CONSERVATIVE TALK RADIO!

Randomly drawing from a list of over 500 women bloggers and by sheer coincidence I click on what must be the only two conservative blogs on the entire list.
Also one was run exclusively by men.
Clearly this list doesn't have a very thorough screening process.
This is Anna.
My EVE Online character is named Anna and she's been something of a bitch lately so I feel especially angry at this Anna.
I'm projecting and NO ONE CAN STOP ME.

This is how the Electoral College is supposed to work.  Each state being a battleground between the candidates.  To ensure each state has a voice and impact on the selection of a President.  But Tuesday it did not happen that way.

Turning my titanic intellect to this issue I have determined the perfect system for determining Caesar.
Every state will be partitioned into one of thirteen districts of roughly equal population. Each district will have an elector (selected by straight popular vote). Each elector will have one vote for president.
However, each elector is in fact pitting his vote against the elector opposite to him in the circle--
so two can cancel thirteen's vote out, two can cancel twelve's vote, etc. The choices are for one candidate or another or the candidate can abstain from voting.
Only one's vote isn't canceled out. The first elector is the pontifex maximus who holds the position for life and is selected through a labyrinthine process I haven't yet determined.

So where do we go from here?  Either we toss away the last bulwark against a scared voting populace and do away with the Electoral College to embrace a national popular vote.

You're bitching about battleground states but that would just ensure the battlegrounds would shift to New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, California, Texas, etc.
That might be better than letting Ohio and Florida decide the election but it wouldn't, in fact, correct the problem you state.
My solution would.

Or your fifteen minutes are used up.  That is what I think when I contemplate Dr. Karen King's possibly earth shattering discovery.

Oh I read this article in Smithsonian.
I read Smithsonian. That's why they let me teach children.
Apparently Dr. Karen King discovered this papyrus in Egypt or wherever they find this bullshit that is from the way long ago time and it contains reference to Jesus' wife.
Needless to say Christers are angry.

Dr. King claims this scrap of papyrus has Coptic writing and is from the 4th Century.

Side note Coptic Christianity is separate from Roman Catholic/Christian and Eastern Orthodox but shares more with Eastern Orthodox.  It is a faith predominately found in Egypt. 

...
Thanks. Couldn't guess that Coptic Christianity is primarily practiced in Egypt.
Not with a name like Coptic or anything.
Did you know Greek Orthodoxy is primarily practiced in Greece?

Dr. King says this fragment refers to a woman named Mary as being Yeshua bin Yusef/Jesus's wife.  That would be a monumental upheaval to more than one billion Christians worldwide if verified.  Therein lies the rub.  Dr. King has not yet exercised due diligence in verifying the papyrus is authentic.

She didn't actually say it was authentic, though. She just said "well it seems I found this papyrus that appears to be from the 4th century that says Jesus was married."
I guess that is kind of her fault for assuming people wouldn't turn into shit chucking apes about it but the fact remains she didn't specifically state she'd found the missing Bible link.

A Reuters photographer caught President Obama right behind his favorite crutch, a teleprompter.  So like others in the blogosphere decided to have fun with it.

Fans of Masamune Shirow's Ghost in the Shell will recognize what I Photoshopped in.  I couldn't resist. 

It was a picture of the Laughing Man logo over Obama's head and I can say having watched the show it makes 0 sense in or out of context so I haven't bothered including the picture because I have 100% of the requisite knowledge to understand this joke (there aren't enough sarcasm quotes in the world to put around the word joke so I won't even try) and I still don't get it so I doubt attaching the picture will aid in anyone's understanding.
The Laughing Man (the first time)  hacked peoples' cyber brains so they couldn't see the faces of people committing crimes.
But then in a twist it turns out the Laughing Man is at least partially memetic as he didn't commit the later crimes or hacking jobs and it was other, unrelated people.
The entire show is a commentary on the nature of perspective and understanding and the effect of bias on memory and knowledge. That's just one of about a dozen messages the show had, like:
the nature of man
the effect of technology on the human condition
the nature of memory
the nature of cognition
the purpose and goal of terrorism
the hypocrisy of the drug industry
to say this woman probably didn't understand Ghost in the Shell is a crushing understatement.
You'd likely miss out on half of these messages if you didn't do the required homework of reading all of J.D. Salinger's writings (including the short stories that no one reads [even though these are his best work]) and I doubt our friend did.
Ascribing a political bend to Ghost in the Shell by itself is pretty stupid because it's basically apolitical and if I had to do it I would call it left leaning so this isn't really the analogy you want to be drawing here.
If the analogy made sense in the first place.

Back in 1934 Robert E. Howard help create a whole new genre of sword fantasy, the fearsome woman warrior.

... Fearsome warrior women?
Invented in 1934.
Amazons?
What?
No, man, 1934.
Oh that story of Mulan is actually way older than the Disney movie?
Oh, shit?
Uhhh, wow.

 Red Sonya/Red Sonja had another impact in the world of fiction.  More than a new genre was created, a new term was also birthed.  From thence onwards any story that featured a woman warrior in skimpy armor was called a 'Chick in Chainmail' story.

I just wrote a half page thesis on the themes of Ghost in the Shell so I think my litnerd status is solidified for this entry and I can safely say I have never heard that term before right now.
I'm not saying you made it the fuck up but you made it the fuck up.

So where is this going this post?  Is it supposed to be just on fiction and fantasy?  Not really.  Like the authors in Esther Friesner's book, the United States Army has come to a realization of a different sort, body armor designed for men really does not properly fit all the women in the military.

... Yeah, of course.
Why the fuck not?

I just have a problem with the Army invoking another fictional female warrior in their attempt to sell the new designs - Xena.  One thing I can say is, if the new armor is based on the Xena armor then the US military won't see any chicks in high-tech chainmail. 

Why?
Why do you have a problem with that?
Lots of guns are named after Roman or Greek gods.
Why?
Because the US Army knows who kicks ass, that's what.
M61 Vulcan because when it goes off it's like Vulcan punching you square in the scrot.
Gotta make some body armor for ladybros?
Name it after the ladybro of modern TV, Xena.

This Friday Georgetown University signaled how far they have strayed from the Jesuit path to knowledge and wisdom. 

Yeah, the Christian path to knowledge and wisdom and yet not three posts ago you invoked Themis, goddess of justice, to express how angry you were about some bullshit grave injustice.
Doesn't look very Christian to me.

Something to ponder:

Iosef Stalin was a Failed seminarian.
Fidel Castro was a Failed major league pitcher.
Hugo Chavez was a Failed coup plotter.
Adolph Hitler was a Failed artist.
Joseph Goebbels was a Failed chicken farmer.

Notice what they all have in common? 

... People try many different things before finding their niche?
I mean holy fuck, what do you even mean by that?
Successful dictators/propagandists (Goebbels is the odd one out on this list) failed at one thing so therefore they became megalomaniacs?

In Imperial Rome they would say Ave Ceaser! or in English Hail Ceaser! as a greeting. 

Caesar*
I still use that greeting from time to time, incidentally.

That kind of thinking is something our Founding Fathers were allergic to.  George Washington could have set himself up as King, the veterans of the Continental Army would have supported him. 

Don't talk shit about Caesar.

Instead he talked them out of overthrowing the new government and after two terms retired back to his farm.  By these actions he embodied the spirit of a great Roman patriot - Cincinnatus. 

I'm ignoring the very obvious problem with this analogy:
Gaius Julius Caesar and Lucius Quinctius Cinncinatus both lived under the Republic.
A republic.
You know-- the thing the US is right now?
Some might say it's knit picking but I would say it's only the crux of her entire argument.

So when I see people flying a copy of the US flag where President Obama's picture replaces all the stars of the Union, I have to think of the Roman Emperors and their various cults of personality.  Some of these rulers even thought they were truly divine.  What history shows is most of them did far more harm to the Roman Empire than any external force ever could.

I don't even know where to start with this.
Many emperors were bad, granted. There were a lot of emperors.
Most of them doing more harm than good?
Let's look at the Julio-Claudian Dynasty only.
You have Augustus who by all rights at least possessed enough wisdom to continue with Caesar's plans--
you have Tiberius who was generally not as successful in life as Augustus but still enacted several revolutionary engineering projects--
then you have Caligula who was nuts. He's the odd one out.
Then you have Claudius who was well-liked by the people and was regarded as a fair and wise ruler.
Finally you have Nero who is generally demonized by modern history due to his persecution of Christians.
So you have like 1 bad ruler and 1 who was maybe an asshole out of 5.
That's still a way better batting average than modern leaders.
Then what about rulers like Pertinax or Galba who weren't liked in their own times but did a ton for the future of the Empire that we can only now see?
Are they bad rulers?
Holy shit is there anything you say that isn't provably stupid?

Whether my interpretation is what is on the minds of people who fly this flag is immaterial.  History shows that once a leader becomes more important than the country he leads, the country itself is on an arc of decline. 

Caesar, the architect of the Roman Empire died before its creation and it is still the longest enduring empire of all time.
What the fuck are you even talking about?
It stood for 1400 years.
Sure it was a bullshit shadow of itself that barely registered as a country by the end but of America collapsed today literally no one would care in 500 years because who the fuck cares about a country that stood for 250 years?
What would the summary of America be?
invented mass production-- went to the moon-- didn't really do anything with it-- collapsed into a cesspool of mediocre sitcoms and reality TV shows.

There has been a lot of religious talk of late and how the secular sphere intersects such.  Of faith held beliefs colliding with secular beliefs.  Of confronting Moloch.

It has been 2000 years but damn it it's time to confront Moloch.

So what has all this history to do with confronting Moloch?  Its very simple, in all three cases presented above an oppressive secular government has attempted or is attempting to wipe out any other locus of power.

... Much like the story of Moloch in the Bible.
Who was a god with a bronze statute that would be heated up and infants thrown into its yawning maw.
Ooooooor, and I'm just going to say it, a Christian corruption of the birthing rituals performed to honor the god Kronos.
It's not like the Bible doesn't do shit like that frequently.
Beelzebub (the lord of flies) is a corruption of Baal Zebub (the lord on high)
Apollyon is Apollo--
Intense propaganda campaign in the Bible.
And I'm not faulting them for it, shit. But let's call it like it is.

These other sources of normative mores, I think that is the term, rebuke what the secular mandarins want to impose.  They deny the validity of this secular dogma.

 What does this have to do with Moloch?
The Phoenicians (who worshiped Moloch [allegedly]) were clearly not a secular society.

Now we are seeing this secular dogma being attempted here in the United States.  Health and Human Services has issued a draconian ruling that will have drastic impact upon religious non-profits of all beliefs.  These non-profits have one year to comply with the demands of Moloch ... errr...  the Obama administration's diktats. 

... Moloch is frequently used as an analogy for something that requires a great sacrifice.
Maybe that's what she's going for?

After the trials of Nuremberg and what happened at My Lai, soldiers are now expected to refuse unlawful orders.  What the Obama administration is demanding of religious non-profits is an unlawful order.  It is an attempt to impose secular state beliefs upon individuals.  What next, will Cesar Obama demand all offer burnt sacrifices at the altar of Obama as divine being?  That did not work well for Imperial Rome nor France after their revolution.

...
Because Napoleon demanded burnt offerings.
Or fuck it let's simplify:
Imperial governments require burnt offerings.
Ohhh fuck.
Anyway this is boring so goodbye.