Commandment 1

I am Facebook thy social networking site, which have brought thee out of the land of MySpace, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other social networking sites before me.

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is similar to Me, or that is even like me, or would be confused with me.

Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I, Facebook, am a jealous social networking site, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

And shewing mercy unto millions of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

Commandment 2

Thou shalt not take the name of Mark Zuckerburg in vain; for Facebook will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

Commandment 3

Remember Mark’s birthday, to keep it holy.

Commandment 4

Eight hours shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:

But all other hours shall be devoted to Facebook.

Commandment 5

Honour thy father and thy mother: and then complain about them on Facebook.

Commandment 6

Thou shalt not kill thy browser window as it is Facebook thy social networking site’s window into your soul.

Commandment 7

Thou shalt not commit adultery with other social networking sites. (Refer to Commandment 1)

Commandment 8

Thou shalt not steal from Facebook thy social networking site. (Refer to Commandment 1 again)

Commandment 9

Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour unless thereby thee shalt garner likes from thy friends.

Commandment 10

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s unless thee shalt post it upon Facebook thy social networking site.

Commandment 11

Thou shalt post ad nauseum those posts that tug upon thy heartstrings and also upon thy friends’ regardless of the veracity thereof. By doing so thou shalt heap upon thy person shares and likes of the nations as their heartstrings art tugged forthwith.

Please tell me people are smarter than this

I don’t know whether people blindly follow a political line, that they are so totally oblivious that you can just name drop and they will follow, or that they are just incredibly, incredibly stupid.   Please watch the following videos and give me hope that we as a species are not irrevocably doomed……












Many at this time of year would like to cause confusion and division. They don’t specifically do this out of spite, but out of ignorance of the etymologies of words. I am speaking of the “Don’t take Christ out of Christmas” crowd.

Most of these people are well-meaning, but misinformed individuals. Xmas is not something new to the 20th century. The earliest use, “X’temmas” meaning Christmas, dates to around 1551 in English since shortened to Xmas. An even earlier reference to Christmas is Xp̄es mæsse in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle around 1100. This is an Anglicization of Greek.

X itself, in this context, refers to the letter chi in Greek, an abbreviation used by the early church for Christ. This abbreviation is still used by the Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestant denominations to refer to Christ. In many manuscripts of the New Testament, Χ is an abbreviation for Χριστος (Christos in English), as is XC.

My biggest problem with this thinking is that people will blindly follow their pastor’s lead without checking to see if he even knows what he is saying. This is a case of the blind leading the blind. For when you look to find evil or whatever under every rock, you will surely find it or interpret it as such since that is what you seek.

And for those who would say that I am looking only on the Internet, I have known these things stated above for over 30 years. I first researched it in the late 70’s in a book, namely The Encyclopaedia Britannica. I’ve just used the Internet out of convenience for all those who read this.


Potential Reform of the Electoral College

There have been several proposals to reform the electoral college.  The two fairest, I believe, would be Congressional District Apportionment (CDA) or a State Level Popular Vote Apportionment (SLPVA).  Each would award the 2 votes that would be equivalent to the number of Senators in the state to the overall state winner.  CDA would award an elector to the winner of each Congressional District.  SLPVA would award the electoral votes equal to the congressional district on a proportional basis.

Under CDA Mitt Romney would have lost the popular vote but won the Electoral College 272-266.  This proposal would give smaller rural states more clout but would result in possibly as many Presidents elected not winning the popular vote as before if not more.

Under SLPVA Barack Obama would have won the nationwide popular vote 276-255.  Other candidates would have won the remaining 7 votes. The vote percentages of 51.3%-47.4%-1.3% fairly closely mirror the actual percentages of 51.1-47.2-1.7.  Under this proposal, the states do not lose clout and, in a close election, can influence the results.  My personal choice would be this one.

I would therefore make 2 proposals.  The first, a State Compact to agree to apportioning electors per SLPVA. Or, the second, a Constitutional Amendment that would provide for this apportionment scheme.


Section 1.

The apportionment of Electors for President and Vice-President shall be as follows:

Two Electors from each State, equal to the number of Senators from the state, shall be awarded to the winner of the statewide popular vote. The remaining Electors shall be apportioned among the various candidates proportional to the total votes that candidate received on Election Day.


Section 2.

Each State may set, by appropriate legislation, minimum limits on popular vote percentages needed before being awarded Electors and procedures relating to apportionment under these limits; which Electors are chosen according to the aforementioned procedures, but shall not deny any candidate’s Elector based on political affiliation, party or creed; and shall apportion said Electors as closely as possible to enacted procedures and actual proportional voting results.


Section 3.

The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


If you believe this is the correct way to proceed, please share this.

Conspiracies or, Do These Nuts Grow on Trees or Just Congregate on Social Media?

First I want to say I am conservative, Republican and God-fearing, but I believe that conspiracy theorists do a disservice to the Conservative movement.

Conservatism should foremost be mostly non-reactionary.  In the last decade, though, I have watched it devolve into a knee-jerk reactionary movement more akin to children not getting their way.  That is not to say that quick reaction is unnecessary.  In some instances it is paramount, but even then should be well reasoned and pragmatic.

I see posts on Facebook, other social media and websites devoted to the belief that the United States is going to hell in a hand basket.  From Obama is a communist, Islamic, non-citizen (points 1 and 2 are mutually exclusive theoretically) to FEMA concentration camps and death lists.  A major proponent of these theories is Barbara Hartwell (disclaimer: from what I find on the Internet).  A perusal of her website seems to show a well spoken person with inside knowledge of some sinister things.  But posts and copied emails by her (less polished) show a rambling disorganized mind that bounces all over.  I will admit to not having read any books, papers etc. that she has written, but I have met several people like this in my 46 years and in almost every instance the person was a nutcase to the extreme.

Most of these theories are presented as secondhand information from a “source” that is nameless and unverifiable but nevertheless we all would know and admire if we only knew who they were, at least so we are told. Interviews on the subject tend to move from the original topic to more bizarre and unverifiable topics if allowed to proceed long enough. Other times there is verifiable information that has been so distorted from the original that it supports the crazy theory that someone is espousing.  Mainly though these theorists speak from their gut, going with what will sell regardless of outlandishness or verifiable evidence to contrary.

The internet provides a bully pulpit for those who crave attention.  Bizarre theories, distorted facts, and bombastic rhetoric are the bread and butter of these “purveyors of truth.”  But this does not negate the fact that as long as it tickles our ears or falls in line with our beliefs or paranoias (depending on the person), we will lap it up and ask for even more bizarre things. Ephesians 4:14 says it best:  “We must no longer be children, tossed to and fro and blown about by every wind of doctrine, by people’s trickery, by their craftiness in deceitful scheming.”

This concludes today’s rant