Wednesday, August 31, 2005

Should the President be Impeached?

Pat Buchanan has suggested that some Republican congressman propose a bill of impeachment of President Bush.


Buchanan is a staunch Republican and unashamed supporter of President Bush, so why on earth would he advocate the impeachment of the President?

Because, Buchanan says:

"Twice, George Bush has taken an oath to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." Article IV, Section 4 of that Constitution reads, "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against invasion."

Well, we are being invaded, and the president of the United States is not doing his duty to protect the states against that invasion. Some courageous Republican, to get the attention of this White House, should drop into the hopper a bill of impeachment, charging George W. Bush with a conscious refusal to uphold his oath and defend the states of the Union against "invasion."

It may be the only way left to get his attention, before the border vanishes and our beloved country dissolves into MexAmerica, what T.R.(Teddy Roosevelt) called a "polyglot boarding house for the world."

Read more here.

He is referring to the porous border that is allowing illegal immigrants seemingly unimpeded access to our country.

He is right.

However, I think threatening impeachment is a little extreme. In your humble friend and uneducated blogger's opinion, a bill of impeachment at this particular time could start the bandwagon rolling, with every left winger and Democrat that has an agenda jumping aboard. They would be crawling all over like roaches after the lights go out. There is way too much dissension over the war, social security, oil prices and "that woman" that's camped outside his ranch, among other things, right now.

But Bush needs to take some action, and fast. Those borders aren't getting any more secure on their own. There have been some suggestions that we should put a fence up along the border from the west coast of California to the easternmost end of the border between Texas and Mexico. This proposed fence would be 10 foot high, chain link, and topped with razor wire. In addition, the fence line would be patrolled by border patrol agents, 4 times the number currently employed.

I think that is more reasonable than threatening to impeach the President.

The big problem now will be in getting the President to agree with this plan.

But now we're back to impeachment again. Darn.

Also, Remember to keep all the victims of Hurricane Katrina in your prayers, and help with whatever you can. My girlfriend, Jeannie's father lives in New Orleans. She hasn't heard from him and doesn't know where he is. Pray for him and his family and also for blogger friend Dana in Slidell. In her last post before Katrina struck she said they were going to stay home and camp out in the family room. Yesterday, I heard on the radio that Slidell was under water.

Lie Of The Day: (from Laura Ingraham's web site)
After providing Judge John Roberts with background memos regarding the government's policy on the treatment of detainees (something Roberts had no role in), Sen. Patrick Leahy commented: "I don't think a Supreme Court hearing is a game of gotcha. I'd really like to know what he thinks."

Roberts may have to rule on a related issue as a Justice, and Leahy is merely trying to stir the pot knowing that the press loves to cover anything relating to the Bush Administration's "torture memo."

Tuesday, August 30, 2005


To make up for the fact that I didn't include any pictures in my last posting, I am posting this song today, complete with illustrations.

It is called Hallelujahs and it was written by Chris Rice and recorded by Kathy Trocolli.

A purple sky to close the day

I wade the surf where dolphins play
The taste of salt, the dance of waves
And my soul wells up with hallelujahs

A lightning flash, my pounding heart
A breaching whale, a shooting star
Give testimony that You are
And my soul wells up with hallelujahs

Oh praise Him all His mighty works
There is no language where you can't be heard
Your song goes out to all the earth
Hallelujah, hallelujah, hallelujah

O cratered moon and the sparrow's wings
O thunder's boom and Saturn's rings
Unveil our Father as we sing
And my soul wells up with hallelujahs

Oh praise Him all His mighty works
There is no language where you can't be heard
Your song goes out to all the earth
Hallelujah, hallelujah, hallelujah
Hallelujah, hallelujah, hallelujah, hallelujah

The pulse of life within my wrist
A fallen snow, a rising mist
There is no higher praise than this
And my soul wells up
Oh my soul wells up
Yes my soul wells up with hallelujahs

Oh, praise Him all His mighty works
There is no language where you can't be heard
Your song goes out to all the earth
Hallelujah, hallelujah, hallelujah.

Oh, hallelujah, hallelujah, hallelujah

UPDATE: I just heard on the radio that Slidell, LA is under water, due to the hurricane. This is the home of blogger buddy Dana. Our thoughts, prayers, and best wishes go out to Dana and her family.

Monday, August 29, 2005

The Begatting of Dissension

In the beginning, Bush created a Republican administration.. And darkness was upon the face of the Democrats.
And Bush looked, and saw that it was good.

But then, a false prophet, a son of Ishmael, rose up, and fell upon the people of US, and slew three thousand of them, and brought down their towers.

And there were wailings and lamentations in the land.

And lo, Bush was sore aggrieved. And he called upon the people to gird up their loins, and fall upon the people of al-Qaida, and slay them. And the armies of US rose up, and fell upon the people of al-Qaida and plundered their caves, and SAC’d their cities, and drove them out before themselves with fire from the sky, and from the earth.

But the evil one rose up, and hid them from Bush, saying, “Thou usurper king in the house of Clinton, Thou hast invaded our lands and defiled our sacrifices. Thou shalt be accursed.”

There were people in the land of US, who were called the Democrats, and they were dissenters.

And the Democrats were afraid, and revolted against Bush, and called him all manner of vile things, and accused him of atrocities, and cried out for vengeance against him, saying, “Where are the Weapons of Mass Destruction. of which you speak? Thou hast broken the covenant that we have made with the children of Ishmael and brought judgment down upon us!”

And there arose between the followers of Teddy and the followers of Bush, a chasm which was called the Credibility Gap.

But still Bush did not relent and did not hearken to the cries of the dissenters. And the children of Ishmael ran to the hills and called for the rocks to fall upon them, to shield them from the wrath of Bush, and from his army.

And the evil one defied Bush, and Bush was wroth, and girded up his loins and drew his sword, and searched through the land for the evil one, and found him hiding in a spider hole, in fear of Bush’s terrible vengeance. And the evil one’s idols were destroyed, yea, even unto the tenth cubit. And the evil one was brought unto Baghdad, to stand before the court of judgment.

But the followers of Teddy and Durbin and Chuck and of all the leaders of the tribes from the left, and the Clintonites decried the triumph of Bush and rent their garments and gnashed their teeth, saying, ”What evil hast this man done, that thou hath defiled him and his sons? Thou hath angered the son’s of Ishmael, so that thou canst play Texas Ranger to the world.”

But their words were of sounding brass and a tinkling cymbal.

Thus did Bush conquer the evil one, but there remained unrest in the lands of the sons of Ishmael. And it was as dust and ashes in his mouth.

Wherefore I sayeth unto thee, my brethern, let us pray.

(more to come)

Sunday, August 28, 2005

Guest Interview

We have a special guest with us today. Ms. Emily Latella has asked to comment on a story that has been in the news as of late.

Me: Ms. Latella, welcome to my blog. What is your comment?

Emily: Thank you. I want to know what is all this fuss I keep hearing about Sydney Sheen? Just because he wants to be an actor and make his mark like his father, Martin Sheen and his brothers, Emilio and Charlie...

Me: Ms. Latella.....

Emily: I mean, just because Sydney isn't as good as his father, doesn't mean...

Me: Emily...That's not...

Emily: ...he doesn't have the right to....


Emily: ...not be allowed...huh? What?

Me: Ms. Latella, that's not Sydney, That's Cindy.... Cindy Sheehan, not Sydney Sheen.... Cindy. Not Sydney.

Emily: Oh...Well....That's very different...Nevermind.

Me: That's the news, Have a pleasant evening.

Saturday, August 27, 2005

2008 Election Nominees

Dan Patrick, sitting in for Laura Ingraham yesterday, was conducting an unofficial poll, asking his listeners to call in with who they pick to be the Republican Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates in 2008. I choose Condoleeza Rice and Sam Brownback, Senator from Kansas. I chose Brownback because, being from Kansas, I've known about him since he first ran for the senate, and I've always been impressed with him.

So, what do y'all think? Who do you think will be the Republican candidates? And why? Who would you like to see run, and are who you like and who you think will run the same?
Also who do you think Hillary will choose for her running mate?

Put your guess in my comments.

Friday, August 26, 2005

Iraqi Women Worse Off?

There are some leftists who seek to scorn the efforts of the administration in regards to the establishment of a democratic government in Iraq, and will look for any excuse to do so. One of the more recent assertions by them is the myth that women will be "worse off than before" in the new Iraqi government.

Let's take a look at the draft of the constitution now being debated in the newly formed democratic government in Iraq:




FIRST: Civil and political rights.

Article (14): Iraqis are equal before the law without discrimination because of sex, ethnicity, nationality, origin, color, religion, sect, belief, opinion or social or economic status.

Article (15): Every individual has the right to life and security and freedom and cannot be deprived of these rights or have them restricted except in accordance to the law and based on a ruling by the appropriate judicial body.

Article (16): Equal opportunity is a right guaranteed to all Iraqis, and the state shall take the necessary steps to achieve this.

Iraqis are equal before the law without discrimination because of sex.

How clear does it have to be? Have the aforementioned leftists actually read the draft of the Constitution? It surely doesn't appear that way, does it?

So, why in the world would they say such a thing? Can they not read it for themselves? What part of "Iraqis are equal before the law without discrimination because of sex" don't they understand?

I seem to remember that Saddam Hussein and his son's weren't too nice to women in general. Didn't Uday and Qusay rape and torture women routinely? Weren't women required to wear those "burka" things and weren't they prohibited from almost everything that men were allowed to do? So, in what way will they be worse off if they are being treated as equals?

From this:To this:

I have been doing some studying on Islam recently and one thing that surprised me is that the Muslim Holy Book, the Qur'an, makes no distinction between women and men when it comes to being treated fairly and with respect. It seems to me that the new constitution is validating the Qur'an.

Wait. I just had a thought. Maybe this is wishful thinking on the left's part. Maybe they want to keep women down just so they can point to the Bush administration and say he made things worse. Maybe they are hoping that women will be worse off so it will make them look like they are the good guys.


I don't know. I'm just your humble friend and uneducated blogger, but if there is something in the new constitution that proves their point that women would be worse off under the new regime, I surely would like them to show it to me.

In other news, I found this on some web site somewhere. I don't remember where:

Los Angeles - Sacha Baron Cohen aka Ali G was dunked in the sea by Pamela Anderson's bodyguards - after rugby-tackling the actress at her dogs' wedding.
The Ali G star was dressed as his other creation, Kazakhstani TV journalist Borat, when he pulled the stunt.
Cohen, 33, in trunks, leather jacket and Village People-style cap, emerged from the surf on an inflatable turtle.
His rugby tackle sent Pam, 38, hurtling to the sand on the beach at Malibu, California.
Concerned security men grabbed the comedian and dragged him into the sea.
Pam was presiding over the nuptials of her Golden Retriever Star to Chihuahua Luca.

A wedding for her dogs? And the Hollywood people think they're normal.

Lie Of The Day: (from Laura Ingraham's web site)
"As the only woman on the committee, I have an additional role to play, representing the views and concerns of 145 million American women during this hearing process," claimed Dianne Feinstein, as she forged heavy drama about John Roberts and Roe V. Wade at the L.A. Bar Association.

A California liberal represents all women? Now that's funny.

Thursday, August 25, 2005

On Reverend Pat

Reverend Pat Robertson has apologized for his statement about Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez made on Monday's telecast of his Christian Broadcasting Network show "The 700 Club".

Robertson had said: "You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war, and I don't think any oil shipments will stop."

Then, after the firestorm erupted, he went into CYA mode, saying, "I didn't say 'assassination.' I said our special forces should 'take him out.' 'Take him out' could be a number of things including kidnapping." By the way, He said that laughingly, as if it was funny.

Now he has publicly apologized saying, "Is it right to call for assassination? "No, and I apologize for that statement. I spoke in frustration that we should accommodate the man who thinks the U.S. is out to kill him."

The second statement was a blatant lie, demonstrating to the world that this man is not what he portrays himself to be. That fact alone should be enough for the people in his organization to call for his resignation.

No one who claims to be a man of God should be allowed to continue to lead a Christian organization if he is caught in a blatant lie. Even one lie.

I don't watch his program, but let me tell you what my impression is of him based on the few times I have seen his program.

The first thing I noticed about him is that I can't seem to watch his program for more than 5 minutes before he starts talking about money. He appears to me to be fixated on that subject. I don't mean he is asking for contributions all the time. I mean the stories he covers seem to revolve around money issues a lot.

I don't want to get on the bandwagon with those that say televangelists are only in the business for the money. But I get the distinct impression that it's true of Rev. Robertson.

I have said before that I have the spiritual gift of discernment. When I meet someone that is a phony, my "spidey sense" kicks in. I get an overwhelming feeling that something isn't right about that person. I can't explain it. It's just the way I am.

I get that feeling about Robertson.

Once, I saw him on his program preaching a prayer. He closed his eyes tightly, gripped his Bible in what appeared to be a death grip, and said, "Somewhere, right now, there is someone who is being healed of chronic back pain..."

I thought, "How arrogant! How can this man sit there and make a definitive statement like that? he doesn't know anything of the kind!" This man has the audacity to claim he knows the mind of God. I don't buy that man's sanctimonious ramblings for a minute.

Remember when he ran for President a few years ago? Remember when he said God told him He wanted him to be President?

Is he President?

I don't know about Reverend Robertson's God, but when my God makes a prediction, it comes true.

Then I think about those thousands, maybe millions of people all over this country that listen faithfully to this guy, and send him money to help his ministry, to bring the Gospel to the world. I am not going to be so arrogant as to say his ministry doesn't do anything good. I don't know. Maybe he has helped and is helping many people. I know God sometimes uses even evil people to accomplish His purposes.

But Reverend Pat Robertson, in the opinion of your humble friend and uneducated blogger, is a phony.

Lie Of The Day (from Laura Ingraham's web site)
"Terrorists always come from countries we've occupied,"claimed Jodi Evans, founder of Code Pink, on the Laura Ingraham Show.

Hmmm...let's start with Mohammad Atta, who came from Saudi Arabia, a country we did not occupy. (Although Jodi's definition of "occupation" includes any country in which we have military I guess we occupy Germany as well).

Note: I have added word verification to the comments section. I personally hate word verification because sometimes i can't tell what the letters are that i'm supposed to re-type, and it's just one more hassle, but it will keep out blogspammers, and I hate them.

Wednesday, August 24, 2005

A Minor Miracle

Years ago, I worked for Beech Aircraft, in my hometown of Wichita, Kansas. The building in which I worked, was a Quonset building, one of several in a row, that used to be one of several hangars. There was a giant overhead door in each end of the building. Since we didn't have air conditioning, on warm days (and hot) we would open both doors and the breeze that wafted through was usually adequate to keep us fairly cool.

The department I worked in was known as department 14E, the "E" stood for "Engines". In addition to putting the engines of the aircraft together, the department was also responsible for testing hydraulic equipment.

My own position there consisted in the operation of two very large and temperamental radial drills. They drilled sideways, rather than up and down and the holes they drilled were as much as 16 feet long. These machines broke down often. Usually 3-4 times a night. They broke down so often, in fact, that the operator had to be trained to do the maintenance on them instead of calling the maintenance department. They just couldn't be bothered that often.

I worked 2nd shift, from 3:30 pm to 12:00 am.

My co-workers were all men. The only woman in the entire department was the supervisor's secretary. One can imagine what kind of language was heard constantly with no women to be careful around. This was back in the early 70's when men still respected ladies, to a point.

There were not many "religious" men working there. Or so it appeared.

One otherwise unremarkable evening, something very remarkable happened.

I remember I was screwing off, as usual. I was young and foolish and thought I was too good to work for a manufacturing company, although I had no education over that of high school.

I was going to be a millionaire as soon as I figured out what I was good at.

I was walking towards the north door, away from my post, and suddenly I became aware that the sky outside had turned a vivid pink in the twilight, as the sun had slipped behind a cloud.I believe I must have been the first in the department to notice this phenomenon. The other men were busy working, and talking amongst themselves as they worked. I could hear the cursing and laughter as they Joked with each other.

It was then that the remarkable thing happened.

I had stopped walking by this time. One by one the men in the building stopped working, and talking, and cursing, and laughing as they, too, became aware of the beauty spreading slowly across the sky. Every one of them, to a man, dropped their tools and slowly walked towards the open door. Then we all stood transfixed there in the opening. Wordlessly.

What a sight! 50 men standing in the opening of a former aircraft hangar gazing in rapt wonder of the beauty of a twilight sky.

It was breathtaking.

I don't know how long we all stood in silence, each man gazing in wonder at an entire world bathed in a vivid pink light. It seemed like an eternity, but it was only a few minutes, tops.

Somehow, I think each man there, atheist and agnostic, Christian and Jew, took advantage of the moment to contemplate the majesty of the universe.

I heard a voice softly say, "No one who sees this can say there is no God."

The voice was mine. It was me. Your humble friend and uneducated blogger. It seemed to come from somewhere else, as if someone else had said it. But it was me.

Nobody else said a word, as far as I know, we all stood there in silence and awe.

Soon after that, everyone returned to their work. And returned to talking and laughing, but the cursing had stopped, and the laughter was subdued, not loud and boisterous as before.

At that moment, I believe everyone in that building believed in God.

Tuesday, August 23, 2005

Reading Comprehension 101

Good morning, class. Today we're going to have a pop quiz on the material we covered yesterday. It isn't timed, so you can take all the time you want to think about your answers. And, no, it won't count as part of your final grade, but it may be on your finals. Answering all questions except the last one is required, but you may want to answer that one for extra credit.

1. Did you read yesterday's reading material entitled, "What if we Lost"?

What was the main topic?

2. Do you believe and/or understand that there is a difference between extreme fundamentalist Islamic terrorists (such as Usama bin Laden's al-Qaida network) and most other Muslims?


3. What is your understanding of Rush Limbaugh's role in yesterdays material?

4. Using only the information provided in yesterday's reading material, What is the author's opinion of Rush Limbaugh?

5. What do you think is the reason that the author mentioned Rush Limbaugh's name?

Extra Credit:

6. Re-read yesterday's reading material. Did you miss the point the first time you read it? If, yes, SLAP YOURSELF.

Lie Of The Day
Nebraska Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, after painting the most dire picture of the war in Iraq during a press conference over the weekend, claimed, "I'm not looking at Iraq based on any political analysis."

If Hagel weren't contemplating running for president, he would be meeting with President Bush and Secretary Rumsfeld to express his concerns--not airing them in the media.

Monday, August 22, 2005

What if We Lose?

Rush Limbaugh made this statement on his show the other day:

“The only way these people (Liberals) will be happy is if they're right -- and what would it take for them to be right? We'd have to lose."( the war on terror) Parenthesis mine.

That started me thinking.

What would become of the United States of America if we lost the war? Do the Liberals think we would be better off? If not, what would be their solution to the problem of stopping terrorism?

Let’s consider how America would change if Usama bin Laden dictated the laws in America.

1. First of all, Anyone that admits to being a Christian or a Jew would be beheaded. Usama takes literally the Qur’an when it commands that the crime of apostasy is punishable by execution. (Sura 6:151).

Also, he distorts the meaning of one of the Qur’an’s version of the 10 commandments (found in Sura 17:23-40) which commands, “You shall not kill anyone whom Allah has forbidden you to kill, except for just cause.”
Apparently, according to bin Laden, apostasy is “just cause”.

The second group that would be executed would be all those American citizens who supported the Terrorists in Iraq, including those who protested the war in the interests of peace. History has shown us that the first people to be executed once a dictatorial regime takes over a country are the ones who served as traitors or spies against that country. Usama would feel, rightly so, that if they would betray their own country, they would eventually betray him.

After all that, the only people left alive in America would be Muslims, and only certain Muslims, at that.

2. The constitution of the United States would be altered somewhat. Starting with the first amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The first thing he would need to do is remove that.. Islam will be the National religion and all citizens still alive and not imprisoned would be required to worship Allah, in accordance to Islamic law. (Usama, being a Wahhabist Muslim, does not support religious tolerance. Wahhabists make distinction between those whom they consider to uphold “true” Islam and “unrighteous” others, including Sufi’s, the Islamic mystics, Christians, and Jews.)

Freedom of speech would be outlawed. No one would be allowed to speak out against the new government. If they do, they will be imprisoned or executed.

The press would be silenced, since the only thing that the people will need to read is the Qur’an, except for the propaganda approved by the government. The people would be discouraged from assembling except to worship in the mosque of their choice.

3. “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Yes, throw that out, too. Only “approved” loyalists to Usama will be allowed to bear arms, to prevent any possible coup d’ etat.

4. “No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.”

Does anyone think that will stand in Usama’s world?

5. “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

No, I don’t think he would leave that in our constitution either. Do you?

6. In fact, throw out the rest of the amendments, too. All would deprive Usama of the pleasure of asserting his will.

7. No more adultery, gambling, cheating, eating pork, consuming alcohol, and banks would no longer be allowed to charge interest on loans. Actually, the no interest idea isn’t a bad rule.

Oh wait. We would not be allowed to collect interest on savings, either. Better rethink that one.

8. Feminist organizations such as NOW, NARAL, and all the others, will be gone. Women would be required to cover themselves head to toe, even the face, with only 2 slits in the veil, to facilitate sight. And they would not be permitted to voice their opinions either. (Actually, another possible benefit) Men would be allowed to have up to four wives, but women can only have one husband. Jewelry would be discouraged.

9. Abortion would be outlawed. So sorry, Planned Parenthood.

10. No women in politics, or in business.

11. Severe punishment for the most trivial of crimes, and crimes that we don't even consider to be crimes. Cutting off hands, feet, and cutting out tongues, and stoning to death.

These are just some of the changes that could be made to America if we were to lose the war on terrorism. There is probably many more, but on the interest in brevity, I will not attempt to list them. I hope what I’ve already listed makes the point.

Bottom line is this: We cannot afford to lose this war.

And yet, it would appear that losing is exactly what some Liberals want.

Ted, and Chuckie, and Nancy, and Dick, and Pat, and Barbara, and Maxine, and Cindy, and Michael, and the other left wing Liberals who are constantly calling for ending this war and withdrawing our troops before the job is finished should perhaps think about this possibility before the morale of our troops is irreparably damaged and the terrorist are further emboldened.

Their freedom to protest may be endangered.

Sunday, August 21, 2005

Thank You, Bloggers

Sometimes I don't remember why I started blogging. I go back to my first post and I read what I said then:

"The title of this site refers to the location my mind can usually be found. I am usually so far out in left field that I'm about 4 rows back in the bleacher seats. This being my first post, I will tell you that I will be commenting on things in the news that make me say, "What the....?" I believe I can be counted on for a different perspective on things other than those offered by the usual suspects, ie talk radio hosts and political pundits and bloggers. I offer only my opinions based on what I hear, with the caveat that what I hear may not necessarily be accurate."

I think that has come pretty close to true. So far. I never intended it to become a political blog, and that's why sometimes I write about non-political issues.

Some things I've noticed since, about blogging:

I have been encouraged by those who visit and offer uplifting comments. Even some who disagree instill in me a desire to continue to offer my opinions.

I have been insulted, too. But I've notice the ones that insult are generally the ones that have no fresh ideas of their own. No "perspective from out in left field" so to speak. Most of the time they are just angry and miserable people who seek to bring me and others down to their own miserable level.

I have said before that I feel a need for everyone to like me, so those jerks hurt my feelings anyway, but I am learning.

Soon their comments will roll off me like water off a ducks back. I suppose that I should thank them for hardening me, but is that really something to be aspired to?


I am being educated, too. I don't always write about things that I am particuarly knowledgeable. My new found blogger buddies are always right there to set me straight when I am mistaken. I get direction from all sides. Recently I noted that I was unaware of some very important things in U.S. History.
Lone Ranger enlightened me, and ER took me to task for my ignorance. Thanks guys. I needed that. Poison Pero teaches me things, too. I am becoming more educated as a result of blogging.

It's not only other bloggers that are educating me, but it is because of the fact that they hold me accountable that I now try, at least, to research what I write about.

Tug, and Daffy, and Mary, and Xena, and Lores,and Francis Lynn all give me input on things that interest me, and they encourage me.

Mike, as well as Pero, offers me a somewhat far right perspective. Rich Bachelor, although he disagrees much more often than he agrees (does he ever agree?), gives me left wing perspectives to consider. Others could make me consider their left wing viewpoints, possibly, if they were not so mean spirited and hateful.

They know who they are.

Middle of the roader MadMustard offers interesting commentary.

Wordsmith and Tech inspire me to continue my attempts to improve my skills.

All of these people, with their various opinions and commentary, together embody what the first amendment is all about. Free speech, thought, and expression.

God bless America!

Overall, I think blogging is quite possibly one of the most challenging and rewarding things I've ever done. I am richer for the experience.

I love it!

Saturday, August 20, 2005

Is God Fallible?

In a comment on my last post, my friend Francis Lynn says:

"The problem with quoting from the Bible is that if it is the literal Word of God, word for word, then His Word has survived hundreds of centuries of oral recitation before it was written down, the translation errors, the editing & the prejudices of those who decided what to put in the Bible & what to leave out. This would make sense if God directed that His Word survived through these processes. Still, the literalist concept brings about its own internal inconsistencies & contradictions in the Bible.

If the Bible is not the literal Word of God, then it is a recounting of what God said & did. It opens the door to interpretation by those who wrote it & those who read it now. For instance, "Adam" in the Aramaic language in which the text of the original scrolls were written, can be translated to mean Adam- a persons name, or Adam- meaning mankind or adam - red, reddish color. Most scholars today believe that the Bible is a guide to God & not the literal Word.

Did God really say, "Who is this that darkens..."? Or did someone put words in God's mouth, so to speak? It is a dicey proposition when quoting the Bible. I am not a literalist.

As an aside, Jesus spoke Aramaic. If you want to see the Lord's Prayer in Aramaic & hear it recited in Aramaic, as it would sound if Jesus spoke it, go here:"

This is what I have to say in reply:

So, you are not a literalist. Then perhaps you can tell us what parts of the Bible are not true and what parts are. And while you are explaining that, also explain who decided which of God's words are not accurate.

Do you really think that the God Who created the universe out of nothingness would allow His word to be inaccurate?

If you were to say, for instance, in John 11:35, Jesus did not weep but was really just very sad, then you could just as easily say Jesus didn't exist at all. If any part of the Bible is wrong then the entire work is suspect. And if it is suspect then you might as well consider it absolutely irrelevant. Every word.

Who besides God has the authority to decide what parts to believe? This idea that one can decide for oneself what parts of God's word is to be believed over another, is the same belief that inspires homosexuals to disbelieve or at least, ignore that part of God's word that says any man who lies with another man as he would with a woman is an abomination unto God.

Where does fantasy end and truth begin? And once again, who has the audacity to crown himself the arbitrator of that truth over God, Who is the creator of the Truth?

My God doesn't make mistakes. My God wouldn't create an abomination unto Himself. That just doesn't make sense.

God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, and omni-everything else. Does it not occur to you that a God who is all these things wouldn't allow His Word to be changed, perverted, or inconsistent? Throughout history men have tried to destroy, discredit, change, and discount as inaccurate God's Word, and have failed.

Why? Because God's Word is eternal.

Matt 5:18 states, "For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled."

(God's word is The Law)

The "Jot" is the Hebrew word "Yodh" which is the 10th letter of the Hebrew alphabet. It is also the smallest letter. It's European or English equivalent is the letter "Y" as in the English term Yahweh or in Hebrew YHVH since there were no vowel's used in the ancient script.

The word "jot" itself is an English transliteration of "iota" which is the 9th letter of the Greek alphabet. "Iota," in turn, is the nearest Greek equivalent for the Hebrew yodh.

The "tittle" is the small decorative spur or point on the upper edge of the yodh. If you can imagine a tiny letter with a slightly visible decorative mark.

Tittle is used by Greek grammarians of the accents and diacritical points. It means the little lines or projections by which the Hebrew letters differ from each other. One example would be the difference between the letter L and I. The difference is only one small mark. We use phrases like "the dotting of the i, and the crossing of the t," and "every iota."

It is interesting that the Jewish scribes who copied the MT (Massoretic Text) of the Hebrew Bible scrolls paid the greatest attention to the minutiae of detail and such marks attached to each consonant throughout the entire text. They even numbered every letter, word, sentence, paragraph, chapter, section, and scroll to insure that the total equaled that of the text being copied before allowing it to enter the holy synagogue.

The meaning of the passage is very clear. Not even the smallest letter or even its decorative spur will ever disappear from or be added to the "God Breathed" Word until all is fulfilled. In fact when heaven and earth are replaced by a new heaven and earth, the Word of the Lord will have accomplished its purpose and will be fulfilled in every detail even to the very letter.

More on this can be found here.

So, yes, His Word has survived hundreds of centuries of oral recitation before it was written down, the translation errors, the editing & the prejudices of those who decided what to put in the Bible & what to leave out. This does make sense because God did direct that His Word would survive through these processes.

Or is Matthew 5:18 wrong, too?

If the Bible cannot be counted on to be the inerrant Word of God, then we might as well just do as we please without fear of God's judgement, because without it there is no law.

Friday, August 19, 2005

Comments From E-mail

I received this in an e-mail yesterday. I don't know who the author is, but I don't have a lot of time to post a comment of my own today. I'm not sure I completely agree with the sentiment but it does give us something to think about:

To whom it may concern...or not...
We, the hard working people of the United States are done.
We have, for the most part, remained silent except for the occasional grumble at the gas pumps, at the dinner tables, at our places of employment, and places where we socialize. Well now...We are really done.
There will be no school this year because teachers cannot afford the gas to drive to work, and the parents are unable to drive their children to school anyway, and school buses cannot afford the fuel to pick up and deliver the children.
There will be no more food...Truckers nation wide will come to a stand still...They can no longer continue to haul freight when every penny of their pay check goes for fuel to keep them on the road.....
There will be no doctors or nurses at hospitals because they no longer can afford the commute.
We see billions of dollars being spent in foreign aid but where is our help...Visit a United States Emergency Room and count the dehydrated and emaciated babies that enter those portals for perhaps the last time...because they have no fluids or food to sustain them.
Go knock on a card board box to check on a homeless person living in filth beneath an overpass...
People who are working are working hard to try to pay their bills and feed their families and every penny will go for fuel.
King Fahd died and once again the prices at the pumps soared...Hello......Anyone out there listening?
We are now fighting a war of insanity in the United States. If the terrorists don't get us then surely poverty will take us down. The fat cats in their ivory towers just smirk and blame our president...and OPEC just shrugs and continues doing what they do best.
An outraged mom parks herself near Crawford, Texas to protest a war. My son would be so ashamed of me. How dare she protest the very reason for which he so willing gave his life...I guess so people like her and others could protest. What a tribute to her heroic son.
Our media spouts gloom and doom worldwide on an hourly basis but I don't hear or see any solutions out there.
But I do see them scrambling to be the first network to break any tragic story.
The democrats and republicans squabble and nit pick until I want to send them to time out. My two year old grandson exhibits more compassion and understanding as well as diplomacy.
How much more are we willing to take? I have often said that where Iraq is concerned we need a media black out and now I am saying we need a United States GAS OUT...
What would happen if next week every teacher, doctor, nurse, truck driver, store clerk, etc. would just call in and say "I can't come to work until the price of fuel goes down..I don't have any money."
There are already senior citizens that are going without food so they can buy their much needed medication...You think that is not so...well believe me this is true....
What is it going to take? If you have any suggestions please share them with the powers that be because I am done.
I am proud to be an American and I love my country, but I am sickened at the rapid rate of our decline.
We all watched in awe as millions of dollars blew out into space...for what....Won't do much good for all of those wonderful discoveries if our country is dead in the water...
My friends.....We are circling the drain...

I have now exercised my freedom of speech...

Perhaps we need divine guidance. Here is a prayer that was recited in the Kansas House of representatives, by a pastor, Joe Wright, from Wichita, who borrowed it from a pastor in Louisiana. It made the rounds of the e-mail circuit, too, but I remember when this happened. It made the news because some of the press and a lot of congressmen were so outraged. Judge for yourself if it is something to be outraged about.

"Heavenly Father, we come before you today to ask your forgiveness and to seek direction and guidance. We know your word says "Woe to those who call evil good", but that is exactly what we have done. We have lost our spiritual equilibrium and reversed our values. We confess that:
We have ridiculed the absolute truth of Your Word, and called it Pluralism;
We have worshipped other gods, and called it multiculturalism;
We have endorsed perversion, and called it alternative lifestyle;
We have exploited the poor, and called it the lottery;
We have rewarded laziness, and called it Welfare;
We have killed our unborn' and called it choice;
We have shot abortionists, and called it justifiable;
We have neglected to discipline our children, and called it building self esteem;
We have abused power, and called it politics;
We have coveted our neighbors possessions, and called it ambition;
We have polluted the air with profanity and pornography, and called it freedom of expression;
We have ridiculed the time-honored values of our forefathers, and called it enlightenment;
Search us, Oh God, and know our hearts today; cleanse us from every sin and set us free. Guide and bless these men and women who have been sent to direct us to the center of Your will to open ask it in the name of Your Son, the Living Savior Jesus Christ. Amen."

Have a blessed day.

Thursday, August 18, 2005

A Mothers Story

Let me tell you all a story. It is a true story. It is about my ex-wife and one very big reason why she's my ex-wife. It has a point so don't go away.

When I met my ex-wife she was already married to another man. She had one child, a cherubic red haired boy, 3 years old. Her husband was abusive. He would beat her physically and verbally assault her. After 7 years of this abuse, she left him and brought her son with her.

At this time the most important person in her life was her son. She loved him more than life. She would do, and did everything for him. Because she loved him so much, she allowed him to behave anyway he wanted to. In other words, she spoiled him.

There are some who would say this isn't really love, and I would tend to agree, but I don't know what else you could call it.

Her and I dated and after a time we were married. She insisted that I adopt her son. I didn't really want to, I felt that adoption wasn't really needed, but I acquiesced.
So then, he was my son, too. Later we had a son of our own. So now, she had 2 children to spoil and she did.

This was the reason we began to have problems. I believe in discipline. She didn't. The focus of our differences was her natural son, my adopted son. I guess she felt that since I wasn't his birth father, I had no right to discipline him, because when he disobeyed, I would attempt to mete out discipline, and she would defend him. In front of him. I was between a rock and a hard place. If I disciplined him she would fight me and cause discord. If I didn't, he would continue to act up and that would cause discord.

As is often the case with undisciplined kids, he became increasingly hard to control, and got involved with some very bad people. He got arrested the first time when he was 12, and spent a year in a juvenile detention center.

But my wife loved him, and we drove 100 miles every weekend to spend the day with him. When he got out he went right back to his friends and right back into trouble. This time, I told him that if he got put into jail again, I would not waste my time visiting him.

And I didn't.

After a couple of arrests more, he was placed into a group home for juvenile offenders. My wife visited him reguarly. One day he escaped custody. And she helped him. She helped him hide from the police for a year afterwards. I was not "allowed" to interfere at all, anymore. She believed that somehow, I was the reason for all the trouble he was in.

To make a long story a trifle shorter, we ended up divorcing, mainly for this reason.
What little discipline he still had left when I did. After I left, in a PCP induced rage, he attempted to rape and murder his mother.

He was 17 at this time.

That changed her attitude about him immediately. She had him arrested and, while he was still in jail, she moved away, leaving no forwarding address.

To this day he doesn't know where she is. And she doesn't want him to know. And she doesn't know where he is. And she no longer cares about him.

For some reason, she apparently no longer cares about her younger son either, although he is not, nor has he ever been a behavior problem. She sent him to live with me.

Now. The point I am making is this:

Sometimes a mothers love can become something else.

I am sick of hearing about Cindy Sheehan and her crusade in the name of her son. I believe she is either exploiting the death of her own son or allowing herself and his memory to be used to further an anti-Bush agenda.

I am sick of those who say that she is a grieving mother. I don't believe she is honoring the memory of her son. I wonder about her sincerity. I wonder if she really loved her son. Maybe, as in my ex-wife's case, she did once.

But remember, It has been proven that she has always been a vocal anti-war advocate. Perhaps the son that she once loved, alienated her from himself when he decided to join the armed service. Maybe, just maybe, she is so angry at the Bush administration that her anger carried over into hatred for her son and for what he believed and died for. Perhaps she is angry at her son for "joining" what she considered her enemies.

Perhaps she is an unwitting pawn in the extreme leftist groups agenda. But in my opinion, she is dishonoring her son and his memory. And I don't see that as an act of a loving mother. And, as i said, sometimes love gets replaced by other things.

In any case, I am sick of hearing about her and her crusade. And I believe most of America is too. We were all sympathetic to her at first. But now, I think most of the people want her and her group to just go away. The left wing arm of the media (not ALL media) who uses these stories to further their own agenda has done the usual stellar job of buiding a mountain from a molehill and, instead of creating more sympathy, it has created apathy.

I could be all wrong, of course, and if I am, I would be the first to apologize.

But I could be dead on.

UPDATE: I made this post before I listened to any talk shows on radio, as I have stated previously that I make it a point to do. After posting this, I had the chance to hear Dan Patrick's take on this subject, wherein he pointed out that Ms. Sheehan might not have always had her current opinion on the war and Bush. He says she was traumatized by her son's death and the sorrow has crept in and tramsformed her opinion. Which more or less agrees with my observation. Trauma undoubtably had a devastating impact on both her and my ex-wife, and very well could have changed them. However, Cindy Sheehan has said herself that she and her family was opposed to war before her son enlisted, so Dan may be mistaken. I don't know.

That said, although it is a valid reason for why they both may have changed their minds, the main point of my post remains the same. It matters not why they changed, only that they have chosen these methods to cope.

Wednesday, August 17, 2005

Is The Apocalypse Near?

As I write this post this morning, I am watching the forcible eviction of one family from their home in the Gaza strip.
The family has been living there for 32 years. It is a tragic sight. They are crying and rending their garments in the traditional demonstration of anguish, and the children are reading aloud from the Torah.

The mother of this family has just stated that this is exactly the way the Jews were forcibly removed from their homes by the Nazis. They have all repeatedly asserted that there is a religious reason for being here. They point to a photo on the wall, a photo of their oldest son, who they say was murdered by the Palestinians in terror attacks upon their village.

And now, the image of an Israeli Soldier sitting on the ground between two walls, crying. Clearly the Israeli Army is sympathetic to their people, but they have a job to do, however unpleasant. That should send a message to anti-war protestors here in the States. Soldiers do what they are commanded to do. It is their job.

The Israeli government seemingly is comfortable with depriving the Jews of their birthright, that is, the God given right to their land. This is the Jews "Promised Land", a land that they have fought for thousands of years to claim. And now, it is being ripped from them.


All this was foretold thousands of years ago in the Old Testament. Israel will be driven out of their land, and will return, and it has been thus for centuries, just as the Prophets said.

"I believed that God would not let this happen, but this is not true," a woman said in the isolated settlement of Morag while clutching her baby.

This eviction, in my opinion, is a travesty, an outrage. I realize that I may be blowing this incident out of proportion, but in any case, I believe this does not bode well for the future of Israel and the world. This may signify the beginning of the end. What the Israeli government and the Palestinian Government have done, in concert, in the name of peace, is a direct violation of God's commandment to His chosen people, according to these people I am watching right now.

I have not been able to find words To express the emotion I am feeling right now. I feel that I am watching the beginning of the apocalypse. But one of the callers on the Laura Ingraham show this morning summarized my feelings very nicely. He said, "I've read my Bible, and I know how it ends."

This will not bring peace.

UPDATE: One of the commentators, Mike, in my comments section has a very good blog of his own. Go visit it here. I already blogrolled it.

Tuesday, August 16, 2005

Where is Dean Martin When We Need Him?

The other night I watched the celebrity roast of Pamela Anderson on the cable channel, Comedy Central. Or I should say, I watched part of it.

I thought it would be funny.

It wasn't.

I thought I would see something like the famous celebrity roasts of Dean Martin. His shows were delightful and funny. To this day I can remember some of Red Button's hilarious "never got a dinner" lines. I thought I would see some comedians and other celebrities stand up and playfully tease Ms. Anderson, and then Pamela would get her turn to tease them back.

Just like Dean's famous guests.

What I saw instead, was the most obscene, filthy exhibition of depravity I have ever seen on television. I have seen pornography that was less offensive.

Don't get me wrong. It's not like I'm not used to seeing such perversion. I used to be married to a stripper. I am a recovering porn addict. Not very much shocks me.

But this show did. Don't take my word for it. Comedy Central, as is their way, will no doubt air it again and again and again, ad nauseum, so you will get a chance to see for yourself. But I will offer you this caveat:

If obscenity and perversion offends you, don't watch it. Consider yourself warned.

Let me see if I can recall enough to give you an idea what I am talking about.

There were continual references to the infamous sex video of Pamela Anderson and Tommy Lee that was supposedly "accidentally" released to the public via internet. There were what seemed to be hundreds of references to the size of both Tommy Lee's and Pamela's genitalia. There were references to Pamela's Breast implants. There were nude pictures of Pamela Anderson broadcast, although they were mercifully blurred in strategic places by the otherwise non-existent censor. Oh God, I don't remember what all else went on there, mercifully. I turned the channel before I had seen all of it.

The other guests weren't spared the depraved barbs from the various comedians, either. Courtney Love, the widow of Kurt Colbain, was attacked mercilessly by the comedians about her addictions to drugs, alcohol, and sex. One comedian actually made reference to the current state of her dead husband. Absolutely appalling, in my opinion. I don't have any respect or love for Courtney love, mind you, but that disrespect went way too far over the line. Even for her.

Later, she responded to another insult about her "sluttiness" by leaning back in her chair and spreading her legs wide in front of the national audience. It was also blurred, so apparently she wasn't wearing anything under her skirt. Thank God the network censor managed to catch that one, too.

By the way, Courtney groggily announced she had been "clean and sober" for an entire year. Apparently, she fell off the wagon just for that night. Or so it appeared.

I don't know. Maybe your humble friend and uneducated blogger is becoming an old fuddy-duddy in his old age, but I kind of think just about anyone would have been offended by this disgraceful event.

Where, O where is Dean Martin when you need him?

Alas, Dino is dead, but surely turning over in his grave.

Gas Prices

I drive for a living. And I pay my own expenses. I drive about 325 miles a day. So I am more concerned than most about the price of gasoline.

Yesterday for instance, I filled my tank and the price per gallon was at $2.49. This was about 10:00 AM. Later the same day, at approximately 3:00 PM, I topped off my tank at the same gas station and the price had gone up to $2.59 a gallon. The price went up 10 cents a gallon in less than 5 hours!

There is a reason that gasoline prices are going up so rapidly. The reason given by the so-called "experts" is that the price of crude oil has gone up drastically.

Crude oil is attained by drilling deep into the Earth. From there, the oil is pumped to the surface where a pipeline pipes the crude oil to the refinery. There it is refined and transformed into gasoline.

Gasoline is not the only product made from crude oil. Here is another product that is made from crude oil:This is motor oil. At present motor oil is priced at approximately $1.08 for a quart. It has been about that price for several years.

Here is another product made from crude oil:This is transmission fluid. It currently sells for about $5.94 a gallon. Here is an interesting fact about transmission fluid. A few years ago, the price of transmission fluid was around the $8-9.00 mark. And the "experts" were blaming the high prices on the cost of crude oil.

Isn't that interesting?

There are many other products that are made from oil products and/or by-products. Did you know plastic is made from by-products of crude oil? All plastic. Everything you own that is made wholly or partially out of plastic was created from crude oil.

Now. I told you all that to make a point. The point is this:

The only product made from crude oil at this time, that the price has gone up on so drastically, is gasoline. The other products are basically the same price as they have been for the last several years. Give or take a few pennies.

That, to me, is a mystery. If the cost of crude oil is the reason for skyrocketing gasoline prices, then why aren't the other oil products and by-products prices going up accordingly? Could there be some other reason?

I think there could be.

I confess that I have no answer to that question. I don't even have a theory. I have no idea why there appears to be a paradox here.

There are those who would say that President Bush led our country into war in Iraq to steal oil from them. And somehow that drives the prices up.

I don't buy that.

The President is literally surrounded at all times by secret servicemen, advisors, cabinet members, Senators, Congressmen, and others. Given that he is in contact with so many people at all times, it is completely inconceivable, if not impossible, that he would be involved in an insidious plot of that magnitude. If any one of those people had aspirations for greatness, he couldn't ask for a better opportunity to blow the proverbial whistle. Does anyone think any of Bush's people are unambitious? I don't. In fact, they are probably among the most ambitious people in America.

No, I don't think Bush is in the war for oil. That would surely make him the most evil man in history and I just don't see that in him. I think those that do just aren't reasoning things out properly.

So, there has to be another reason why the gas prices are out of control. I just don't know what it is.

Monday, August 15, 2005

Israelis Evicted from Gaza

NEVE DEKALIM, Gaza Strip (Aug. 15) - Tearful Jewish settlers locked gates at their communities, formed human chains and burned tires to block troops from delivering eviction notices Monday as Israel began to pull out from the Gaza Strip after 38 years of occupation. Read more here.

A pastor I knew once traveled to Israel a few years ago. He came back with the startling revelation (at least, it was to me) that Israel was not predominantly Jewish anymore. Instead, he said, they are mostly atheists. Apparently, it would appear from the previous news report, that the inhabitants of Gaza must be predominantly Jewish, because they cling to the idea that the land in which they are now living is still the "Promised Land".

In the Bible we are told that the Israelites were led, by God, via Moses, into Canaan, the location which is present day Israel. Over the centuries, the Jews have been scattered over the Earth by those who would seek to destroy and decimate them.

If you simply read through, without even studying, the Old Testament, it becomes clear that the Jews must indeed be the chosen People. Of all the ancient peoples and civilizations that have been destroyed and displaced over the centuries, the ones remaining to this day are the Jews. Why?

Because the Jews are God's chosen people. Time and time again, the Jews have abandoned God and time after time, God has welcomed them back and forgiven them their transgressions.

They are the only people to whom God has promised protection and they are the only people that have continued to snub their collective noses at God, but God has continued to keep His promise to them regardless.

Now, the Jews are once again suffering the consequences of turning their backs on the One that protects them. They are losing the land that God has promised them.

Some might ask, "What's the big deal? If they have to move, move, and get it over with."

Some might say that.

I might say that, myself, if I did not know something of their history. As for myself, I once moved all the way from Kansas City, KS. to this small village in Western Maryland for something as unimportant as a woman, (thereby raising the aggregate IQ of both states) so, I am not one to judge.

But the Jews know that this is their land, and whatever happens to them in the next millennia or so, they will get it back.

The point is this: Gaza belongs to the Jews. It has belonged to them since Joshua fought the battle of Jericho. God gave it to them. Sure, Palestine and Egypt and others have laid claim to the land before, and still claim it to be theirs, but nevertheless, the land belongs to the Jews. It always will, and no matter what the Palestinians or the Egyptians or anyone else says, Gaza is Israel's.

So, Palestine has it now, but this battle is far from over. The time will come, as it invariably and inevitably does, that Israel will return to God and he will once again forgive them and bless them, and once again, Gaza will be theirs.

But not without a lot more bloodshed on both sides.

UPDATE: I discovered a pretty good blog today, check it out here.

Sunday, August 14, 2005

Actual Random Thoughts

The columbarium at left at Arlington National Cemetery contains the ashes of Russell Wayne Wagner. Wagner’s vault is in the top row

Questioning how the remains of a "cold-blooded murderer" were accepted at a national military cemetery, U.S. Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski, D-Md., on Thursday asked members of a Senate committee to investigate.
"Our national cemeteries are places of national honor for those who have served their country and fellow citizens," Mikulski wrote in a letter to Sen. Larry E. Craig, R-Idaho, and Sen. Daniel K. Akaka, D-Hawaii, both of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. "Convicted murderers should not be allowed in the hallowed grounds of our national cemeteries."
Mikulski was referring to Russell Wayne Wagner, 52, who was convicted of murdering Daniel Davis, 84, and Wilda Davis, 80, of Hagerstown, MD in 1994. Wagner was sentenced to consecutive life terms in 2002.
He died in prison in February. The cause of death was listed as heroin intoxication.
Wagner served in the U.S. Army from 1969 to 1972 and was honorably discharged. At his sister's request, Wagner's ashes were placed in an urn at Arlington National Cemetery last month with standard military honors.

Mikulski wrote that she was "shocked" to learn that a 1997 law passed to keep convicted murderers such as Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh from being buried at national cemeteries did not apply to Wagner because his sentence allowed him to apply for parole.

He should not have been allowed to be buried at Arlington, in my opinion. I see it this way: He murdered 2 people. Thus he sacrificed his rights as an American citizen. If he was no longer allowed rights as an American citizen, the same loss of rights should be extended to his military service as well. Arlington is a place where The United States honors the American service men and women for their service to their country. We don’t honor the memory of murderers. And we shouldn’t.

This is a photo of Rudolph Hess, taken on the grounds of Spandau Prison, shortly before his death.

In other news, An “official” close to the proceedings said, on Thursday, that Saddam Hussein could be executed after the first trial if he is convicted and sentenced to death for his alleged role in a Shiite massacre, even though he faces other charges as well. An estimated 150 Shiites were massacred in 1982 in Dujail, north of Bhagdad. His trial is scheduled to begin in the fall.

Iraqi authorities are building about a dozen other cases against Saddam that they intend to try separately, but the official said authorities could “theoretically” carry out the death sentence without waiting for the other trials to begin.

Personally, I think it would be a mistake for Saddam to be executed. I also think it would be a mistake to kill Osama Bin Laden. Why? Because killing them would make martyrs of them and would only serve to embolden the terrorists.

I think I have a better solution. Place them both in a prison by themselves as the allies did to 7 Nazi war criminals convicted in the famous trial at Nuremberg after World War II. In 1947, 7 men were locked away in Spandau prison in Berlin, Germany.
Spandau Prison was built as a 19th Century penitentiary. The buildings are of a pseudo-medieval, red-brick fortress. It was built in 1876 to hold 500 prisoners as a military detention center. after World War II it held the seven Nazi leaders sentenced from Nuremberg. But, since 1966, its only prisoner was Rudolph Hess (1894 - 1987) until his death on 17 August 1987.

A Military guard was provided by the four occupying powers, The U.S.A., Britain, France and the Soviet Union. The Military guards were supplemented by eighteen warders. The Military guard was provided by a platoon strength who manned the six watch towers. Strict orders were given to the guards regarding fraternization with Hess, and all sentries were searched prior to taking up their post to prohibit the use of cigarettes. Most of those who carried out this duty remember a very old man walking around the garden on a path he had trodden himself.

This is what should be done with Osama and Saddam, in my opinion. Never let them out, and never allow them any contact with the outside world.
None. They can’t be martyrs if they are still alive but there is no way they can do any more harm if they have no contact with anyone.


The guy that invented this evil concoction called the "Double Chocolate" bar. It is creamy milk chocolate on the outside and creamy dark chocolate, almost chocolate syrup, on the inside. It is so delicious that it will no doubt end up killing me. Some one stop this evil, please!

Saturday, August 13, 2005

Hey, Children, What's That Sound?

On Keith Olbermann's "Countdown", Mr. Olbermann interviewed the mother of Army Specialist Casey Sheehan, who died at Sadr City, Iraq, in April 2004. She held a news conference of her own, joined by other families. Cindy Sheehan pledged to stay camped outside that ranch for the duration of the president's August vacation, adding that if he does not talk with her there, she may to go Washington in September. She says she wants to ask him why he killed her son.

(rustle, rustle, plop)

Wait. Listen. Did you hear that? What was that sound?

KEITH OLBERMANN: And while the President did not talk with her directly today, he did finally address her presence and her purpose...(to Ms. Sheehan) You heard what the President said today at his news conference. What's your response to that?

CINDY SHEEHAN, GOLD STAR MOTHER: I don't want the President's sympathy. You know, I want to talk to him, and I want answers to my questions. And I want him to tell me the noble cause that my son died for. And I want him to stop using my son's name and the name of the other lost loved ones and Gold Star Families for Peace. We want him to stop using our children's name to justify the continued killing.

(rustle, thump, rustle, plop, rustle)

There it goes again, Do you hear it now? Sounds like it's getting louder. Hear it?

OLBERMANN: As I mentioned earlier, as is well known here, you spoke with Mr. Bush last year, and your comments to your local newspaper in California about that meeting have made the rounds anew on the Internet this week, how you had said that you had felt he was sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqis, that he had felt obviously some pain for your loss.
Two questions about those quotes, first being, your critics say they suggest that you have changed your stance on the war, on Mr. Bush, in the interim. Is that true, or is it false?

SHEEHAN: No, it's false. If they had read the whole article, or talked about the whole article, it would have shown that I was already having serious misgivings about the mission that keeps on changing all the time.
And the other day, I wonder if they blogged about this. My hometown newspaper said Cindy Sheehan has not changed her position. It's just become clarified and it's become more focused, and her mission has become more important to her.

(plop, thump, plop, rustle, plop, thump)

What is that sound? It is getting louder.

OLBERMANN: Second question about the meeting in June of last year. What could you say to President Bush now that you could not have said to him then? Or why didn't you say then what you want to say now?

SHEEHAN: Good question. June of 2004 is a lot different than August of 2005. For one thing, in June of 2004, I had buried my son nine weeks before the meeting. I was a woman in a deep state of shock, in a deep state of grief. And you know what? I am still in a deep state of grief. And thanks to George Bush, I will be in a deep state of grief for the rest of my life.But I'm not in shock anymore. The Duelfer weapons of mass destruction report came out, the 9/11 commission report came out, the Downing Street memos came out, the Senate Intelligence Committee report came out. These have all come out since my son was killed. They show categorically that my son, his murder was premeditated, that there was no reason to invade Iraq.

And that's what I want the answers to today, in August of 2005.

(Thump, plop, thump, plop, thump, plop)

Sounds like the plops and thumps are getting closer together now. And louder. What is that sound?

OLBERMANN: Another part of this story that has developed in terms of the criticism and this political flashpoint that has developed around you, that seems so reminiscent of a lot of protests. I kept thinking about your camp there, and it sort of being a parallel world to that, the whole Terri Schiavo protest situation that just became a Mideast phenomenon.
There is an e-mail that purports to be from members of your family that denounces your presence there in Crawford. It was sent to a right-wing Web site. Is there any truth in it? Are there members of your family who are upset with what you're doing there?

SHEEHAN: There's members of my...they're my in-laws. And we have always been politically on the opposite sides of the fence. And we always kind of did it good-naturedly. You know, my father-in-law would call me Meathead and I would call him Archie, and we would just fight about politics all the time

(plop, thump, whirrrrrrr)

Wow, the plops and thumps have melded into one endless whirr now. WHAT IS THAT SOUND?

But you know what? When they supported George Bush in November, and when they voted for the man who I consider killed their grandson, that's when--that was it. That, to me, was a betrayal of Casey, and it hurt me so deeply. I haven't spoken to them since.
And our family, Casey's dad and my other three children, are 100 percent behind me and agree with me philosophically about what's going on. I just talked to my husband, and he said, he said, Cindy, you know I've always supported you philosophically. I know George Bush did the wrong thing, and I had nothing to do with what my sister wrote


Really loud now. It shakes the ground. WHAT IS THAT SOUND? WHERE IS IT COMING FROM?

OLBERMANN: The nature of the media coverage you're getting now, the response from other families of soldiers killed in Iraq, all of that, from the perspective of your protest there, in a way, isn't it really better if President Bush doesn't meet with you?

SHEEHAN: I would think so, yes. I think it's great. And if he would come out right now, it would really defuse the momentum, and I don't want to give them any hints. And I think that's something they've probably already thought about.
But, you know, but we're here. We're committed. We're staying the whole month of August, and then we're moving to Washington, D.C. And we're going to have a 24-hour vigil on his front lawn to keep the pressure on. The pressure is there. Sixty-two percent of Americans want our troops home. And this is giving them a voice to stand up and be counted and say, You know, we want our country back, and we want our troops home.


The sound is very loud now. It reverberates up from the ground, and surrounds us. It echoes up the hills and mountains, and sweeps through the valleys.

I know what it is! I've discovered the source of the sound! It is here, below our feet!

It is the sound of Casey Sheehan, virtually spinning in his grave.


Seriously, when I first heard of this poor mother, who lost her beloved son in Iraq, my heart went out to her. I sympathized.

But now I have a different opinion. I think this is a matter of a woman taking advantage of her 15 minutes of fame, and exploiting it for all it's worth. I don't doubt that she has suffered pain from the loss of her son. But I think she's over that now. At least, as over it as she will ever be.

There are people who will exploit every opportunity to get attention. (My ex-wife is one of them.) Ms. Sheehan mourns her son's death, I am sure. But I think her son's death is secondary, now, to her craving for the spotlight.

Read what she said. She tipped her hand: "...if he would come out right now, it would really defuse the momentum, and I don't want to give them any hints. And I think that's something they've probably already thought about."

She doesn't really want to talk to the President! She just wants attention. She reminds me somewhat of Roseanne Barr.


Everytime Roseannes popularity waned a little, she would insinuate her name into the headlines again, either announcing she once had lesbian relations or announcing she once tried prostitution. After a while, people got tired of hearing even that sensationalism. Where is Roseanne now?

Cindy Sheehan will eventually lose her audience. And then she will show up in the news again, over some other issue. She might have been a good mother. I don't know. But she is a bad survivor. I feel sorry for her. But not because she lost her son.

Because she has lost her integrity.

Here is a must read for anyone who supports Cindy Sheehan and for Ms Sheehan herself.

Lie Of The Day
"She's not a candidate, and I don't know that she will be," claimed Bill Clinton, on Hillary's prospects for '08.


Willy, please. We know you're itching to be "First Man." You actually expect us to believe that the two of you haven't already mapped out the whole campaign?

Friday, August 12, 2005

The Arts

I have an affection for the arts. Music, Art, Literature. All kinds. I wanted to major in fine arts when I was in college, but I never finished. Most everyone in my family is artistic in some way.

My oldest brother, while he is in the ministry, is an excellent writer.

My next oldest brother is an accomplished musician and singer. He teaches music at Eastern University in Pennsylvania. He is a musical genius. Hand him a musical instrument, any instrument, and in five minutes he will be playing it as if he's been studying it all his life. I've seen him do that. It's incredible.

One of my 2 sisters is a singer, too. She used to be a music teacher in Kansas but not anymore. A few years ago she had a stroke and hasn't taught since. She has sung Opera with the great Sam Ramey, now with the Metropolitan Opera in New York City. I was there, I saw her. Not at the Met. Sorry. When they were both in college at Wichita State University.

All three of those siblings graduated with honors from their respective colleges.

My brother just 2 years older than me is an artist. He graduated with a degree in graphic arts. He works for Boeing Military Aircraft division now, in the CGI department.

My point is this: I have a special fondness for the arts. Let me tell you what I like and what I don't like.

I like classic country music and classic rock and roll. I also like folk music and bluegrass. Lately, since I have discovered my Scottish roots, I have also discovered Scottish and Irish folk music. Call it Celtic. I love it. I like classical music, too. I also like pop music, like Sinatra and Dino, etc. I like some modern rock, even punk rock. Like I say, just about all kinds.

I don't like Rap. That isn't music, in my opinion. I also don't like Opera or modern jazz. Or ballet. Too boring for me, or maybe, too sophisticated. But then again, I think the only people who like those kinds of music are pretentious elitists. And if the pretentious elitists were honest, they would probably say they don't like them either.

Those are the kind of people that have a lot of letters behind their name and wear the letters as a badge to display for all the world to see and envy.I don't wnat to imply that everyone that has letters after their name are pretentious elitists. Of course they are not all that way. My brothers and sister are not pretentious elitists. Neither are a lot of others, but the ones that are, well, all I can say is, "If the shoe fits..."

Jazz is too discordant. It assaults the ears like garbagemen banging trash cans in the early hours of the morning when you're trying to get some sleep.

I tool a guitar course in college, and my teacher was a world renown Jazz guitarist named Jerry Hahn, He wrote a monthly column in "Guitar Player" magazine on jazz guitar. He couldn't sing a lick. Us class members used to tell him we couldn't get the tune right on songs we were working on just to get him to try to sing. It was funny. He couldn't sing a lick.

Not a lick

Opera? Who wants to hear music sung in a foreign language? If I can't understand it, I'm not interested. Ballet is just boring.

But I, like the pretentious elitists, do enjoy classical music, like Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, Hayden, Brahams, etc. Not because it's "classy" to like it, but because I appreciate the intricacies of the parts coming together in such perfect harmony, and the talent it took the great composers to put 126 different parts together in one hour long composition. Incredible. I think I got that appreciation from my brother and sister.

I got my appreciation for Country music from my dad. He wasn't who my siblings got their talent from. He was just a simple country preacher. We used to tease him about his love for country music. He once explained what kind of music he liked best and why. This is what he said:

"I like songs that tell a story."

Me too. My dad's 2 favorite songs were, "Long Black Veil" and Six Times a Day". I like them too.

"Six Times a Day"

Six times a day, the train came down from Frankfort.
Six years she waited, never missed a train.
Six times a day the people saw her waiting.
He never came, she never missed a train....

Great, huh?

I like art, too. I had some art talent, but according to my preacher dad, I lost the talent because I didn't use it for God's glory. I agree.

I don't care for modern art like Jackson Pollack or Jim Dine or Pablo Picasso. You could hand a chimpanzee a brush and some paint and get as good a painting. You want to see art that takes real talent? Look here: Those are not photos, they are paintings. Incredible, aren't they? The style is called Photo-realism. I fell in love with this kind of art when I went an exhibition of Photo-realism long ago. One painting was 10 feet high and 8 feet across. It was a black and white painting of the face of a freckled boy. Just the face. And you had to get within 1 foot of it to tell it was a painting. As I said, Incredible.

I like literature also. Mostly I like fiction. But when I read non-fiction it is usually a Biography or History, especially old west history, my favorite subject in that are the gunslingers. My favorite author is Kurt Vonnegut Jr. You may see his influence in my writing style. You may not. I don't know, but I like him and I don't care if he is a liberal.

I have read a lot of books that the pretentious elitist say they like. I read Catcher in the Rye, for instance. It was just OK, as far as I'm concerned. I've read Updike, and Sinclair, and Steinbeck, and Hemingway, and Langston Hughes, the author that is so popular with the pretentious elitists lately. I am not impressed, regardless.

Kurt Vonnegut says there are only two themes in all of his books. One is, "Cleaning shit off of practically everything" and the other is, "No Pain." I happen to think that's brilliant. But that's just me.

Anyway, these are some of the things in the arts that I like and some that I don't like. And now, I've wasted enough of your time, and mine, pretending that anyone besides myself is really interested in what I like.

Thursday, August 11, 2005

Child or Choice?

This is an ultrasound 3-D image of my grandson, A.J. Isn't technology wonderful? They do the ultrasound and then they use a computer program to enhance and colorize it, making a virtual 3 dimensional image out of it. My daughter was less than 6 months pregnant when this was done. I don't recall exactly how far along she was.

There are some who would say this isn't a baby. Not a child. There are those who would argue that this is merely a mass of lifeless tissue.

Remarkable, isn't it?

It is indeed remarkable that after all we now know about the development of the human fetus, that there would still be some who claim to believe life doesn't begin until the baby breathes air. Or until his face meets the light of day. Even now, after scientists have conceded that life begins at conception, there are still those who say this child is not a living, viable human being.

I believe those people are so committed to the "culture of death", that they refuse to believe evidence that stares them in the face. These people are to be both feared and pitied.

Here is another picture of the same "mass of tissue" some time later:

Let me tell you of another child. Another grandson of mine. My son's wife was 6 months pregnant when complications arose. She gave birth to a 1 lb. 7 oz. baby boy. It was a breech birth.

He lived one day.

One day was certainly not enough time for a mother and child to "bond", was it? I wouldn't have thought so.

I attended the funeral. To those who claim that a child 6 months along in gestation is not a viable living human being, that it has no more right to life than say, a lump of clay, I have only this to say: If you could have seen for yourself the pain and the grief experienced by my daughter-in-law, and still say her child was only a zygote, an amoeba, a mass of lifeless tissue, you have no heart. I wish you could trade places with that baby.

I truly do.

And if you stood in front of me, physically, and said something like that to my face, I would cheerfully separate your teeth from your mouth.

An extremist group called NARAL has recently released an advertisement claiming Judge John Roberts supports the bombing of "women's health clinics", better and more accurately known as Abortion Mills.

The ad is completely false.

And this shows the extremes that those who endorse the culture of death will go to further their Godless agenda. They, and those like them, also think it's acceptable to take the lives of the old and infirmed. If left unchecked, they will most assuredly take us to the point where anyone who has outlived their usefulness can be exterminated. They appear to be in the process of creating a society where only the strong survive. It's the survival of the fittest in action.

You see how this fits right in with Darwin's theory of natural selection?

And yet, they accuse President Bush of murder. They pretend to object to the killing of soldiers in the heat of battle. That, they say, is obscene. And wrong. They object to the execution of those who wouldn't think twice about killing their loved ones for the fun of it. Or for money. Which, paradoxically, is the same thing they claim Bush is killing for. Why is it wrong for Bush to allow soldiers to die fighting for our freedom and to save the lives of innocents all over the world, but it's ok to kill innocent babies and brain damaged young ladies by the cruel and inhuman method of starvation and dehydration?

What's wrong with this picture?

Kill babies if you don't want the responsibility of raising a child. Kill grandma when she outlives her usefulness to society.

Who's next?

Maybe YOU.

Don't come onto my blog and make mean spirited hateful statements claiming you have some insight into the mind of God or denying the existence of God. THe process of gestation in a human being could not happen by accident. So, don't even go there. I take this subject very seriously.

UPDATE: After I posted this, my daughter called me and told me that ultrasound was actually done when she was about 8 months pregnant. So, I stand corrected.

Incidently, my daughter once told me she hated kids, that she would never have any, and that if she ever did accidently get pregnant, she would have an abortion. But she did accidently get pregnant, and she didn't have an abortion, and she loves her child.

I asked her this morning how she feels about abortion now. Not surpringly, she is against it.

Children have a way of changing minds.