Archive for the General Discussion Category

Opting for Benedict

Posted in General Discussion on March 11, 2017 by McKinley Pitts

Smart commentary on the Benedict Option…

Charles H. Featherstone

So this comment I made on Rod Dreher’s blog, as he took apart Rachel Held Evans’ tweet storm rant about Rod’ latest book, seems to have gotten some traction:

Progressive Christians and the Progressive Church is still wants American Christendom to work, still cannot tell the difference between state and society and church, and still very much want it to be 1962, when the church was influential and church leaders were listened to and everyone was good and bourgeois and belonged. Oh, they want a far more integrated version of 1962, complete with same-sex marriage. But their church is just as much Christendom, just as imperial, just as Constantinian, as the conservatism they decry. They want to be the chaplains to a well-ordered, relatively just (or justice oriented) state and society.

It does not help any that most progressives are trapped in a narrative of the civil rights…

View original post 1,342 more words

Advertisements

Ron Fournier: POTUS May Be In The Middle Of “Full Blown Constitutional Crisis” (Video)

Posted in General Discussion on March 13, 2014 by McKinley Pitts

Muat Reading…

Nice Deb

Another major scandal for the regime is coming to light as the head of the Senate Intelligence Committee is accusing the CIA of “breaking laws and breaching constitutional principles in an alleged effort to undermine the panel’s multi-year investigation of a controversial interrogation program.”

Chairman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) accused the CIA of ­secretly removing documents, searching computers used by the committee and attempting to intimidate congressional investigators by requesting an FBI inquiry of their conduct — charges that CIA Director John Brennan disputed within hours of her appearance on the Senate floor.

Feinstein described the escalating conflict as a “defining moment” for Congress’s role in overseeing the nation’s intelligence agencies and cited “grave concerns” that the CIA had “violated the separation-of-powers principles embodied in the United States Constitution.”

Brennan fired back during a previously scheduled speech in Washington, saying that “when the facts come out on this, I think a…

View original post 170 more words

Camile Paglia: Woman of the Year

Posted in Big Government, conservatism, Culture, Enemies, First Things, freedom, General Discussion, Philosophy, Politics, Progressivism on January 4, 2014 by McKinley Pitts

Re. Camile Paglia: Woman of the Year

When you experience some sort of medical symptom such as a rash, you might choose to go to a doctor. Typically, you ask that doctor to render an opinion as to what might be the matter. The doctor will use a combination of medical signs, i.e., measurable things like blood pressure or bacteria in the urine, observing the rash, taking a biopsy the rash, et al and medical symptoms, i.e., asking the patient what it feels like or what they have been experiencing. In turn, opinion is rendered, treatment prescribed, behavior proscribed, etc., to ameliorate the problem.

If what you want is hard, irrefutable evidence that Western Civilization is experiencing collapse, which collapse might be defined as radical, rapid change (it can be relatively slow) that clearly harms the prospects of its inhabitants and that many might view as bad, then we will probably have to wait for its collapse. Immediately prior to the old Roman Empire’s collapse, the majority of Romans could not foresee that the Visigoths at the gate would ever bring down the Empire. The barbarians were no big deal and nothing had changed as the water in the pot reached boiling. But wasn’t that the point of the 1960s freak movement? A call that civilization was indeed in a bad way and things needed to change.

Point is that one may easily parrot the de jour talking points of the left that either all is just fine or all is going to hell if we don’t get a lot more government control a la MSNBC, CNN, and on ad infinitum. Demanding so-called absolute, unalloyed facts/truth before we dare to adjust our fair republic’s current trajectory seems to be madness, especially since so many of our brightest diagnosticians seem to believe that said trajectory apparently will quickly intersect with an immovable reality.

Me? I don’t want to wait until we hit the fan. I want to hear from those diagnosticians and make a judgement call as to whether we jink the car left or right. Seems left is causing a lot of damage. We need to jink right a bit. Who’s crazy or not? Rather than listening to the screeching vapors on the left that we need more government control of every aspect of our commerce and medical care to the likes of scolds like Kathleen Sebelius and Ezekiel Emanuel, to give unfettered war making powers to a nit-wit in the White House and his crazed enablers at the State Department, its much easier right now for me to listen to the likes of Camile Paglia, David Mamet, Christopher Hitchens, Peter Hitchens, George Will, Charles Krauthammer, Heather MacDonald, Thomas Sowell, Peggy Noonan, Victor Davis Hanson, Jonah Goldberg, Ross Douthat, Roger Kimball, and a host of other public intellectuals that posit that perhaps all is not quite right in Paradise.

What is a wholesome sexuality?

Posted in General Discussion on September 27, 2013 by McKinley Pitts

Very good!

Reflections, Reflections by Alessandra

On a recent McCain thread (Miley Cyrus: Insult to Injury), a commenter (Joe) asked:

What in Alexandra’s estimation is a “wholesome sexuality”? If it hurt’s someone it’s immoral if it doesn’t then who cares if people want to have anal sex, engage in S&M, cross dress, worship feet, have threesomes, etc. It’s no one’s business. I’m sure most people here agree with that. if not, then what is wholesome sexuality? Sex done only for pro-creation in the missionary position with the lights off?

I have to say this question lies at the heart of what is wrong with liberal ideology. It’s very important and the answer doesn’t fit in a short comment space. But here is a first attempt at a short reply.

We can look at sexuality in many ways. One is to examine what happens inside the mind of an individual. If their sexual thoughts or…

View original post 986 more words

Cheer Up: Negativity bias – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Posted in Faith, General Discussion, Personal Remembrances with tags on September 17, 2013 by McKinley Pitts

Negativity bias – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Slowest Start To A Hurricane Season On Record

Posted in General Discussion on August 25, 2013 by McKinley Pitts

From Real Science Blog…

Real Science

Obama says that hurricanes are getting worse, based on some research done at the Choom Climatological Institute.

As we approach the end of August, there have been no Atlantic hurricanes. By this date in the year 1886, there had already been seven hurricanes – including three major hurricanes, one of which wiped the city of Indianola, Texas off the map.

ScreenHunter_357 Aug. 24 09.14

1886 Atlantic hurricane season – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A kinder, gentler natural hurricane from 1886

ScreenHunter_359 Aug. 24 09.46

Obama’s presidency has also seen the fewest US hurricane landfalls of any president. Three hurricanes have hit the US while he was in office, compared to twenty-six while Grover Cleveland was in office.

ScreenHunter_19 May. 08 06.04

Chronological List of All Hurricanes

View original post

I COMMAND You to Read The Fortunes of Permanence by Roger Kimball.

Posted in General Discussion with tags , on August 20, 2013 by McKinley Pitts

I’m having a hard time sticking with books here lately for some reason. (Age!) One I am enjoying, however, is The Fortunes of Permanence by Roger Kimball. Stellar.

Jay Nordlinger’s five part review in NRO (the review is great!):

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/347406/important-part-i
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/347538/important-part-ii
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/347605/important-part-iii
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/347791/important-part-iv
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/347834/important-part-v