Monday, October 26, 2009

More Evidence Journalism Is Dead

"A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~ Mark Twain

This story is the stupidest attack on a Conservative I've heard yet.

I don't believe the anonymous author of this article actually listened to the comments Rush made about this story.

Because he got it all wrong.

Listen for yourselves:

Not once did Rush say he believed the story. He did, however, mention the story has no sourcing data.

He did say, "[W]e have to hold out the possibility that this is not accurate".

He also said, "I have had this happen to me recently. I've had quotes attributed to me that were made up. And when it was pointed out to the media that these quotes were made up, they said, 'It doesn't matter. We know Limbaugh thinks it anyway.'"

(Obviously referring to the recent lies spread all over the internet and the broadcast media about certain made up statements falsely attributed to him)

And then, he mocked Dan Rather, by paraphrasing, almost word for word, the statement Dan Rather made when it was revealed he had reported a story based on forged documents, ie, "I don't care that these quotes are made up. I know Obama thinks it".

I don't know what the author of this blatantly leftist attack on Limbaugh was smoking, but I would have paid almost anything for a hit of it back in the 70's.

And, I don't blame the author for not supplying a byline. I'd be embarrassed, too.

One would have to do some amazing mental gymnastics to reach the conclusion Rush bought the story. In fact, it would seem the only person who actually bought it was Michael Leeden, the "obscure blogger" who first reported it, apparently thinking it was true.

In fact, Leeden admitted, according to the article, he thought it was true. "I failed to notice that one of the tags was 'satire,'" he wrote.

Well, I'm sure Mr. Leeden recognizes satire once he becomes aware of it, but the anonymous AP reporter apparently doesn't.

Saturday, October 24, 2009

Thursday, October 22, 2009

What's In My Head

The song.

Not the film.

Friday, October 16, 2009

I Still Don't Understand

"But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea...Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven... Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish." Matthew 18:6, 10, and 14

In my previous post, I stated I don't understand how Christians can support politicians who support abortion. I made my case.

Not only did I post it here on my blog, I also posted it as a Facebook note on my Facebook page. It was there that I received a response from the Liberal Christian point of view.

I said it was a response. It was not a convincing explanation of why some Christians embrace the "right to choose" ideology.

My Doctor Professor nephew Kevin (Liberal) attempted to enlighten me, but in my opinion, fell woefully short, which is somewhat surprising, since he is a college professor with a doctorate and everything. I would think he could have been much more convincing. Perhaps he doesn't believe his explanation himself. In the interest of brevity, I will spare both of my readers the entire exhaustive response he wrote.

I would like, however, to paste an excerpt or two from his diatribe so that my two readers will better understand my response to him which I have inserted in their entirety below.

My Doctor nephew Kevin said this first:

When I saw the title "What I Don't Understand," I knew that this would have to be a long Facebook note!

Bwah ha ha ha ha!

Just kidding. I know, this is a serious issue, but I just had to throw in a little (probably inappropriate) levity.

OK, that was funny, I admit. But then he went all Liberal on me, writing, among other things,

I do find myself wishing that anti-abortion conservatives would put as much energy into fighting other violations of the sanctity of life as they do into fighting for the criminalization of abortion... all they seem interested in is making sure that all these aborted fetuses get born, but when it comes to supporting them with things like healthcare, childcare, early childhood education, safe and affordable housing, job training and creation for the child's parents, public education, after-school programs, financial aid for poor teens seeking college education, etc., these conservative voices suddenly sing a very anti-life tune. I won't even get into how fiercely these so-called "pro-life" advocates support things like war, the death penalty, and all manner of practices that destroy the environment and threaten all of God's Creation.

That's just a teeny snippet of the response I received. I can't paste the entire conversation here. This post is already much too long. But, another relative of mine, my niece Lori, daughter of a different sibling, wrote, among other things, the following:

"First of all I'd like to say, Sorry Mom, but here is how I feel". (She is my sister's daughter, which makes me proud to know, at least my sister is against abortion)

Anyway, she also defended abortion but without presenting a convincing or logical argument. However, she can be excused for her inability to articulate her thoughts coherently. My nephew can't. He is a genius. Really.

She went on to write, "I do want to ask you to stop indicating that I am not a Christian just because I don't agree with you or because I voted for Obama."

Both Niece and Nephew mentioned an opposition to the death penalty, saying, in so many words, they believe execution to be inhumane.

Although my first response to Kevin's comments are (if I may say so myself) quite logical and well thought out, and should have been convincing, I will not post it here. This is my second response to their first responses:

(First statement responding to Niece Lori's assertion that I accused her of not being a Christian)"It is not my place to say whether anyone is a Christian or not, and I didn't. I said I don't understand how one can call himself a Christian and support the mass murder of innocent babies. I then said I know there are Christians that do. And, I am absolutely convinced that they are indeed Christians. As I said, I don't understand it, and I am still waiting for someone to explain it to me logically.

While I admire and respect Kevin for his intellect and education, I don't believe he is being intellectually honest in responding to my note. Common sense tells us that in order for a child to have a chance at a better education, a more fulfilling childhood, better childcare, better health care, job training etc, he must first have a chance at life. What chance does a dead baby have at any of those things?

Don't misunderstand me. I believe a woman has the right to choose. She has the right to choose to keep her pants on. She has the right to choose not to have pre-marital sex, or at least act wisely before she's ready to have a child. She has the right to choose abstinence. She also has the right to make lifestyle choices all the way from her own birth to her death. All decisions have consequences. Some have more consequences than others. Some have good consequences. Some have unfortunate consequences, but all decisions result in some form of consequences.

When one makes a decision, one must be prepared for the consequences involved in making that decision. If one is not capable of dealing with unfortunate consequences, than one should not make that decision. If a woman makes the unfortunate decision to do something that causes her to end up pregnant when she doesn't want to be pregnant, she doesn't get to take a mulligan. She must live with the consequences of her decision. That's called taking personal responsibility.

Now, before I am challenged with the inevitable question about cases of rape and incest, my answer remains the same. There is never an intellectually honest reason to abort a living human child. If a woman is raped, why punish the baby with execution? That doesn't make sense. If a woman becomes pregnant due to an incestuous relationship either with her consent or without, again I say, why punish the baby with execution? In neither case is the pregnancy the baby's fault.

Again, it's all about personal responsibility. Put it this way...If a two year old child suffers some calamity and is left permanently disabled as a result, would it be right for the child's parents to put the child to death to avoid taking responsibility for the care and nurturing of that child? Of course it wouldn't.

With abortion we have the exact same scenario with the only exception being that of the child's physical age. It is punishing the innocent so that the responsible party can spare himself a modicum of inconvenience. That is NOT taking personal responsibility.

I also find it dichotomous for one to object to executing a murderer on grounds that it is inhumane but doesn't have a problem killing unborn children who have done nothing to deserve death save being an inconvenience to his mother.

A murderer committed a crime. He deserves whatever punishment he gets for his transgressions. As I say, if he didn't want to face a just punishment, he shouldn't have committed the crime. After all, he most likely knows what would likely happen to him if he gets caught. And still he decides to commit the crime. How many people would he have to kill before his defenders would say he deserves what he gets?

If it is inhumane to take his life, how much more inhumane is it to take the life of a perfectly innocent baby?

And what about war? Is it inhumane to defend one's country against murderous savages who have every intention of wiping our country off the face of the earth? Again, which killing is more moral? The killing of a mortal enemy who will kill you or your family if not killed first, or killing an innocent baby in the womb before he has the chance to choose whether he wants to be a murderer or a terrorist or a brain surgeon or a teacher, etc?

It seems to me one does not have much faith in God or your fellow man if you think an unborn child doesn't stand any chance just because he may happen to be unwanted. the world is full of people who beat the odds to become successful in a veritable plethora of endeavors. They are written about in songs and in legends.

Why not give the innocent unborn child the opportunity to become someone.

Why not give him or her a chance?

I still don't get the logic".

Thursday, October 15, 2009

What I Don't Understand

"But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven." ~ Matthew 19:14

Do you know what I don't understand? I don't understand Christians who support political candidates who support abortion. More than that, really. I don't understand Christians who are Liberals.

Perhaps the most important issue that has come to distinguish a Liberal from a Conservative is abortion.

In my view, Christianity and a pro-choice ideology are incompatible with each other.

Christians are supposed to believe in the sanctity of life. How do Christian Liberal/Democrats justify their party's stance on abortion? Considering the Democrat's stance on this issue, I don't understand how Christians can justify being Democrats.

Is it possible to support a candidate without supporting a major plank in his platform?

Especially a candidate who may have a considerable impact on legislation that would directly strengthen or weaken Roe v Wade in the future?

I don't think it matters much what a candidate for state Treasurer, for instance, believes about abortion.

But a President, Governor, or United States legislator?

How can a Christian reconcile his belief in the sanctity of life with the taking of innocent human life within the womb? It just makes no sense to me.

Why would a Christian vote for a candidate who openly advocates a position which favors abortion?

Barack Hussein Obama not only favors abortion on demand, in any trimester, without reservations or conditions, but when he was a State Senator in Illinois, he voted against legislation that would save live babies born in spite of failed abortion attempts.

Get that?

Obama voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act.

He thinks babies who survive abortion attempts should be neglected, and deprived of care, until they die.

How can Barack Obama call himself a Christian?

And, seriously, how could a Christian have voted for that man?

Christians who vote for such an obvious enemy to Christian values must be ignoring the abortion issue in favor of some other issue they consider more important. I believe they have a much too cavalier attitude regarding abortion.

Millions of innocent babies have been slaughtered since the Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade.

That is a fact that, in my opinion, cannot be ignored. How can any Christian consider that a trivial matter, not important enough to consider when choosing to vote for one candidate or another? If that is indeed their reasoning?

Here in Virginia, the race for Governor depends a great deal on the how the two candidates differ in their opinion of abortion. The Democratic candidate, Creigh Deeds, is actually using abortion as a wedge issue, advertising that his opponent, Bob McDonnell, has both introduced and supported legislation that would limit a "woman's right to choose". It is a major plank in his campaign platform. He would like you to vote against his opponent, based a great deal on this issue. That, and a thesis McDonnell wrote 20 years ago in graduate school, which really didn't contain anything objectionable to anyone who sincerely advocates Christian values.

In my opinion, Creigh Deeds is only hurting himself. Virginia has traditionally been a Conservative state. Yes, we have a Democrat Governor now, and Obama won Virginia in the last election, but I believe most Virginians are still vehemently opposed to abortion.

Deeds is at least 10 percentage points behind McDonnell in every poll. One would think he'd realize he's playing with fire.

And, make no mistake.

Abortion is a seminal issue with both Liberals and Conservatives.

One of the first questions Liberal media types ask Republican candidates for any office is, "Where do you stand in regard to abortion rights?" If a Republican says he is against abortion, the Liberal media uses this for ammunition to begin their onslaught of attacks against the Republican.

Democrats who are against abortion often keep a low profile on their view. If they campaigned on the right to life, they would lose their own party's support, but they often get Republicans votes.

Don't tell me that isn't significant.

Here's the wrap: If it's such an important issue (and I agree that it is), how can a Christian, in good conscience, support any candidate who favors abortion?

And frankly, although I am loathe to ask, how can one call himself a Christian who supports the wholesale slaughter of millions of innocent pre-born babies?

And yet, I know without a doubt, there are Christians who do.

I just don't understand.

Saturday, October 10, 2009

I'm Nominating Myself For Next Year's Nobel Peace Prize

"I like to believe that people in the long run are going to do more to promote peace than our governments. Indeed, I think that people want peace so much that one of these days governments had better get out of the way and let them have it." ~ Dwight D. Eisenhower

Barack Hussein Obama has another feather in his cap. Now, he can add a Nobel peace prize to his resume. I predict he will soon be adding the words, "I won the Nobel Peace prize" to his incessant reminders that he is the President.

When I first heard Barack Hussein Obama had won the Nobel peace prize, I was aghast. Had the Nobel prize committee lost their minds?

But then, I decided to objectively consider what Obama's qualifications might be to earn him such an accolade.

What are the qualifications? Who should win a peace prize? What traits should one possess that would qualify him to win a peace prize?

Obviously, it should be someone who accomplishes something extraordinary to establish peace. Someone who ends strife between two warring factions somewhere in the world, shouldn't it?

If I were awarding a peace prize, I believe I'd look for someone who did something substantial to peacefully settle a dispute or two.

What has Obama done that establishes peace?

I don't think it's so much an establishment of peace as a reluctance to make war that made the Nobel committee award the peace prize to Obama.

When Obama took office, the United States were engaged in two wars. One in Iraq, and one in Afghanistan.

Did Obama somehow manage to convince either of our enemies in these two theaters of war to settle their differences with us peacefully?

Well, no, he didn't. We are still at war with terrorists factions in both countries.

But on the other hand, he didn't escalate the wars either. Perhaps that's why he won the peace prize.

Or maybe because he talks a good game. Talking about bringing peace to the world is really the only thing he's done to establish a peace. He hasn't done a thing to make it happen. And if anyone had the power to accomplish such a task, it seems it should surely be Obama.

But, that couldn't be it, could it? Anyone can talk about peace. It seems to me that there are thousands, perhaps millions of people in this world who are at least as deserving of being awarded the Nobel peace prize as Barack Hussein Obama. Thousands can talk about peace as eloquently as Obama. Why weren't any of those thousands considered?

Mark Levin nominated Rush Limbaugh for the Nobel Peace Prize, but Rush didn't win. I wonder why.

Rush Limbaugh is as deserving as Obama.

I myself, am just as deserving of the prize as Obama.

Witness this:

I want world peace.

There. Now, I am qualified to win the Nobel Peace Prize.

I've done nothing to earn the award.

And neither has Obama.

Thursday, October 08, 2009

Guitar Lessons

"He says it's going to kill me, but he don't say when" ~ Luke Jordan

One of my favorite David Bromberg Songs, and how he plays it. I used to fiddle a bit with a guitar before I decided I had reached my level of incompetence. In fact, I once took a University guitar course taught by the famous Jerry Hahn, one of the best Jazz guitarists in the country.

Instead of fiddling, I should have learned to play it, because if I had, I might be able to play this tune.

The original version of this song was recorded by Luke Jordan, a black blues singer, I think sometime in the 20's. I have both versions on CD, and believe me, the version by Luke Jordan was hard to find.

Anyway, a couple of my occasional readers play guitar, and I thought they might want to try this.

Sorry, the phenomena I call Obamanation is starting to bore me. He's on TV EVERY BLESSED DAY!

When he does something extraordinarily bone headed, I will blog about it, but for now, really, whatever he does is just more of the same.

By the way, while I'm at it, here's a video of my guitar teacher, Jerry Hahn:

He doesn't sing. Believe me, he doesn't sing. The other students and I used to ask him how the lyrics went with the songs he was teaching us just to hear him try to sing. It was like nails on a blackboard to hear him sing.

Sunday, October 04, 2009

What Was In My Head When I Awoke.

A couple of days ago, I saw just the beginning of a digital remake of "The Wizard of Oz" on Blu-Ray. While the twister was tearing up Dorothy's farm, this tune was playing. Without words, of course. I have known this song since the Animaniacs were on TV, but it wasn't until recently I realized this was the tune from the twister scene in "Wizard of OZ".

Now I can't get the song out of my head.

Saturday, October 03, 2009

If We Think We've Got Problems...

"Of all the pulpits from which human voice is ever sent forth, there is none from which it reaches so far as from the grave." ~ John Ruskin

It's been a rough week at my house this past week. Wednesday night, about two and a half hours before October first, our cable went out. The cable company had cut our service off.

This would not have been a problem, ordinarily. We understand if we don't pay the bill we should be deprived of service (that's called acknowledging personal responsibility), but arrangements had already been made to pay the entire bill on Thursday, as soon as my wife got her Social Security check. Due to the failing economy coupled with big Government intrusion into my business, I have pretty much lost my income, and have had to take another job that pays poorly. But, it pays more than nothing. I got my first two week paycheck on Thursday.

But I digress.

The cable company had promised to wait for the payment, and they broke their promise.

Calls to the office were fruitless because, once we waded through the obligatory automated phone system prompts to state the purpose of our call, the department we wanted, our phone number, address, account number, verification of our account number, etc, we were eventually routed to the collection department, which was the wrong department, because we were only a month late and the collections department only has information on accounts over 2 months late.


Early Thursday morning we awoke and found we had no hot water. The company who supplies our fuel oil to heat our house and our water had come out the day before to clean and do routine maintenance to our boiler. Apparently, the serviceman made some error, because the boiler stopped working after he left.

Again, calls to the company's service number were fruitless. When we called the number for service which was located on a sticker on the side of our boiler, we were informed, by recording, that the company's office was closed all day for inventory, and no one would be able to help us until tomorrow, October 2nd.

So, after we drove over to the Cable company's office and personally took care of the first problem, we had to drive over to the Boiler service company to personally talk to someone there who could come over and service the boiler, which, as I explained, had been in perfect working order before it was serviced.

I spent the remainder of the day waiting for a serviceman to come over to fix the problem. I was promised the boiler would be working in time for me to take a shower before I left for work. It wasn't, and I had wasted all that time waiting. So, I had to go to work unwashed.

By Thursday afternoon all electronic and fuel powered essential appliances had been restored to working order and all was right with our world.

Thursday evening, I bought my wife a new computer and myself a flat panel 20 inch monitor for mine.

So, as I said, it was a rough week. But that wasn't the worst.

Then came Friday.

As I was seated at my computer enjoying the finer clarity of my new monitor, and while my wife slept, I received a call from my second son in Wichita, Kansas, who was calling to inform me of shocking news.
Erik and Stephanie (taken last summer)

He told me my oldest son's wife had passed away unexpectedly earlier Friday morning. She had surgery on the previous Friday to remove a growth on her spine. The doctors said the surgery was a success, and there was nothing more to be concerned about.

But, at approximately 4:00 Friday morning, after hospital personnel struggled for an hour to save her, she slipped away into eternity. She was 32.

She leaves behind her husband(my son Erik), and three children, ages 8, 6, and 14 months.

Because I had spent more money than I would have normally buying the computer and monitor, we cannot afford to go to the funeral, so we will have to send flowers. Had I known, I wouldn't have bought them, but hindsight is 20/20, and foresight is blind.

Erik has multiple medical problems of his own, including severe Epilepsy, Chronic Depression, and Paranoid Schizophrenia. I believe he also suffers from a bi-polar disorder, but I may be mistaken on that.

It would appear there is no positives to his condition, but my other son has assured me Erik has made substantial improvement since I saw him last Summer. Erik himself, the last time I talked with him over the phone, told me he still hears voices in his head, but at least he knows they aren't real, so he ignores them. That is a significant improvement over where he was medically and psychologically in previous years. Anthony, my other son, told me a few months ago that he predicts Erik will achieve normalcy within the next year.

But now, with the sudden passing of his wife, no one knows how he will deal. She was his rock.

Erik has already endured many more hardships and trials than probably about 98% of the world's population. It was his child that died a day after birth a few years ago. he and his wife, Stephanie were devastated. Their marriage almost ended as a result. Erik had a previous girlfriend before Stephanie that passed away suddenly, also.

He plans on raising his children himself, but will, of course, require help from his mother-in-law. No doubt my brother and sister who live in the Wichita area will lend a hand as well.

Most importantly, though, he will require prayer. A lot of earnest, sincere prayer. For him. For his children. For his support system.

I've seen prayer work. I know it does. He will get through this. Through the Grace and power of God.

Please pray for my son and his family.