BenchedPoor or Mis-performing Sorts End Up Benched

The celebrities of both Hollywood and the NFL thought that their opinions mattered, that those opinions trumped their performance of their jobs in what are service industries. They spoke their narrative, which they proclaim as Truth, to Power and Power – real power, the power of the People and the People’s purse – responded.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

Be Aware Of Breasts

It’s October and one of the things that means is it’s Susan G. Komen Awareness Month aka Pink Ribbon Awareness Month… also and more politically correctly known as Breast Cancer Awareness Month. So please be aware…of breasts this month.

Now, before I go on let me state for the record that Komen does a variety of good work and does well. It’s just that Pink Ribbon Fatigue is real and well-deserved.

But, in any case or event, October is a great month to be even more aware of breasts than we normally are. It doesn’t matter how you look at them, they’re wonderful.

From The Top

Cleavage – the easy to achieve standard view of the world’s best hope for a new power source, is always a good starting point for awareness, a top-down overlook if you will.

From The Side

Sideboobs – Currently the most legally and commercially important viewpoint on breasts, this is one of my favorite ways of appreciating breasts. One could think of the sideboob as rarer and deeper study of the wonder of women’s breasts.

From Beneath

Underboobs – Think of this as a bottom-to-top appreciation of breasts. It’s certainly the rarest presentation and, hence, the most provocative. I’d call it an in-depth study of subject.

They key is boobs. They cure anythingBoobs Are Magic

It’s important to remember that, no matter how you look at them – and look at them or, at least, want to you will – breasts are magic, strong magic, magic that some cowardly and/or breast-deprived fools think cause earthquakes. So let us all remember that we must respect the magic even as we “labor” to ensure that the magic of boobs doesn’t leave the world.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | |

Feminism 2015

Free that which is already freeSometimes a film aptly and quite perfectly encapsulates a sociopolitical movement or meme and Free The Nipple is on of those films. It is the distillation and summation of the modern, toxic wave of Feminism.

Amongst other things of little or nor value, this is a film where one character masturbates to videos of herself masturbating.

That right there pretty much sums up the film, the Free The Nipple “movement” in NYC, and the entirety of the modern iteration of Feminism – a narcissistic, masturbatory fantasy.

On the brighter side though….Hey! Topless women! 😆

Tags: | | | | | | | | | |

Coal Is The New Black?

You may have heard, and even thought – if you’re not one of impis of the “Black Community”, that Queer was the new Black. This is untrue, however, at least in Bristol County, Massachusetts. In that area of the country coal is the new Black.

Recently, District Attorney Sam Sutter of Bristol, Massachusetts, used his prosecutorial discretion to drop all criminal charges against two eco-terrorists – Jay O’Hara and Ken Ward, who were set to go on trial Monday for blocking a shipment of 40,000 tons of coal because of…Global Warming. Sutter chose to drop the charges solely because he believed in- and supported O’Hara’s and Ward’s actions and position, as he made explicitly in two separate statements to the media.

Climate change is one of the gravest crises our planet has ever faced. In my humble opinion, the political leadership on this issue has been sorely lacking…. This symbolizes our commitment, at the Bristol County district attorney’s office, to take a leadership role on this issue.


As in all instances, I first had to consider the people of Bristol county. In addition to that, I had to give strong consideration to the cause that led to the act of civil disobedience. And I agree that climate change is one of the greatest crisis the planet has ever faced and that we have to act more boldly now.

— Sam Sutter

This moral, if not legalistic, crime is nothing new. Both before and during the “Civil Rights” era it was not uncommon in some areas for prosecutors to refuse to bring charges against Whites who committed crimes against Blacks, even when the evidence in favor of prosecution was both clear and overwhelming, solely because those prosecutors, just like Sutter, believed that the criminals’ behavior was justified and necessary.

So forget the Queers. In the ways that really matter, it’s coal, not them, which is the new Black.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

Straight Heartland

gay-angerAs all with rational minds know, the queers really seem to get off on portraying themselves as victims of oppression. It’s also a simple fact that the queers and their enablers stridently proclaim any law that either doesn’t validate their lifestyle or doesn’t infringe upon Americans’ religious freedoms as some act of horror, segregation, and/or apartheid.

As such it’s easy and normally best to simply discount them as immoral agendists who care nothing for anything but their own self-images. But what about those singular times when the Queers are neither wrong nor hyperbolic in their claims?

On Tuesday, February 11, 2014 the Kansas State House of Representatives easily passed House Bill 2453 by a vote of 72 : 49.  Kansas’ HB 2453 would permit individuals, businesses, and government employees to deny service to same-sex couples on the basis of their religious principles.


AN ACT concerning religious freedoms with respect to marriage.

Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Kansas:

Section 1. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no individual or religious entity shall be required by any governmental entity to do any of the following, if it would be contrary to the sincerely held religious beliefs of the individual or religious entity regarding sex or gender

(a) Provide any services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges; provide counseling, adoption, foster care and other social services; or provide employment or  employment benefits, related to, or related to the celebration of, any marriage, domestic partnership, civil union or similar arrangement;

(b) solemnize any marriage, domestic partnership, civil union or similar arrangement; or

(c) treat any marriage, domestic partnership, civil union or similar arrangement as valid.

Section 2.

(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no refusal by an individual or religious entity to engage in any activity described in section 1, and amendments thereto, shall result in:

1) civil claim or cause of action under state or local law based upon such refusal; or

2) an action by any governmental entity to penalize, withhold benefits from, discriminate against or otherwise disadvantage any protected individual or religious entity, under any state or local law.

(b) Any individual or religious entity named in or subject to a civil action, an administrative action or any action by a governmental entity may immediately assert the protections provided by section 1, and amendments thereto, or this section, as a defense by moving to dismiss such action. If the motion to dismiss is filed in an action before an administrative tribunal, within 15 days after the filing of such motion any party to such action may elect to transfer jurisdiction of such action to a district court with proper venue. Within 60 days after such transfer of jurisdiction, the district court shall decide whether the claimed protection applies. The district court shall not permit any additional discovery or fact-finding prior to making its decision.

(c) If a governmental entity, or any person asserts a claim or cause of action, or takes any adverse action against an individual or religious entity in violation of subsection (a), such individual or religious entity shall be entitled upon request to recover all reasonable attorney fees, costs and damages such individual or religious entity incurred as a result of such violation.

(d) If an individual employed by a governmental entity or other non-religious entity invokes any of the protections provided by section 1, and amendments thereto, as a basis for declining to provide a lawful service that is otherwise consistent with the entity’s duties or policies, the individual’s employer, in directing the performance of such service, shall either promptly provide another employee to provide such service, or shall otherwise ensure that the requested service is provided, if it can be done without undue hardship to the employer.

Section 3.  As used in sections 1 through 4, and amendments thereto:

(a) “Religious entity” means an organization, regardless of its non-profit or for-profit status, and regardless of whether its activities are deemed wholly or partly religious, that is:

1) A religious corporation, association, educational institution or society;

2) an entity operated, supervised or controlled by, or connected with, a religious corporation, association, educational institution or society; or

3) a privately-held business operating consistently with its sincerely held religious beliefs, with regard to any activity described in section l, and amendments thereto.

(b) “Governmental entity” means the executive, legislative and judicial branches and any and all agencies, boards, commissions, departments, districts, authorities or other entities, subdivisions or parts whatsoever of state and local government, as well as any person acting under color of law.

Section 4.

(a) If any word, phrase, clause or provision of sections 1 through 4, and amendments thereto, or the application of any such word, phrase, clause or provision to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remaining provisions shall be given effect without the invalid portion and to this end the provisions of sections 1 through 4, and amendments thereto, are severable.

(b) Nothing in sections 1 through 4, and amendments thereto, shall be construed to allow any individual or entity, acting under color of state law to perform any marriage prohibited by state law, including, but not limited to, laws relating to plural marriage, incest, consanguinity and marriageable age.

(c) Nothing in sections 1 through 4, and amendments thereto, shall be construed to authorize any governmental discrimination or penalty against any individual or religious entity based upon its performance, facilitation or support of any celebrations of same-gender unions or relationships.

(d) The provisions of sections 1 through 4, and amendments thereto, shall be construed in favor of a broad protection of religious exercise, to the maximum extent permitted by their terms and by the constitutions of this state and the United States of America

Section 5. This act shall take effect and be in force from and after its publication in the statute book.

I’m always among the first to discount and disparage the “usual suspects” in the special interests activism sphere but I have to side with their claims on this one. It’s essentially Jim Crow as applied to queers or, at least, any queers who are publicly couples.

Admittedly, I’m somewhat ambivalent over all parts of this bill that pertain to the private sector because I don’t think that the rights and privileges of queers should ever trump Americans’ rights to free association, property, or religious expression. The government and its employees, however, do not enjoy all of those rights and including them in the bill is more than a little disturbing.

Finally, as purely a matter of law, I don’t like this bill at all. I can’t see where an objective legal test can be made for “sincerely held religious beliefs” and, hence, this law is crying out to be voided solely on those grounds by the Courts.

Tags: | | | | | | | | |