KILLERS

I am singing to you 

Soft as a man with a dead child speaks;

Hard as a man in handcuffs,

Held where he cannot move:

__ Under the sun

Are sixteen million men,

Chosen for shining teeth,

Sharp eyes, hard legs,

And a running of young warm blood in their wrists.

__ And a red juice runs on the green grass;

And a red juice soaks the dark soil.

And the sixteen million are killing. . . and killing

______ and killing.

__ I never forget them day or night:

They beat on my head for memory of them;

They pound on my heart and I cry back to them,

To their homes and families, dreams and games.

__ I wake in the night and smell the trenches,

And hear the low stir of sleepers in lines—

Sixteen million sleepers and pickets in the dark:

Some of them long sleepers for always,

Some of them tumbling to sleep to-morrow for always,

Fixed in the drag of the world's heartbreak,

Eating and drinking, toiling. . . on a long job of

___ killing.

Sixteen million men.

~ Carl Sandburg (1878-1967)

In Honor of the Victims 

of the Horrible Events at 

The Boston Marathon

_______ A Meeting With Despair ________

As evening shaped I found me on a moor
Which sight could scarce sustain:
The black lean land, of featureless contour,
Was like a tract in pain.

"This scene, like my own life," I said, "is one
Where many glooms abide;
Toned by its fortune to a deadly dun ––
Lightless on every side.

I glanced aloft and halted, pleasure-caught
To see the contrast there:
The ray-lit clouds gleamed glory; and I thought,
"There's solace everywhere!"

Then bitter self-reproaches as I stood
I dealt me silently
As one perverse –– misrepresenting Good
In graceless mutiny.

Against the horizon's dim-descernèd wheel
 A form rose, strange of mould:
That he was hideous, hopeless, I could feel
Rather than could behold.

"'Tis a dead spot, where even the light lies spent
To darkness!" croaked the Thing.
"Not if you look aloft!" said I, intent
On my new reasoning.

"Yea –– but await awhile!" he cried. "Ho-ho! ––
Look now aloft and see!"
I looked. There, too, sat night: Heaven's radiant show
Had gone. Then chuckled he. 

~ Thomas Hardy (1840-1928) - 

Wessex Poems and Other Verse (1898)

BLOODBATH in BOSTON

Let nothing disturb thee 

Nothing affright thee.

God never changeth.

Patient endurance

Attaineth to all things.

In whom God pleaseth

In nothing is lacking.

Alone God sufficeth.

~ St. Teresa - Lines Written in her Breviary

Translated by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

POWERLINE

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/04/why-arent-more-people-repelled-by-the-left.php

WHY AREN’T MORE PEOPLE REPELLED BY THE LEFT?

APRIL 13, 2013 

by JOHN HINDERAKER 

Here is something I don’t understand: liberals are often revealed as vile, vulgar hatemongers–not all of them, of course, but far too many–yet they never seem to pay a penalty at the polls. Why is that?

Margaret Thatcher’s death has been the latest occasion for the Left to show its true stripes. All across the U.K., there have been demonstrations–vulgar at best, and violent at worst. In Bristol, lefties celebrating a Thatcher “death street party” started fires, destroyed property and battled police:

This evening in Trafalgar Square, liberals have turned out for a long-planned celebration of Thatcher’s death:

“We’ve been waiting a long time for this,” Richard Watson, a 45-year-old from eastern England wearing a party hat, said. “It’s an opportunity of a lifetime.”

As a huge effigy of Thatcher, with a hook-nosed and toting a handbag, made its way down the stairs in front of the National Gallery, the crowd erupted into cries of “Maggie! Maggie! Maggie! Dead! Dead! Dead!” and sang lyrics from the “Wizard of Oz” ditty “Ding Dong! The Witch is Dead.”

Here in the U.S., the last similar display from the Left was the Occupy Wall Street movement, but liberal violence and general hatefulness have a long and consistent history. Recall, to cite just one of many examples, the liberals who attacked buses containing delegates and dropped cement blocks on cars from a highway overpass during the 2008 Republican convention in St. Paul. It is notable that violent leftists are never denounced by Democratic Party politicians. On the contrary, as we have seen most recently with Kathy Boudin, they find them well-paid jobs as professors when they can. And it is not hard to understand why liberals tend to be so angry; nearly every communication that emanates from the Democratic Party is a hateful, over-the-top smear against Republicans.

So to repeat: I don’t get it. Why aren’t more voters repelled by the constant parade of vulgarity, hate and violence that characterizes modern liberalism?

Inner Invincibility

04/14/12

Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me . . . —Matthew 11:29

Whom the Lord loves He chastens . . .” (Hebrews 12:6). How petty our complaining is! Our Lord begins to bring us to the point where we can have fellowship with Him, only to hear us moan and groan, saying, “Oh Lord, just let me be like other people!” Jesus is asking us to get beside Him and take one end of the yoke, so that we can pull together. That’s why Jesus says to us, “My yoke is easy and My burden is light” (Matthew 11:30). Are you closely identified with the Lord Jesus like that? If so, you will thank God when you feel the pressure of His hand upon you.

“. . . to those who have no might He increases strength” (Isaiah 40:29). God comes and takes us out of our emotionalism, and then our complaining turns into a hymn of praise. The only way to know the strength of God is to take the yoke of Jesus upon us and to learn from Him.

“. . . the joy of the Lord is your strength” (Nehemiah 8:10). Where do the saints get their joy? If we did not know some Christians well, we might think from just observing them that they have no burdens at all to bear. But we must lift the veil from our eyes. The fact that the peace, light, and joy of God is in them is proof that a burden is there as well. The burden that God places on us squeezes the grapes in our lives and produces the wine, but most of us see only the wine and not the burden. No power on earth or in hell can conquer the Spirit of God living within the human spirit; it creates an inner invincibility.


If your life is producing only a whine, instead of the wine, then ruthlessly kick it out. It is definitely a crime for a Christian to be weak in God’s strength.

~ Oswald Chambers

http://utmost.org/inner-invincibility/

Sentinels of Spring

Shovels poised in frozen arms they stand

Noiselessly and guard the homeward paths ––

Obese, rotund, avuncular. The land

White around them drifts like bubble baths,

Moving not, however, as those do.

Enisled in sparkling crystal’s frozen mass

No one of them a mate will e’er pursue.

Stoically poised above the grass

Panda-like with eyes of coal they wait

Impassively, and do not even flinch,

Recoil or shrink at barbarous crimes of hate.

Instead, they wait for warmth, then inch by inch

Tired, shrinking, soundless mix with mud

Soberly to join the Springtime Flood.

~ FreeThinke - The Sandpiper - Spring 1996

QUESTIONS

The Spanish Inquisition

 What might be the difference between LEGALITY, MORALITY and COMPASSION? 

Do you see one as having greater value or a higher purpose than the other?

Are the three ever in conflict?

Do you believe that obedience to The Law should always supersede all other considerations?

FOLLOW UP 

To The 

RECENT DISCUSSION

 About “RACISM” 

"RACISM" isn't about RACE so much as it is about DIFFERENCE -- about STRANGENESS -- about ALIENATING BEHAVIOR PATTERNS -- about NOT doing "as the Romans do" when in ROME, etc.

The leftists, who like to portray themselves as more tolerant, more benevolent, more high-minded, more helpful, more enlightened than -- and in every way superior to -- "the rest" play the same game indulged in by the ancient Jews -- the Ku Klux Klan and Adolf Hitler, et al.

What is that game? The mistaken ILLUSION or DELUSION of acting on an assumption of innate SUPERIORITY -- a delusion that inspires AGGRESSION towards those perceived as "LESS" or "UNWORTHY" -- a passion to CORRECT the flaws in OTHERS while completely ignoring the flaws in ONESELF.

Leftists are no different from -- and certainly no better than -- anyone else. The only difference between the would-be reformers on the left, the theocrats of eld, and organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan, Aryan Nation or the Skinheads, etc. is the FOCUS of THEIR particular brand of hatred -- of THEIR aim to spark DIVISION and foment ALIENATION and ENMITY ------ of THEIR claims to innate SUPERIORITY, which are every bit as specious as anyone else's.

Unless and until human beings begin to understand that THERE IS NO "GOOD EXCUSE" for ANY KIND of HATRED and DIVISION WHATSOEVER from ANY source -- Black - White - Jewish - Gentile - Asian - Atheist - Religious - Tall - Short - Fat - Thin - Ugly - Beautiful - Smart - Stupid - Healthy - Diseased - Gay - Straight - WHATEVER ----- we are DOOMED to follow endless cycles of AGGRESSION, DOMINATION, SUBJUGATION, SUBMISSION, RITUAL ABUSE, and REBELLION --- a relentless pattern of ATTACK and REVENGE. A pattern that keeps us forever going 'round in circles.

If I call a Negro a Negro, that does not make me a "RACIST."

If I address an unmarried woman as MISS So and So, or a married woman as MRS. So-and-So, that does not make me a SEXIST.

If I express my distaste for a big, tall, muscular hairy-chested male prancing around in a pink satin gown flapping his arms in the breeze while loudly singing "I Enjoy Being a Girl," that does not make me a "HOMOPHOBE." Neither does expressing my sense of revulsion at the spectacle of a chubby woman defiantly sporting a crewcut while wearing engineer boots, baggy jeans, a grease-stained sweatshirt and chomping on a cheroot with broken, brown-stained teeth make me a "BIGOT."

It's perfectly all right to DISLIKE and ESCHEW lifestyles and modes of behavior we find abhorrent, but it is NOT all right to take it upon ourselves to PERSECUTE those things out of EXISTENCE.

Put as simply as possible:

The only TABOO we should permit ourselves would be making TABOOS TABOO.

The ONE and ONLY RULE we need to follow:

"DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE THEM DO UNTO YOU."

Article on Margaret Thatcher's death 

posted just below this item

About My Imputed Racism

Two Negroes by Rembrandt Van Rijn

Some time ago there was quite a brouhaha over my accusing Stanley Ann Dunham of marrying “an African savage.” I’m still astonished that anyone took offense, because savage has always been a legitimate term for natives of primitive nations of any kind. For the record: I don't consider American Negroes to be "savages," even if some of the inner city ones act that way.

What bugs the you-know-what out of me is the way certain perfectly polite, appropriate terms have been politicized –– by the left, of course –– and are now considered "bad words." It’s  a form of bullying –– purely a tactic designed to intimidate or embarrass non-leftists into submission. I continue to use these words very deliberately, because I think it's important to stand up to tyranny, which is exactly what Political Correctness is. I too have had black friends, and have respected them and loved them dearly –– but never because they were black. I care for them, because they are great people. 

It's the same with any number of Jews, Asians and Hispanics I've known and worked with. Only leftists love and adore Obama simply because he is a Negro.

By the way don't you remember Sidney Poitier's character Dr. Prentice was referred to by Katharine Houghton, his beautiful milky-white golden-haired love interest, as “a Negro” in Guess Who's Coming to Dinner? –– surely one of the the most "progressive" films Hollywood ever produced?

But once more I have to say that where I come from "savage" was a perfectly polite, standard term of reference used to describe ANY primitive people who lived very close to Nature who were illiterate, ignorant and unsophisticated. It was applied to American Indians, native tribes living in the jungles of South and Central America and Australian Aborigines as well as to sub-Saharan Africans. It was never the moral equivalent of "nigger" –– a word I never use, unless I’m quoting someone else. If I had ever used that word as a child, my mother would have washed my mouth out with soap.

And even "nigger" was not considered offensive in England, until it too was co-opted and used as a weapon by leftist activists. Before that it was used freely –– often as a term of endearment –– in reference to the natives of India. Joseph Conrad wrote a literary classic called The Nigger of the Narcissus, and Agatha Christie published a novel called Ten Little Niggers. These distinguished writers were not trying to be offensive to anyone; they were using the normal parlance of their time. 

And so it goes ... 

FYI:

Savage adj.

belonging to a wood, wild, fr. silva a wood. See Silvan and Silvatyic 

Of or pertaining to the forest; remote from human abodes and cultivation; in a state of nature; nature; wild; as, a savage wilderness.

Living in a State of Nature. Primitive, wild; untamed; uncultivated; as, savage beasts –– “Cornels, and savage  berries of the wood.” - Dryden.

Uncivilized; untaught; unpolished; rude; as, savage life; savage manners.

“What nation, since the commencement of the Christian era, ever rose from savage to civilized without Christianity?” E. D. Griffin.

Characterized by cruelty; barbarous; fierce; ferocious; inhuman; brutal; as, a savage spirit. Syn. –– Ferocious; wild; uncultivated; untamed; untaught; uncivilized; unpolished; rude; brutish; brutal; heathenish; barbarous; cruel; inhuman; fierce; pitiless; merciless; unmerciful; atrocious. See ferocious 

Savage n.

A human being in his native state of rudeness; one who is untaught; uncivilized, or without cultivation of mind or manners.

A man of extreme, unfeeling, brutal cruelty; a barbarian.

Mrs. Thatcher in great old age.

Former prime minister Baroness Thatcher dies peacefully 

in her suite at the Ritz 

after suffering a massive stroke at 87

Mrs. Thatcher in her prime

• The Iron Lady became Britain's first and only female Prime Minister

• Baroness Thatcher had suffered from poor health over the past decade

• Mrs Thatcher had been staying at the Ritz hotel up until her death

• Politician will have a ceremonial funeral at St Paul's Cathedral next week

• Last politician to be afforded that honour was Winston Churchill in 1965

• David Cameron: 'We've lost a great leader and a great Briton'

• Queen 'sad' and sends private message of sympathy to her family

• President Barack Obama: 'She stands as an example to our daughters'

• Family asks well-wishers for donations to Royal Hospital Chelsea

• MPs to return from recess early to pay tribute to former PM in Commons

During her days as Britain's prime minister

By MARTIN ROBINSON and SIMON TOMLINSON

View complete article:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2305751/Margaret-Thatcher-dead-Former-prime-minister-dies-87-massive-stroke.html

THE ELVIS HIT THAT NEVER WAS

Burka Baby, please be mine.
Shed your tent and be my Valentine.
Baby, Baby, baby, please let me in.
Drop that veil, c'mon let's sin.

Oh oh oh! Burka Baby, don't you torture me.
You know I want you bad, so let me see
What you got behind that heavy curtain.
Baby baby, through those slits you eyes are flirtin.'

If I can't have you, I'm just gonna die
You know you're gettin' hot, and so am I.
I can hear you hissin.‘ So, let’s start kissin.’
You just don't know what it is you're missin'

KABOOM!!!

Burka Baby, we just hit the sky!

When we hit the ground, we’re gonna die.

Burka Baby, 

BOOM! BOOM! BOOM! 

}}}}}} SPLAT {{{{{{{

GOOD BYE!

Transforming Life's Dissonance into Consonance by Sharing Insights

St. Paul's Conversion on the road to Damascus

Where and how do knowledge and subsequent achievement originate? What is inspiration? What was it that caused the first primitive man to use sticks and stones as tools to aid him?

“All of us are guilty of being ignorant in the circular patterns  we engage in with our conscious mind. But we need only to look deeper into our whole mind, where we are all connected to the source of infinite, purposeful, creative cosmic energy to jog ourselves out of the ruts 

For example, I suggest that when we look at ourselves on earth, we are not aware that we are moving with the earth, eastward at about 1000 miles an hour. If we look with our mind’s eye, however, we will understand this truth, because the earth, at our latitude, is spinning on its axis at just about that speed. Then consider in addition that the earth on which we stand is moving at an even faster speed in its orbit around the sun.

Next, look still deeper and your mind's eye will comprehend that our sun is moving still faster around the center of our Milky Way galaxy and our galaxy is only one of billions of galaxies moving eternally around the Universe, kept in balance and in place by the magnetic connection that governs all. We are a part of this infinitely large life, but are not to be oppressed by it, for we are in no way responsible for it. We are only privileged to participate in it.

What I am hoping to do, is to help others see more deeply into Reality with the Inner Eye each one of us possesses. Whether we examine an essay, a poem, a painting, a piece of music, or merely grapple with an idea that may be controversial or even revolutionary, there is an essential meaning at the heart of it that cannot be learned or understood by rote memorization from material gleaned from textbooks. We must engage whatever it is we examine with our whole mind, a process that requires tapping into our capacity to grasp insight and intuition. 

The best artists, writers and musicians never do what they do to show us how great and important they are. Their work is never about merely displaying their skill to “impress” others. Rather it has always been about sharing the excitement and joy they found in their unique discoveries in such a way that we experience empathy with what they felt with similar passion and intensity.

When this kind of communication succeeds, it is bound to help expand our understanding of Reality as it joyfully decreases our ignorance.

~ J. Erwin Soloman (born 1923)

FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS

1. Does the Homosexual Marriage issue concern you? Why or why not?

2. What impact, if any, do you think would the legalization, official recognition, and  normalization of Homosexual Marriage have on traditional marriage?

3. As it stands now, how does the Homosexual Marriage issue affect you, personally?

4. If you believe Homosexual Activity of any kind is truly sinful, does that mean you believe it should be proscribed by law? If so, should it be treated as a felony or a misdemeanor? What sort of punishment would you advocate?

5. What is your understanding of Bisexuality? Do you believe it exists? If someone is a true bisexual, does that mean he or she must suppress one side of their nature completely, or might it there be a legitimate way to accommodate both needs? If so, how? 

SUGGESTED POSSIBILITIES:

A. Live a “Double Life” in secret?

B. Marry another bisexual and pretend to be normal? 

C. Live a dissolute life as a single person devoid of commitment to a significant other?

D. Live a celibate life?

E. What other lifestyle choices might the bisexual have?

The Unimportance of 

the Gay Marriage Issue

_____ TOO SOON OLD & TOO LATE SMART _____

Before committing Marriage Gay People should take pause
And consider the implications of Community Property Laws.

Lust may achieve satiety
With or without propriety,
So why become a martyr
To receive the imprimatur
Of a dull Bourgeois society
Whose strictures you flee gleefully?

Intimate relationships of each and every kind
Are blithely entered into by mad persons love made blind.
The stress and strain of living close together every day
Demands incessant giving causing tempers soon to fray.

The quest to reach Equality considers not, of course,
The Agony -- and vast Expense -- that comes with a Divorce!

~ FreeThinke- 4/2/13

April 2, 2013

http://www.irishexaminerusa.com/mt/2013/04/02/the_unimportance_of_the_gay_ma.html

"For the Republicans to regain the Congress they are going to have to wake up and smell the coffee. Social issues are emotional weapons that the Democrats use to obscure the fact that they haven't one good idea on how to save our economy.”

By Alicia Colon - The Irish Examiner, USA

Announcements by potential 2016 candidates, Hillary Clinton and Rob Portman, that they now approve of gay marriage made headlines as predicted. Never once discussed, however, by advocates is how this issue has anything to do with the economic state of the nation today. Legalizing gay marriage will not improve the economy nor is it really that important to the average homosexual. 

Celebrity nuptials and endorsements may garner news coverage stressing it as a civil rights issue but ironically these come from a wealthier than average demographic. The average homosexual has concerns that are much more aligned with the general population –– jobs.

Nor will the laws allowing same-sex marriage impact our national security so why is it even being discussed as a potential hot-button issue for conservatives? Why are we seeing more and more articles on the discord in the GOP between the social conservatives and the moderates? 

For the Republicans to regain the Congress they are going to have to wake up and smell the coffee. Social issues are emotional weapons that the Democrats use to obscure the fact that they haven't one good idea on how to save our economy.

The Republicans have to shout in unison the words that Hillary Rodham Clinton shouted when she was asked about the dead Americans in Benghazi: "What difference does it make?" 

The media didn't hammer her about this callous response but of course they will go after all the Republican candidates tooth and nail so they have to learn right now how to deal with the lapdogs.

When the GOP candidates are asked what their positions are on the hot social issues like same-sex marriage, contraception and abortion, they should fire right back with the questions:

• What does that have to do with saving our country? 

• How are these issues affecting the economy? 

• Why aren't you concerned with that and our national security? 

• Why aren't you more interested in closing the borders to terrorists? 

• Why are you ignoring the continual threat against us by radical Islamists? 

• Why aren't you wondering why the State Department didn't respond to Ambassador Stevens' request for additional security before he was brutally attacked and murdered? 

• How come you're not interested in the Fast and Furious scandal in the Justice Department? Do you think that's just the name of a movie instead of the Justice Department and ATF giving weapons to gun cartels that ended up with hundreds killed and maimed including a U.S. Border agent? 

If you want to know our positions on social issues, read the party's platform. We are all pro-life and for the sanctity of traditional marriage. That's all you need to know. Now for once ask me an intelligent and pertinent question."

Okay, it's unlikely we'll ever have a candidate that can put the media lapdogs in their place. It seems that when we do have someone worthy like that, fate seems to remove them from the running. I still have my Fred Thompson for President button from 2008 and will always remember how he refused to raise his hand as a debate moderator asked the candidates about global warming. Mitt Romney and John McCain were among those who hastily pulled their hands back down after Thompson told the moderator, "I am not doing hand shows today."

When asked by ABC News' Christine Byun why he refused, he answered, "I just decided that I wasn't going to engage in any of this monkey business that they like to engage us on sometimes - making us look like trained monkeys reaching for peanut or something ... 30 seconds is brief enough and when they try to reduce your answer to just a hand raise - I 'aint going to play that game."

What a superb candidate Thompson would have made but alas, he dropped out and the only time I see him now is on television shilling for reverse mortgages. The ability to hush up the mainstream media should be a desirable skill for the next Republican nominee because it is the media that decides what the important issues for debate and these will always favor the Democrat.

... and so the propaganda begins and the GOP falls for it all over again. Last week Time magazine asks, "Why Republicans Are Saying 'I Do' to Gay Marriage." In the article, Zeke Miller writes, "Will the next Republican nominee for President support gay marriage? It is a question that was unthinkable years ago, but amid a rapid shift in public opinion and demographics, it is being seriously considered in GOP circles."

According to Mr. Miller, "Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus supported Portman's decision to change his mind on gay marriage when asked how the party will try to reach out to gays and young voters into the fold, saying it was no different than embracing the so-called Liberty movement championed by Senator Rand Paul. "I think Senator Portman made some pretty big inroads last week," Priebus told reporters. "I think it's about being decent. I think it's about dignity and respect, that nobody deserves to have their dignity diminished, or people don't deserve to be disrespected."

One more reason to get rid of the RNC chairman who ignores the fact that just six months ago, the Republican platform ratified its 2012 platform at the Republican Convention including a reaffirmation of its call for a marriage amendment to the Constitution and a defense of the Boy Scouts of America for banning gay scouts and troop leaders. "We applaud the citizens of the majority of states which have enshrined in their constitutions the traditional concept of marriage, and we support the campaigns under way in several other states to do so," the platform states. "We condemn the hate campaigns, threats of violence, and vandalism by proponents of same-sex marriage against advocates of traditional marriage and call for a federal investigation in to attempts to deny religious believers their civil rights."

The truth that the media is covering up is the very real hatred and violence demonstrated by the advocates of same-sex marriage. My nephew and his longtime partner were shocked at the obscenities and threats sent to me when I defended the Boys Scouts of America. However, I received just as much supportive correspondence from gays who apologized for the militants' inexcusable behavior and insisted that they do not represent the majority of homosexuals. In fact, many tell me that they have no interest in legalizing their relationships. Civil unions address most of their legal concerns in longtime relationships. The gay marriage hype is all about flouting the influence of religious institutions.

Nevertheless, more and more media coverage is being given to groundbreaking announcements from liberal organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics' new policy, citing research showing that the parents' sexual orientation has no effect on a child's development and is now for gay marriage. Hollywood chimed in with, "The Kids are all Right" with heterosexuals Annette Benning and Julianne Moore playing the lesbian Moms.

Let's have a real study that shows that kids raised with love develop fine regardless of the marital status of their nurturers but that having a mother and father in a loving committed marriage is still the optimum choice and one that all children deserve.

But once again the mainstream media is determining that an unimportant issue is all-important and once again, the stupid Republicans are allowing them to do so.

Alicia Colon resides in New York City and can be reached at aliciav.colon@gmail.com and at www.aliciacolon.com

FOUND IN A CHURCHYARD

Epitaph for Two Homosexual Lovers

We kept our counsel quietly, and thrived 

In secret reverie, while platitudes

And mockery from prejudice derived

Surrounded us with violent attitudes.
 

With faith sincere we never gave up hope,

Pursued our life together with true zeal,

And yet, we wound up swinging from a rope.

Our deaths made pseudo-righteousness seem real.

Love is eternal