San Juan Mountains

San Juan Mountains
San Juan Mountains: Grenadier Range

Saturday, March 11, 2017

Stupid Week: The Grand Finale

What a stupid week it has been.  Just when I thought things could not get any dumber someone comes along and does something even more stupid.  I read a story this morning in the "Ask Amy" advice column in my Denver Post.  The question, brought by "Concerned Mother," left me scratching my head in complete befuddlement.  So, without any further ado, allow me to finish Stupid Week with the grand finale of all stupidity, as described by a concerned mother:
"I am a proud mother to my gay son who lives across the country.  We love him unconditionally.  My son married his partner, John.  They have been together for several years.  Recently, my son came to his father and me with shocking news that my family is still reeling from.  John is a trans man (that means a woman for those of you who don't understand the new terminology, MW) who has had 'top surgery,' and is actually three months pregnant.  John is going to keep living as a man, even during the pregnancy, which they told us was planned.  We have met John many times and neither he nor my son had given any indication that John was born a woman."
When you stop laughing and have had a moment to wipe the tears from your eyes, please read on.
"My other son said he was 'disgusted' by the situation, and won't have contact.  My husband and I feel hurt, misled, and are confused, bur really want to focus on getting everyone to move past this and to accept them.  No one will participate in any sort of therapy, and I worry that the family will never recover. How can I bring everyone together?"
Well there you have it.  Welcome to the modern world of shifting gender identity.  Just when you thought it was safe to affirm the lifestyle choices of heterophobes (homosexual people with a pathological fear of heterosexuals), you discover that some of them are actually trannies!  Does it get any better than this?  Let's take some time and muse upon this wildly stupid situation here today.
Apparently everyone in this family was downright "proud" to affirm the immoral and God-hating lifestyle choices of their son/brother as he wed his true love, a man named John.  But John was not what he appeared to be.  I was not aware of this but apparently transvestites are capable of converting back and forth between the two sexes in two parts.  Lo and behold, John is not a true homosexual man.  In fact, he is really a she and he/it has converted the upper half of her body to manhood while retaining a female bottom half.  To make things even more bizarre, John (the female transvestite homosexual half-man half-woman creature) teamed up with the concerned mother's truly homosexual son to have a baby.  Why a homosexual man like the mother's son would want to have a baby with his "male" life partner was not described.  Why a trannie woman would want to marry a homosexual man was not explained.  Why either one of them wanted to be in a relationship in which one of them was half man/half woman was not explicated.
Now the concerned mother has a problem.  The great pride she felt at how tolerant her entire family was in accepting the homosexual "marriage" of her son and John has been replaced with disgust, hurt and confusion as the facade of tolerance and acceptance shown previously has come crashing down under the revelation that John is a quadra-gender.  A quadra-gender is a new word that I just coined.  It refers to women who want to marry homosexual men by converting half of their bodies into a man while retaining the lower working parts as female in order to have a child that will no doubt be raised in an amazingly tolerant, healthy and accepting family environment.
I guess concerned mom has a good point.  If the family members were willing to accept and "unconditionally love" their son/brother when he married John, why has anything changed?  How is being a homosexual any different, other than the obvious things, than being a quadra-gender?  Certainly if the family members had been able to muster up the tolerance to accept the perversion of homosexual marriage it is not big deal to muster up the tolerance for a quadra-gender union, is it?   I wonder....what moral standard are the family members using that allows them to praise the son for being a homosexual married to another homosexual but that does not allow them to praise him for being married to a quadra-gender?  That is the problem with moral relativism.  Once the moral perfection of God's law is abandoned, what passes for moral in the eyes of each relativist is simply nothing more than that which each individually is emotionally comfortable with.  Homosexuality is comfortable.  Quadra-genderism is not.  Homosexuality is good.  Quadra-genderism is bad.  That is ethics in the Socialist Democracy of Amerika at its finest.
I am really looking forward to next week.  I wonder if anything can top the story of the concerned mother?  I don't know how but I have been surprised every day this week as things just got stupider and stupider every day.  Wow.

Friday, March 10, 2017

Stupid Week Continues...

The fact that all of the examples of extreme stupidity referenced during national "Stupid Week," some of which are discussed in this blog, are exclusively the result of the activities of women is not meant to disparage, demean or in any way deprecate the significance and value of the fairer sex.  After all, the Bible refers to women as the "weaker sex" and they are doing the best they can to rise up to the level of intelligence that we men enjoy.  So when you see a woman struggling with stupidity stop and take a moment to encourage her to rise above her natural shortcomings and become more like a man.
Speaking of becoming more like a man (a reference which stupid women no doubt find offensive), women themselves readily admit that they aspire to that goal.  I am not being a misogynist when I authoritatively declare that women are inferior.  They shrilly scream out that truth on an almost daily basis.  As proof for my belief I will reference an article in the newspaper yesterday that serves as a perfect example of this truth about women.  The article was entitled "In a world first, Iceland will require firms to prove equality."  The first paragraph of the article said, "Iceland will be the first country in the world to make employers prove they offer equal pay regardless of gender, ethnicity, sexuality or nationality, the Nordic nation's government said Wednesday -- International Women's Day."  Let's consider this newly created law for a while today.
The article described the process by which women will receive equal pay with men by saying that the new legislation "will require all employers with more than 25 staff to obtain certification to prove they give equal pay for work of equal value."  The stated goal of the new law was "to eliminate the gender gap by 2022."  Pity the poor woman who works at a firm that employs only 24 people. She will be forced to continue living on slave wages, deprived of the enormous benefits derived from government protections under the new law.  The choice of a totally arbitrary number to determine who the new law will apply to, besides being extraordinarily stupid, is an act of discrimination itself.  In this case the government of Iceland is discriminating against women who work for companies that employ less than 25 people.  There ought to be a law preventing that from occurring but it is highly unlikely it will be created by the spineless wimps who created the first law.  But it is not the absurd and contradictory establishment of an arbitrary number that concerns me today.  I am much more concerned about how "equality" is going to be defined.  According to the new law, any particular job with a specific job description must pay the same amount to whoever fills the position.  That person can be a man, a woman, a homosexual, a transvestite, a Caucasian or a Welshman and they will all be required, by law, to be paid the same amount.
Let me begin by admitting that I am not equal to women in any way, shape or fashion.  No matter how hard I try I cannot conceive a baby, bear a baby, nurse a baby or change a diaper for a baby.  That state of affairs, the result of random mutation, natural selection and the survival of the fittest, is entirely unfair.  If I believed in the god of civil government I would beseech my deity to create a law making me able to bear children, thus proving my equality with women.  I, however, do not worship at the throne of the State so that will never happen.
In addition to not being able to bear children, I am able to determine which direction is North, no matter where I am at any given time.  I am able to park my car in a parking lot and remain equidistant between the lines.  I am unable to put makeup on while driving down the road.  I am incapable of talking for more than five or ten minutes without running out of something to say.  About the only thing I share in common with women is a decidedly feminine inability to work with any mechanical equipment other than a broom, mop and a vacuum. 
Now that I have established that men and women are not equal, as if that is something that is somehow difficult to prove to anyone who is not exceedingly stupid, let's consider Iceland's new law declaring that women are economically equal to men when they provide labor services to a profit seeking corporation that employs 25 or more people.  The law says that if a man and a woman occupy the same position at a firm that firm must certify to the government that they are paid the same amount, ostensibly because they are performing the exact same function.  Any firm that does not pay the women the same amount as the men will be subject to some sort of punishment.  The presupposition that supports the doctrine of equal pay for women is that the people who fill the jobs with the same job description are identical in their skills, abilities, experience, goals and value to the company.  That presupposition is downright stupid, to say the least.
Suppose I have a position open at my firm for a cleaning crew supervisor.  I post the job and announce that I will pay $30,000/year for a qualified applicant.  In a free society I would not post my salary along with the job notice.  I would negotiate the salary with the person I want to hire until we come to an amicable and voluntary decision about what he/she would be paid.  In Iceland however, I am forced to post the salary in advance because the new government law declares that everyone is equally qualified to fill the job and any discrepancy in pay rates is based exclusively upon my own hatred for women, transvestites and Irishmen.  Two people apply for the job.
A female applicant is 50 years old.  She has raised two children who do not live in her basement.  She has 20 years of experience as a maid, including experience supervising other maids in a large hotel.  She provides a long list of references informing me that she is of the highest moral character and will readily fulfill the terms of her employment contract.  The second applicant is a 30 year old male who lives in his parent's basement.  He is an expert at playing video games but his mother says that he never cleans his room.  He has no references and he was late to the job interview.  Of these two applicants, who would you hire?
The last question was a trick question.  In a free market I might hire both of them.  In a free market I might be willing to take a flyer on the irresponsible young man and hire him for $20,000/year.  He deserves an opportunity to gain some job experience but I am not willing to pay him $30,000 to take that risk.  In a free market I would also hire the woman.  I would recognize that she is a very valuable asset for my firm and I would offer her $40,000/year to work for me.  My goal would be to obtain and retain her services for as long as possible.  Only an exceedingly stupid person would believe that the man and the woman deserve the same pay for the same job.  Politicians and feminists who worship civil government are exceedingly stupid people.

Thursday, March 9, 2017

It Must Be Stupid Week

By my calculations I have lived over 3000 weeks in my life.  That means I have seen a lot of weeks over the years.  Despite having borne witness to so many weeks during my lifetime I do believe that this week might be the stupidest week of them all.  Just sitting here thinking about what has taken place this week causes me to believe that the citizens of the Socialist Democracy of Amerika are getting dumber every day.  Let me tell you about it here today.
The week began, for me, with the revelation that a 15 year old girl from Boulder decided to destroy $1000 worth of prime, grain-fed, organic beef by holding a funeral service for the dearly departed bovines.  This air-headed little girl marched into an organic meat store and put flowers on top of the sirloins and T-bones.  You got that right.  She put flowers on steaks as a means to memorialize the courageous lives of cattle.  According to the laws of the State of Colorado a flower is a deadly contaminant so the owner of the store had to immediately destroy the tainted meat before the flower residue could kill someone.  I didn't realize pollen was so deadly.   Meanwhile, the girl turned herself in the day after the funeral she had conducted and was quickly granted an interview on the local nighty news.  She exclaimed that she could not understand why everyone was so upset over the loss of $1000 worth of meat when the company selling the meat was making "billions of dollars."  I questioned her analysis of Whole Foods' financial statements but let it pass for the time being.  She also explained that she was "passionate" about animals and that they had all personally informed her that they would prefer to live rather than die.  She did not explain how they managed to convey that bit of information to her.
After I finished scratching my noggin about the little girl with a propensity to deliver eulogies to cows, I learned about the 22 year old air-head (also a female) who is championing the cause of rooftop gardens.  I posted to this blog earlier this week about her.  She wants every new apartment/condo building larger than 25,000 square feet to be required to have a rooftop garden. If she gets her way her proposal will become law after the next general election.  Why, you might ask, do developers need to place gardens on the rooftops of their buildings?  Because it will slow or reverse global warming!  Ha! Ha! Ha!  I believe I asked the question if things could get any stupider in that post.  Well, they have.
Today I learned that yesterday was national "A Day Without Women" day.  Wow!  I didn't even notice it.  My wife is out of town for a couple of days so I was not surprised when I woke up and she was not beside me in bed.  (I did wake up once and discovered that she was not beside me.  In my half-dreamy state I thought she had been raptured.  I later learned she had simply gone to the bathroom.)   In fact, I went about the entire day and did not notice a single woman missing.  I guess that proves I am a male chauvinist pig.  Despite being a pig-dog when it comes to women's rights, I was intrigued by the fact that some women believed they needed to declare there would be a day in which they would somehow disappear.  Thankfully my morning newspaper explained things for me.
A second page story, complete with a large photograph of a bunch of women wearing large smiles, told me what was going on.  The women had not really disappeared.  They had simply gone to a worship service together.  Hundreds of women all around the SDA had gathered on the steps of various government buildings around this idolatrous land to make their shrill little voices heard.  They had all gathered to worship their god of civil government and to beseech it to give them the things they want.  They were carrying signs proclaiming the things they are upset about.  One sign said, "Respect Your Mother."  Another sign said, "Love is Love, Black Lives Matter, and Science is Real."  Yet another said, "The Future is Female."  Still another said, "Keep Your Laws and Hands Off My...." I couldn't tell what the last word was supposed to be because it was a drawing instead of a word.  All of the women looked like they were having a great time marching around together.  The photo also showed a man in the middle of the group of ladies.  I suspect he chose to identify as a woman that day.
Later on I saw a news story on the television in which three different marchers were interviewed.  Each of them explained why they were out on strike that day.  I wish I could tell you what their reasons were but I can't.  They statements were incoherent.  One said something about how women need to express solidarity, whatever that means.  Another said something about the political climate and how she needed to come out to protest it.  I wonder, is the current political climate experiencing global warming? She didn't say.  The third said that, as a woman, she just felt like she had to join the group.  Good for her.  I was forced to conclude that none of the women who had gathered together in their church had the slightest idea why they were there.  Or, if they really did have a reason for being there, it sure seemed as if each one of them had a very different reason. 
As I sat here today contemplating the day without women it seemed to me that what they were doing was really dumb.  Really, really dumb.  In fact, it seemed even dumber than the funeral director for cows and the supporter of rooftop gardens.  So I came to the only conclusion I could come to.  Today must be stupid week and all these women are out showing just how stupid they can be.  Good for them!

Wednesday, March 8, 2017

A Reallly Stupid Proposal

Monday's Denver Post had an above the crease front page story entitled, "Height of go green."  The by-line of the story said, "Should the city of Denver require rooftop gardens to help slow human-caused climate change?  Voters might decide this year."  What followed has to be one of the dumbest things I have ever read in my life.  Let's consider this stupid idea here today.
A couple of radical environmental wackos have decided that anthropomorphic global warming is true.  That is the first amazingly stupid thing they believe.  The world may indeed be getting incrementally warmer but to believe that human beings are responsible for that change is the epitome of human hubris and ignorance.  Madison Backens (a female) is a 22 year old biology student at the University of Colorado/Denver.  She is the primary sponsor of the proposed new law.  The campaign manager for the proposed  new rule is a 30 year old idiot named Brandon Rietheimer.  These two believe they can change Denver for the better and stop human-caused global warming at the same time.  Following the example of San Francisco (is there a better role model?) these two human dynamos are proposing a new zoning ordinance that would "require gardens atop most new buildings of at least 25,000 square feet."
A report I heard last week said that Denver is now the eight least affordable housing market in the Socialist Democracy of Amerika.  The primary reason Denver housing is so unaffordable has to do with the existing rules and regulations in regards to the construction of large scale apartments and condominiums.  I have posted to this blog on that topic previously, found here, here and here.  Less expensive multi-family housing construction in Denver has ground to a halt for all of the reasons stated in the three posts cited above.  Just last week I read another story about how Denver's regulations about constructing "affordable housing" has brought about a state of affairs in which developers of downtown condominium complexes are charging more for the high end condos in order to subsidize the low end condos they are required to build to meet the city's "affordable housing" requirements.  The developers readily admit that they can't sell a low end condo for what it costs to build it so guess who ends up footing the bill?  As expected when government gets involved in building projects, wealth is transferred from the "wealthy," whoever they are, to people connected to the government in some fashion.  It pays to be a favored son of the civil government.  It is all immoral, unjust and an act of robbery but it is the law.
Now Maddy and Branny, as they like to be called, have entered the picture with another deleterious proposal for the Denver housing market.  Maddy said this in her defense of her brainless proposal, "I am very passionate about climate change, and with our recent election, its time for our citizens to take the initiative and battle some of the climate changes we are experiencing."  Can this woman get any dumber?  Does she really believe a new law forcing developers to put a ridiculous garden on the roofs of their apartment complexes is going to stop global warming?  The developers, of course, will be forced to pay for the gardens but who will maintain them?  I would also like to know what would be permitted to be grown there.  Can a resident of the complex grow marijuana there?  How about tomatoes?  Or does a prospective urban farmer have to get approval from Maddy and Branny before planting something in his rooftop farmland?  I suspect Maddy and Branny have already calculated which crops are most effective at combating global warming and they will probably come forth with a list of approved crops as a part of their ballot proposal.
I am a citizen, just like Maddy, and I am very passionate about the fact that if the world is getting warmer I like it.  I want a warmer world. Human beings have always been better off when the world has been warmer.  There are more agricultural products grown when the world is warmer.  People get more exposure to the sun and more vitamin D in their bloodstreams as a result of warmer temperatures.  High levels of vitamin D keep people from getting cancer, diabetes and MS.  People are generally happier when it is warmer.  When is the last time you heard someone complain about the winter being too warm?  Warmth is good. Warmth is our friend.  We, the citizens of the SDA, should embrace warmth with a passion.  Why should Maddy be allowed to pass a law to attempt to bring about a colder world?  Why should she not be arrested for infringing upon my right to a warm world?  I think there should be a new law and I might just try and get it on the ballot for a November 7th vote.  My proposal is that anyone who does anything to try and prevent global warming should be banished to Siberia each winter until they change their minds about man-caused global warming.  Is that a great proposal or what?

Tuesday, March 7, 2017

You Can't Take Back An Entitlement

Well, today is the big day.  This is the day we have all been waiting for.  This is the day the Republicans announce their magical plan to abolish the not-so-hated Obamacare and establish health insurance justice throughout the land.  The problem for the Republicans is that Obamacare has been around long enough to become entrenched.  An entrenched entitlement program cannot be abolished without suffering significant political backlash.  The Republicans know this and have already started to backpedal on their promise to repeal Obamacare.  The Democrats also know this and are cheerfully watching the Republican machinations, knowing full well that if the Republicans really do repeal most of the constituent parts of Obamacare they, the Democrats, will win the mid-term elections in 2018.  Oh what fun it is to watch career politicians doing everything they can to remain career politicians while, at the same time, making grandiose speeches about how what they are really doing is really best for the Amerikan people.
Few people recall the sordid socialist history of this sad land but there was real opposition to the Social Security Act, as it later became known, on the grounds that it was nothing more than socialism.  Those criticisms were brushed aside by the majority of the politicians at the time because they realized that passing the Act would guarantee them lifetime positions in Congress.   As early as 1935 the citizens of this immoral land were already committed socialists.  That should not surprise anyone.  Socialism is founded upon the bedrock principles of sinful human envy + government power + redistribution of wealth to the majority of the voters.  Anytime government exists socialism is bound to be close behind.
The same thing happened with what eventually became Medicare/Medicaid.  The following quote describes the efforts taken by one man in what proved to be a vain attempt to slow down the socialist train in regards to Medicare.  "In 1960 the Kerr-Mills Act passed, providing federal funds to states to cover the 'medically needy.' Another piece of legislation, the King-Anderson bill, was introduced, and proposed covering some medical expenses for the elderly. The King-Anderson bill ultimately failed, but was seen as a predecessor to Medicare. In 1961, a newly-conservative Ronald Reagan — at the time still an actor — joined a PR push by the American Medical Association against 'socialized medicine.' 'If you don’t [write your senator in opposition to King-Anderson], this program, I promise you, will pass just as surely as the sun will come up tomorrow, and behind it will come other federal programs that will invade every area of freedom as we have known it in this country,' Reagan said, 'until one day… we will wake to find that we have socialism. And if you don’t do this and I don’t do this, one of these days we are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children, what it once was like in America when men were free.'”
Reagan was correct.  Nobody remembers what it was like to be free these days.  Quite the opposite is the case.  People who run around claiming to be free are also running around claiming that health insurance is a "civil right" granted to them by the Constitution and the Supreme Court of Jokers.  If the Republicans had any courage they would announced that they are repealing Obamacare in toto.  I heard Rush Limbaugh argue for that position a week or so ago.  He said that all the Republicans need to do is declare that all aspects of Obamacare are gone and whatever "system" of health insurance had existed prior to the creation of Obamacare is what will now rule the day.  It would be even better if the Republicans truly behaved like people who believe in freedom and announced that the government would not be involved in health care or health insurance in any way.  A total abolition of all government programs related to health, plus an absolutely free market in all things health, would be the best thing for the citizens of this land, although few of them know that and even less of them believe that to be true.
Instead the Republicans are going to give us a modified version of Obamacare, which I will call Repubcare, that maintains most of the socialist elements of the prior plan.  According to an Associated Press story this morning, "The plan would repeal the statute's unpopular fines on people who don't carry health insurance.  It would replace income-based subsidies the law provides to help millions of Americans pay premiums with age-based tax credits that may be skimpier for people with low incomes.  Those payments would phase out for high-earning people.  The bill would continue Obama's expansion of Medicaid to additional low-earning Americans until 2020."  The article went on to point out that Repubcare will have some rules in regards to preexisting conditions that will be essentially the same as the Obamacare rules.  In other words, those folks with preexisting medical conditions cannot be refused health insurance when they apply for it after becoming ill.
Unlike most things I write about in my blog, I am not an expert on health insurance.  What I do know is that most envy-filled citizens of this land hate the free market and love civil government.  I also know that when a bill says that it will kick the can forward "until 2020" on something, that something will never change. Those who are on Medicare today will be on Medicare after 2020, I guarantee it.   I also know that most envy-filled citizens of this land believe evil profit seeking health insurance companies are worse than Hitler and need to be heavily regulated to make sure they genuinely serve the hard working families of this land.  I suspect most folks believe profit seeking health insurance companies make outrageous profits by refusing to cover people with preexisting conditions and only insuring people who are "healthy" and will not use their services.
The facts are found here:  "Updated data are now available for Q4 of 2009, and the Health Care Plan industry (includes Humana, Aetna, WellPoint, Magellan, Unitedhealth Group, etc.) slipped to #88 with a profit margin of 3.4%. Actually, that industry profit margin was boosted by WellPoint's 18% profit margin for Q4 2009, which was due largely to a one-time sale of its Pharmacy Benefit Management division. Without that sale, WellPoint's profit margin would have been only 3.9%, the industry average profit margin would have been closer to 3%, and the ranking for the industry would have fallen a few places down to #92."  So evil, profit seeking health insurance companies have an average profit margin of 3%. Shame on them!  They should be serving the public for free.  3% is an outrage!  There ought to be a law forbidding such abusive profits.
It seems to me that Repubcare is doomed to fail.  By eliminating the requirement that all people purchase health insurance, defined as a "tax" by the Supreme Court of Jokers, and by continuing the provision that nobody can be excluded due to a preexisting condition they have sown the seeds for their own demise.  How are any health insurance companies, operating on a thin 3% profit margin, going to be able to remain in business when they can't count on an income stream from the mandated "tax" and they have to cover people who will make the rational and voluntary decision to wait until they are sick before purchasing insurance?  
There is no going back when spineless wimps rule over us.  Rather than getting the citizens of the country entirely out of socialized medicine, the Republicans are proposing a misguided and ultimately economically doomed plan to replace the Obamacare they proclaim to hate so much.  However, what they are discovering is that it is vain to close the barn door after the horse has escaped.  Too many socialist citizens in this immoral and God-hating land have already become accustomed to their free health care and they are not about to give it up.  The Republicans are about to discover what the Democrats already know.  Once an entitlement has been given it is impossible to take it back.  

Monday, March 6, 2017

Amerikans Are United

I am sick and tired of hearing people whine and moan about how Amerika is divided.  All of the major news outlets are making a huge deal about something that does not even exist.  Every time I tune into one of their stations I am witness to a never ending stream of propaganda describing how we are experiencing civil division at a level unseen in the history of the Socialist Democracy of Amerika.  The coronation of King Donnie has a lot to do with it, of course, as the liberals who dominate the news media are doing all that they can to convince the rest of us that we are perched on the edge of the destruction of Amerikan civilization.  But they are all wrong.  What divides us is far less than what unites us.  Don't believe me?  Let me give you some examples.
Here is a complete list of the things that divide the citizens of this immoral and profligate country:
  • How to divide up the money that is taken from the top 49% of the income population.  The liberals want to spend more on social programs and the conservatives want to spend more on expanding the empire.  But both agree that tremendous amounts of money should be spent on both areas.  In reality, there is very little difference between the two groups when it comes to dividing up the booty.
  • How to define morality.  This is the only real difference between the two camps in this land.  Progressives want to stamp out all vestiges of Christian morality and the conservatives want to retain a sanitized and secular version of Christian morality.  This divide is real but it has little to no real impact upon the citizens of the land.  Debates about who can use public bathrooms and if Christian businesses have to bake cakes for God-hating homosexuals truly effect very few people.
In comparison to the two, or one and a half, things that divide the citizens of this land there are at least a dozen things that unite us every single day.  Here is an incomplete list of the things that unite the citizens of this immoral and profligate country:
  • Everyone agrees that government is grand and worthy of worship.  Everyone turns to civil government as the source of all good.  Everyone believes that the solutions to life's problems are to be found in government legislation.  The refrain, "there ought to be a law," is the first thing on the lips of all loyal citizens of the Socialist Democracy of Amerika.
  • Everyone worships the military and everyone associated with it.  Just try to say something negative about the armed services and the people who populate it and you will find out precisely what I mean.  There is no end to the worship of the military in this militaristic empire.
  • Just like the military, the police and some group that is now called "first responders" are all venerated as heroes.  They are nothing more than government employees in jobs that are not nearly as dangerous as they would have us believe.  Nevertheless, we are constantly told they are all great people and that we would soon be overrun by terrorists and natural disasters were it not for their valiant efforts on our behalf.  
  • All the citizens of this country are dedicated to the expansion of the Amerikan Empire.  All of the citizens of this land love the Empire and want to see it grow.  There may be some disagreements about how fast, and where, the Empire should grow but nobody but a handful of freedom lovers, pejoratively labeled "isolationists" by the loyal citizens of the land, ever dares to criticize the fact that the Empire exists and is constantly expanding.
  • Government is believed to be the source of economic prosperity by almost all citizens of this economically ignorant country.  Our career politicians drone on endlessly telling us how many jobs or how much economic growth they have created.  Every assertion they make is a blatant lie but the citizens of this land, blinding by love of government, believe everything they are told.
  • Politicians are altruistic and "public service" is the most noble of careers, according to the state-worshiping citizens of this idolatrous land.  Don't let the fact that public opinion surveys inform you that politicians are ranked low on the "trustworthiness" scale.  The truth is to be seen in the way people behave, not in what they tell pollsters.  People still flock to government and political jobs and people still believe that those who fill those jobs are doing so out of a desire to serve us, the citizens of this enslaved country.  
  • One thing that everyone but a couple dozen of us agree upon is that the Law of God as found in the Bible is never to be the law of the land.  Neither is it to be consulted when considering what should be the law of the land.  Christians and God-hating pagans alike come together and hold metaphorical hands when it comes to the principle of rejecting God's law as the proper moral and legal standard for this immoral and illegal country.
  • Closely related to the rejection of God's law is the associated principle on which there is also general agreement, namely, that Christians are to remain silent in the public square.  Christian views on various social, economic and political issues are not permitted.  The myth of neutrality reigns supreme.  Christians have adopted the myth of neutrality and put down the central truths found in the Bible in favor of a humanistic approach to running a country.  God-haters have convinced Christians that there is some common ground where they can meet and discuss issues in a productive fashion.  That notion is utterly false but the Christians have adopted it nonetheless.
  • Everyone agrees that free markets are dangerous and need to be regulated by government bureaus.  Strangely, this principle finds almost universal agreement, even among those who consider themselves to be proponents of the free market.  In advocating government regulation of free markets the citizens of this horrible country specifically ignore the fact that consumers regulate the free market far better than government bureaus ever will.  But the citizens of this land do not trust the consumers and they hate freedom so the government is called in to protect us all from evil, profit seeking corporations.  
  • Associated with the call for government to regulate the free market is the call for government to regulate all of our lives.  Almost everyone quickly runs to government looking for special privileges and powers over the others citizens of the land.  Whenever someone does not like something that might take place he calls for a career politician to do something to protect him and his interests, all in the name of "public safety and welfare," of course.  The people scream out for regulations and those who rule over us are happy to provide them.  Government has become the source of personal security, even though it is completely incapable of delivering that particular commodity.
  • Since 9/11 Amerikans are in total agreement that the primary job of government is to protect us from "bad guys," whoever they are.  The historic concept that government exists to protect the rights of the minority from the tyranny of the majority has long since been abandoned.  The historic concept that the government that governs the least governs the best is dead.  The accurate understanding that government is incapable of providing personal security has disappeared down the memory hole. In its place we have become a nation of sheeple who gladly give up our freedom in exchange for a specious promise of government provided personal security. 
  • The religious doctrine of Amerikan Exceptionalism unites all but the bold and crazy few who populate this land.  Nobody but the occasional Welshman believes that Amerikans are pretty much like everyone else in the world.....sinful human beings who, in our case, have way too much power.  Merely suggesting that we are not morally, culturally, militarily, philosophically, athletically and governmentally superior to everyone else in the world is seen as an act of seditious treason. 
I could go on with many more examples of how we are united as a nation but I think you get the point.  So when you hear some media outlet with an ax to grind telling you that we are a divided nation, just take a moment to consider that we are all adherents of the same religion.  We all worship the same Beast, praised be his name forever, amen.