Archive for June, 2015

Flag Burning for the 4th of July

Posted by Troy on 30th June 2015 in Current Events, Political

Protest groups in New York are planning on holding flag burning demonstrations for the Fourth of July.  Naturally, I have to say “Well, that’s freedom of speech.”  But isn’t it interesting?  What if someone had a protest burning Mexican or Dominican flags?  People would go nuts about hate speech.  However, burning the American flag is “Hey, that’s freedom of speech, man.”  Yeah, it is.  So is speaking out against gay marriage or flying the Confederate flag.  So is writing perverse fictional stories or drawing such things or of the Prophet Mohammad.  However, people are not willing to defend freedom of speech anymore.  If your speech is not the “cool” kind of speech, you are shamed and told to shut up by Hollywood and the media, which is doing their best to rewrite what should and should not be allowed in our society.  It’s a different kind of censorship nowadays.  They don’t prevent you from saying what you wish to say.  Instead they attempt to shame you.  ”You just hate _____.”  ”Obviously, you’re stupid or uninformed.” “You need to stop watching Fox News.”  ”You’re in the minority of opinion.”  ”Ugh, that’s so outdated.”  etc etc.  Heaven forbid you think for yourself and express your own views.  Heaven forbid if you refuse to conform to what others WANT you to believe.  They want you to shut up.  If people don’t speak out, then they can destroy the old ways and replace it what they have deemed to be “good.”  This Forth of July, what say you wave your flag!  Chat “USA! USA! USA!”  Eat some hot dogs!  And USE THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH FOR WHAT IT WAS INTENDED: to safeguard your rights and freedoms.

Long Live the Constitution!

Alabama’s Elegant Solution to Gay Marriage

Posted by Troy on 29th June 2015 in Current Events

Alabama is getting out of the marriage license business, a business that the government really didn’t have any business being in anyway.  They will not tell you who you can or cannot marry.  The only real requirement is that you cannot be married to more than one person at a time.  I have always said, “Why do you have to get permission from the government to marry someone?  It never should have been a thing anyway.  It is a bit fascist, when you really think about it.  The neat part is that it also takes a matter out of hand.  Previously, those who opposed gay marriage were going to have to live with their government sanctioning something that they viewed as abhorrent.  Alabama has found a way to satisfy the requirements of the Supreme Court while maintaining their constituent’s desire not to sanction such unions.  Very well done, Alabama!  A very Libertarian solution to the problem.  Gays can marry and receive the rights as such, but the people do not have to sign off on such unions.

Long Live the Constitution!


Posted by Troy on 28th June 2015 in Human Nature

Rainbows are awesome.  100% of sighted people love rainbows.  (Blind people are rather indifferent.)  What’s my point?  I have decided that the truest and best option when in a conversation you don’t want to have is to immediately steer the conversation to the topic of rainbows.  ie “Hey, did you guys see that rainbow yesterday?”  Or “Do you recall the last time you saw a rainbow?”  If dealing with an argumentative person, say, “I for one think the world would be a better place without rainbows,” and allow them to convince you otherwise.  If there happens to be a rainbow in the sky at the time, so much the better.

Consider this a life hack courtesy of Swamp Fox Press.

Long Live the Constitution!

Gay Marriage: Be Prepared for Buyer’s Remorse

Posted by Troy on 26th June 2015 in Current Events

First, let’s get one thing out of the way.  I am a Libertarian.  If gay marriage had come up for a vote in my state, I would have voted for it.  However, I cannot agree with what the court did today.  What the justices said is “the five of us are overruling the 150,000,000 of you.”  These are unelected officials that have just completely re-wrote several laws with a wave of the hand with no recourse from the voters whatsoever.  That being said, all they did was hit fast forward.  If you had been patient, over the course of ten years, you would have gotten the same thing as more and more states decided to allow gay marriage.

Again, I am not against gay marriage.  I am against the way it was brought about.  And I am very much against what is going to come next, as I will explain.

I believe gay marriage was the Save the Whales of the 2000′s.  It was the trendy thing that Hollywood and the cool and the “tolerant” could jump on the bandwagon.  I say “tolerant” because I haven’t met a Leftist in a LONG time that has been able to contain their temper when having a rational discussion.  It always seems to devolve into them yelling and screaming.  For thousands of years in most cultures, marriage was between one man and one woman.  Everyone seemed okay with this it seemed.  If you were gay, you were together, and that was it.  Suddenly, there is a movement.  Gay marriage is plastered on TV shows and advertisements and movies.  This is the way Hollywood works.  Essentially, brainwashing.  That’s fine.  All’s fair in love and brainwashing as it were.  They do the same thing against the patriotism and capitalism and guns.  Whatever they decide is good or evil, you too must accept as good or evil.

I truly believe that the entire movement is based on “getting” gay marriage, not gay marriage itself.  It’s about the attention and the spectacle.  It’s the “Hey!  Look at me!”  Something I generally hate.  Where you lost me was when you started forcing florists and bakers and others to bow to your will.  If you were really just concerned about marriage, you would find a florist and a baker that wanted to service your wedding.  Seriously.  Do you expect me to believe you can’t find a gay florist?  [That's a joke, develop a sense of humor!]  Instead, you ruin the lives of these shop owners just to force them to do your bidding.  It’s a sickness of the mind and soul.  Do you think you are going to win over their hearts and mind that way?  Again, if you just wanted marriage, you would just marry the person you love and be done with it.  This is about force.  This is about attention.  And that’s where you lose me.

So, you have it now.  Welcome to Hell.  Here’s something you will get to hear now: “Why aren’t we married?  So and so is married.”  And you also get to find out about divorce.  ”Shit, we can’t just ‘break up?’”  Most heterosexual couples that marry have some child aspect (either wanting one or having one) that helps keep the relationship going.  Most gay couples will be missing this, and will face a heavier divorce rate.  I predict that gays will soon hate lawyers more than any other group.  You will also learn that there is a difference between being together and marriage.  I hope you like what you got.

Again, I would have voted for ya, but I don’t like how it was done.

Long Live the Constitution!

Why I want to buy a Confederate Flag

Posted by Troy on 25th June 2015 in Uncategorized

Southerners!  Check it out!  Go to Google > Shop.  Type in “Confederate Flag.”  It comes back: Not Found.


Well, Google is no longer my search engine.  Not sure what I will be using.  I’m thinking of reviving  They have a fun name at least.  Maybe Lycos or webcrawler or hotbot is still out there…

All the major flag companies said “We’re not making them anymore.”  To which, I said, “Eh…no matter.  China will make them.  China will make anything!”

Wal-Mart and e-bay and Amazon said they wouldn’t sell them anymore.  To which, I said, “Eh…no matter.  People can buy them elsewhere.  Besides, the vendors have every right to decide what products they carry.”

But this is beyond the pale.  It is not up to Google’s discretion to decide what is appropriate for you to buy.  This makes them hypocrites!  They are always complaining about China and censorship, and they turn around and do the exact same thing.  It is amazing how quickly they moved on this!  A near blackout on this product for which demand has not changed or has even increased!  The powers that be decided they didn’t want you to have access to it, and poof!  Gone!

I can type in “Brother Sister Incest Fiction” right now and get pages and pages of pornography.  But we have a blackout on Rebel Flags.  I could probably find bestiality and all kinds of filthy ____ with less trouble than finding the damn stars and bars?!  Are you ____ing kidding me?

If you’re black (or liberal or whatever) and reading this and getting all upset about me wanting to buy a flag, let me ask ya…what if tomorrow the powers that be decided rap music is destructive and had Amazon and Google pull your access to that?  It’s freedom of speech.  You’re either for it or against it.  You can’t have it both ways because you sell out all speech when you sell out ANY speech.

Interestingly enough, this whole episode is reminding me of the other side of the Rebel Flag, the one that doesn’t get ANY press time.  It is a symbol for the time when the states stood up to the Federal government and said, “No.”  Regardless of the fact that it was on slavery (yeah yeah, we could spend all day debating it, but the root cause of most of the friction from North and South stemmed from slavery), it is still the time the states said, “No.”

The battle flag is not illegal.  I should be able to buy it if I want to.  If I wanted to run it up my flag pole, that’s my own damn business.  While I can justify Valley Forge’s decision not to make it and Amazon’s decision not to carry it, I will forever condemn Google’s hypocritical stance to censor it.

What speech is next for Google?  Shall they deny access to politicians?  What if they chose to black out information on the Founding Fathers?  Am I taking things to a silly level?  Maybe!  But I don’t care!  I am offended and pissed off on a very deep and personal level.  The logic is the same.  They have deemed themselves to be the adjudicator to the ideas you are allowed to expose yourself to!

Goodbye Google.  I shall not miss you.

Long Live the Constitution!

FAIL: Supreme Court upholds Obamacare subsidies

Posted by Troy on 25th June 2015 in Current Events, Political

The Supreme Court decided that all Americans have a right to subsidies under Obamacare, regardless of whether or not their states set up the exchange.  Here are the relevant facts:

1 – Under the Affordable Care Act, subsidies are available when people buy insurance from an exchange “established by a state.”

2 – Committee reports and Gruber’s comments state that this was intentional to punish any state that did not establish an exchange.

3 – 37 states didn’t care and didn’t set up an exchange.

4 – Obama waved a hand and said, “They qualify even if they buy from the Federal exchange.”  This is neat because he essentially re-wrote a law AND dictated payments.  Two powers which reside in Congress.

So, today, the Court said.  “That’s cool.”

Why isn’t it cool?  If they hadn’t, millions of people would have lost their subsidies!  There would have been chaos!

So what?

The President and/or the Court does not not get to rewrite a bad law.  If it was a bad law, he should have vetoed it.  If it was poorly written and passed anyway, the Court is obligated to judge the law as it is written, not as they deem it should have been written.

This case basically says that the law is a fluid thing to be decided upon as a matter of convenience.  That is why this such a terrible ruling.  Take the Fourth Amendment, which says that warrants have to be individual and specific.  So the Court can now say that a general warrant that covers all Americans for all things really is the same thing as an infinite number of specific, individual warrants.  Why not?  Maybe back in 1786, we didn’t see a general warrant over all Americans.  Now we do, so we just assume that the law really meant for the government to have the ability to get a warrant  for anything whenever it is needed, so it is good to just have a deemed warrant out there for any and all illegal activities.  I mean…if you’re not doing anything wrong, why are you upset?

I will make no illusions.  I hate the law.  It is convoluted and complicated.  It did nothing it was supposed to accomplish.  All it did was take away freedom.  The government now has the ability to tell you that you HAVE to BUY a product even if you want to or not.  Take that, you healthy twenty-year-olds.  Shame on you for cheating the system with your God-given good health!  All that aside, this is a horrible ruling.  I have lost all respect for the Supreme Court at this point.  I knew this is how it was going to go down, but I had hoped that they would actually do their jobs and read the law as written.  Instead, they are about “saving” the law, something they cannot do.  We have given the power to rewrite legislation to the Executive and Legislative Branches.

We are on VERY dangerous ground now.  Obama has acted as a dictator.  Thank gawd he is going to be gone in a year and a half…assuming he doesn’t declare martial law.  We will see.

Long Live the Constitution!

Josh Duggar – of forgiveness and justice

Posted by Troy on 4th June 2015 in Current Events

Do you believe in redemption?

That is the question.  It shouldn’t be a hard question.  Of course, you must believe in redemption or you probably would have shot yourself a long time ago.

This is a sensitive issue because of the crime at hand.  But the question then becomes, do you believe that a pedophile can be redeemed.  Do they deserve the chance at redemption?  There is a strong movement that thinks that pedophilia should be punishable by death.  I can respect this logic more than the general populace that believes that the pedophile should have to walk door to door, go to the sheriff’s office and register themselves, and so forth.   I’ve always thought it interesting that we don’t make murders do this.  We don’t make con artists do this.  We don’t make burglars do this.  We don’t make people with AIDS get branded or something to prevent the spread of the disease.  At least the people who call for death are being consistent.  They have determined this group of people do not deserve to rejoin society, and they should be killed.

So, let’s go into justice.  Who is the justice for?  Let’s limit this down for simplicity sake.  In this case, Josh molested his sisters.  If the sisters call for forgiveness, do you overrule them?  Do you say that the sisters were wrong and punish him?  What if this causes them the pain of missing their brother for years out of their lives?  Do the victims get any say?  Or do you say that this cannot be allowed because the sisters are damaged.  That is, society, not the victim, has the say in the punishment.

I will say this: Josh Duggar has advocated the death penalty for incest.  This makes him a hypocrite, and in this case, it wouldn’t break my heart if he did get the death penalty.  It would be what he deserves.  In some weird way, I have more respect for a NAMBLA member.  At least they’re not hypocrites.  This is little more than Eliot Spitzer frequenting prostitutes with taxpayer money while he was throwing hookers and johns in jail.

Of course, people will say that the difference is that the perpetrator has caused the victim harm that will never be healed.  Is that the case then?  The drunk driver that paralyzes someone causes them harm that will never heal.  The father that walks out on their children may cause them such harm that they cannot have healthy relationships.  Someone whose house gets burglarized may become terrified of being home alone.  Someone that was mugged may became afraid to leave their homes.  Shall we talk about the horrors of war?

My point is that there are HORRIBLE things that happen to people that harms them, scars them for life.  This is unfortunate.  But only in this one set do we seem to accept a premise of “Well, if that happened to them, I guess they’re screwed up for life.  Hell, they should probably kill themselves.”  That really is sorta the feel.  Like “Well, you had your whole life ahead of you, and now it’s over.  Damn.  Sorry, kid.”

Our justice system is supposed to be centered around rehabilitation.  That’s supposed to be the goal with any and all crimes.  If we go away from that, if we go away from redemption, the only other solution that makes any logical sense is the extermination of anyone that commits a crime, ie, consider Sharia for your system of law.

I do not condone Josh’s actions.  However, he brought it to his parents attention.  They attempted to make amends.  Supposedly, there have been no further instances.  Under these specific set of circumstances, I’m willing to forgive if the victims are.

Long Live the Constitution!