User Profile: E_PLURIS_LUX

Member Since: January 28, 2011


  • [2] October 9, 2016 at 6:20pm

    As I read the mad-as-hell comments from Trump supporters, I see nothing but strawmen aplenty. No, Hillary is not decent. No, she is not qualified, either. No, never Trump are not leftist apologists, and abstention from Trump support is not Hillary support, no matter how many brainwashed binary thinkers there are out there.

    Yes, Bill is a sexual predator. And now it’s starting to sound like Trump is, too. The realist in all of this is not the one who spouts the bumper sticker slogans (“A vote not for Trump is a vote for Hillary”). Pure garbage. The realist is the one that sees the absolute depths to which we’ve sunk, to where BOTH candidates are unqualified and should by all rights be DIS-qualified…. but they won’t be.

    This is the worst choice in my lifetime. Hillary is a guaranteed nightmare. Trump is the potential nightmare so bad that we haven’t begun to fathom it.

    Hillary is the worst thing you can imagine ONLY IF you lack the imagination to recall true historical extremes. This IS the no win scenario that these parties have pushed us to. This is the edge of the abyss. The answer…..Hold onto your honor…. when all else fails…. hold on to that, because if you give that up, then you’re no different than the Machiavellian leftists, rooting for their tribe, no matter how bad they are, or what evil they have done. Be an individual. Deny the binary choice. Hold to your honor. Protect your family, and the truth. Stop equivocating. Stay true.

    Responses (1) +
  • January 11, 2013 at 11:10pm

    It’s easy enough to get caught up in the passion of it all in these times, with all that the leftists, statists, progressives, and willing ignorant toadies usurping liberty, defying common sense, lying, etc. Ignorance, hypocrisy, self interest, and outright evil are easy to find these days, and it can and does bring the righteous rage to the hearts of good people. So now what? Give in to the rage? Stop caring about accuracy? Get so depressed and cynical that you retreat in a downward spiral until it’s every man for himself? If so, it’s already over because the opposition is organized. So let’s keep a big enough tent for different ideas, can we please?

    Everyone has their own assessment. My own is that Alex is passionate and patriotic. Sometimes right, but often wrong. I can not use him as a reference, as the risk is too great to hurt my own credibility…not with leftists, who will dismiss me anyway. But with facts and reason. Does the left want more power? Yes. Do they want to game the system so as to ensure they limit freedom to choose opposing options? Yes. Is the press in the bag for the Progressives? Obviously. Does this administration want higher taxes, fewer guns, less oil, fewer profits, more welfare, more redistribution? Yes across the board.

    But not all theories are created equal. FEMA camps, and flouridated water, and 9/11 being an inside job are just the tip of the iceberg. And the screaming… He just comes off as not balanced, to me. No offens

  • November 22, 2011 at 10:30am

    Amazing…. just another universalist approach to everything. A spritual stimulus program. A church, of all things, is supposed to be close to its congregation. A church is supposed to actually be in the lives of its congregants, and be close enough to know who needs what and how much, and when. A mass distribution of $100 dollar bills is just like the mass distribution of anything else of value given freely. You haven’t done any discernment between the needy and the greedy, the good and bad stewards….what you’ve done is outsourced your responsibility to get involved with your congregation, and taken a cookie-cutter approach…. probably because the money came from an external source to the church, and therefore is valued less than money earned or money under proper stewardship. I would respect this a whole lot more if it were part of an internal missions or helps program, where actual due diligence, discernment, and involvement occurred…… but then it wouldn’t get headlines, would it? All that said, I commend the idea of giving at the holiday times to those in need, and I can see how the invitation of Jesus to all (to the wastrels and to the miserly) might be seen as an allegory for doing it this way, so I’ll give the benefit of the doubt on good intentions, but the difference is they are already a church, hopefully providing the TRULY universalist message of Jesus Christ (please no comments about universal salvation, not saying that).

  • October 27, 2011 at 9:08am

    This, quite simply, is how nations commit suicide. Invite unrest. Invite invasion. Punish the defenders. Suicide.

  • September 16, 2011 at 1:52pm

    Can I please see this recalculated, after dividing the amount of debt each state has by the number of employed citizens. I’ll bet good money these float skyward.

  • August 16, 2011 at 5:57pm

    Let’s explore the fundaments of this argument, and the one made by Carney and others earlier.

    -Joe loses his job which had paid him $30,000 a year (conservatively)
    -Joe files for, and gets unemployment benefits @ 60% of his pay for 52 weeks (conservatively)
    -Joe’s net change of income is a loss of 12,000 to $18,000
    -Let’s say even that Joe gets food stamps, too
    -Assume Joe buys less food because he knows he’s got less disposable food money
    -Let’s even grant that Joe’s food stamp supplement amounts to say, a $3,000 value
    -3K + 18K = $21,000 out of Joe’s prior $30,000 income

    Assume fixed utilities and rent are inelastic, you still have 30% less of this person’s money in motion in the economy. How does a net drop of 30% of disposable income stimulate new jobs? It doesn’t.

    The only way they can say this is NEW money that stimulates is if they ignore the precipitating event that led to the eligibility for it (the job loss). It’s not a gain. It’s a mitigation….a reduced loss. More government accounting like how “cuts” are just cuts in growth. Idiocy.

  • July 25, 2011 at 10:00pm

    If this is not treason or at least sedition, then we should remove those words from our law books. Juxtapose this video with the oath she took as a member of the US Congress. There is no truth in her.

  • June 11, 2011 at 2:20pm

    The truth is mostly out. The sides are chosen, and the lines are drawn. Weiner will stay unless he sexted an underage girl… somehow this is the lower bar that Pelosi will not accept. In the meantime, the ONLY points of continuing this story in the MSM are a) for the sheer salaciousness of it to satisfy the interests of their prurient audiences, and b) to take heat off of Obama for his complete and utter failures, while he ties off the next anchor to sink America to the bottom of the sea. Move on, for heaven’s sake. Eye on the ball, people. Be well all.

    Responses (1) +
  • May 31, 2011 at 1:35pm

    Yes, back to sleep everyone. Just rest. The government is here. We’ll take care of everything for you. No, no. It’s not poison. Just drink it in… a little more. That’s it. Nice deep breaths, now. Remain calm and productive. Shhhhhhh. Rest now. Lie down. That’s good. So good. Don’t bother raising your children. It’s so hard to do that these days. Let us do it for you. Isn’t that better? Now you can rest more. Relax, rest. Nothing to fear. We’re in charge….. sleeeep. Caaaaalm…. sleeep.

  • May 31, 2011 at 1:27pm

    a) Who believes that this will not misinterpret a myriad of other human conditions as “malintent”?
    b) Who believes that this will not lead to placing “malintent” people on lists, irrespective of proof of any wrongdoing?
    c) Who believes that this technology will make us even one bit safer?
    d) This technology couples the massive political and legal power of a government with the interpretation of results by a select few scanner operators, doctors and software engineers. Who believes that this doesn’t lead to incarceration, loss of career, loss of security status, loss of social standing, family, and ultimately loss of even life for people whose only ‘crime’ is to be a political opponent to someone in power?

    This is a weapon against the innocent. Plain and simple.

  • May 27, 2011 at 10:41am

    In essence, the judge rewards the idea that you can flee your state to avoid a vote which won’t go your way, and the majority—lacking a quorum– is utterly helpless to due it’s democratically elected duty. Judges of the law who implicitly or explicitly sabotage the laws and constitutional process they swore an oath to defend and uphold deserve an ouster.

  • May 20, 2011 at 9:53am

    …and I promise not to be divisive…..and I promise to shut down Guantanamo….and I promise to bring back the jobs and keep unemployment below 8%

    ….. and one last small promise….

    I promise to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States of America..

    On what record of kept promises would a rational man base faith in this man’s word?

  • May 13, 2011 at 5:03pm

    If the PETA crown truly have the courage of their convictions, they ought to voluntarily add their names into a database of people who will not be administered drugs or health care if any of the following are true:
    1) If the drugs they need were developed through animal testing / trials
    2) If the procedure they are requesting or in need of was developed through animal experimentation
    3) If the medical staff were trained through the use of animal dissection

    If people truly=animals with respect to value, these people need to cowboy up and stand strong. A happy side-effect might be fewer of these loons, or they may convert back to realists when they see the benefits to themselves if Fluffy the mouse or Oinky the pig takes one for the team.

  • May 7, 2011 at 6:30pm

    One party has a wing which is trying to defund Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood and other abortionists abort predominantly minority babies. One party (D) wants these minority baby deathmills running at capacity, and the other party (R) would love them shut down. Case closed. Nothing here but inane blather.

  • May 5, 2011 at 12:33am

    Homophobia: A made up term designed to advance a sociopolitical agenda by accusing adherents of an opposing viewpoint of “being afraid of” rather than simply “disagreeing with the validity of”. Acrophobia is the fear of heights or high places. Claustrophobia is the fear of small places. Agoraphobia is the fear of the market, or open spaces. Homophobia, literally, is the fear of things that are the same. That’s all. Only the sheer repetition of the term and the acceptance of its legitimacy has allowed it to enter the popular lexicon, but it’s an invented term. A closer word would be homoporneiaphobia, or fear of sexual intercourse with the same. But it’s too cerebral…too antiseptic, and doesn’t roll off the tongue with activism and accusation like “homophobe”. Don’t acknowledge this silly term. Don’t fear or hate homosexuals, either, but don’t accept this activist and inaccurate colloquialism.

  • May 4, 2011 at 5:23pm

    Maybe this will turn out to be Bizarro-World Superman. Then again, DC is already Bizarro-world.

    -Got to increase our credit line (debt ceiling) to reduce our debt
    -Release 2,000 Abu Ghraib pictures, but none of killing OBL, because the LATTER is incendiary.

    To heck with Superman comics….they can pander now, but I know where they stand. They want a globalist message to get to the kids.

    Where’s Lex Luthor when you need him?

  • May 4, 2011 at 5:06pm

    I always find it interesting that modern psychology can find environmental cause or environmental contribution for so many things, and yet homosexuality remains as this untouchable beacon of “born this way”.

    Science seems to be able to somehow find small or large environmental factors at work in all of the following human attitudes and behaviors: road rage, bed-wetting, wife-beating, misogyny, serial murder, obsessive compulsive disorder, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, racism, sexism, thrill-seeking, narcissism, depression, anxiety, sociopathic behaviors, self-loathing, drug addiction, alcoholism, addictions in general, hypertension, overeating, bulimia, anorexia, ADHD, and many many more. Notice I said causal OR contributing. The point is, environment is in the mix.

    Yet homosexuality has somehow attained the “magic” status among many as an innate condition.

    It is indisputable that the human urge for sex, at it’s essence, is a procreative imperative. It exists to further the existence of the species, period.

    While it is also true that (dare I say most) humans enjoy the associated touch, closeness, kind words, excitement, romance, physical release, and other beautiful complexities and layers of sex, none of this changes the reason for the physiological imperative urge…which is to make babies, so as to keep the species going. Therefore, normal (biologically purposeful) sexual attraction exists only between the two opposite sexes, not between two of the same sex.

    Two of the same sex may seek pleasure and comfort, but they will not find procreation…by definition. Their need, therefore, is an emotional and mental one, which misdirects the physiological urge. This is neither surprising nor restricted to homosexuality, since mankind has an almost limitless ability to confuse and deceive himself and others. He also a social animal, and so he may often feel better by finding like-minded people who are equally deceived, so as to avoid confronting reason and logic. Does the fact that there are many of a belief make the belief true? No, but it is comforting to have the numbers.

    All of this is not to say that heterosexuals are better humans than homosexuals, they (we) are not. Everyone has their own issues and differences about them, and the fact that so much hatred exists towards homosexuals should not be tolerated. But one behavior is in alignment with human procreative physiology, and one behavior is out of alignment with human procreative physiology. That is the razor, for me. At least the secular one. The non-secular razor, is of course, the word of God.

    Just because a million blind people are in agreement that blindness is normal, does not mean that the state should sanction them with drivers’ licenses.

    As an interesting aside, take a look here: and draw your own conclusions about why this was removed in 1973.

    Responses (1) +
  • May 1, 2011 at 10:58pm

    13th Imam, He gets credit for creating jobs, no doubt. But Steve Jobs did that. Steven Spielberg does that. Heck, Arianna Huffington and even Soros create jobs. This obviously is not the equivalent of conservative bona fides. And nothing about the Vegas speech establishes his long-term conservative credentials, as it’s only recently given. My BS-o-meter goes into the red when this guy talks every bit as much as when Obama talks. So far, his qualifications are a) he’s wealthy from capitalistic ventures, b) He’s got a good brand for no-nonsense business dealings, c) he’s an astute student of the public’s pulse and current unease with this administration, and d) He’s willing to throw calculated and perhaps effective political or personal punches in the open for the world to see. I freely stipulate all of the above, and always have, if you read my posts. For me, though, the positives stop there. I don’t trust him even a little bit, to do right for this country. I see a man who has himself as his own hero. I do not see a public servant, not even close. And NO, I am not part of the Republican establishment, looking for Newt and Karl Rove to bless a candidate before I consider them worthy. This is all just my opinion after having watched Trump’s ups and downs for years. Thanks for the reply.

  • April 30, 2011 at 4:51pm

    One last thought on this thread…. for all of you who upbraided liberals for their deification of Obama… what is Trump but another cult of personality?

    Responses (3) +
  • April 30, 2011 at 4:48pm

    Folks, all of you who say Trump is your guy because “he’s real”… I just do not get you. He’s pugnacious, yes. He knows how to get and keep himself in the public eye. He knows how to insult people, wow, what a skill. Let’s see the stuff that Trump’s ‘investigators’ told him about that was “Amazing, unbelievable, troubling….” or whatever else Trump said. Let’s hear him articulate his position on how he’d “get tough” with China and how that would work well for us. Let’s hear him articulate a framework of understanding (or a detailed plan might even be nice) for his geopolitics, or speak to the appropriateness of when the use of the armed forces. Let’s hear him give a stirring narrative on the greatness of America without talking about how “phenomenally smart and wealthy and successful” he has been. Let’s hear him give credit to the founders for the American framework that allows people like him to succeed, or hear him give credit to the soldiers and sailors and airmen and all servicepeople who sustain that framework. We already know he thinks HE’S exceptional. Let’s hear his reasons why America is exceptional. Best of all, let’s see his conservative pedigree, and I don’t mean things he’s said in the last month. Let’s see things he’s done ion the last ten years. Show me that, Trumpites. George Soros, Steven Spielberg, Harry Reid, Barbara Boxer, Arianna Huffington, Teresa Heinz-Kerry, Bill Gates, and Steve Jobs are all wealthy people. Some of them even earned it rather than inheriting it…but it doesn’t make them conservative. There’s nothing real about this guy except he is REAL savvy in his business, REAL interested in self-promotion, and REAL stuck on himself. He does not put America first, and never will.

    Responses (2) +