Saturday, August 28, 2010

On The "Ground Zero Mosque"

"Such evil deeds could religion prompt." ~ Lucretius

I've stayed out of the discussion about the Mosque at ground zero controversy for several reasons. Mostly, because there really isn't anything to say about it that hasn't been said already. And, it doesn't require a lengthy statement to state my opinion which is:

They have the right to build it there, but they shouldn't.

However, allow me to respond to the points made by the left in their attempts to justify their support of the Mosque by repeating, ad nauseum, some, but not all of the following points:

1. The Mosque won't be built right on Ground Zero, but is instead a couple of blocks away.

2. It really isn't a Mosque, per se, but an Islamic "cultural center". The Mosque is only a small part of the entire center.

3. They have a legal, first amendment right to build their Mosque wherever they want.

4. Their stated intent is to dissolve the antipathy between Islam and all other religions and to unite the community.

5. Not all Muslims are terrorists.

6. Americans are racist bigots for not wanting to allow the Muslims to build their Mosque near Ground Zero.

7. We need to be tolerant of other religions and cultures. Intolerance is anti-American.

8. It doesn't matter who is funding the project.

9. Americans who oppose the building of the Mosque only oppose it because they hate Obama. (I've actually heard this)

10. Some of the families of the victims of 9/11 support the project.

This is my response to those points:

1. It doesn't matter if the Mosque isn't right at ground Zero. The intent is clear. It is a "victory" Mosque. Make no mistake. Muslims, by and large, consider the attacks on the WTC a victory for Islam. If one does the necessary research, one will find it is standard operating procedure for Muslims to build Mosques upon the rubble of property taken in battle. I'm sure the Muslims probably wanted to build it right at Ground Zero, but were disallowed because it is now considered an historical site, so they got as close as they were allowed.

2. An Islamic cultural center is even more dangerous to Americans than merely a Mosque. A cultural center, especially one that promotes itself as multi-culturist, will attempt to convert all who make use of the facility to Islam, and by extension, some of the more impressionable converts may become terrorists, or at least, terrorist sympathizers themselves.

Think of your local Evangelical Church establishing programs for the youth in the community for the purpose of evangelism. It's the same concept.

Except, Christian community programs don't usually teach kids how to blow things up.

An Islamic Cultural center may breed terrorism. Any true Christian should oppose this cultural center on the basis that Islam is a Satanic religion intent on wiping Christianity out, if for no other reason.

3. This is true. But, just because they have the right to build it wherever they want, it doesn't mean they have to build it wherever they want.

4. If they are truly trying to "unite" the community as they claim, they would build it almost anywhere else (with the exception, of course, next to the Pentagon or in a certain field in Pennsylvania).

5. This is true also, but most terrorists are Muslims, with very few exceptions. And, regardless whether certain Muslims are terrorists themselves, the majority of them support terrorism, or refuse to condemn terrorist acts.

6. Some Americans are indeed bigots and racists, but they aren't the only Americans who oppose the project. Muslims are bigoted against Jews, Americans, women, and homosexuals, along with every other group in the world that represents any group except Muslims. In fact, there are Muslims that are even prejudiced against other Muslims who are not of the same sect of Islam. Muslims, as a rule, are much more bigoted than the majority of Americans. Why doesn't the left have a problem with that?

7. Intolerance is a door that swings both ways. Why is there no outrage over the intolerance exhibited by supporters of the Mosque? Why do they have no tolerance for my opinions? I've said this often: I find Liberal intolerance of my intolerance intolerable.

8. This is true, also. I see no reason why Conservatives would use this as an objection to the Mosque. Does anyone ever ask who funds Baptist Church buildings? How about Catholics? Mormons? Scientologists? It doesn't matter who funds the project. The better question is why they are funding the project. What is their motive?

9. No, we oppose it because it is highly insulting and insensitive to the memory of the victims of the WTC attacks in 2001. We don't oppose the project because Obama supports it. Obama's support of the project is yet another in a long list of reasons why we hate Obama.

10. So what? Families of the victims have every right to be supportive of the group that destroyed their lives. They also have the right to be wrong, misguided, and deluded.

It's called Liberty.

Giving tacit approval of a bad idea doesn't make it a good idea.

Bottom line: Muslims have the right to build their Mosque anywhere they want. But, if they are truly a "religion of peace", as the Liberals claim, why would they want to build it near Ground Zero unless they want to intentionally insult and offend America?

Cross posted at American Descent

Tuesday, August 17, 2010

My Favorite Line

"Anything so innocent and built like that just got to be named Lucille" ~ Dragline

I bought the DVD of "Cool Hand Luke" the other day. It is one of my all time favorite movies and has a wealth of really great lines. The following clip contains what I consider the best line of the movie:

Wednesday, August 11, 2010

Patiently Waiting For November



"The word 'hope' comes up with Obama as often today as it did during his campaign, just in a different context." ~ John Hawkins

My wife and I have been considering a move to the Midwest.

The idea first started from a leisurely search on the internet, in which my curiosity about the value of our house in today's real estate market taught me that real estate prices in my hometown of Wichita are less than half that of similar properties here in the Fredericksburg area.

We learned houses there that are even larger and better than ours are selling for less than half what ours is worth. Initially, it seemed we could sell this house and buy one in the Wichita area for cash and have enough money left over to literally live comfortably for at least a year while I search for a job.

So, we had a real estate man visit our house to do an assessment of it's value, and give recommendations for enhancing it's saleability.

The results were disappointing. Real estate values in our area have plummeted in the last few years.

Curiously, that happened about the same time the Democrats took over Congress.

I blame them and Obama.

It seems we will have to wait until the real estate market improves before putting our house on the market. It is a buyers market right now, not a sellers market.

Of course, I knew that beforehand. I'm not that stupid. I just didn't know how bad it was.

I told my wife we should wait until November when the Republicans re-take the Congress and, consequently, the market improves.

Some might say it will take quite a bit longer for the market to improve even if the Republicans immediately begin to repair the damage done to the economy by the Obama regime's reckless economic policies, but I have my own theory.

Now, I'm far from an economic expert, so my theory may be dead wrong. And, if I'm wrong, I know some economic experts (such as resident Liberal, Jim) will no doubt enumerate the many reasons why. But regardless, here it is:

The stock market is driven by speculation. Economic experts, whose entire existence depends on their ability to analyze and predict the ups and downs of the economy, stake their jobs and their reputations on educated guesses about what the stock market will do tomorrow.

This is called speculation.

The real estate market is influenced by the stock market exactly the same way as all other aspects of the economy. If the stock market is down, the real estate market follows suit. The same applies if the stock market goes up.

The fluctuations of the stock market, and by extension, the real estate market, are directly influenced by the movers and shakers in the industry, through the process of speculation.

When the Republicans win the majority in November, I'm thinking the experts in the industry will speculate (and rightly so) that the Republicans will begin to reverse the failed economic policies of the Obama administration and the stock market will immediately jump up several notches on whatever scale the market is measured.

In the same way it dropped immediately after the Democrats took over as the majority party in 2006.

Coincidence? I think not.

The stock market will improve, and with it, the real estate market.

Thus, come this November, I'm hoping I'm correct and real estate prices will improve enough that the move we're considering will be worth the wait.

I'm waiting for November.

Monday, August 09, 2010

This Is Where Our Tax Money Goes

"Nothing is more admirable than the fortitude with which millionaires tolerate the disadvantages of their wealth." ~ Rex Stout

I posted this video before as an introduction to Republican Governor of New Jersey Chris Christie. In that post, we focused on Governor Christie's response to a complaint from a member of the New Jersey teachers union.

This time, I want to focus on what "disgruntled" teacher, Rita Wilson says.



Did you hear that?

She is complaining that she "only" makes $83,000 a year for less than a years work. She is also complaining that she is "only" paid for the 184 days a year that she does work (not counting her benefits package, pension, and paid vacation days). Apparently she is upset that the Governor has proposed that the teachers not take a raise for one year and to pay for a small part of their benefits in an effort to save the failing state economy.

Watching this obscenity, I have to admit the old Liberal in me allowed a little bit of the old class envy to emerge. I don't make half that much a year, and probably never will. And, I work a full forty hours a week, 52 weeks a year. I would be grateful to "only" earn $83,000.00 a year. I would also be grateful to "only" be paid for 184 days of work a year at that level of compensation.

So, it really makes me angry that this woman has the audacity to complain that the good people of New Jersey, many of whom make less than half what she makes in a year, are less than willing to sacrifice even more of their hard earned money to pay her grossly overpaid wages.

Especially since she probably doesn't deserve to earn even half that much.

Her attitude indicates she doesn't possess the brains or common sense to be teaching anyone, much less impressionable students. She may have a college education, but obviously, in her case, education doesn't equal intelligence.

Now, don't misunderstand me. I have a great deal of respect for those who earn a good living through the sweat of their own labor, and because they had the foresight and drive to earn their diplomas. If one does the work, one should be compensated accordingly. I have no problem with that.

I also realize that wealth is relative.

To me, a yearly salary of $83,000 is wealthy. To Bill Gates, for instance, $83,000 is chump change.

But this woman is a public school teacher. Believe me, if the level of the average public school student's education is any indication, not only does she not earn such a high salary, she should be paying the taxpayers back.

In any other occupation, one who so consistently failed to produce positive results would have been fired for gross incompetence.

Remember, the people pay her wages through their taxes which are extracted from their salary. They have no choice. They can't refuse. They can't choose to distribute their money to those who deserve much more.

To think that money is being forcefully taken from them to pay the exorbitant salary of one so ungrateful, makes me want to vomit.

Thursday, August 05, 2010

Homos Score 2 Big Victories

"All sects are different, because they come from men; morality is everywhere the same, because it comes from God." ~ Voltaire

Well, The Democrats and five turncoat Republicans have confirmed Lesbian Liberal activist lawyer Elana Kagan to the Supreme Court of the U.S. So now, opponents of Proposition 8 out there in breakfast cereal land* have another Liberal activist vote on the bench.

I suppose they will celebrate with another shameless, hedonistic, pornographic carrot-in-the-butt parade.

A Liberal activist judge has ruled that the voters of California unconstitutionally (how does one "unconstitutionally" vote?) voted against the oxymoronic same sex marriage with their overwhelming defeat of the proposal, and now the Senate has sealed the deal by confirming a sexual deviant to the highest court in the land.

Personally, I think its all over. The Supreme Court, with Kagan on board, will undoubtedly uphold the aforementioned liberal activist judge's ruling. Conservatives might as well pack up and look for another battle to fight.

Now, I will re-iterate how I personally feel about same sex marriage:

I don't care what the homos do. If they want to marry, let them. I don't see how any decision they make affects me either negatively or positively, provided they leave me and all other non-homos alone. They can float their boat in the port of their choosing.

I am, however, opposed to special rights for homosexuals, but the way I see it, allowing them to marry each other if they want to does not constitute special rights. If a man and a woman can marry, two men or two women should expect that same right, no matter how disgusting the mental picture it brings to mind.

I don't believe homosexuals should be afforded any rights just because they choose to be perverts. I believe they should be afforded the same rights as every other American citizen, and none extra.

Now, if they expect me to accept them as normal and natural, they can forget that. I don't accept them as normal human beings. I consider them abnormal sexual deviants.

I can respect them for their contributions to society, arts, and business. I can respect them for their intellect, their humor, and above all, as living human beings with basic human rights.

But I do not respect their perversion and their conscious choice to be deviant.

The damage is done. Elena Kagan has been confirmed. Only time will tell how adversely this will affect America in the years to come.

*California: Full of flakes, fruits, and nuts. Like a breakfast cereal.

Wednesday, August 04, 2010

A Great Quote...

...if I do say so myself, and I do.

"Barack Hussein Obama has as much importance to Americans as the first person thrown out of the lifeboat."~ Me