Man claims that pedophilia is a civil right
It was only a matter of time. As you read this article you may laugh at how ridiculous it sounds, but don’t laugh too hard. This is just one more downhill stop on the slippery slope of our moral fiber. So this article may sound ridiculous now, but in ten years the man’s claim may become the norm.
After all, twenty years ago it was a ridiculous notion to think that homosexuality was not a conscious choice, and that homosexuals should be allowed to marry. Now, you’re a bigot if you have such thoughts. Judges all over the nation are adding to the controversy by calling the crime of child molestation a "disease" and sentencing the offender to "treatment" rather than prison time.
To hell with that. I say lock them up for a long, long time.
So, this nut in Ohio will likely be put in prison, but his words will set a precedent. Soon, more pedophiles will be making similar claims and it won’t be long before they demand equal rights under the law, maybe even demand the right to marry a six year old. See what happens in an immoral society? It’s the children who ultimately pay the price for our sins.
So one day in the near future I may be called a bigot by saying that it's immoral for an adult to have sex with a child. You may laugh, but don't laugh too hard.
Thursday, August 03, 2006
Wednesday, August 02, 2006
UN Resolution for Iran
UN Resolution demands Iran suspend nuke program or face consequences.
It took me a few minutes to write that sentence. After all, it's hard to type while laughing so hard. My guess is, the Iranians are probably laughing just as hard. The UN threatening action? Right.
Anyone out there want to take bets on what happens after the August 31 deadline comes and goes? We know Iran won't stop their nuke program. I think the only think up for debate is exactle how many UN Resolutions are issued before the US has to build another coalition to go in and do the UN's job for them. How many were issued to Iraq? 18 or 19? I lost count.
That's a mighty big number, but I think the UN can surpass it. After all, the US is stretched to a near-limit and there doesn't seem to be much of a coalition willing to disarm these lunatics. So maybe the UN can get up to 20 or 30 worthless resolutions before something is actually done. Either that, or Iran lobs a few warheads into Europe and wakes up the appeasers. I'm not sure which will come first.
But I'm certain August 31 is a pretty meaningless "deadline".
It took me a few minutes to write that sentence. After all, it's hard to type while laughing so hard. My guess is, the Iranians are probably laughing just as hard. The UN threatening action? Right.
Anyone out there want to take bets on what happens after the August 31 deadline comes and goes? We know Iran won't stop their nuke program. I think the only think up for debate is exactle how many UN Resolutions are issued before the US has to build another coalition to go in and do the UN's job for them. How many were issued to Iraq? 18 or 19? I lost count.
That's a mighty big number, but I think the UN can surpass it. After all, the US is stretched to a near-limit and there doesn't seem to be much of a coalition willing to disarm these lunatics. So maybe the UN can get up to 20 or 30 worthless resolutions before something is actually done. Either that, or Iran lobs a few warheads into Europe and wakes up the appeasers. I'm not sure which will come first.
But I'm certain August 31 is a pretty meaningless "deadline".
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
"Tar Baby"....no, I won't apologize
Romney apologizes for ‘tar baby’ remark
Here is another example of how we’ve become way too sensitive. A ‘tar baby’, like the article says, is generally used to describe a ‘sticky mess’. THAT’S the context in which Mr. Romney used it, yet, for some reason many people felt it was a racial slur. Why?
I understand that ‘tar baby’ has been used by some as a racial slur, but that’s not how Romney was using it. He used the term properly and accurately when describing the Big Dig. Why have we become so sensitive that any little remark taken out of context suddenly becomes offensive? Is it politics or is it because we’ve grown way too politically correct? I don’t know, but it’s getting ridiculous.
I’m white. If someone says "I’d like to spread some cheese on that cracker", I’m not going to gasp in horror and demand that person apologize. Why? Because it wasn’t a racial slur.
Relax people. Ease up a bit. Political correctness in this country has itself grown into a tar baby.
Here is another example of how we’ve become way too sensitive. A ‘tar baby’, like the article says, is generally used to describe a ‘sticky mess’. THAT’S the context in which Mr. Romney used it, yet, for some reason many people felt it was a racial slur. Why?
I understand that ‘tar baby’ has been used by some as a racial slur, but that’s not how Romney was using it. He used the term properly and accurately when describing the Big Dig. Why have we become so sensitive that any little remark taken out of context suddenly becomes offensive? Is it politics or is it because we’ve grown way too politically correct? I don’t know, but it’s getting ridiculous.
I’m white. If someone says "I’d like to spread some cheese on that cracker", I’m not going to gasp in horror and demand that person apologize. Why? Because it wasn’t a racial slur.
Relax people. Ease up a bit. Political correctness in this country has itself grown into a tar baby.
Monday, July 31, 2006
Israel and Qana
Israel investigating Qana
The bombing at Qana is tragic and regretable. I don't think anyone would argue that. But, tragic as it may be, war is war. Israel did not choose this war. This war was thrust upon them by the aggressive action of a brutal and peace-hating terrorist group that only wants one thing - death of the Jewish people in the Middle East.
Who is crying more for the dead at Qana? Israel or Hezbollah? I don't think I need to answer that question.
And yet attacks on Jewish institutions have sprung up all over the globe...from Sydney to Seattle there seems to be a resurgence of anti-Jewish crime. What does the Anti-defamation league have to say? Well, I'm sure they'll let us know as soon as they get Mel Gibson ostracised in Hollywood (as if that hadn't already happened).
So, the US is now pressing for peace in the Middle East. My guess is Israel will likely once again sit down at the negotiating table and once again strike a peace deal with a terrorist organization that will once again be broken by that organization and we'll be doing this again in another 18 months. Does anyone else see a pattern here?
It's obvious that peace will not be realized in the Middle East UNTIL we eliminate the war-loving killers that don't want peace.
The bombing at Qana is tragic and regretable. I don't think anyone would argue that. But, tragic as it may be, war is war. Israel did not choose this war. This war was thrust upon them by the aggressive action of a brutal and peace-hating terrorist group that only wants one thing - death of the Jewish people in the Middle East.
Who is crying more for the dead at Qana? Israel or Hezbollah? I don't think I need to answer that question.
And yet attacks on Jewish institutions have sprung up all over the globe...from Sydney to Seattle there seems to be a resurgence of anti-Jewish crime. What does the Anti-defamation league have to say? Well, I'm sure they'll let us know as soon as they get Mel Gibson ostracised in Hollywood (as if that hadn't already happened).
So, the US is now pressing for peace in the Middle East. My guess is Israel will likely once again sit down at the negotiating table and once again strike a peace deal with a terrorist organization that will once again be broken by that organization and we'll be doing this again in another 18 months. Does anyone else see a pattern here?
It's obvious that peace will not be realized in the Middle East UNTIL we eliminate the war-loving killers that don't want peace.
Thursday, July 27, 2006
OPEC not looking out for us
OPEC "can’t bring down prices"
So the leader of OPEC has basically thrown his hands up and said ‘it’s not our fault’. This is a load of garbage. For one, he follows this by saying that there ‘is no shortage in world oil supply’. I agree. There is not one shred of evidence suggesting that we are on the brink of exhausting earth’s crude oil reserves. So the question I have is: Why the high prices?
If there is no shortage of oil supply, then that means supply and demand can be balanced to keep the price steady and static. UNLESS, that supply is artificially manipulated to keep things in a constant state of imbalance, thus driving the price higher. That’s precisely what OPEC is doing.
OPEC has the means to supply more oil. Even they wouldn’t argue that. But they simply choose not to. Iran has said they are ‘happy’ with the current price of oil, and who wouldn’t be? They are turning a 4600% profit on each barrel sold and no one has done a thing to stop it. Of course they are happy.
Our dependence on foreign oil is one of the top three problems we face as a nation, and it must stop. Drill more in the Gulf, in the arctic, who cares? Spend more for nuclear power and alternative fuel sources. Do what it takes to keep our enemies (and OPEC members DO fund terrorists) from holding this power over us. The sooner the better.
So the leader of OPEC has basically thrown his hands up and said ‘it’s not our fault’. This is a load of garbage. For one, he follows this by saying that there ‘is no shortage in world oil supply’. I agree. There is not one shred of evidence suggesting that we are on the brink of exhausting earth’s crude oil reserves. So the question I have is: Why the high prices?
If there is no shortage of oil supply, then that means supply and demand can be balanced to keep the price steady and static. UNLESS, that supply is artificially manipulated to keep things in a constant state of imbalance, thus driving the price higher. That’s precisely what OPEC is doing.
OPEC has the means to supply more oil. Even they wouldn’t argue that. But they simply choose not to. Iran has said they are ‘happy’ with the current price of oil, and who wouldn’t be? They are turning a 4600% profit on each barrel sold and no one has done a thing to stop it. Of course they are happy.
Our dependence on foreign oil is one of the top three problems we face as a nation, and it must stop. Drill more in the Gulf, in the arctic, who cares? Spend more for nuclear power and alternative fuel sources. Do what it takes to keep our enemies (and OPEC members DO fund terrorists) from holding this power over us. The sooner the better.
Wednesday, July 26, 2006
Andrea Yates...not guilty
I do not, for one second, dispute the claim that Andrea Yates is insane. Anyone who would willingly murder her own children would have a difficult time convincing me they are of sound mind. That's not what bothers me about this case.
What bothers me is this whole '..by reason of insanity' mess. I never understood giving somone a free pass for murder based on mental illness (and please don't give me any two-bit freshman year psych lectures about conscious awareness). Personally, if someone is insane enough to murder another human being, that person belongs in prison or in the electric chair. Under NO circumstances should they be allowed back into society.
Yet, there is a good chance that Andrea Yates will be back in society one day.
The sad thing is that our justice system failed these poor children. As is often the case, the story became about the lunatic mother and NOT the victims. These kids were murdered, and our government failed to deliver justice to their killer. It failed to protect other children in similar situations. Once again, our government has failed the next generation.
Tonight I will pray for those poor kids, and for the many others who may one day suffer the same fate under a legal system designed to protect the offenders moreso than the victims.
What bothers me is this whole '..by reason of insanity' mess. I never understood giving somone a free pass for murder based on mental illness (and please don't give me any two-bit freshman year psych lectures about conscious awareness). Personally, if someone is insane enough to murder another human being, that person belongs in prison or in the electric chair. Under NO circumstances should they be allowed back into society.
Yet, there is a good chance that Andrea Yates will be back in society one day.
The sad thing is that our justice system failed these poor children. As is often the case, the story became about the lunatic mother and NOT the victims. These kids were murdered, and our government failed to deliver justice to their killer. It failed to protect other children in similar situations. Once again, our government has failed the next generation.
Tonight I will pray for those poor kids, and for the many others who may one day suffer the same fate under a legal system designed to protect the offenders moreso than the victims.
Tuesday, July 25, 2006
PETA and stem cells
PETA's position on stem cell research
This story is fascinating and I think it does a lot in illustrating how extreme and nonsensical PETA really is. They support embryonic stem cell research...ok, no big deal. There are some sound arguments for it (even though I don't buy any of them).
But what's incredible is WHY. PETA supports ESCR because it is a means that could decrease the amount of animal testing that is being done throughout the country. What?
Yes, it's true. Stem cell research COULD lead to scientific advances that benefit humans. PETA doesn't particularly care about that. What's important to them is that it means less testing on animals. So, in summation, PETA's position is 'more scientific testing on humans, less on animals'.
Is anybody else frightened by the insanity of this? I think these people have seen too many Bambi movies, not that I have anything against deer (I think everyone should have one in the crosshairs of their rifle), but to elevate animals above humans?
I wonder if these tree-hugging, granola-eating, whale-watching, baby-seal-saving quacks have any credibility with the general American public? My guess is, they probably have about as much as the ACLU and the UN. And whatever credibility was left will probably disappear with this story.
This story is fascinating and I think it does a lot in illustrating how extreme and nonsensical PETA really is. They support embryonic stem cell research...ok, no big deal. There are some sound arguments for it (even though I don't buy any of them).
But what's incredible is WHY. PETA supports ESCR because it is a means that could decrease the amount of animal testing that is being done throughout the country. What?
Yes, it's true. Stem cell research COULD lead to scientific advances that benefit humans. PETA doesn't particularly care about that. What's important to them is that it means less testing on animals. So, in summation, PETA's position is 'more scientific testing on humans, less on animals'.
Is anybody else frightened by the insanity of this? I think these people have seen too many Bambi movies, not that I have anything against deer (I think everyone should have one in the crosshairs of their rifle), but to elevate animals above humans?
I wonder if these tree-hugging, granola-eating, whale-watching, baby-seal-saving quacks have any credibility with the general American public? My guess is, they probably have about as much as the ACLU and the UN. And whatever credibility was left will probably disappear with this story.
Monday, July 24, 2006
Right and Left
Nobel Peace price winner threatens Bush’s life
In this article, once I get past the moronic remark about our Commander-in-Chief, I see an inherent difference between Right and Left.
For one, the Nobel prize winner seems to blame Bush for the death of so many children, and suggests the America’s involvement in Iraq has contributed to those deaths. That’s a typical Lefty position, and I don’t deny the fact that many civilians have suffered in this war on terrorism. That truly is a shame. But, unfortunately, it is a fact of life when it comes to war. There is no such thing as ‘zero collateral damage’. It’s part of what makes war so horrible. But is this enough to say ‘never’ when it comes to war?
The Right position would say: "Yes, there are some children dead because of the war, but how many lives were saved as a result of removing this madman from power?"
It’s a fair question and, unfortunately, one that can’t be answered outside of ‘a lot’. After all, if you look at Hussein’s track record, he is responsible for much more innocent dead than has occurred in the 3 years of warfare that has gripped Iraq. So is America the brutal animal that everyone makes them out to be? The sad thing about history is that man does not have the luxury of viewing the outcome of decisions NOT made. Such is the case with Iraq.
They say shame on us for taking action, while I would say shame on us for not taking action. It’s a debate that began in the 60’s and may never end.
She also mentions a story about British soldiers killing an IRA operative, resulting in his car careening onto the sidewalk and killing two innocent children. Tragic. But who’s to blame? The Left would say it’s the British soldiers who are to blame. The Right, myself included, blame the IRA. They were, after all, a terrorist organization that killed MANY innocent people in the struggle they called a revolution. These two poor children were amongst those.
I hope we can all agree that terrorists must be stopped. The question is how. My hope is that we won’t be looking back twenty years from now and wondering about the possible outcome of decisions not made.
In this article, once I get past the moronic remark about our Commander-in-Chief, I see an inherent difference between Right and Left.
For one, the Nobel prize winner seems to blame Bush for the death of so many children, and suggests the America’s involvement in Iraq has contributed to those deaths. That’s a typical Lefty position, and I don’t deny the fact that many civilians have suffered in this war on terrorism. That truly is a shame. But, unfortunately, it is a fact of life when it comes to war. There is no such thing as ‘zero collateral damage’. It’s part of what makes war so horrible. But is this enough to say ‘never’ when it comes to war?
The Right position would say: "Yes, there are some children dead because of the war, but how many lives were saved as a result of removing this madman from power?"
It’s a fair question and, unfortunately, one that can’t be answered outside of ‘a lot’. After all, if you look at Hussein’s track record, he is responsible for much more innocent dead than has occurred in the 3 years of warfare that has gripped Iraq. So is America the brutal animal that everyone makes them out to be? The sad thing about history is that man does not have the luxury of viewing the outcome of decisions NOT made. Such is the case with Iraq.
They say shame on us for taking action, while I would say shame on us for not taking action. It’s a debate that began in the 60’s and may never end.
She also mentions a story about British soldiers killing an IRA operative, resulting in his car careening onto the sidewalk and killing two innocent children. Tragic. But who’s to blame? The Left would say it’s the British soldiers who are to blame. The Right, myself included, blame the IRA. They were, after all, a terrorist organization that killed MANY innocent people in the struggle they called a revolution. These two poor children were amongst those.
I hope we can all agree that terrorists must be stopped. The question is how. My hope is that we won’t be looking back twenty years from now and wondering about the possible outcome of decisions not made.
Friday, July 21, 2006
A right wing lunatic
Proof that lunacy is not just a moonbat trait
Add Pat Buchanan to the list of anti-Israel columnists that seem to have forgotten that we are currently immersed in a global war on Islamofascism. In this column, Buchanan basically advocated an isolationist policy that, as history has told us, is a policy doomed to failure. He is overtly critical of Israel’s proactive defensive actions and, while at it, takes a stab at Bush’s similar approach. This is my response to some of Buchanan’s comments.
"Binyamin Netanyahu says the ruination of Lebanon is Hezbollah's doing. But is it Hezbollah that is using U.S.-built F-16s, with precision-guided bombs and 155-mm artillery pieces to wreak death and devastation on Lebanon?"
I suppose a better option would be for Israel to simply allow Hezbollah to attack their soldiers unprovoked, kidnap them at will, and maintain a constant threat of attack from just beyond the Lebanon border. Yet, somehow, that’s Israel’s fault? I live about 15 miles from the state line. If there were a terrorist group on the other side with thousands of rockets aimed at my town, I would want something done about it…apparently Pat Buchanan wouldn’t (unless of course it were his town under threat).
"Where does George W. Bush get the authority to launch a war on Iran? When did Congress declare war or authorize a war on Iran?"
Congress hasn’t declared war since 1941, yet that hasn’t stopped us from defending ourselves when the time came. The Constitution does not forbid using military force to protect our interests overseas, Mr. Buchanan.
"none of them has attacked our country, nor has Syria,"
Since when does it take an attack to identify a threat? Did Germany attack us in the 1940s? By Buchanan’s reasoning, we wouldn’t have taken any action against the Third Reich until they had conquered Europe and Asia.
"there is no evidence Iran has any tighter control over Hezbollah than we have over Israel"
Proof? How about 13,000 Iranian-made rockets? Did they spontaneously manifest themselves or did Iran possibly supply them? And these very rockets are killing many Israelis as we speak, yet no one seems to care about that. No, they’re too busy weeping for the terrorists that have clearly bitten off more than they can chew.
"there is no solid proof Iran is in violation of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty"
And you prefer to wait for proof? That, to me, means waiting until Iran has a nuclear weapon. That’s NOT acceptable. If we do that, then Tel Aviv will be destroyed before we can act. This is foolish and irresponsible. If we have any shred of evidence suggesting Iran is even close to having the bomb, then they must be taken out. Either that, or face a nuclear war.
Mr. Buchanan is as wacked as Howard Dean. Neither one of them have any semblance of a clue regarding the nature of the enemy. They’re still deluded enough to think that diplomacy is an option when dealing with blood-thirsty hoodlums. Their thinking endangers us all and I don’t appreciate it. We ARE at war, gentlemen, despite what you may think, and the enemy will overcome us if we don’t stop them before they become too powerful to stop. Do it now, or wait until they can strike us with WMDs, which do you prefer?
Add Pat Buchanan to the list of anti-Israel columnists that seem to have forgotten that we are currently immersed in a global war on Islamofascism. In this column, Buchanan basically advocated an isolationist policy that, as history has told us, is a policy doomed to failure. He is overtly critical of Israel’s proactive defensive actions and, while at it, takes a stab at Bush’s similar approach. This is my response to some of Buchanan’s comments.
"Binyamin Netanyahu says the ruination of Lebanon is Hezbollah's doing. But is it Hezbollah that is using U.S.-built F-16s, with precision-guided bombs and 155-mm artillery pieces to wreak death and devastation on Lebanon?"
I suppose a better option would be for Israel to simply allow Hezbollah to attack their soldiers unprovoked, kidnap them at will, and maintain a constant threat of attack from just beyond the Lebanon border. Yet, somehow, that’s Israel’s fault? I live about 15 miles from the state line. If there were a terrorist group on the other side with thousands of rockets aimed at my town, I would want something done about it…apparently Pat Buchanan wouldn’t (unless of course it were his town under threat).
"Where does George W. Bush get the authority to launch a war on Iran? When did Congress declare war or authorize a war on Iran?"
Congress hasn’t declared war since 1941, yet that hasn’t stopped us from defending ourselves when the time came. The Constitution does not forbid using military force to protect our interests overseas, Mr. Buchanan.
"none of them has attacked our country, nor has Syria,"
Since when does it take an attack to identify a threat? Did Germany attack us in the 1940s? By Buchanan’s reasoning, we wouldn’t have taken any action against the Third Reich until they had conquered Europe and Asia.
"there is no evidence Iran has any tighter control over Hezbollah than we have over Israel"
Proof? How about 13,000 Iranian-made rockets? Did they spontaneously manifest themselves or did Iran possibly supply them? And these very rockets are killing many Israelis as we speak, yet no one seems to care about that. No, they’re too busy weeping for the terrorists that have clearly bitten off more than they can chew.
"there is no solid proof Iran is in violation of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty"
And you prefer to wait for proof? That, to me, means waiting until Iran has a nuclear weapon. That’s NOT acceptable. If we do that, then Tel Aviv will be destroyed before we can act. This is foolish and irresponsible. If we have any shred of evidence suggesting Iran is even close to having the bomb, then they must be taken out. Either that, or face a nuclear war.
Mr. Buchanan is as wacked as Howard Dean. Neither one of them have any semblance of a clue regarding the nature of the enemy. They’re still deluded enough to think that diplomacy is an option when dealing with blood-thirsty hoodlums. Their thinking endangers us all and I don’t appreciate it. We ARE at war, gentlemen, despite what you may think, and the enemy will overcome us if we don’t stop them before they become too powerful to stop. Do it now, or wait until they can strike us with WMDs, which do you prefer?
Thursday, July 20, 2006
A new Axis
Iranians witnessed North Korea’s missile test
This is becoming a much more dangerous situation than I at first thought. I never was concerned about North Korea doing something stupid. Granted, their leader is certifiably nuts, but even he isn’t stupid enough to launch an attack against the United States.
But I am concerned about this alliance building. Does anyone remember the Axis powers? Or the Warsaw Pact? When two or more evil powers get together, NOTHING good can come from it.
There is a scheduled meeting between Kim Jong Il and Hugo Chavez in September, and now this news about Iran witnessing Il’s missile tests. This is unacceptable and has the markings of a planning stage. You’d better believe that if Hussein was still around he would be in on it as well (forget this Sunni/Shia garbage, they BOTH hate the US and Israel).
Here’s a hypothetical: A liberal wins in ’08, effectively giving our enemies a perceived green light to carry on. Chavez and Il launch on America (Chavez will do doubt be provided nukes from North Korea by then). Iran (and maybe Syria) launches on Israel and our troops in Iraq (if they are still there). Europe has been effectively neutered by the progressive voice leaving only Great Britain as our ally. What happens next?
It’s an open-ended question and perhaps my scenario sounds a little far-fetched…but is it? If you can name three lunatic world leaders then Il, Ahmadinejad and Chavez would head most people’s lists. We need to stop this mess before it gets out of hand.
This is becoming a much more dangerous situation than I at first thought. I never was concerned about North Korea doing something stupid. Granted, their leader is certifiably nuts, but even he isn’t stupid enough to launch an attack against the United States.
But I am concerned about this alliance building. Does anyone remember the Axis powers? Or the Warsaw Pact? When two or more evil powers get together, NOTHING good can come from it.
There is a scheduled meeting between Kim Jong Il and Hugo Chavez in September, and now this news about Iran witnessing Il’s missile tests. This is unacceptable and has the markings of a planning stage. You’d better believe that if Hussein was still around he would be in on it as well (forget this Sunni/Shia garbage, they BOTH hate the US and Israel).
Here’s a hypothetical: A liberal wins in ’08, effectively giving our enemies a perceived green light to carry on. Chavez and Il launch on America (Chavez will do doubt be provided nukes from North Korea by then). Iran (and maybe Syria) launches on Israel and our troops in Iraq (if they are still there). Europe has been effectively neutered by the progressive voice leaving only Great Britain as our ally. What happens next?
It’s an open-ended question and perhaps my scenario sounds a little far-fetched…but is it? If you can name three lunatic world leaders then Il, Ahmadinejad and Chavez would head most people’s lists. We need to stop this mess before it gets out of hand.
Wednesday, July 19, 2006
Bush's Veto
I wrote the words below some time back in regards to partial birth abortion, and in light of Bush's recent veto I'd like to post them again because I think it is applicable.
"I believe that human life is a sequence of events. A human being grows from a single cell, to an embryo, a fetus, an infant, a child, a teenager, etc...until life ends. This is a process that moves through many phases, but that process ALWAYS begins with fertilization. There is no other way for life to exist. Any 'boundaries' that are placed within that process are man-made, and thus can change. For example, if we place a boundary and say that life begins at birth, then who's to say that one day that boundary can be moved to another age? Perhaps when the child is self-dependent, or capable of working or voting? Obviously, this is dangerous thinking. So the answer is to look at nature, and nature shows that the process of life has a beginning...and that beginning is ALWAYS at fertilization."
I hope that Bush stands strong on his position and that Congress backs off of this stem cell thing. To me, prioritizing life is playing with fire. Are we prepared to say that an adult with Alzheimer's is worth more and is more important than an embryo in a fertility clinic?
Whenever a society begins to experiment with and kill it's members for the greater good then it has crossed a boundary that puts its very existence in jeopardy. This is dangerous thinking and I stand by the President and his decision. At some point, we must recognize life for what it is and not for what it can do for us. I hope that time comes sooner rather than later. Our moral fiber may be at stake.
"I believe that human life is a sequence of events. A human being grows from a single cell, to an embryo, a fetus, an infant, a child, a teenager, etc...until life ends. This is a process that moves through many phases, but that process ALWAYS begins with fertilization. There is no other way for life to exist. Any 'boundaries' that are placed within that process are man-made, and thus can change. For example, if we place a boundary and say that life begins at birth, then who's to say that one day that boundary can be moved to another age? Perhaps when the child is self-dependent, or capable of working or voting? Obviously, this is dangerous thinking. So the answer is to look at nature, and nature shows that the process of life has a beginning...and that beginning is ALWAYS at fertilization."
I hope that Bush stands strong on his position and that Congress backs off of this stem cell thing. To me, prioritizing life is playing with fire. Are we prepared to say that an adult with Alzheimer's is worth more and is more important than an embryo in a fertility clinic?
Whenever a society begins to experiment with and kill it's members for the greater good then it has crossed a boundary that puts its very existence in jeopardy. This is dangerous thinking and I stand by the President and his decision. At some point, we must recognize life for what it is and not for what it can do for us. I hope that time comes sooner rather than later. Our moral fiber may be at stake.
Tuesday, July 18, 2006
Olmert's words
This was lifted from my Australian friend, Gravelrash. Check out his blog, it is truly worth your time.
These are a few excerpts from Olmert's address yesterday. I am impressed. You can see the rest at Gravelrash's site. This speech is inspirational in every sense of the word.
“Only a nation that can defend its freedom truly deserves it.”
“There are moments in the life of a nation, when it is compelled to look directly into the face of reality and say: no more! And I say to everyone: no more! ”
”We are entitled to our freedom, and when necessary, we know how to fight for it and defend it.”
This is the reaction of someone who truly feels that their liberty is in jeopardy and is willing to do what it takes to preserve that liberty. I applaud him for it.
These are a few excerpts from Olmert's address yesterday. I am impressed. You can see the rest at Gravelrash's site. This speech is inspirational in every sense of the word.
“Only a nation that can defend its freedom truly deserves it.”
“There are moments in the life of a nation, when it is compelled to look directly into the face of reality and say: no more! And I say to everyone: no more! ”
”We are entitled to our freedom, and when necessary, we know how to fight for it and defend it.”
This is the reaction of someone who truly feels that their liberty is in jeopardy and is willing to do what it takes to preserve that liberty. I applaud him for it.
Monday, July 17, 2006
I spoke too soon
Leftists march in Tel Aviv in protest of war
Looks like I spoke too soon in praise of the Israeli people. I guess the "service before self" mentality will die with world war two generation.
I believe it was Lenin who referred to the American left as ‘useful idiots’, knowing that the actions of the Left were extremely beneficial to his own cause. The ‘idiot’ part was in reference to the Left’s lack of insight into the harm that their actions cause their own country. Lenin knew what he was talking about.
Indeed, the Muslim extremists have no ally as precious as the international Leftists, whether in France, Spain, England, the US or Israel. Without the Left, their cause would be doomed. Just look at what these people are saying…
"Peretz, don't worry, we'll be seeing you at The Hague."
"Stop the war monstrosity."
"The Israeli aggression leads to an overall war no one wants. I think that Israel should negotiate with Hizbullah and Hamas and release Palestinian prisoners in exchange for the hostages. This way this story will come to an end."
"What Israel is doing now resulted in the death of civilians, innocent children, and it serves no purpose except for the government's vindictiveness."
They make a better case for Nasrallah and Hezbollah than Nasrallah himself. If these extremists were wise, they’d start putting some of these Lefties on the payroll as spokespeople.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. IF this world becomes dominated by Islamic extremists, it will be the direct result of the actions of the Left. THEY are the only ones enabling these lunatics, and I’m not sure what it will take to convince them of their error.
Looks like I spoke too soon in praise of the Israeli people. I guess the "service before self" mentality will die with world war two generation.
I believe it was Lenin who referred to the American left as ‘useful idiots’, knowing that the actions of the Left were extremely beneficial to his own cause. The ‘idiot’ part was in reference to the Left’s lack of insight into the harm that their actions cause their own country. Lenin knew what he was talking about.
Indeed, the Muslim extremists have no ally as precious as the international Leftists, whether in France, Spain, England, the US or Israel. Without the Left, their cause would be doomed. Just look at what these people are saying…
"Peretz, don't worry, we'll be seeing you at The Hague."
"Stop the war monstrosity."
"The Israeli aggression leads to an overall war no one wants. I think that Israel should negotiate with Hizbullah and Hamas and release Palestinian prisoners in exchange for the hostages. This way this story will come to an end."
"What Israel is doing now resulted in the death of civilians, innocent children, and it serves no purpose except for the government's vindictiveness."
They make a better case for Nasrallah and Hezbollah than Nasrallah himself. If these extremists were wise, they’d start putting some of these Lefties on the payroll as spokespeople.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. IF this world becomes dominated by Islamic extremists, it will be the direct result of the actions of the Left. THEY are the only ones enabling these lunatics, and I’m not sure what it will take to convince them of their error.
Saturday, July 15, 2006
Israel's lesson for us all
I gotta say, I'm extremely impressed with the Israeli people. They are waging war the way I wish America could. It's been several days of relentless bombing and the use of "disproportionate" force (in the eyes of some), and I have yet to hear a single word of dissent from an Israeli citizen, political leader, or media outlet. And you'd better believe that if people were voicing dissent, the MSM would be all over them.
Does that mean that every single Israeli agrees with what it's government is currently doing? I doubt that. There are some pretty deep political divisions within that country. So, I'm sure there are many who believe in a policy of restraint, or at least woundn't advocate all-out war over three kidnapped soldiers.
So what's impressive about it is that, even though I'm sure there is disagreement within Israel, we aren't hearing it. The Israeli's know that they are surrounded by danger, and they know that disarming Hamas and Hezbollah is in the best interest if the WORLD. So, they keep their mouths shut. Perhaps, when all of this is over, they will debate the merits of the current campaign, but not while it's ongoing. America could learn a lesson from them.
Like us, they believe in healthy dissent, but the difference is that the dissenters know of the proper time and place to voice their dissent...and it's NOT when their soldiers are engaged in a violent campaign with the enemy.
My guess is the Left is probably actively criticizing Israel, so I doubt the lesson will be learned. But it would be nice if we, as a nation, followed their example.
Does that mean that every single Israeli agrees with what it's government is currently doing? I doubt that. There are some pretty deep political divisions within that country. So, I'm sure there are many who believe in a policy of restraint, or at least woundn't advocate all-out war over three kidnapped soldiers.
So what's impressive about it is that, even though I'm sure there is disagreement within Israel, we aren't hearing it. The Israeli's know that they are surrounded by danger, and they know that disarming Hamas and Hezbollah is in the best interest if the WORLD. So, they keep their mouths shut. Perhaps, when all of this is over, they will debate the merits of the current campaign, but not while it's ongoing. America could learn a lesson from them.
Like us, they believe in healthy dissent, but the difference is that the dissenters know of the proper time and place to voice their dissent...and it's NOT when their soldiers are engaged in a violent campaign with the enemy.
My guess is the Left is probably actively criticizing Israel, so I doubt the lesson will be learned. But it would be nice if we, as a nation, followed their example.
Thursday, July 13, 2006
Don't kick a bear
Israel has retaliated with brutal force against an enemy that doubted their will to use that force.
That’s what this all boils down to. Israel is a much more powerful entity than Hezbollah or Hamas. They are capable of much more destruction. So why would these smaller, weaker organizations provoke them?
Americans can answer that better than anyone else. Back on Sept. 11, 2001, we were struck in similar circumstances. The most powerful nation in the world was hit by a smaller, weaker organization. Why?
There are many reasons why, but one of them has to be…because they didn’t think we had to will or the resolve to use the force that we possessed. If Bin Laden knew that attacking on 9/11 would ultimately lead to the toppling of two of the most terror-friendly regimes in the world, would he still have done it?
It’s a fair question. And if Hamas/Hezbollah knew that Lebanon would undergo the attacks that are currently underway, would they have thought twice about kidnapping those soldiers? That also is a fair question.
I think it’s safe to say that the resolve of both America and Israel have been underestimated…so far. I think in many ways the jury is still out on our resolve.
Yet, this article shows one phrase repeated many times in the international response to Israel’s actions… "disproportionate force". What? Israel is being criticized for using the one thing that should discourage her enemies from attacking her?
Disproportionate force is what keeps whatever peace we have on this planet
Disproportionate force is what ended the bloodiest war in human history
Disproportionate force is probably the only thing keeping North Korea from attacking its neighbors, including us
Disproportionate force, or the threat of it, is the very thing that gives the UN whatever power it has
Disproportionate force is what discourages bad people from doing bad things
It may not be fair to use it, but Israel didn’t start this mess, and WE didn’t start our war with Al Qaida and international terrorism. So, don’t blame the powerful for using the force that everyone knew was there.
If I kick a grizzly bear in the groin, then would the bear be at fault for mauling me afterward?
That’s what this all boils down to. Israel is a much more powerful entity than Hezbollah or Hamas. They are capable of much more destruction. So why would these smaller, weaker organizations provoke them?
Americans can answer that better than anyone else. Back on Sept. 11, 2001, we were struck in similar circumstances. The most powerful nation in the world was hit by a smaller, weaker organization. Why?
There are many reasons why, but one of them has to be…because they didn’t think we had to will or the resolve to use the force that we possessed. If Bin Laden knew that attacking on 9/11 would ultimately lead to the toppling of two of the most terror-friendly regimes in the world, would he still have done it?
It’s a fair question. And if Hamas/Hezbollah knew that Lebanon would undergo the attacks that are currently underway, would they have thought twice about kidnapping those soldiers? That also is a fair question.
I think it’s safe to say that the resolve of both America and Israel have been underestimated…so far. I think in many ways the jury is still out on our resolve.
Yet, this article shows one phrase repeated many times in the international response to Israel’s actions… "disproportionate force". What? Israel is being criticized for using the one thing that should discourage her enemies from attacking her?
Disproportionate force is what keeps whatever peace we have on this planet
Disproportionate force is what ended the bloodiest war in human history
Disproportionate force is probably the only thing keeping North Korea from attacking its neighbors, including us
Disproportionate force, or the threat of it, is the very thing that gives the UN whatever power it has
Disproportionate force is what discourages bad people from doing bad things
It may not be fair to use it, but Israel didn’t start this mess, and WE didn’t start our war with Al Qaida and international terrorism. So, don’t blame the powerful for using the force that everyone knew was there.
If I kick a grizzly bear in the groin, then would the bear be at fault for mauling me afterward?
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
Tomorrow our paycheck is ours
Today, July 12, is the day that we stop working for the government and start working for ourselves! Yes, that's right, from January 1 to now we've all been working to pay for that mammoth bureaucracy that we call the federal government, but not anymore.
Entitlements for immigrants? Yes, that was pretty much the entire month of February. Their health care and social security are just a few of the many things that we all worked for over the past half-year.
Social Security? We'll probably NEVER get to benefit from this dinosaur concept, but we worked for it, probably several weeks in March or April.
Welfare and Food Stamps? Those people didn't work for it, but we did, no doubt a few weeks in May.
Foreign Aid? Hundreds of millions of dollars were given to countries who hate us, and we probably worked most of June to pay for it.
How about the money that goes to the UN? We furnish a LARGE amount of that organization's budget and probably had to work a few days in January to pay them.
But no more! Starting tomorrow, the money we earn is ours! So get up early, have a good breakfast and an extra cup of coffee because tomorrow we're all working for ourselves! I'm gonna put in a good ten hours and whistle a catchy tune all the way home knowing that my paycheck is ALL MINE.
Here's to all of you taxpayers, and a prayer that a liberal won't take the White House in '08, otherwise we may not be working for ourselves until October.
Entitlements for immigrants? Yes, that was pretty much the entire month of February. Their health care and social security are just a few of the many things that we all worked for over the past half-year.
Social Security? We'll probably NEVER get to benefit from this dinosaur concept, but we worked for it, probably several weeks in March or April.
Welfare and Food Stamps? Those people didn't work for it, but we did, no doubt a few weeks in May.
Foreign Aid? Hundreds of millions of dollars were given to countries who hate us, and we probably worked most of June to pay for it.
How about the money that goes to the UN? We furnish a LARGE amount of that organization's budget and probably had to work a few days in January to pay them.
But no more! Starting tomorrow, the money we earn is ours! So get up early, have a good breakfast and an extra cup of coffee because tomorrow we're all working for ourselves! I'm gonna put in a good ten hours and whistle a catchy tune all the way home knowing that my paycheck is ALL MINE.
Here's to all of you taxpayers, and a prayer that a liberal won't take the White House in '08, otherwise we may not be working for ourselves until October.
Tuesday, July 11, 2006
Human rights abuse? Not if it's an American
Mutilation of 2 GIs claimed to be in retaliation for alleged rape.
So much for ‘innocent until proven guilty’. I don’t even know where to begin on this story. First, why are we reporting on "alleged" crimes when we know it does nothing but fuel the insurgency…and I’m blaming the military as much as the media on this one. How did these nutcases even know about the alleged rape? Granted, that’s NOT why they killed these two soldiers, but it still makes it clear that they listen to our press and feed off of what’s said. We should take heed.
Second, I searched the big three human rights websites for this story: Amnesty International, The International Red Cross and the ACLU. Guess what, I didn’t find it anywhere. This story is non-existent on their websites. In fact, when these two troops were initially murdered, the story wasn’t even covered THEN…
Why?
This IS a human rights abuse. This IS a violation of the Geneva Convention. This IS a violation of the civil liberties of two Americans. So why isn’t it being covered. It seems that such an action would be a direct challenge to what these organizations stand for. Shouldn’t they at least have SOMETHING…how about, "this happened and it was bad"
That’s all I’m asking for. Just acknowledge that terrorists are bad people. I think it’s evident that the reason these organizations aren’t interested is simply because the victims here are Americans. Had they been Iraqi or Al-Qaida, then you better believe they would be up in arms about it...like dynamite on a suicide bomber. The message hear is 'we're willing to overlook human rights abuses so long as the abuses are against the right people'. That's does a lot for the credibility of these organizations.
What are the odds of one of these organizations one day asking the UN to recognize Al-Qaida as a legitimate state or government? Don't laugh. After all, they're not too much different than the Palestinians.
Just another illustration of how the Left has weakened our beloved country.
So much for ‘innocent until proven guilty’. I don’t even know where to begin on this story. First, why are we reporting on "alleged" crimes when we know it does nothing but fuel the insurgency…and I’m blaming the military as much as the media on this one. How did these nutcases even know about the alleged rape? Granted, that’s NOT why they killed these two soldiers, but it still makes it clear that they listen to our press and feed off of what’s said. We should take heed.
Second, I searched the big three human rights websites for this story: Amnesty International, The International Red Cross and the ACLU. Guess what, I didn’t find it anywhere. This story is non-existent on their websites. In fact, when these two troops were initially murdered, the story wasn’t even covered THEN…
Why?
This IS a human rights abuse. This IS a violation of the Geneva Convention. This IS a violation of the civil liberties of two Americans. So why isn’t it being covered. It seems that such an action would be a direct challenge to what these organizations stand for. Shouldn’t they at least have SOMETHING…how about, "this happened and it was bad"
That’s all I’m asking for. Just acknowledge that terrorists are bad people. I think it’s evident that the reason these organizations aren’t interested is simply because the victims here are Americans. Had they been Iraqi or Al-Qaida, then you better believe they would be up in arms about it...like dynamite on a suicide bomber. The message hear is 'we're willing to overlook human rights abuses so long as the abuses are against the right people'. That's does a lot for the credibility of these organizations.
What are the odds of one of these organizations one day asking the UN to recognize Al-Qaida as a legitimate state or government? Don't laugh. After all, they're not too much different than the Palestinians.
Just another illustration of how the Left has weakened our beloved country.
Monday, July 10, 2006
Doctor Moore to tell us the 'truth'
Michael Moore sets his eyes on the health care industry
I can sum it up without even seeing the movie, so put your 6 bucks away. Here you go:
"Look at all these poor, helpless people who don’t have health insurance. Cry a tear for them. How tragic. This country is so rich, why can’t we just GIVE them health insurance. Blame to HMO, blame the drug companies, blame anyone who has prospered in America. Shame on them for their success when others fail to achieve. We need to give everyone in this country free health care, and we should make the rich (aka, anyone who makes over $50,000 a year) pay for it. It’s the humane thing to do."
Whaaaaa…here’s a better idea. How about if you don’t have health insurance, you just renounce your US citizenship, then you can be seen in any ER in any of the border states for free.
I can sum it up without even seeing the movie, so put your 6 bucks away. Here you go:
"Look at all these poor, helpless people who don’t have health insurance. Cry a tear for them. How tragic. This country is so rich, why can’t we just GIVE them health insurance. Blame to HMO, blame the drug companies, blame anyone who has prospered in America. Shame on them for their success when others fail to achieve. We need to give everyone in this country free health care, and we should make the rich (aka, anyone who makes over $50,000 a year) pay for it. It’s the humane thing to do."
Whaaaaa…here’s a better idea. How about if you don’t have health insurance, you just renounce your US citizenship, then you can be seen in any ER in any of the border states for free.
Just run a tab for them
Dallas hospital to bill Mexico for indigent care.
This is a good idea, even though the bill won’t get paid. I don’t think people realize how taxing the illegal immigration problem is on health care. It’s putting hospitals out of business and it’s shutting down emergency rooms. Keep in mind, this is making access to health care even worse for those law-abiding citizens who pay taxes.
But I want to take this a step further. The US currently sends $30 Million a year to Mexico as foreign aid. Why? Mexico’s leading industry is immigration. That’s no joke. Why are we giving them an additional $30 million on top of that?
I think we should take that money and give it to these hospitals who are on the verge of collapse all along the border. Then, make it optional for emergency rooms to provide health care to anyone who can’t prove US citizenship. Sound harsh? Of course it does, but we’ve been backed into a corner and it’s not fair for the US taxpayer to shoulder this burden. It’s not fair to me, or you, or anyone else who is an honest citizen paying taxes.
This is a good idea, even though the bill won’t get paid. I don’t think people realize how taxing the illegal immigration problem is on health care. It’s putting hospitals out of business and it’s shutting down emergency rooms. Keep in mind, this is making access to health care even worse for those law-abiding citizens who pay taxes.
But I want to take this a step further. The US currently sends $30 Million a year to Mexico as foreign aid. Why? Mexico’s leading industry is immigration. That’s no joke. Why are we giving them an additional $30 million on top of that?
I think we should take that money and give it to these hospitals who are on the verge of collapse all along the border. Then, make it optional for emergency rooms to provide health care to anyone who can’t prove US citizenship. Sound harsh? Of course it does, but we’ve been backed into a corner and it’s not fair for the US taxpayer to shoulder this burden. It’s not fair to me, or you, or anyone else who is an honest citizen paying taxes.
Sunday, July 09, 2006
The UN is after our guns
by Jack McLain Vice - Chairman, Constitution Party of Florida
For many years the United Nations has had their eye upon the guns of the worlds’ citizens. Socialists and Communists know from experience that removing guns from the people is the best way to remove their freedom. Americans know from experience that we needed our arms to win our freedom and that we had better keep them if we are to remain free !
The Associated Press reported in 1994, "So quietly that even the gun lobby hasn’t noticed, the United Nations is beginning to set its sights on global gun control." U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan reported to the General Assembly in 2000, "Some progress is already being made as States [nations] tighten their arms export legislation and collect and destroy surplus weapons." Today gun owners are very alert to efforts being made nationally and internationally to confiscate their guns.
Now at the very season of the 230th anniversary of the celebration of our July 4th signing of our Declaration of Independence, as if intentional, the United Nations is holding an international affair to finalize a treaty to take away the gun rights of citizens worldwide. Under such a treaty, if honored by our "wilting" leadershp, Americans could lose their rights to self-protection under the Second Amendment. Is our Constitution still effective? We had better be certain.
The United Nations has proven itself to be anti-gun. The statue at the U.N. headquarters depicts a revolver with a knotted barrel as significant of the position of the organization. U.N. forces have disarmed civilians in Kosovo, Haiti, and Somalia. The U.N. funded Commission on Global Governance in 1995 published the statement, "We strongly endorse community initiatives...to encourage the disarming of civilians..."
More than 100 members of the United Nations and more than 500 gun-ban groups worldwide are involved in this conference to draft a global "Treaty on Small Arms." Six supposedly "free" countries: the United Kingdom, Sweden, The Netherlands, France, Norway, and Belgium are among those aiding and supporting the global gun ban treaty movement. As reported by Wayne LaPierre of National Rifle Association, "This past year marked the 60th anniversary of the end of WWII---a war in which liberation and freedom for dozens of nations was bought with American blood." Over 400,000 Americans died to bring freedom for others. Now many of these nations are working with dictatorships and terrorist states to render our Bill of Rights ineffective and to bring other peoples to servitude.
"Libya and Cuba are seated on the U.N. Human Rights Commission, and even Sudan--the only country that still allows slavery--is in charge of this Commission. Yet they arrogantly claim that your freedoms are to blame for the problems of the world!!!", reported LaPierre.
Surely the United Nations crowd wants to disarm the nations of the world to the end that we will be slaves to the global government being planned. Once free Americans will no longer be able to rely on the protection of our Second Amendment to keep and bear arms.
To allow such happenings in the free land of the United States of America borders on insanity. Wisdom has vanished and vision is blinded. God reminds us that, "Where there is no vision, the people perish."
Gun Owners of America is striving to awaken Americans to the dangers we face. They have sought the influence of America’s U.N. Ambassador John Bolton who has assured them that he would continue speaking out against infringements on the gun rights of Americans. Freedom loving Americans need to be alerted to respond to the call to demand that our freedoms be unchallenged. All gun groups should be especially active as well as encouraging others to join them to preserve this most essential freedom---if America is to survive.
The Constitution Party of Florida stands on our party Platform which emphasizes the guarantee of the Second Amendment to keep and bear arms, that "it may not properly be infringed upon or denied." "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have them." We further call for the termination of membership in the United Nations and the removal of its operations on United States territory.
While Americanists are sleeping, we are gradually being deceived and deprived of our very basic rights. It is past time to get off our comfortable couches, wake up, and to get into the battle! The days of "Let George do it" are past, my friend
If the UN wants my gun, then they can come and try to take it, along with the millions of other Americans who hold their "right to bear arms" true to heart. I qualified as an expert with a 9mm pistol. I have 16 bullets, so you'd better send at least 17 people to take it!
For many years the United Nations has had their eye upon the guns of the worlds’ citizens. Socialists and Communists know from experience that removing guns from the people is the best way to remove their freedom. Americans know from experience that we needed our arms to win our freedom and that we had better keep them if we are to remain free !
The Associated Press reported in 1994, "So quietly that even the gun lobby hasn’t noticed, the United Nations is beginning to set its sights on global gun control." U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan reported to the General Assembly in 2000, "Some progress is already being made as States [nations] tighten their arms export legislation and collect and destroy surplus weapons." Today gun owners are very alert to efforts being made nationally and internationally to confiscate their guns.
Now at the very season of the 230th anniversary of the celebration of our July 4th signing of our Declaration of Independence, as if intentional, the United Nations is holding an international affair to finalize a treaty to take away the gun rights of citizens worldwide. Under such a treaty, if honored by our "wilting" leadershp, Americans could lose their rights to self-protection under the Second Amendment. Is our Constitution still effective? We had better be certain.
The United Nations has proven itself to be anti-gun. The statue at the U.N. headquarters depicts a revolver with a knotted barrel as significant of the position of the organization. U.N. forces have disarmed civilians in Kosovo, Haiti, and Somalia. The U.N. funded Commission on Global Governance in 1995 published the statement, "We strongly endorse community initiatives...to encourage the disarming of civilians..."
More than 100 members of the United Nations and more than 500 gun-ban groups worldwide are involved in this conference to draft a global "Treaty on Small Arms." Six supposedly "free" countries: the United Kingdom, Sweden, The Netherlands, France, Norway, and Belgium are among those aiding and supporting the global gun ban treaty movement. As reported by Wayne LaPierre of National Rifle Association, "This past year marked the 60th anniversary of the end of WWII---a war in which liberation and freedom for dozens of nations was bought with American blood." Over 400,000 Americans died to bring freedom for others. Now many of these nations are working with dictatorships and terrorist states to render our Bill of Rights ineffective and to bring other peoples to servitude.
"Libya and Cuba are seated on the U.N. Human Rights Commission, and even Sudan--the only country that still allows slavery--is in charge of this Commission. Yet they arrogantly claim that your freedoms are to blame for the problems of the world!!!", reported LaPierre.
Surely the United Nations crowd wants to disarm the nations of the world to the end that we will be slaves to the global government being planned. Once free Americans will no longer be able to rely on the protection of our Second Amendment to keep and bear arms.
To allow such happenings in the free land of the United States of America borders on insanity. Wisdom has vanished and vision is blinded. God reminds us that, "Where there is no vision, the people perish."
Gun Owners of America is striving to awaken Americans to the dangers we face. They have sought the influence of America’s U.N. Ambassador John Bolton who has assured them that he would continue speaking out against infringements on the gun rights of Americans. Freedom loving Americans need to be alerted to respond to the call to demand that our freedoms be unchallenged. All gun groups should be especially active as well as encouraging others to join them to preserve this most essential freedom---if America is to survive.
The Constitution Party of Florida stands on our party Platform which emphasizes the guarantee of the Second Amendment to keep and bear arms, that "it may not properly be infringed upon or denied." "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have them." We further call for the termination of membership in the United Nations and the removal of its operations on United States territory.
While Americanists are sleeping, we are gradually being deceived and deprived of our very basic rights. It is past time to get off our comfortable couches, wake up, and to get into the battle! The days of "Let George do it" are past, my friend
If the UN wants my gun, then they can come and try to take it, along with the millions of other Americans who hold their "right to bear arms" true to heart. I qualified as an expert with a 9mm pistol. I have 16 bullets, so you'd better send at least 17 people to take it!
Friday, July 07, 2006
My Second Book Review
Review by W. J. Rayment / ConservativeBookstore -- John Washburn in "When Evil Prospers" delves into what politics would become in America if a liberal president were in the White House in the midst of a war on terror. Mr. Washburn works hard to be even-handed in his characterizations and in the arguments put forth by various characters to justify their actions within the constraints of the plot line.
As in any political thriller, drama drips from every page. The characters are confronted with a new devastating terrorist attack. The Governor of Texas, where the attack occurs, is a straight-forward, self-reliant political novice who uses common sense to deal with the issues that naturally arise from a violent attack on Texas soil.
Meanwhile a liberal president has come to power, and she deals with the situation in a way that reflects the "turn the other cheek" and "consensus building" attitudes of the left. The conflict in the story becomes not a struggle between the United States and terrorists, but a struggle between political factions within the United States.
Washburn has created some interesting and plausible characters who are confronted with hard choices that challenge their beliefs. It is incredible that he has been able to pull this off without his characters becoming caricatures of the intellectual ideas they are meant to represent.
Seeing the political decisions being made, we can draw parallels with our current struggle with terrorists(and Washburn does not hesitate to mention actual historical and political figures as they come to have a bearing on the story). We are also shown how these political decisions directly affect the individuals on the front lines of the struggle.
What I like about "When Evil Prospers" is that both liberals and conservatives can read this book and feel that their own sides of the political issues depicted are well-represented. The moderate can read the book with a detached perspective and follow the story line to its logical conclusion.
In all, this is a well-written work that could be a prescient view of what our future holds in store.
Wow! Thanks to Mr. Rayment at The Conservative Monitor for the kind words.
Click HERE to learn more about When Evil Prospers or preorder at Amazon.com
As in any political thriller, drama drips from every page. The characters are confronted with a new devastating terrorist attack. The Governor of Texas, where the attack occurs, is a straight-forward, self-reliant political novice who uses common sense to deal with the issues that naturally arise from a violent attack on Texas soil.
Meanwhile a liberal president has come to power, and she deals with the situation in a way that reflects the "turn the other cheek" and "consensus building" attitudes of the left. The conflict in the story becomes not a struggle between the United States and terrorists, but a struggle between political factions within the United States.
Washburn has created some interesting and plausible characters who are confronted with hard choices that challenge their beliefs. It is incredible that he has been able to pull this off without his characters becoming caricatures of the intellectual ideas they are meant to represent.
Seeing the political decisions being made, we can draw parallels with our current struggle with terrorists(and Washburn does not hesitate to mention actual historical and political figures as they come to have a bearing on the story). We are also shown how these political decisions directly affect the individuals on the front lines of the struggle.
What I like about "When Evil Prospers" is that both liberals and conservatives can read this book and feel that their own sides of the political issues depicted are well-represented. The moderate can read the book with a detached perspective and follow the story line to its logical conclusion.
In all, this is a well-written work that could be a prescient view of what our future holds in store.
Wow! Thanks to Mr. Rayment at The Conservative Monitor for the kind words.
Click HERE to learn more about When Evil Prospers or preorder at Amazon.com
My Second Book Review
Review by W. J. Rayment / ConservativeBookstore -- John Washburn in "When Evil Prospers" delves into what politics would become in America if a liberal president were in the White House in the midst of a war on terror. Mr. Washburn works hard to be even-handed in his characterizations and in the arguments put forth by various characters to justify their actions within the constraints of the plot line.
As in any political thriller, drama drips from every page. The characters are confronted with a new devastating terrorist attack. The Governor of Texas, where the attack occurs, is a straight-forward, self-reliant political novice who uses common sense to deal with the issues that naturally arise from a violent attack on Texas soil.
Meanwhile a liberal president has come to power, and she deals with the situation in a way that reflects the "turn the other cheek" and "consensus building" attitudes of the left. The conflict in the story becomes not a struggle between the United States and terrorists, but a struggle between political factions within the United States.
Washburn has created some interesting and plausible characters who are confronted with hard choices that challenge their beliefs. It is incredible that he has been able to pull this off without his characters becoming caricatures of the intellectual ideas they are meant to represent.
Seeing the political decisions being made, we can draw parallels with our current struggle with terrorists(and Washburn does not hesitate to mention actual historical and political figures as they come to have a bearing on the story). We are also shown how these political decisions directly affect the individuals on the front lines of the struggle.
What I like about "When Evil Prospers" is that both liberals and conservatives can read this book and feel that their own sides of the political issues depicted are well-represented. The moderate can read the book with a detached perspective and follow the story line to its logical conclusion.
In all, this is a well-written work that could be a prescient view of what our future holds in store.
Wow! Thanks to Mr. Rayment at The Conservative Monitor for the kind words.
Click HERE to learn more about When Evil Prospers or preorder at Amazon.com
As in any political thriller, drama drips from every page. The characters are confronted with a new devastating terrorist attack. The Governor of Texas, where the attack occurs, is a straight-forward, self-reliant political novice who uses common sense to deal with the issues that naturally arise from a violent attack on Texas soil.
Meanwhile a liberal president has come to power, and she deals with the situation in a way that reflects the "turn the other cheek" and "consensus building" attitudes of the left. The conflict in the story becomes not a struggle between the United States and terrorists, but a struggle between political factions within the United States.
Washburn has created some interesting and plausible characters who are confronted with hard choices that challenge their beliefs. It is incredible that he has been able to pull this off without his characters becoming caricatures of the intellectual ideas they are meant to represent.
Seeing the political decisions being made, we can draw parallels with our current struggle with terrorists(and Washburn does not hesitate to mention actual historical and political figures as they come to have a bearing on the story). We are also shown how these political decisions directly affect the individuals on the front lines of the struggle.
What I like about "When Evil Prospers" is that both liberals and conservatives can read this book and feel that their own sides of the political issues depicted are well-represented. The moderate can read the book with a detached perspective and follow the story line to its logical conclusion.
In all, this is a well-written work that could be a prescient view of what our future holds in store.
Wow! Thanks to Mr. Rayment at The Conservative Monitor for the kind words.
Click HERE to learn more about When Evil Prospers or preorder at Amazon.com
Green Tax and the loony Mexican left
This article is more evidence of what happens when we allow fear to preside over logic. In an effort to curb carbon dioxide emissions from jet liners, Europe will be imposing a green tax on the airline industry. The result…you got it…higher rates. That tax is passed right on to the consumer. The airline industry doesn’t lose any profit, they still make the same amount of money on a ticket, but it could potentially wreak havoc on the European economy and the common citizen.
Why? Because there are some scientists who "think" that carbon dioxide produced from human activity adversely alters the earth’s climate. Proof of this? I’m still waiting.
Hopefully, the American airline industry won’t be facing a similar situation, that is, unless the Left take over in November. Then, get ready to pay sky-high prices.
These crazed environmentalists won’t stop until the global economy is in shambles and we’re all living in the stone age again. On second thought, maybe that’s exactly what they want.
This goes to show that even in Mexico, the loony Left don’t know when to respectfully bow out of an election. Does anyone remember the last time a Liberal candidate lost with dignity?
They remind me of a two year old who has just been told they can’t have another cookie. The only way they know to respond is to throw themselves on the floor in a tantrum. The election is over, you lost, deal with it.
Why? Because there are some scientists who "think" that carbon dioxide produced from human activity adversely alters the earth’s climate. Proof of this? I’m still waiting.
Hopefully, the American airline industry won’t be facing a similar situation, that is, unless the Left take over in November. Then, get ready to pay sky-high prices.
These crazed environmentalists won’t stop until the global economy is in shambles and we’re all living in the stone age again. On second thought, maybe that’s exactly what they want.
This goes to show that even in Mexico, the loony Left don’t know when to respectfully bow out of an election. Does anyone remember the last time a Liberal candidate lost with dignity?
They remind me of a two year old who has just been told they can’t have another cookie. The only way they know to respond is to throw themselves on the floor in a tantrum. The election is over, you lost, deal with it.
Thursday, July 06, 2006
Saddam's DIY terrorism
Iraq How-to manual helped direct Afghan militants
I always supported taking out Saddam. I never doubted that he had WMDs. I never doubted that he supported terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda and Bin Laden. So this document doesn’t surprise.
I am, however, glad to see it surface. It will help debunk the naysayers who love to scream that Saddam was not part of the war on terror. I’d like to know how they respond to this training manual.
Of course, it won’t change their opinion. They will still naysay. They’ll come up with some lame explanation as to how this doesn’t prove anything. In fact, if Saddam himself were to admit to financial and military backing of Bin Laden, they would STILL find ways to explain it as inconsequential. So this won’t really change anything, except maybe it will make the naysayers look that much sillier.
But it will still be fun to hear their remarks.
I always supported taking out Saddam. I never doubted that he had WMDs. I never doubted that he supported terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda and Bin Laden. So this document doesn’t surprise.
I am, however, glad to see it surface. It will help debunk the naysayers who love to scream that Saddam was not part of the war on terror. I’d like to know how they respond to this training manual.
Of course, it won’t change their opinion. They will still naysay. They’ll come up with some lame explanation as to how this doesn’t prove anything. In fact, if Saddam himself were to admit to financial and military backing of Bin Laden, they would STILL find ways to explain it as inconsequential. So this won’t really change anything, except maybe it will make the naysayers look that much sillier.
But it will still be fun to hear their remarks.
Wednesday, July 05, 2006
This must be stopped!
Venezuela to discuss arms trade with North Korea
I don’t know about anyone else, but this has another Cuban Missile Crisis written all over it. America’s enemies are circling and THIS LITTLE ARMS DEAL MUST BE STOPPED. If North Korea has nukes, then you can bet Venezuela will soon have them as well.
This is concerning on multiple levels. Another psycho is seeking WMDs, and this time it’s right in our own back yard. I wonder what the loony Left will have to say once Chavez has a missile that can reach Topeka?
I don’t know about anyone else, but this has another Cuban Missile Crisis written all over it. America’s enemies are circling and THIS LITTLE ARMS DEAL MUST BE STOPPED. If North Korea has nukes, then you can bet Venezuela will soon have them as well.
This is concerning on multiple levels. Another psycho is seeking WMDs, and this time it’s right in our own back yard. I wonder what the loony Left will have to say once Chavez has a missile that can reach Topeka?
Tuesday, July 04, 2006
Happy Birthday America!
I posted this not too long ago, but it's fitting for the 4th. It's a poem by one of our country's greatest poets.
Ragged Old Flag
by Johnny Cash
I walked through a county courthouse square,
On a park bench an old man was sitting there.
I said, "Your old courthouse is kinda rundown,"
He said, "Naw, it'll do for our little town."
I said, "Your flagpole has leaned a bit,
And that's a Ragged Old Flag you got hanging on it."
He said, "Have a seat", and I sat down.
"Is this the first time you've been to our little town?"
I said, "I think it is."
He said, "I don't like to brag,
But we're kinda proud of that Ragged Old Flag."
"You see, we got a little hole in that flag there
When Washington took it across the Delaware.
And it got powder-burned the night Francis Scott Key
Sat watching it writing 'Oh Say Can You See'.
And it got a bad rip in New Orleans
With Packingham and Jackson tuggin' at its seams."
"And it almost fell at the Alamo
Beside the Texas flag, but she waved on though.
She got cut with a sword at Chancellorsville
And she got cut again at Shiloh Hill.
There was Robert E. Lee, Beauregard, and Bragg,
And the south wind blew hard on that Ragged Old Flag."
"On Flanders Field in World War I
She got a big hole from a Bertha Gun.
She turned blood red in World War II
She hung limp and low by the time it was through.
She was in Korea and Vietnam.
She went where she was sent by her Uncle Sam."
"She waved from our ships upon the briny foam,
And now they've about quit waving her here back home.
In her own good land she's been abused...
She's been burned, dishonored, denied and refused."
"And the government for which she stands
is scandalized throughout the land.
And she's getting threadbare and wearing thin,
But she's in good shape for the shape she's in.
'Cause she's been through the fire before
and I believe she can take a whole lot more."
"So we raise her up every morning,
Take her down every night.
We don't let her touch the ground
And we fold her up right.
On second thought I DO like to brag,
Cause I'm mighty proud of that Ragged Old Flag."
Ragged Old Flag
by Johnny Cash
I walked through a county courthouse square,
On a park bench an old man was sitting there.
I said, "Your old courthouse is kinda rundown,"
He said, "Naw, it'll do for our little town."
I said, "Your flagpole has leaned a bit,
And that's a Ragged Old Flag you got hanging on it."
He said, "Have a seat", and I sat down.
"Is this the first time you've been to our little town?"
I said, "I think it is."
He said, "I don't like to brag,
But we're kinda proud of that Ragged Old Flag."
"You see, we got a little hole in that flag there
When Washington took it across the Delaware.
And it got powder-burned the night Francis Scott Key
Sat watching it writing 'Oh Say Can You See'.
And it got a bad rip in New Orleans
With Packingham and Jackson tuggin' at its seams."
"And it almost fell at the Alamo
Beside the Texas flag, but she waved on though.
She got cut with a sword at Chancellorsville
And she got cut again at Shiloh Hill.
There was Robert E. Lee, Beauregard, and Bragg,
And the south wind blew hard on that Ragged Old Flag."
"On Flanders Field in World War I
She got a big hole from a Bertha Gun.
She turned blood red in World War II
She hung limp and low by the time it was through.
She was in Korea and Vietnam.
She went where she was sent by her Uncle Sam."
"She waved from our ships upon the briny foam,
And now they've about quit waving her here back home.
In her own good land she's been abused...
She's been burned, dishonored, denied and refused."
"And the government for which she stands
is scandalized throughout the land.
And she's getting threadbare and wearing thin,
But she's in good shape for the shape she's in.
'Cause she's been through the fire before
and I believe she can take a whole lot more."
"So we raise her up every morning,
Take her down every night.
We don't let her touch the ground
And we fold her up right.
On second thought I DO like to brag,
Cause I'm mighty proud of that Ragged Old Flag."
Monday, July 03, 2006
Notes on Monday
First, I'm a little disappointed in some of my liberal readers. Seems to me if you were committed to fighting our terrorist enemies you could at least watch the videos of them doing what they do best. You must know your enemy, right? Something tells me you guys might not.
Here is another comment on crazy Al Gore's claim that science has reached a consensus on global warming, this one from an MIT Professr. After thinking about it, in fairness to Al, maybe we should give him the benefit of the doubt. Maybe there is global warming on whatever planet he's living on.
NYT shows Rumsfelds house, and points out a security camera. Hey, why not print his address and phone number, with blueprints of the home and include the next time he'll be there, the public deserves to know right? The New York Times has replaced Al Jazeera as the number one media ally to the Islamo-Fascists. Congrats you morons!
N Korea warns of nuclear war. Isn't this becoming a weekly thing. Kim Jong Il is insane, we all know that, this guy isn't far from putting masks on his children and dangling a baby off a balcony. But, as insane as he is, he knows that war with America would be a bad thing. As for Amadinejad, I don't think he gets that. I think he welcomes it, which puts him in a whole new category of insanity. If HE gets nukes, we WILL be involved in a nuclear holocaust within five years.
Palestinian militants issue ultimatum to Israel. I've said before, it's clear that Hamas wants war with Israel. The Israelis have given them every oppurtunity to get out of this crisis, and they've refused. Remember, it was the Palestinian PEOPLE who chose Hamas to represent them. That says a lot. So why is Israel the one responsible for 'turmoil in the Middle East'? To me, they're the answer. We should turn them lose and let them fix this whole problem.
Conservative wins in Mexico. Not that this matters. Mexico is NOT a US ally and I don't think any of us can breathe a sigh of relief about the election. But I am amused at the quote below, from the losing candidate, talking about the vote count (and hinting at a recount).
"If in the count we conduct, it turns out the final result does not favor us, I am going to abide by the result," he said. However, he added, "We are going to defend the will of the people if it favors us."
Sound familiar? IT's good to know we're not the only one with a loony Left.
Here is another comment on crazy Al Gore's claim that science has reached a consensus on global warming, this one from an MIT Professr. After thinking about it, in fairness to Al, maybe we should give him the benefit of the doubt. Maybe there is global warming on whatever planet he's living on.
NYT shows Rumsfelds house, and points out a security camera. Hey, why not print his address and phone number, with blueprints of the home and include the next time he'll be there, the public deserves to know right? The New York Times has replaced Al Jazeera as the number one media ally to the Islamo-Fascists. Congrats you morons!
N Korea warns of nuclear war. Isn't this becoming a weekly thing. Kim Jong Il is insane, we all know that, this guy isn't far from putting masks on his children and dangling a baby off a balcony. But, as insane as he is, he knows that war with America would be a bad thing. As for Amadinejad, I don't think he gets that. I think he welcomes it, which puts him in a whole new category of insanity. If HE gets nukes, we WILL be involved in a nuclear holocaust within five years.
Palestinian militants issue ultimatum to Israel. I've said before, it's clear that Hamas wants war with Israel. The Israelis have given them every oppurtunity to get out of this crisis, and they've refused. Remember, it was the Palestinian PEOPLE who chose Hamas to represent them. That says a lot. So why is Israel the one responsible for 'turmoil in the Middle East'? To me, they're the answer. We should turn them lose and let them fix this whole problem.
Conservative wins in Mexico. Not that this matters. Mexico is NOT a US ally and I don't think any of us can breathe a sigh of relief about the election. But I am amused at the quote below, from the losing candidate, talking about the vote count (and hinting at a recount).
"If in the count we conduct, it turns out the final result does not favor us, I am going to abide by the result," he said. However, he added, "We are going to defend the will of the people if it favors us."
Sound familiar? IT's good to know we're not the only one with a loony Left.
Friday, June 30, 2006
You need perspective...here it is
And so, the Supreme Court has issued a ruling that, in effect, will aid our enemies. As I write this, I am shaking my head in disbelief, shame, exasperation. I have seen the pundits on TV, in print. I have debated with people on this and many other sites. And I still don’t get how so many American citizens are oblivious to the fight that we are facing. We are going into war with a brutal enemy, with one hand tied behind our back and many American citizens trying to pull the free arm back there as well. I don’t know what it’s going to take for the bleeding heart human rights Left to understand what we face, until it’s too late and we’ve already lost. The problem with waiting that long is that when we lose we will all be worshipping allah under the sword. That’s not an acceptable alternative.
So my challenge is this. If you’re read this site, I want you to look in my sidebar and find Michael Savage’s website. Click the link. Scroll down to the bottom until you see the links to the videos of the terrorist beheadings. Choose one...and watch it.
Don't close your eyes. Don't turn away. Watch it. Watch the enemy stand in front of the camera, proclaiming the glory of their god from behind ski masks. Watch them grab their blindfolded, handcuffed hostage by the hair. Watch them begin to saw at the man's neck...that's right, they don't slice, they saw - obviously using a very dull knife. Listen to them grunt with exertion.
Listen to their hostage howl as the blade saws through their neck, imagine the unimaginable pain. Hear the fear in the man's voice, knowing it's just a few more seconds. Watch him kick and writhe. Watch the blood spurt out. Watch them struggle to get the blade through the spinal column....WATCH IT! You need to. You need to do this in order to gain the proper perspective. Watch them parade around with a severed human head as if it were a bowling trophy. THIS IS THE ENEMY! It's not America, the only American in the picture is the one without a head. It's not the US military. The enemy are the ones cutting people's heads off and celebrating it as if they just gave birth.
If you don't have the stomach to watch the video, to learn about those who want us all to suffer the same fate, then you surrender your right to criticize myself and others who wish to stop these lunatics. If you watch it, you'll see what we're dealing with. They are not human. They are animals. Rabid dogs. You can't negotiate with a rabid dog. You can't give him a bone and hope he leaves you alone. The only way to stop a rabid dog is to put a bullet in its head.
That's what needs to be done. And won't happen by calling our soldiers 'murderers'. It won't happen by saying America in the biggest threat to peace in the world...the peace in this world exists BECAUSE of America, not despite her, so step down from your holier-than-thou soapbox and wake up to reality. The ONLY ones between these lunatics and world domination is America, and don't think for a second that they would hesitate at removing any of your heads in the process. So watch the video, then tell me who the criminals, the evil-doers are in this whole conflict.
So my challenge is this. If you’re read this site, I want you to look in my sidebar and find Michael Savage’s website. Click the link. Scroll down to the bottom until you see the links to the videos of the terrorist beheadings. Choose one...and watch it.
Don't close your eyes. Don't turn away. Watch it. Watch the enemy stand in front of the camera, proclaiming the glory of their god from behind ski masks. Watch them grab their blindfolded, handcuffed hostage by the hair. Watch them begin to saw at the man's neck...that's right, they don't slice, they saw - obviously using a very dull knife. Listen to them grunt with exertion.
Listen to their hostage howl as the blade saws through their neck, imagine the unimaginable pain. Hear the fear in the man's voice, knowing it's just a few more seconds. Watch him kick and writhe. Watch the blood spurt out. Watch them struggle to get the blade through the spinal column....WATCH IT! You need to. You need to do this in order to gain the proper perspective. Watch them parade around with a severed human head as if it were a bowling trophy. THIS IS THE ENEMY! It's not America, the only American in the picture is the one without a head. It's not the US military. The enemy are the ones cutting people's heads off and celebrating it as if they just gave birth.
If you don't have the stomach to watch the video, to learn about those who want us all to suffer the same fate, then you surrender your right to criticize myself and others who wish to stop these lunatics. If you watch it, you'll see what we're dealing with. They are not human. They are animals. Rabid dogs. You can't negotiate with a rabid dog. You can't give him a bone and hope he leaves you alone. The only way to stop a rabid dog is to put a bullet in its head.
That's what needs to be done. And won't happen by calling our soldiers 'murderers'. It won't happen by saying America in the biggest threat to peace in the world...the peace in this world exists BECAUSE of America, not despite her, so step down from your holier-than-thou soapbox and wake up to reality. The ONLY ones between these lunatics and world domination is America, and don't think for a second that they would hesitate at removing any of your heads in the process. So watch the video, then tell me who the criminals, the evil-doers are in this whole conflict.
Thursday, June 29, 2006
Fear
Like everyone else I am watching events in the Middle East unfold with concern. I do not want war to break out, or escalate, between Israel and the Palestinians. I don’t think anyone could say otherwise.
But as I watch these events unfold, a realization comes over me. Israel has something that America once had, and has lost somewhere along the way. Israel is not afraid. America is.
War is something that should be avoided, but not feared. I say this because fear can cloud your judgment. Fear can take away your resolve. Fear can impede your determination. Today, many Americans fear war. THAT is why they are handcuffing our troops, cursing our military, speaking out against Bush. Much of it is simply from fear.
Fear of what, I don’t know. Maybe they are afraid of the world hating America. Maybe they don’t want us to get a bad reputation. Maybe they don’t want to be called upon to defend their country. Who knows, but there is no doubt in my mind that the actions of the anti-war crowd are driven by fear.
Israel does not have that. They are not afraid of war. They take actions to avoid it. They offer diplomatic solutions. But they are not afraid, and the world knows it. They are not afraid to push the world to the brink.
Neither was Reagan.
Neither was Roosevelt.
Neither was Kennedy.
Avoid it. But do not fear it. Our enemies will smell our fear and thrust upon us that which we fear.
Roosevelt once said, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself."
Perhaps today that is more true than ever before.
But as I watch these events unfold, a realization comes over me. Israel has something that America once had, and has lost somewhere along the way. Israel is not afraid. America is.
War is something that should be avoided, but not feared. I say this because fear can cloud your judgment. Fear can take away your resolve. Fear can impede your determination. Today, many Americans fear war. THAT is why they are handcuffing our troops, cursing our military, speaking out against Bush. Much of it is simply from fear.
Fear of what, I don’t know. Maybe they are afraid of the world hating America. Maybe they don’t want us to get a bad reputation. Maybe they don’t want to be called upon to defend their country. Who knows, but there is no doubt in my mind that the actions of the anti-war crowd are driven by fear.
Israel does not have that. They are not afraid of war. They take actions to avoid it. They offer diplomatic solutions. But they are not afraid, and the world knows it. They are not afraid to push the world to the brink.
Neither was Reagan.
Neither was Roosevelt.
Neither was Kennedy.
Avoid it. But do not fear it. Our enemies will smell our fear and thrust upon us that which we fear.
Roosevelt once said, "We have nothing to fear but fear itself."
Perhaps today that is more true than ever before.
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
My First Book Review
Thanks to Bookideas.com and Heather for this review, my first one. Check out their website. Judging by the comments about my book, they are straight shooters who won't lead you astray if you're looking for a good read.
3.5 stars out of 5
What would happen if Mexico’s highest drug cartel teamed up with a handful of Iranian terrorists? A plot to make a terrorist attack on American soil may come to be. What will America do about it? Have we learned anything from the hunt for terrorists in Afghanistan or the occupation of Iraq? This time, the president wants to work with the UN. Is a peaceful result possible? In John Washburn’s novel, “When Evil Prospers,” social chaos is about to unfold. This is a terrifying book when looking at the social study of it all.
The terrorist attack hits the most “Wanted-Dead or Alive” state in the nation – Texas. As a result, the governor takes steps for revenge – or as he sees it – protection for his people. Calling up the Texas National Guard to patrol the Mexico border is just the beginning. What follows is an attack on Cuba and Mexico through developing a volunteer militia – since the President of the US does not support these actions. The UN sees this all as an act of war and takes action. What ensues is an all out division of the United States.
While I am sure that John Washburn intended to draw attention to certain issues, I doubt that he meant for me to be terrified by the possibilities I took notice of – that the political “right,” religious zealots of this country could actually entice such an uprising. This book contains a good deal of one-sided political commentary – most of which I do not agree with. I wonder really, who the “evil” that “prospers” is.
The book raises many issues that American readers should be thinking about. As a work of Christian Fiction, I feel it is typical in mission. As a story, the plot is interesting and fast paced, dealing with unfortunately similar current concerns. Readers will connect with the characters on both sides of the issues and likely find that the author leads them to side with those he gives a greater voice to. In execution, the writing is well done with a tight plot, vivid detail, and protagonists that breathe life. All in all, this is a thought-provoking read.
3.5 stars out of 5
What would happen if Mexico’s highest drug cartel teamed up with a handful of Iranian terrorists? A plot to make a terrorist attack on American soil may come to be. What will America do about it? Have we learned anything from the hunt for terrorists in Afghanistan or the occupation of Iraq? This time, the president wants to work with the UN. Is a peaceful result possible? In John Washburn’s novel, “When Evil Prospers,” social chaos is about to unfold. This is a terrifying book when looking at the social study of it all.
The terrorist attack hits the most “Wanted-Dead or Alive” state in the nation – Texas. As a result, the governor takes steps for revenge – or as he sees it – protection for his people. Calling up the Texas National Guard to patrol the Mexico border is just the beginning. What follows is an attack on Cuba and Mexico through developing a volunteer militia – since the President of the US does not support these actions. The UN sees this all as an act of war and takes action. What ensues is an all out division of the United States.
While I am sure that John Washburn intended to draw attention to certain issues, I doubt that he meant for me to be terrified by the possibilities I took notice of – that the political “right,” religious zealots of this country could actually entice such an uprising. This book contains a good deal of one-sided political commentary – most of which I do not agree with. I wonder really, who the “evil” that “prospers” is.
The book raises many issues that American readers should be thinking about. As a work of Christian Fiction, I feel it is typical in mission. As a story, the plot is interesting and fast paced, dealing with unfortunately similar current concerns. Readers will connect with the characters on both sides of the issues and likely find that the author leads them to side with those he gives a greater voice to. In execution, the writing is well done with a tight plot, vivid detail, and protagonists that breathe life. All in all, this is a thought-provoking read.
Monday, June 26, 2006
Murtha...remember your history
American presence in Iraq is more dangerous to world peace than nuclear threats from North Korea or Iran
If I were shown this statement and asked to guess who made such a remark, I’d probably say someone like Kim Jong Il or Amadinejad. Perhaps Chirac, perhaps Bin Laden. But, no, this was said by a United States Congressman, in front of hundreds of people and numerous television cameras. We are currently at war, facing a dangerous, well-funded and well-motivated enemy. American soldiers are dying every day. And one of our Congressman feels the need to say something like this.
Mr. Murtha is entitled to his opinion. I respect that he is against the war, but I do not respect the manner in which he is voicing that opposition. Comments like this do nothing to help the situation. This is not healthy dissent. This is propaganda that the enemy can use to further their cause. They can use this statement to recruit. They can use this statement to motivate. They can use this statement to encourage the fight against America. THAT is not healthy dissent.
Another problem I have with this way of thinking is that it continues a trend this country has followed since Vietnam. It’s a trend in which America is not willing to keep its word, to keep its promise, to stay until the objective is complete. Every US leader since Vietnam has failed to uphold our promise…to "mean what we say, and say what we mean."
Follow along with me:
Nixon/Ford – Vacated Vietnam prematurely, allowing all of Southeast Asia to fall under Communist rule and the emergence of Pol Pot. 1 million people died under his reign.
Carter – Turned his back on the Shah of Iran, which allowed for the emergence of Ayatollah Khoumeni and the theocracy that still prospers there today
Reagan – Vacated Lebanon after a marine barracks bombing, message: We will give in when threatened.
Bush Sr. – Vacated Somalia after the Mogadishu incident, breaking our promise to protect the citizens of Somalia from the hideous warlords that ruled that country, and furthering the message sent by his predecessors
Bush/Clinton - Failed to enforce the cease fire agreement with Saddam Hussein that demanded Iraq disarm. Bush stopped short of Baghdad, failing the Iraqi people and subjecting them to another decade of Hussein's tyranny. Backed off of UN demands, allowing Hussein to stockpile weapons, and perhaps even aid Al Qaeda terrorists.
Clinton – Capitulated to demands from North Korea, allowing them a nuclear reactor under direct threat. Failed to respond forcefully to repeated attacks from Al Qaeda.
Say what you want about Bush. He has made some mistakes. But, at least he has tried to buck this trend. At least he has tried to change America’s image amongst those who desire our downfall. For thirty years, our leaders have delivered a message that America has weakened, that we don’t have the resolve to fight through to victory. If Murtha has his way, then we will continue that message. How can world peace ever be achieved in such a manner?
If I were shown this statement and asked to guess who made such a remark, I’d probably say someone like Kim Jong Il or Amadinejad. Perhaps Chirac, perhaps Bin Laden. But, no, this was said by a United States Congressman, in front of hundreds of people and numerous television cameras. We are currently at war, facing a dangerous, well-funded and well-motivated enemy. American soldiers are dying every day. And one of our Congressman feels the need to say something like this.
Mr. Murtha is entitled to his opinion. I respect that he is against the war, but I do not respect the manner in which he is voicing that opposition. Comments like this do nothing to help the situation. This is not healthy dissent. This is propaganda that the enemy can use to further their cause. They can use this statement to recruit. They can use this statement to motivate. They can use this statement to encourage the fight against America. THAT is not healthy dissent.
Another problem I have with this way of thinking is that it continues a trend this country has followed since Vietnam. It’s a trend in which America is not willing to keep its word, to keep its promise, to stay until the objective is complete. Every US leader since Vietnam has failed to uphold our promise…to "mean what we say, and say what we mean."
Follow along with me:
Nixon/Ford – Vacated Vietnam prematurely, allowing all of Southeast Asia to fall under Communist rule and the emergence of Pol Pot. 1 million people died under his reign.
Carter – Turned his back on the Shah of Iran, which allowed for the emergence of Ayatollah Khoumeni and the theocracy that still prospers there today
Reagan – Vacated Lebanon after a marine barracks bombing, message: We will give in when threatened.
Bush Sr. – Vacated Somalia after the Mogadishu incident, breaking our promise to protect the citizens of Somalia from the hideous warlords that ruled that country, and furthering the message sent by his predecessors
Bush/Clinton - Failed to enforce the cease fire agreement with Saddam Hussein that demanded Iraq disarm. Bush stopped short of Baghdad, failing the Iraqi people and subjecting them to another decade of Hussein's tyranny. Backed off of UN demands, allowing Hussein to stockpile weapons, and perhaps even aid Al Qaeda terrorists.
Clinton – Capitulated to demands from North Korea, allowing them a nuclear reactor under direct threat. Failed to respond forcefully to repeated attacks from Al Qaeda.
Say what you want about Bush. He has made some mistakes. But, at least he has tried to buck this trend. At least he has tried to change America’s image amongst those who desire our downfall. For thirty years, our leaders have delivered a message that America has weakened, that we don’t have the resolve to fight through to victory. If Murtha has his way, then we will continue that message. How can world peace ever be achieved in such a manner?
Friday, June 23, 2006
A Fitting Tribute
I'm leaving this post up all weekend, it's too important for only one day. Click this link to become part of this effort.
I have a project and I need the help of a few bloggers to make it work.2,995 bloggers.September 11, 2006 will mark the 5-year anniversary of the attacks that killed 2,996 innocent people on American soil.
A few months ago I started wondering what, if anything, I would write in my blog that day. A remembrance? A tribute? Anything I came up with seemed shallow, cliché, not enough.About a week after the attacks the president ordered all flags returned to full-staff. This seemed too soon to me.
A common practice for other deaths had been one day per victim. But when I realized that this would mean flying the flag at half-staff for over sixteen years (remember in those first days the death toll estimate was much higher) I realized that that sort of symbol wouldn’t be healthy for the country. Even with the actual death toll, one day at half-staff for each victim wouldn’t see the flag raised until November 24, 2009.
But any idea I came up with gave me the same pause: Nothing I could do could possibly do tribute to all those people. And in the last five years I’ve heard precious little about the victims, but I’ve heard the names of the guilty over and over.
So here’s my proposal:I’d like 2,995 blogging volunteers to help me with a tribute to the victims of 9/11. If you’d like to participate, you’ll be assigned the name of someone who was murdered on September 11, 2001. Then on September 11, 2006 you’ll post your own tribute to that person. It can be anything you want it to be: a photo tribute, an essay, a remembrance, a poem…it’s up to you. Then link back to a page I will create which will give the names of all 2,996 victims and links to the blogs that will remember them that day.But, and this is critical, I don’t want any of us to remember the murderers. Do not refer to the terrorists. Or their organization. Or their goals. Let them fade into nothing. Let them be forgotten. Remember those worth remembering.
What help do I need?A lot.I need 2,995 bloggers who are willing to participate for one day.I need people to pass on this message to others, because 2,995 people don’t read this blog.I need a name for this goofy thing.I need some sort of graphic or banner we can all drop in our entries.And I need suggestions as to how to make this work.Anyone game?
What a phenomenal idea! I have the link at the top, please join in!
I have a project and I need the help of a few bloggers to make it work.2,995 bloggers.September 11, 2006 will mark the 5-year anniversary of the attacks that killed 2,996 innocent people on American soil.
A few months ago I started wondering what, if anything, I would write in my blog that day. A remembrance? A tribute? Anything I came up with seemed shallow, cliché, not enough.About a week after the attacks the president ordered all flags returned to full-staff. This seemed too soon to me.
A common practice for other deaths had been one day per victim. But when I realized that this would mean flying the flag at half-staff for over sixteen years (remember in those first days the death toll estimate was much higher) I realized that that sort of symbol wouldn’t be healthy for the country. Even with the actual death toll, one day at half-staff for each victim wouldn’t see the flag raised until November 24, 2009.
But any idea I came up with gave me the same pause: Nothing I could do could possibly do tribute to all those people. And in the last five years I’ve heard precious little about the victims, but I’ve heard the names of the guilty over and over.
So here’s my proposal:I’d like 2,995 blogging volunteers to help me with a tribute to the victims of 9/11. If you’d like to participate, you’ll be assigned the name of someone who was murdered on September 11, 2001. Then on September 11, 2006 you’ll post your own tribute to that person. It can be anything you want it to be: a photo tribute, an essay, a remembrance, a poem…it’s up to you. Then link back to a page I will create which will give the names of all 2,996 victims and links to the blogs that will remember them that day.But, and this is critical, I don’t want any of us to remember the murderers. Do not refer to the terrorists. Or their organization. Or their goals. Let them fade into nothing. Let them be forgotten. Remember those worth remembering.
What help do I need?A lot.I need 2,995 bloggers who are willing to participate for one day.I need people to pass on this message to others, because 2,995 people don’t read this blog.I need a name for this goofy thing.I need some sort of graphic or banner we can all drop in our entries.And I need suggestions as to how to make this work.Anyone game?
What a phenomenal idea! I have the link at the top, please join in!
Thursday, June 22, 2006
A leader we should be proud of
I lived in the Jackson, MS area for about 8 years. Back then, it had one of the worst per capita crime rates in the nation and still does today. Even though the population is roughly 400,000, it is still a dangerous place to live.
Enter Frank Melton. He is an entrepreneur who has dabbled in journalism and dedicated much of his time and money to community matters. He cares deeply for the citizens of Jackson, MS and abhors the wrong-doers who make life miserable for those citizens. He is a take-no-BS-straight-shooter, and he is NOT a politician. He is simply a man dedicated to his community who happened to win a Mayoral election.
So, in response to the city’s out of control crime, he has reverted to drastic measures, imposing a strict curfew and even threatened to call in the Mississippi National Guard to put down the criminals. Good for him! If only more community leaders had the guts to do things like this.
Melton will come under heat for it. He’ll be cursed and criticized. Luckily, he’s a black man or he’d be called a racist. He’ll go through some tough times, especially when they start arresting people’s kids for violating the curfew, but he will drop the city’s crime rate. He will achieve his objective and I tip my hat to him.
Mayors and Governors nationwide could learn a lesson from Frank Melton. In fact, I’d love to see him seek a higher office. God knows we need people like him. But he won’t. He’s dedicated to the people of Jackson, Mississippi, and the city will be better off for it.
Enter Frank Melton. He is an entrepreneur who has dabbled in journalism and dedicated much of his time and money to community matters. He cares deeply for the citizens of Jackson, MS and abhors the wrong-doers who make life miserable for those citizens. He is a take-no-BS-straight-shooter, and he is NOT a politician. He is simply a man dedicated to his community who happened to win a Mayoral election.
So, in response to the city’s out of control crime, he has reverted to drastic measures, imposing a strict curfew and even threatened to call in the Mississippi National Guard to put down the criminals. Good for him! If only more community leaders had the guts to do things like this.
Melton will come under heat for it. He’ll be cursed and criticized. Luckily, he’s a black man or he’d be called a racist. He’ll go through some tough times, especially when they start arresting people’s kids for violating the curfew, but he will drop the city’s crime rate. He will achieve his objective and I tip my hat to him.
Mayors and Governors nationwide could learn a lesson from Frank Melton. In fact, I’d love to see him seek a higher office. God knows we need people like him. But he won’t. He’s dedicated to the people of Jackson, Mississippi, and the city will be better off for it.
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
Put up or shut up
I like it when my opponents prove my point for me.
My point: America's passive Left will be responsible if America falls
Yesterday, I posted on the death of two American soldiers. In response, I had 3 Lefties leave comments on my post. One valiantly came to Sean Penn's defense, one (for some reason) mentioned casualty numbers, and the other got preachy about the Geneva Convention.
NONE of them showed any sign of outrage or anger at the news of two American soldiers being captured, tortured and dismembered to the point that their bodies had to be identified by DNA. Are these 3 upset about the news? Probably, if they're human they should be. But for some reason these other remarks took precedence. Which brings me to the purpose of this post.
If you read this blog regularly, you know that I have low tolerance for people who criticize without offering any counter-solution, it wastes time and does nothing to solve the problem.
So, here's your chance. 2 questions. I'm looking for one simple answer and one proposal. This is NOT a chance to preach or debate the merits of the Iraq War. This is your chance to put up or shut up. Fail to answer the questions and you'll be exposed as whiny with no ideas of your own.
1) Do you want America to be victorious in Iraq? Yes or No. (Victorious meaning the defeat of the insurgency and instating a freely elected democratic government)
Yes or NO. Not preachy. If you answer yes, move to question #2. IF you answer no, then never mind. You've chosen your side and I group you in with the people who murdered those two troops.
2) You are now the Commander in Chief. How do YOU achieve victory in Iraq? I want your plan. We're there. We're at war. You WANT to win. How do you do it?
Take your time. Good luck.
(Conservatives should feel free to answer as well, it should be fun)
My point: America's passive Left will be responsible if America falls
Yesterday, I posted on the death of two American soldiers. In response, I had 3 Lefties leave comments on my post. One valiantly came to Sean Penn's defense, one (for some reason) mentioned casualty numbers, and the other got preachy about the Geneva Convention.
NONE of them showed any sign of outrage or anger at the news of two American soldiers being captured, tortured and dismembered to the point that their bodies had to be identified by DNA. Are these 3 upset about the news? Probably, if they're human they should be. But for some reason these other remarks took precedence. Which brings me to the purpose of this post.
If you read this blog regularly, you know that I have low tolerance for people who criticize without offering any counter-solution, it wastes time and does nothing to solve the problem.
So, here's your chance. 2 questions. I'm looking for one simple answer and one proposal. This is NOT a chance to preach or debate the merits of the Iraq War. This is your chance to put up or shut up. Fail to answer the questions and you'll be exposed as whiny with no ideas of your own.
1) Do you want America to be victorious in Iraq? Yes or No. (Victorious meaning the defeat of the insurgency and instating a freely elected democratic government)
Yes or NO. Not preachy. If you answer yes, move to question #2. IF you answer no, then never mind. You've chosen your side and I group you in with the people who murdered those two troops.
2) You are now the Commander in Chief. How do YOU achieve victory in Iraq? I want your plan. We're there. We're at war. You WANT to win. How do you do it?
Take your time. Good luck.
(Conservatives should feel free to answer as well, it should be fun)
Tuesday, June 20, 2006
It's time to get Old Testament
My prayers go out to the families of these two brave young men. I can’t imagine the pain and suffering they endured. God bless you both, and thank you for laying your lives down on the altar of freedom.
I wonder how Dick Durbin feels about this? I wonder if Howard Dean is as appalled at this as he is at Gitmo? Where is Sean Penn now? Notice how no one is jumping to criticize and condemn? At least, not as fast as they would if something like this happened at Gitmo. I’m not saying these guys don’t have a problem with it. I’m just saying that they’re not as eager to criticize our foes as they are to criticize our soldiers.
What are the odds of someone actually coming out and saying that the deaths of these men are America’s fault? It’s a bet I won’t be taking. My guess is the bodies won’t make it back to American soil before someone on the Left makes such a remark.
"Well, we expect such behavior from terrorists"
"We’re better than them"
"We should be held to a higher standard"
I’m guessing this would be their way of rationalizing their criticism of American troops, and lack of criticism of terrorists.
"Just because they behave badly doesn’t mean we should"
"Two wrongs don’t make a right"
This is crap! If you want these wackos to cool it with this behavior, then it’s time to get Old Testament on them, it’s time to get Israeli on them. Eye for an eye my friend. If they want to execute prisoners, then so be it. They can call down that thunder and we’ll play too. Execute our troops, and we execute yours. We should be marching two men out of Gitmo and in front of a firing squad right now. That’s how General Patton would have handled this, and he had some pretty good results with it.
I can hear the collective gasp from all of you Lefties right now, so save your comments. I know what you’re gonna say, much of it is already in quotes above. I don’t care if you call me barbaric…I want to win this war! And if getting brutal will end this war that much quicker, then it’s time to get our hands dirty.
I’m tired of seeing Americans get beheaded. I don’t like it. So it’s time we make these idiots think the next time they raise their sword over the neck of an American.
We’re at war, and in war sometimes you have to kill enough of the enemy to convince them that keeping up the fight is not in their best interest. Sherman, Grant, Patton, Napoleon, Bradley and MacArthur all seemed to play by this strategy, and it seemed to work for them. So let’s apply it here. What have we got to lose?
I wonder how Dick Durbin feels about this? I wonder if Howard Dean is as appalled at this as he is at Gitmo? Where is Sean Penn now? Notice how no one is jumping to criticize and condemn? At least, not as fast as they would if something like this happened at Gitmo. I’m not saying these guys don’t have a problem with it. I’m just saying that they’re not as eager to criticize our foes as they are to criticize our soldiers.
What are the odds of someone actually coming out and saying that the deaths of these men are America’s fault? It’s a bet I won’t be taking. My guess is the bodies won’t make it back to American soil before someone on the Left makes such a remark.
"Well, we expect such behavior from terrorists"
"We’re better than them"
"We should be held to a higher standard"
I’m guessing this would be their way of rationalizing their criticism of American troops, and lack of criticism of terrorists.
"Just because they behave badly doesn’t mean we should"
"Two wrongs don’t make a right"
This is crap! If you want these wackos to cool it with this behavior, then it’s time to get Old Testament on them, it’s time to get Israeli on them. Eye for an eye my friend. If they want to execute prisoners, then so be it. They can call down that thunder and we’ll play too. Execute our troops, and we execute yours. We should be marching two men out of Gitmo and in front of a firing squad right now. That’s how General Patton would have handled this, and he had some pretty good results with it.
I can hear the collective gasp from all of you Lefties right now, so save your comments. I know what you’re gonna say, much of it is already in quotes above. I don’t care if you call me barbaric…I want to win this war! And if getting brutal will end this war that much quicker, then it’s time to get our hands dirty.
I’m tired of seeing Americans get beheaded. I don’t like it. So it’s time we make these idiots think the next time they raise their sword over the neck of an American.
We’re at war, and in war sometimes you have to kill enough of the enemy to convince them that keeping up the fight is not in their best interest. Sherman, Grant, Patton, Napoleon, Bradley and MacArthur all seemed to play by this strategy, and it seemed to work for them. So let’s apply it here. What have we got to lose?
Monday, June 19, 2006
Where's the racism?
Here is an excellent column about the black caucus and their recent disappointing behavior in regards to Congressman William Jefferson.
The black caucus has resorted to claiming racism as a root cause for Congressman Jefferson's recent run-in with the law and potential indictment for bribery. Racism?
They are absolutely right. What kind of country do we live in when a black man can't commit bribery without coming under the scrutiny of the FBI. We should all be ashamed.
Now, to North Carolina Supreme Court candidate Rachel Lea Hunter, a democrat, who had this to say about Vernon Robinson, a Republican congressional candidate.
"Like a good slave, he has returned to the plantation."
I'm not one to throw out accusations of racism and bigotry loosely, but doesn't this qualify. In fairness to the Dems, they aren't too happy with Ms Hunter, but where is the black caucus? If they rally to anyone's side shouldn't it be Mr. Robinson after someone calls him a slave?
Word of advice to the black caucus, if you quit crying racism about Congressman Jefferson and start defending Mr Robinson it will do wonders for your credibility. At least, from my perspective.
The black caucus has resorted to claiming racism as a root cause for Congressman Jefferson's recent run-in with the law and potential indictment for bribery. Racism?
They are absolutely right. What kind of country do we live in when a black man can't commit bribery without coming under the scrutiny of the FBI. We should all be ashamed.
Now, to North Carolina Supreme Court candidate Rachel Lea Hunter, a democrat, who had this to say about Vernon Robinson, a Republican congressional candidate.
"Like a good slave, he has returned to the plantation."
I'm not one to throw out accusations of racism and bigotry loosely, but doesn't this qualify. In fairness to the Dems, they aren't too happy with Ms Hunter, but where is the black caucus? If they rally to anyone's side shouldn't it be Mr. Robinson after someone calls him a slave?
Word of advice to the black caucus, if you quit crying racism about Congressman Jefferson and start defending Mr Robinson it will do wonders for your credibility. At least, from my perspective.
Saturday, June 17, 2006
She says it all
The Dixie Chicks:
"A lot of pandering started going on, and you'd see soldiers and the American flag in every video. It became a sickening display of ultra-patriotism."
"The entire country may disagree with me, but I don't understand the necessity for patriotism," Maines resumes, through gritted teeth. "Why do you have to be a patriot? About what? This land is our land? Why? You can like where you live and like your life, but as for loving the whole country… I don't see why people care about patriotism."
You know, she's right. Who needs patriotism? I'm way too busy climbing the corporate ladder and glutting myslef on the spoils of freedom and capitalism to get all involved in this patriotism thing. Isn't that what it's all about? Aren't we here on this world just for ourselves? What's more important than that?
We shouldn't believe in a higher cause. How inconvenient. So what if our country is attacked. So what if it's slowly become a hispanic-muslim society. I got albums to sell. I don't have time to care about all that stuff. Patriotism? Hah...who needs it?
If there's one thing about Natalie Maines that I like, it's the way she masterfully summarizes how the Left is slowly weakening our country. THIS attitude, reflected in her words, is the biggest threat to America. It's not the illegal immigrants, the islamo-wackjobs, or some psycho-midget in North Korea...it's people like Natalie Maines and their don't-give-a-damn-about-my-country attitude.
IF America ever falls, it will be because of people like this.
"A lot of pandering started going on, and you'd see soldiers and the American flag in every video. It became a sickening display of ultra-patriotism."
"The entire country may disagree with me, but I don't understand the necessity for patriotism," Maines resumes, through gritted teeth. "Why do you have to be a patriot? About what? This land is our land? Why? You can like where you live and like your life, but as for loving the whole country… I don't see why people care about patriotism."
You know, she's right. Who needs patriotism? I'm way too busy climbing the corporate ladder and glutting myslef on the spoils of freedom and capitalism to get all involved in this patriotism thing. Isn't that what it's all about? Aren't we here on this world just for ourselves? What's more important than that?
We shouldn't believe in a higher cause. How inconvenient. So what if our country is attacked. So what if it's slowly become a hispanic-muslim society. I got albums to sell. I don't have time to care about all that stuff. Patriotism? Hah...who needs it?
If there's one thing about Natalie Maines that I like, it's the way she masterfully summarizes how the Left is slowly weakening our country. THIS attitude, reflected in her words, is the biggest threat to America. It's not the illegal immigrants, the islamo-wackjobs, or some psycho-midget in North Korea...it's people like Natalie Maines and their don't-give-a-damn-about-my-country attitude.
IF America ever falls, it will be because of people like this.
Friday, June 16, 2006
Louisiana abortion
I am glad to see Louisiana actually showing some initiative on the abortion issue. Granted, this law is pretty meaningless, it only takes effect under one of two circumstances: 1) the Supreme Court overturns Roe v Wade, 2) the federal gov’t allows the states to decide the issue for themselves. What are the chances of either one of these things happening? Zero. Congress can’t even agree on the definition of marriage, so there’s no way they’ll agree on perhaps the most inflammatory issue of our time.
But, like I said, at least Louisiana is doing something. Most politicians avoid this issue like the plague. One thing I don't like is this whole "danger to the mother" thing. Again, I challenge anyone with a medical background to detail any situation where an abortion is absolutely necessary to save someone's life.
My guess is "danger to the mother" will be used by the other side to apply to psychiatric dangers. In other words, there may not be any actual health risks for someone to carry a baby to term, but there may be significant psychiatric risk...and that's how people will begin to justify abortions from a medical standpoint.
We'll see.
Anyway, kudos to Louisiana for the symbolic gesture. Now if they can only get rid of Ray Nagin.
But, like I said, at least Louisiana is doing something. Most politicians avoid this issue like the plague. One thing I don't like is this whole "danger to the mother" thing. Again, I challenge anyone with a medical background to detail any situation where an abortion is absolutely necessary to save someone's life.
My guess is "danger to the mother" will be used by the other side to apply to psychiatric dangers. In other words, there may not be any actual health risks for someone to carry a baby to term, but there may be significant psychiatric risk...and that's how people will begin to justify abortions from a medical standpoint.
We'll see.
Anyway, kudos to Louisiana for the symbolic gesture. Now if they can only get rid of Ray Nagin.
Thursday, June 15, 2006
Today's nutjobs
Wow, the nut cases are out in full force today. I’ll have to check…is there a full moon or something?
Stephen Hawking: "It is important for the human race to spread out into space for the survival of the species," Hawking said. "Life on Earth is at the ever-increasing risk of being wiped out by a disaster, such as sudden global warming, nuclear war, a genetically engineered virus or other dangers we have not yet thought of."
Space colonies? Here’s a better idea: how about we start our own Jedi training academy. I’ll hide the secret death star plans in my VCR, you go ask the Ewoks for help.
Bill Clinton: "It is now generally recognized that while Al Gore and I were ridiculed, we were right about global warming," Clinton said at a fundraiser for the Florida Democratic Party. "It's a serious problem. It's going to lead to more hurricanes."
What? More hurricanes? Of course, you do have PROOF of that, right Mr Clinton? Surely you wouldn’t make any off-the-cuff remarks like that without scientific evidence to back you up, right? Are you sure you even know what global warming is? (Hint: it’s not what happens "down there" whenever the GoDaddy commercial comes on)
Al Gore’s army: The former vice president, a Democrat, said on Monday that by the end of the summer he would start a bipartisan education campaign to train 1,000 people to give a version of his slide show on global warming featured in the film "An Inconvenient Truth" and book of the same name.
Of course, they’re all going to travel on bicycles, right? I mean, if this were such a crisis you wouldn’t want 1,000 people flying around or driving those horrible polluting SUVs right?
Robert Redford: The Oscar-winning director was in Washington to discuss energy policy with the liberal group Campaign for America's Future and to present an award to Leo Gerard, president of the United Steelworkers, for his work on energy independence.
I didn’t know Robert Redford was an expert on energy. I didn’t know that his opinion about energy policy was valuable. I thought he was an actor.
Stephen Hawking: "It is important for the human race to spread out into space for the survival of the species," Hawking said. "Life on Earth is at the ever-increasing risk of being wiped out by a disaster, such as sudden global warming, nuclear war, a genetically engineered virus or other dangers we have not yet thought of."
Space colonies? Here’s a better idea: how about we start our own Jedi training academy. I’ll hide the secret death star plans in my VCR, you go ask the Ewoks for help.
Bill Clinton: "It is now generally recognized that while Al Gore and I were ridiculed, we were right about global warming," Clinton said at a fundraiser for the Florida Democratic Party. "It's a serious problem. It's going to lead to more hurricanes."
What? More hurricanes? Of course, you do have PROOF of that, right Mr Clinton? Surely you wouldn’t make any off-the-cuff remarks like that without scientific evidence to back you up, right? Are you sure you even know what global warming is? (Hint: it’s not what happens "down there" whenever the GoDaddy commercial comes on)
Al Gore’s army: The former vice president, a Democrat, said on Monday that by the end of the summer he would start a bipartisan education campaign to train 1,000 people to give a version of his slide show on global warming featured in the film "An Inconvenient Truth" and book of the same name.
Of course, they’re all going to travel on bicycles, right? I mean, if this were such a crisis you wouldn’t want 1,000 people flying around or driving those horrible polluting SUVs right?
Robert Redford: The Oscar-winning director was in Washington to discuss energy policy with the liberal group Campaign for America's Future and to present an award to Leo Gerard, president of the United Steelworkers, for his work on energy independence.
I didn’t know Robert Redford was an expert on energy. I didn’t know that his opinion about energy policy was valuable. I thought he was an actor.
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Not very convenient
I love this article. Here is science’s response to crazy Gore’s movie:
Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia gives what, for many Canadians, is a surprising assessment: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."
Appearing before the Commons Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development last year, Carleton University paleoclimatologist Professor Tim Patterson testified, "There is no meaningful correlation between CO2 levels and Earth's temperature over this [geologic] time frame. In fact, when CO2 levels were over ten times higher than they are now, about 450 million years ago, the planet was in the depths of the absolute coldest period in the last half billion years." Patterson asked the committee, "On the basis of this evidence, how could anyone still believe that the recent relatively small increase in CO2 levels would be the major cause of the past century's modest warming?"
Gore's point that 200 cities and towns in the American West set all time high temperature records is also misleading according to Dr. Roy Spencer, Principal Research Scientist at The University of Alabama in Huntsville. "It is not unusual for some locations, out of the thousands of cities and towns in the U.S., to set all-time records," he says. "The actual data shows that overall, recent temperatures in the U.S. were not unusual."
Concerning Gore's beliefs about worldwide warming, Morgan points out that, in addition to the cooling in the NW Atlantic, massive areas of cooling are found in the North and South Pacific Ocean; the whole of the Amazon Valley; the north coast of South America and the Caribbean; the eastern Mediterranean, Black Sea, Caucasus and Red Sea; New Zealand and even the Ganges Valley in India. Morgan explains, "Had the IPCC used the standard parameter for climate change (the 30 year average) and used an equal area projection, instead of the Mercator (which doubled the area of warming in Alaska, Siberia and the Antarctic Ocean) warming and cooling would have been almost in balance."
Al Gore says: "Scientists have an independent obligation to respect and present the truth as they see it."
Well, I think they just did.
Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia gives what, for many Canadians, is a surprising assessment: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."
Appearing before the Commons Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development last year, Carleton University paleoclimatologist Professor Tim Patterson testified, "There is no meaningful correlation between CO2 levels and Earth's temperature over this [geologic] time frame. In fact, when CO2 levels were over ten times higher than they are now, about 450 million years ago, the planet was in the depths of the absolute coldest period in the last half billion years." Patterson asked the committee, "On the basis of this evidence, how could anyone still believe that the recent relatively small increase in CO2 levels would be the major cause of the past century's modest warming?"
Gore's point that 200 cities and towns in the American West set all time high temperature records is also misleading according to Dr. Roy Spencer, Principal Research Scientist at The University of Alabama in Huntsville. "It is not unusual for some locations, out of the thousands of cities and towns in the U.S., to set all-time records," he says. "The actual data shows that overall, recent temperatures in the U.S. were not unusual."
Concerning Gore's beliefs about worldwide warming, Morgan points out that, in addition to the cooling in the NW Atlantic, massive areas of cooling are found in the North and South Pacific Ocean; the whole of the Amazon Valley; the north coast of South America and the Caribbean; the eastern Mediterranean, Black Sea, Caucasus and Red Sea; New Zealand and even the Ganges Valley in India. Morgan explains, "Had the IPCC used the standard parameter for climate change (the 30 year average) and used an equal area projection, instead of the Mercator (which doubled the area of warming in Alaska, Siberia and the Antarctic Ocean) warming and cooling would have been almost in balance."
Al Gore says: "Scientists have an independent obligation to respect and present the truth as they see it."
Well, I think they just did.
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
No English, No service
One of South Philadelphia's biggest names in cheesesteaks is in a bit of a legal pickle for a lunch-line political statement against immigrants who don't speak English. The city's Commission on Human Relations yesterday filed a discrimination complaint against Geno's Steaks over signs that read: "This is AMERICA ... WHEN ORDERING SPEAK ENGLISH."
Discrimination? How can you make that stick? Hasn’t ‘racism’ and ‘discrimination’ become the Salem witch hunt of our time? What happened to free speech? Or how about freedom in business?
If a restaurant can say "No shirt, No shoes, No service", then why can’t he say the same about speaking English. Doesn’t a business owner reserve the right to refuse service if he deems it appropriate?
The way I see it, if there is no law requiring businesses to hire bilingual or multi-lingual staff, then a business owner has a right to demand that his customers speak English. There is no discrimination.
This is the definition of discrimination from the Wikipedia Online Encyclopedia:
"To discriminate socially is to make a distinction between people on the basis of class or category without regard to individual merit. Examples include racial, religious, sexual, disability, ethnic, height-related and age-related discrimination. Distinctions between people which are based just on individual merit (such as personal achievement, skill or ability) are not discriminatory."
Key words are "individual merit", "skill", "ability".
So, Geno’s will serve anyone of any race, religion, sexual preference, age, height, color, national origin, or handicap just as long as that person has the SKILL and ABILITY to speak English.
There is no discrimination. I tip my hat to Geno’s.
Discrimination? How can you make that stick? Hasn’t ‘racism’ and ‘discrimination’ become the Salem witch hunt of our time? What happened to free speech? Or how about freedom in business?
If a restaurant can say "No shirt, No shoes, No service", then why can’t he say the same about speaking English. Doesn’t a business owner reserve the right to refuse service if he deems it appropriate?
The way I see it, if there is no law requiring businesses to hire bilingual or multi-lingual staff, then a business owner has a right to demand that his customers speak English. There is no discrimination.
This is the definition of discrimination from the Wikipedia Online Encyclopedia:
"To discriminate socially is to make a distinction between people on the basis of class or category without regard to individual merit. Examples include racial, religious, sexual, disability, ethnic, height-related and age-related discrimination. Distinctions between people which are based just on individual merit (such as personal achievement, skill or ability) are not discriminatory."
Key words are "individual merit", "skill", "ability".
So, Geno’s will serve anyone of any race, religion, sexual preference, age, height, color, national origin, or handicap just as long as that person has the SKILL and ABILITY to speak English.
There is no discrimination. I tip my hat to Geno’s.
Monday, June 12, 2006
Achievement...It's not PC
Not too long ago, my nephew graduated from pre-school. We all watched proudly, knowing that next it's kindergarten and amazed at how fast he has grown.
It's hard to measure a child's ability in pre-school, but they do test kids with acuity exams. It's a way to identify the kids that may have a special talent for academics. My nephew scored higher than anyone else in his pre-school. Great news right! A chance for the parents to be proud in front of the other parents, right! Wrong.
His accomplishment was not recognized. Aside from being allowed to sit in the first chair, there was no mention of it. Why? Apparently that sort of thing is frowned upon because it may keep the other kids from feeling good about themselves. It seems like they could have given him a different color tassle, or a patch or something...no.
I know it's only pre-school. I know they're young. But when does recognizing achievement translate into criticizing non-achievement? Is that how we encourage our kids to strive for success? When we give losing teams a trophy just for trying, what message does that send?
Is it OK to lose? Sure it is. Should it be celebrated? No. Is it OK to not finish first? Of course. But that shouldn't keep us from recognizing the one who DOES finish first.
Maybe I'm just over reacting, but it would have been nice for them to mention how well my nephew did.
It's hard to measure a child's ability in pre-school, but they do test kids with acuity exams. It's a way to identify the kids that may have a special talent for academics. My nephew scored higher than anyone else in his pre-school. Great news right! A chance for the parents to be proud in front of the other parents, right! Wrong.
His accomplishment was not recognized. Aside from being allowed to sit in the first chair, there was no mention of it. Why? Apparently that sort of thing is frowned upon because it may keep the other kids from feeling good about themselves. It seems like they could have given him a different color tassle, or a patch or something...no.
I know it's only pre-school. I know they're young. But when does recognizing achievement translate into criticizing non-achievement? Is that how we encourage our kids to strive for success? When we give losing teams a trophy just for trying, what message does that send?
Is it OK to lose? Sure it is. Should it be celebrated? No. Is it OK to not finish first? Of course. But that shouldn't keep us from recognizing the one who DOES finish first.
Maybe I'm just over reacting, but it would have been nice for them to mention how well my nephew did.
Saturday, June 10, 2006
Dem strategy
Democratic strategy for the war on terror:
It's all about Bin Laden. Why aren't we going after Bin Laden? We've "taken our eye off the ball". Too many resources have been devoted away from Bin Laden. We are ignoring Bin Laden.
Democrat response to Al Zharqawi's death:
It's just one man. It doesn't really change anything.
It's all about Bin Laden. Why aren't we going after Bin Laden? We've "taken our eye off the ball". Too many resources have been devoted away from Bin Laden. We are ignoring Bin Laden.
Democrat response to Al Zharqawi's death:
It's just one man. It doesn't really change anything.
Friday, June 09, 2006
Good Deeds
So the UN feels that Middle America is kept in the dark about their "good deeds". Well, maybe they’re right. So, to honor the UN, here is a rundown of their good deeds:
800,000 people slaughtered in Rhuwanda over 100 days, the UN did nothing to stop it
The UN supports a global ban on sidearms
The UN embraces China, despite their shameful human rights record
The UN calls for global population control, similar to measures that China has in place
Oil-for-Food
The UN attempted to prosecute Britain for using bunker busting bombs
The UN calls for protecting the rights of children by preventing parent interference in their lives
Refuses to acknowledge Taiwan as an independent state
Has failed to stop OPEC in its artificial manipulation of the world oil market
Refused to enforce its disarm orders on Saddam Hussein
Has failed to prevent Iran from seeking WMDs
Failed to prevent Somali warlords from dominating that country
Did I miss anything? Feel free to add to this list of accomplishments. I’m not criticizing, I just feel Middle America should know the truth. After all, we don’t want anyone having false notions about them, right?
800,000 people slaughtered in Rhuwanda over 100 days, the UN did nothing to stop it
The UN supports a global ban on sidearms
The UN embraces China, despite their shameful human rights record
The UN calls for global population control, similar to measures that China has in place
Oil-for-Food
The UN attempted to prosecute Britain for using bunker busting bombs
The UN calls for protecting the rights of children by preventing parent interference in their lives
Refuses to acknowledge Taiwan as an independent state
Has failed to stop OPEC in its artificial manipulation of the world oil market
Refused to enforce its disarm orders on Saddam Hussein
Has failed to prevent Iran from seeking WMDs
Failed to prevent Somali warlords from dominating that country
Did I miss anything? Feel free to add to this list of accomplishments. I’m not criticizing, I just feel Middle America should know the truth. After all, we don’t want anyone having false notions about them, right?
Thursday, June 08, 2006
Ditsy Twits
Soda: $5
T-shirt: $25
Only selling 1/3 of the available tickets for your concert after your dunderhead lead singer inserts her foot in her mouth repeatedly: PRICELESS
What a day! It just keeps getting better!
T-shirt: $25
Only selling 1/3 of the available tickets for your concert after your dunderhead lead singer inserts her foot in her mouth repeatedly: PRICELESS
What a day! It just keeps getting better!
DEAD
Al Zharqawi has been confirmed dead.
The world has just become a safer...and better, place.
Here's to a job well-done by our troops.
As for Al Zharqawi, you can run but only for so long. Eventually, we will catch up to you. So long, you psycho. Say hello to Hitler and Qusay for us. Right about now I hope those 72 virgins have you bent over and...well, you get the picture.
The world has just become a safer...and better, place.
Here's to a job well-done by our troops.
As for Al Zharqawi, you can run but only for so long. Eventually, we will catch up to you. So long, you psycho. Say hello to Hitler and Qusay for us. Right about now I hope those 72 virgins have you bent over and...well, you get the picture.
Wednesday, June 07, 2006
Remember in November
It's time for a roll call:
Akaka (D-HI) Baucus (D-MT) Bayh (D-IN) Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM) Boxer (D-CA)Cantwell (D-WA) Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI) Clinton (D-NY) Collins (R-ME) Conrad (D-ND) Dayton (D-MN) Dorgan (D-ND) Durbin (D-IL) Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA) Gregg (R-NH) Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI) Jeffords (I-VT) Johnson (D-SD) Kennedy (D-MA) Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI) Landrieu (D-LA) Lautenberg (D-NJ) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) Lieberman (D-CT) Lincoln (D-AR) McCain (R-AZ)
Menendez (D-NJ) Mikulski (D-MD) Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL)
Obama (D-IL) Pryor (D-AR) Reed (D-RI) Reid (D-NV)
Salazar (D-CO) Sarbanes (D-MD) Schumer (D-NY) Snowe (R-ME) Specter (R-PA) Stabenow (D-MI) Sununu (R-NH) Wyden (D-OR)
Not Voting - 3
Dodd (D-CT)
Hagel (R-NE)
Rockefeller (D-WV
Breakdown of the states, and their respective positions on gay marriage
This website posts regular updates on the status of Defense of Marriage
41 states have laws prohibiting same sex marriage, only 9 allow it
18 states have constitutional amendments banning gay marriage
So why is it that our Senators are denying the states, and therefore the people, the right to voice their opinion on this. 82% of the states have agreed to outlaw gay marriage, yet less than half of our elected Senators will agree to allow the states to decide the issue.
Somewhere there is a disconnect between the will of the people and the our US Senators. So, come November, remember this. If there is a disconnect, then it's up to the voters to correct it. So remember these names. Look for YOUR senator on the list.
Akaka (D-HI) Baucus (D-MT) Bayh (D-IN) Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM) Boxer (D-CA)Cantwell (D-WA) Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI) Clinton (D-NY) Collins (R-ME) Conrad (D-ND) Dayton (D-MN) Dorgan (D-ND) Durbin (D-IL) Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA) Gregg (R-NH) Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI) Jeffords (I-VT) Johnson (D-SD) Kennedy (D-MA) Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI) Landrieu (D-LA) Lautenberg (D-NJ) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) Lieberman (D-CT) Lincoln (D-AR) McCain (R-AZ)
Menendez (D-NJ) Mikulski (D-MD) Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL)
Obama (D-IL) Pryor (D-AR) Reed (D-RI) Reid (D-NV)
Salazar (D-CO) Sarbanes (D-MD) Schumer (D-NY) Snowe (R-ME) Specter (R-PA) Stabenow (D-MI) Sununu (R-NH) Wyden (D-OR)
Not Voting - 3
Dodd (D-CT)
Hagel (R-NE)
Rockefeller (D-WV
Breakdown of the states, and their respective positions on gay marriage
This website posts regular updates on the status of Defense of Marriage
41 states have laws prohibiting same sex marriage, only 9 allow it
18 states have constitutional amendments banning gay marriage
So why is it that our Senators are denying the states, and therefore the people, the right to voice their opinion on this. 82% of the states have agreed to outlaw gay marriage, yet less than half of our elected Senators will agree to allow the states to decide the issue.
Somewhere there is a disconnect between the will of the people and the our US Senators. So, come November, remember this. If there is a disconnect, then it's up to the voters to correct it. So remember these names. Look for YOUR senator on the list.
Monday, June 05, 2006
Health care crisis
This is a great story from the LA Times. As a family physician, I have a strong opinion on this one.
There IS a health care crisis in this country. It’s not a developing crisis, it’s here and it’s real. It is good that this article pointed out this fact. What’s not good is some of the proposed solutions.
First, I’m okay with increasing the enrollment in medical schools nationwide, but NOT at the expense of lowering admission standards. Some may be alright with this, I think it’s a mistake. In healthcare you can have either quality or quantity, rarely both. I’d rather have quality.
Second, bringing in more foreign medical graduates is a HUGE mistake. See my reason above. Not only are FMGs held to lesser standards at overseas medical schools, but there is also difficulty developing healthy doctor-patient relationships as well as some substantial language barriers. When you’re discussing treatment plans, properly taking prescription medicines and preventive health strategies, a language barrier is a very big deal. Once again, quality or quantity?
Allow me to point out a few reasons for this health care shortage that I feel the politicians aren’t exactly going to be willing to act on:
Lawsuits – This IS the number one problem in American health care, and it must stop. Doctors are being forced out of practice all over the country because of trial lawyers. Not only that, but lawsuits are also limiting the scope of practice for many doctors. For example, as a family physician, I am licensed and trained to deliver routine OB care, but I will NOT do it because of the litigation risk. I am not alone. Couple that with the fact that OB is one of the fields that is suffering the greatest from the health care shortage and you can see my point. There must be sweeping reform here, and must be quick. The problem is that Congress is full of lawyers. They’re not going to change anything.
Medicare – The federal gov’t continues to cut payments to doctors. As a result, more physicians are eliminating medicare from their practice. In many cases, seeing these patients actually incurs an overall LOSS to the bottom line. Remember, this is how we make a living. Keep cutting medicare payments and soon this program will become obsolete because no one will be able to find a doctor who takes these patients.
Push for national health care – Socialized medicine is BAD. Listing the reasons why it’s bad is a whole other post, but I guarantee that if our lawmakers continue pushing for a national health care plan there will be a mass exodus of healthcare professionals out of the health care field. I would rather bag groceries for a living than work in a socialized medicine setting, and I am not alone in this.
Greedy insurance companies – Bottom line, the insurance companies don’t want to pay for things that we as physicians feel are necessary. So on one hand, you have the insurance companies limiting our freedom as physicians, and on the other the lawyers are suing us for NOT doing the tests that the insurance companies won’t pay for. Something has to give.
My solution: Sweeping reform of the insurance businesses and plaintiffs attorneys. Freeze or increase medicare payments to physicians – these things will stop physicians from leaving their profession and encourage more to enter it - and drop corporate taxes. Why drop corporate taxes? Because if you start providing incentives for big business to operate in the US, then they will come to the US (free trade will actually reverse direction and begin to work in our favor), which means more jobs, which means more people with health insurance. Sounds simple and easy….which is probably why our lawmakers haven’t done it yet.
There IS a health care crisis in this country. It’s not a developing crisis, it’s here and it’s real. It is good that this article pointed out this fact. What’s not good is some of the proposed solutions.
First, I’m okay with increasing the enrollment in medical schools nationwide, but NOT at the expense of lowering admission standards. Some may be alright with this, I think it’s a mistake. In healthcare you can have either quality or quantity, rarely both. I’d rather have quality.
Second, bringing in more foreign medical graduates is a HUGE mistake. See my reason above. Not only are FMGs held to lesser standards at overseas medical schools, but there is also difficulty developing healthy doctor-patient relationships as well as some substantial language barriers. When you’re discussing treatment plans, properly taking prescription medicines and preventive health strategies, a language barrier is a very big deal. Once again, quality or quantity?
Allow me to point out a few reasons for this health care shortage that I feel the politicians aren’t exactly going to be willing to act on:
Lawsuits – This IS the number one problem in American health care, and it must stop. Doctors are being forced out of practice all over the country because of trial lawyers. Not only that, but lawsuits are also limiting the scope of practice for many doctors. For example, as a family physician, I am licensed and trained to deliver routine OB care, but I will NOT do it because of the litigation risk. I am not alone. Couple that with the fact that OB is one of the fields that is suffering the greatest from the health care shortage and you can see my point. There must be sweeping reform here, and must be quick. The problem is that Congress is full of lawyers. They’re not going to change anything.
Medicare – The federal gov’t continues to cut payments to doctors. As a result, more physicians are eliminating medicare from their practice. In many cases, seeing these patients actually incurs an overall LOSS to the bottom line. Remember, this is how we make a living. Keep cutting medicare payments and soon this program will become obsolete because no one will be able to find a doctor who takes these patients.
Push for national health care – Socialized medicine is BAD. Listing the reasons why it’s bad is a whole other post, but I guarantee that if our lawmakers continue pushing for a national health care plan there will be a mass exodus of healthcare professionals out of the health care field. I would rather bag groceries for a living than work in a socialized medicine setting, and I am not alone in this.
Greedy insurance companies – Bottom line, the insurance companies don’t want to pay for things that we as physicians feel are necessary. So on one hand, you have the insurance companies limiting our freedom as physicians, and on the other the lawyers are suing us for NOT doing the tests that the insurance companies won’t pay for. Something has to give.
My solution: Sweeping reform of the insurance businesses and plaintiffs attorneys. Freeze or increase medicare payments to physicians – these things will stop physicians from leaving their profession and encourage more to enter it - and drop corporate taxes. Why drop corporate taxes? Because if you start providing incentives for big business to operate in the US, then they will come to the US (free trade will actually reverse direction and begin to work in our favor), which means more jobs, which means more people with health insurance. Sounds simple and easy….which is probably why our lawmakers haven’t done it yet.
Sunday, June 04, 2006
No more cobra bashing
A woman who fell in love with a snake has reportedly married the reptile at a traditional Hindu wedding celebrated by 2,000 guests in India's Orissa state.
Bimbala Das wore a silk saree for the ceremony Wednesday at Atala village near the Orissa state capital Bhubaneswar.
Priests chanted mantras to seal the union, but the snake failed to come out of a nearby ant hill where it lives, the Press Trust of India (PTI) said.
Sounds like the snake didn’t want to perform on his wedding night.
But, more importantly, this is a victory for cobras all over the world who have been denied their right to love whomever they choose. At last, cobras are allowed to love and marry just like everyone else. At last, they don’t have to walk down the street in shame. They can have a normal relationship, and anti-cobra bigots are shaking their heads in disbelief.
And it’s about time. For far too long we’ve been suppressing cobras. Shame on us all. Perhaps, one day, we’ll look back on our anti-cobra mentality and feel grateful at the bravery this one cobra showed in attacking our traditional views of marriage and overcoming centuries of misconceptions about his group.
Bravo, Mr. Cobra. You’ve taught us all a valuable lesson.
Bimbala Das wore a silk saree for the ceremony Wednesday at Atala village near the Orissa state capital Bhubaneswar.
Priests chanted mantras to seal the union, but the snake failed to come out of a nearby ant hill where it lives, the Press Trust of India (PTI) said.
Sounds like the snake didn’t want to perform on his wedding night.
But, more importantly, this is a victory for cobras all over the world who have been denied their right to love whomever they choose. At last, cobras are allowed to love and marry just like everyone else. At last, they don’t have to walk down the street in shame. They can have a normal relationship, and anti-cobra bigots are shaking their heads in disbelief.
And it’s about time. For far too long we’ve been suppressing cobras. Shame on us all. Perhaps, one day, we’ll look back on our anti-cobra mentality and feel grateful at the bravery this one cobra showed in attacking our traditional views of marriage and overcoming centuries of misconceptions about his group.
Bravo, Mr. Cobra. You’ve taught us all a valuable lesson.
Church...er...Mosque and State
At midday on Fridays, Muslims gather to pray in a basement room of the U.S. Capitol. Kneeling on sheets they've spread over the floor and facing east toward Mecca, they are members of the Congressional Muslim Staffers Association, about two dozen congressional aides who are part of a small but growing minority in America and in the halls of government.
At first just a prayer group, later a Muslim support group, the association is now looking outward to change what many see as woeful ignorance about Islam on Capitol Hill and beyond, said Jameel Aalim-Johnson, a black Muslim and chief of staff for Democratic Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York.
This story fascinates me. I ask you to click the link and read the full story once. Then read it again, but substitute Muslim with Christian. Now, this story is not really making news, I found it buried on the Las Vegas Sun website. But imagine if this were a group of Christian congressional aids. Imagine the national outcry.
How many times would we hear the phrase ‘separation of church and state’?
Or ‘Don’t impose your religious beliefs on others’?
Or ‘Christians shouldn’t be influencing members of Congress’?
Or ‘vast right wing conspiracy’?
But, since these are Muslims it’s okay, and won’t generate so much as a whimper from the mainstream press.
Anyone want to offer a guess as to how long before we are all bowing down to Mecca on a daily basis?
At first just a prayer group, later a Muslim support group, the association is now looking outward to change what many see as woeful ignorance about Islam on Capitol Hill and beyond, said Jameel Aalim-Johnson, a black Muslim and chief of staff for Democratic Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York.
This story fascinates me. I ask you to click the link and read the full story once. Then read it again, but substitute Muslim with Christian. Now, this story is not really making news, I found it buried on the Las Vegas Sun website. But imagine if this were a group of Christian congressional aids. Imagine the national outcry.
How many times would we hear the phrase ‘separation of church and state’?
Or ‘Don’t impose your religious beliefs on others’?
Or ‘Christians shouldn’t be influencing members of Congress’?
Or ‘vast right wing conspiracy’?
But, since these are Muslims it’s okay, and won’t generate so much as a whimper from the mainstream press.
Anyone want to offer a guess as to how long before we are all bowing down to Mecca on a daily basis?
Saturday, June 03, 2006
Purple Heart
Soldier gives CBS reporter his Purple Heart]
I wanted to share this story, since most of the news about our troops involves ‘killing innocent civilians.’
Kudos to Fox News and MSNBC for carrying the story.
It was nowhere to be found on CNN.com. Or maybe it was just hidden beneath the photo of a bloody bedroom in Haditha that they were so proudly displaying.
I wanted to share this story, since most of the news about our troops involves ‘killing innocent civilians.’
Kudos to Fox News and MSNBC for carrying the story.
It was nowhere to be found on CNN.com. Or maybe it was just hidden beneath the photo of a bloody bedroom in Haditha that they were so proudly displaying.
Friday, June 02, 2006
"Crony capitalism"
Former president Bill Clinton keynoted a Phoenix Democratic fundraiser Thursday evening, saying the Republican Party is dominated by "right-wing, white Southerners."
Clinton also hit the GOP for favoring the rich and practicing "crony capitalism".
Clinton also voiced support for raising the minimum wage above the $5.15 per hour federal baseline
I gotta say, as much as I dislike the man, Bill Clinton has got to be one of the most entertaining politicians in history. Rarely is there a story about him that doesn’t make me laugh, and this one is no different.
"Crony capitalism". What a great description. But what’s even better is that he made this statement at a $500-a-plate dinner. That’s priceless.
Raise the minimum wage? I found this story on Drudge, right next to a story that shows the unemployment rate has dropped yet again. Well, we can’t have that, can we? All these people working? No.
You know that has the libs in a panic. After all, if people are working, then they are paying taxes. And if people are paying taxes, they’re not going to like the Democratic Party. I can see them in their little private discussions.
Bill Clinton: "The unemployment rate has dropped again. How is my wife gonna get elected with all these people working?"
John Kerry: "I have a plan."
Ted Kennedy: "Hiccup…whatttifff……hiccup….we….hiccup……quagmire!"
John Kerry: "I have a plan."
Bill Clinton: "We need more layoffs. Quick, somebody order me a pizza and a stripper, I can’t think like this."
Howard Dean: "arrrrrgggghhhhh…….wahoooooo"
Robert Byrd: "How about a lynch mob?"
Al Sharpton: "That’s disgusting, disreputable, disillusioning, disrespectful, disgraceful, disenfranchising, disappearing, dismantling, disengaging, displaying, dislikable and racist."
John Kerry: "I was in Vietnam!"
Al Gore: "We can use a lockbox, or just sell them to the Chinese."
John Kerry: "Cheney’s daughter is gay!"
Bill Clinton: "She’s gay? Damn, she’s a hottie too."
Hillary: "Why not just raise the minimum wage?"
John Kerry: "I got it! Raise the minimum wage!"
I wonder if any of these minimum wage workers were invited to this $500-a-plate fund raiser in which Mr. Clinton bashed those evil crony-capitalists? Well, maybe if they keep raising the minimum wage….
As it climbs, so does the unemployment rate, which means more people jobless, which means more people dependent on the government, which means the Democrats take over, all while looking like they care about the ‘little man’. How’d they come up with such a brilliant strategy?
Clinton also hit the GOP for favoring the rich and practicing "crony capitalism".
Clinton also voiced support for raising the minimum wage above the $5.15 per hour federal baseline
I gotta say, as much as I dislike the man, Bill Clinton has got to be one of the most entertaining politicians in history. Rarely is there a story about him that doesn’t make me laugh, and this one is no different.
"Crony capitalism". What a great description. But what’s even better is that he made this statement at a $500-a-plate dinner. That’s priceless.
Raise the minimum wage? I found this story on Drudge, right next to a story that shows the unemployment rate has dropped yet again. Well, we can’t have that, can we? All these people working? No.
You know that has the libs in a panic. After all, if people are working, then they are paying taxes. And if people are paying taxes, they’re not going to like the Democratic Party. I can see them in their little private discussions.
Bill Clinton: "The unemployment rate has dropped again. How is my wife gonna get elected with all these people working?"
John Kerry: "I have a plan."
Ted Kennedy: "Hiccup…whatttifff……hiccup….we….hiccup……quagmire!"
John Kerry: "I have a plan."
Bill Clinton: "We need more layoffs. Quick, somebody order me a pizza and a stripper, I can’t think like this."
Howard Dean: "arrrrrgggghhhhh…….wahoooooo"
Robert Byrd: "How about a lynch mob?"
Al Sharpton: "That’s disgusting, disreputable, disillusioning, disrespectful, disgraceful, disenfranchising, disappearing, dismantling, disengaging, displaying, dislikable and racist."
John Kerry: "I was in Vietnam!"
Al Gore: "We can use a lockbox, or just sell them to the Chinese."
John Kerry: "Cheney’s daughter is gay!"
Bill Clinton: "She’s gay? Damn, she’s a hottie too."
Hillary: "Why not just raise the minimum wage?"
John Kerry: "I got it! Raise the minimum wage!"
I wonder if any of these minimum wage workers were invited to this $500-a-plate fund raiser in which Mr. Clinton bashed those evil crony-capitalists? Well, maybe if they keep raising the minimum wage….
As it climbs, so does the unemployment rate, which means more people jobless, which means more people dependent on the government, which means the Democrats take over, all while looking like they care about the ‘little man’. How’d they come up with such a brilliant strategy?
Thursday, June 01, 2006
Give them a break
Let me start by saying that if the killings in Haditha are truly what they appear to be on the surface, then this is an unfortunate and sad thing.
I do not condone the killing of civilians in a war effort, unless those civilians, regardless of sex or age, are in any way supporting the enemy. In my mind, that makes them the enemy. Were any of these people aiding the enemy? I don’t know, and neither does anyone else.
If not, then they should not have been gunned down the way they were, and those responsible should be punished. Period.
But the fact of the matter is, we don’t know if any of these people were truly innocent. Sure, they were not in uniform, they were not part of an army, but does anyone over there who kills American soldiers fit this description? No.
My suggestion would be to give our troops the benefit of the doubt. Investigate? Yes. Punish those found to be in the wrong? Yes. But don’t convict until we know the facts. And don’t judge these young men unless you’ve experienced what they’ve experienced. It’s easy to condemn from an easy chair, but spend one day in their shoes and you’ll see how fast your attitude changes.
As for the media, I don’t think they’re entitled to as much information as they’ve been given. We already know what they do with ANY anti-military rhetoric…it becomes fact and is used against America to hinder the war effort. Personally, I think the military leadership should issue one simple statement… "An unfortunate series of events occurred in Habitha, like many other events that occur during war. It is being investigated and anyone found guilty of wrongdoing will be punished." That’s it. That’s all we need to know.
For those of you who object to this, let me remind you of something. WE ARE AT WAR! I know it’s hard for the progressives to admit that, but it’s the truth. We are at war! Say it. Repeat it. We are at war. Keep saying it until it sinks in. We are at war. And for those who don’t know, war is not about tea parties, group hugs and therapy sessions.
War is a terrible thing in which terrible things happen. People die and many times those people are innocent. Things get destroyed. Suffering occurs. That’s what makes war so terrible and is why we avoid it whenever possible. So don’t act surprised when something terrible happens during a war. We do what we can to minimize those terrible things but we will never eliminate them.
It’s easy to forget while we drive to work in our SUV and pick the kids up at soccer practice. It’s easy to forget that we are at war. So keep repeating it. We are at war. Maybe someday you’ll realize the truth and won’t gasp so hard the next time someone dies in Iraq. It’s not our fault these extremist nut cases started causing trouble over there. We didn’t ask for this. So don’t blame America for being evil and insensitive.
And don’t blame our troops for being human, even if their enemy is not. Sure, they are professionals, but they’re also kids. They’re kids under a lot of stress, fighting and dying for our freedom, to protect us from evil and to secure the rights of a civilization who couldn’t care less about them. Give them justice, demand better from them, but also…give them a break.
For those of you who believe, I ask that you remember these soldiers in your prayers. They’re going through a lot, and as the investigation continues so will their strain.
I do not condone the killing of civilians in a war effort, unless those civilians, regardless of sex or age, are in any way supporting the enemy. In my mind, that makes them the enemy. Were any of these people aiding the enemy? I don’t know, and neither does anyone else.
If not, then they should not have been gunned down the way they were, and those responsible should be punished. Period.
But the fact of the matter is, we don’t know if any of these people were truly innocent. Sure, they were not in uniform, they were not part of an army, but does anyone over there who kills American soldiers fit this description? No.
My suggestion would be to give our troops the benefit of the doubt. Investigate? Yes. Punish those found to be in the wrong? Yes. But don’t convict until we know the facts. And don’t judge these young men unless you’ve experienced what they’ve experienced. It’s easy to condemn from an easy chair, but spend one day in their shoes and you’ll see how fast your attitude changes.
As for the media, I don’t think they’re entitled to as much information as they’ve been given. We already know what they do with ANY anti-military rhetoric…it becomes fact and is used against America to hinder the war effort. Personally, I think the military leadership should issue one simple statement… "An unfortunate series of events occurred in Habitha, like many other events that occur during war. It is being investigated and anyone found guilty of wrongdoing will be punished." That’s it. That’s all we need to know.
For those of you who object to this, let me remind you of something. WE ARE AT WAR! I know it’s hard for the progressives to admit that, but it’s the truth. We are at war! Say it. Repeat it. We are at war. Keep saying it until it sinks in. We are at war. And for those who don’t know, war is not about tea parties, group hugs and therapy sessions.
War is a terrible thing in which terrible things happen. People die and many times those people are innocent. Things get destroyed. Suffering occurs. That’s what makes war so terrible and is why we avoid it whenever possible. So don’t act surprised when something terrible happens during a war. We do what we can to minimize those terrible things but we will never eliminate them.
It’s easy to forget while we drive to work in our SUV and pick the kids up at soccer practice. It’s easy to forget that we are at war. So keep repeating it. We are at war. Maybe someday you’ll realize the truth and won’t gasp so hard the next time someone dies in Iraq. It’s not our fault these extremist nut cases started causing trouble over there. We didn’t ask for this. So don’t blame America for being evil and insensitive.
And don’t blame our troops for being human, even if their enemy is not. Sure, they are professionals, but they’re also kids. They’re kids under a lot of stress, fighting and dying for our freedom, to protect us from evil and to secure the rights of a civilization who couldn’t care less about them. Give them justice, demand better from them, but also…give them a break.
For those of you who believe, I ask that you remember these soldiers in your prayers. They’re going through a lot, and as the investigation continues so will their strain.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)