Thursday - January 13, 2005

On The Good News Front

You may have already seen this but I doubt it got much airplay on the MSM newscasts because it deals a death blow to many homosexuals dreams of adopting.  In effect what the ruling by the Supreme Court does is open the way for other states to adopt such laws.

I think it is a resounding victory for conservatives.

   Monday - January 03, 2005

Avoiding Telluride

And all other places that pride themselves in celebrating such actions.

From those whose political persuasions are always accusing conservatives of being intolerant and a bunch of bullies, well, guess who’s doing the bullying now?

The homosexual, et. al. community have their collective knickers in a twist because a guy in Telluride advises families not to come visit because the city is sponsoring a homosexual ski week (sorry, I will not use the “g” word.  It’s been corrupted by those who really are not.) They are outraged.  They accuse him of being intolerant, hateful, offensive, racist, homophobe. 

Somehow, though, the actions of these people is not seen as “HATEFUL” against him nor “INTOLERANT” to his views nor “OFFENSIVE” in that they can’t tolerate a hetero/family view nor “HETEROPHOBIC.”

I hope everyone takes heed and does not go to Telluride. I sure the hell would be pissed off to no end to find out I booked a peaceful vacation skiing the slopes only to find a bunch of openly homosexual activities going on.  Last thing I need is several days on the slopes with Billy and Jimmy lip-locked in front of the fireplace or practicing some new dance act on the slopes or streets full of cross-dressers and mincing-Bobs.

   Monday - December 20, 2004

This Is Not Good

When the MSM gets its teeth into this one we will never hear the end of it.

Comments?

   Wednesday - October 27, 2004

FOUL!!! FOUL!!!  (hmmmm, not so foul now!)

I’ve been in a really foul mood lately with little cause to be cheery.  You need only witness the perversions of truth spit out by papers like the NY Times regarding the ammo story, the attempts at CBS to blatantly sway the election by running the story of missing ammo on Sunday, 2 days prior to the election, the lies of Kerry and Edwards promoting this nonsensical hysteria by the media to tar and feather President Bush, and the blatant attempts by Democrats to steal the election through fraud, intimidation, criminal activity and outright violence.

Hell, it even effects my ability to sleep well.  It’s a good thing I am mentally well-balanced or I’d be tempted to go postal on the next son of a bitch that gleefully supports Fuckface.

But this morning I read something that cheered me up.

I’ve always enjoyed Dr. Mike Adams’ writing style and he has a flair for debunking liberal bullshit that I rarely see.

This one involves the politically correct endeavors of the homosexual and transgender crowd to get “gender neutral” bathrooms. So I am thinking to myself, “Self, what the FUCK is the big deal about a guy who thinks he’s a woman using the men’s bathroom.  His plumbing is the same as everyone else’s.  If he’s so concerned, use a stall. It’s not like another guy is going to put a move on him.  Hell, he might even enjoy it.  Same thing for women”

But no, they want their own place to cop a squat and hang out with their own kind, I guess.  Just thinking about it causes me to get annoyed at these fucktards.

But anyway, Dr. Adams recommends straight people attend any meetings held to discuss this.  Men should go dressed as women and women as men.  Since doing so automatically puts them into a “protected class” when they begin to ask questions at variance with their appearance and the organizers try to kick them out he says:

“that’s the beauty of it. As long as you are a man wearing a dress and feeling uncomfortable, you have a right to be in the GLUT Resource Center. That’s why it was built. It is supposed to be a “safe zone.” Just remember to claim that whatever they say to you makes you feel uncomfortable.  Since it is their job to make you feel comfortable while you are “at variance” with your gender, they might even get fired for trying to evict you! You can’t lose, can you?”

As Stewie, in the hilarious program, “Family Guy” would say, “How delicious. 

And it’s exactly the kind of thing I’d do if I knew it was going on here.  Talk about fun!!!!!!!

   Tuesday - October 19, 2004

Boycotts are Wonderful Things

A bank in Canada decided it was going to become “homosexual friendly” and do a promotion to advertise that. 

People got pissed off and threatened a boycott.  Others closed their accounts, sent e-mails, made phone calls or wrote letters.

The bank stopped the program but said:

“the boycott was not the reason it changed its policy.”

Now here is what I find a bit bizarre about this.  The bank was proposing putting out little “rainbow triangles” so that homosexuals, transgendered, etc. would know that they’d find a safe environment there.

Imagine that:  you can use the little triangles as a lure.  Say what you will but the bank’s plan does JUST THAT.  Is the homosexual, etc., etc.  gang really that dumb they’d flock like that? 

   Monday - October 18, 2004

Let’s Play, “Guess Who?”

Here’s a scenario for you.

You’re in a major city and there is a homosexual-rights rally going on.

You are part of a group of Christians who attend the event in order to protest it.  You hold up your signs and all of a sudden a group of “pink angels” (homosexual militants) attempt to drown you out and also cover your signs.

Police arrive and charges of criminal conspiracy, possession of instruments of crime, reckless endangerment of another person, ethnic intimidation, riot, failure to disperse, disorderly conduct, and obstructing highways are filed.  Three of these are felonies.  The people arrested spend 21 hours in jail.

So, your job is to guess who got arrested.  The homosexual-rights people, the Christians or the Pink Angels.

This was too simple, huh?

   Wednesday - October 13, 2004

The EU Homo Test and Canadian Homo Lottery

I guess if you disparage homosexuals you’d better not apply for any EU post.

---

Speaking of homosexuals, it is now illegal and punishable by LARGE fines and awards to call a homosexual in Canada a “fifi.” I guess soon we won’t be able to say “girly-men” or hum any ABBA or Village People tunes.

How politcially correct is this shit going to get?

“Calling someone a `fifi’ constitutes a scornful way of referring to homosexuals. The use of this term wounds and adds to the disgrace and lack of respect of human dignity a person [can suffer], homosexuals in particular.”

   Friday - October 08, 2004

WHAT Media Bias?  Where?  I Don’t See it!!

Read This and if you’re a Republican you’ll immediately be aware of what I am about to launch into.  If you are a Democrat, then allow me to explain in a manner that will not overload your feebly incapacitated brain:

Go ahead, read the article.  Completely.

Now tell me how long it took for the paper to identify the perpetrator as a Democrat.  Then explain to me why it is the Republicans were immediately identified as such by an (R) after their names as if THEY were the ones who committed the slur.

Then explain to me why there is no seeming outcry from the homosexual community for the use of the terminloogy the Dummycrap Senator employed.

Lastly, if you have any capacity to be intellectually honest, try and convince me that if the tables were turned this individual wouldn’t have been ridden out of town on the rails.

Go on!  I dare you!

OK, you liberal wankers can go away now.

For the rest of you, check this out.  It’s a comment made by one of the homosexuals to whom this Vince Fumo asswipe apologized:

“Vince is the kind of guy, when he gets angry colorful things come out of his mouth,” said Segal, who considers himself a friend of Fumo’s. “But he is also the No. 1 supporter of gay and lesbian issues in the Pennsylvania Senate ... and deeds speak louder than words.”

You gotta love the blatant hypocrisy!!

   Monday - October 04, 2004

This One Is Ripe For Cheap Shots

So......what IS the reason homosexuals are against a baseball team coming to Washington D.C.?

Might it have something to do with jealousy related to how well some men can play with balls?

(sorry, the devil made me do it!)  

   Thursday - August 12, 2004

The Real Story

The headline reads: "Calif. Court Voids S.F. Same-Sex Marriages". Most of you probably read that and said to yourselves "Hey! California's judges aren't so stupid after all", right?

Well, go back and read the whole thing again, kids. Especially this part:

The court did not resolve whether the California Constitution would permit a same-sex marriage, ruling instead on the limits of authority regarding local government officials.

When the justices agreed to hear the case, they said they would decide only whether Newsom overstepped his mayoral powers for now, but would entertain a constitutional challenge — that gays should be treated the same as heterosexual couples under the California Constitution — if such a lawsuit reached the court.

So you see, they only agreed, although unanimously, that Mayor Newsom of San Francisco had overstepped his legal bounds, something I was talking about here months ago when all this came up. I said then and I'll say it again, government officials do not, I repeat, DO NOT have the power to blithely bypass state law whenever they please (California voters passed a unanimous resolution last year declaring "marriage" as something that is only between a man and a woman - Newsom decided to ignore the law). But here we have something else to look out for:

Newsom argued to the justices in May that the ability of same-sex couples to marry was a "fundamental right" that compelled him to act. Newsom authorized the marriages by citing the California Constitution's ban against discrimination, and claimed he was duty-bound to follow this higher authority rather than state laws banning gay marriage.

Gay and lesbian couples immediately filed lawsuits making that argument, as did Newsom. The now-consolidated cases are unlikely to reach the California Supreme Court for at least a year or more. California lawmakers have refused to take a position on the matter.

So there you have it. Mayor newsom is full of shit and listens to "a higher calling" .... and he has magnanimously decided that "marriage is a fundamental right". Everyone cry "BULLSHIT"! This madman needs to be put away for his own good.

Also, the homosexuals immediately filed a lawsuit to challenge the state law that a majority of voters approved and it will all wind up back before the California Supreme Court in a year or so. Notice the last sentence? "Lawmakers have refused to take a position ..". Stoopid chickenshit bastards in the legislature are running away under a smoke screen. They want the homosexual vote but are afraid to offend the majority of people in their state so they duck the issue and let the courts legislate (i.e., pass and change laws). This is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! The California legislators need to be taken to task, held responsible and forced to vote as the people of California asked them to do .. or else just take them all out and shoot their sorry asses.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it, dammit!

Memo To Vilmar: Vilmar, the word "homosexual" is just too long and I also refuse to let them kidnap the word "gay". From now on these people will be referred to using the clinically correct term, "Deviant Ignorant Practitioners of Sexual Habits and Irrational Tantrums" or just DIPSHITs for short.

   Wednesday - August 04, 2004

COURAGE….Found in Missouri

Say what you want about Missouri but its citizenry just climbed a notch in my estimation.

Last night they OVERWHELMINGLY passed an amendment to their constitution banning homosexual marriage.

Now let's see where states like Louisiana, Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, Oklahoma, Oregon and Utah stand. Their vote is later this year. In the states of Michigan, North Dakota and Ohio the initiatives are pending.

   Sunday - July 04, 2004

Only In America

I was intending to rest today and post lightly. I have several bottles of ice-cold Corona (fine Mexican beer) in the fridge with some lemon slices ready to go, a 14 oz. T-Bone steak all ready for the grill .... and then I made the mistake of opening up this morning's Washington Post (I subscribe to the online versions of that rag as well as the L.A. Times, The Chicago Tribune and the New York Times - it's painful work every morning reading those leftist rags but someone's got to do it).

Nothing really exciting on the front page but when I got to page 2 a headline caught my eye and by the time I had read the first two lines of the story, my mind had entirely slipped a gear. The words "Kentucky", "Sex-Change", and "Same-Sex Marriage" twisted through my eyeball, navigated to the center of my brain and wreaked terrible damage before my eyelids slammed shut and the cerebral cortex shut down for emergency maintenance. My brain will be off-line for the rest of the day. Enjoy the Fourth .... and remember that only in America can a story happen like this one below. Unfortunately.

Sex-Change Operation Tests Marriage Law
- Manuel Roig-Franzia

Here’s a legal riddle: Can a man marry a woman, but still violate a ban on same-sex marriages? It will be up to some of the great minds of Kentucky law to find an answer. The courtroom brainteaser comes courtesy of a Louisville marital dispute or, better yet, the case of the Paul who became a Paula.

The Paul in this scenario is Paul Spina. About 22 years ago, Spina married Sharon Hays, whose family owns a big Ford dealership in Louisville. Spina went to work for the in-laws, serving as general counsel to the company’s network of car dealerships. Spina says he and his wife accumulated company stock worth millions of dollars.

Last year, Spina went to Thailand and underwent a sex-change operation. He returned with a new name: Paula Spina.

Spina’s wife reacted by trying to get their marriage annulled. Among her legal arguments is the claim that Paul Spina was always psychologically a woman and, therefore, violated Kentucky’s law prohibiting same-sex marriages when they said their “I do’s.”

Spina’s attorneys have argued that their client was obviously a man when the couple wed. After all, he fathered two children. Sharon Spina’s attorneys did not return calls.

The annulment request, which was dismissed this spring by a county judge, is on its way to the Kentucky Court of Appeals.

Paula “is being mistreated,” said Shannon Minter, legal director for the National Center for Lesbian Rights and a board member of the Transgender Law and Policy Institute. “This is really a despicable legal tactic.”

Paula Spina (pictured here) says stock accumulated during marriage to Sharon Hays is worth millions.
Hays’s request for an annulment was denied in the spring and is headed for appeals court.

   Sunday - April 18, 2004

You gotta wonder!

Years ago when AIDS/HIV was finally recognized as a great peril to man with virtually no cure in sight, the medical community together with the Surgeon General put the public on alert.

Warnings were issued far and wide about how easy it was to transmit this disease; for people to be careful, to avoid casual sex, to use new needles when doing drugs, to stop risky behavior. Heterosexuals were warned that they were just as much, if not more, at risk. Fear was instilled in men and women everywhere.

Jump forward 20 years and we find that although most of the emphasis has been on heterosexuals and transmission of the disease, studies are out proving that transmission of AIDS is concentrated in the homosexual and drug using community. Risk to heterosexuals, although present, is nowhere near the levels promulgated by the politically correct crowd.

So you have to wonder why this myth continues to be fed to us when we have instances like this occurring within the homosexual community.

Read it here.

   Wednesday - March 24, 2004

Oregon County Bans All Marriages

Finally, a solution to the so-called "gay-marriage dilemna" that we can live with.

Benton County in Oregon has banned all marriages, homosexual and heterosexual ....until the state decides who can and who cannot wed.

Now, no one is breaking the law and it's time for the legislators and voters to clarify the issue. As it should be.

---

---

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2008 Domain Owner