much politics into everything.

Hypocrite Liberalism, Where Leftist Sean Penn’s Racist Son Calls A Black Reporter The N-Word While MLK-Marching Charleton Heston Gets Demonized

According to the tenants of liberalism, this is fine:

Say What? Sean Penn’s Son Calls Black Photographer ‘N**er’ and ‘Fa**ot’
Mar 27, 2013
By Ruth Manuel-Logan

Hollywood A-Lister Sean Penn was once notorious for his explosive temper but now his son, Hopper (pictured right), has apparently followed suit.

Well, somewhat.

The younger Penn is accused of resorting to vicious and racist name-calling after he got into an altercation with a random Black photographer who confronted the pair as they entered a medical building, reports TMZ.

The nasty encounter between the photographer (pictured) and the 19-year-old was captured on video.  Hopper is seen pushing the unidentified man and this is followed by a face-to-face confrontation where the hot-headed teen is heard spewing the words, “F**k you,  you’re a f**king fa**ot…shut up you fu**ing ni**er.”

During the raucous, police just happened to be in the vicinity and overheard what had transpired between Hopper and the photographer. When officers questioned the shutterbug about what had happened, he just sloughed off the argument and refused to press charges.

Yes, he did say that.  On camera, no less.  With his words being recorded.  For the record, without the asterisks, Sean Penn’s apple that didn’t fall very far from the tree shouted, “You’re a fucking faggot.  Shut up you fucking nigger!”

Now, of course, if it had been Sarah Palin’s kid, imagine the rabid-cockroach feeding frenzy the press would have had.  You would have thought Sarah herself had been caught on tape mouthing those obscenities if it had been her kid who had said that.  She would have been persona non grata.  You know, the way the left already treats her.

Instead, it’s yawnsville.  You know, much the same way that famous liberal actor and loud-mouthed punk Alex Baldwin “a rude little pig.”  Which you’d think would be, you know, a WAR ON WOMEN.

Hell, you can even slaughter dogs after you’ve mangled them by forcing them to fight with other dogs as long as you belong to the “permanent ward of the liberal State” class.  As Michael Vick did.  Rush Limbaugh can’t become a part owner of an NFL team because he’s a Republican and Republicans are evil, but people who force dogs to fight to their deaths and then viciously slaughter the ones who aren’t vicious enough are peachy dandy as long as they’re black.  The media falsifies stories to demonize the former while ignoring the truth to celebrate the latter.  You can get caught red-handed committing adultery with whores in the scores, like Tiger Woods did.  And Obama will still play golf with you during one of his countless vacations.  Why not?  Obama is pissing on marriage by replacing it with sodomy; so why not further piss on it by endorsing the crown prince of all adulterers???

No one is ever to be punished for their words or their behavior except Republicans, you see.  Because Democrats despise actual morality and view the world through a rabid political prism that Stalin would have admired.

It’s Charleton Heston – the first famous actor to put his stand with the civil rights movement and march with Martin Luther King when people were getting beaten BY DEMOCRATS – who should be tormented in the “fundamentally transformed” world of liberalism.  Even from beyond the grave by worthless punks like Jim Carrey who is upset that anybody else should be allowed to have guns to protect themselves with the way his ARMED SECURITY has guns to protect him with.  But, what the hell – he’s a conservative so his sacrifical service out of his love for his fellow man should be mocked by a worthless liberal turd.

When I first saw Jim Carrey, I thought he was hilarious.  But by the time I saw his third movie, I realized that he was purely one-dimensional.  And if you’ve seen one of his films, you’ve pretty much seen his entire repertoire.  Unlike, say, Charleton Heston – an actual ACTOR.

Greg Gutfeld of Fox News’ “The Five” has destroyed Carrey.  He pointed out that Carrey attacked Heston because he didn’t think he could lose an argument with a dead man.  But the funny thing is THAT HE DID LOSE AN ARGUMENT WITH A DEAD MAN.  Because a dead Charleton Heston is worth a 16.7 trillion Jim Carreys (or however many trillions Obama’s national dead is at now).

The quintessential essence of the left is abject moral hypocrisy.  If you are a Democrat, you are a hypocrite; if you are a liberal Democrat, you are a tyrannosaurus hypocrite on megasteroids.  Whether it’s about racism or guns or taxes or any other damn thing under the sun of their fascism.

This is an amazing time when the truth is urinated upon while liars and their lies are beloved.

The day is coming when liberals are going to stand before a just and holy God and find out the hard way that morality is a real thing and that God will judge them according to His Word that they mock rather than their self-serving standard of political correctness.

That day will be so beautiful that it’s worth wading through all the liberal ugliness and filth to get to.

Update, 3/29/13: I wrote this piece to highlight the galling and appalling constant piss of liberal hypocrisy.  I have Jim Carrey to thank for providing more documentation to prove my thesis.  The whiny little turd just released a letter bitching about “vicious slander” from Fox News because this pathetic little turd believes that only HE should have the right to viciously slander people.  He alludes to a lawsuit because this little creep knows that the man whose grave he literally danced on is dead and can’t sue him right back.  Most amazing of all is his assertion that the clear majority of Americans that he mocks and slanders – as proven by the fact that even the majority of DEMOCRATS refuse to embrace his fascist position on guns as evidenced by Harry Reid’s tabling the so-called “assault weapons” ban – are “intolerant” even as this intolerant little creep demonizes them.  What a pygmy little loser.

Obama And His Liberal Fascists Want To Ban Guns. Why Don’t We Ban Anti-Christian Worldviews Instead?

Columbine, Tucson, Aurora, Newtown.  Liberals love to bring up these massacres as “evidence” that we need to ban guns.

But the thing is that, apart from some bizarre Hollywood film, there has NEVER been a single documented case of a gun EVER rising up by itself and deciding to start shooting people.

Liberals are free to try to refute me by documenting cases of guns developing independent consciousness and choosing to go on murderous rampages.  Until then, my statement stands as fact.

But now let’s briefly consider the worldviews of the people who actually pulled the damn trigger of those guns.  Let’s look at the belief systems of the PEOPLE who committed those murders.  You know, rather than contemplating the worldviews of guns that non-liberals understand DO NOT HAVE WORLDVIEWS.

The Columbine killers were atheists who glorified in their atheism.  One of their quotes haunts me to this day.  They recorded themselves claiming, “We are no longer human, for we have evolved beyond human morality.”  In one of their notes they scribbled – and pardon the language – “Why give a fuck what Jesus would do?”  And, “I blew off his head with one shot.  I am god.  He died.”

I welcome atheists to explain in detail how it would be impossible for mankind to ever “evolve” into the kind of alien cultures that wickedly prey on the weak and kill every sentient being they can get their tentacles on that we watched in movies like Independence Day.  Remember that signature line from the film:

President Thomas Whitmore: I saw… its thoughts. I saw what they’re planning to do. They’re like locusts. They’re moving from planet to planet… their whole civilization. After they’ve consumed every natural resource they move on… and we’re next. Nuke ’em. Let’s nuke the bastards.

Given that liberals love to demagogically and slanderously characterize conservatives in these terms, I demand that evolutionists explain to me how human beings could never so “evolve beyond human morality.”

I remember the exchange from the movie Alien:

Ash: You still don’t understand what you’re dealing with, do you? Perfect organism. Its structural perfection is matched only by its hostility.

Lambert: You admire it.

Ash: I admire its purity. A survivor… unclouded by conscience, remorse, or delusions of morality.

I challenge the atheist with his implicit faith in evolution to demonstrate how it could never possibly happen that human beings could so “evolve beyond human morality” that we would likewise be “unclouded by conscience” and “delusions of morality.”  Especially given the sheer number of human beings who have clearly DONE so.

I submit that there is little question that we are in fact as a culture “evolving beyond human morality.”  Just take a look at the Supreme Court openly considering imposing sodomy in place of marriage while we re-elected the first openly pro-sodomite president.  Which openly flies in the face of the entirety of human civilization and all previous “human morality.”

Liberals WANT the morality that was based entirely on Judeo-Christianity and the Judeo-Christian worldview to “evolve.”  That is their most cherished goal.

Now, on my worldview of Judeo-Christianity, I have a very firm rebuttal to the Columbine killers.  You did NOT “evolve” beyond human morality.  Rather, you were created in the image of a holy God.  And you will be held accountable to the morality that God created you to live out.  What do you have in your moral arsenal to respond to this crisis, atheist?

Right now, according to Judeo-Christianity, the Columbine killers are screaming in hell.  In a trillion years, they will be screaming in hell as God imposes the justice upon them that they denied to their victims.  In a trillion times a trillion-trillion years, they will be viscerally screaming in hell in refutation of the vile atheist crap they believed that motivated their actions.  They were profoundly and wickedly wrong; and all eternity will attest to that FACT.  What punishment do YOU have to deter these moral monsters from committing these terrible crimes, atheist?

It is with this in mind that I recall the famous words of the liberal Supreme Court Justices expressed their opinion that the Ten Commandments – including the one about “Thou shalt not murder” – be forcibly taken down from shcools for the following reason:

“If the posted copies of the Ten Commandments are to have any effect at all,  it will be to induce the schoolchildren to read, meditate upon, perhaps to  venerate and obey, the Commandments… [which] is not a permissible … objective.”

Was it worth it, liberals?  Was Columbine and all the other horrors that have followed worth your adventure into godlessness?  Are you glad that Eric Harris and Dyland Klebold were never allowed the opportunity to read, meditate upon, and yes, perhaps even to venerate and obey, the Ten Commandments?  Was it a good thing that disturbed people with an urge to mayhem were never exposed to the one reason NOT to indulge their murderous fantasies?  If you have a superior reason not to murder than the Judeo-Christian one that you purged from society, perhaps it is time to share your secret.

Let’s take Jared Lee Loughner and his massacre at Tucson, Arizona.

Jared Loughner was, according to those who knew him, an atheist and by consequent a nihilist:

As Loughner and Tierney grew closer, Tierney got used to spending the first ten minutes or so of every day together arguing with Loughner’s ”nihilist” view of the world. “By the time he was 19 or 20, he was really fascinated with semantics and how the world is really nothing—illusion,” Tierney says. Once, Tierney recalls, Loughner told him, “I’m pretty sure I’ve come to the conclusion that words mean nothing.” Loughner would also tell Tierney and his friends that life “means nothing,” and they’d reply, “If it means nothing, what you’re saying means nothing.”

And of course it DID mean nothing – expect to those famous secular humanist atheist thinkers who basically share in Loughner’s moral idiocy.

I’ve described precisely WHERE the belief system – that words mean nothing, that the world is really an illusion – of Jared Loughner originated from: it came from the philosophical systems and worldview of the left – from existentialism, from postmodernism, from secular humanism.  And I’ve pointed out that these leftist ideas have CONSEQUENCES.  These systems of thought don’t sit in the ivory towers of the secular humanist liberals who invent them.  They spread like the malignant thought cancers that they are.

I’ve similarly posted this refutation of this mindless atheist evolutionary nihilist crap by Dr. Gleason Archer many times, so it isn’t hard to find:

“But it should be pointed out that consistent atheism, which represents itself to be the most rational and logical of all approaches to reality, is in actuality completely self-defeating and incapable of logical defense. That is to say, if indeed all matter has combined by mere chance, unguided by any Higher Power of Transcendental Intelligence, then it necessarily follows that the molecules of the human brain are also the product of mere chance. In other words, we think the way we do simply because the atoms and molecules of our brain tissue happen to have combined in the way they have, totally without transcendental guidance or control. So then even the philosophies of men, their system of logic and all their approaches to reality are the result of mere fortuity. There is no absolute validity to any argument advanced by the atheist against the position of theism.

On the basis of his won presuppositions, the atheist completely cancels himself out, for on his own premises his arguments are without any absolute validity. By his own confession he thinks the way he does simply because the atoms in his brain happen to combine the way they do. If this is so, he cannot honestly say that his view is any more valid than the contrary view of his opponent. His basic postulates are self-contradictory and self-defeating; for when he asserts that there are no absolutes, he thereby is asserting a very dogmatic absolute. Nor can he logically disprove the existence of God without resorting to a logic that depends on the existence of God for its validity. Apart from such a transcendent guarantor of the validity of logic, any attempts at logic or argumentation are simply manifestations of the behavior of the collocation of molecules that make up the thinker’s brain.”

Go ahead, secular humanist liberal.  Go ahead, atheist.  Show me how what Dr. Archer is saying doesn’t follow.  Show me how the more you scramble something with random and by definition arbitrary evolutionary “progress,” the more ORDER you’ll get.  Show me how you’re correct in asserting that mind necessarily comes from mindlessness rather than from Mind.  Show me how your drivel is anything other than pure degradation – as St. Paul so eloquently states in Romans chapter one (in which St. Paul also points out that some cultures can sink so low into the moral sewer that it will welcome sodomy just as we are doing RIGHT NOW).

Let us also, through the writing of Dinesh D’Souza, consider what would happen to two tribes if one was religious in worldview and the other was atheist:

The Reverend Randy Alcorn, founder of Eternal Perspective ministries in Oregon, sometimes presents his audience with two creation stories and asks them whether it matters which one is true.  In the secular account, “You are the descendant of a tiny cell  of primordial protoplasm washed up on an empty beach three and a half billion years ago.  You are the blind and arbitrary product of time, chance, and natural forces.  You are a mere grab-bag of atomic particles, a conglomeration of genetic substance.  You exist on a tiny planet in a minute solar system in an empty corner of a meaningless universe.  You are a purely biological entity, different only in degree but not in kind from a microbe, virus, or amoeba.  You have no essence beyond your body, and at death you will cease to exist entirely.  In short, you came from nothing and are going nowhere.

In the Christian view, by contrast, “You are the special creation of a good and all-powerful God.  You are created in His image, with capacities to think, feel and worship that set you above all other life forms.  You differ from the animals not simply in degree but in kind.  Not only is your kind unique, but you are unique among your kind.  Your Creator loves you so much and so intensely desires your companionship and affection that He has a perfect plan for your life.  In addition, God gave the life of His only Son that you might spend eternity with Him.  If you are willing to accept the gift of salvation, you can become a child of God.”

Now imagine the two groups of people – let’s call them the secular tribe and the religious tribe – who subscribe to these two worldviews.  Which of the two tribes is more likely to survive, prosper and multiply?  The religious tribe is made up of people who have an animating sense of purpose.  The secular tribe is made up of people who are not sure why they exist at all.  The religious tribe is composed of individuals who view their every thought and action as consequential.  The secular tribe is made up of matter that cannot explain why it is able to think at all. — Dinish D’Souza, What’s So Great About Christianity, pp. 15-16

We’ve actually seen this experiment played out in actual human history as we’ve seen the rise of an America founded upon the Judeo-Christian worldview versus the society of the godless French Revolution and its resulting Reign of Terror; versus the rise of godless Marxism and its degeneration into state atheist Stalinism with over forty million of its own people murdered during peacetime; versus the rise of state atheist Maoism and its murder of over sixty million of its own people during peacetime; versus the crushing of the human spirit in state atheist Cambodia where over a million were murdered in the Killing Fields; and versus the godless tyrant regime of state atheist North Korea and the fact that the entire nation is dark at night.

But since when did FACTS ever matter to the left?  Even when there have been more than 100 million “facts” murdered by their official state atheism.

“State atheism” equals “communism”:

State atheism has been defined as the official “promotion of atheism” by a government, typically by active suppression of religious freedom and practice.^[1]

State promotion of atheism as a public norm was first practised during a brief period in Revolutionary France. Only communist states and socialist states have done so since.

Which is precisely why we are moving in the direction of socialism and communism today.  Because the Democrat Party consists of secular humanists, liberals, atheists who all have the same agenda: to reshape society by reshaping the economies of the world in their image.

You want to ban something?  I suggest we ban a godless left-wing State that has all the guns versus a disarmed and oppressed people who were promised Utopia but have nothing but misery and the very sort of propaganda that we are seeing right now in America to feed them the manure of self-serving lies.

I would suggest banning that instead of going the opposite direction as Democrats demand.

Let’s continue our tour to Aurora, Colorado and the warped worldview that perpetrated it.  He went from murderer to Muslim.  Which given the rabid tendency of Islam to produce terrorists isn’t that far of a stretch.

Let’s look our show to Newtown/Sandy Hook and consider the worldview of the ghostly little creep who murdered 26 people in a school that had no armed security of any kind:

The Sandy Hook gunman worshiped the devil and  had an online page dedicated to Satan, a former classmate revealed, as his  childhood barber recalls Adam Lanza never spoke and would stare at the floor  every time he had his hair cut.

Lanza’s worshiping page had the word ‘Devil’  written in red, Gothic-style letters against a black background, Trevor L. Todd  told The National Enquirer, something which he said was ‘weird’ and ‘gave him  the chills’.

The FBI are trying to piece together his  smashed up hard drive to see if his online footprint will reveal any motive for  the killing, but they strongly believe he made use of devil-worshiping and  suicide sites and boasted of his murder plans on message forums.

I actually saw claims by atheists that this turd was a “Christian” because his desperate, troubled mother took him to church a few times.

You moral idiots, I can not only walk into a garage, but even lie down on the concrete and start calling myself a “car.”  If Adam Lanza was a “Christian” because somebody else took him to a church and he sat in the pew, I guess that makes me a “car.”  Let’s see four of you moral imbeciles climb into me and start driving me down the road on my nonexistent wheels.  I hope I’ll get really crappy gas mileage, just to irritate you.

Let’s get one thing straight.  Rather than banning guns, let’s try banning all these idiotic and depraved worldviews instead.

Now, some of you are shouting that that would violate the Constitution.  But that never stopped you leftists before.  Just as it’s not stopping you now as you stomp all over the 2nd Amendment.

The day that you secular humanist liberals manage to melt every gun down and turn it into ploughshares – as the Holy Bible declares that Messiah will one day do during the Millennium when He reigns as King of kings and as Lord of lords – then you won’t be a crazy fascist nutjob.  Until then, you are crazy fascist nutjobs.  Because the simple fact is that you CAN’T ban guns; you can only pass laws that prevent LAW-ABIDING citizens from being able to legally buy them as criminals couldn’t give less of a damn about your stupid laws.

I pointed out this inconvenient truth about other Dianne Feinstein attempts to stop crime by criminalizing legal products.  Thanks in large part to liberal Democrat Feinstein, it is now incredibly difficult for anyone to purchase pseudoephedrine – a prime ingredient of “meth” and “crank” – except for the criminals who have explodied meth production as a result.  Her proposed ban on assault weapons does little more than treat law-abiding citizens like criminals even as liberals treat criminals like law-abiding citizens.

Secular humanist liberals stupidly think that human nature is something infinitely malleable, something they can mold and shape by replacing God with “the State.”  They foolishly think that the GUN has the depraved worldview rather than the mind of the person who is pulling the trigger.  They think that they can control human behavior by controlling human environment.

In reality, they are the very ones who are producing these sick, evil minds.  In reality, when you criminalize guns you only allow the criminals who don’t give a damn about your stupid laws to possess them.  In reality, when you criminalize guns, you only keep law-abiding citizens from having the means to protect themselves.

By the way, Adam Lanza parked his vehicle in a fire lane.  I know that’s impossible, because it’s illegal to park in a fire lane.  But that’s what he did.  That’s the “respect” psychos have for your stupid laws.  That’s how successful all your stupid laws are in deterring crime.  And in the same way, NONE of the bans or regulations that Obama is proposing as he hypes and demagogues Newtown would have done ANYTHING to prevent the very mayhem that he is so cynically exploiting.

A pro-2nd Amendment rape victim asked the question, “How does rendering me defenseless protect you against a violent crime?”  I demand that question be answered.

How does it?  How does abrogating the right and the ability of self-defense to the government – a government whose president literally fearmongered to take away the police as he deceitfully demagogued the sequester – do that?  Why should I surrender my own security and protection as a law-abiding citizen to a president who literally threatened to withhold the police protection that I would as a result of his policies depend on for my survival unless I agree to his massive tax hikes?  Why should the American people make themselves hostages to an incredibly cynical political agenda?

Under secular humanism, i.e., under liberalism, no one is responsible for their actions – just as no one is to be given any credit for their hard work or the wealth that they earn as a result of their efforts – and therefore ANYBODY can go nuts at any time and therefore NO ONE should be allowed to possess a gun even as no one should be allowed to work hard and keep the wealth they earned.  Except liberals and the government they erect to advance liberal fascism.  Society is to blame when murders murder; society is to be credited when rich people work hard and become rich.  Individual responsibility and individual credit alike are anathema to the left.  We are herd animals; only the herd matters.

And liberals – who invariably manage to exempt themselves from all their edicts – hypocritically view themselves as having some sole mandate to rule over all others and crush all opposition to their rule.  Society is all that matters; and they get to dominate that society.

We find that Obama has been the WORST president when it actually comes to enforcing the gun laws already on the books.  Just as his home city of libturd Chicago is the worst city in the nation at enforcing the laws already on the books.  These people don’t want to protect the defenseless; they want to exploit the tragedies that their policies create in order to impose more fascist control over the people and render them more and more and more powerless to defend themselves and defend their Constitution from government tyranny.

Every single tyrant regime on earth – whether it be Nazi Germany, or Stalinist Russia, or Kim Jong-Un’s North Korea – seized guns from the people before they imposed their godless agenda.  Every single one.  And now we’re following the same path toward slavery and the ultimate crushing of the human spirit.

That was the whole point of the 2nd Amendment: it was to be the people’s protection against future government tyranny.

Since we’ve already seemingly decided that the Constitution isn’t worth its weight in bovine manure, why don’t we just cut to the heart of the matter and ban something that will actually stop the mayhem???  Why don’t we ban secular humanism?  Why don’t we ban atheism?  Why don’t we ban murderous political systems masquerading as religious systems like Islam does?

In reality, over 55 million innocent human beings have been murdered by Obama’s demonic abortion hell pits.  As opposed to the relatively miniscule number of children killed in gun homicides.  If you care about children, why do you smile sweetly at the millions of precious babies murdered by your abortion???  Why should anybody give one damn when holocaust baby murdering liberals demand children be “protected” by fascist gun laws?  And why is it that it is LIBERAL cities like Obama’s home city of Chicago – rather than the pro-gun conservative areas – where all the children are being murdered as law-abiding people are rendered defenseless and helpless?  Why is it that the murderous policies of liberalism become the basis for even more murderous policies of liberalism?

We’ve got a Democrat doctor right now on trial for delivering numerous babies alive so he could have an easier time slashing their little spines and throats with his scalpel.  Just as we have a Democrat professor demanding that his students stomp on Jesus and everything Jesus stood for.

Why don’t we ban Obama?  Why don’t we criminalize the Democrat Party?

But of course we’re not going to do those things, are we?

The beast will be celebrated, worshiped and praised by the Democrat Party that actually voted to remove God from its Party platform.  He will be celebrated, worshiped and praised by the same Party whose representatives demanded that the idiot youth whose morally-warped minds Democrats have captured stomped on the name of Jesus.  He will be celebrated, worshiped and praised by the same Party that is now exalting in the homosexual sodomy that God in His Word declared to be an abomination.

That’s why when the beast of the Book of Revelation comes, there will BE no guns for people to protect themselves with.  And every single Democrat will eagerly worship the beast and take his mark on their right hands or on their foreheads.

You’ll get yours, Democrat.  In the exact same place where the Columbine killers are already getting theirs.  Your day is coming.

As a P.S. of how liberalism is to blame for these savage murders, it turns out that thirty years ago, a family could petition a court to declare a family member crazy and have him or her committed.  But guess who decided that was inhumane?  You guessed right: ACLU liberals.  Liberals, understanding that liberalism is a mental disease, figured that it was better to keep these psychotic lunatics outside where they could vote Democrat than locking them up and putting them in rubber rooms where they belong.

As a P.P.S. of how liberalism is to blame for these savage murders, it similiarly turns out that Hollywood liberalism is responsible for both the violent movies – which glorify violence – and the video games that literally teach kids how to kill while desensitizing them to the violence they commit.  And again, liberals, apparently understanding that they are entrenching a violence-laden culture, could do something about this problem they created if they wanted.  But they would rather cynically exploit their culture of violence by blaming it on guns.  And of course, on Republicans.

Should I add a P.P.P.S. about liberals and rap music that glorifies violence, hostility toward women and the lowest form of gang-banging nihilism???

Liberal Fascist Hypocrite Joan Walsh Says It’s ‘Racist’ To Go After Obama’s Family – After Viciously Slandering Bush’s Family In 2001.

Joan Walsh is a typical liberal hypocrite.  She literally says it’s racist to do what she herself did.  Only of course it wasn’t racist when she did it.

Here’s her article attacking George W. Bush as a father and then attacking his daughters back in 2001 (note that the picture of Bush’s daughter below was a prominent part of the Salon.com piece) back when it was wonderful to demonize the president:

Thursday, May 31, 2001 01:00 AM PDT
The first family’s alcohol troubles
President Bush downplayed his own drinking problem and hid a DUI. Now his daughters are making news for underage drinking. Is there a connection?
By Joan Walsh

Enlarge

I don’t envy Jenna and Barbara Bush, going off to college under the watchful eye of the Secret Service and the international media. But the sudden flurry of headlines about the first twins’ alcohol-related mishaps raises new questions about the way their father handled his own “young and irresponsible” past.

I always thought it was a bad decision for Bush, as a politician, to refuse to acknowledge his wild youth — which, by his own account, lasted until he was 40. But now it seems it was a bad choice for Bush as a father. After his 1976 drunken-driving arrest was revealed last year, Bush said he didn’t admit it when he decided to run for president because he didn’t want his daughters to know about it. That was a mistake, and the twins’ recent run of bad behavior seems designed to let him know that.

There’s no evidence either twin has a drinking problem, but the string of news items involving their partying and scrapes with the law in the last few months can’t be ignored. First came the tale of Secret Service agents ferrying home Jenna’s boyfriend after he was arrested for public drunkenness. Then there were randy National Enquirer photos of Jenna, a University of Texas freshman, and a beer-drinking pal, and a story about her alleged marijuana use. Yale freshman Barbara, supposedly the studious twin, had a false I.D. confiscated at a New Haven, Conn., bar. In April, the Enquirer featured a lurid tale of Barbara’s drunken spring-break binge in Mexico, and by the end of the month all major newspapers were carrying a story about Jenna being cited by police at an Austin bar for underage drinking, while Secret Service agents waited outside.

Now, barely a week after a court appearance to deal with that alcohol citation, Jenna has been caught again using a false I.D. to buy alcohol at an Austin restaurant, with sister Barbara at her side.

Of course, many of us would have provided lively tabloid fodder in college if we’d been subjected to the scrutiny Barbara and Jenna Bush must endure. And their college drinking doesn’t mean they’ll turn into alcoholics as adults. Most teenage party girls become responsible citizens, eventually. Still, their recklessness in the first months of their father’s presidency suggests their parents screwed up by downplaying and even denying President Bush’s own drinking problem.

Bush’s he-man decision to quit drinking cold turkey is the stuff of legend. The morning after a boozy 40th birthday party in 1986, he woke up at Colorado’s tony Broadmoor Resort and decided, on his own, to get sober. Alcohol had begun to “compete for my affections,” Bush said later. Certainly he didn’t need Alcoholics Anonymous, he told the Washington Post: “I don’t think I was clinically an alcoholic; I didn’t have the genuine addiction. I don’t know why I drank. I liked to drink, I guess.”

But his close friends tell a slightly different story: “Once he got started, he couldn’t, didn’t shut it off,” Bush’s buddy Don Evans, now commerce secretary, told the Washington Post last year. “He didn’t have the discipline.” That sounds a lot like an addiction, though only Bush himself knows for sure.

He refused to discuss details of his drinking or rumored drug use throughout his political campaigns, relying on the stock excuse, “When I was young and irresponsible, I was young and irresponsible.” His parents have also repeatedly denied he had a drinking problem, even after several family crises involving his drinking came to light: an ugly Christmas confrontation with his father in 1972, after Bush drove drunk with his brother Marvin, crashed into a neighbor’s garbage cans and offered to fight “mano a mano” with his father; and the 1976 DUI incident near the family compound in Kennebunkport, Maine, with his then-teenage sister Dorothy in the car.

We know Bush’s problem drinking, including the DUI, was a family secret. The night a reporter broke the DUI story, Laura Bush called both daughters, in Austin and New Haven, to break the news to them. “I made the decision that as a dad I didn’t want my girls doing the kinds of things I did, and I told them not to drink and drive,” Bush told reporters. But he didn’t tell them about his own arrest.

The secrecy, of course, was a mistake. Anyone who works with alcoholics and their families knows honesty is crucial: The drinking parent needs to come clean about his or her problems, and kids need to understand the family dynamics that were established around the drinking. And as teenagers, they need to know that alcoholism is a disease — whether because of psychology or physiology or some combination of the two — that is remarkably hereditary, and think about their own drinking in that context.

“We know for a fact that [Jenna’s] father had a long history of alcohol use and abuse,” Lynn Ponton, a psychiatrist who studies teenage risk-taking, told Salon. “And this is an opportunity for the Bushes … to talk honestly with their children about risk-taking and really provide guidance and increase communication. And I would wonder what type of communication is actually taking place.”

I wonder, too. I’d bet there hasn’t been enough communication in the WASP-y Texas Bush family, and it looks as if the first twins are acting out as a result. Even with a Secret Service detail, there are ways for young women to party, if they’re discreet. Clearly, the first twins aren’t. Their blatant risk-taking and public partying (the Secret Service waits outside the bars where they drink illegally?) seem designed to force a family reckoning that their father’s drinking never triggered.

I’m reluctant to play family therapist for a family I’ve never met, but I’d say that Bush may have gotten past voters with evasiveness about his drinking problem, but he hasn’t satisfied his daughters. And if he sticks to the sanitized, up-from-Broadmoor version of the story, he may someday find he won the White House at the cost of an honest relationship with his daughters.

An earlier version of this story appeared in Bushed! last month.

That was then.  As liberal fascism always declares, it can’t be fascist when we do it.  So liberal roach-thug Walsh apparently gets pissed off about what is actually a pretty straightforward piece at Breitbart and writes this stinking pile of crap that these days passes as “journalism” (note the considerably more flattering picture of Obama’s daughters in which they look considerably less drunk than their choice for Jenna’s pic above).

For the record, I read over the Breitbart piece.  Somehow I missed the parts that Walsh alleges are there about a) the color of Obama’s skin; b) the unfitness of Obama as a parent; or c) the disgracefulness of the president’s daughters.  Please note, however, how Walsh just flat-out poured hate on George W. Bush as a father and slammed his daughters even after acknowledging that she had any actual factual basis for doing so:

Tuesday, Mar 26, 2013 09:51 AM PDT
How not to seem like a racist
A tip for right-wingers angry about charges of racial bias: Try treating the Obama daughters with decency
By Joan Walsh

EnlargeSasha and Malia Obama(Credit: Reuters/Kevin Lamarque)

Writing my piece on Andrew Breitbart and Tucker Carlson, I missed a huge example of overlap between their two sham-empires: the reporter who broke the Caller’s now-disgraced “scoop” about Sen. Robert Menendez patronizing prostitutes, Matthew Boyle, now works for Breitbart.com. And on Monday he penned the ridiculous story revealing the location of Malia and Sasha’s spring break vacation (which is now at the top of the Drudge Report).

On Twitter Monday and Tuesday, Breitbart fans attacked my focus on their hero’s bizarre racially driven crusades. They continue to insist that they’re being unfairly tarred with the charge of racism, when they’re the real “post-racialists” who just don’t like Barack Obama because he’s a liberal. I have some advice for right-wingers who don’t want it to seem like their anti-Obama animus is racial: Try treating his daughters with respect.

You’ll remember back in December, the NRA went after Sasha and Malia with an ad insisting that the fact that they have armed protection, when the administration was supposedly blocking armed security at America’s schools (actually, it wasn’t), was the height of hypocrisy – ignoring the many threats to their safety faced by the children of presidents and the tradition of Secret Service protection, for all of them.

The Weekly Standard’s Daniel Halper went even crazier, with a piece alleging that the girls’ school, Sidwell Friends, a Quaker school, had armed guards, too. Anyone familiar with the Quaker tradition of nonviolence found that claim strange, and of course, like most claims about the Obama family that come from the right, it turned out not to be true.

Unfortunately for the untalented Mr. Boyle, journalists have a consensus about not revealing the location of the presidents’ children’s vacations. Reporters don’t write about minor first children except when they’re attending “official or semi-official events.” It’s considered a security risk. As the Washington Post’s Paul Farhi reported last year:

The ban on such coverage has existed through many administrations by informal agreement with the White House Correspondents’ Association, which represents the interests of journalists who cover the president.

“There’s a general feeling among the press corps that it wants to be respectful” of the president’s children, said Caren Bohan, the White House reporter for Reuters who is president of the WHCA.

When Agence-France Presse wrote about Malia’s trip to Mexico last year, a few U.S. outlets picked it up, and the administration tried to get the details removed. Then an earthquake in Mexico made the first daughter’s vacation newsworthy, and other sites, justifiably, reported it.

A year later, along comes the brave Matthew Boyle, fresh off his Menendez humiliation, to tell Breitbart readers about the Obama girls’ vacation. The news hook seems to be that it’s a waste of money.

“It is unclear how long the first daughters will be staying in the Bahamas, or what the cost will be to taxpayers,” Boyle harrumphs. “Earlier this month, the White House canceled public tours as a result of the recent budget sequester, citing Secret Service staffing costs.”

Esquire’s Charlie Pierce put it better than I can:

What possible interest does this serve, except to titillate the dark and envious nether parts of Boyle’s 22 readers? (No link, because fk that pudgy little monster.) There is no possible news value to this. Sooner or later, the frolicks of what my pal [Eric] Boehlert calls the “rightwing entertainment complex” are going to get someone killed.

The theme of most right-wing stories on Sasha, Malia and Michelle Obama’s vacations and leisure-time activities seems to be that they’re entitled princesses, when they do exactly the same kinds of things other presidents’ families have done throughout history. There’s only one difference I can see.

Drudge is also hyping the president’s vacation with the blaring headline “A vacation a month.” That’s another racially tinged trope on the right, that our first black president seems to be a little, well, lazy, because he can’t stop taking vacations. Of course, Obama is on track to take about a fifth of the vacation days George W. Bush did over his two terms. Obama took 131 vacation days in his first term – which would amount to 262 if he kept that pace in his second term. Bush took a staggering 1,060 vacation days over eight years, by far the most vacation in history (he also took the longest single presidential vacation in the modern era, a full five weeks.) Can someone explain why Obama is supposedly the vacation-hog?

Oh, and the comments on Boyle’s Breitbart.com story are pretty awesome, too. Here’s a good one:

They will indeed grow up to be monsters. Very, very, angry and vengeful monsters. Just like momma… Especially after they are forced to visit their obamination of a father in a federal penitentiary following his impeachment and conviction for Treason… Although I’d far prefer they visit his plot occasionally following his hanging for treason.

Boyle is perfect for his new employer (although he was a pretty good fit for the Daily Caller, too). In a post explaining why he jumped ship (which didn’t mention the higher salary he got), he bragged about “enlisting in Andrew Breitbart’s army … I’m shipping out today. It’s time to go to war.”

A war on the president’s daughters? Boyle ought to talk to some veterans of actual war. What a putz.

Paul Farhi’s story on the media’s traditional treatment of first children quoted Democratic pollster Celinda Lake on the political appeal of Obama’s family: “The value of the family is enormous. The more you know this family and the more you think of Barack Obama in these terms, the harder it is to vilify him.”

That’s true for the vast majority of Americans. But not the haters and racists who belong to Breitbart’s “army.”

The galling, appalling hypocrisy of liberals and liberalism is disgusting beyond belief.

Hey, maybe if Barbara and Jenna Bush had jetset all over the world on other people’s money the way Obama’s daughters have, they wouldn’t have, they wouldn’t have ever had any issues with alcohol.  That and the fact that the Bush daughters were in their college years rather than their grade school years like Sasha and Malia.

I have documented in the past that being “white” is no more a defense against “racism toward whites” than liberals accord to black conservatives for being immune to racism because they’re black.  Do I seriously need to post articles of liberals going after conservtive blacks in a racist manner?  Condoleeza Rice, Justice Clarence Thomas, Allen West, Michael Steele, Stacey Dash, Dr. Benjamin Carson, pretty much ANY black person who has ever expressed conservative views in his or her life, is labelled “Uncle Tom,” Oreo Cookie and far, far worse.  So blacks can’t be “racist” because of the color of their skin on liberal theory unless they’re conservative blacks – in which case they are the quintessential ESSENCE of racist bigotry regardless of the color of their skin on the view of these self-refuting turds.  And then these hypocrites declare themselves inpeccable – i.e. incapable of sin – while they define their opponents as ONLY capable of nothing BUT sin.

Facts get in the way, of course.

Karl Marx was a self-hating Jew who actively despised Jews in his writings.

If you can be a self-hating black, as liberals assert conservative blacks are by definition and if you can be a self-hating Jew, as Karl Marx clearly was, then just how the hell is it impossible to be a self-hating white???

Thus, by liberals’ vicious attacks against black conservatives as being self-hating blacks, and literally by her own diatribe, Joan Walsh is a far-leftist intolerant racist bigot.  She is a self-hating racist race traitor according to her own demonic views.  In addition to being a truly crappy excuse of a human being.

This is what pisses me off about the left above all else: they constantly drool out the most vicious and self-righteous slanders while demonizing everyone on the other side for doing the tiniest FRACTION of what they hypocritically do.  Unless you actually want to defend her attack against Bush relative to the innocuous piece that she poured her hate on in Breitbart.

It’s time to go, Walsh, you Nazi.  That that your fellow jackbooted stormtroopers right out of the Joseph Goebbels Ministry of Propaganda mold will ever make you leave.  Becuase they’re all as hypocritical and as fascist as YOU are: they’re just not as STUPID as you are in your glaring obviousness as a biased ideologue useful idiot.

Note: AJ Delgado took on the hypocrite Joan Walsh first.

For The Simple Factual Record, No Homosexual Has EVER Been Deprived Of The Right To Marry.

I’ve heard this argument – a la Hitler’s “big lie” – so many times that if I’d vomited every time I heard it, I would have barfed myself into vapor by now.  That’s why they call it “ad nauseum,” I suppose.

“Everyone has a fundamental right to marry,” we’re told.  And so homosexual marriage is not merely a Constitutional issue, but a human rights issue.

But here’s the damn obvious question: when have homosexuals EVER been denied the right to marry?

A homosexual can marry anybody of the opposite sex of maritable age and status who will have them, the same as everybody else.  Nobody has had their right to marry deprived from them.

I challenge anybody to find me an example of a single case in which a homosexual was denied the right to marry, given what marriage is: the union between one man and one woman.  Just find me one time when a homosexual tried to marry and was denied the right to do so.

Let’s put it this way: if homosexuals are somehow being defined as having been denied the right to marry, you have to employ a definition of “marriage” that no society has ever before embraced.  Which is to say that you literally have to assume what you want to prove and then use what you just assumed as your “proof.”  To wit, “marriage” is the union between a man and a woman under God.  That is what it has ALWAYS been.  Which is why no civilization has ever called for homosexual marriage.  And unless you assume that marriage is somehow something else (which it isn’t and has never been), no homosexual has EVER been denied “the right to marry.”

That’s what we call facts.  That’s what we call logic.  That’s what we call morality.  And that’s what we call history.  Homosexual marriage fails on all counts.  It is an oxymoron.  “Homosexual marriage” is like “liquid solid.”  It is like “adult children.”  You can’t have both.  It is either one or the other.  Unless you want think of “adult children” in the Obamanomics sense in which young people have been “fundamentally transformed” into permanent “children” because they’ll never be able to get a job in this disastrous economy and will therefore be helpless dependents forever.  In that Orwellian sense in which “freedom is slavery” and “ignorance is strength,” I suppose anything is possible – even “homosexual marriage.”

“Homosexual marriage” is non sequitur unless you begin by perverting the thing in language that you then want to pervert in actuality.  When I hear somebody mouthing this idiocy of homosexuals being denied the right to marry, I know that I am in the presence of a true moral and intellectual idiot.  And I excuse myself in search of somebody who is actually worth having an intellectual conversation with.

If homosexuals don’t want to marry, fine by me.  But don’t whine because you don’t want what decent, healthy people want.

Homosexuals don’t want the right to marry; they want the right to pervert the institution of marriage.  Period.

Florida Professor (And High-Ranking Member Of Palm Beach County Democrat Party) Orders Students To Literally Stomp On Jesus Christ

I have been saying it since I started writing this blog: Democrats despise Jesus Christ, despise Christianity, despise Christian morality and despise the Judeo-Christian worldview.

The Democrat Party is the Party of abject moral wickedness and depravity in America.  It is the Party that has murdered 55.7 million babies in America alone even as it has exported the culture of abortion to the rest of the world.  It is the Party of sodomy.  It is the Party of the depraved militant homosexual agenda.  It is the Party of Antichrist and the Party of the totalitarian government Mark of the Beast.

One day all of these sons of hell are going to receive the eternal destruction of their souls in hell that they have reaped in their bodies.

Take a look at the shockingly ugly demoniac face of liberalism and everything liberalism truly stands for.

Here’s the new daily dose of outrage that is the Democrat Party in God damn America.  And if you don’t think that Democrats will burn in hell, put this in your crack pipe and smoke on it:

Professor/Dem Party Official Makes Students Stomp on Jesus
by Jennifer Kabbany – Associate Editor on March 22, 2013

A Florida professor and high-ranking member of the Palm Beach County Democratic Party recently instructed his students to take out a piece of paper, write “JESUS” on it, then put it on the floor and stomp on it – and the Mormon student who refused to do so, calling the assignment morally offensive – was suspended.

“Anytime you stomp on something it shows that you believe that something has no value. So if you were to stomp on the word Jesus, it says that the word has no value,” the Florida Atlantic University student in question, Ryan Roleta, told a CBS news affiliate. “I am not going to be sitting in a class, having my religious rights desecrated.”

So Roleta – a junior at the school who is also a devout Mormon – told his professor, Dr. Deandre Poole, that he refused to do the assignment, calling it inappropriate, offensive and unprofessional – and his religious objections got him suspended from the class, CBS News’ WPEC reported.

After he complained to Poole’s supervisor, Roleta said he was suspended from the intercultural communications class and advised not to return.

“I’m being punished, and I am still waiting for an apology from somebody,” Roleta told WPEC.

In an emailed statement the university sent to CBS, campus officials stated “faculty and students at academic institutions pursue knowledge and engage in open discourse. While at times the topics discussed may be sensitive, a university environment is a venue for such dialogue and debate.”

Apparently the exercise is a suggestion in the textbook, “Intercultural Communication: A Contextual Approach, 5th Edition,” and the school would not say if Poole would face disciplinary action, WPEC reports.

After news of the incident spread Thursday, it came to light that Poole is not only a professor but also a high-ranking official in the region’s Democrat Party. In particular, reports BizPacReview, Poole is vice-chairman of the Palm Beach County Democratic Party.

Poole’s bio blurb on the Palm Beach County Democratic Party website states that he is a member of Lighthouse Worship Center Church of God in Christ who “prides himself in being actively engaged in civic affairs.” It also notes Poole is a “new junior faculty member in the School of Communication and Multimedia Studies at FAU.”

According to his profile page on Florida Atlantic University’s website, Poole earned his PhD from Howard University and is writing a book called “Obamamania: The Rise of a Mythical Hero.”

Every single Democrat in America participated in this vile Nazi act.  These “progressives” have been progressively voting for more and more evil for the last fifty years.

It’s amazing.  Democrats love sodomy.  They love terrorist Muslims and the Muslim Brotherhood.  They love “mothers” who murder their babies.  They love everything but Jesus Christ and Christians and people having the right to defend themselves against the government fascism that Barack Obama is seeking to impose on what is left of this nation.

When Democrats haven’t been massacring babies by the tens of millions through their votes and their appointments and their policies, they have been destroying families and family values through their votes and their appointments and their policies.  Through their easy no-fault divorce, through their celebration of casual sex, through their elevation of single mothers to secular sainthood, they have destroyed as many families as they have babies.  And then in their wicked depravity they have cynically exploited the resulting tsunami of poverty they have created by destroying families by pimping welfare and a culture of dependency in exchange for votes.  Let’s take black people – the ultimate wards of the state due to the strategems of the Party that had actually enslaved them and fought an ugly Civil War to keep them in chains – and the 72% out-of-wedlock birthrate of the black community.  Let’s consider that these wards of the Democrat Party’s statism are five times more likely to kill their own babies through abortion than whites.  And let’s consider the crime and gang and homicide rates of blacks and understand that they are living out the causual-but-brutal indifference toward life that they have been so thoroughly indoctrinated in.  Their poverty isn’t in spite of the efforts of Democrats; it is BECAUSE of the efforts of Democrats.

Hypocrite Democrats dishonestly and hypocritically slandered and demonized George Bush out of golfing as president while dishonestly and hypocritically celebrating Barack Obama as he played more than four times as much golf in his first four years than Bush played in eight.  It was immoral for Bush to play golf while our soldiers were perishing on the battlefield until it was right for Obama to play golf while our soldiers were perishing on the battlefield.  But would George Bush have ever taken a closed-to-the-press golf vacation with Tiger Woods after that turd had been caught red-handed committing adultery with women numbering in the scores???  I think not.  Because it takes a Democrat to endorse that kind of moral sewage.

This most recent example of Democrats’ walking all over that which is Jesus Christ is the continuation of false messiah Obama’s war on religion that he began when he declared war on anybody who didn’t want to be forced to participate in the holocaust of babies in America.

This is the poster boy for the Democrat Party.

In God damn America, people aren’t rewarded for doing the moral thing or the right thing; quite the contrary.  They are persecuted for doing what is right.  By Democrats.

In God damn America, right and wrong are turned on their heads.  Wrong is right and right is wrong.  And doing wrong merits reward and doing right merits punishment.  The one student who wasn’t so brainwashed by liberal Democrat hatred of Jesus Christ discovered that refusing to stomp on Jesus was a violation of the student code of conduct.  He received a letter stating, “You are requested to attend a Student Conduct Conference.”

Next time, when a Democrat Party professor tells you to stomp on Jesus, you’d better stomp on Jesus.  And do it with gusto, too.  Because when a Democrat asks you to stomp Jesus, you ask, “How high?”

This insane world will culminate in the Tribulation and the Mark of the Beast.  And that hell on earth when big-government liberals create mass suffering and death on a scale never before witnessed in the history of the world is coming soon.

Remember, true Christian, that you have heaven.  Democrats, aka secular humanists, have only this earth.  And while they will thrive in God damn America, the time is coming when they will reap what they have sown.

The day is coming when Democrats will stand before Jesus Christ and claim that they were Christians.  And Jesus will sadly tell them, “I was a baby in my mother’s womb and you murdered Me.  I was never able to live a perfect life on earth and die in your place for all of your vile wickedness.  Depart from Me.  I never knew you.  Especially when you were desecrating Me by placing Me in a jar of urine and calling it “art” and stomping on My name.”

Vote Democrat.  Vote to burn in hell forever.

Your time is coming.

A Former Sports Bike Guy’s Thoughts On V-Twin Motorcycle Engines And The Harleys That Made Them Famous

Are you considering buying a motorcycle, or considering switching from one type of street bike (e.g., sports bike, cruiser, touring bike, sports tourer) to another?

I found myself in that situation.

I’ve owned several sports bikes.  Never even would have CONSIDERED buying a Harley or for that matter ANY v-twin engined bike, as I frankly considered them to be mechanically inferior.

If sombody had suggested a Harley Davidson bike to me, I would have – with something of a sneer – stated that Harley bikes featured technology that was ancient when dinosaurs walked the earth with an engine that is still around only because for some bizarre reason people actually like the sound of uneven idling just as they like paying twice as much money for a massively heavy bike with inadequate power.  I also would have pointed out with that same sneer that Harleys were infamous for peeing oil and didn’t finally stop vibrating for half an hour after being shut down.

My first sport bike was a 1983 Suzuki GS 1100e that produced 104 bone stock hoursepower to propel its 500 lbs like a bat out of hell.  It won “Motorcycle of the Year” because it deserved to.  My best friend had the same year Harley Superglide (we’d both bought our bikes brand spanking new with our enlistment bonus checks) that was trying in vain to make it down the road with 68 horses while it weighed in at well over 600 lbs.

With all the power that Suzuki had, it apparently still wasn’t enough: I installed a big bore kit, a performance carburetor and a performance exhaust.  That sucker was putting out over 150 horseys and if you’d ask me to do a wheelie, I would have asked you which gear you wanted me to do it in.  I could get on the freeway and hit the 55 mph speed limit and THEN smoke the rear wheel.  The thing sounded like a fighter jet and I used to love riding home from the bars and setting off all the car alarms at 3 am (it was even more fun on the one-way roads where I could set off all the car alarms on either side of the street).

Suffice it to say I didn’t get the whole Harley thing.  At all.

I’ve had a few other sport bikes since that ’83 Suzuki, and never really seriously considered riding anything other than a bike that wasn’t in the class of “crotch rocket.”  The only thing I wanted more than a bike that went fast was a bike that went even faster.

A bad wreck and a head that got increasingly full of gray hair – possibly from worrying about getting in another bad wreck – changed my attitude.

Well, at least some.

I was looking for a bike that had a) saddlebags and b) a windshield or fairing that actually managed to deflect wind.

That already meant I was “getting old,” mind you.  There’s that line from the movie Big Trouble in Little China: “A brave man likes the feel of nature on his face.”  And the reply: “Yeah, and a wise man has enough sense to get in out of the rain!”

While one might argue that wise men don’t throw their legs over motorcycles, I would point out that I was at least trying to make strides from brave fool to wise man.  I wanted saddlebags because dang you can’t pack very much stuff in those little back packs you have to wear on a sport bike, and I wanted a shield because I was getting tired of freezing in the rain.

Sport bikes by definition don’t have saddle bags and they don’t have actual functioning wind shields – as you would learn for yourself were you to hug the gas tank behind those tiny little sport fairings during a rain the way a soldier hugs the deck during an incoming artillery barrage.

I was getting old enough to start having the beginnings of that rare state of mind otherwise known as common sense.  Maybe not enough common sense to look out of a car window with the AC blasting, but common sense as it relates to two wheels.

That left me with buying a sport tourer.  Because I sure wasn’t old enough to want a full dress touring bike.  And I still had enough of a pulse that I didn’t want to drag around on a Harley.

But as I looked at the sport tourers, I couldn’t help but notice the cruiser bikes that I’d largely ignored did in fact have the saddlebags and windshield that I wanted.

I don’t know how it happened, exactly.  But I kept looking at bikes, and those cruisers had all that beautiful chrome and those sport tourers had all that … plastic.

And, almost against my will, I began to appreciate that chrome.

I’ve always loved old cars, and one of the things I love about old cars is all that bright, shiny chrome and the styling that is absolutely nowhere to be found these days as cars all look like they came out of the same wind-tunnel research.

Do you know why you don’t see Harley engines being surrounded by a bunch of plastic?  Because v-twins are absolutely beautiful engines and it would be a crime to hide them under a plastic sport bike fairing.

That’s the beginning of understanding the appeal of a v-twin engine: they are visual works of art.  Versus the sport bike engines that are usually covered up because frankly nobody really gives a damn what they look like as long as they’re fast.  The bottom line is that sport bike engines aren’t beautiful – apart from the sheer beauty of function – and they were never intended to be beautiful.

Harley guys accuse the so-called “metric twins” built in Japan of being soulless clones.  What is interesting is that over the past few years, it has been Harley following the Japanese more than vice versa.  The Japanese saw the market for performance v-twins and built bikes with more grunt: it was Harley that followed suit as they scrambled to build bikes with bigger engines while trying to keep their patented exhaust sound.

Harleys DO sound beautiful; and unlike any other make of motorcycle, it doesn’t take an expert to be able to tell that a bike is a Harley from the exhaust note alone.  That said, it turns out that the issue is more about complying with federal regulations limiting decibels than it is about make and model.  Harleys sound like “Harleys” largely because virtually all Harley owners have their stock federal-complying exhausts removed and replaced with different aftermarket Harley exhausts.  Which many metric cruiser owners do as well (you listen to a couple of aftermarket pipes for Roadliners here and here).

When it came time to pull the trigger and buy a bike, I bought a Yamaha Stratoliner.  That is, I bought an 1854 cc (as in nearly 1.9 liter!) engine.  In Harley speak, that’s 113 cubic inches, which for the record is ten cubic inches bigger than the biggest Hog.  On a bike that weighs a good sixty pounds less than a Hog due to its having an aluminum frame.  That aluminum frame consists of a total of eight pieces, versus 40-60 separate components for a typical tubular steel frame.  That means a lot less weight shift, which means a lot more stability.

As for the stock factory sound of the exhaust, one reviewer for Motorcycle.com stated that the Roadliner/Stratoliner had “the best exhaust note of any OEM cruiser” in a comparison that included a Harley-Davidson bike.  An aftermarket system will make it sound a lot louder by eliminating the federal-mandated baffling, but it won’t make it sound sweeter.

Harley owners as well as the metric v-twin guys who modified their exhausts justify themselves by claiming that the louder they are, the safer they are.  They claim, “They might not be able to see me, but they’ll damn sure be able to hear me.”  But the actual studies have demonstrated pretty conclusively that bikes with loud exhausts aren’t one iota less likely to avoid collisions with cars than bikes with quieter exhausts.  So it’s really about being loud rather than being safe.  And the bottom line is that they like being loud.

I like my ears the way God intended them to be able to hear something else besides my own exhaust.  But that’s just me.

The Yamaha Stratoliner features the second largest v-twin engine on the road (behind the 2000 cc Kawasaki Vulcan 2000).  And in the world of v-twins, it features the 3rd fastest major production v-twin cruiser ever put on the road (behind only the Vulcan, the Suzuki M109 and Harley’s answer to the sport bikes, the V-Rod).  Still, in the shootout that considered the mega v-twin’s total performance, it was the Roadliner (the Strat’s twin wearing bags and windshield) that emerged as “Godzilla.”

Yamaha actually considered building the biggest mega v-twin on the planet – 2,400 cc.  But the prototype was so big and heavy that it was a buzz kill to ride around in the real world.

What they came up with instead was a great bike with a great engine.

I just wasn’t ready for a Harley-Davidson yet.  Not when the Road King (for example) crawled along from 0-60 mph in 8 seconds.  I mean, dang, I wanted to get to the next traffic light before civilization collapsed and mankind re-entered the stone age and humans started to look like, well, like a bunch of hairy, bearded bikers (who, being savages, would naturally opt for Harleys, right?).

The 1854 cc Stratoliner/Roadliner engine does the 0-60 thing in less than half the time at 3.8 seconds.  Which is comparable to a Corvette Z06.  It’s got about the same 1/4 mile time, too.  And since not many people are driving their Corvettes around like bats out of hell, I don’t have to worry very much about whether I’m going to be able to get in the lane I want to get in out of a red light.

Granted, I’m not going to blow the wheels off a Suzuki Hayabusa that hits 60 mph a full second quicker (and in first gear, no less), but I’m too old and wise for a bike like that now, remember?

That Stratoliner is actually fast enough to widen the eyes of anybody who doesn’t have a Hayabusa or one of the very, very few highest of the high performance sport bikes that compete with it.  And I don’t have to curl myself up into a pretzel doing it, either.

V-twin cruisers and sport bikes make their power in different ways.  Sport bikes produce a horsepower-to-weight ratio that defies belief; cruisers produce gobs of torque.  The difference is an inline sport bike engine that was designed to be wound up to nearly 10,000 rpm before attaining max power versus a v-twin cruiser engine that produces its maximum power at (in the case of the Stratoliner) between 2,300 and 4,500 rpm.

In other words, the v-twin power is available immediately.  Everything is down low where you want it most.  More importantly, it’s available to where riders want it in real-world driving conditions as opposed to a racing track.

When I’m on the freeway doing 70 mph, I’m running at about 2,600 rpm whether the wind is in my face or at my back.  If I want to pass somebody, I’m right there in my max power range.  And I don’t have to wind up nothin’.  That’s how 124 ft-lbs of torque works.

V-twins are not bikes for guys who want to fly at triple digit mph.  Because they weren’t built with race tracks in mind.  But they do their job quite well under ridiculous speeds.  And they most certainly aren’t dogs out of a red light if a manufacturer doesn’t want them to be.

It’s a different concept.  It’s a luxury car versus a sports car.  Only my Strat is a performance luxury car.  It has a big, high compression engine with a giant 100mm x 118mm bore and stroke, a twin-bore fuel-injection system with 43mm throttle bodies and 12-hole injector nozzles, high performance spec twin, crankcase-mounted, high-lift cams, huge 100mm bore ceramic composite-plated cylinders and an exhaust system (borrowed from the sport bikes) featuring a valve that stays closed at lower rpm to maximize torque that opens at higher rpm to maximize horsepower.

The young bucks who race around on the sport bikes ARE out to impress; that’s just what young bucks do.  They’re like the actual young bucks in nature who run into each other with their horns at high speed.  I’m not knocking them; it’s what I did when I was a young buck, after all.  When I was 20 and some old turd tried to tell me what a “real” motorcycle was and then started droning on about Harleys, I’m sure my eyes glazed over and my brains jumped out of my ear about two seconds into the lecture.

Now, that young buck will eat my lunch on every curve on every curvy road on any sport bike.  But I’ll let him: I’ve been down and dang did it ever hurt.  When it comes to hairpin curves I’m just in a lot less of a hurry to injure myself than I used to be.  Where I live there’s a better than even chance that there will be sand or gravel at the intersections.  And strawberries are much tastier when eaten than they are when worn on your body.  I take my turns slow and stately these days.  On a bike that makes slow and stately look good.

I’m at that point in life where I’d rather get somewhere in style and comfort than race around like the brave fool.

I love my chrome.  I love my smooth ride.  I love my floor boards.  I love the heel shifter and the fact that every gear is “down” for me as opposed to first gear being down and the rest being up.  I love being able to put my boots up and lean back into my back rest and just cruise down the road all day long.  And if some kid goes flying by me at twice the legal limit in a body posture that would cause my lower back to miserably die in about half an hour, I just chuckle and say a biker’s prayer for that young buck and keep on enjoying the buzz of my ride.  I’m cruising down the road at 70 or 75 and I’m right in my power band and I’m getting 42 mpg, and I’m just as happy as a clam in its shell.

The seats on cruisers were designed around the concept of comfort, of being able to accommodate the butt of somebody who isn’t one of those incredibly gaunt fashion models.  The cruisers were designed around the concept of a comfortable riding position.  Not even the sport touring bikes match them for pure comfort.

Believe me, you start to care about stuff like that as you age out of being young and dumb.

I used to mock Harley guys for caring all about style and nothing about performance.  And preferring comfort to sheer omygod speed?  Heresy!!!  But I now realize that “performance” and speed for the most part are about bragging rights as much as they are about anything else.  My bike can go 180 mph, someone might tell me.  And I’m thinking, “And just where in the world do you plan to actually DO that?  And while we’re talking about it, WHY do you want to do that?  Were you tossed in the air and dropped on your head too many times as a baby or something?”  What I’m saying is Harley guys who love the way their bikes look and sound and feel don’t have to apologize to guys who boast about quarter-mile times and G-force turns.  And as you get a little older and a little wiser, you tend to care a lot more about the former and a lot less about the latter.

Whatever floats your boat.  Whatever rocks your world.  Knowhatimean?

Having ragged on Harleys a fair bit, let me say this about them: they do what they were intended to do every bit as well as the sport bikes do what they were intended to do.

Harley-Davidson has a long-term view of motorcycling.  They are engaged in all kinds of venues to just introduce people to motorcycles and get them to start riding, whether they’re riding Harleys or even whether they’re riding the competition.  And the reason they do that is that they believe that everybody who rides will ultimately choose to ride a Harley.

I now understand why they’re right.  You can’t beat Harleys for style, even if you can beat them in every other way.  There just comes a point when you’re drawn to the style and image of a beautiful machine.  Harleys are all about “the ride” when you have grown up enough to stop racing and start cruising.

Another thing about Harleys is the infinite customizability. They have a part catalog that is absolutely UNREAL and they make their bikes with the ability to cross-match damn near anything. Versus the Japanese, who have nothing of the sort on either front. If you truly like customizing and truly making a bike unique, Harley is your ride.

My next bike probably won’t be a Harley (although it might be).  There’s still enough “kid” in me that I want that big bore performance.  But at some point – having finally personally experienced a v-twin motorcycle – I can easily imagine myself choosing a Harley.  I can (gasp!) even imagine myself choosing a full dress tourer.  My v-twin has opened up the entire world of motorcycling to me in a way that thinking in sport bike performance terms never would have done for me.

A few pictures of my Strat:

.

.

.

The Yamaha team that designed the Stratoliner and Roadliner didn’t set out to “clone” Harley-Davidson motorcycles.  Rather, they went back to a previous era that was still uniquely American.  They went back to the pre-Harley 1920s/1930s “streamliner” art deco style that influenced art and found its way into both architectural and automotive designs.  The result is a long, streamlined, elongated stylized look found in the Roadliner’s 102″ (a full 7″ longer than similar class Harleys) length and its swooping stance.  At the same time, it most definitely DOES copy Harley in that it was an attempt to wed style and art with motorcycling function – which has always been the design philosophy at the core of Harley-Davidson’s appeal.

Motorcycles are just fun.  When you can look down and see the road rushing past beneath your feet, when you don’t have to roll down a window to experience real, actual air, when you feel the freedom and rush that only a bike can provide, you start to get it.  If it’s got two wheels, I’ll ride it and I’ll have a blast riding it.  And if I don’t have the soul of a Harley rider in me yet, suffice it to say I’m beginning to grow one.

Leftist CBS Celebrates That ‘The American Empire Was Destroyed’ By Having ‘Amazing Race’ Contestants Dance Around A Shot-Down B-52 In Hanoi

Maybe CBS can have stops at the Hanoi Hilton to celebrate the crushing of the spirits of American POWs next: “And in this cell an American imperialist with untreated broken bones was tied into the shape of a pretzel between meals of the maggots we fed him.”

CBS had their contestants dancing around the wreckage of a shot-down B-52 in Hanoi.  Four crewmen were captured and endured hell at the hands of North Vietnamese torturers.  Two were never found and listed as MIA, presumed dead.  The plaque CBS had stupid Obama-voting punks dance around declares:

“At 22:00 hours on December 27, 1972, the capital’s anti-aircraft forces shot down this B-52 in the area of Ngoc Ha Village. This is one out of 23 B-52s shot down from Hanoi’s skies. The strategic surprise attack against Hanoi by the B-52s of the American Empire was destroyed”

CBS also required that the contestants attend a musical celebration of anti-American propaganda.  You know, just in case the B-52 thing may have been too subtle in declaration of the hatred CBS has for America.

The program amounted to a victory lap for everything communist in celebration of the conquest of everything that our founding fathers dreamed of when they forged America and enshrined its Constitution.

Just to let you know how patholigically despicable and evil our mainstream media propagandist machine truly is.

It was only two days ago – and I am directly quoting the United States Marine Corps here – that Harry Reid as the leader of the Democrat-possessed Senate enaged in “pure political posturing on the backs of these dead Marines.”

Evil is being spread on top of evil on a giant cake of depraved evil in what was once the greatest nation in the history of the world.

The left are a bitter, demonic group of whining entitlement whores who won’t be happy until America is destroyed and a hammer and sickle flag rises over the ashes of our Capitol.

We can go back to the fact that liberals regarded America’s defeat and humiliation in Vietnam as a great victory.  We can go back to the fact that Bill Clinton – the first president to grow up during that Vietnam era dodged the draft by writing of his loathing for the U.S. military.  We can go back to the fact that after writing himself up for a bunch of medals he didn’t deserve, John Kerry slandered the U.S. military by falsely claiming that he had personally witnessed war crimes that he later admitted he had in fact NOT witnessed (confessing his slander of our miltary when he realized that he himself was in fact a war criminal had he witnessed atrocities but not reported them at the time).  John Kerry further demonstrated that he despised the U.S. military by throwing away medals as if they were garbage.  We can go back to the fact that Harry Reid stated that the U.S. military had lost the Iraq War (which we won in spite of his and his fellow Democrats’ treason) while our soldiers were sacrificing to secure victory.  We can go back to the fact that Barack Obama has absolutely gutted the United States military even more than Bill Clinton and before him Jimmy Carter did.  And of course we can go back to just a few days ago when Harry Reid – and again I’m quoting the Marine Corps – engaged in “pure political posturing on the backs of dead Marines.”

Democrats have a history of being shameful treasonous vermin that goes back nearly fifty years.

This is God damn America, kids.  Not that you godless little punk kids have the moral intelligence or decency to care as you vote for a socialist turd and dance around celebrating America’s humiliation.

I keep saying that the beast of the Book of Revelation is coming.  But there are beasts aplenty already here.  And these beasts are eagerly awaiting the arrival of the Antichrist.

P.S. To his credit, liberal Bob Beckell was outraged by this appalling display of disgusting anti-Americanism on the part of CBS.  Which pretty much means that the other four conservatives on the cast of “The Five” are beginning to get to him.

Marine Corps To Dishonest Harry Reid After More Obama Sequester Slander: Stop Your Demonic Political Posturing On The Backs Of Dead Marines

The sheer cynical depravity of the Democrat Party is a firehose of pure evil.

Fortunately, for once, they got caught red-handed over this crap:

The scare tactics that Democrats from President Obama on down have employed to wring political benefit out of the sequester have apparently hit a despicable new low.  In comments made about the deaths overnight of seven U.S. Marines in a training incident in Nevada, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Dem from Nevada, reportedly suggested that we may see more such incidents because the sequester cuts put Marines at risk.

NBC military correspondent Jim Miklaszewski, appearing on Andrea Mitchell’s MSNBC show this afternoon, reported that the Marines have strongly rejected Reid’s claim, and that one Marine official accused Reid of “pure political posturing on the backs of these dead Marines.” View the video after the jump.

[See here for video]

 Miklaszewski made his stunning remarks while speaking to Luke Russert, hosting in the absence of Mitchell, who is in the Middle East with President Obama.  I’ll be back soon with the video.

JIM MIKLASZEWSKI: Luke, you opened that segment with a sound bite from Senate Majority Leader Democrat Harry Reid expressing his condolences. But also during that statement, there was an implication there that under sequestration, when budgets are cut, that we may see more of these, that it may put the Marines and others and soldiers at risk because of the budget cuts. Now I can tell you, Marine Corps officials this afternoon are taking a strong exception to what Harry Reid implied, saying that this this exercise, for example, was planned well in advance, had nothing to do with the budget cuts. There were no corners cut. And if they couldn’t afford to have all the safety precautions into place, they wouldn’t do the exercise. And in fact, one Marine Corps told us just, one Marine Corps official told us a short time ago that he considers this nothing but pure political posturing on the backs of these dead Marines.

LUKE RUSSERT: Those are some very strong words from the Marine Corps about Senator Harry Reid.

Democrats are – even as we speak – doing absolutely everything they possibly can to create as much havoc as they can and create as much suffering as they can knowing that the most dishonest media propaganda since Goebbels’ Nazi Ministry of Propaganda will largely protect and defend them.  They’ve let out 2,000 recidivist Illegal Mexican immigrants to inflict mayhem.  They’ve shut down White House tours to hurt and disappoint little children who had the stupidity to think the White House was “the people’s house” rather than Pharaoh Obama’s palace for life.  And they are threatening to punish more children by taking away the White House Easter Egg hunt.

They’ve done this during and even AFTER being caught red-handed in so many damn lies trying to hype the sequester “cuts” (because the sequester does nothing more than BARELY reduce the rate of budget growth, after all).  Obama was all over the country on his permanent campaign tour claiming that if the sequester happened, the nation would burn out of control and no firefighters would help anyone, the nation would degenerate into the state of savagery and no police officers would help anyone, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

In point of fact, the sequester has Obama all over it.  The sequester originated FROM the Obama White House.  Obama signed the sequester into law.  And Obama even threatened to VETO anything that tried to undo the sequester several months ago.

Obama was for his sequester before he was against it.

Now Harry Reid is out being a typical Democrat: he is lying about his lies, saying that the following statement that he made on the floor of the US Senate regarding the deaths of seven Marines in a training accident –

HARRY REID: As I indicated, it was quite a big explosion. We’ll follow this news very closely. I will do whatever I can going forward to support the United States military and the families of the fallen Marines.

Mr. President, it’s very important we continue training our military, so important. But one of the things in sequester is we cut back in training and maintenance. That’s the way sequester was written. Now, the bill that’s on the floor, we hope to pass today helps that a little bit. At least in the next six months, it allows the military some degree of ability to move things around a little bit. Flexibility, we call it, and that’s good. But we have to be very vigilant. This sequester should go away. We have cut already huge amounts of money in deficit reduction. It’s just not appropriate, Mr. President, that our military can’t train and do the maintenance necessary.

These men and women, our Marines were training there in Hawthorne. And with this sequester, it’s going to cut back this stuff. I just hope everyone understands the sacrifices made by our military. They are significant, being away from home, away from families, away from their country.

– somehow had nothing whatsoever to do with the sequester after very clearly connecting it to the sequester “cuts.”  Even though he had clearly just said they did.

Which is another way of saying Democrats are lying cowards who proceed to cowardly lie about their own lies.

The Marines were killed when a 60mm mortar exploded during a live-fire training exercise.  Apparently, that explosion couldn’t have happened had Republicans just allowed more tax hikes.

The Marines might be “jarheads,” but they clearly aren’t as stupid as Harry Reid, Barack Obama and the Democrat Party think the rest of the American people are.  NBC reported the USMC response:

NBC’s Jim Miklaszewski reports: Now I can tell you, Marine Corps officials this afternoon are taking a strong exception to what Harry Reid implied. Saying that this this exercise, for example, was planned well in advance, had nothing to do with the budget cuts. There were no corners cut, and if they couldn’t afford to have all the safety precautions into place, they wouldn’t do the exercise.

Seven Marines are tragically dead because war is dangerous and training to be ready for war is dangerous.

But the death of our warriors is nothing to Democrats but another opportunity to demonize and slander and lie.

May God bless our Marines – especially when they take a stand against our enemies “BOTH FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC.”

When Obama tries to seize power with the massive stockpile of arms and ammunition that he clearly thinks only HE should have access to in contemptuous disregard for the 2nd Amendment, I hope the Marines stand with the people.