Things just keep getting curiouser and curiouser. When will we find President Barack Obama wandering around the White House lawn in his jamies? The White House just announced that 3,000 U.S. military personnel are going to be deployed to deal with the Ebola crisis in West Africa. This Obama now claims is the #1 threat to the USA. Is this insane? Or is this insane?
Only last week the entire nation heard Obama planned to deploy far fewer military personnel to deal with ISIS in the Middle East. So what is it? The truth seems to be that the #1 threat to America, to Israel, and to the free world is Barack Obama.
The sooner this man is removed from office the better. I know, I know, he has an insurance policy against that happening – Vice President Joe Biden. But even Biden may be better than what we currently have, and if POTUS is replaced soon enough we don’t have to deal with the silliness of Joe Biden in 2016 – he will have shot himself in the foot multiple times by then. In fact he will have shot himself in the foot so many times that even the Main Stream Press will have to report it. (I get the feeling that they hide a lot of this today in order to protect Obama.)
It seems that this sheer stupidity is fairly widespread among the Democrats. We all know about Nancy Pelosi and her ‘we must pass the bill to find out what is in it’ statement regarding Obamacare. We all know about Debbie Wasserman Schulz calling the Israeli Ambassador a liar, despite videos that showed the opposite. But have you heard that Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) said that the Gang of Eight’s immigration bill would have helped the cause because it would have allowed foreign trained doctors to leave the country to help with the crisis without jeopardizing their immigration status.
Here’s a thought: first we stop allowing people with contagious diseases, or countries that have known widespread contagious diseases, into the country, and also screen all potential immigrants for diseases. Why not tighter immigration laws to begin with? I understand that in the 1920s a potential immigrant could come to the USA and be turned away for a heart defect – now people with contagious diseases are allowed to enter. How things have changed.
You read that a right. It was the Mexican flag that was flown last Saturday on the occasion of a Mexican holiday parade (Eloy Fiesas Patrias), in which the flag was flown on a float it was in support of Democrat Party nominee for Governor of Arizona, Fred DuVal and Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick is a sitting member of Congress. Banners of both Democrat politicians were also on the float.
Governor Jan Brewer is term limited, hence cannot run for re-election. However the Republican Party is running Dough Ducey – I don’t know a lot about him but I did find a photo of Sheriff Joe Arpaio (American’s toughest sheriff). on stage with him (night of the primary?). He has been endorsed by Senators Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, John McCain and Jeff Flake along with former Senator John Kyl. Governor Brewer of Arizona and Scott Walker also have endorsed him.
While the float as created and run by Democrat volunteers, what does this tell you about Democrats?
“The only way to win a war is to be as nasty as the enemy.” Mallory (Gregory Peck), THE GUNS OF NAVARONE, 1961
For the benefit of President Obama and a great deal of the Democrat Party:
ISLAMIC: Of or pertaining to the religious faith and personal actions of the seventh century self-avowed prophet, Muhammad.
STATE: 1. Condition; 2. A nation or one of the governmental elements of a nation; 3. To declare.
NATION: A people living within established political boundaries or united under a central government.
SHARIA: “The Core and kernel of Islam” (Joseph Schacht) governing the actions of all who abide by Muhammad’s beliefs and actions and considered the fundamental duty of all Muslims, unifying the Muslim nation under the banner of Muhammad and the Quran.
From these four basic definitions, most rational people can agree that the group known as ISIS, or ISIL, or more recently (defined by the group themselves) IS – the Islamic State – represents a religious belief (Muhammadanism), a state (Caliphate-seeking Muslims), and a nation united under a central government (Sharia). Only the fool sayeth there is no religion in the Islamic State. Of course, our own government remains populated by fools. Fools that, historically, have not known the definition of a two-letter word, realize that the death of U.S. diplomats does matter, and that many people throughout the world inseparably fuse religion and politics.
Nor do members of our government – particularly the Leftist, Democrat Party – seem to realize that next year, 2015, marks the 100th anniversary of the death of 1,500,000 Armenian Christians at the hands of post-Ottoman “radical” Islamists, a harbinger to the world of rampant Muhammadanism (for effect, Muhammad ordered more assassinations than all of the 266 Roman Catholic popes combined). One and a half million deaths does not constitute “workplace violence” or “manmade contingencies”, it constitutes war – conflict between states, groups, and other organizations. The same party that refuses to admit that we are at war against (radical) Islam, are quick to accept that for forty-six years the United States proudly – and, largely, patriotically – engaged within a Cold War, another war where we had little to declare ourselves.
Therefore, permit me to explain a little bit about reality to our national leadership. First, the Islamic State is whatever they view themselves as and that entails an Islamic State – not, for example, a Roman Catholic municipality. Second, they therefore believe in religion, specifically the faith created and forcibly advanced by Muhammad ibn Abdallah, which permits zero tolerance of non-believers (or else Muhammad would not have murdered those that made fun of him). Finally, IS – the Islamic State now ruling most of Iraq and Syria – bears an active army consisting of arms formerly owned by the United States and most recently given to the failing government of Iraq. These tanks, aircraft, missiles, rifles, and uniforms are not meant to defend orphanages and hospitals from attack by worshippers of the Reverend Moon (or else they would not have expanded outside of Syria). These implements of war are being ruthlessly employed to wage war against “infidels” – any individual that stands in the way of the progress of the Islamic State.
Now that we realize what the true definition of IS, is, permit me to instruct you in how to deal with the abomination: you burn it out and send all adherents back into the Stone Age. You hunt down its members all over the world, no matter where they reside, and you pound the living shit out of them until they regret ever hearing of the word “Muhammad”. You keep after these people until the “decent” Muslims of the world reel back in horror and profess that their faith should more resemble modern Christianity than any proverbial cult that cannot accept competition. You teach the entire planet that whoever invokes the name of God without care will learn firsthand the prospects of Genghis Khan-esque “punishment of God”. And when a century passes from the last time that a single Christian, or Jew, or Hindu, or Buddhist, or even atheist fears to tread in Mecca, then you can begin to suspect that the war that radical Islam began 1,400 years ago may finally be over…
R.J. Godlewski (GOD LESS KEY) is the manager of Tactical Extractions, LLC, a threat resolution services company, and presently serves as the president of Roadsailor Security Corporation. He is a graduate of American Military University, holding an M.A. in Military Studies, Asymmetrical Warfare concentration and a B.A. in Intelligence Studies, Terrorism Studies concentration, both earned with academic honors. He further holds graduate and undergraduate certificates in Security Management and Explosive Ordnance Disposal, respectively. Mr. Godlewski is a veteran of both the U.S. Navy and U.S. Navy Reserve.
The headlines say it all it seems and here are a few I found on Obama’s 9/10 address to the nation about ISIS (incidentally not a word on Iran, the real threat to the Western world). Below in alphabetical order are headlines from news media, Left and Right, and a figure on the left who article was published in the right wing media (ever noticed how it almost doesn’t exist the other way), and a few comments.
Is Obama ISIS’s worst nightmare? (subtitled Can Obama destroy ISIS?) by Fred Kaplan for The Chicago Tribune.
We wish. This is what was really meant: Is ISIS Obama’s worst nightmare? The golfer-in-chief seems to act like it is 2009 and so does the author. The article concludes with a quote from Slate that “Obama is doing as close to the right thing as the mess of the Middle East allows” – but then did we expect the questions posed to be answered, or to for this paper to ever disagree with Obama?
So let me get this straight – this Administration is arming (via the CIA) and intends to further arm the rebels (who side with ISIS although technically they are not the same thing), i.e. the Administration intends to fight ISIS by arming ISIS?!?. Furthermore, Obama pulled American troops out of Iraq, but now it is going to “expand the overall campaign” and that will require putting American troops back in Iraq.
Obama’s speech on Islamic State gets mixed reviews in Divided Congress by Michael A. Memli, Lisa Mascao, in the Los Angeles Times. (Note: this article focuses on Congress and does not seem to take a position on the issue, but then they probably just wanted something to publish and being on the West Coast, yada, yada, yada . . ..)
Naturally one expects the Left to avoid criticizing Obama, hence it is surprising to see the article in The Washington Post by Jennifer Rubin seems to do just that. The Chicago Tribune tries to avoid the whole topic, in the title it is more focused on Obama’s reputation than the issue at hand, but concludes with a quote (see I didn’t say that – they did), followed by an exoneration of Obama. The Los Angeles Times also avoids any direct comment on the speech Wednesday night by focusing on the reaction of Congress.
Bill Maher, who has pretty solid leftist credentials, goes right for the truth about Islam and indirectly says that Obama is naïve. This article serves to mirror the right wing article about CAIR asking Obama to say ISIS isn’t Islam – although in fact ISIS practices a more Koranically correct form of Islam than most.
It is Mark Lander, who writes for The New York Times, who deserves a medal however because he has, in one short article, made it seem as if Obama actually does believe that he is responsible for defeating ISIS (or ISIL as Obama incorrectly likes to call it), while at the same time talking out of both sides of his mouth.
The weaving and dodging done by left wing media outlets also shows that they are mostly opposed to Obama’s ideas, but are just not ready to admit it yet.
On the Right
Only an article posted on Michelle’s Mirror (aka MOTUS – Mirror of the United States) refers to the fact that in June of this year ISIS gained control of nuclear material from the University of Mosul. They also have obtained ‘remnants of the former Iraqi, chemical weapons program.’ (You know the chemical weapons that didn’t exist when Bush was President.)
This article list Obama’s ‘strategy,’ which is:
1) air strikes, like in Somalia and Yemen
2) find some Arab allies
3) try to get the Sunnis “on message”
4) rebuild the Iraq army (we did that once already)
Good luck on doing any of the above, and it will take a miracle to do all four. In other words it is not surprising that his plans have no chance of winning, and are doomed to fail.
The right wing reports and make it quite clear that Obama’s ‘strategy’ (a strategy he didn’t even have two weeks ago), is ‘doomed to fail.’ They also show that Kerry is still anti-war after all these years, and that Britain and Germany are not willing to support America under Obama – wise move that.
Today we remember the events of 9/11/2001 when nearly 3,000 people, mostly (but not all) American, lost their lives because Muslim terrorists flew into the World Trade Center in New York City, the Pentagon in Washington, DC, and into a field in Pennsylvania rather than their Washington, DC target. While nearly everyone is familiar with the story of the brave New York firefighters who went into the Trade Center (many lost their lives too), few are familiar with the fact that there is an International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), a labor union representing professional firefighters in North America.
This union has approximately 300,000 members in 3, 100 locals and affiliates in the United States and Canada. Late on 9/11/2001 IAFF prohibited Canadian firefighter from entering the United States. This ruling did not affect volunteer firemen or those who worked part-time. There were a few professional Canadian firefighters who did not get the message in time – they later faced disciplinary action for going. Granted there might be some complications e.g. paying the firefighters, housing them, and insuring them for example. However, after five days the FBI, IAFF, and others asked them to leave. The full story, in some detail, can be found here.
The worse disaster in American history and our dearest and closest neighbor was largely forbidden from helping us. As I read this story for the first time numerous questions arose as to why. I still don’t have the answer/s – but it seems so wrong. There may, or may not, have been more survivors if the Canadian firefighters had been able to help. We will never know.
While recognizing the need to keep track of who is where, and paying, housing, and insuring the firefighters it seems to me that these issues should have been covered in the contracts and membership forms of IAFF. The plans of this union should have naturally considered the fact that we are neighbors and that in the event of a major disaster (however that is defined) this should have been covered.
I don’t know if that definition should cover hundreds or thousands of potential casualties. But I do know for certain that on 9/11/2001 up to 50,000 deaths were expected. I know too that there are hundreds, and probably thousands, of communities of all sizes at or very near the border between the two countries. I also know that there are factories, railroads, and other facilities in these places that might be in immediate need of more professional firefighters than are available on one side or the other of the international border.
Any competent leader (or lawyer), should have been prepared and included plans for such a crisis. But then this is a union – and unions are rarely if ever, interested in facts or reality, they seem to exist solely to gain as many benefits for their organization as possible, especially for their leaders, and to extort (or punish) management of the organization and/or the general public. This story does not look too good for the FBI either, another organization that seems more concerned with enforcing the rules, than maximizing their mission.
On 9/11 we mourn the loss of these victims, but if they are not to have died in vain, we must also learn ALL the lessons of that day and one of them is that emergency services are there to protect our populations. The IAFF didn’t do what it could have done, and we must acknowledge that and make changes. This is a change we can believe in.
“You Jews are always complaining of your own suffering, but you get fat off the poor, cheat the simple, exploit the virgin, pollute where you’ve exploited – America is one Big Jew! We are soldiers fighting a war. We are not criminals and we are not vandals but men of ideals.”
Such are the words spoken by a Muslim-Palestinian terrorist in The Death of Klinghoffer, an American opera based on the 1985 hijacking of the passenger liner, Achille Lauro, by the Palestine Liberation Front, and their murder of a wheelchair-bound, stroke victim – the Jewish-American passenger Leon Klinghoffer, on holiday with his wife and daughters. However, the words came from the mind of librettist Alice Goodman, an anti-Semitic, Jewish apostate-turned-Anglican priest, who found an “artistic” channel for her own animus, hatreds and biases.
Commissioned by five American and European opera companies and the Brooklyn Academy of Music, the composers have turned a heartbreaking event into musical entertainment. The story is of a malevolent crime of Islamic jihad (a crusade to kill for conquest), presented with consideration for the villains and indifference to the innocent victim. There is something deeply perverse – nay, depraved – in producing this for showbiz, as I see our once-great civilization sinking into the depths of a fascistic Islamic evil.
It is said that there can only be peace when the Muslims stop revering death the way Jews revere life. Islam’s militaristic, expansionist, religious, oppressive ideology revolves around subjugation, mutilation, and death – all that is antithetical to our Western civilization. As a nation we debate about length of prison terms, the death penalty, humaneness for animals, yet there are some will create, perform, and view a callous, political murder as “theater,” as well as provide a venue for slowly Islamizing the American psyche.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (aka, little Debbie), the Democrat candidate for the 23rd Congressional district (it includes Miami Beach) in Florida has done it again, and again. What has she done you may ask? Well, once again she has proved how utterly dishonest and spectacularly ignorant she is, and once again she has provided cover for the disgraceful Obama Administration.
If one goes to her website and looks under ‘Media Center’ there two sections I would like to point out, one is titled ‘Latest News’ and the other ‘Press Releases.' Now I for one cannot even begin to understand why she has the “Latest News’ section at all – I mean isn’t the internet, radio, and TV full of ‘the latest news’ and surely they are more recent than August 8, 2014 – the most recent article listed there.
Actually it isn’t even news – it is an editorial from the Sun Sentinel. So it is quite clear that she (and/or her staff) don’t know the difference between actual news and an editorial, even though the word ‘editorial' is right there. And is that editorial piece a doozy. Straight from the Sun Sentinel it discusses the case of Marine Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi (from Weston, Florida) who claims to have brought firearms illegally (although owned legally in the USA) into Mexico accidentally, which has resulted in his being incarcerated in Mexico for several the last months. I don’t know if he was careless and/or really did get lost and accidentally went to Mexico (and cannot even imagine why he would do it deliberately). However, the article, while admitting that the case has become an embarrassment for the Obama Administration, proceeds to justify the Mexican position.
The article then heads directly into the issue of the illegal flow of firearms from America to Mexico, but claims that Congress has done little to stop the deadly smuggling and blames this on the power of the National Rifle Association (NRA). It conveniently ignores the fact that it was the Obama Administration behind the flow of American firearms into Mexico, not Congress, not the NRA. It refers to the Fast &Furious sting as a ‘botched law enforcement operation’ – well you could say that, but it would be more accurate to call it a botched attempt by the Obama Administration to attempt to thwart the 2nd Amendment and to arm Mexican drug cartels.
Wasserman Schultz is lauded in the article for endorsing diplomatic pressure. So somehow it implies that as the issue involves a foreign government, diplomatic pressure would be put on the Mexican government by the State Department, now headed by the only American gigolo to become Secretary of State. Is this really a good idea? Is it likely to happen? Somehow I think not. Still fresh in this writer’s mind is the imprisonment of Meriam Ibrahim, the Sudanese Christian whose release from the bonds of Sudanese Sharia law was obtained by the Italian government so that she could leave that vile country with her naturalized American citizen husband and her two American children. The White House was silent on this story. Might we expect more silence on the subject of Sgt. Tahmooressi?
By posting this story on her website Debbie Wasserman Schultz seems to endorse it and to say, like the Sun Sentinel, that his case ‘should not be used be used to justify baseless accusations that the Obama administration does not care about Tahmooressi.’ But what conclusion are we to draw? America, once the beacon of hope in this world, was silent on the subject of Meriam Ibrahim, an innocent woman with every right to live in the USA. The suspicion that the Obama Administration will not care about Sgt. Tahmooressi is hard to ignore in the light of her story, and it is hardly baseless. Thus we see that Debbie Wasserman Schultz once again seeks to criticize her opponents and defend the indefensible Obama Administration.
The Press Releases are equally amazing – the one for September is a boilerplate condemnation of the killing of Steven Sotloff and her ‘profound’ expressions of horror, etc. But then take this one from July 2014 titled: Wasserman Schultz Statement on Recent Sanctions Against Venezuela, U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (FL-23) issued the following statement on the Obama Administrations recent sanctions against Venezuela. "I strongly commend the Obama Administration for taking action against the Venezuelan officials who have perpetrated egregious human rights violations against the citizens of Venezuela.”
Yet in May, the Huffington Post carried a story from Reuters (neither exactly right wing) that made it clear that Venezuelan security had taken about 250 people into custody for protesting the Maduro government. In the Reuters article (see here) a state department official said that the US does not want to be viewed as interfering in internal affairs of the country. If this is true, then what action was DWS referring to?
Once again Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) showed her true colors, and it was not a pretty picture. She also provided evidence of her lack of leadership. Last Friday in the Starbucks at Weston (Florida) Town Center, Debbie Wasserman Schultz (DWS) and a woman with her ordered drinks, and the other woman wasn’t happy with hers. The server who was apparently new didn’t handle it to her satisfaction, although he did offer to remake the drink. Their unhappiness led to both women leaving with what was termed by the on-duty staff “an attitude.” One result is that the five people working there at the time, when they learned of DWS’ identity, vowed that they would not vote for her. According to one customer who witnessed the event unfold, DWS acted like a “b****” and “looked like a fool in there.”
Any adult with even a modicum of common sense might have easily diffused the situation. This was Starbucks after all. Their mission is to “inspire and nurture the human spirit – one person, one cup and one neighborhood at a time.” Any adult capable of adult behavior could have stepped in, perhaps saying something to the woman or to the server. After all, Starbucks has an excellent reputation for customer service, and DWS could have suggested that perhaps the drink be made over, or a free coupon be offered (to compensate for their perceived failure) – one, or both, of these responses is pretty standard procedure in nearly every eatery in the country. This was an excellent opportunity to present herself as a mature adult and a peace maker. Instead, it seems she chose to behave with the indignation of a schoolgirl.
If DWS cannot handle a simple mistake or misunderstanding in a local coffee shop, how exactly can she be expected to handle the serious issues facing this nation? Clearly she cannot. Although anyone who is paying much attention realizes how completely incompetent she is and that she has not been good for the people of South Florida, the reality is even worse. She is not only the incumbent Representative for the 23rd Congressional District, she is also the current head of the DNC (Democratic National Committee). Debbie Wasserman Schultz is a post turtle* and needs to be ‘pink-slipped’ in November.
*If you see a turtle on a post you know it didn’t get there by itself, doesn’t know what to do while it is there, and doesn’t know how to get down. Turtles don’t belong on posts – it is that simple.
“Rather than allowing her to utter a single syllable in her defense, the thugs tied her hands and prevented her from moving. Treviño Morales stepped forward, grabbed a two-by-four, and, after a couple of practice swings as if he were batting clean-up, methodically began to beat her, beginning with her tear-stained face. Once released, the alleged traitor’s remains consisted of body fluids, viscera, and splintered bones so mangled, bruised, and blooded that it was impossible to recognize that she had a few minutes earlier been a sentient human being. The stunned and frightened onlookers got the point.”
The “stunned and frightened onlookers” were police officers. Corrupt ones, to be sure, but duly authorized municipal “peace” officers nevertheless. Nor was this incident representative of “distant”, foreign lands few people beyond aging geographers have heard of; it occurred in Nuevo Laredo – literal walking distance from Texas. And it did not represent a solitary incident, but rather a singular example culled from opportunities far too numerous to recite verbatim.
The incident above may very well become “standard operating procedure” for those groups and individuals freed from worrying about Angelina Jolie’s recent marriage or whether some other starlet’s in-the-buff photographs were heisted from the Cloud. In fact, those more nefarious groups that like to behead – or blow up – their adversaries often utilize the Internet to affect their trade. It remains little wonder that the Provisional IRA (PIRA), Spanish ETA, Colombian FARC, Mexican Los Zetas, al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, and HAMAS all employ similar tactics and technologies. When each group’s respective “experts” cannot visit one another, they simply share knowledge via the Internet or publish open-source materials for use by all. Latin American drug trafficking organizations are notorious for utilizing métis – competitive adaptation earned through trial and error and sharing such lessons learned from “continually changing environments.” These groups understand that we “normal people” will abdicate quickly when confronted with such sadism.
We observe such revelations emanating from the White House when the Obama Administration declares that after a great many years, it still does not possess a workable strategy for dealing with an ISIS group that devalues life to the greatest degree. Is not ISIS simply carrying on where Abu Musab al Zarqawi’s al-Qaeda in Iraq left off? Yet, those researchers evaluating gruesome beheadings in Iraq have been quick to suggest that the tactic may have originated in Mexico. Conversely, Mexican public authorities lay blame squarely upon the Iranians for initiating the practice. Both sides are inherently wrong.
For as long as there has been one “peaceful” person on the planet, there has been another individual quick to slay that person out of (real or imagined) grievance.  Often, these slayings have been of the most sadistic variety, such as when a young Palestinian teenager boasted on television of “slicing and chopping up his victims…after he had tortured them for days”. Far earlier, Herod literally delivered John the Baptist’s head on a platter to Herodias’s daughter. The atrocities did not stop with John, either. Many of Christianity’s most beloved saints died within the most horrific ways imaginable. On March 7, 203, Saints Perpetua and Felicity (the latter just having given birth) were sentenced to wounding by a wild cow and then eventually put to the sword for their faith. Saint Cecilia suffered through a botched beheading. Even Saint Valentine – take your pick of the three – was martyred.
Why is it that so many efforts by liberals to lift the black underclass not only fail, but often harm the intended beneficiaries?
In Please Stop Helping Us, Jason L. Riley examines how well-intentioned welfare programs are in fact holding black Americans back. Minimum-wage laws may lift earnings for people who are already employed, but they price a disproportionate number of blacks out of the labor force. Affirmative action in higher education is intended to address past discrimination, but the result is fewer black college graduates than would otherwise exist. And so it goes with everything from soft-on-crime laws, which make black neighborhoods more dangerous, to policies that limit school choice out of a mistaken belief that charter schools and voucher programs harm the traditional public schools that most low-income students attend. In theory these efforts are intended to help the poor—and poor minorities in particular. In practice they become massive barriers to moving forward.
“From affirmative action to welfare, a devastating examination of the real-life effects of good intentions gone terribly wrong. This thoughtful, lucid, and often restrained account of the wreckage produced by racial politics marks Jason Riley as one of the nation’s rising political writers.”
“Please Stop Helping Us by Jason Riley is a much-needed fundamental education on the facts about race in America. It is an honest discussion of race in plain English, without the evasive rhetoric and outright cant that have become the norm in these politically correct times. It packs a lot of facts and a lot of wisdom into 204 pages of very easily understood writing. I cannot think of any book that has said so much in so few pages since Milton Friedman's Capitalism and Freedom back in 1962. This book would be an especially valuable gift for someone who has just graduated from a college that pushes the usual politically correct line on racial issues. A few doses of the truth can work wonders.”
“Boom! A combative, conservative shot to the jaw of liberal dogma about black America. Riley is brash in calling out the phony leaders, the false prophets. He exposes the weak thinking behind so many of the smiling faces with good intentions that lead to bad results for those of us most in need of help.”
Get your copy now and buy an extra one for a friend or your local library. My copy will be donated to my local library as I do all review copies of books.
This blog is an exercise in the author's First Amendment Rights as pertaining to Free Speech with all the protections as afforded & granted by the Constitution of the United States of America.
The blog owner is not responsible for content of sites linking to this blog or sites that this blog links to.
Opinions quoted on this blog or left as comments on this blog, do not necessarily represent the opinions of the blog owner.
Opinions included in articles written by anyone other than the blog owner, do not necessarily represent the opinions of the blog owner.
If you are offended by anything written, quoted, excerpted, referenced, linked to ... on this blog: Then go somewhere else.