Wednesday, January 25, 2017

Monstrous Regiment of Wimmin (2)

I was doing my morning clean up of debris from the night before and the Southern Gal was giving a helping hand. She does a better 'clean' than I do so I was grateful. She asked why it is that only the leftwing, feminist and fellow-travellers do these mass marches and why 'conservative' ladies do not. Not being all-knowing I could only guess that perhaps they do but no-one takes much notice. We were both off-mark though as the real reason is that the media do not report the conservatives en-masse in the streets, just the ratbags. The nice ladies do march; do protest.

But at last someone has listened. President Trump's first day saw him de-fund Planned Parenthood and bring to an end the taxpayer forced complicity in the mass-murder of babies.  
Strike #1 for the good gals.

But we are all still reeling from the display of violent petulance and tantrum-throwing by the lunatic ladies that followed the Inauguration Day.  They were seeking 'equality' it seems. Of the hundreds of thousands of brainwashed wimmin who attended, it is estimated that as many as 14 had to take a day off work. Meanwhile the clean up was left to..... yes, of course, men.

Some 85 tonnes of rubbish were removed - by men - from Washington march...85 tonnes, bill boards, placards, lunch boxes, drink cans and bottles. Many of those placards and bill-boards were 'professionally' made, unlike the knitted 'vagina hats' that many of the wimmin wore. 

They refuse to define people by their genitals, but knit vagina hats. 

They profess against objectifying woman by body parts, but focus on vaginas. They even made vagina costumes. 

Go figure. 

Irony abounded but it seems America still doesn't quite get irony.

The rioters smashed windows - of Clinton Campaign donors - and set fire to a limo that turned out to belong - on hire purchase - to a muslim immigrant who was not only dragged out and given a whacking but left with a $70,000 debt to pay off on the burned-out wreck.

The 'Big Lefty et (almost) Al' march was 'inclusive of diversity'. 

Trans-folk were not very welcome though, nor were 'some' women. Those such as we spoke about when wiping the tables in the Tavern. 

Even the 'Misguided Battalion of Foot-in-Mouth' Feminists that are pro-life.

Some Women Are More Equal Than Others

The Women's March doesn't actually include all women.

On Saturday, gaggles of anti-Trump feminists will descend on Washington to protest The Donald’s presidency. The Women’s March on Washington claims to “stand together in solidarity with our partners and children for the protection of our rights, our safety, our health, and our families — recognizing that our vibrant and diverse communities are the strength of our country.”

How curious, then, that march organizers disqualified from sponsoring the event a feminist organization whose founder is on record calling Donald Trump “a greedy, narcissistic, misogynistic, adulterer; a corporate mogul (who brags about not being able to be bought, but conveniently leaves out that he’s usually the one buying); a Godless, brainless reality TV star.”

Why the rejection?
'Reproductive freedom or reproductive justice means that women decide the fate of our own bodies,' Gloria Steinem, an honorary co-chairwoman of the Women's March told the Times.
The problem remains that it is someone else's body they kill.
The Baby's.

Turns out the organization in question — New Wave Feminists (NWF) — is pro-life, and we all know that’s an unforgivable sin on the Left. 
So when rabid pro-abortionists got wind that NWF was listed among event sponsors, they did what ultra-Leftist women do best: throw a fit. 
As one woman hysterically tweeted, “Intersectional feminism does not include a pro-life agenda. That’s not how it works! [Insert pouty face and foot-stomping here.] The right to choose is a fundamental part of feminism.” 
Unless you choose to be pro-life, that is.

Apparently, solidarity applies only if you support dismembering live babies and selling their body parts for profit. And diversity can go no further than choosing between D&E or suction abortions.

Quickly backtracking from any semblance of open-mindedness, the Women’s March issued a statement apologizing for the “error” and confirming that unless you favor killing babies, your diverse feminism is simply not identical enough to Planned Parenthood’s to be welcome. No free thinkers allowed. After all, the march takes place the day before the anniversary of Roe v. Wade.
The innane grin of the loon

Responding to the rejection, NWF founder Destiny Herndon-De La Rosa stated, “It appears that the [Women’s March on Washington] only wants to include a ‘diverse’ array of women who think exactly like them. That’s unfortunate, but we will not be deterred.” Despite being removed as a sponsor, the group will still march.
Oh do come along Destiny. You are a feminist. You know what feminists are and what they are like. 

You made the bed.  Now you lie in it. 
As will And Then There Were None (ATTWN), another pro-life group that received a similar rejection after first being approved as an event sponsor. You may recognize ATTWN founder Abby Johnson as the former Planned Parenthood director who left the abortion industry in 2009. Johnson shares on Facebook that after ATTWN applied to be an event partner, she received a phone call from a woman informing her that the application was rejected because all partners “must be supportive of women’s reproductive rights.”
Wonderful how it is always termed 'reproductive rights' when there has been absolutely no question about 'reproducing'. It is a better mantra though than 'Kill your Baby'. 
Johnson explains: “I told her that wasn’t a problem because we absolutely support reproductive rights, as long as they don’t infringe on the rights of individual human beings in the womb. I guess she didn’t like that, so she just repeated that we could not be a partner. … I finally asked, ‘So is this a pro-abortion March now?’ She hung up.”
Oddly, later that day ATTWN was approved and listed as an event sponsor — only to be disqualified once again later.

Of course, this hardly comes as a surprise. Groups like Planned Parenthood and NARAL have hijacked the word “feminism” — and are even trying to hijack the word “women” — to advance their infant-dismemberment business. As The Federalist’s Joy Pullman notes, “[Feminist Susan B.] Anthony’s legacy has become largely a cover for people who profit from killing other humans and selling their dissected body parts for profit. So much for human rights. … 
[T]he decline in women identifying themselves as feminists has directly coincided with leading feminists' defenestration of pro-life women to obsess almost exclusively over abortion. Making abortion the core of the women’s rights movement isn’t helping.”

Indeed, nearly 40% of women believe abortion should be illegal in all or most cases, according to the Pew Research Center. With 40% of women unwelcome, Saturday’s event can hardly be called a “Women’s March.”

Turns out that to abortion-fixated females, equality looks good on paper. But when it comes to reality, they believe some women are more equal than others.
 The Prof, JJ Ray sat quietly supping on his drink. He put it down to say a few words. Everyone listens to JJ. He pointed to The Most Salient Fact about Feminism and the Left.
Children are a joy and a great delight -- but not so much for feminists
That a woman of no great physical strength will fight like a lion to protect her children tells you something about the bond that forms between normal parents and their children.  So much so that a lot of parents are embarrassed by it.  When asked about child rearing, a mother will often stress the negatives rather than confess the great happiness that children bring.  Children give the happiness that drug users seek but do not find.  Foolish people frantically seek pleasures in all sorts of places when the key to happiness is right under their noses: children.
But children are a burden, too, right? They can be.  A single mother bringing up children by herself has to be unusually capable and resourceful to come through the experience well.  But single mothers are well outside what humans have evolved for. For almost as long as we have been human, a mother was surrounded by  helpful others:  a husband plus two sets of grandparents.  
A husband took away much of the need to work so doing things with the children could be a fairly relaxed affair.  And whenever a mother needed time out -- to work or unwind, there were as many as four grandparents to help out with the childminding.  
Often the grandparents did more of the child-rearing than the mother did. As a child, my son spent more of the day with his Nanna than with any other family member. And I won't mention aunts, uncles, siblings and cousins.  To this day, they often help out too.
And the scenario I have described still actually exists in most of the world and is not uncommon even in "modern" societies.
But some "independent" people in their wisdom think they can do without all that.   
Their values are quite simply unwise. And to them children can be a great stress and a burden.  They make out of their greatest happiness their greatest burden.  They find that "independence" is not all it is cracked up to be. 
Independence and support are basically opposites.  Anybody reading this might do well to think for a little while about whether their various connections with others could be strengthened.
And one of the greatest sources of the independence folly are feminists.   
Contrary to all human experience, they even preach that men and women don't need one-another.  So some women are misled into missing out on children altogether.  Biology being what is is, however, most feminists do seem in the end to have a child or two.  And that's where the "fun" starts.   
The "sisterhood" turns out to be surprisingly unhelpful to the mother concerned.   
They may even scorn the mother concerned and call her a "breeder", a term of great contempt for them.  Children are just not their bag.
If there is a man consistently in the mother's life, that can be a big help but may not be. A strong bond between a man and a feminist is inherently unlikely.  So when children arrive the man may run, or at least distance himself.  So a feminist mother will generally be stuck in the stressful single mother scenario.  Her only salvation from that will be that she has retained enough connections with her parents for them to help.  But she will still be more burdened that she would have been in a traditional relationship.
Traditional relationships are wise.   
They will of course have some conflicts but they are what has evolved to fit us best.  They are traditional because they do fit what we are.  But these days a lot of mothers don't even have a husband so they haven't even got their foot on the first rung of the ladder.
Why are they so foolish?  Again, feminism is a big part of the blame.  Feminists fill women's heads with lies such as women can "have it all" and even deceive women about how desirable "all" is.  They fill women's heads with fantasies about how wonderful is this "career" that men have.  
They fail to mention that a man enters onto a career as simply the best way to make money, not to achieve honour and glory.  And they fail to mention that a career entails spending the best part of most of your day in the company of people you don't particularly like and whom you would not seek out.  Sometimes you may get good feelings out of your career but all you usually get for all the stresses you endure is money. And many men would gladly throw it all away if they could reasonably do so.
Traditionally too, the money a man earns goes to support his wife and children, their food, clothing, heating, lighting, education, health..... the list goes on. Women who 'earn' have not moved anywhere near as close to the male paradigm of providing for another mature adult. - her husband. 

What sort of mother has her child hold such a sign?
And to cap it all, a feminist mother may well bear a boy.  And there is nothing more destructive of feminists delusions than a normal little boy.  90% of the time he will be indestructibly boyish.  Given him a choice of a dolly and a toy truck and 90% or more of the time he will choose the truck. I have two favourite real life stories about that:
* A woman has three boys in close succession, and being a kindly soul, she gave her boys toys that they chose.  She had however heard feminist ravings so wondered if they would like a dolly.  So she gave them one.  They promptly ripped it legs off, pulled its eyes out and threw it in a corner.  They decisively educated her about male/female differences.  She herself had a doll from her childhood which she greatly treasured. In a traditional society men fought the battles and women minded the children.  And that is now genetically encoded.
* I was at a party where there was a 4-year-old boy. I was talking to him about his toys and said to him, "Boys have trucks and girls have dolls, don't they? He promptly nodded.   
But a more "modern" man nearby then said to the boy, "But boys sometimes have dolls too, don't they?"  The boy's reply was eloquent.   
He simply said "AAARGH!".
And if the feminist mother bans her boy from having toy guns, he will simply imagine one into existence using a stick or something else as a prop.  So her boy will almost certainly disabuse a feminist mother of claims that males and females are born with no basic differences.
It probably eventually  occurs to a woman who has been "woke" out of feminist fantasies that maybe a husband might be a good idea after all.  But finding one at that juncture will make what is always a difficult task very difficult indeed.
Perhaps she can find an exotic male. A 'bad-boy' one with a rap record: A transgender one; or a gay one (so like a woman, you see: they can 'understand'  !!); or non-white one who shares her 'lack of privilege'; or a Muslim perhaps. 
Stupid is what stupid does.

 Not a suprise to see a rabid, Hamas-loving, anti-western, islamic woman being a leading light on the Wimmin's March. 

And those wimmin followed her !! 
Many a placard on the march by lefty wimmin advocated for Islam by Gays. 

Hello !!

The wimmin's march was as it always will be, populated by lunatics, even western educated women who go off and become sex-slaves for Isis Muslims. I said back in November that a civil war is brewing .....
The effort that is needed to retain and maintain an orderly civil society is far greater than most imagine. The talk in the bar last evening left even me wondering and scanning the horizons.

Very few are even aware that a civil war is likely, until belief in one is shoved down their street. Many nations have 'experienced' one in their history and few have escaped unscathed. Why on earth imagine that western democracies are exempt?
...and these are the opening shots. The proponents are sick. Their ethos is anti-life. Their modus operandi is to destroy. 

Trump has gathered his generals: he needs sound women behind him along with sound men. He has made a start on the first day with a direct assault on the Baby-Killers. He has yet much work to do. Heck he could even direct that 50% of street cleaners must be female by the end of the year..... or else.

And there is another Legion of Women. Good women.  Women such as the admirable Southern Gal, who along with her sisters wants desperately to DO something. Their turn IS coming.

There is an annual event just a few days away where pro-life women – and men too – are especially welcome, the March for Life, taking place on January 27. 

Put on your leather knickers ladies; and leather breast-plates. Take up your spatulas, sharp kitchen knives and rolling pins --- and into the fray !

Don't forget your Rosary beads.

Pax, (one day)



    Yes, conservatives do march and I support them - i.e., MFL has been marching every year since 1974. The press only seems to report on the ratbags of both, but I guess it wouldn't be newsworthy if they reported the rules rather than the exception. And perhaps press does that to make things appear more rampant than it was to people who weren't there, to stir people up so they can get more ratings/readers ;)

    Regardless, I don't think peaceful abortion protestors care for being automatically lumped in with abortion clinic bombers any more than peaceful women march protestors care for being automatically lumped in with rioters.

    Speaking of which, the window-smashing events occurred the day before women marches, and they were performed by men, as this video shows:

    I'm not blaming men for violence - I personally don't believe men are any more prone to violence than women. I'm just saying in this particular case, it happened to be men the day before.

    Lastly, the meme above with Bank of America's windows being smashed says that those businesses were anti-Trump is incorrect. Here's BoA's CEO on Fox Business Insider, singing Trump's praises:

    Otherwise, I can tell you that I personally know 7 couples that went to the marches (which included their eager husbands) and all of them said they were peaceful and positive and saw no violence whatsoever.

    They did see some inappropriate signs and nastiness like above, but it was not common, and both those signs and the prior day's violent acts were denounced by my friends and other non-ratbag protestors :)

    Regardless, the women's march happened 4 days ago. Much has happened since. And though I agree with you on defunding Planned Parenthood for abortions (but not for general female healthcare provision for low-income women, especially with Obamacare going), and a few features of other EO's, that is not the only issues at stake, nor is that the point. The point is abuse of executive privilege.

    An executive order has also been issued to continue DAPL on Lakota Sioux Federal Land grant, which both conservatives and liberals supported the peaceful protests on, after paid local law enforcement on behalf of DAPL tear-gased them, let loose attack dogs on them and shot at them with rubber bullets for refusing to leave their own land. These are American citizens who will lose their land - again.

    Trump also made a Twitter threat yesterday at 6:30 p.m. to bring in "the feds" if Chicago didn't "fix it's gun violence problem" - not only insulting his biggest voters, cops, but threatening to do exactly what gun owners feared Hillary would do - send in federal troops to take their guns away/fight them.

    Regardless of whether we like or agree with a president, there is no reason to have a Congress at all if we give a president this much power. Had Obama abused his EO's in this manner rather than waiting for Congress, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul would've threatened to shut down the govt again led the charge to impeach. Considering I'm sort of a left-libertarian, I'm inclined to agree with them on limited government.

    I'm just wondering where those same voice are now, when one of their own is in power. Because IMO, abuse of executive power, government overreach and unconstitutionality is never okay, lib or conservative.

    And the fact that no one from the right is challenging that abuse of power from one of their own is what at least appears to be hypocritical, especially because "laissez-faire" government is the entire foundation of their party platform?

    Regardless, the constitutional right to peacefully assemble should be supported rather than condemned, and I think we all could be a bit more careful not to confuse them with ratbags and condemn them ;)

    ~ Chrystal

    1. Chrystal, dear lady, so good to see you back. :) There are things that you and I can agree on even if there are some things, sometimes, that you are quite wrong about. Still, better a shared glass than a bitter one, eh?

      I am pleased that you added to this post. You are quite right to point out the men involved in the violence. I had made a mention which went missing in the editing. I even had a couple of videos of men rioting and of women rioting. One can deal with only so much before one drifts off from the point. As you know I interject only so much and let the customers do most of the talking.

      I too think that peaceful assembly is a fine thing, while blocking traffic, cursing and getting one's kiddies to hold filthy signs isn't. I do hope you can make it to the March for Life tomorrow.

      What can I get for you to drink, m'dear?

    2. Perhaps that's something we have in common, we're both the expressive sort (downright wordy, in my case). We both like to pour out all thoughts on a subject at once, editing later in hopes of creating better flow or perhaps just for brevity, when perhaps the 1st draft was the gold! (Thus why my 1st comment doesn't flow, I edited too much for length :) )

      I'm quite wrong sometimes? How DARE you?!;)

      Hahaha - I'm just kidding! Of course I'm wrong sometimes. In fact, I'm wrong a lot. If I wasn't, I'd have a lot more to show for my 48 years of life than I do lol. But ya know, you learn as you go, if you're the sort that can admit you're wrong and learn from your mistakes :)

      And of course I HAVE to add, here, that I think you're quite wrong sometimes too ;) But that's okay, we don't always have to agree, one doesn't have to be right and the other wrong, and who says either one of us is right?

      But did you ask "When am I wrong, for instance?" ;)

      Well, I'll tell you, thank you for asking ;) lol.

      Like the Qu'ran verses quoted above. That isn't what those verses say at all. But I digress in the interest of discussion rather than argument and encourage you to look those versus up/read the Qu'ran in full context and compare them to the meme ;)

      Now would be a good time during this conversation for that drink, I think? lol. But I'll just have a glass of chamomile tea this time, thanks, as it's bedtime here :)

      I think we're more alike/agree more than you may think, we just have different ideas on how to reach the same goal. In fact, I think that's actually the only difference between the right and left, different ideas, same goal.

      Unfortunately, all of this "leftists are all this" and "rightists are all that" nonsense has gotten in the way of that truth, in recent years. I don't pay any attention to that propagandic nonsense from either side. That kind of thinking is causing the hatred and divisiveness on both sides, that the other side is our "enemy" rather than our fellow countrymen with different ideas. And people are individuals before the groups they belong to anyway and there are variances within groups, IMO.

      Having said that, it is pretty hard to have a friendship with people who've been indoctrinated to believe you're the enemy and that they can't trust you because you're a lefty. I don't find that to be the mindset of all conservatives, but I have to admit, I've run into that extreme "enemy" mentality more with Trump voters this last election.

      As for your question about marches, didn't/won't be attending either - unfortunately I can't afford the time off!

      Well, it's off to bed with me now, good to see you, Amfortas :)

      ~ Chrystal

      PS - BTW, agreed about the kids with signs, totally disgusted. And I admit, I laughed at the meme of the near-naked women holding a sign demanding that she be desexualized. I'm pretty sure the sign didn't accomplish men desexualizing her, but her blatant lack of self-awareness and hypocrisy may have done the trick.

      I'm thoroughly convinced what is lacking most in today's society is the inability to look in the mirror before we speak and point fingers.

      Now if you'll excuse me, rather than exemplify that myself, I must go and create a sign about it, then yell at other people to do as I say rather than what I do, to make my world more comfortable for me ;)

      (Kidding again lol)

    3. You think I am wrong sometimes? Don't believe everything you think, m'dear. Dream instead. Sleep tight.

  2. PS - My friend who works for the CDC is Catholic and does not support abortion. However, she was marching because she is on the Zika research team and funding for it will be cut. Zika is know to cause birth defects, particularly microcephaly. So the main reason she was marching was against funding cuts because they only have the preliminary research done and there is no assistance yet in place for children with these birth defects nor their families.

    ~ Chrystal

    1. Will be cut, eh? That would be dreadful, but I do not recall any pronouncement that such funding would be cut by Mr Trump. Perhaps that was an Obama thing or the nasty folk in the Health Department that Trump has yet to put a hose through. So far Trump has only put a stop to Planned Parenthood funding, and as we all know from them themselves, 93% of their work is in killing babies not trying to cure disabilities.

      I would suggest - clearly with little impact - that your friend might choose better allies. As for her being a Catholic, hmmmmm, there are 'Church of Nice', outright socialists, and Traditionalists and a lot in between. I hope she is a good Catholic woman. There are 'infiltraitors' too. The emphasis is on the 'traitors' there: traitors to the Faith. I am reminded that a Catholic Priest was a member of Congress who voted FOR abortion.

    2. Well, there also wasn't any pronouncement that he ever supported the DAPL pipeline and was going to force the issue with an EO (probably because people on both sides were against it. In fact, a Trump-voting friend of mine is really mad about him never mentioning that).

      In fact, he didn't tell us about any of these EO's, we were under the impression he would sign Congressional votes on them.

      As for my friend at the CDC, I can't verify, I don't work there. All I know is what my friend said her boss told her (her boss is a Trump voter btw), which was similar to what EPA employees later reported on social media and to the press the same day - funding freezes, gag orders. In fact, she had asked me to use her private email because of it from now on and it was hours before those articles about the EPA.

      Here's what (fact-checking site) says on the subject:

      Snopes ends the entry by stating they have reached out to EPA officials to verify, so they haven't labeled it true or false yet.

      Interesting, that my friend told me the exact same story about the CDC hours before those articles about the EPA were published, though, isn't it?

      Could just be "what if" panic. Time will tell...

      ~ Chrystal

    3. Such a lot of pannicky talk going around that it is hard to discern the true from the false. As far as I can tell ALL Government Departments are on tenterhooks expecting a hose pipe or a diverted river through them. Time will tell and we shall see.

      American Government Departments operate differently from most Anglophile countries in that there are many, many 'political' appointments. Obama installed well over 4000 people to bring the 'change' part of hope and change, much to the dismay of the many who were 'replaced'. They too will go and no doubt try to push through a wrecking ball before they are found.

  3. Forgive me, a correction. (I tried to shorten/edit my 1st comment and ended up taking out a bit too much, here and there, I hope you can still follow).

    Most important is a correction to the second sentence. It originally and should've said: "The press only seems to report on the "ratbags" of both conservative and liberal protestors, but I guess it wouldn't be newsworthy and boring if they reported on the rules, rather than exceptions to the rules."

    ~ Chrystal

  4. PS - On Catholicism, oh, I'm in no position no judge who's a good Catholic and who isn't, not being Catholic. I guess it's also not my place to judge who's a Christian and who's not or who should be "allies" with whom. Again, I don't look at my countrymen as enemies or allies - I look at them as having different opinions and sins compared to mine.

    The moment I start down that "who's a true Christian" road, I remember someone could just as easily say the same about me, using different evidence. I try to remind myself of this verse every day, some days go better than others :)

    James 4:12: "There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you—who are you to judge your neighbor?"

    ~ Chrystal

  5. By the way, you do your case little good quoting Snopes. They were busted a while back for being run by an unqualified and amateur Clinton supporter. Hardly a 'fact-checker' and more like a shill.

    1. I'm listening :) (I always do, because I'd prefer to read your perspective more than some others on your side, believe me. But I think both sides need to start listening to each other, rather than propaganda about each other :)

      Having said that, the EPA issue isn't my 'case' dear lol. As I said, I saw the articles, found it curious they were very similar to what my friend told me hours before, went to fact-checkers to verify. I prefer Politifact but they haven't reported yet. Doesn't mean I believe them, either, I just weigh their arguments.

      As for Clinton support, I'm sure all fact-checking site contributors vote (or at least I hope they do) and we all have bias, try as hard as we can to remove them. But I have seen Snopes contributors verify conservative stories. For instance, the story about Obama releasing money to the Palestinian Authority right before he left?

      Deemed "mostly true" by Snopes. "Mostly" because the part of the story left out was Congress voted on it 2 years ago and approved it, he just didn't release it until he left. Presidents have to ask Congress for money, they don't have it lying around to give.

      Not sure I agree with supporting the PA, but at the same time, if we're stopping all refugees in, I don't mind giving money out to help, public or private, but ya never know who it really goes to either way.

      As for Obama, didn't agree with everything. I'm a left libertarian, I don't believe government needs to be involved in too much. However, there is also such a thing as cutting back things too far. Governor Snyder from Michigan proved that. His style was reward your inexperienced political cronies with high-paying gov jobs and cut funding back to govt. programs. That ended in Flint's water crisis. And I think people are scared because Trump has followed that pattern.

      IMO, just because Trump is against abortion doesn't make him moral or even Christian. Muslims are against abortion too. There's a bit more to being a Christian than that, IMO. And there was a bit more to the Women's March than abortion. Some of the marchers didn't get that themselves.

      We've seen Trump's nasty live many times and from Twitter account. Ain't nothing else Christian coming off him BUT anti-abortion.

      However, as I said in my last comment last night that apparently didn't take regarding my friend being Catholic, I'm in no place to judge, I'm not Catholic. And I typically worry about my own sin unless others' sin harms me, others or themselves. Not much I can do about it though.

      As for company kept, Jesus' own disciples were sinners, he preferred them to the self-righteous pharisees.

      He never said shun the sinner - that was Paul. (Paul said/did a lot of things to please the Pharisees Christ refused to and Christ trumps Paul IMO.)

      Christ said "shake the dust off your feet" to those who won't listen. The worst sinners listened, self-righteous Pharisees refused; thus, Christ chose worst sinners as disciples. Doesn't mean he didn't love the Pharisees or was shunning them, it just meant he's was better off talking to a brick wall. .

      And that's the beauty of discussion with other Christians who self-examine in Christianity rather than use to as a righteousness measuring stick - we don't have to agree on everything, but we both want to do what Christ wants and double check.:)

      Speaking of which, appreciate the good discussion with you. At least I thought it was, but your last comment leaves me wondering if we're still okay, so I'll scoot away and just say good day to ya,

      ~ Chrystal

    2. Yes, still OK. Lots of drinks to serve. Will Trump turn out to be the 'saviour' or the 'wrath' is anyone's guess but I am less inclined to think he is appointed from above. He has been sitting on the Throne (he didn't build that. Obama did) for less than a week issuingthe Decrees that Obama made so popular and we usually give a new leader 100 days to sort out his washing. A decree a day will keep destruction away. Hopefully.

  6. Golly - people must have a licence to sell real estate, yet those women are permitted to procreate at will and the methodology they choose to employ in raising their children is deeply disturbing. Logic is not subject to any law of diminishing returns - it just seems to be unfashionable - especially for women. Perhaps it's the absence of a silly wog label and no obvious price tag. On the other hand, stupidity is forever - there is no remedy - but it's really fashionable at the moment. I wonder if any of those women know how to cook - I'm sure they all know the nearest junk food drive through - lucky off-spring! Peter H.

  7. Nice thing is that the Donald is giving em hell over this.

    1. They seem busy bringing Hell all by themselves.

  8. Great post my dear friend:). They never cover women like us because according to the leftists women we aren't really women. We may have a post with more of my views soon:). I am working on it!
    The southern girl

    1. I guess women come in all sizes just as men to. There are good ones and bad ones; ones who do well and ones that don't The bad are always jealous of the good. I look forward to clearing a table for you to sit at and speak.


Ne meias in stragulo aut pueros circummittam.

Our Bouncer is a gentleman of muscle and guile. His patience has limits. He will check you at the door.

The Tavern gets rowdy visitors from time to time. Some are brain dead and some soul dead. They attack customers and the bar staff and piss on the carpets. Those people will not be allowed in anymore. So... Be Nice..