Friday Funnies

Are Asteroids Humanity's 'Greatest Challenge'?

Throughout its 4.5-billion-year history, Earth has been repeatedly pummelled by space rocks that have caused anything from an innocuous splash in the ocean to species annihilation.

When the next big impact will be, nobody knows.
But the pressure is on to predict—and intercept—its arrival.
"Sooner or later we will get... a minor or major impact," Rolf Densing, who heads the European Space Operations Centre (ESOC) in Darmstadt, Germany, told AFP ahead of International Asteroid Day on Friday.
It may not happen in our lifetime, he said, but "the risk that Earth will get hit in a devastating event one day is very high."
For now, there is little we can do.
And yet, the first-ever mission to crash a probe into a small space rock to alter its trajectory suffered a major setback when European ministers declined in December to fund part of the project.
"We are not ready to defend ourselves" against an Earth-bound object, said Densing. "We have no active planetary defence measures."
Hitherto relegated to the realms of science fiction, tactics could include nuking an incoming asteroid, using lasers to vaporise it, sending a space "tractor" to drag it off course, or bumping it into a new direction.
But first, we need to be able to spot the threat.
Astrophysicists monitoring the risk classify objects into sizes ranging from a few millimetres to behemoths 10 kilometres (6.2 miles) across—the size of rock that wiped out non-avian dinosaurs some 65 million years ago.
The smallest type enter Earth's atmosphere daily, burning up prettily as shooting stars.


Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2017-06-asteroids-humanity-greatest.html#jCp

Throughout its 4.5-billion-year history, Earth has been repeatedly pummelled by space rocks that have caused anything from an innocuous splash in the ocean to species annihilation.

When the next big impact will be, nobody knows.
But the pressure is on to predict—and intercept—its arrival.
"Sooner or later we will get... a minor or major impact," Rolf Densing, who heads the European Space Operations Centre (ESOC) in Darmstadt, Germany, told AFP ahead of International Asteroid Day on Friday.
It may not happen in our lifetime, he said, but "the risk that Earth will get hit in a devastating event one day is very high."
For now, there is little we can do.
And yet, the first-ever mission to crash a probe into a small space rock to alter its trajectory suffered a major setback when European ministers declined in December to fund part of the project.
"We are not ready to defend ourselves" against an Earth-bound object, said Densing. "We have no active planetary defence measures."
Hitherto relegated to the realms of science fiction, tactics could include nuking an incoming asteroid, using lasers to vaporise it, sending a space "tractor" to drag it off course, or bumping it into a new direction.
But first, we need to be able to spot the threat.
Astrophysicists monitoring the risk classify objects into sizes ranging from a few millimetres to behemoths 10 kilometres (6.2 miles) across—the size of rock that wiped out non-avian dinosaurs some 65 million years ago.
The smallest type enter Earth's atmosphere daily, burning up prettily as shooting stars.


Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2017-06-asteroids-humanity-greatest.html#jCp

Getty Images

Throughout its 4.5-billion-year history, Earth has been repeatedly pummelled by space rocks that have caused anything from an innocuous splash in the ocean to species annihilation. 

When the next big impact will be, nobody knows. 

But the pressure is on to predict—and intercept—its arrival.

"Sooner or later we will get... a minor or major impact," Rolf Densing, who heads the European Space Operations Centre (ESOC) in Darmstadt, Germany, told AFP ahead of International Asteroid Day on Friday.

It may not happen in our lifetime, he said, but "the risk that Earth will get hit in a devastating event one day is very high."

For now, there is little we can do.

And yet, the first-ever mission to crash a probe into a small space rock to alter its trajectory suffered a major setback when European ministers declined in December to fund part of the project.

"We are not ready to defend ourselves" against an Earth-bound object, said Densing. "We have no active planetary defence measures." 

Hitherto relegated to the realms of science fiction, tactics could include nuking an incoming asteroid, using lasers to vaporise it, sending a space "tractor" to drag it off course, or bumping it into a new direction.

But first, we need to be able to spot the threat.

Astrophysicists monitoring the risk classify objects into sizes ranging from a few millimetres to behemoths 10 kilometres (6.2 miles) across—the size of rock that wiped out non-avian dinosaurs some 65 million years ago.

The smallest type enter Earth's atmosphere daily, burning up prettily as shooting stars.

Throughout its 4.5-billion-year history, Earth has been repeatedly pummelled by space rocks that have caused anything from an innocuous splash in the ocean to species annihilation.

When the next big impact will be, nobody knows.
But the pressure is on to predict—and intercept—its arrival.
"Sooner or later we will get... a minor or major impact," Rolf Densing, who heads the European Space Operations Centre (ESOC) in Darmstadt, Germany, told AFP ahead of International Asteroid Day on Friday.
It may not happen in our lifetime, he said, but "the risk that Earth will get hit in a devastating event one day is very high."
For now, there is little we can do.
And yet, the first-ever mission to crash a probe into a small space rock to alter its trajectory suffered a major setback when European ministers declined in December to fund part of the project.
"We are not ready to defend ourselves" against an Earth-bound object, said Densing. "We have no active planetary defence measures."
Hitherto relegated to the realms of science fiction, tactics could include nuking an incoming asteroid, using lasers to vaporise it, sending a space "tractor" to drag it off course, or bumping it into a new direction.
But first, we need to be able to spot the threat.
Astrophysicists monitoring the risk classify objects into sizes ranging from a few millimetres to behemoths 10 kilometres (6.2 miles) across—the size of rock that wiped out non-avian dinosaurs some 65 million years ago.
The smallest type enter Earth's atmosphere daily, burning up prettily as shooting stars.


Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2017-06-asteroids-humanity-greatest.html#jCp

Read the rest here:
Are asteroids humanity's 'greatest challenge'?

Hump Day Hunnies

Looking for a Great Investment?

Environmental Packaging Technologies, Inc. – a leading global bulk packaging company providing innovative packaging solutions for the transport and storage of bulk products.

The Arrogant Ignorance of the 'Well-Educated' | Intellectual Takeout

On more than one occasion my essays for The Imaginative Conservative have been inspired by bumper stickers. Many moons ago, for instance, I wrote “The Wisdom and Wickedness of Women” in response to seeing a bumper sticker declaring that “Well Behaved Women Do Not Make History.” Recently, sitting in traffic, I saw this very same bumper sticker on the car in front of me, beside another which declared the following: “What you call the Liberal Elite, we call being well-educated.” The juxtaposition of these two stickers, carefully selected by the car’s owner to teach me a lesson, set me thinking. I might even say that it taught me a valuable lesson, though not the lesson that my neighbor in the car in front of me meant to teach me.

Read more at: http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/blog/arrogant-ignorance-well-educated © IntellectualTakeout.org

On more than one occasion my essays for The Imaginative Conservative have been inspired by bumper stickers. Many moons ago, for instance, I wrote “The Wisdom and Wickedness of Women” in response to seeing a bumper sticker declaring that “Well Behaved Women Do Not Make History.” Recently, sitting in traffic, I saw this very same bumper sticker on the car in front of me, beside another which declared the following: “What you call the Liberal Elite, we call being well-educated.” The juxtaposition of these two stickers, carefully selected by the car’s owner to teach me a lesson, set me thinking. I might even say that it taught me a valuable lesson, though not the lesson that my neighbor in the car in front of me meant to teach me

Read more at: http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/blog/arrogant-ignorance-well-educated © IntellectualTakeout.org

On more than one occasion my essays for The Imaginative Conservative have been inspired by bumper stickers. Many moons ago, for instance, I wrote “The Wisdom and Wickedness of Women” in response to seeing a bumper sticker declaring that “Well Behaved Women Do Not Make History.” Recently, sitting in traffic, I saw this very same bumper sticker on the car in front of me, beside another which declared the following: “What you call the Liberal Elite, we call being well-educated.” The juxtaposition of these two stickers, carefully selected by the car’s owner to teach me a lesson, set me thinking. I might even say that it taught me a valuable lesson, though not the lesson that my neighbor in the car in front of me meant to teach me.

Read more at: http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/blog/arrogant-ignorance-well-educated © IntellectualTakeout.org

On more than one occasion my essays for The Imaginative Conservative have been inspired by bumper stickers. Many moons ago, for instance, I wrote “The Wisdom and Wickedness of Women” in response to seeing a bumper sticker declaring that “Well Behaved Women Do Not Make History.” Recently, sitting in traffic, I saw this very same bumper sticker on the car in front of me, beside another which declared the following: “What you call the Liberal Elite, we call being well-educated.” The juxtaposition of these two stickers, carefully selected by the car’s owner to teach me a lesson, set me thinking. I might even say that it taught me a valuable lesson, though not the lesson that my neighbor in the car in front of me meant to teach me.

be fair to her, she is basing her presumption on data that shows that those who are “well-educated” tend to vote for the Democrats whereas those who are less “educated” tend to vote Republican. She votes Democrat because she is well-educated. We, who are presumed to be Republicans (because we are presumed to be stupid), complain that those who are better educated than us (and are therefore better than us) are part of an elite.

Read more at: http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/blog/arrogant-ignorance-well-educated © IntellectualTakeout.org

On more than one occasion my essays for The Imaginative Conservative have been inspired by bumper stickers. Many moons ago, for instance, I wrote “The Wisdom and Wickedness of Women” in response to seeing a bumper sticker declaring that “Well Behaved Women Do Not Make History.” Recently, sitting in traffic, I saw this very same bumper sticker on the car in front of me, beside another which declared the following: “What you call the Liberal Elite, we call being well-educated.” The juxtaposition of these two stickers, carefully selected by the car’s owner to teach me a lesson, set me thinking. I might even say that it taught me a valuable lesson, though not the lesson that my neighbor in the car in front of me meant to teach me

Read more at: http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/blog/arrogant-ignorance-well-educated © IntellectualTakeout.org

On more than one occasion my essays for The Imaginative Conservative have been inspired by bumper stickers. Many moons ago, for instance, I wrote “The Wisdom and Wickedness of Women” in response to seeing a bumper sticker declaring that “Well Behaved Women Do Not Make History.” Recently, sitting in traffic, I saw this very same bumper sticker on the car in front of me, beside another which declared the following: “What you call the Liberal Elite, we call being well-educated.” The juxtaposition of these two stickers, carefully selected by the car’s owner to teach me a lesson, set me thinking. I might even say that it taught me a valuable lesson, though not the lesson that my neighbor in the car in front of me meant to teach me.

Read more at: http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/blog/arrogant-ignorance-well-educated © IntellectualTakeout.org

Let’s take the second bumper sticker first. Clearly designed to offend other motorists, it is supremely supercilious and extremely arrogant. We, the average Joe, whoever we may be, are not as “well-educated” as the royal “we” driving the car in front of us. This pompous “we,” who is presumably a she, presumes that anyone who disagrees with her is poorly educated, whereas she, of course, is well-educated. If we were as well-educated as she, we would agree with her.

To be fair to her, she is basing her presumption on data that shows that those who are “well-educated” tend to vote for the Democrats whereas those who are less “educated” tend to vote Republican. She votes Democrat because she is well-educated. We, who are presumed to be Republicans (because we are presumed to be stupid), complain that those who are better educated than us (and are therefore better than us) are part of an elite.

The problem is that her education is not as good as she thinks it is. If she was educated in our secular system, she would have learned nothing whatsoever about theology, presuming that, if there is a God, he, or probably she, agrees with us. If he or she does not agree with us, he or she can go to hell. And, of course, we can tell God to go to hell because he or she is made in our image (we are not made in his/hers) and we can do what we like with him or her. In short, we can treat God with the same arrogance and superciliousness with which we treat our neighbor: “What God calls sin, we call being well-educated.”

By Joseph Pearce
Joseph Pearce is a Senior Contributor at The Imaginative Conservative. He is writer in residence and director of the Center for Faith and Culture at Aquinas College in Nashville, Tennessee. His works include: G.K. Chesterton: Wisdom and Innocence, Literary Converts, Tolkien: Man and Myth, Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile, The Quest for Shakespeare and Old Thunder: A Life of Hilaire Belloc. He is the series editor of the Ignatius Critical Editions, and editor of the St. Austin Review. Mr. Pearce has hosted two television series for EWTN on Shakespeare’s Catholicism.

Joseph Pearce is writer in residence and director of the Center for Faith and Culture at Aquinas College in Nashville, Tennessee. His works include: "G.K. Chesterton: Wisdom and Innocence," "Literary Converts: Spiritual Inspiration in an Age of Disbelief," "Tolkien: Man and Myth," and "Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile."

Read more at: http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/blog/arrogant-ignorance-well-educated © IntellectualTakeout.org

If she was educated in our secular system, she will know nothing of philosophy, or, if she does, she will believe that there was no philosophy worth taking seriously before René Descartes. She will know nothing of the philosophy of the Greeks, of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, and still less of the great Christian philosophers, such as Augustine or Aquinas. Insofar as she’s even heard of these people, she will presume that they did not know what they were talking about: “What the ancient philosophers call error, we call being well-educated.”

If she was educated in our secular system, she will know nothing of history, or, if she does, she will know it only from her own twenty-first century perspective, or from the twenty-first century perspective of those who taught it to her. History is not about learning from the people of the past, their triumphs and their mistakes, but is about sitting in judgment on the stupidity of our ancestors, who are presumed to be unenlightened, or at least not as enlightened as she is or her teachers are. “What the people of the past believed to be immoral, we call being well-educated.”

If she was educated in our secular system, she will know nothing of great literature, or, if she does, she will have misread it from the perspective of her own twenty-first century pride and prejudice, or from the proud and prejudiced twenty-first century perspective of those who taught her. She would not think of trying to read the great authors of the past through their own eyes because, living in the past, such authors lack the sense and sensibility which she has. “What Jane Austen calls pride and prejudice, we call being well-educated.”

Once we understand what being “well-educated” actually means in the deplorably illiterate age in which we find ourselves, we are not surprised to find these two bumper stickers side by side. One who is “educated” in this way, will obviously believe that “well-behaved women do not make history.” What we, the uneducated, call bad behavior, the liberal elite call being well-educated.

To be “well-educated” is to be ignorant of theology, philosophy, history and the great books of civilization. It is to believe that we have nothing to learn from the Great Conversation that has animated human discourse for three millennia. It is to treat our neighbor in the car next to us with supercilious and scornful contempt, presuming that he is stupid because he is not as “well-educated” as we. It is to treat the greatest minds and the most brilliant writers in history with contempt because they are not as “well-educated” as we. In short, to be “well-educated” is not merely ignorance, it is the arrogance of ignorance      

Source:
The Arrogant Ignorance of the 'Well-Educated' | Intellectual Takeout

Watters Visits Trump's Alma Mater to Talk Tax Reform

A Growing Number of Scholars Are Questioning the Historical Existence of Jesus | Big Think

Christmas is a time of year where people are supposed to put aside their differences and come Ancient pagans brought pine branches into their houses, lit up the night with bonfires and candles, gave gifts, and burned the yule log.
together to celebrate in peace, love, and understanding. Though few question the traditions of the season, many of them predate Christianity in Europe. A lot was borrowed from the Norse tradition of Yule—the celebration of the winter solstice. Others originate with the Roman festival of Saturnalia.

Even Santa Claus comes from a variety of sources. Of course one of them is St. Nicolaus of Turkey. But earlier renditions look far more like the iconography associated with Odin or the Anglo-Saxon god, Woden. Ancient proselytizers when converting the continent found it was much easier if people could keep their traditions, and merely put a Christian stamp on them. And that’s how these were incorporated into the season. Some even question whether or not Jesus was born on December 25. The Orthodox Church for example celebrates Christmas on January seventh, as according to the Julian calendar which predates the Gregorian, a date they claim is more accurate. 

Today more and more, historians and bloggers alike are questioning whether the actual man called Jesus existed. Unfortunately, many of the writings we do have are tainted, the authors being religious scholars or atheists with an axe to grind. One important point is the lack of historical sources. In the bible, whole chunks of his life are missing. Jesus goes from age 12 to 30, without any word of what happened in-between.

Historians have measures in terms of a burden of proof. If an author for instance is writing about a subject more than 100 years after it occurred, it isn’t considered valid. Another important metric is the validity of authorship. If the author cannot be clearly established, it makes the record far less reliable.

What we do have are lots of sources completed several decades after the fact, by authors of the gospels who wanted to promote the faith. The gospels themselves are contradictory. For instance, they tell competing Easter stories. Another problem, there aren’t any real names attached to many of them, but rather an apostle’s who “signed off” on the manuscript. There is also evidence that the gospels were heavily edited over the years.

Read more:
A Growing Number of Scholars Are Questioning the Historical Existence of Jesus | Big Think

Constitution Revolution: The Six Degrees Of Interstate Commerce

Another extremely controversial and constantly abused clause in Article 1, Section 8 is the Commerce Clause. As I mentioned last week, Article 1, Section 8 is the part of the Constitution that lays out what powers Congress has the authority to use. With respect to Commerce, it says Congress has the power:

“To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes…”

At first glance, it doesn’t seem like this clause should be too terribly complicated. The problem is that over the years, the Supreme Court has dramatically expanded the meaning of commerce “among the states” to include any type of activity that directly – or even indirectly – affects interstate commerce.

Using that definition, can you think of anything that wouldn’t affect interstate commerce if you tried hard enough to find a connection?

When it comes to the Commerce Clause, it’s almost like the Supreme Court has created a new game for itself. Have you ever played “The 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon?” Here, it seems like the justices are playing “The 6 degrees of Interstate Commerce” – if you can figure out a way to connect an activity to interstate commerce in six steps or less, Congress can regulate it. Yay!!

I know it seems like I’m exaggerating here (and I am only to the extent that the Supreme Court has never created an actual six-step rule). But in 1942 the Supreme Court actually went so far as to rule that this clause gave Congress the power to regulate a farmer growing wheat on his own private property and then using that same wheat without the product ever leaving his property! You know it took some serious effort to justify that connection.

Clearly the Framers never intended to grant Congress such a ridiculous amount of power with the Commerce Clause.


Read more:
Constitution Revolution: The Six Degrees Of Interstate Commerce | TheBlaze.com

Friday Funnies

Homeopathy Explained

Hump Day Hunnies

The Secret Racist History of the Democratic Party

Kimberly Bloom Jackson 

Have you heard of Josiah Walls or Hiram Rhodes Revels?  How about Joseph Hayne Rainey?  If not, you’re not alone.  I taught history and I never knew half of our nation’s past until I began to re-educate myself by learning from original source materials, rather than modern textbooks written by progressive Democrats with an agenda.

Interestingly, Democrats have long ago erased these historic figures from our textbooks, only to offer deceitful propaganda and economic enticements in an effort to convince people, especially black Americans, that it’s the Democrats rather than Republicans who are the true saviors of civil liberties.  Luckily, we can still venture back into America’s real historical record to find that facts are stubborn things.  Let’s take a closer look.

An 1872 print by Currier and Ives depicts the first seven black Americans elected to the U.S. Congress during the Reconstruction period of 1865 to 1877-- and they’re all Republican!

From left to right:

• Hiram Rhodes Revels, R-MS (1822-1901):  Already an ordained minister, Revels served as an army chaplain and was responsible for recruiting three additional regiments during the Civil War.  He was also elected to the Mississippi Senate in 1869 and the U.S. Senate in 1870, making him America’s first black senator. 
• Rep. Benjamin Turner, R-AL (1825-1894):  Within just five years, Turner went from slave to wealthy businessman.  He also became a delegate to the Alabama Republican State Convention of 1867 and a member of the Selma City Council in 1868.  In 1871, Turner was even elected to the U.S. Congress.
• Rep. Robert DeLarge, R-SC (1842-1874):  Although born a slave, DeLarge chaired the Republican Platform Committee in 1867 and served as delegate at the Constitutional Convention of 1868.  From 1868 to 1870, he was also elected to the State House of Representatives and later Congress, serving from 1871 to 1873.
• Rep. Josiah Walls, R-FL (1842-1905): Walls was a slave who was forced to fight for the Confederate Army until he was captured by Union troops.  He promptly enlisted with the Union and eventually became an officer. In 1870, he was elected to the U.S. Senate. Unfortunately, harassing Democrats questioned his qualifications until he was officially expelled.  Although he was re-elected after the first legal challenge, Democrats took control of Florida and Walls was prohibited from returning altogether.
• Rep. Jefferson Long, R-GA (1836-1901): Long was also born into slavery, and he too became a successful business man.  However, when Democrats boycotted his business he suffered substantial financial loses.  But that didn’t stop Long, who in 1871 became the first black representative to deliver a congressional speech in the U.S. House. 
• Rep. Joseph Hayne Rainey, R-SC (1832-1887):  Although born a slave, Rainey became the first black Speaker of the U.S. House for a brief period in 1870. In fact, he served in Congress longer than any other black America at that time.
• Rep. Robert Brown Elliot, R-SC (1842-1884): Elliot helped to organize the Republican Party throughout rural South Carolina.  He was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1870 and reelected in 1872.  In 1874, he was elected to the State House of Representatives and eventually served as Speaker of the House in the State Legislature.

Clearly, the latter half of the 19th Century, and for much of the early half of the 20th Century, it was the Republican Party that was the party of choice for blacks. How can this be? Because the Republican Party was formed in the late 1850s as an oppositional force to the pro-slavery Democratic Party.  Republicans wanted to return to the principles that were originally established in the republic’s founding documents and in doing so became the first party to openly advocated strong civil rights legislation.  Voters took notice and in 1860 Abraham Lincoln was elected President along with a Republican Congress.  This infuriated the southern Democrats, who soon afterwards left Congress and took their states with them to form what officially became known as The Slaveholding Confederate States of America.

Meanwhile, Republicans pushed full steam ahead.  Take, for example, the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution that officially abolished slavery in 1864.  Of the 118 Republicans in Congress (House and Senate) at the time, all 118 voted in favor of the legislation, while only 19 of 82 Democrats voted likewise.  Then there’s the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments guaranteeing rights of citizenship and voting to black males.  Not a single Democrat voted in favor of either the Fourteenth (House and Senate) or Fifteenth (House and Senate) Amendments.

In spite of this, in almost every Southern state, the Republican Party was actually formed by blacks, not whites. Case in point is Houston, Texas, where 150 blacks and 20 whites created the Republican Party of Texas. But perhaps most telling of all with respect to the Republican Party’s achievements is that black men were continuously elected to public office.  For example, 42 blacks were elected to the Texas legislature, 112 in Mississippi, 190 in South Carolina, 95 representatives and 32 senators in Louisiana, and many more elected in other states -- all Republican. D

Read more here:
Articles: The Secret Racist History of the Democratic Part

We’re Out Of Problems

by Derek Hunter

It’s 2016, right? I hope so because that’s the year I put on my check when I paid my taxes.

That’s means we’re at around 6,000 years or so of recorded human history, right? Add to that that thousands of years unrecorded before that, and you realize people have been around here for a while. Yet, in the year 2016, we find ourselves in a heated debate over what is or isn’t a man or a woman.
We are out of problems.

Seriously, human beings have our issues, but we are out of substantial problems. Especially in the civilized world, particularly the United States.

Since we are out of problems – we have food, shelter, medicine, etc. – we’ve decided not to celebrate but rather to create problems out of thin air.

Making up problems is a luxury afforded us only by our success. The poor in the United States are some of the richest people to ever live. To distract from this fact, brought to us by capitalism, our progressive friends focus on the differences between what some possess compared to others.

The implication of the left’s obsession with “income inequality” is someone has less because someone else got more. Unless you’ve been physically robbed, this is a childish claim. That so many believe it and fixate on it is a testament to just how good we have it.

Mark Zuckerberg is not worth $35 billion because you aren’t, or because anyone else isn’t. He didn’t take $35 from a billion people. His wealth was created, not taken. Earned – a concept we used to understand and celebrate, but now go out of our way to scorn.

Many of our nation’s poor are fat, lazy and satisfied. They have flat screen TVs and cable, microwaves and Internet, and all the food they need. Even our homeless have cellphones. Because we don’t have to wake every day to forage for food and hope some simple scrape won’t lead to an infection that kills us, we’re afforded the luxury of feeling cheated by someone having more.
Rather than have that difference serve as motivation or aspiration, it’s a wedge – a manufactured problem allowing people to obtain society’s most coveted status: victim.

Success has been shunned; victim is the new hero. It’s a sham and a game, and even the most powerful among us play along.

In Hillary Clinton’s campaign speeches she spouts off on how “we are going to keep our families safe and our country strong, and we’re going to defend our rights—civil rights, voting rights, workers’ rights, women’s rights, LGBT rights, and rights for people with disabilities.”

Read the rest:
We’re Out Of Problems | John Hawkins' Right Wing News

A Brief History of Father’s Day | The Art of Manliness

Father’s Day is coming up, so in honor of dear old dad, the Art of Manliness is presenting a series of

father-themed posts. Today we look into the history of Father’s Day. Sadly, retailers and marketers, in an effort to make a quick buck, have bastardized the original meaning of Father’s Day. A holiday that was supposed to honor dad and enumerate his special qualities, now is used to sell chili pepper ties and shop vacs. Hopefully by understanding why the concept of Father’s Day was created, we can better celebrate and honor the fathers who raised us into men.

The History of Father’s Day in the United States

There are two stories of when the first Father’s Day was celebrated. According to some accounts, the first Father’s Day was celebrated in Washington state on June 19, 1910. A woman by the name of Sonora Smart Dodd came up with the idea of honoring and celebrating her father while listening to a Mother’s Day sermon at church in 1909. She felt as though mothers were getting all the acclaim while fathers were equally deserving of a day of praise (She would probably be displeased that Mother’s Day still gets the lion’s share of attention).

Sonora’s dad was quite a man. William Smart, a veteran of the Civil War, was left a widower when his wife died while giving birth to their sixth child. He went on to raise the six children by himself on their small farm in Washington. To show her appreciation for all the hard work and love William gave to her and her siblings, Sonora thought there should be a day to pay homage to him and other dads like him. She initially suggested June 5th, the anniversary of her father’s death to be the designated day to celebrate Father’s Day, but due to some bad planning, the celebration in Spokane, Washington was deferred to the third Sunday in June.

The other story of the first Father’s Day in America happened all the way on the other side of the country in Fairmont, West Virginia on July 5, 1908. Grace Golden Clayton suggested to the minister of the local Methodist church that they hold services to celebrate fathers after a deadly mine explosion killed 361 men.

While Father’s Day was celebrated locally in several communities across the country, unofficial support to make the celebration a national holiday began almost immediately. William Jennings Bryant was one of its staunchest proponents. In 1924, President Calvin “Silent Cal” Coolidge recommended that Father’s Day become a national holiday. But no official action was taken.
In 1966, Lyndon B. Johnson, through an executive order, designated the third Sunday in June as the official day to celebrate Father’s Day. However, it wasn’t until 1972, during the Nixon administration, that Father’s Day was officially recognized as a national holiday.

Read more here:
A Brief History of Father’s Day | The Art of Manliness

Some More Humor

Since I will be busy most of the day today I am going to leave all of you a little humor for the weekend. Enjoy your Father's Day and celebrate those that are still with us and those that have passed on.

Friday Funnies