The television box was on, and I heard the latest holiday KFC ad, with the spokeschick burbling about their new "Festive Feast".

Festive

Feast.

Our language is cast adrift from all etymological moorings.

Happy Hollydaze!

Hope everyone had a marvelous Thanksgiving time.

Having had the term "rant" obliquely aimed at a Facebook comment (I was responding to something that had do be answered, and did so rationally), I started thinking about rants, primarily what a rant isn't. If I reasonably respond in disagreement to your point of view, that does not constitute a rant. To be pellucid, just because I don't agree with you, my answer is not automatically a rant.

NOT A RANT!!!!!!!!

(ahem)

-------------------------------------------

I am bugged by how few conservative, Constitutional black politicians there are out there. Alan Keyes was a man I supported several years ago, but he is not on the radar any more. Herman Cain is a possibility.
----------------------------------

Vox has been uttering dark utterances about the Tea Party for some time, but I have bravely whistled past the graveyard. Well, the Tea Party is being co-opted. The losses by Sharron Angle and Christine O'Donnell have made them gunshy about different candidates with odd comments. The Movers and Shakers are pushing to take a page from the Conservative playbook. Their socially conservative playbook. You know the one, the overwhelmingly popular and successful playbook that has done things like reverse Roe v. Wade.

The Tea Party leaders want to be Successful, and apparently do not see their initial muscle-flexing as Successful Enough. They want to do not only fiscal conservatism; they want to add social conservatism as well. The problem is, much of what flies as "socially conservative" does not fly as Constitutional.

War on drugs: unConstitutional
Abortion "rights": unConstitutional (pro or con)

These are most popular issues among social conservatives (read: conservative Republicans or Constitution partiers). They are not congruent with the stated Tea Party concerns of Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government, Free Markets. The Tea Party distinctives are threatened by same-old "conservative" interests.

For my money, Constitutional=Conservative.

Teal Party people, don't allow the Conservative losers to cause you to lose what made you a (comparative) winner this November. The fact that opponents or friends want you to change means that you probably shouldn't.

Just ran across a website "Blackdoctors.org". Actually, it ran across me in the form of a pop-up browser page.The site capitalizes "Black".

In true Hannity fashion, I ask "What would happen if we started "whitedoctors.org" to deal with the special medical needs of White people? What dreadful things would be written or said about the effort?

Perhaps "That's RAYYYYY-cist"?

(Incidentally, there isn't one.)

For your Holiday Travel wardrobe





















Order from aardtees(at)hiwaay.net


Black 100% preshrunk cotton tee. $20 including shipping.
(International orders slightly higher)


Sizes S-5X, because we are not The Gap.

The Dread Dormomoo and I were discussing the current kerfuffle over the TSA's special secure brand of molestation, and herself sagely opined that it is part of Government's ongoing effort to subjugate the citizenry.by public humiliation, to render us sheepish. This methodology has been used for years in pub...er, Government schools to control the kinder. The sharp-tongued harridan (or Teacher) will ridicule and verbally humiliate a student who is not measuring up to behavioral or academic norms, providing an object lesson for the rest of the class.

The sexually invasive methods of security screening favored by the TSA belong in a third-world...sorry, developing nation rather than the United States. You can thank the PC zeitgeist for this development. Israel, whose every neighbor wishes to be no more, has not had an EL AL jet to fall from the skies onto Jerusalem or Tel Aviv because they know what to do. It has been said that American security looks for weapons; Israelis look for terrorists. Because it is not considered fair to look for people who look or sound a certain way, we waste our time and efforts groping Lutheran grandmas and blond-haired, blue-eyed children looking for explosive bras or Underoos. The Israelis talk to passengers. They look for a profile. Three times they speak eye-to-eye to flyers, and remove the hinky ones. The inhabitants of Iraq and Afghanistan are swarthy, as are the Saudis, whence came funding for the 9/11 events. Is it beyond the pale to look for those who hail from these peoples, or do we remove everyone else, and leave the skies to the AY-rabs?

I suggest that we not fly. Vox encourages this, as well. If the airlines feel the pinch, perhaps the bottom line will help them resist the groping they endure from the Feds.

Behold the Singularity!

Because, well, why not?