22h50 UTC; TUESDAY, 6 MAY 2014: Should the preceding be seen as a more-or-less accurate reflection of what Your Correspondent regards this blog, he should like to apologise at this time.

Meanwhile, at least one Christian Right leader has gone on record urging like-minded conservatives to--well, let's have Right Wing Watch, a People For the American Way project exposing right-wing prolefeed, explain:
In a blog post Friday, anti-gay activist Scott Lively speculated that President Obama and the “New World Order” oppose Russia’s seizure of Crimea because of President Vladimir Putin’s “unequivocal stand against homosexual perversion.” Lively urged his fellow conservatives to back Putin in the Ukrainian conflict because Russia is “the only world power that is standing up to the LGBT agenda and embracing Biblical values on family issues.”

Lively – who has tried to take personal credit for Russia’s “gay propaganda” ban – was responding to the Daily Beast’s report that Putin had imposed secret sanctions on “Obama campaign fundraisers tied to the LGBT community.” Putin has used opposition to LGBT rights as a powerful form of political currency in his campaign in Ukraine.
Which, in any case, should raise red flags about Possible Divided or Questionable Loyalties on Meneer Lively's part with the likes of the FBI should there be any sort of war or emergency situation relative to Ukraine. I'm not sure if there is still a super-secretive DETCOM ("detain as Communist") watchlist held by the FBI or even the Department of Homeland Security such as was kept well into the Joe McCarthy era; however, the FBI may want to ask questions of Lively vis-a-vis where his patriot love really lies in a time of possible crisis.

Which turns out to also be of interest to Chinese media conduits as are in the crosshairs of BBC Monitoring's daily review of Chinese media (and which is dedicated to such among conservative ranks as still insist that any and all hope for AmeriKKKan Socioeconomic Recovery depends on our "being more like China"):
"Sending troops there is not the top option for Russia, but if the situation in eastern Ukraine worsens, it might consider doing so. However, Russia will avoid a large-scale conflict," Li Shuyin, military expert with the People's Liberation Army Academy of Military Sciences, says.

"If eastern Ukraine gains independence, Moscow will be in direct confrontation with the West... Nobody will benefit from the disintegration of Ukraine," he tells the Liberation Army Daily.

Echoing similar sentiments, Feng Yujun, expert on Russian affairs at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, agrees that Mr Putin will not invade Ukraine under "rational circumstances".

"Moscow's relationship with the West and its international image will be greatly affected if it sends troops to Ukraine. However, Russia may not do that because it has other ways of influencing the situation, including making use of pro-Moscow militants, extremists as well as civilians in Ukraine," he tells the Shenzhen Satellite TV.

An article in the Beijing Times describes the US as "an onlooker" and criticises it for "provocations".

"Because of Ukraine's proximity to Russia and the EU, it will be a massive disaster for both if the crisis escalates and turns into a civil war. However, the US, which is like an onlooker, will not be much affected," it says.

"Moscow has been driven to the corner and it will go all out in the fight. In addition, Ukraine's conflicting sectors are still enmeshed in their heated and irrational political struggle. If Washington instigates further provocations and watches the troubles from far, we might not see positive results in the next round of [peace] talks," it says.
Some qualification needs to be brought into yesterday's Supreem Court ruling upholding the "tradition" of preceding government meetings with inherently Christian prayers: In its 5-4 ruling, the solons held that such prayers were permissable so long as they were of a non-sectarian nature, and did not unwittingly disparage other faiths or such so practicing in the context of same.

Click the relationship with graphics easier to read and understand.

As I've been saying for some while now (and which I'll say again), the notion certain specimens of conservative Zealotry and True Belief continue to have about "helping the poor to help themselves" is willfully and consciously subject to overt doublethink these same specimens thereof refuse to openly acknowledge IS doublethink, plain and simple. (As in insisting that the Lower Classes "need to turn to themselves all the more" in making such possible; i.e., channeling an inherent Natural Unity and Identity of the Volk towards their Greater Luscious Glory to attain the motivation, tools and resources towards such an end).

Which is even more difficult considering that the targeted expected in this line of thought to "benefit" thereby lack any sort of general ideas, nor are they expected to have any such because of their being, after Stewie Griffin, "the kind of idiot you see at Taco Bell at one in the morning! The guy who just whiffed his way down the bar skank ladder!"

Or is conservative thought about "empowering the poor" expected to be one based on "cashflow gifting" schemes invoking Paying it Forward as its model and inspiration (cf. the Pyramid Clubs as made the rounds for a few years after World War II, inevitably collapsing for want of fresh monies)?

And in closing, perhaps it's safe to suggest that the following sentiment especially applies to conservative prolefeeders and such groups, sects and movements as enable them all the more in hopes of "winning over hearts and minds" among the Unwashed Masses of the Moronic Underworld:

"What will happen NEXT?!"
Log in tomorrow--and FIND OUT!!!


DreamHost review