Category Archives: OPINION

Things Opinionated

#MSMFAIL

Facebook asks, “What’s on your mind?” #MSMFAIL is what is on my mind. This morning I turn on Fake News, aka any channel on TV with a “news” show. They are talking about the Russian Hacking. Apparently the Russians had a sinister plan. The “journalist” looks into the camera and says, earnestly, “It seems they may even have been trying to cause (pause for effect – and then very soberly) regime change.”

O My God.

The MSM cannot stop themselves –

From wikipedia (hey journalists, there is this thing called the internet):

In formal usage, a régime is the form of government or the set of rules, cultural or social norms, etc. that regulate the operation of a government or institution and its interactions with society.

Wikipedia goes on to say:

Modern usage

While the word régime originates as a synonym for any form of government, modern usage often gives the term a negative connotation, implying an authoritarian government or dictatorship. Webster’s definition states that the word régime refers simply to a form of government,[1] while Oxford English Dictionary defines regime as “a government, especially an authoritarian one”.[2]

Contemporary academic usage of the term “regime” is broader than popular and journalistic usage, meaning “an intermediate stratum between the government (which makes day-to-day decisions and is easy to alter) and the state (which is a complex bureaucracy tasked with a range of coercive functions).”

So what, you may ask. Well, depending on how you look at the word, you could interpret our earnest journalist as telling us that Russia was trying to save us from the dictatorship that exists here in the United States. Or you could say Russia was trying to change our system of government.

My Point: Regularly scheduled elections are not “regime change.”

Hey earnest journalist, this is what regime change looks like:

regime-change-1

And this:

gty_syria_children_14_jc_160912

And this:

_78732243_2_man_child_getty_976

Regime change most certainly does not look like this:

votinglines_1458671621581_1054241_ver1-0_640_360-800x430

I am tired of the idiotic product put out by the networks.

Post Election Ruminations

Scribbled on Facebook the morning after – preserved for posterity in this noble newspaper

Some observations this morning:
1. #msmfail – I have been grimly amused by the freaking out of the main stream media – anyone who thinks they were unbiased in their coverage of this election is in denial.

As to their plaintive cry of “how did we miss this?” I urge them to look up and understand the idea of confirmation bias. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

2. Is there anything uglier and nastier and haughtier than a bigoted liberal?

3. Non-degreed white males are people too. The obsession with the coverage last night on the percent of non-degreed white males that voted for Trump was fascinating. It was like the media just discovered a new species. And the implication – only ignorant white people would vote for Trump, is elitist and dismissive.

4. In adventures in reaching for straws: several talking heads floated the idea that Hillary lost because ignorant white males were prejudiced against a woman president. Again I say: #msmfail and confirmation bias.

5. Lastly, both parties, wake up. The circumstances that resulted in this election result are the same circumstances responsible for the Tea Party movement.

Neither Republican nor Democrat understood the sensibilities that created the Tea Party movement, so they simply created a straw man and called it the Tea Party so that they could attack and destroy it. But, the simple reality is, there is no Tea Party, never was.

So what was this thing? The simple sense that “I don’t care what party you say you are affiliated with, your candidate doesn’t represent me, so I’m not voting for him or her.” Note – the Republican political machine did not select Donald Trump. To their befuddlement, their unruly populace selected Trump to run as a Republican. I am certain the predominant emotion from the political elite was, “The peasants are revolting.” And they meant that in every sense of the word.

#DemocracyWins

The Spiritual Advocate

BY Frater Bovious

CARROLLTON, Texas — Hi!

I’ve been pseudo blogging on a different site – a spin off from this one – it’s called The Spiritual Advocate. It has 10 whole posts up.

Toodles.

FB

Budding Theologian

Not to be confused with Buddhist Theologian

By Frater Bovious

The Global Exclaimer, being an attempt at an online newspaper, has lain fallow for lo these many months. There are many reasons, not the least of which is starting a new job, and starting a Master’s course in theology.

I am now employed as the Director of HR for Nautilus Hyosung America, Inc., a maker and distributor of Automatic Teller Machines.

I am also enrolled at Ave Maria Universityin Ave Maria Florida and pursuing a

Tom Monaghan - The Early Years

Master of Theological Studies (M.T.S.) degree through their Institute of Pastoral Theology. This is a Catholic University started by Tom Monaghan and so this is Catholic Theology. I state this up front for a couple of reasons:

  1. Many people used to follow this blog as a replacement for the late, lamented Print Edition of The Global Exclaimer – they may or may not be interested theology in general and Catholic theology in particular. So, they may want to un-join, un-friend, un-rss, or whatever. I would like to say I will write other articles which many had told me they enjoyed – particularly the Puppycat Page and the Cigar Notes. That may or may not happen.
  2. However, it might be worth hanging around for a two reasons –
    1. The Puppycat Page and Cigar Notes were – in my mind – at least philosophical in nature. And philosophy, classical Aristotelian philosophy that is, is a necessary precursor to faith. If people liked reading those sections, then, I can reasonably state that there is some interest in “things that matter” and this is because:
    2. Philosophy and Theology are interesting.

I have been asked to blog on a Catholic Blog called Joe Catholic, and am trying to decide if I should blog there and link here, or blog here and link there. I do know that I won’t have much time to do either – the course is intensive and requires copious reading and a fair amount of writing. And this semester the three classes will be fascinating, and it will be difficult for me to pull away from what I am doing to write. However, it always seems to help me to write as this seems to be when synthesis occurs.

But, again, this may be of little or no interest to any subscribed to this blog.

Regards,

Frater Bovious

“It’s my right, and I need it NOW!”


Constitution for Idiots #10

by Gary McCoy
Writer for the Global Exclaimer
 

I know, I know, you have all been waiting so patiently for me to finish up the Bill of Rights and I have been SEVERLY waning in my duties. Let’s pick up where we left off, shall we?

“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

With all that has been going on with our debt crisis, growing government, and a general woe over the entire world at this point; it seems that the more laws that are passed the fewer rights we are afforded. Strange because this little amendment here seems to say that just because a right is spelled out in the Bill of Rights for the people does not mean that this is ALL the rights the person has. Hmmmmmmmm. Really. I think this bit of wisdom is overlooked way too easily.

Using this amendment as our guide, what would a world look like that did not have this wisdom entered in the Bill of Rights. Well for one a government (state or Federal) would be able to argue that since it was not spelled out in 1-8 then the Constitution obviously deems that the government has the right to censure  the act of the individual. This of course would give government much more power than it already has, being that an argument for anything socially or technologically new would most likely fall outside the scope of the Constitution. It would also, therefore, negate the purpose of the Constitution’s Bill of Rights by limiting the effectiveness of the sovereignty of the individual.

This amendment has been argued for everything from stream diversions Barron v. Baltimore 1833 to Abortion Roe v.Wade 1973 . While you may not agree with the decisions in either case you do have to admit that just because the forefathers didn’t dream of these issues doesn’t mean that the government or judicial has the RIGHT to take away rights of EITHER party based solely on the fact that it is not enumerated.

Likewise we need to start evoking  this under used and under appreciated amendment in our current political climate. We keep hearing the 14th the 14th out there as a reason why the gooberment has the right to do whatever it wants, well how about we argue back the 9th? This is a handy amendment in many cases. I would like to start seeing signs that say I plead the 9th for a while. We need to explain to our law makers that just because they can not find anything said about an issue doesn’t mean it is their job or duty to squash and kill the idea. It may just be our RIGHT after all!

Weiner’s Weiner


 
Written by Gary McCoy
Writer for The Global Exclaimer
 
 

With Weinergate in full view, I found myself pondering an interesting thought. In this day and age of technology and the virtual world more prevalent than ever, do the same socialistic stigmas of  who is and is not promiscuous still apply?

What made me question this is the young lady that Anthony Weiner was “sexting”. She said in an interview that she had several different virtual lovers out there. She had never met any of them personally and had never actually had the act of sex with any of them. I heard one commentator call her a “lady of the evening” (the other bad word) and thought to myself, “SELF, is she really a S***? After all, the traditional view of the town whore is not new and usually reserved for someone who sleeps with others in lust rather than be in a committed relationship. Say a Hester Prynne.

Can you even have a relationship with someone in the virtual world rather than the physical world? We hear of people who have never met other than online and fall in love. So by that same string of theory, someone who has multiple “partners” online could be considered promiscuous.

Then I started thinking about all the people I know on different forums and blogs and how I would regard them as friends and I really don’t know anything about them other than a screen name. It is very strange that in many aspects we do not have to actually physically know a person to feel a bond to them. So if we can have relationships with others with no physical contact or visual point of reference would 2 consensual adults “sexting” be considered another form of a literal sex act?

As we progress with technology I think we are going to have to define what is and is not considered a relationship, cheating, love, lust, and a gambit of other feelings that we have in the physical world.

Yes Sir may I have another?!?


Constitution for Idiots #9

By Gary McCoy
Writer The Global Exclaimer

I want to apologize in advance for the shortness of this post on my analysis of the amendments but:

“Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”

UM DUH… Well I don’t want to be too short so let’s discuss this some more. *In all fairness I have done a little bit of why the framers would have wanted this in our Constitution*.  It seems that previous kings in England had a nasty reputation of taking people arrested and convicted, forcing them to pay incredibly inappropriate sums of money or land, and also subjecting them to humiliating and often horrible torture. I guess that too would make me think twice about rights I would have should I be imprisoned.

“Uh oh, 15 minutes till Judge Wapner “


Constitution for Idiots # 8

 
By Gary McCoy
Writer for The Global Exclaimer
 

Up until this point we have been talking about the really bad people and their rights in court. Now it is time to discuss the civil or not so civil courts. Ratified in 1791 the 7thAmendment reads:

“In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of common law.”

“In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved…” I know you have all seen an episode of Judge Judy, or the Peoples Court, or even JUDGE JOE BROWN (yes I know I am yelling but JUDGE JOE BROWN is just that awesome). Now of course during these shows there is no jury but clearly these fine citizens have waived their right to have a trial by jury. I imagine that during the time the framers were discussing this amendment, twenty dollars was a good sum of money and may have been considered claims on land or livestock. Today of course this would apply to just about anything and anyone.  Currently it seems that most courts consider Small Claims anything under $7,500 and would be for people with no need of an attorney. HOWEVER, if you do have a claim against another that does not involve a criminal act for say a car that was borrowed and wrecked, or back rents if you are landlord, or even a tree that fell on your car from your neighbor’s house, you would be allowed to have a jury hear the case and decide monitory rewards.

“…and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of common law.” So let’s say that you were watching a friends dog. And the dog ate the trash and had to go to the emergency room. you were being a good friend and paid for the surgery but your friend decided not to pay you back. You go to court, have your trial by jury, the jury says that you deserve the money back and awards you the funds. If your friend was able to take you back continually to other courts in the hopes that they find some sympathetic jury that will not make them pay; that would be BAD! So I say to the Framers, good job… GOOD JOB.

P.S. if you do watch any of those court shows, Shame on you and get back to work!

Albemarle Road church fined $100 per branch for excessive tree pruning | CharlotteObserver.com & The Charlotte Observer Newspaper

Albemarle Road church fined $100 per branch for excessive tree pruning | CharlotteObserver.com & The Charlotte Observer Newspaper.

(NORTH CAROLINA) – This is what happens when you don’t think it matters whether or not you vote or are politically active.

Since our system of government is designed as “by the people” it really is the government “by the people who seek power”. The balance to that lust for power is the voter that does not want to govern, but has chosen to be governed. We put these people in power – as public servants. As a motivated voter, you can fire your public servant if they forget whom they serve. But, you have to actually be politically active and actually vote.

If you don’t bother, this kind of nonsense happens. (tip of the hat to Frater Cowculus for alerting The Glob to this atrocity) Ψ

Jeff Jacoby: A ban on circumcision?


On the ballot in San Francisco this fall will be a proposal making it a crime to circumcise male children. If the measure passes, anyone convicted of circumcising a baby boy could be fined up to $1,000 and sentenced to a year in prison.

via Jeff Jacoby: A ban on circumcision?.
(SAN FRANCISCO) – I’m really curious as to the motive behind this intrusion into private lives. The article discusses both the fact that circumcision is an essentially benign practice with documented and accepted health benefits and the fact circumcision is deeply ingrained in the Jewish religion. The sophistry in use as evidenced by the term Male Genital Mutilation (MGM) is insulting – this practice has nothing in common with the act of violence involved in so-called female circumcision.

Again, I’m curious as to the motivation.Ψ