Ogre's Politics & Views
December 24, 2005
Christmas Eve
1Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,
2Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.
3When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.
4And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born.
5And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judaea: for thus it is written by the prophet,
6And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel.
7Then Herod, when he had privily called the wise men, enquired of them diligently what time the star appeared.
8And he sent them to Bethlehem, and said, Go and search diligently for the young child; and when ye have found him, bring me word again, that I may come and worship him also.
9When they had heard the king, they departed; and, lo, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, till it came and stood over where the young child was.
10When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceeding great joy.
11And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense and myrrh.
Matthew 2:1-11, King James Version.
Posted by: Ogre at
11:05 PM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Merry Christmas Mr Ogre!
Posted by: Machelle at December 25, 2005 12:35 AM (E8xNS)
2
Thank you. And Merry Christmas to you, Machelle!
Posted by: Ogre at December 25, 2005 01:22 AM (s2+Ck)
3
Merry Christmas and God bless you and your family =))
Posted by: kcyap at December 25, 2005 08:33 AM (9OyI8)
4
Have a wonderful Christmas!
Posted by: Patty-Jo at December 25, 2005 09:11 AM (0h1D1)
Posted by: Ogre at December 26, 2005 02:22 PM (s2+Ck)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Charlie Brown Christmas
From last year, Pirate's Cove had Charlie Brown's Christmas text and soundtrack. Perfect.
Posted by: Ogre at
07:44 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
Happy Christmas Eve Day!
It's Christmas Eve Day -- so I'm not sure who's out there reading blogs and who is actually doing stuff. I hope you're not shopping -- I just can't imagine that. Of course, it's neat to watch because I just laugh when I look at the stores this week and the Democrats complain about the economy...
This is also a weird day because it's football Saturday (NFL). I'm a big Dolphins fan, and I'm glad to see that the Dolphins are playing today and not tomorrow -- I really don't get who actually watches sports on Christmas Day. I know there's usually NBA games on Christmas, but I don't know that I've ever turned a TV on Christmas Day.
So hopefully you're having a good day and have lots of good plans with family for the Christmas holiday. I know various families have problems with holiday gatherings -- I hope this year your problems are non-existent!
Posted by: Ogre at
05:03 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Ogre, I do turn the TV on, but I just use the "radio" stations that Cable and Dish have to make sure we have music.
Also, PLEASE keep my little brother in your prayers as he is away from us this weekend (I'll e-mail you) and he is upset by this, as are my parents and I (luckily, my nephew doesn't really understand, and is easily distracted).
MERRY CHRISTMAS!
Posted by: Smokey at December 24, 2005 05:43 PM (K7uqT)
2
Oh, you bet, Smokey! I will certainly do that with a special prayer this evening at services!
Posted by: Ogre at December 24, 2005 05:47 PM (s2+Ck)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
No Economic Freedom in NC
North Carolina is 100% run by Democrats. They have a majority in both state houses -- the NC Senate has NEVER had a Republican majority. The Democrats also hold the governorship. With that tandem, they are free to ignore the judicial branch, and often do.
The North Carolina state banking commissioner
recently decided that you are not free to pay people money if you want to. That's correct, if I WANT to give you money, the state has decided that I should not be free to do so.
This ruling has to do with "excessive rates" charged by companies doing business freely with consumers. Specifically, this "ruling" (how is it unelected officials can make rulings that put companies out of business?) has to do with "payday lending."
Now why is it that I am prevented from giving you money voluntarily. This sort of ruling only protects those it is designed to protect -- those who the Democrat Legislature want to protect, because they are paid to protect them -- Big Banking.
Posted by: Ogre at
01:05 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
I am confused by this poste
You say. "That's correct, if I WANT to give you money, the state has decided that I should not be free to do so."
But from the article you link to, it just means you can't charge me more than 36% interest. But if you are charging me interest, how are you 'giving' me money?
Did I misunderstand the ruling?
Posted by: Gerald at December 24, 2005 02:16 PM (5GlMm)
2
Gerald -- if I want to give you $100 tomorrow in return for you giving me $50 today, I cannot. The state has determined that I should not be free to make that decision.
Posted by: Ogre at December 24, 2005 02:21 PM (s2+Ck)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
December 23, 2005
Alleged meme Tag
Contagion seems to have attempted to tag me with a meme.
However, according to the absolutely official
meme rules, it is simply not permitted to tag people when
they're not home. Therefore, Contagion's tag is hereby officially certified as null and void. Sorry Contagion, better luck next time.
Posted by: Ogre at
07:57 PM
| Comments (12)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Well you're home now. TAG, you're it!
http://miasmaticreview.mu.nu/archives/145307.php
Posted by: Contagion at December 23, 2005 08:11 PM (Q5WxB)
2
Ah, nice try!
But duplicate tags, once an initial tag has been nullified, are not permitted, either -- it's similar to the double jeopardy clause in the Constitution.
Posted by: Ogre at December 23, 2005 08:21 PM (s2+Ck)
3
Ogre, you're sounding a lot like a lawyer there, and BTW, did I miss the "Bah, HUMBUG" comment somewhere?
Posted by: Smokey at December 23, 2005 08:58 PM (K7uqT)
4
Oh, this has got nothing to do with Christmas -- this is all about following the rules. They're posted, after all, so we might as well follow them.
Posted by: Ogre at December 23, 2005 09:04 PM (s2+Ck)
5
Having viewed the "rules", and being a proclaimed rules lawyer by many individuals, I must say that the findings are that it was a valid tag. The "rules" that you have cited have no legal presidence, nor do they hold any validity. The "rules" in question where neither voted on, nor ratified by either a congress nor senate of bloggers. Thus the rules have no legal or actual implication. One can not simply make up rules and cite them as valid. If that was the case I will site the "rule" derived from the Lee Ann book of blogging. "MeMes must be responded to with in 1 month of being tagged, as long as the individual has received proper notification and due time to respond to said request." This rule does not state that you have to be present for it. Then again if you want to make up rules. My rule says, "If Contagion tags Ogre with a meme, he better get off his green butt and respond or Contagion will sign him up for the Al Franken and Hillary Clinton fan clubs."
thank you for your consideration.
Posted by: Contagion at December 23, 2005 09:19 PM (Q5WxB)
6
Ah, so we have devolved to the threats already. Don't make me call the Dome police on you...
The rules are in place, having already been voted upon and accepted, having won a unanimous vote of the entire committee (of Ogre). You may make up other rules, but since all those have been made up AFTER the institution of these rules, they are, by rule, inferior to these aforementioned rules.
Posted by: Ogre at December 24, 2005 03:14 PM (s2+Ck)
7
Merry Christmas to you!
PS: I'm not home...
Posted by: Kathy at December 24, 2005 04:34 PM (ji+kR)
8
Right back at you, Kathy!
My Christmas post will be auto-posted on Christmas Day (when no one will be reading blogs, I imagine...)
Posted by: Ogre at December 24, 2005 04:48 PM (s2+Ck)
9
I'll remember this, oh yes... I will remember this!
Posted by: Contagion at December 27, 2005 01:38 PM (Q5WxB)
10
Well, at least someone will...
Posted by: Ogre at December 30, 2005 09:09 PM (s2+Ck)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
New Advertiser
It's that time -- time to announce yet another blog author who has decided that Ogre's Politics and Views is a good place to advertise! This week it's The Flights of Icarus Goodman.
Icarus is blogging from Tampa, Fl (home of the 100+% tax on rental cars if you get them at the airport -- so I will NEVER visit that city again because of that) who is "an optimistic realist." To find out what he means by that, you're going to have to read his blog.
A recent post of his is a year-end top ten list -- only
this one is a top ten list for the end of 2006! He's also got a nice post that supports my idea of abolishing government education -- complete with numbers and massive savings to EVERYONE.
So head on over and take a peek. The little box there over to the left will be up all week (with a link to his blog). And if you'd like to get in on the advertising here at Ogre's, you can use that spot, but you have to have a
BlogExplosion account -- or you can just
buy a BlogAd.
Posted by: Ogre at
07:05 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
I missed his piece on abolishing government education, I'll go take a look.
Separation of school and state is an idea whose time has come.
Posted by: allan at December 25, 2005 09:13 PM (GX455)
2
I couldn't agree more, AllaN!!!
Posted by: Ogre at December 26, 2005 02:23 PM (s2+Ck)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Carnival of Christmas
I'm sort of out of whack this week with the regular schedule (and will be next week as well), but I just found out that there's a Carnival of Christmas! So, if you need some Christmas blog reading, head on over and read!
Posted by: Ogre at
06:29 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
More in Riviera Beach, FL
The city council is denying that "thousands" of residents will be displaced when the city makes it's move to forcibly take land from people so they can pocket large amounts of cash. Instead, the city wants to make it clear that "only" 283 owner-occupied parcels of land and "1,000" renters will be forcible moved.
With an average of 2.5 people per household, that's just 1,705.5 people that will be forcibly ejected from their homes and thrown onto the street -- not "thousands." Just so you're clear on that -- 1,705.5 people have no right to own property when city officials can make some cash, it's not "thousands" of people who have no property rights.
Posted by: Ogre at
01:07 PM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Yea, but only 283 X 2 (figuring husband and wife both own property) = 566 actually aren't allowed to own property. The rest are renters and don't own it anyway.
To be honest I have less sympathy for renters then owners. Renters can be evicted at any time. Hell the owner could willingly sell and the renter could get evicted.
Posted by: contagion at December 23, 2005 01:34 PM (Q5WxB)
2
That kind of thing happens everywhere. It's a shame. In my hometown, they changed the zoning to get the people out. Their taxes went through the roof.
Posted by: Patty-Jo at December 23, 2005 05:47 PM (0h1D1)
3
Let's keep shining a light on this problem of eminent domain as I did at Mover Mike:
http://www.movermike.com/posts/1134067294.shtml
Posted by: Mover Mike at December 23, 2005 05:53 PM (rc+Fc)
4
It's very, very wrong, no matter who owns the property. The property owners are being evicted. The city almost openly admits they are doing it ONLY to increase tax revenue. They are supported by the developers and the rich people. The people who don't have money don't have rights in Riviera Beach, and that's completely wrong.
Posted by: Ogre at December 23, 2005 06:18 PM (s2+Ck)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Charlotte racists want cash
If I demanded that black people gave me money so I could create a "white power" museum, would that be racist? How about if I demanded all Jews paid me to create a Nazi musical and memorandum show? Would that be racist?
Then why is it when black people in Charlotte
demand $2 million to expand an "Afro-American Cultural Center" is it not racist? I'll say it -- IT IS.
David Taylor is the director of the struggling center that is having great difficulty bringing in visitors. So, instead of allowing the FREE market to work, he is asking the city to save him and his racist cultural center. Of course, the money would come from increased tax rates.
Why are blacks always given a free pass to be as racist as they want? I have nothing against someone building a "Afro-" anything. I do have a problem when they want ME to pay for it because it simply would NOT survive the free market -- in other words, not enough people WANT the damn thing.
If you build a building based on racism, they will NOT come -- taxpayers will just be asked to continue paying for it FOREVER. If it cannot survive the free market, it doesn't need to exist.
Posted by: Ogre at
10:05 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Double standard buddy, double standard. I find a lot of organizations and programs to be racist or discriminatory. Unfortunately, no one will do anything about it because they don't want to be labeled as a racist.
Posted by: Contagion at December 23, 2005 01:36 PM (Q5WxB)
2
But WHY? Is Jesse-I'm-The-King-Of-Blacks-Jackson really THAT powerful?
Posted by: Ogre at December 23, 2005 06:18 PM (s2+Ck)
3
It is not that Jesse Jackson is THAT powerful it is that many are just tired of hearing him complain on TV. Also in some way I think people fear an LA or Chicago riot.
Posted by: Arbitratorofall at December 23, 2005 06:36 PM (5+Jvh)
4
An awful lot of people must fear him and his ilk, or more people would simply call actions like this one racist.
Posted by: Ogre at December 23, 2005 08:02 PM (s2+Ck)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
December 22, 2005
Amanda Alpert
A little while ago, I mentioned the "situation" in Raleigh, NC, where one Amanda Alpert complained about a religious sign posted on property she didn't own. A couple days ago, a commenter who claims to be Amanda* asked me to "get my facts straight."
She wanted to make it clear that she never asked McDonalds corporate offices to take down the sign. Instead, she just wanted to complain about the sign. Eventually, she asked the local franchise to CHANGE the sign, not REMOVE the sign. So I erred in my initial post that said she wanted the sign "be taken down."
Oh, but she does say that she's intolerant -- because she thinks that it's inappropriate for Christians to post signs about their Christmas holiday -- but it's okay for others, such as Hanukkah and Kwanzaa (the made-up black holiday).
*Amanda, if you're reading this, don't be offended by that statement -- I really don't know if that was you who posted that comment. And if it wasn't, you see, I don't want anyone saying I'm trying to libel you.
Posted by: Ogre at
11:59 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Liberal though I am, I don't go so far as to dictate the choices and displays of private individuals. Employees however have the right to complain if their employer favors a religion (religious discrimination in the workplace, and all that), unless of course it's a religious institution that they work for! Customers can complain by taking their dollars elsewhere.
And yeah, Kwanzaa's always seemed a bit fishy to me. I'm not going to tell people not to celebrate it, but it's no more significant to me than Valentine's Day or St. Patrick's Day. Even though those examples do have origins in religion, they have been co-opted for secular celebration.
Posted by: zandperl at December 23, 2005 06:24 AM (KHEUn)
2
You want diversity? Isn't diversity being accepting of other peoples differences? Well the people at that McDonalds where celebrating something that was special to them, why don't you Ms. Amanda whomever you are be a little more diverse and be accepting in their difference of culture.
What a concept.
Being diverse does not mean cleansing the world of all things that are different and not uniform to all so that certain groups are not exposed to it. It's being accepting and recognizing those differences.
Posted by: Contagion at December 23, 2005 01:43 PM (Q5WxB)
3
I was with you part of the way, zandperl, until you tried to tell the employers what to do.
If I put my money into a business, I should, quite literally, be able to hire any damn person I want to for any damn reason I want to. If I don't want Christians working for me, I should have the right to not hire them.
I know that's not currently legal, but there's no reason it shouldn't be.
Posted by: Ogre at December 23, 2005 06:10 PM (s2+Ck)
4
Where did Ms Alpert write that it was OK for Hanukkah etc, but not for Christmas? It wasn't in your comments; she wrote;
"Which would Include Thanksgiving, New Year's, Christmas, Hanukkah and Kwaanza, as well."
Posted by: Rob G at December 25, 2005 05:51 PM (23Apa)
5
"Oh, but she does say that she's intolerant -- because she thinks that it's inappropriate for Christians to post signs about their Christmas holiday -- but it's okay for others, such as Hanukkah and Kwanzaa (the made-up black holiday)."
Where did I say that? Did you even read my response to your blogging?
Thanks Rob G!!
Posted by: Amanda Alpert at December 26, 2005 03:21 PM (VygPn)
6
Um, yes, what Rob said.
Posted by: Ogre at December 26, 2005 03:35 PM (s2+Ck)
7
Amanda needs to get a life. I am 53 years of age and have learned over the years that people like Amanda are quite empty inside and unhappy. Hate is a consequence of this unhappiness and it seeks to disrupt the happiness of others. Amanda used to follow the Jewish Faith but like so many others of her Faith she has become secularized and has turned to Atheism. Amanda has no goal in life and no future to look forward to and wants everyone else to feel the despair she is feeling. By declaring she is an Atheist she has really said She is her own god.
Posted by: Jack at January 11, 2006 01:47 PM (Zb/bF)
8
Jack, I know a lot of people, and I think America society in general, that is that way. They are empty inside and searching for something -- but they won't allow religion to fill that void.
Posted by: Ogre at January 11, 2006 02:09 PM (/k+l4)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
M:i:III New Stuff
Once again, I direct your attention to the Mission Impossible III website (click the image below). The release dates for 51 different countries has been posted and they have started a scavenger hunt contest with piles of neat prizes. Head on over and take a peek at what's new!
Posted by: Ogre at
08:56 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
Cold & Boards
Why is it that most people, when confronted with an outside temperature of 10 degrees Fahrenheit, realize that it really is cold outside and stay indoors, often near the fire or other warm objects, but others say, "Great, the snow won't melt and re-freeze!" -- and then proceed to strap pieces of wood or fiberglass to their feet and head out into the outdoors for an entire day?
The skiing was incredible. The entire time I was there I think the high temperature was 28 degrees -- and that was in the sun. Snow everywhere. It was damn cold, but that just make the snow conditions even better. There should have been huge crowds, but there weren't -- I have no idea why.
Now home for a few days, then next week I'm headed back out on a week-long jaunt to Florida (Jacksonville). I'll be reading and writing in the next few days to hopefully keep everyone entertained while I'm gone again.
I hope everyone is having a really good
Christmas Holiday.
Posted by: Ogre at
04:37 PM
| Comments (12)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Bah! Keep your feet-stick-strappery. I'm stayin' in where it's warm! :-)
Posted by: Harvey at December 22, 2005 10:04 PM (ubhj8)
2
You don't know what you're missing. Oh wait, yes you do!
Posted by: Ogre at December 22, 2005 10:09 PM (s2+Ck)
3
Ogre - Merry Christmas and Tanti Auguri di Buone Feste!!!!
I love the snow, I love to ski, I hate the cold (spent many hours waiting for a bus in Milan in 20 degree weather).
How can that be???
Posted by: David at December 22, 2005 11:21 PM (Jdbsc)
4
I've not been to Milan -- to Rome and Naples, but not Milan. It was wintertime, but nowhere NEAR cold!
Posted by: Ogre at December 22, 2005 11:24 PM (s2+Ck)
5
Hey, glad you had fun. You can keep your skiing. I hate that stuff.
BTW, in case you missed it, you've been tagged for a meme.
Posted by: Contagion at December 23, 2005 01:45 PM (Q5WxB)
6
Have fun skiing. I hope you enjoy your snow. I will be enjoying my Floridian “winter”. It is 70 degrees right now. Tell me how you like the contrast when you get to Jacksonville (though that is North Florida.
Posted by: Mindflame at December 23, 2005 03:12 PM (SlODe)
7
Contagion, I'm still checking the rulebook on that one...
And Mindflame, currently I'm told in Jax I'll be looking at 30-50 degrees daily. Heck, I can get that weather up here in NC!
Posted by: Ogre at December 23, 2005 06:20 PM (s2+Ck)
8
Jax is way up in North Florida, it is much warmer in the rest of the state.
Posted by: Mindflame at December 23, 2005 07:07 PM (SlODe)
9
Yeah, but I've lived in South Florida -- I don't fit there any more -- I speak English.
Posted by: Ogre at December 23, 2005 08:03 PM (s2+Ck)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Internet Down?
So, was the internet down for everyone else today, too?
Posted by: Ogre at
04:06 PM
| Comments (12)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
Posted by: oddybobo at December 22, 2005 04:21 PM (6Gm0j)
2
Absolutely awesome, thanks for asking!
Posted by: Ogre at December 22, 2005 04:37 PM (s2+Ck)
3
Nope, not down for me. I bet it was all that skiing. How's your rear-end? You didn't fall did you? GRIN
Posted by: vw bug at December 22, 2005 10:21 PM (SCN6v)
4
Yeah, but when I fall, it's on my face at 60mph -- it's much more fun!
Posted by: Ogre at December 22, 2005 10:25 PM (s2+Ck)
5
Nope. I use the internet(s)
It does help when I move my broadband modem away from my WiFi router.
Posted by: William Teach at December 22, 2005 10:33 PM (AkiXU)
6
I moved the computer and for some reason the router forgot the ISP name and password. Took me awhile to realize that was the problem and even longer to look up the password I haven't used in 3 years.
Posted by: Ogre at December 22, 2005 10:39 PM (s2+Ck)
7
I have the same password for email as for ISP, use it all the time to check main account, otherwise known as spam central, on webpage rather then Outlook.
Posted by: William Teach at December 22, 2005 11:02 PM (AkiXU)
8
I suppose I could do that -- but I have different, random, odd passwords for all my different accounts -- mainly just to confuse myself.
Posted by: Ogre at December 22, 2005 11:05 PM (s2+Ck)
9
I'm actually pretty bad with my other passwords, all based on the same word, with numbers. I won't say which one, but customers look at me really funny if they happen to hear me give it to a rep for a basic override function.
Posted by: William Teach at December 23, 2005 02:33 AM (AkiXU)
10
I do that sometimes -- a weird word followed by different number sequences. Pretty secure, too -- I just end up guessing a lot...
Posted by: Ogre at December 23, 2005 04:02 AM (s2+Ck)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
December 21, 2005
More $ for NC Government
If you choose to exercise freedom in North Carolina, the fine has now increased to $100.
When it was first determined that you could not drive without a seat belt and that you could be immorally fined for not wearing a seat belt, despite there being no reason in a free country for that action, it would cost you $25. That fine in NC is now $100 -- and yes, it's still a primary offense here, so you can be pulled over for doing nothing else wrong.
Why? Cash. The state now gets over $13 MILLION from seat belt fines.
I know the debate was over years and years ago, but it's still very wrong. There is no reason why I should not be able to drive without a seat belt. It harms no one else. The only reason, and now it's openly given as a reason for increasing the fine, is to increase revenue to the government.
How I wish there were a representative republic somewhere on this planet where I could live in freedom.
Posted by: Ogre at
02:09 PM
| Comments (13)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
The law itself does not bother me nearly as much as the fact that the Federal Government is passing State laws. You see the Federal Government told the States that if they did not pass seat belt laws they would lose Federal transportation money. Eventually every State in the Union passed laws mandating seat belts. It is unconstitutional for the Federal government to tell State governments what laws to pass however they use funding as a way to try to get around this.
This includes one of your pet peeves, Ogre, education. Every school district in the country follows federal guidelines against constitutional mandate (education is a State power) for fear of losing federal funding.
Posted by: Mindflame at December 21, 2005 05:16 PM (kJZEb)
2
It all started when the NC Schools put 'Heather Has Two Mommies' and 'Daddy's New Roomate' on the bookshelves.
Posted by: patd95 at December 21, 2005 08:26 PM (zv3bS)
3
And you can't even buy a damn lottery ticket there either!
Posted by: Chelsea fc at December 21, 2005 08:39 PM (mfxz4)
4
it all started with federal income tax. bastages got greedy.
i hate 'em all. Especially my two spendthrifts posing as conservatives from PA - "buy my friends" spectre and "medacaid is great" santorum.
creeps.
(*)>
Posted by: birdwoman at December 22, 2005 01:04 AM (Sc2Wh)
5
Oh yes, you're dead on mindflame, and that's one of the biggest things I hate. The Republicans here in North Carolina in the Senate called it what it was a few years ago -- blatant extortion.
However, since they were Republicans, they were roundly ignored and the Democrats glady submitted to the extortion. It's so wrong (the extortion) that it truly is worthy of rebellion, if you ask me.
Posted by: Ogre at December 22, 2005 03:04 AM (dPyQ0)
6
It's a blatant infringement on ones' personal freedom when ANY govt; federal, state, city or even tiny hamlet enforces any kind of law that "protects" a citizen against his/her will, when the individual in question is not endangering anybody else. In DC, they have signs in the back seats of taxis that tell passengers they can be fined for not wearing a seat belt. That is a kind of micromanagement that should not occur in a free country.
Though, having had a motorcycle accident in Puerto Rico years ago that would've literally rendered me faceless had it not been for a visored helmet I was wearing, they wouldn't need to threaten me with a fine to make me wear one of those. :-)
Posted by: Seth at December 22, 2005 02:52 PM (1oHTa)
7
And those who don't want to protect themselves most certainly should not be required to!
Posted by: Ogre at December 22, 2005 04:04 PM (s2+Ck)
8
Surely you jest. Our fine, upstanding Legislature Critters wouldn't do something like this, would they?
Posted by: William Teach at December 22, 2005 11:04 PM (AkiXU)
9
I'm sorry, did you say "fine" and "upstanding" in the same sentence as "Legislature?"
Posted by: Ogre at December 22, 2005 11:06 PM (s2+Ck)
10
I'm sure the lottery will pay for it all. Sounds like Kerry.
Posted by: William Teach at December 23, 2005 02:31 AM (AkiXU)
11
It's for the children.
Send me your blank check now.
Posted by: Ogre at December 23, 2005 04:02 AM (s2+Ck)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Insurrection in NC
While I know some of you wish this were a current headline, it's not really. Instead, it's the conclusion of a committee that investigated the infamous race riot of 1898.
The violence was against black people and "was part of a statewide effort to put white supremacist Democrats in office and stem the political advances of black citizens."
Next time you hear Democrats screaming about racism towards blacks, remember that historically it was the Republicans who wanted to free the slaves. It was the Democrats that enacted Jim Crow laws and did all they could to keep them in slavery.
Sorry, just had to bring that up because so many blacks today will only vote Democrat and at the same time scream about years of slavery. If you want to bring up slavery and who's responsible, start looking to your own party.
Me, I'd prefer just to leave it all behind and move forward, not seeing people by the color of their skin. Unfortunately, the Democrats and the "black leadership" will only see people by the color of their skin.
Posted by: Ogre at
10:03 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Increasingly when I talk to my Black friends I find they have values and beliefs much closer to mine than to the Democratic party. Sooner or later the liberals are going to have to stop taking these people for granted or risk loosing them.
Posted by: Mindflame at December 21, 2005 05:20 PM (kJZEb)
2
OH, but didn't you know, we are SUPPOSED to see only the color of a person's skin, then make sure to NOT hire, quote, befriend, give money to, ect... WHITE people!
Basically, because some Portuguese traders and MORE POWERFUL tribes in Africa decided they could profit by selling Africans into slavery, and then said slaves (albeit a MINISCULE percentage) were brought to and sold to people in the US, now we are to reverse it completely and GIVE EVERYTHING to black people. Funny, I thought they just wanted to "get along" (Rodney King), and I thought a very prominant man once said he "had a dream" (MLK), but I guess I was wrong.
Posted by: Smokey at December 22, 2005 12:55 AM (K7uqT)
3
Know what's interesting? One year when I ran for an elected office, I stood and talked with a guy at a BBQ for about 10 minutes. He happened to be black, but we were discussing politics (it was a political BBQ). We were in total agreement about EVERYTHING.
When we were done talking, I asked him for his vote. He said something along the lines of "Sorry, I can't. I have to vote Democrat."
Posted by: Ogre at December 22, 2005 03:05 AM (dPyQ0)
4
I was pretty impressed by what Morgan Freeman said to Mike Wallace about Black History month.
Posted by: Seth at December 22, 2005 02:59 PM (1oHTa)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
December 20, 2005
Star Chamber in MA
Have you noticed how many of my recent posts have ended up in the "Good and Evil" category? I'm wondering if I need to create sub-categories of evil for the various different types of evil that are invading this world...like this one.
Peter Porcupine provides us with
this news story about the creation of a Star Chamber in Massachusetts. Actually, this is just ANOTHER level of star chambers, since there are already appointed government lackeys to watch over the blind, the hard of hearing, the politically incorrect, and more.
This new commission, without which the entire government would crumble's new purpose? To raise awareness about discrimination. And to be a resources for those who think they have been discriminated against -- and as a resource to help file complaints with the state's Star Chamber!
Even worse? When the county was trying to decide who to appoint to be the new paid leader of this thought police section was that the nominees to be selected didn't include certain protected classes: the elderly, the disabled, and "members of the Wampanoag tribe."
So, if you're a Wampanoag over 65 who's disabled, there's a job being held for you as leader of the new county-wide thought police. Holy crap -- I really am hard-pressed to come up with a greater waste of resources or a more efficient way to reduce freedom. What a gigantic pile of steaming you-know-what.
Is it still illegal to shoot politicians? Even if they have no semblance of a brain?
Posted by: Ogre at
02:02 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
December 19, 2005
No Freedom of Speech in Ohio
There is no semblance of freedom of speech allowed in Ohio.
A man posted a sign in his personal place of business that he bought, paid for, and works at daily. The sign said, "For Service, Speak English."
The Ohio "Civil Rights Commission" has ruled that it is illegal and he must take it down. I know what my response would be to the "Civil Rights Commission..."
I don't understand how anyone can actually argue that asking someone to speak English is a violation of anything. Is there anyone who can make even a semi-logical argument that there's something wrong with posting such a sign?
I'm betting Mr. Tom Ullman (the owner) doesn't speak any language other than English -- so he's asking people to communicate with him in a language he understands -- and that's ILLEGAL? I wonder if they will next complain about the fact that he doesn't actually speak his customer's own languages.
Will he be forced to learn the languages of every customer who comes into his shop? If he doesn't speak their language, is that also a violation of their so-called "civil rights?" What civil right is it, exactly, that is being "violated" here?
Why in the name of all that is holy does Ohio HAVE a "Civil Rights Commission?"
Damn, where's my country?
(H/T to
Right Wing of the Gods).
Posted by: Ogre at
02:05 PM
| Comments (24)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
Come on this is Ohio we are taking about here, it's the armpit of Michigan.
Hee hee hee
Posted by: Machelle at December 19, 2005 09:03 PM (ZAyoW)
2
Unbelievable. Why is it illegal to ask patrons to your own business to speak English?? Crazy...
Posted by: Raven at December 20, 2005 01:42 AM (XWFXC)
3
Unbelievable.. indeed !
May Peace
Hope and Love
be with you
Today
Tomorrow
and Always
Merry Christmas!
Posted by: Avik at December 20, 2005 12:41 PM (02qzV)
4
This is pathetic. Okay, so when some patron comes in that only speaks Russian and he turns them away because he can't assist them, will he be jailed then?
Posted by: Contagion at December 20, 2005 01:41 PM (Q5WxB)
5
Well, here is a very logical argument for not posting the sign (although nothing to do with it's legal or moral appropriateness);
If you can't speak English, odds are you can't read the sign.
Seems kinda silly, like putting up a sign that says "Don't throw stones at this sign".
Posted by: Rob G at December 20, 2005 07:12 PM (VV/c8)
6
But the sign said "For Service, SPEAK English."
Nothing about whether or not one could read English. I took it to mean that if English is your second, third, or twenty-ninth language, kindly employ it because that's what we speak here.
So now, let's see. In the wonderful world of U.S. civil liberties we now have Christianity, Christmas trees (which are in their strict sense and history actually secular, if anybody would bother to learn that), and Christmas itself under siege. Add to that, hmmmm, pedophiles' civil rights and NAMBLA are more important than protecting little kids and young people from sexual assault and ruin; and, gosh, now the English language. I could cite lots more but my mind would melt.
People have got to start doing something about this, ahem, STUFF, on their own local levels, not only on the national level. Fight back and fight hard.
Posted by: Laura at December 20, 2005 11:08 PM (ot2zs)
7
Heck, San Fran has a Civil Rights commission.
Posted by: William Teach at December 21, 2005 02:44 AM (AkiXU)
8
Unbelievable! This is America and a privately owned business should have the right to require their prospective clients to communicate in the official language of the country. I'll wager the majority of business owners speak only or predominantly English and wouldn't be able to proficiently communicate in multiple languages on a regular basis. If they enforce rulings such as that one, the next logical step is to require people to be multilingual. I have a hard time being REQUIRED to learn an additional language. It may sound silly to fight this, but this fight should be fought!
Posted by: Kurt at December 21, 2005 03:04 AM (n0m/E)
Posted by: Laura at December 21, 2005 03:04 AM (ot2zs)
10
oops. Previous directed to Teach's comment.
Posted by: Laura at December 21, 2005 03:05 AM (ot2zs)
11
Laura, the sign implies that if you can't speak English, you will not be served. Is it legal in Ohio to refuse service to a non-English speaker? If so, I guess you could refuse service to anyone you choose.
Also, regarding Christmas. Is anyone stopping you from celebrating it? This just sounds like more of looking for outrage where there is none. I love Christmas, and celebrate it joyfully with my family. I couldn't care less whether some store puts up "Merry Christmas" or "Happy Holidays" or nothing at all. They only put stuff like that up to sell more. That ain't what the season is about.
Finally; a Merry Christmas to all.
Rob
Posted by: Rob G at December 21, 2005 02:49 PM (VV/c8)
12
Why can't a store refuse service to anyone they chose?
Posted by: Mindflame at December 21, 2005 05:25 PM (kJZEb)
13
Because, mindflame, this is America. And you're not allowed to do anything that might offend anyone. At all.
Posted by: Ogre at December 22, 2005 03:01 AM (dPyQ0)
14
Ha!
Back in the late 1970s/ early 80s, a friend and I were sitting in a bar in Homestead, Fla, a neat, J. Buffetty kind of place over a stream where they rented boats, when a Cuban family walked in and one of them started speaking Spanish to the bartender.
The owner actually came out of the back waving a pistol, yelling, "We speak f----n' English here, if you don't wanna speak English, get your asses outta my bar!"
It seemed these folks suddenly developed a pretty decent command of the English language.
Posted by: Seth at December 22, 2005 03:09 PM (1oHTa)
15
And today he's be jailed for those actions.
Posted by: Ogre at December 22, 2005 04:05 PM (s2+Ck)
16
This is so stupid. Since when is it against the law to be rude? This sign is not nice, but it isn't illegal to be mean.
Or it shouldn't be.
(*)>
Posted by: birdwoman at December 22, 2005 06:26 PM (vR7Sl)
17
Good correction at the end there, Birdwoman. It SHOULDN'T be.
Posted by: Ogre at December 22, 2005 07:55 PM (s2+Ck)
18
Well Seth, I doubt that sort of behaviour would do much for the tourist trade. Or is it only acceptable when directed at hispanics?
Would it be acceptable to you if you were overseas and had a proprietor respond to you that way? Or is it only Americans who have the right to act threatening and boorish?
Posted by: Rob G at December 22, 2005 09:55 PM (g2D0g)
19
All people have that inherent right. In America, that right is protected by the Constitution. However, as illustrated in the main post here, many are trying to supress the right to be free and to actually own property.
Posted by: Ogre at December 22, 2005 10:08 PM (s2+Ck)
20
Rob G
I don't suppose you lived in, or spent any time in, South Florida right after the Mariel Boat Lift?
The people Castro spewed onto our shores were not "tourists" in any accepted sense of the word. And trust me, I have many Hispanic friends, here and abroad, and have spent a lot of time in places where Spanish is spoken, and while my fluency in that language has expanded and contracted with exposure, I bust my ass trying to speak it when I'm on their "property".
The mood down there was expressed rather well back then in the form of a tee shirt bearing an American flag and the words,
"Will the last American to leave Miami please bring the flag?"
Posted by: Seth at December 23, 2005 05:58 AM (1oHTa)
21
Fair enough, Seth. The context does make it more understandable, but still, pulling a gun out? You don't think that's a potentially dangerous overreaction?
Posted by: Rob G at December 23, 2005 03:37 PM (VV/c8)
22
I think it's an effective reaction.
Posted by: Ogre at December 23, 2005 06:09 PM (s2+Ck)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
NC Elections
County boards of elections are trying to get ready for elections to be held in 2006. The governor mandated that all election machines produce both an electronic vote and a paper ballot. The paper ballots will be used so the voter can verify their vote before casting it and as a backup system to count votes.
In addition, those who
are too damn lazy to vote on election day take advantage of early voting need to have their votes counted in their precincts and not as a separate total. This requires changes in the voting equipment.
So, the county boards of election are asking for cash.
I'm not sure why they really care. We found out after the last election that the votes don't actually matter because the General Assembly has determined that they have total power to determine the outcome of elections -- even when the State Supreme Courts tells them that ballots were cast illegally, the General Assembly can choose to count them anyway.
Tell me again what the point of voting in North Carolina is?
Posted by: Ogre at
10:05 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
December 18, 2005
Ogre's Not Here
Ogre's Not Here.
By the time you read this (unless it's nighttime) Ogre should be looking like this:
And hopefully NOT like this:
Don't worry, it's only for a couple days...and good stuff will still be getting posted here while he's gone, so don't go away (just don't expect responses to comments for a few days). And don't worry,
Contagion, no quest blogger here, just Ogre's posts throughout!
Posted by: Ogre at
11:07 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
1
good thing, that would officially make me a non-thrall of Ogre.
Posted by: Contagion at December 19, 2005 03:25 AM (e8b4J)
2
Hi Ogre
I've read your blog and I am impressed enough to give you a blog award.
Yep, a full blown and very real award for blog design. Where design is the
main criteria, we also look at content, page layout and general aethestics.
This isn't a gimmick, I promise, check it out:
http://www.goldlynx.com/wraward.html
Gomedome
Posted by: gomedome at December 19, 2005 03:55 AM (//3q6)
3
Snow. Wow. My kids have never seen it.
Posted by: Bou at December 19, 2005 12:27 PM (iHxT3)
4
heh...SNOW...SKI's...Ogre's having FUN....
unless he goes *THUD*
LOL
Posted by: Raven at December 20, 2005 01:43 AM (XWFXC)
5
Hey, you're not back yet. I guess that means I can do this and leave with out getting hurt.
TAG! You're it!
http://miasmaticreview.mu.nu/archives/145307.php
Posted by: Contagion at December 20, 2005 09:23 PM (Q5WxB)
6
I'm pretty sure the first rule of memes says that you can't tag people when they're not home, but I'll check the official meme rulebook...
Posted by: Ogre at December 22, 2005 02:46 AM (dPyQ0)
Posted by: Mindflame at December 23, 2005 03:18 PM (SlODe)
8
Oh, you SO do NOT want to know...
Memes are evil things that travel through the blogosphere with their only goal to annoy people as much as possible. They spread like viruses, as every person "tagged" is supposed to tag between 3 and 7 additional people. But I have the rulebook, so I get to interpret the rules the way I see fit...
Posted by: Ogre at December 23, 2005 06:21 PM (s2+Ck)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
New Neighbor #38
It's Sunday, so it must be time to meet a new neighbor here at Ogre's Politics and Views. For those who haven't seen this feature before, each Sunday I pick one blog from the gigantic Evangelical blogroll over there on the right side (left side if you have a narrow screen) and introduce it here.
This week's neighbor is
Apparently this is a rather popular blog that I've just never found before (just one reason I like my neighbor feature) -- as Jay looks to have grabbed second place in the Wizbang Weblog awards in the Best Religious Blog category. Nice job, Jay, it's nothing to shake a stick at losing to Evangelical Outpost!
To start out, I'll tell you that in case you couldn't tell by the above paragraph, Jay's blog is openly religious. He's got a tagline at the top that says, "As for me and my blog, we will serve the Lord." If that offends you...well, you might want to look a little closer at yourself...but on to the posts!
Posted by: Ogre at
03:28 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
| Trackbacks (Suck)
<< Page 123 >>
Processing 0.01, elapsed 0.193 seconds.
37 queries taking 0.1829 seconds, 127 records returned.
Page size 75 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.
