The Countertop Chronicles

Today is Wictory Wednesday. Every Wednesday, scores of bloggers ask their readers to volunteer and/or donate to the Bush 2004 campaign.

Folks, there are only 18 weeks till election day and Hillary is already making clear what her, Fonda Kerry, and the rest of the socialists will do if they win – Take Your Things For the Common Good.

As we sit forced to watch Michael Moore in his gluttonous glory as the Democracts slather all over his feet, remember, you can work to help defeat these enemies of America and put our national security first.

If your inclined to assist, and desire to keep America free, contact the Bush Campaign or email me and I will make sure you are put in touch with the right people. Folks, we can win this if we work together.

If you’re a blogger, you can join Wictory Wednesdays simply by putting up a post like this one every Wednesday, asking your readers to volunteer and/or donate to the Bush campaign. And then e-mail wictory@blogsforbush.com so that you’ll be added to the Wictory Wednesday blogroll, which will be part of the Wictory Wednesday post on all participating blogs:

Today is Wictory Wednesday. Every Wednesday, scores of bloggers ask their readers to volunteer and/or donate to the Bush 2004 campaign.

Folks, there are only 18 weeks till election day and Hillary is already making clear what her, Fonda Kerry, and the rest of the socialists will do if they win – Take Your Things For the Common Good.

As we sit forced to watch Michael Moore in his gluttonous glory as the Democracts slather all over his feet, remember, you can work to help defeat these enemies of America and put our national security first.

If your inclined to assist, and desire to keep America free, contact the Bush Campaign or email me and I will make sure you are put in touch with the right people. Folks, we can win this if we work together.

If you’re a blogger, you can join Wictory Wednesdays simply by putting up a post like this one every Wednesday, asking your readers to volunteer and/or donate to the Bush campaign. And then e-mail wictory@blogsforbush.com so that you’ll be added to the Wictory Wednesday blogroll, which will be part of the Wictory Wednesday post on all participating blogs:

John Tant is confused. He recently joined a Lutheran Church and has now learned that when an Islamic Association asked the church to use its facilities for Islamic prayer meetings, the church committee was evenly divided about the request, voting 6-6 on whether to allow it.

This bothers him.

I know as Christians we’re supposed to do unto others, turn the other cheek, and all that rot. But how far does that go? I mean, it isn’t like we’re talking about another sect of Christianity…we’re talking Islam here. It’s a religion that, frankly, does not recognize the divinity of Jesus Christ. Now that’s all fine, their choice, blah blah. But does my duty as a Christian extend to providing them facilities to exercise their choices which run in direct opposition to the very principles of the facility itself? I don’t think so. I know I’m running a little close to hyperbole here, but suppose there was a group of people who worshipped goats. Wouldn’t it run counter to my faith to provide them a place to teach and/or indulge in goat worship?

I think it would. And I think the principle of having an Islamist group using a Christian church for their services in incompatible with the existence of the church. It’s not like it’s a non-denominational building…it’s unabashedly Christian. So it seems like one of those basic things to me, and yet six members of the committee voted to approve the request. And that’s disturbing to me. The thing is, if you toe the Lefty line, it’s nice and “inclusive” to grant it, but I think it cheapens the entire reason for the church’s existence. In other words, I think the committee is coming close to sacrificing faith for a PR move.

Plus, I’d assume the Islamic group would take issue with the large crosses in the church, along with the stained glass pieces depicting various Bible passages. What, would they be covered up and/or taken down? And what does it say about us that we’d allow such a thing to happen in our church?

Hey, I am nowhere near as offended by this as he is. But what can I say, I am an Episcopalian. But the reason I don’t mind the request being granted is because I would see it as an opportunity to convert these lost souls.

If they want to use the Church, fine. But their use of the Church should come with the understanding that all the Christians who belong at the Church can use the opportunity to sway the godless Muslims from their path of sin to one of redemption. Pass Bibles out to them, read Bible verses, engage them in biblical discussions, compare the peace and transquility that Christ brings to the murder and mayhem that Islam stands for. Baptize them.

Heck, even serve them little pork sandwhiches.

John Tant is confused. He recently joined a Lutheran Church and has now learned that when an Islamic Association asked the church to use its facilities for Islamic prayer meetings, the church committee was evenly divided about the request, voting 6-6 on whether to allow it.

This bothers him.

I know as Christians we’re supposed to do unto others, turn the other cheek, and all that rot. But how far does that go? I mean, it isn’t like we’re talking about another sect of Christianity…we’re talking Islam here. It’s a religion that, frankly, does not recognize the divinity of Jesus Christ. Now that’s all fine, their choice, blah blah. But does my duty as a Christian extend to providing them facilities to exercise their choices which run in direct opposition to the very principles of the facility itself? I don’t think so. I know I’m running a little close to hyperbole here, but suppose there was a group of people who worshipped goats. Wouldn’t it run counter to my faith to provide them a place to teach and/or indulge in goat worship?

I think it would. And I think the principle of having an Islamist group using a Christian church for their services in incompatible with the existence of the church. It’s not like it’s a non-denominational building…it’s unabashedly Christian. So it seems like one of those basic things to me, and yet six members of the committee voted to approve the request. And that’s disturbing to me. The thing is, if you toe the Lefty line, it’s nice and “inclusive” to grant it, but I think it cheapens the entire reason for the church’s existence. In other words, I think the committee is coming close to sacrificing faith for a PR move.

Plus, I’d assume the Islamic group would take issue with the large crosses in the church, along with the stained glass pieces depicting various Bible passages. What, would they be covered up and/or taken down? And what does it say about us that we’d allow such a thing to happen in our church?

Hey, I am nowhere near as offended by this as he is. But what can I say, I am an Episcopalian. But the reason I don’t mind the request being granted is because I would see it as an opportunity to convert these lost souls.

If they want to use the Church, fine. But their use of the Church should come with the understanding that all the Christians who belong at the Church can use the opportunity to sway the godless Muslims from their path of sin to one of redemption. Pass Bibles out to them, read Bible verses, engage them in biblical discussions, compare the peace and transquility that Christ brings to the murder and mayhem that Islam stands for. Baptize them.

Heck, even serve them little pork sandwhiches.

My parents taught me the golden rule at an early age

Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do To You

To me, the loss of civility in this country has coincided with the apparant failure of people to follow this rule and teach it to their children. This strikes me as especially sad and something that we should all strive to resolve.

The Golden Rule, which some may note, pretty much encompasses common sense. To me, it seems like the baseline for common sense, the point from which all of our actions, collectivly as society, should evolve. For that reason, I have long subscribed to the notion that the Golden Rule can be both guidance on how to live your life as well as guideance on how to punish transgression. Sort of like the notion of an eye for an eye.

Well, sadly, I was reminded of this today as I learned about the depths of cruelty some in our society have found. It seems that a group of teenagers, bored by the loss of imagination sowed through reliance on video games and immune to common sense and the suffering of others through the constant exposure to violence in the same video games and Hollyweird movies, decided it would be fun to

set fireworks off in the mouths of puppies.

Puppies!!! 4 an 1/2 month old Labrador puppies.

Six of them died.

When they find these scum bags the only punishment that seems fitting to me is to shove a bunch of fireworks in THEIR mouths, strapped them down, and see how it feels.

And if they survive – then we can just beat them to a bloody pulp till their no more.

Sorry, but I really have no patience for cruelty to animals, especially helpless puppies. Bastards. Ruined my day.

My parents taught me the golden rule at an early age

Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do To You

To me, the loss of civility in this country has coincided with the apparant failure of people to follow this rule and teach it to their children. This strikes me as especially sad and something that we should all strive to resolve.

The Golden Rule, which some may note, pretty much encompasses common sense. To me, it seems like the baseline for common sense, the point from which all of our actions, collectivly as society, should evolve. For that reason, I have long subscribed to the notion that the Golden Rule can be both guidance on how to live your life as well as guideance on how to punish transgression. Sort of like the notion of an eye for an eye.

Well, sadly, I was reminded of this today as I learned about the depths of cruelty some in our society have found. It seems that a group of teenagers, bored by the loss of imagination sowed through reliance on video games and immune to common sense and the suffering of others through the constant exposure to violence in the same video games and Hollyweird movies, decided it would be fun to

set fireworks off in the mouths of puppies.

Puppies!!! 4 an 1/2 month old Labrador puppies.

Six of them died.

When they find these scum bags the only punishment that seems fitting to me is to shove a bunch of fireworks in THEIR mouths, strapped them down, and see how it feels.

And if they survive – then we can just beat them to a bloody pulp till their no more.

Sorry, but I really have no patience for cruelty to animals, especially helpless puppies. Bastards. Ruined my day.

Jeff Soyer at Alphecca is reporting on a disturbing incident over the weekend at an Ohio Gay Rights parade where members of the pro second amendment Pink Pistols were assaulted by liberal left goonies from the gay lobby, goosestepping along with those other Donk extremists the gun grabbers. Hell in a handbasket also has some first hand reporting.

Seems these people celebrate diversity, except when it involves opinions other than their own.

Initially three, then later, four members of the Central Ohio Pink Pistols, a group promoting the safe handling of firearms in the GLBT community, were threatened by the Executive Director of Stonewall Columbus, who wielded a 2-foot club, and up to 30 volunteer security personnel at the Stonewall Columbus Pride Event on Saturday, June 26. The Pink Pistols were repeatedly ordered to surrender their legally-owned and carried firearms by a steadily-growing army of guards. Knowing the law was on their side, the Pink Pistols refused to surrender their property or knuckle under to illegal threats of violence, search, and seizure by Stonewall Columbus personnel. Police were summoned at Pink Pistols request. No firearms were surrendered or confiscated, and no arrests were made, as no laws were broken.

So much for peace, love and happiness.

Executive Director Kate Anderson’s actions CLEARLY amount to an intentional tort – Assault. The tort of assault (as opposed to criminal assault) requires only the following –

1. An intentional, unlawful threat or “offer” to cause bodily injury to another by force;

She offered to remove their weapons by force.

2. Under circumstances which create in the other person a well-founded fear of imminent peril;

She approached and surrounded them with her goons and made her intention to remove their weapons (and touch their bodies) clear.

3. Where there exists the apparent present ability to carry out the act if not prevented.

Not only did she approach them with 20 goons (each of whom is also liable for damages under a tort suit) but she was carrying (and clearly displaying) what sounds like a brutal weapon while acting in a manner indicating her intent to use it against them.

In addition to suing Ms. Anderson personally, the Pink Pistols should also sue the organization hosting the event, as well as each one of the security guards. Since Ms. Anderson had prior knowledge that her actions were not only illegal and unfounded, but also outrageous, I would seek punitive damages against both her and the Stonewall Organization.

I’d also sue the city’s police department for their failure to arrest her and for allowing the situation to continue. Their actions, especially their recomendation that the Pink Pistols leave the scene peacefully, clearly amount to squashing their rights to occupy a public space. However, since the police were generally helpful I wouldn’t seek millions, just a nuisance suit to educate them. They should seek $1 or some other token amount but force the city to litigate the issue or reach a favorable settlement setting a firm precedent for future occaisions.

The press attention the Pink Pistols get will be tremendous, the Ms. Anderson will look like the violent goon she seems to be, and the city will be embarrassed about not protecting citizens from a gang of liberal criminals.

Of course, thats just my offhand thoughts. An Ohio lawyer might advise them differently.

Jeff Soyer at Alphecca is reporting on a disturbing incident over the weekend at an Ohio Gay Rights parade where members of the pro second amendment Pink Pistols were assaulted by liberal left goonies from the gay lobby, goosestepping along with those other Donk extremists the gun grabbers. Hell in a handbasket also has some first hand reporting.

Seems these people celebrate diversity, except when it involves opinions other than their own.

Initially three, then later, four members of the Central Ohio Pink Pistols, a group promoting the safe handling of firearms in the GLBT community, were threatened by the Executive Director of Stonewall Columbus, who wielded a 2-foot club, and up to 30 volunteer security personnel at the Stonewall Columbus Pride Event on Saturday, June 26. The Pink Pistols were repeatedly ordered to surrender their legally-owned and carried firearms by a steadily-growing army of guards. Knowing the law was on their side, the Pink Pistols refused to surrender their property or knuckle under to illegal threats of violence, search, and seizure by Stonewall Columbus personnel. Police were summoned at Pink Pistols request. No firearms were surrendered or confiscated, and no arrests were made, as no laws were broken.

So much for peace, love and happiness.

Executive Director Kate Anderson’s actions CLEARLY amount to an intentional tort – Assault. The tort of assault (as opposed to criminal assault) requires only the following –

1. An intentional, unlawful threat or “offer” to cause bodily injury to another by force;

She offered to remove their weapons by force.

2. Under circumstances which create in the other person a well-founded fear of imminent peril;

She approached and surrounded them with her goons and made her intention to remove their weapons (and touch their bodies) clear.

3. Where there exists the apparent present ability to carry out the act if not prevented.

Not only did she approach them with 20 goons (each of whom is also liable for damages under a tort suit) but she was carrying (and clearly displaying) what sounds like a brutal weapon while acting in a manner indicating her intent to use it against them.

In addition to suing Ms. Anderson personally, the Pink Pistols should also sue the organization hosting the event, as well as each one of the security guards. Since Ms. Anderson had prior knowledge that her actions were not only illegal and unfounded, but also outrageous, I would seek punitive damages against both her and the Stonewall Organization.

I’d also sue the city’s police department for their failure to arrest her and for allowing the situation to continue. Their actions, especially their recomendation that the Pink Pistols leave the scene peacefully, clearly amount to squashing their rights to occupy a public space. However, since the police were generally helpful I wouldn’t seek millions, just a nuisance suit to educate them. They should seek $1 or some other token amount but force the city to litigate the issue or reach a favorable settlement setting a firm precedent for future occaisions.

The press attention the Pink Pistols get will be tremendous, the Ms. Anderson will look like the violent goon she seems to be, and the city will be embarrassed about not protecting citizens from a gang of liberal criminals.

Of course, thats just my offhand thoughts. An Ohio lawyer might advise them differently.

Surely the Washington Post’s report that a heavily armed gang robbed its sixth bank is mistaken. I mean, aren’t guns outlawed in D.C.

What kind of person would dare break that law?
Certainly not a bank robber!

Surely the Washington Post’s report that a heavily armed gang robbed its sixth bank is mistaken. I mean, aren’t guns outlawed in D.C.

What kind of person would dare break that law?
Certainly not a bank robber!

Add to the list of organizations I will never do business with, th epublishing house of Alfred A. Knopf who are know advocating the assassination of President Bush.

They should be ashamed of themselves. May they, and Nicholson Baker burn eternally in hell.

Add to the list of organizations I will never do business with, th epublishing house of Alfred A. Knopf who are know advocating the assassination of President Bush.

They should be ashamed of themselves. May they, and Nicholson Baker burn eternally in hell.

A group of Pink Pistols was subjected to unwarranted and illegal harrassment and thuggery by confirmed members of the Left Wing Loony Brigade at a Gay Pride Parade. The Pink Pistol’s a group of gun toting homosexuals who refuse to be victims of unwarranted attacks, believing self preservation is a personal responsibility, not something to rely upon the police state to provide, were invited to march in the parade with the Buckeye Region Veterans for Equal Rights.

The parade itself was without incident. But trouble occurred while three of the Pink Pistols were having lunch at the festival site afterwards. According to sources, about halfway through lunch, the first two staff persons, one bearing a 2-foot long, inch-thick truncheon (which she referred to dubiously as a “keychain”, by virtue of the split keyring and key at one end), accosted the group with the statement: “I thought I told YOU PEOPLE not to bring firearms in here?”

…

Then she said, “I’m going to confiscate those firearms, turn them over to me right now!”

The Pink Pistols responded that they would do no such thing. Ms. Anderson repeated that they must turn over their weapons, and they would get them back after the event.

. . .

Ms. Anderson retreated briefly and returned with 10 security guards. She again insisted they surrender their firearms. Still, the Pink Pistols refused. More guards were called, until approximately 30 security guards surrounded the three Pink Pistols. Ms. Anderson at this time brandished her truncheon and demanded once again that the Pink Pistols either turn over their firearms or she would take them, but the Pink Pistols once again refused.

Kim Rife recalls: “I have a sense about these things, and I think her ‘plan’ was to ’subdue’ us.

A group of Pink Pistols was subjected to unwarranted and illegal harrassment and thuggery by confirmed members of the Left Wing Loony Brigade at a Gay Pride Parade. The Pink Pistol’s a group of gun toting homosexuals who refuse to be victims of unwarranted attacks, believing self preservation is a personal responsibility, not something to rely upon the police state to provide, were invited to march in the parade with the Buckeye Region Veterans for Equal Rights.

The parade itself was without incident. But trouble occurred while three of the Pink Pistols were having lunch at the festival site afterwards. According to sources, about halfway through lunch, the first two staff persons, one bearing a 2-foot long, inch-thick truncheon (which she referred to dubiously as a “keychain”, by virtue of the split keyring and key at one end), accosted the group with the statement: “I thought I told YOU PEOPLE not to bring firearms in here?”

…

Then she said, “I’m going to confiscate those firearms, turn them over to me right now!”

The Pink Pistols responded that they would do no such thing. Ms. Anderson repeated that they must turn over their weapons, and they would get them back after the event.

. . .

Ms. Anderson retreated briefly and returned with 10 security guards. She again insisted they surrender their firearms. Still, the Pink Pistols refused. More guards were called, until approximately 30 security guards surrounded the three Pink Pistols. Ms. Anderson at this time brandished her truncheon and demanded once again that the Pink Pistols either turn over their firearms or she would take them, but the Pink Pistols once again refused.

Kim Rife recalls: “I have a sense about these things, and I think her ‘plan’ was to ’subdue’ us.

Its official. Hillary wants John Kerry to lose.

“Many of you are well enough off that … the tax cuts may have helped you,” Sen. Clinton said. “We’re saying that for America to get back on track, we’re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”