January 21, 2020

Phunny Phoney Phinicum Phamily


Pipeline Psyop – It’s Bullshit – And We Get a Ghost Cop..

Guess who ain’t really dead and gone… He’s in the video dressed like a LEO..


I’m not going to waste much of my time with this.. Because the citizenry are dumbed down, blind and deaf..

But I will say this, the pipeline psyop is crawling with actors.. I knew Tim was alive and around but I wasn’t expecting to see him.. But whatever.. Rider trucks and fertilizer don’t knock down buildings..


What Was That About Welfare Ranching Subsidies Again?



New Superior Sophist Jesuitism Maxims Enforcer General Elected


Are You Sure You’ve Got Curves?



Lucy Lives On A Ball



Which One DO You Live On?



Efforts to Take Down State-Level Religious Protection, Freedom of Conscience and Public Accommodation Laws

Investor Alert: Procter & Gamble Shareholders Urged to Reject Highly-Politicized Shareholder Proposal

National Center for Public Policy Research Calls on Procter & Gamble Investors to Reject Northstar Asset Management Resolution Designed to Enlist the Company into Efforts to Take Down State-Level Religious Protection, Freedom of Conscience and Public Accommodation Laws

Activist Proposal Seeks to Have Procter & Gamble Join with Companies Such as Apple and Google in Advancing Liberal Political Agenda

“Northstar’s Proposal is Bad for Business, Bad for Investors and a Threat to Religious Liberty, Common Sense and Freedom of Conscience”

Cincinnati, OH/Washington, D.C.  In advance of tomorrow’s annual meeting of Procter & Gamble shareholders in Cincinnati, Ohio, the National Center for Public Policy Research is urging all of the company’s investors to reject Northstar Asset Management’s shareholder proposal that is designed to convince Procter & Gamble to join its crusade against religious freedom, public accommodation and freedom of conscience laws.

The National Center’s Free Enterprise Project Director Justin Danhof, Esq. intends to speak out against Northstar’s proposal at tomorrow’s meeting.

“Northstar’s proposal is bad for business, bad for investors and a threat to religious liberty, common sense and freedom of conscience,” said Danhof. “Northstar is a left-wing political agent that is working to undermine certain conservative state laws. Joining one side or the other of hot-button political issues would not benefit Procter & Gamble’s investors in any way. We are calling for all investors to vote against Northstar’s proposal and send its political agenda packing.”

Northstar’s proposal calls for Procter & Gamble to become politically involved in certain political battles over state laws in locations such as Mississippi, Tennessee and North Carolina.

Northstar proposal takes issue with a religious protection law in Mississippi. While that law is currently on hold pending appeal, Northstar claims that it “legalizes discrimination” but Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant has said “the law simply provides religious accommodations granted by many other states and federal law.”

Northstar also inaccurately characterizes a Tennessee freedom of conscience law as anti-LGBT as a way to score political points. That law merely allows for a counselor to refer a patient to another professional if he believes treating that patient would conflict with his sincerely-held beliefs. Pro-LGBT counselors can hold sincerely-held beliefs just as well as an ardent Christian or Muslim counselor can.

Finally, Northstar’s proposal targets North Carolina’s much-debated public accommodation law which states that public restrooms, locker rooms and shower facilities, including some in educational settings, should be used by individuals based on their biological sex.

Northstar implies that Procter & Gamble should engage in public policy campaigns about such laws and consider relocating operations from regions with these types of laws.

“Procter & Gamble has little, if anything, to gain by becoming a political pawn of Northstar Asset Management. While liberals may support Northstar’s policy positions, many religious and conservative folks would feel differently. Either way, choosing sides in heated political contests does nothing to improving Procter & Gamble’s business, operations or duties to its shareholders,” said Danhof.

Procter & Gamble’s board of directors also recommends that the company’s investors reject the proposal. Northstar’s complete proposal, and Procter & Gamble’s response to it, are available on pages 63 and 64 of the company’s proxy statement, which is available here.

The National Center’s Free Enterprise Project is the nation’s preeminent free-market activist group focusing on shareholder activism and the confluence of big government and big business. In 2014-15, National Center representatives participated in 69 shareholder meetings advancing free-market ideals in the areas of health care, energy, taxes, subsidies, regulations, religious freedom, food policies, media bias, gun rights, workers’ rights and many other important public policy issues. Tomorrow’sProcter & Gamble meeting marks its 21st shareholder meeting of 2016.

Just this year, the Free Enterprise Project has been featured in the Washington Post, the Washington Times, Fox News “Cavuto,” the Drudge Report, the Financial Times, Crain’s Chicago Business, Hollywood Reporter, the Los Angeles Times, Fortune, Newsmax, Daily Caller, Lifezette, the Seattle Times, the Quad City Times, the San Francisco Chronicle, and the Chicago Tribune among many others.

The National Center’s Free Enterprise Project is also prominently featured in Wall Street Journal writer Kimberley Strassel’s new book, “The Intimidation Game: How the Left is Silencing Free Speech,” published by the Hachette Book Group.

The National Center for Public Policy Research, founded in 1982, is a non-partisan, free-market, independent conservative think-tank. Ninety-four percent of its support comes from individuals, less than four percent from foundations, and less than two percent from corporations. It receives over 350,000 individual contributions a year from over 96,000 active recent contributors. Sign up for free issue alerts here or follow us on Twitter at @NationalCenter.


Animal Rights You Say

People that want rights for animals don’t really want rights for animals they want rights for their emotional problems. If animals are given rights then how do these activists propose mankind get animals to respect other animals rights. Especially when these activists cannot respect the rights of people that either agree with or disagree with what it is they think they want. If mankind were to give animals rights then all animals that violate other animals rights must be prosecuted. Like me, since In your minds I am an animal when any animal damages me or my property I want my rights upheld so the animal must be prosecuted. In the case of  the wolf chewing up my horse a bullet is prosecution. Same as a bullet for a terrorist is justified prosecution. Warfare against ones enemies is justified prosecution. According to the legalese of man.. Are you sure you want animals rights? End wild animal management and even domestic animals management and conflicts over rights will increase. So nothing will change. We already have domestic animal prisons all over the country. And we have zoos.  When you animals rights dummies get the animals to stop damaging each other, and the property of mankind then I’ll buy into your animal rights bullshit.  In the meantime I’m going to eat wildlife, because wildlife sees nothing wrong with that. Because wildlife eats wildlife. I agree with wildlife, wildlife is damn tasty stuff. Yum yum..






Niel Tyson deGrasse stated he is agnostic. He then goes on to say Intelligent Design is the philosophy of ignorance. Why doesn’t he say that both the philosophy of Intelligent Design and the philosophy of the evolutionary theory are both philosophies of ignorance? Because to be agnostic means both theories are impossible to know. So how can anyone claim they know if these two philosophies are philosophies of ignorance? It seems to me to to call oneself an agnostic and then obviously favor one philosophical world view over the other is the real philosophy of ignorance. Or it is the philosophy of deception. Science like all traditions of men, legalese and religions can be used to do good, or bad things..

To state one is agnostic is an admission of ignorance. So if one is ignorant how can one in the position of influence like deGrasse go ahead and say things that will increase the division between these two world views to the point of destroying the possibility of reasonable discourse concerning the scientific validity of either view? How can one claim to be agnostic while at the same time one is practicing Gnosticism? Of having vast knowledge? deGrasse stated in an interview the earth is Pear shaped.. Then why don’t the NASA “pictures” of the Earth prove this statement? So we’re on a Pear shaped earth that is spinning at 1100mph while moving through space circling the SUN at 60,000+mph.. And we don’t feel the wobble.. And its all by happenstance.. It has to be an accident because no intelligent designer would create such a flawed model that denies the laws of physics..

Ok, I’m going back to my woodpile..

agnoiology, n., the doctrine of ignorance [philos]—Coined by J.-F. Ferrier in 1854 fr. Gk..yvoix, ignorance, and one who speaks in a certain manner]; one who deals with a certain topic]’Gk yvoix is formed. “to know” see gnostic..

agnostic, n., one who professes that the existence of a First Cause and the essential nature of things are not and cannot be known.

source, Ernest Klein – A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary Of The English Language. Volume 1 A-K.. 1966

My book shelf.