Tuesday, October 28, 2014


"Vow, kids, vasn't it SCARY vhen Leonard the gravedigger 
killed off those four cans of Hamm's beer?"
~ Count Floyd

'Monster Chiller Horror Theater'

I met Old Weird Eric on the second day of 5th grade and we formed a friendship that lasted through high school and beyond. (We've since kind of lost track of each other, living in different states.) Eric and I used to love the old monster movies on late night television. We were always catching the showings of 'War Of The Worlds', 'The Monster From The Black Lagoon', and 'Frankenstein', et al.

And there was always some Horror Theatre host - a B or C-list celebrity - like Vampira, Elvira, Sinister Seymour, and years later, The Crypt Keeper.

My all-time favorite Horror movie host, however, is COUNT FLOYD, the fictional character from Second City Television (SCTV).

SCTV ran at the same time Saturday Night Live did, but it was a godzillian times funnier than SNL. I didn't learn about it until about 1988 or so. My then-girlfriend The Countess turned me onto it and I love it still. SCTV was supposed to be a day in the life of a third-rate television station with a nonexistent budget. The show had a ton of great comedic talent and they performed a lot of spoofs or parodies of just about everything one could think of, from movies and TV shows to singers and news broadcasters.

See, like this: 




My favorite recurring character was Count Floyd (played by Joe Flaherty) of 'Monster Chiller Horror Theatre'. The station was always supplying him with horror movies that were total dogs, and poor Count Floyd (who howled like a werewolf, despite being a vampire) would have to work his cape off trying to convince the kids that they'd seen a "vedy skedy" movie. 

One of the running gags was Count Floyd's showing of 'Doctor Tongue's 3-D Horror Movies'. The problem though was that the movies were so cheaply produced that they weren't really filmed in 3-D at all. So the actors would occasionally shove objects toward the camera to try simulating a 3-D effect. If you don't think that's funny, kids, you'd better not go to college!

To celebrate "Happy Halloweenie", which is just around the corner, I decided to share with you some great Count Floyd moments and "skedy" movies.




WHOA! Hold On! That really WAS scary!

This is supposed to be funny, NOT skedy.
Let's try this again, shall we?... 

'Dr. Tongue's Evil House Of Pancakes'


'Dr. Tongue's 3-D House Of Stewardesses'




'Blood Sucking Monkeys From West Mifflin, Pennsylvania':


'Whispers Of The Wolf'


 ~ Stephen T. McCarthy

YE OLDE COMMENT POLICY: All comments, pro and con, are welcome. However, ad hominem attacks and disrespectful epithets will not be tolerated (read: "posted"). After all, this isn’t Amazon.com, so I don’t have to put up with that kind of bovine excrement.

Sunday, October 26, 2014


In my previous blog bit I told y'all that currently my favorite political writer is SELWYN DUKE whose excellent articles you'll find HERE. 

I didn't tell ya then but I'm tellin' ya now that two of my favorite sources for current event news are World Net Daily and The New American. The former site has done more than anyone else to expose the truth about Barack Obama's forged long-form birth certificate, and the latter site has been ahead of the “New World Order” political conspiracy curve for many decades (although there's a Mormonism connection and some questionable stuffs in their past that one should bear in mind). 

Today I want to yak to ya about a straight-shooting Christian minister whose articles I like to read.

CHUCK BALDWIN tells is like it is, and he once even ran for President representing 'The Constitution Party', which is the only political party I actually respect. Naturally, I don't agree with Chuck Baldwin's views 100% of the time, but close enough. (One area of frequent disagreement pertains to my belief that Baldwin is unable to see Ronald Reagan for what he really was: just another deceptive, Big Government NeoCon, but one who talked a particularly good game. Dig into objective details of Reagan's presidency and you'll soon see that he wasn't the conservative hero the Republican party wants We The People to think he was. He was just “more of the same” but with better words; a better “actor” with a better act.)

Even the liberal propaganda site Wikipedia has been unable to dig up any really good dirt on Christian pastor CHUCK BALDWIN: 


Below are links to some of CHUCK BALDWIN's articles, in some cases followed by selected excerpts (not to be confused with “unselected excerpts”). 

October 24, 2014 

When I started my radio talk show back in 1994 – and for the next six years hosting the show – I was considered a hero by conservatives everywhere. Between my leadership position with the Moral Majority back in the 1980s and my radio talk show in the 1990s, I walked shoulder-to-shoulder with practically every notable conservative leader, including Christian leaders, one could think of. I traveled the country speaking with, and for, the most visible conservative leaders in America. I became friends with a host of U.S. congressmen and senators, not to mention several State governors. I even sat at the "king's table" with President Ronald Reagan and Vice President George H.W. Bush. I was one of the "darlings" of conservatism. Just about anybody who was anybody was a guest on my show.

I only mention all of that so readers can understand my background – along with the "rest of the story" that brought me to where I am today.

Back in those days, I fell right in lock-step with the left-right paradigm: Republicans were good; Democrats were bad. And even if the Republican was downright bad, he wasn't as bad as the Democrat. That doctrine was sacrosanct and unassailable. And I believed that malarkey as much as anyone.

September 6, 2014 

I was told by a Marine Corps officer, who was there, that last year Marines at Twentynine Palms, California, were asked in a survey if they were ordered to turn their weapons on the American citizenry for the purpose of gun confiscation, would they comply with the order. Sixty-six percent of them said yes, they would. Two-thirds! When this same question was asked of Marines at Twentynine Palms back in the 90s, 26% of the Marines said yes. This is a very disturbing trend. …

Look at what happens more and more frequently at routine traffic stops. My mother-in-law (who is in her eighties) was recently pulled over for a routine traffic stop here in Montana. (She must have been pulled over for driving too SLOW.) Two officers came out of the police car, and one of them was actually pointing his pistol at her head. Her vehicle was not suspected of having been part of a felony. They ran her plates. They knew who she was. To point a gun at a harmless, innocent senior citizen – who is suspected of no violent crime – is the mark of a burgeoning Police State. …

It all begins with philosophy. The philosophy being drilled into police officers today is that of an "us versus them" mentality. In the eyes of a Police State, we are not citizens to be protected; we are enemy targets who are guilty until proven innocent. Plus, the phrase that we hear constantly repeated today by law enforcement personnel and spokesmen is "the safety of the officer.

Wait a minute! The sworn duty of a police officer is to obey the Constitution (including the Bill of Rights), which is designed to protect the rights, liberties, and safely of the American people. The role of the police officer is to protect the safety of the public. Any man or woman who volunteers to put on a badge should be consciously willing to put his or her life on the line to protect the public. That's what their job is all about. And no one forces them to take this risk; they take it of their own volition. Of course you men and women of law enforcement want to go home at the end of your shift. But so do the people of your community. 

August 29, 2011 

"[C]onspiracy nuts." Right? Isn't that what anyone is called who believes that the federal government hides the truth about what happens and conjures up a convenient "official" story to sell to the American people? Isn't that what the media calls anyone who dares to question any "official" report? Isn't that what Glenn Beck calls them? Isn't that what Joe Scarborough calls them? Isn't that what Bill O'Reilly calls them? Isn't that what Rush Limbaugh calls them? They are "conspiracy nuts." Right? … 

I want to go ahead and just say up front: I believe that anyone who thinks that there are no conspiracies that many times involve people and agencies at the highest levels of government and business is downright simple minded, willingly ignorant, incredibly naïve, or has a personal, vested reason to remain clueless. … 

9/11 Twin Towers and Pentagon Attacks

There has been so much written on this subject, I will let readers fend for themselves as to personal research on the matter. Without wading too deeply into this discussion (and for the sake of column space), let me ask just one simple question. Pray tell, what took down Building 7? To this good hour, I have not heard one single plausible explanation proffered by any government or media representative that explains why Building 7 collapsed.

Do I believe that the government is purposefully keeping the American people in the dark as to what really happened on 9/11/01? You bet I do! Do I believe that there is a cover-up of crucial evidence related to 9/11 by both the federal government and the national news media? You bet I do! 

August 19, 2011 

Pray tell, where do you find anything in the New Testament about churches joining with the State, or being incorporated by the State, or being required to submit to the State? It's not there! The 501c3 corporation status has turned the Lord's Church into mere creatures of the State.

Therefore, please remember, when you "worship" inside these government corporations, when you give your tithes and offerings to these government corporations, you are NOT supporting "the Lord's work." You are supporting the work of the State. You might as well be paying taxes; it amounts to virtually the same thing. The same is true for all these TV preachers. They are all 501c3 incorporated.

This is why many pastors do not speak out on the burning issues of the day. This is why neither he nor his church will take a stand for anything. This is why he won't "get involved in politics." He is a corporate officer of the State, and he will not jeopardize his standing as such.

I don't care how "nice" the preacher is! It matters not how knowledgeable you think he is of the Scriptures. It doesn't amount to a hill of beans if he knows Hebrew and Greek and how many degrees he has behind his name. If he is a corporate officer of the State, he will never preach the "whole counsel of God;" he will never be willing to stand in front of his congregation and tell "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help him God." He won't do it! Why? He knows he is a State corporate officer, and he knows where the line is drawn. Ditto for the church deacons and trustees (I mean, corporate officers) that support him.

If the so-called "Religious Right" would get as excited about replacing these government-toadies (called pastors) that we have in our "churches" and putting honest-to-God, tell-it-like-it-is, fearless prophets in their pulpits as they are about replacing a "liberal" and putting some so-called "conservative" Republican in the White House, we really could have revival in America! The problem is not the White House; the problem is the church house!

Is it any wonder that the donor base for these religious-talking Republican politicians is mostly identical to the donor base for these religious-talking government corporations called churches? They are Siamese twins! This is why the "Religious Right" will never offend the GOP establishment: they are both sucking from the same teat! And the sow providing the milk for both is the federal government, via its non-profit corporation status, corporate welfare programs, and endless cash for the Warfare State. …

The motivating factor for most of these government corporations is the same as it is for private corporations: money. Money drives everything they do. The workshops, seminars, how-to manuals, etc., are all geared to making these government corporations more attractive and appealing to the donor base. Just as Jesus said to the moneychangers in His day, these corporate officers have turned God's House into "a den of thieves."

August 23, 2013 

I recently read a column by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts that was so good I wish I had written it. …

I realize that anyone who dares to contradict accepted politically correct dogma is demonized as being "radical," "extremist," or racist," and some people have tried to characterize Dr. Roberts in that vein. But it should be obvious to any honest and objective person that Paul Craig Roberts has one of the most distinguished resumes of anyone in America today. 

Paul recently wrote a column entitled, "Humanity Is Drowning In Washington's Criminality". I realize it is difficult for most Americans to conceive the idea that their federal government could actually be criminal, but the case Roberts makes in his column cannot be tossed aside as the ranting of some right-wing nut (as if there are no left-wing nuts).

Roberts writes, 

"Americans will soon be locked into an unaccountable police state unless US Representatives and Senators find the courage to ask questions and to sanction the executive branch officials who break the law, violate the Constitution, withhold information from Congress, and give false information about their crimes against law, the Constitution, the American people and those in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Guantanamo, and elsewhere. Congress needs to use the impeachment power that the Constitution provides and cease being subservient to the lawless executive branch. The US faces no threat that justifies the lawlessness and abuse of police powers that characterize the executive branch in the 21st century.

"Impeachment is the most important power of Congress. Impeachment is what protects the citizens, the Constitution, and the other branches of government from abuse by the executive branch. If the power to remove abusive executive branch officials is not used, the power ceases to exist. An unused power is like a dead letter law. Its authority disappears. By acquiescing to executive branch lawlessness, Congress has allowed the executive branch to place itself above law and to escape accountability for its violations of law and the Constitution.

"National Intelligence Director James R. Clapper blatantly lied to Congress and remains in office. Keith B. Alexander, Director of the National Security Agency, has also misled Congress, and he remains in office. Attorney General Holder avoids telling Congress the truth on just about every subject, and he also remains in office. The same can be said for President Obama, one of the great deceivers of our time, who is so adverse to truth that truth seldom finds its way out of his mouth.”

August 7, 2010 

You see, the GOP (including their lackeys at Fox News) either really don't know what a constitutional conservative looks like, or they do know what he or she looks like and don't want them leading the party. I believe the answer is the latter, but in either case, the GOP continually does nothing to groom constitutionalist conservatives for leadership. Just the opposite: such people are routinely ignored, shunned, besmirched, or impugned. (Can anyone say, "Ron Paul"?) Is it any wonder that by the time the general election comes around, the GOP candidate for President is usually nothing more than a Democrat-lite, or a "Democrat in Drag" to borrow from Steve Farrell.

That brings me to one of the people that the talking heads at Fox News and other GOP propaganda centers are routinely discussing as their 2012 Presidential hopeful: former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich.

According to Reuters News, "Republican former House of Representatives Speaker Newt Gingrich said on Sunday [July 25th] he will decide after November's congressional elections whether he will make a run for the White House in 2012." 

Here's what Gingrich is looking at: he wants to see if the GOP makes significant gains in both houses of Congress in the November elections. If the GOP wins one house (especially if enough real conservatives win), I predict Gingrich will enter the race. So he can ride a conservative wave into the White House in 2012? No! So he can derail any potential conservative momentum that the Tea Parties might be able to create in this year's November elections. You see, Newt Gingrich is the Grinch Who Stole Conservatism from the GOP. 

Some of us are old enough to remember Newt Gingrich's "Contract with America" that produced huge Republican victories in both houses of Congress back in 1994. However, what did that "Conservative Revolution" (as it was called then) actually produce? The answer: NOTHING! Newt's promise of smaller government was immediately forgotten. Instead, Gingrich, along with Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, facilitated and helped orchestrate further expansion of the federal government. The "less government" theme that swept house freshmen such as Joe Scarborough, Steve Largent, Sonny Bono, Bob Barr, Helen Chenoweth, John Shadegg, and J.C. Watts into Congress quickly evaporated and this new neocon Republican Party was born. 

January 27, 2009 

It is hard to believe, but a majority of Americans (including Christians and conservatives) seem oblivious to the fact that there is a very real, very legitimate New World Order (NWO) unfolding. In the face of overwhelming evidence, most Americans not only seem totally unaware of this reality, they seem unwilling to even remotely entertain the notion. 

On one hand, it is understandable that so many Americans would be ignorant of the emerging New World Order. After all, the mainstream media refuses to report, or even acknowledge, the NWO. Even "conservative" commentators and talk show hosts such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, or Joe Scarborough refuse to discuss it. And when listeners call these respective programs, these "conservative" hosts usually resort to insulting the caller as being some kind of "conspiracy kook." One host even railed that if anyone questions the government line on 9/11, we should "lock them up and throw away the key." So much for freedom of speech!

This is an area — perhaps the central area — where liberals and conservatives agree: they both show no patience or tolerance for anyone who believes that global government (in any form) is evolving. One has to wonder how otherwise intelligent and thoughtful people can be so brain dead when it comes to this issue. It makes one wonder who is really pulling their strings, doesn't it?

The list of notable personalities who have openly referenced or called for some kind of global government or New World Order is extremely lengthy. Are all these people "kooks" or "conspiracy nuts"? Why would world leaders — including presidents, secretaries of state, and high government officials; including the media, financial, and political elite — constantly refer to something that doesn't exist? Why would they write about, talk about, or openly promote a New World Order, if there is no such thing? 

September 24, 2008 

Yesterday, September 22, Congressman Ron Paul publicly gave me his endorsement for the office of President of the United States. In his blog at the Campaign for Liberty web site, he said, "I'm supporting Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party candidate." …

I was happy to support Ron Paul during the Republican primaries, because I believe in the same principles. I personally campaigned for him in several states and in this column. And I asked (or expected) nothing in return. In fact, I have stated this publicly, time and again: if Ron Paul had won the Republican nomination for President, I would not be running. I would still be supporting Ron Paul.

I am running for President because the Republican Party rejected Ron's Paul's message of constitutional government, fiscal responsibility, and non-interventionism. Therefore, someone had to pick up the mantle and carry this message into the general election. …

The American people still have a real choice instead of the big-government, globalist, interventionist, "big box" party candidates, John McCain and Barack Obama.

Ron Paul's message is my message; Ron Paul's fight is my fight.

I want to return America to constitutional government. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." (Amendment X) I believe that, and will govern the Executive branch of the federal government accordingly. 

These other articles you oughta read in their entirety. (To be honest, I'm tired of copying excerpts and, truthfully, EACH article mentioned above should also be read in its entirety.) 

August 21, 2010 
Sez STMcC: “Good selections all, but especially 12/23/1913.” 

January 30, 2009 

August 11, 2007 

And more of Pastor Chuck Baldwin's articles can be found HERE.

Americonned Sheeple, you need-a... READ, PRAY, LOVE. 

~ Stephen T. McCarthy 

YE OLDE COMMENT POLICY: All comments, pro and con, are welcome. However, ad hominem attacks and disrespectful epithets will not be tolerated (read: "posted"). After all, this isn’t Amazon.com, so I don’t have to put up with that kind of bovine excrement.

Tuesday, October 7, 2014



Aww, not to worry. I wasn't gonna leave ya without giving you website links to take my place. Not that I think I'm totally replaceable but... these ought to help ease the strain 'n' pain during the post-STMcC-partum depression period.

There's an extremely intelligent, logical, witty writer whom I've been a fan of for several years now. He is a Christian conservative thinker who possesses exceptional skill at cutting right through the B.S. and getting to the heart of a matter. His big hero is apparently G.K. Chesterton (as he quotes him in many of his articles) and he is fond of imaginative wordplay.

In my last blog bit's comment section, reference was made to my tendency to wink and nod at a whole lot of disparate sources in my writings. Well, this superb writer does the same – so much so that I'm sometimes jealous, left thinking: “Why didn't I think of that?” He has a very creative style that incorporates a sense of humor (something lacking in so many of the liberals he skewers with his superior logic).

You know the bloke is good when you see that he gets so under the skin of libs that they try to retaliate with stupid, anti-intellectual, lowbrow distorted photos like this...

...and try to criticize his viewpoints with pathetically childish, barely-literate non sequiturs like this... http://urbaniak.livejournal.com/201111.html


I first became aware of SELWYN DUKE in the years when I was subscribing to The New American, as Duke was a periodic contributor to that excellent magazine. Some time later I discovered that he had his own website...

and wrote regularly for the website RenewAmerica:

Below are a few quotes from a few Selwyn Duke articles to whet your appetite:

It's not that I don't think Obama knew there are 50 states. Rather, he doesn't have the intellectual foundation you'd expect of an educated Western man, and this includes a lack of the rote knowledge that, like an actor who has spoken a certain line in 500 rehearsals and performances, is expressed the same way every time. And this, by the way, has nothing to do with where anyone thinks Obama was born. He simply is not truly American in mind, heart and spirit.

But to fully grasp the nature of leftists' ignorance, an understanding of their philosophical foundation is necessary. There is a certain experience many conservatives know very well: You debate a liberal, and he just seems immune to facts and reason. No matter how airtight your point, it rolls off him like water off a duck. …

Second, pride can get in the way, as correcting oneself involves admitting error, often with respect to ideas we've spent an entire lifetime defending. It can be like giving up a cherished son.

Anyway, the left may be upset that another one of their themes, the white-mass-killer myth, has bitten the dust. But all is not lost. In the area of massacres as in so many other things, they can always celebrate diversity.

Yet the very same people who claimed they could orchestrate the health care of 317 million people will insist that "we can't deport" 20 million people. In fact, even though deportation should be reflexive, it isn't even on the radar screen. To suggest it brands you bigot or xenophobe, and the only thing really at issue is the rate of surrender: will it be sudden with full-on amnesty or the slower "path to legal status," the coup de grace or the death by a thousand cuts? ...
Particular indignation is exhibited when defending children of illegals, who, we're told, "are here through no fault of their own." This also is meaningless. Countless millions of children throughout the world are poor through no fault of their own, yet we don't propose they all be allowed green cards. And how many children have ended up in foster care through no fault of their own after their parents were imprisoned for committing crimes? Perhaps we should stop enforcing laws, period – "for the children."

And what do we see 20 years later? Criticism of homosexuality will get overseas Westerners punished through law and Americans punished through social pressure.

How's that tolerance workin' for ya'?

"Tolerance," as it has been marketed, was always a con. Aristotle said that "[t]olerance is the last virtue of a dying society," but it's also the vice that kills it. And it so often is a vice because it's generally misunderstood. For one thing, tolerance
always implies a negative, real or perceived; you wouldn't have to tolerate a beautiful car or a delectable meal – you relish those things. But you might have to tolerate a cold or bad weather. Thus, tolerance is only noble in two situations: One is when dealing with something objectively negative that cannot be eliminated, such as irremediable pain. The other is when confronted with something you don't happen to like and could avoid, but that is objectively good or neutral; an example would be tolerating a food you detest in order to avoid offending your hosts.

So while we might admire a person who can bear a cross with a stiff upper lip, what if he abides a negative he needn't put up with? He then is either a doormat or a masochist.

That's us.

The doormat, that is. ...

Our culture war is a fight to the death. The barbarians are inside the gate, and they don't listen to reason. Show them the same tolerance they show you – and then show them the door. In the case of A&E, what should happen is that they be boycotted till brought to their knees. 

To their knees.

Returning to Vanity Fair writer Purdum, the reality about Obama he's struggling to reconcile is explained well by the first part of his magazine's name. After all, he also wrote, "'I think that I'm a better speechwriter than my speechwriters,' Obama told his 2008 campaign political director, Patrick Gaspard.... 'I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors. And I'll tell you right now that I'm going to think I'm a better political director than my political director.'" As per his subtitle, Purdum sloughs this attitude off by claiming Obama "didn't need feedback." The correct explanation is a bit different.

Obama is a self-centered, arrogant, and quite probably megalomaniacal and narcissistic - and possibly sociopathic – jerk.

Truth: everyone needs feedback. A good leader knows this and is wise enough to both surround himself with competent people and to separate good counsel from bad. He exhibits what Confucius spoke of when saying, "Wisdom is, when you know something, knowing that you know it; and when you do not know something, knowing that you do not know it." And Obama? He's not dumb, as some suggest, though his intelligence is overrated. It's that he doesn't know much that is true -- and, more significantly, he doesn't know what he doesn't know.

This is when even intelligent people can do profoundly stupid things. For example, Adolf Hitler, a master manipulator who could mesmerize masses, thought he knew better than his generals and was best suited to choose battlefields, strategies, and tactics on the Soviet front. Evil people, you see, tend to be ridden with that intellect-occluding thing called pride; they consequently make bad decisions and eventually sink their own ship. And if at the helm of a nation, it can be a mighty big ship they sink.

Speaking of pride, G.K. Chesterton once said, "[A] great man knows he is not God, and the greater he is the better he knows it." This is brought to mind by an interview Obama gave to Chicago Sun-Times religion reporter Cathleen Falsani in 2004. When asked if he prayed often, Obama offered this curious response: "It's not formal, me getting on my knees. I have an ongoing conversation with God. Throughout the day I'm constantly asking myself questions...."

So a "conversation with God" = "asking [himself] questions"? Literally interpreted, this means Obama considers himself God. Of course, allowing for loose talk, there's no saying the president is like an Egyptian pharaoh and actually believes he is a deity. But was his comment akin to a Freudian slip? Did it reflect not only how he is at the center of his own world, but how he naturally assumes he should be the center of the world?

I can almost hear all y'all thinking: Damn! I wish Stephen had turned his blog over to Selwyn years ago.

No, you're not going to get all the straight poop on the New World Order conspiracy with Selwyn Duke like you did with me. (Duke probably believes in the non-Michael Jackson “Moon Walks”; probably believes that Timothy McVeigh was the major player in the Oklahoma City bombing; probably believes the “official” Uncle Scam version of 9/11; probably believes that the Sandy Hook “shooting” and Boston Marathon “bombing” were real events like the Lamestream Media reported them.) No, I don't ALWAYS agree with Duke's assessment of a story - and if I did, one of us would be unnecessary. For example, Duke believes that George W(ish I had a brain) Bush's war in Iraq was based on faulty intelligence reports about Weapons of Mass Destruction. While I say, “Bush lied, liberties died!”

So, no, Selwyn Duke isn't going to always relate to you the same sorts of truths that I would have related to you but, nevertheless, the guy is a brilliant thinker and writer. And I am very glad to be basically the same sort of “Conservative” that Selwyn Duke is, because I would not want to have to debate him if I were “Left” of him.

It was probably in the year 2000 that I first began to notice the “Chemtrails” in the skies over (Phuckin') Phoenix, Airheadzona. I had a job that kept me outdoors for the first three hours of my shift, and countless times I saw the Chemtrail skies being created.

These were definitely NOT normal jet contrails that would quickly evaporate and disappear. No, these were Chemtrails. It would start out with just one airplane, or sometimes two or three planes, flying back and forth across the sky emitting a white trail behind them. Sometimes they would line the sky all in one direction, and other times they would fly in opposite directions, leaving a big white criss-cross pattern across the sky.

As I watched, these white lines would begin to spread out across the sky in a milky-like haze or film, and in 90 minutes to two hours the sky overhead would have a massive, artificial cloud cover that went for miles and miles above me.

Naturally I began to investigate this and found that it was a common and sometimes daily occurrence in many places across the United States (and later, beyond). To this day the Chemtrail project is still shrouded in mystery and there are multiple theories explaining the purpose for it.

Some things we now know for sure are that the Chemtrail phenomenon is very real; it is very secret, and widespread; and the trails consist largely (but not necessarily exclusively) of very fine particles of aluminum and barium. There is no question but that “The Wizards Behind The Curtain” are spraying us like we're insects without any right to know or right to protest.

The ultimate purpose for the Chemtrails is still a debated topic but the most commonly held belief is that they are being used in weather control experiments (likely in conjunction with H.A.A.R.P.), but other theories have to do with population control (i.e., sickness and death), mind control, high-tech WMD-like activities such as earthquake initiators, etc.

It's a very interesting topic worthy of further study.


Clifford Carnicom, 2005

I've not yet had the time to fully vet the following two websites, so if there are flagrant errors to be found there, or if they are in actuality disinformation agents, that's news to me as of this posting. However, I have visited numerous pages at both sites and what I have thus far seen has very much impressed me. See what YOU think of 'em:



If you have never noticed any Chemtrails in your area, you really ought to try keeping your chin up, my depressed little friend!

Some days ago I somehow clicked my way to a new (to me) blog. Below are some excerpts from the first few paragraphs of the (at that time) most current blog bit:


You see it’s all to do with evolution and although humans are a smug bunch … the truth is we are not as unique as some would have you think. You see just think how many critters have four limbs and a head at the front end, and dispose of food at the other, the list is huge.  Even birds have four limbs; it’s just that two have turned into wings giving them a rather clever method to get about.

Evolution of course is a long process it takes time. . . . Man now sees himself as Top Dog in this process which is very silly as we are not dogs, and shows the foolishness of us humans.  You see mankind is a relative newcomer to planet Earth and some critters have been about for ages and there are more of them too. …

Now as time passes evolution would normally predict that biodiversity will increase, but us humans are always keen to eat new species so most of the meal sized things are sort of becoming extinct.   One of the odder aspects of man is that we are critters of habit and could be classed as one of the worlds herd animals like Cows or Wildebeest, an old survival instinct from the days when we were shoals of fish and huge prehistoric scary things ate us.  This is why we tend to take revenge on big beasts now and get our own back by eating them. …

I couldn't help having some fun with this, so I left a comment:

Stephen T. McCarthy 3 October 2014 19:06
>>... “This is why we tend to take revenge on big beasts now and get our own back by eating them”

Just think how bad it would be for us if those big beasts ever invented guns and bombs. Then they'd go back to eating US again.

Many billions of years from now, we human beings may be in big trouble. Unless of course, by then, we've developed our own wings and can just fly away from the big beasts with their guns and bombs.

Yes, I know we could do that NOW, on airplanes, but that just gets back to the herd instinct again - you know, buying tickets, obtaining boarding passes, standing in line as we creep down the aisle looking for our seat number. It's just too slow a process when life hangs in the balance. We need our own wings so we can fly away individually at a moment's notice.

That's why I'm concentrating and meditating and imagining wings sprouting from my arms. (But just in case that's a fruitless, evolutionary dream, I'm also designing bigger guns and bigger bombs with which to defeat the big beasts 40 billion years from now. I was a Boy Scout and I heartily believe in the motto, "Be Prepared".)
~ D-FensDogg
'Loyal American Underground'

The blogger replied:

Dont give up on growing those wings, it has been said that birds are the direct descendants of dinosaurs . So if a 15 ton huge scaly dinosaur can grow wings and fly off then it should be easy for mankind. Please remember you probably will not grow wings yourself, but your kids might...

Bigger Guns and Bigger Bombs. . .mmmmm I take it you are an America you are little rascals with those guns and bombs and stuff, but hey we like you in Britain lets face it we have to be friends because no one else likes either of us much. I think the world is safe in our hands, mankind needs some positive thinkers . . Well Done and thanks for the comment, it is good to get feedback.

I responded:

That's a pretty tall order for my kids to grow wings, since I never had kids and never will have any. So, first, my kids are going to need to invent themselves and THEN grow their wings. But, hey, given enough billions of years, ANYTHING is possible, right? My kids will probably also be flying when pigs fly. Chasing their bacon like World War I flying aces in an aerial dogfight.

No, I am not an American. In fact, I don't like most Americans. What I am is a 'Constitutionalist', which is a nearly extinct entity – unlike the T-rex which is still very much alive and doing quite well. And by T-rex, I do NOT mean the Rock 'N' Roll band but the Godzilla-like beasts that live in the White House using names like Obama and Bush and feeding on others. I only wish the 'Constitutionalists' were thriving and the T-rex was extinct. But given enough billions of years, someday maybe the 'Constitutionalists' will rule the roost... also when pigs fly.
~ D-FensDogg

Then another blogger joined the fun. I believe he was addressing the writer of the blog bit but I couldn't keep myself from offering an A to his Q:

Esbboston 4 October 2014 23:42
Q: If you are wrong about 22 things and 2 wrongs make right, does that mean you are stiLL 11ish right?

Stephen T. McCarthy 5 October 2014 02:32
I believe it would make you "eleventy" percent right. However, I confess that mathematics has never been my strong suit.
~ D-FensDogg

Esbboston 5 October 2014 11:31
People have reaLLy sped up evolution by starting to fly. In airplanes. People committing suicide by leaping to their death hasn't helped, a wrong type of flying. Perhaps a study of knife use in humans causing fingernails to be longer, sharper and grow faster needs to be performed.

Stephen T. McCarthy 5 October 2014 15:38

Oh, that's a very astute observation!

By some strange coincidence, my buddy Bryan [of the blog 'A Beer For The Shower'] and I were recently discussing evolution in an Email exchange (which truly is a strange coincidence because usually we only discuss beer and Film Noir).

So, Bryan writes:
"...we share approximately 55% of our DNA with bananas. ... I had a banana for breakfast this morning, too... I'm starting to feel bad that maybe I ate a long lost relative..."

And that's when I had one of those "Ah-Ha!" moments.

Suddenly it all makes sense: Bananas were the first life form. Over millions or billions of years (don't bore me with details) bananas evolved into monkeys, and monkeys eventually became bigger and stronger... yes, they became apes. (Surely you've noticed the fascination and tender love that primates have for bananas... and not just as phallic symbols either - it's more meaningful than that.)

Then, of course, apes evolved (or devolved?) into human beings. And over many years, human beings evolved into banana cream pies.

Now, I know you're going to ask, "Then why are there still human beings?" And I answer, "For the same reason there are still apes, monkeys, and bananas. I don't know why... but it's for the same reason, I'm sure."

So my theory is that banana cream pies will eventually lose their non-essential appendages like crust and whipped cream, and revert back to bananas again. It's like a circular evolutionary thang.

Hey, it's a certainty that if a bunch of bananas randomly hit typewriter keys for a lot of years they would eventually duplicate all the works of Shakespeare, so ANYTHING is possible!
~ D-FensDogg

You see, Ferrets and Ferretettes, once you know the truth about the Evolution nonsense - knowing you could debate anyone on the topic and win – you can begin to have lotsa fun with those anti-science propagandists.

And when you know what is contained in this book...

...then you will know the truth about Evolution.

And I'm happy to say that all 977 pages of 'THE EVOLUTION HANDBOOK' can be accessed for free at...



A few weeks ago I received an Email from my dear friend The Flying Aardvark (not to be confused with a plucky flying squirrel). A couple years ago The Flyin' Aard's aging Mom moved into the Aard's apartment because independent living was not so easy for the elderly woman anymore. And the Aard is such a lovely woman she welcomed her Mom to live with her.

Well, Flyin' Aard told me the following in that recent E:

I am sorry I have been off the grid for a while.  We had some problems at home (they painted the bedroom ceilings in my apartment and I had to stay at a hotel, plus our ancient stove finally went nuclear and wouldn’t shut off so we had to cut off all the circuit breakers to prevent a fire in the apartment until they could send someone).

We have a new stove now -- but it sticks way out in the middle of the floor.  In order to open the silverware drawer, you have to lower the oven door, but first you have to open the refrigerator door because otherwise there is no space to open the oven door.  It’s kind of comical (and fairly annoying).

I replied:

That is one of the FUNNIEST things I've heard of in a LO-OOO-NG TIME! It seems like something you'd see in an old episode of 'The Carol Burnett Show' or sumpin'. Maybe 'I Love Lucy'. OH, THAT IS HILARIOUS!!!

Thanks so much for telling me your "kitchen layout" story. I gotta remember that. Here it is 3 weeks later and I'm STILL literally laughing out loud every time I mentally picture that. You couldn't make up something like THAT!

~ Stephen T. McCarthy

YE OLDE COMMENT POLICY: All comments, pro and con, are welcome. However, ad hominem attacks and disrespectful epithets will not be tolerated (read: "posted"). After all, this isn’t Amazon.com, so I don’t have to put up with that kind of bovine excrement.