APPOINT AN ATTORNEY GENERAL WHO WILL PROSECUTE HILLARY CLINTON
Hillary Clinton represents everything that is wrong with the American political class. She epitomizes establishment corruption and wanton criminality, and to ignore her blatantly felonious behavior is to condone it.
REPEAL & REPLACE OBAMACARE
Of all the ruinous policies enacted by the previous administration, none is so egregious and universally despised as The Affordable Care Act. It must be eradicated like the cancer that it is and replaced with a free-market-based alternative as soon as humanly possible.
BUILD THE WALL
This is the primary reason why Donald Trump was elected president, make no mistake about it, and while its construction will not, in and of itself, put an end to illegal immigration, it will symbolize a seriousness of intent with respect to border security that has been sorely lacking in our government for decades.
APPOINT ORIGINALISTS TO THE FEDERAL JUDICIARY
When it comes to our nation’s highest courts, there are essentially two types of judges who oversee them, originalists and activists. Activistic judges believe that our Constitution is a “living, breathing” document that they are free to modify from the bench at any time and for any reason they concoct. As for originalist judges, I think Justice Antonin Scalia put it best when he said: “Our manner of interpreting the Constitution is to begin with the text, and to give that text the meaning that it bore when it was adopted by the people.”
SLASH TAXES ON BUSINESS & RENEGOTIATE INTERNATIONAL TRADE DEALS
Reinvigorating the U.S. economy cannot occur without radically reducing taxes on the companies which make up its foundation. Business taxes amount to taxes on all Americans - be they CEOs, employees, stockholders or consumers - and trillions of dollars have been lost to our economy over the years due to government’s insistence on inflicting punitive taxation upon our nation’s most productive citizens. Adding insult to injury, pro-globalist trade policies like NAFTA have served to accelerate the decline of America’s economic vitality, and any attempts to reverse the trends of the past few decades without addressing these key points will prove futile.
DRASTICALLY CUT GOVERNMENT SPENDING & REGULATION
Cutting government spending begins with downsizing the bureaucracies infesting it. This can be done through attrition, which simply means not hiring new federal employees to replace the ones who retire for an extended period of time. Beyond that, there are scores of agencies which should be eliminated entirely, like the departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, Housing & Urban Development, and the EPA for starters. Furthermore, federal regulations have become so pervasive that reducing their number by 50 percent would still leave the Federal Register with nearly 100,000 pages of growth-killing rules. Yes, certain regulatory powers must be exercised in order to stop bad people from doing harm to the rest of us, but when nanny-state know-it-alls in Washington DC decide to start telling the rest of us how much water we can use to flush our toilets or what sort of bulbs we can screw into our light fixtures, they’ve engaged in the sort of conduct that our founding fathers would have taken up arms to oppose.
The animus between Cruzites and the Trumpians is so strong these days that anyone in either camp who tries to point out that one side isn’t always right and the other side isn’t always wrong results in knee-jerk, moonbat-like hostility the likes of which I’ve not seen among the Republican electorate in my lifetime.
For instance, I read a brief post the other day on some social media network by an ardent Trump fan wherein he(?) mentioned that Cruz gets a bum rap for being a part of the “RINO-Bush” 2000 campaign. The Trumpian in question merely pointed out that, at the time, Bush was the most conservative guy in the race who had any chance of beating Al Gore, and that Ted was simply supporting his party’s nominee. He opined that Cruz wasn’t necessarily some establishment assclown just because he’d backed George Dubya for president, and he was exactly right in that assessment, but that didn’t stop other Trump backers from treating him like he was the worst traitor since Benedict Arnold.
Similarly, I was attacked by faceless, #NeverTrump SM-warriors just the other day for defending The Donald over accusations by Ted Cruz that he had planted the National Enquirer sex-scandal story. All I did was share information which confirmed that it was allies of Marco Rubio who had been shopping that story around for months prior to it becoming public. Afterward I mentioned that I thought it was hypocritical of Cruz to be doing exactly what he’d accused Trump of doing only days before, which was holding someone to account for acts that no one could prove they’d actually committed. Based upon the reactions I got from my fellow Cruzites, one would have thought that I’d tortured a puppy on live video. I was branded a Trumpaloompa, a TrumpRump and other such monikers, even though I’d made it clear from the start that I’ve always backed Ted Cruz for president and still do. Not only did none of the people who responded to me exhibit the intellectual honesty to admit that I’d made a valid, fact-based point, but they seemed to assume I was a part of some pro-Trump, lunatic-fringe spy network or something.
In both of the above cases, the various respondents behaved with irrational contempt toward well-intentioned and well-reasoned people, and nobody else piped up at any time to illuminate these folks as to how completely leftist they all sounded. Yes, I said LEFTIST!
Look, I don’t give a damn who you support for president or why, that’s your business. However, what I DO care about is the manner in which you choose to do it, and if your idea of righteous campaigning is to defame and denigrate anyone who has the temerity to expose the inconsistencies and outright falsehoods perpetrated by whatever candidate you happen to embrace, then you’re no better than a filthy neo-socialist parasite!
And that goes doubly for people who support Ted Cruz for president. Why? Because the number one criticism I hear leveled at Trump from my fellow Cruzites is that he will say or do anything to get elected. And while that may be true, when you turn a blind eye to the fact that Ted Cruz does not appear to be above dirty tricks and hypocrisy himself, you’ve just ceded any moral or ethical high ground you may have had to the opposition. Indeed, I hold Cruz supporters to a higher standard than I do the followers of other candidates in this race, and if you’re to have any real integrity as a Cruzite, you will too.
Moreover, I’m sick to death of seeing people whom I’ve always considered to be genuine, well-principled conservatives take sides against Donald Trump absolutely every time some left-wing media asshat invents a “scandal” out of thin air. Sure, you have every right to criticize The Donald for the myriad dumbass things he’s said over the years, but jumping on the let’s-bash-Trump bandwagon every time the opportunity presents itself is just plain pathetic. It’s beneath men and women of good faith to act in such a way, and what pisses me off the most about this state of affairs is that I am often forced to defend a man I don’t even like very much in the name of fairness and basic decency against others of my own ideological bent.
It angers me, and for that reason I now beseech my fellow Crusites to GROW THE FUCK UP and start behaving like the sort of people you profess to want running our country, instead of the unprincipled swine who’ve done nothing but steer it straight into the crapper since the day after President Ronald Reagan gave his farewell address from the Oval Office.
"Donald Trump has been roundly denounced by MPs from all parties in a debate in the British parliament. But most of those MPs who spoke were critical of the call in a petition signed by 575,000 people for Trump to be banned from the UK because of his proposal for Muslims to be prevented from entering the US and the debate, which took place in an annex outside the main Commons chamber, ended without a vote. One of the functions of a parliament is to allow a nation to let off steam and effectively that is what happened this afternoon."
And with that little snippet, please allow me – an American – to spout off to this miserable pack of limey ASSHOLES for a moment.
Look here, it’s one thing for a U.S. citizen to criticize, mock and even damn one of his own, but when a bunch of pasty-faced, neo-socialist politicians from another country decide to spend the afternoon repeatedly labeling the front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination every variety of bigot known to humanity, that’s where I draw the line!
To put it in terms that everyone on both sides of the pond can understand, FUCK YOU!
In the first place, The Donald ISN’T a bigot. He may be a loud, obnoxious prick at times, but he’s always been an equal opportunity prick in my estimation, so every time somebody in the Jurassic media accuses him of trashing women or Hispanic illegals, understand that they are intentionally leaving out the fact that he has trashed far more men and Caucasian citizens over the years.
As for his position on banning Muslim migrants from our shores, keep in mind that he is only talking about what he intends to do in the short-term, and his main concern is with people who hail from a country in the Middle East that is currently embroiled in a civil war and whose various factions are ALL hostile to the west. In fact, he probably wouldn’t have even brought up the subject if our lunatic president hadn’t promised to force thousands of these unvettable people upon our society despite opposition from the vast majority of Americans.
Sure, Trump says dopey, unrealistic shit every once in a while. So what? The smoothest politicians say dopey, unrealistic shit too, only they’re more practiced at sounding reasonable when they do it, and in the final analysis, they’ve generally been far less successful at getting things done over the years than The Donald has.
But whatever your opinion on the matter, that’s an argument for we, the people of the United States of America to have, isn’t it? What it definitely is NOT is a subject for the men and women of Parliament to discuss in their capacity as representatives of the BRITISH people!
In case you self-loathing, dhimmi bastards hadn’t noticed, Donald Trump isn’t a citizen of your rapidly declining nation. He’s a citizen of OUR rapidly declining nation, so mind your own business, you incessant whiners, and try expending your energies on saving YOUR country from the growing threat of Islam instead of pissing on everyone in the world who happens to recognize just how completely buggered your leftist opinions are!
By the way, I’m an American of both Irish and English lineage, but today I consider myself completely Irish. I, hereby, disassociate myself from my English heritage, because if England is a country where its leaders don’t have the balls to stand up for the fundamental right of all people to speak their minds plainly and openly without fear of reprisal, then England is a fascist, pussy nation.
The high mucky-muck of the Republican establishment crowd, otherwise known as Dubya's younger, less interesting brother.
Not since the failed candidacy of Howard Dean has an early front-runner in a Presidential race taken such a sustained beating in the polls. The once great, white hope of the Republican elitist class is now a single-digit joke whose big-money backers are starting to regret they ever laid eyes on this no-trick pony.
The radio host, turned minister, turned Governor, turned Presidential candidate, turned TV host, turned Presidential candidate again.
Why this man hasn't started his own televangelist network by now is beyond me. He is clearly better suited to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ on cable channel 287 than run for political office. At least as a TV pastor he'd be competitive in his chosen field of endeavor, instead of pointlessly clinging to his status as a second-tier political hack.
The Senator from Kentucky and middle child of former Congressman, libertarian Presidential candidate and prattling lunatic, Ron Paul.
Let's face it, the only reason most people even know about this freshman lawmaker is because his father made a name for himself promoting pretty much the same policies that Rand has since adopted. Apparently, the nut doesn't fall far from the nut-tree when it comes to blaming America for the rise of Muslim terrorism since the 1970s, and while the good doctor in question doesn't seem nearly as crazy as his old man did when he ran for President, the things he says have just enough batshit mixed in with them to remind most of us why we're not libertarians.
The morbidly obese Governor of New Jersey, former Obama rump-swab and RINO squish, otherwise known as El Jefe Grande.
He's big, he's fat and he's loud. Okay, so he'd make a great Ralph Kramden if CBS ever decides to bring back 'The Honeymooners', but beyond that, he's a waste of space... WAY too much space. Did I mention he's really fat?
The former corporate CEO, failed Senatorial candidate and fake conservative, whose only claim to fame is that she managed to turn a largely destructive business career into a multi-million dollar personal fortune.
What can I say about this woman that Donald Trump hasn't already said in far more entertaining and sexist terms before? Hmmm... well, for starters she's the single most left-leaning candidate on the GOP debate stage, despite her well-rehearsed assertions to the contrary. In essence, she's a would-be Susan Collins pretending to be the next Sarah Palin, only she doesn't have the credibility or the gams of Mama Grizzly.
The extremely annoying Governor of Ohio, former Congressman, former TV host and snarky know-it-all, otherwise known as the guy who just won't shut the fuck up already.
To say this man is irksome would be an insult to irks everywhere. I'd add more, but I'm too irritated by the very thought of this idiot to continue insulting him right now.
The former Congressman, former Senator and former Presidential candidate from Pennsylvania who can't seem to understand why a sweater vest is not a viable substitute for charisma.
Ya know, there was a time when I honestly believed that Mr. Santorum would evolve into a credible, top-shelf candidate for President one day. That was over a decade ago, and now I'm convinced that - like stupid - you just can't fix boring. The upside is that Mr. Rogers' old job is still wide open.
The former Mayor of Peekskill, New York, former State Assemblyman, former State Senator and former Governor, who, despite being in politics since 1981 has yet to garner the name recognition of your average, small-town Comptroller.
Just the fact that this assclown has bothered to stay in the game longer than superior candidates like Rick Perry and Bobby Jindal makes me want to smack him over the head with a plastic snow shovel. Cripes, George, you're not even gaining traction at the kiddie-table debates anymore. If you look in the dictionary, there's a picture of Lindsey Graham right next to the word 'pathetic'. Why? Because you've yet to rise to the level of pathetic. You are a catastrophic loser, George, yet you need not lament your absolute failure. After all, very few people have even noticed so far.
NOTE: It has just come to my attention that Lonesome George dropped out of the race last week. Gee, how could I have possibly missed that? (sarcasm off)
There is so much to dislike about this program that I barely know where to begin criticizing it. To say that I don’t care for the show is an understatement. To say that it makes me want to gouge my own eyeballs out with a KFC spork is closer to the truth, and here’s why: IT DOESN’T EXPLAIN ANYTHING!
I thought the whole point of this series was to help us understand how and why the zombie apocalypse began. If that’s not so, what IS the point? It seems to me that its parent series has the bases covered when it comes to showing us clueless people trying to survive the chaos of walker-world. Do we really need to see more of the same here? I mean, can somebody please explain to me why we are supposed to care about another random group of people who know nothing about what’s going on, and afford us no insight into the genesis of the zombie pandemic?
Oh, and did I mention that this show’s main characters are dumbasses? They are, especially the female lead named Madison, who, in the second episode, attempts to have a conversation with what looks like an undead Barack Obama as it shambles toward her, drooling and glassy-eyed. Keep in mind that, by this point in the story, she and her boyfriend, Travis, have already been attacked by a zombie – which didn’t stop trying to eat them even after they ran it over with a truck.
As for Travis, later on, he too tries to have a nice, civil chat with a zombie that he finds feasting on the intestines of a dog in his living room. Then, when another character is forced to step in and save the fool’s life, he tries to stop his hero from killing the zombie. Now that I think about it, Travis is an even bigger dumbass than Madison, and she’s got only slightly more functioning brain cells than your average walker.
By the way, none of these people seem to care what’s going on outside of Los Angeles, which is where the story takes place. Thanks to ‘The Walking Dead’, we know that zombies are also popping up on the east coast – and assumedly everywhere else on the planet – yet, nobody in this story appears to be curious at all about what’s happening anywhere else. You’d think that at least one of them would be glued to their TV or computer, trying to find out anything they can about the scope of the problem while there’s still electricity available to them, but they don’t. Instead, everyone on the show behaves as if the advances in communications technology over the course of their lives have had only a peripheral influence on them.
And why is it that these folks didn’t immediately load up on food, water and weapons once they realized that the living dead were walking the Earth? After all, they were among the first to see a walker up close, so it would be reasonable for them to try and procure as many survival items as possible before stories of reanimated, flesh-eating corpses spread throughout the city, and all the stores got overrun. Frankly, the only character on the entire show who seemed to appreciate the gravity of the situation early on was a pimple-faced high school kid named Tobias who tried unsuccessfully to impress upon dim-witted Madison just how completely screwed everyone was. Sadly, he was only a minor character, and after the second episode, he was never heard from again.
Look, if I wanted to watch a show about unappealing idiots facing imminent, societal collapse, I’d tune into C-SPAN. Maybe this program’s creators don’t know it, but there are alternatives to their zombie franchise on TV these days, and those shows actually have entertaining characters and engaging plotlines. While the likes of ‘iZombie’ and ‘Z Nation’ may not have the production value of AMC’s original gore-fest, at least they’re trying to take the theme in a new direction. What does this program do, other than kill time before we get a chance to see Rick Grimes and his crew of seasoned zombie-killers again?
Personally, I would like to have seen this teleplay begin with a focus on hospital, morgue and funeral home employees in various states across the country, since those are the kinds of places where you’d expect zombies of this particular variety to first appear. It also would have made sense to introduce a few characters from some top-secret, government facility who either started the whole mess, or at least have some idea as to what caused it. Instead we are confronted with a bunch of people whose only distinguishing, common features are that they tend to be less intelligent and likeable than just about everyone on the first series.
Last night, the inaugural season of ‘Fear The Walking Dead’ came to an ugly, putrefied end, yet we still have no new information pertaining to the origin of the zombie apocalypse. The only thing we do know for sure is that Californians have little to no common sense, and their government is run by incompetent, lying douchebags. Thanks, AMC, that really clears things up for me. What’s next on the schedule, a prequel to ‘Mork and Mindy’ where Mork meets a chick named Mandy before finally settling down with the girl of his dreams?
On September 25th, 2012 President Barack Obama delivered a speech to the United Nations General Assembly in which he stated: “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”
He said this in the wake of the infamous terrorist attack against the American diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya on the 11th anniversary of 9/11. The attack was a well-planned, well-coordinated, military-style assault which led to the slaughter of four of his fellow citizens, yet despite the fact that Obama had real-time intelligence exposing the reality of the situation, he chose to adopt the false narrative that the attacks were the result of a spontaneous protest against an obscure, anti-Islamic video.
As is all too common these days, leftists like President Obama not only refuse to admit that the responsibility for such atrocities lies squarely at the feet of the Muslim extremists who commit them, but they inevitably end up blaming innocent people who have the audacity to practice their God-given right to free speech and expression.
I cannot think of a more anti-American and, frankly, suicidally stupid position to take in the face of so pernicious a threat as radical Islam, yet to this day the left persists in repeating the unconscionable fairytale that Islam is a religion of peace, and that if only people like you and I would keep our big mouths shut about it, those who murder in the name of Allah would be perfectly happy to live and let live.
What a crock of excrement! In the first place, even if what leftists believe turned out to be true – which is beyond ridiculous – what self-respecting human being would ever go along with such a strategy? Think about it, according to these clowns all you have to do to avoid being gunned down or blown to pieces by a pack of psychopathic true believers is to never speak your mind about the religious doctrine that fuels their murderous impulses. Great! Can I get a side order of swastikas with that?
Tell me, what kind of leader steps onto the world stage only weeks after his fellow countrymen have been brutally killed by Islamic thugs and insinuates that insulting the religion embraced by those very thugs is somehow worse than the act of terror they just committed? I’ll tell you what kind of leader, the exact same kind who refuses to use the words ‘Islamic terrorists’ to describe the perpetrators of the latest act of Muslim mass murder visited upon the staff of a satirical publication called Charlie Hebdo in Paris, France.
Indeed, Barack Obama is the kind of leader who, after more than five years, still refers to the religiously-motivated massacre of American soldiers at Fort Hood, Texas by a Muslim traitor in their midst as “workplace violence”.
Remember, this is the same guy who once insulted the entire Christian world by cherry-picking “controversial” verses from the Bible – which I’ve never heard him refer to as holy, unlike the Koran – just so he could bash conservative Americans who believe that the Judeo-Christian ethic is foundational to our culture and laws. The following year he referred to the Islamic call to prayer as “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset,” which I’m sure is something any faithful Christian man would say while being interviewed by the New York Times about his spiritual beliefs.
I could go on and on with similar examples of the president’s religious proclivities, but I think my point has been sufficiently made.
Whether Barack Obama is a Muslim in Christian clothes or merely a faithless, pandering jerk matters little. All that matters is that he and his leftist ilk would rather make excuses for the inexcusable acts of Islamo-Nazis than stand up for one of the most profoundly American principles ever conceived; that we are endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights, among them being the right – with rare and obvious exceptions – to say whatever the hell we want to, whenever the hell we feel like it.
That is something people cannot do in the Muslim world today, and if the extremists thereof get their way, none of us will be able to speak our minds anywhere on Earth in the future.
Modern day Democrat politicians are socialists, which really isn’t breaking news. Heck, that particular socio-political philosophy was adopted by the DNC during the Great Depression. What is news, however, is that they’ve also become psychopathic, exhibiting the personality traits of your average serial killer just before he decides to start butchering prostitutes for the first time.
For a while there – say, 70 years or so – they seemed to be merely delusional, but since the turn of the 21st century, they’ve proven themselves to be devoid of any genuine feelings of empathy, compassion or remorse with respect to other human beings – at least the ones who don’t appear on their respective campaign contributors lists.
While not insane in the purely legal sense of the word, they are, nonetheless, stark-staring lunatics who are capable of the worst atrocities imaginable. In other words, they are scheming, soulless humanoids with a knack for appearing normal most of the time, despite their utter lack of humanity.
They’re also control freaks of the highest order, which is why they spend practically every waking moment thinking up ways to interfere with other people’s lives instead of doing anything substantive with their own. They become politicians because that is the one profession wherein you can make a name for yourself – not to mention oodles of money – without actually being a productive member of society.
Sadly, their minions in the entertainment industry, academia, and the press are still stuck in the aforementioned delusional phase of the socialist experiment, and have no idea that pols like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are complete monsters. Then again, I suppose it’s better that they’ve remained merely psychoneurotic rather than having mutated into full-blown, dead-eyed maniacs themselves. After all, psychosis (a distorted sense of reality) can be treated and even cured over time, but psychopathy is forever.
Anyway, enough with those demented bastards, let’s move on to the psychology of today’s Republican politicians and the sad sacks who help elect them, shall we?
— In the interest of full disclosure, there was a time when I too was a card-carrying member of the Republican party, but that ended soon after John Boehner became Speaker of the House of Representatives. You see, Mr. Boehner is what we in the rusted bucket of political punditry call an “assclown”, and one day while I was having a shave, I looked into the bathroom mirror and asked myself this question: can you really continue to claim membership in an organization that would appoint the likes of ‘Tammy Faye Boehner’ to such a position of power in Congress? My reflection answered with a resounding: NOPE! And the rest, as they say, is history. —
Now onto the subject at hand…
The GOP of the 21st century – thus far – is about as useful as shoe laces on a pair of sandals, and its leadership seems to be comprised of more cowards than a battalion of Iraqi soldiers.
But why is that, you ask?
Well, have you ever heard the term ‘Stockholm Syndrome’? It’s a psychological phenomenon in which hostages come to identify with – and even feel sympathy for – their captors. If you ask me, that’s the basic underpinning of the whole right-wing malfunction at the federal level in recent times, and if there’s a better explanation than this one for the behavioral patterns exhibited by the GOP’s most powerful leaders, I’d like to hear it. Really, I would.
The only viable alternative hypothesis I can come up with is that they’re just plain suicidal, and they want to take us all down with them. The problem with that supposition is that people who commit suicide are generally compulsive in nature. They don’t plan their demise years in advance, and they almost never intentionally take a stranger to his grave in the process.
As for the psychology of Republicans who are prominent in the fields of academia, entertainment and journalism, these people appear to be largely normal, with some notable exceptions. That’s why they and most other right-wingers in the private sector feel so disconnected from their elected representatives these days – especially the ones in positions of party leadership. After all, rational people have a hard time accepting irrational behavior, even from people they like.
So if you’ve been wondering why so many Republicans – even a good number of staunch conservatives – on TV, the internet, and talk radio are defending the likes of Donald Trump this election cycle, despite the fact that he’s wandered all over the political spectrum in terms of policy positions over the years, please allow me to explain their reasoning as best I understand it.
You see, it’s not who Trump is – per se – or even what he may believe about many issues that’s of primary importance to a lot of folks on the right these days. No, it’s what he represents that has them fired up, and what he represents is a man who just might actually get something positive done for a change in Washington DC, simply because he’s not a career politician with a long track record of fucking up absolutely EVERYTHING he touches!
Many people are just plain tired of the same platitudes and empty promises they’ve heard over and over again for the past quarter of a century from nearly every polished, right-leaning, professional politico who’s come down the pike. They all say pretty much the same things, yet little if anything actually changes once they take office, and in the meantime, the party elites keep growing more and more hostile toward the very people who elected them.
In essence, a growing number of Republicans are willing to roll the dice with an unknown quantity like The Donald on the off chance that he may be able to do what nobody since Ronald Reagan has managed to pull off, which is stem the tide of leftist incompetence and corruption that has permeated our federal government for decades. And what’s more, it really doesn’t seem to matter to them that he may entertain certain left-leaning sympathies with which they disagree.
Perhaps if there is a psychological malady that can be applied to some non-elected Republicans, it is ‘Battered Woman Syndrome’, a condition brought about by persistent abuse at the hands of someone whom the victim initially trusted and even professed to love. Of course, people who suffer from this complex for an extended period of time often snap and turn on their abusers with unfettered ferocity. (see Battered Woman’s Defense – U.S. criminal law)
So, is that what this whole Trump phenomenon is about? Is he merely a weapon of convenience being leveled at an habitually abusive political class by its long-suffering voter base? Is he like the butcher knife on the counter that the bruised and bloodied wife of a bully finally picks up one day and plunges into her tormenter’s filthy neck?
Your guess is as good as mine, but I certainly wouldn’t be surprised to find out that there’s some merit to that theory.
SHERLOCK HOLMES PROVES THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle once wrote that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.
I agree with this principle, which is why I’ve decided to apply it to the question of the universe’s origin.
Firstly, I must ask what the universe is.
My answer is this: The universe is the sum of all matter, space and time.
Secondly, I must ask if the universe is eternal – having no beginning or end – or if it had a genesis.
My answer is this: Scientific investigation has revealed that the universe had a beginning.
Thirdly, I must ask what nothing is.
My answer is this: Nothing is the absense of all things.
Fourthly, I must ask what God is.
My answer is this: God is the conceptual creator of the universe.
Fifthly, I must ask what the nature of such a creator would have to be.
My answer is this: God would have to be more powerful than anything in human experience, considering the size, scope and complexity of the universe. He would also have to be more intelligent than any being imaginable, for the same reason. God would have to be eternal, as well, because he would not be bound by the properties of time that he’d created. He would, furthermore, have to consist of something other than matter, because he would have to exist in a state of being independent of the properties of matter.
Sixthly, I must ask if it is possible for the universe to have been created.
My answer is this: Yes, because it exists, yet it has not always existed.
Seventhly, I must ask if it is possible for the universe to have spontaneously come into being from nothing.
My answer is this: No, because nothing is a hypothetical state in which all things do not exist, and such a state is, therefore, incapable of causing anything to happen.
So, in the final analysis you can see that the only logical explanation for the universe’s existence – no matter how improbable some may consider it to be – is that it was created by a super-intelligent, ultra-powerful, non-material, timeless being, because the alternative is impossible.