Christmas Day 2005

“Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.
But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all." --Isaiah 53:4-6 (King James Version)

Just a few observances to ponder on this Christmas day:

No where in the Bible is there mentioned a time when Angels sing. “And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying,
‘Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men‘.”--Luke 2:13-14

I am not a scholar in ancient languages, but I have been told by experts, the words “Peace on Earth, goodwill toward men” is more accurately translated as, “Peace on Earth to men of goodwill.”

This would make more sense to those of us who believe there are rewards for the righteous and consequences for the unrepentant. The unrighteous do not know peace.

It is commonly believed that Joseph and Mary were poor because they were forced to spend the night in a barn. It is more likely that they would be considered, in today’s terms, to be working middle class. Joseph had a specialized trade, making him slightly higher in status than the ordinary man in his day.

The reason Jesus was laid in a manger was because there was no room for them in the inn, not because they didn’t have the money for a room. They were in Bethlehem for the census, along with every other man in the kingdom who’s hometown was Bethlehem, hence, the town was overcrowded.

I have always found the words of this song to be particularly touching, especially the verse that speaks of despair. How often we get depressed over the sorrows of this world. It is helpful to know that "God is not dead, nor doth He sleep."

I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day
Henry W. Longfellow

I heard the bells on Christmas day
Their old familiar carols play,
And wild and sweet the words repeat
Of peace on earth, good will to men.

2. I thought how as the day had come,
The belfries of all Christendom
Had rolled along th'unbroken song
Of peace on earth, good will to men.

3. And in despair I bowed my head:
'There is no peace on earth,'I said
'For hate is strong, and mocks the song
Of peace on earth, good will to men.'

4. Then peeled the bells more loud and deep:
'God is not dead, nor doth He sleep;
The wrong shall fail, the right prevail,
With peace on earth, good will to men.'

5. Till, ringing, singing on its way,
The world revolved from night to day
A voice, a chime, a chant sublime,
Of peace on earth, good will to men.

And now, I want to share a modern day parable, with apologies to author and lecturer Frank Peretti. It is his story, but I can only share it from memory:

It was a sunny and warm Spring day. The flowers were blooming, the new grass was green, the leaves had awakened from their Winter dormancy and had burst forth in bright green splendor upon the trees. The wind was balmy and mild.

A typical ordinary family, Father, Mother, and 8 year old girl decided to take advantage of the beautiful Spring day and go for a Sunday afternoon drive in the country. The Father was driving, Mother was in the front passenger seat, and the little girl in the back seat. It was a wonderful day for a drive.

As they drove along a dirt country road, all of the windows down, and enjoying the sights, sounds, and scents of Spring, suddenly a big black bee flew into the car window.

As the bee buzzed around inside the car, panicked from finding itself trapped in an unfamiliar place, and getting frustrated and angry, the little girl cried out in fear. She was allergic to bee stings and one sting would mean quick and certain death to her.

“Daddy,” she cried, Please Daddy, help me! The bee's going to sting me! Please save me!”

Her father, at first tried to swat at the bee and scare it back out the window, and failing that, attempted to maneuver the car to the side of the road, while trying to catch the bee in one hand and steer the car with the other.

Finally, with his panicked daughter screaming in terror, and his wife swatting at the bee, he was finally able to trap the bee against the windshield glass, and then closed his fingers around it.

And then he waited. The bee buzzed angrily within his closed fist. He waited for the inevitable. And then, the inevitable happened. He winced in pain, and then opened his hand, releasing the bee.

The bee, free of the mans hand, buzzed into the back seat area of the car, prompting the little girl to scream louder.

The Father, said, “It’s Ok, honey, He can’t hurt you now. Look what I have in my hand.”

And he opened his hand to reveal, in the center of his palm, the bee’s stinger, embedded there in the flesh of his palm. And the bee continued to buzz harmlessly around in the back seat.

Look what Jesus has in his hand.

See, this is what Jesus has done for us. He took Satan’s sting. The sting of pain, the sting of distress, the sting of loneliness, the sting of hopelessness.

The sting of death.

He took Satan’s sting.

And now all Satan can do is buzz.

This Christmas, consider the significance of that one humble birth, and how it has impacted the world for the last 2,000 years. And thank God for the greatest Christmas Gift of all.

Rudolph The Disco Reindeer

Several years ago, I attended a Christmas party hosted by a friend of mine. He had a karaoke machine set up there for the guests to display their singing talents. Also in attendance were two young men who were gay. They were partners. Before my turn at karaoke, I spoke to my host on whether I might offend the two with my selection. He assured me they were good sports, so when my turn to sing came, I selected my song, and when the famous strains of "Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer" began, I sang the following lyrics:

You've heard of Slasher and Flasher
And Pansy and Bitchin'
Vomit and Stupid
And Bummer and Nixon.
But do you recall
The wierdest reindeer of all?

Rudolph the disco reindeer
Wore a lot of funny clothes.
And everytime you saw him,
He was sticking cocaine up his nose.

All of the other reindeer
Used to laugh and call him queer
All they ever did was watch football
And drink a lot of beer.

Then one boring weekday night
Santa came to say
"Rudolph with your skin tight pants
Let's go to Xenon and dance."

Then all the reindeer flipped out
And they were all heard to say,
"Rudolph the disco reindeer
Has gotten Santa Claus to turn gay!"

The two gay men laughed louder and longer than the rest.

Also, I received this in an e-mail a little while ago:

If you remember the Original Hollywood Squares and its comics, this may bring a tear to your eyes. These great questions and answers are from the days when Hollywood Squares game show responses were spontaneous and clever, not scripted and (often) dull, as they are now.

Peter Marshall was the host asking the questions, of course. Enjoy!

Q. Do female frogs croak?
A. Paul Lynde: If you hold their little heads under water long enough.

Q. If you're going to make a parachute jump, at least how high should you be?
A. Charley Weaver: Three days of steady drinking should do it.

Q. True or False, a pea can last as long as 5,000 years.
A. George Gobel: Boy, it sure seems that way sometimes.

Q. You've been having trouble going to sleep. Are you probably a man or a woman?
A. Don Knotts: That's what's been keeping me awake.

Q. According to Cosmopolitan, if you meet a stranger at a party and you think that
he is attractive, is it okay to come out and ask him if he's married?
A. Rose Marie: No; wait until morning.

Q. Which of your five senses tends to diminish as you get older?
A. Charley Weaver: My sense of decency.

Q. In Hawaiian, does it take more than three words to say "I Love You"?
A. Vincent Price: No, you can say it with a pineapple and a twenty.

Q. What are "Do It," "I Can Help," and "I Can't Get Enough"?
A. George Gobel: I don't know, but it's coming from the next apartment.

Q As you grow older, do you tend to gesture more or less with your hands while talking?
A. Rose Marie: You ask me one more growing old question Peter, and I'll give you a gesture you'll never forget.

Q. Paul, why do Hell's Angels wear leather?
A. Paul Lynde: Because chiffon wrinkles too easily.

Q. Charley, you've just decided to grow strawberries. Are you going to get any during the first year?
A. Charley Weaver: Of course not, I'm too busy growing strawberries.

Q. In bowling, what's a perfect score?
A. Rose Marie: Ralph, the pin boy.

Q. It is considered in bad taste to discuss two subjects at nudist camps. One is politics, what is the other?
A. Paul Lynde: Tape measures.

Q. During a tornado, are you safer in the bedroom or in the closet?
A. Rose Marie: Unfortunately Peter, I'm always safe in the bedroom.

Q. Can boys join the Campfire Girls?
A. Marty Allen: Only after lights out.

Q. When you pat a dog on its head he will wag his tail. What will a goose do?
A. Paul Lynde: Make him bark?

Q. If you were pregnant for two years, what would you give birth to?
A. Paul Lynde: Whatever it is, it would never be afraid of the dark.

Q. According to Ann Landers, is their anything wrong with getting into the habit of kissing a lot of people?
A. Charley Weaver: It got me out of the army.

Q. It is the most abused and neglected part of your body, what is it?
A. Paul Lynde: Mine may be abused, but it certainly isn't neglected.

Q Back in the old days, when Great Grandpa put horseradish on his head, what was he trying to do?
A. George Gobel: Get it in his mouth.

Q. Who stays pregnant for a longer period of time, your wife or your elephant?
A. Paul Lynde: Who told you about my elephant?

Q. When a couple have a baby, who is responsible for its sex?
A. Charley Weaver: I'll lend him the car, the rest is up to him.

Q Jackie Gleason recently revealed that he firmly believes in them and has actually seen them on at least two occasions. What are they?
A. Charley Weaver: His feet. (me too)

Q. According to Ann Landers, what are two things you should never do in bed?
A. Paul Lynde: Point and Laugh

Don't Count Your Chickens Before They Hatch

"The great masses of the people... will more easily fall victims to a great lie than to a small one." --Adolf Hitler

Conservative radio talk show hosts seem to be all of one mind when it comes to what the results will be of the Democrats opposition to Bush administration policies. They seem to think they are losing themselves votes, and in the process it will cost them the next election.

Even according to ER, "The Dems are not doing the things they are doing because they think it's popular (although a very few deluded folks might very well be that deluded.) The Dems are doing what they're doing because they think it's the right thing to do".

But I'm not so sure. I think we are overestimating the rank and file American voter.

The Tonight Show's Jay Leno often has a segment they call "Jay-walk", where he goes out onto the street with a microphone and asks passers-by simple questions.

Sean Hannity features "Man on the street Thursdays" where his producer goes out with a cell phone and he asks people questions about things like "who is the Vice President?" or "What political party does the President belong to?" etc.

Radio talk show host Glenn Beck features "More-On Trivia" on Fridays, a spot where he asks, by phone, convenience store workers in selected NFL cities similar questions.

The reason these spots are so popular are because they are funny. Most of the people interviewed are unbelievably uninformed and clueless.

But I find it disturbing. Sean Hannity's is particularly disturbing because he targets college students. One would presume college students would know a lot more than they do. They don't.

When questioned about politics, most people are sadly uninformed. Usually they don't have an answer at all, and when they do have an answer, it is often word for word the same things they hear in the electronic media. It is obvious they have never thought for themselves. I wouldn't be surprised to hear one of them say "President Bush doesn't care about black people". Because Kanye West said it on a star studded benefit concert for victims of Hurricane Katrina.

These are the kinds of things the American people remember.

These are some of the people that vote. And they will vote based on what they hear in the electronic media.

Every news program you watch has a Liberal bias, and interview programs that the rank and file tend to watch are overloaded with Liberal Democrat pundits, such as "The Daily Show" on Comedy Central, Or Bill Maher's show. (The show pictured here had one Conservative lawyer, and two Liberal Hollywood actresses, and one very Liberal Hollywood comedy writer.)Usually they will have about 4 guests, 3 of whom are Liberals and one Conservative, who the Liberal guests and the Liberal host almost always shout down and interrupt to the point that their point is not even heard, much less understood.

The deck is stacked in favor of the Democrats. They have a chance of winning the next election.

When uninformed people are misinformed, the electoral process can be manipulated.

Conservatives are wrong to assume that common sense and logic will prevail against Liberal propaganda and misinformation..

"Kilting" Time

"O we'll fight for what is right and the dawning of the day
When we'll rise again to win our claim for Scottish destiny

Oh Caledonia, we are your sons
And will again be free." --Scottish folk song

After several postings in which I have complained about the Democrats and the Liberals, I have decided, in the spirit of the season, and in keeping with the altruistic nature thereof, to suspend my usual diatribe of pointing out questionable acts of the Democrats. At least, for today.

Today, I was hopping news channels on TV and I thought I heard one of them say the House passed the appropriations bill complete with the drilling in ANWR attachment. So I went to the Fox News website for more details. I didn't find any information about that, and later, while typing this, I found that they didn't pass that part of the bill, which is disappointing, to say the least.

But while I was looking for it, i found this story that is probably only interesting to me:

In Missouri, a high school student has been told he cannot wear a kilt to a formal school dance. For those unfamiliar with kilts, they are the traditional garb worn by Scottish men, once the standard mode of dress for Scots, but now usually only worn on special occasions. It looks like a skirt. You may read the rest of the story here.

This story is interesting to me on several levels, one being that I am of Scottish heritage myself. Another point that interests me is the spokesman for the Scots point of view is from my own clan, the Gunn clan. Follow this link I provided and you can see my last name among the list of Gunn clan septs. This is the crest of the Gunn clan.

I read this article with amusement until I read the quote from the school's principal, who said, "Well, this is my dance, and I'm not going to have students coming into it looking like clowns."

And that offended me. I have considered, if circumstances allow it, and if I ever remarry, dressing in the traditional Gunn tartan plaid, including a kilt, for my next wedding. It probably won't happen, but it's a nice dream.

What is the school principal afraid of?

From the article: Several Scottish heritage organizations are angry, saying the kilt is a symbol of Scottish pride and considered formal dress.

"To say the traditional Scottish dress makes you look like a clown is a direct insult to people of Scottish heritage and those who live in Scotland," said Tom Wilson, a Texas commissioner for the Clan Gunn Society of North America, a Scottish heritage organization.

Another Clan Gunn member, Beth Gardner, started an online petition seeking an apology for Warmack. It questions in part the notion that the kilt was a distraction.

"From what? From the intense concentration it takes to dance?"

One last observation: According to the story, "Warmack said he showed it to a vice principal before the dance, who joked he'd better wear something underneath it, and Warmack assured him he would".

This disturbs me somewhat, too. No self respecting Scotsman wears anything under his kilt. To suggest anything else is blasphemy.

Real men wear kilts!

Tie Our Hands, Dig Your Grave

"The superior man, when resting in safety, does not forget that danger may come. When in a state of security he does not forget the possibility of ruin. When all is orderly, he does not forget that disorder may come. Thus his person is not endangered, and his States and all their clans are preserved". --Confucius

I have been agonizing over what to post today. I have been rather contentious and offensive in my previous posts, and I don't like myself when I get that way.

I suppose what is upsetting me is the recent allegations that President Bush has been breaking the law in wiretapping phone calls between suspected terrorists within the United States in an effort to stop future 9/11 type attacks before they have a chance of happening. Everyone has heard all about it by now. I don't have to rehash everything.

I believe the President is an honorable man. I believe him to be a man of integrity and honesty. I do not want to believe he would do anything that he is not legally allowed to do.

There has been arguments from both sides regarding the legality of this. I read somewhere that there is legal precedence supporting the claim that it is legal. I hope that is true.

Because if it is determined that the President acted illegally, among other things, the wiretaps will have to stop. Harry Reid has boasted that his party has killed the Patriot act, and "Jamies wall" will go back up, effective at midnight Jan 1st.

All of these actions will leave the United States effectively defenseless against future attacks on our soil. We will be unable to ascertain what, if anything, the existing al Qaeda cells already in America are planning.

If, indeed, we have to stop protecting our citizens against brutal murderers and terrorists, we can only rely on God for our protection.

But guess what? I no longer care. Most of the whiny, bleeding heart, Liberal, sob sisters that want us to live in an absolute open society where al-Qaeda terrorists are free to plan murderous attacks in peace without fear of being found out by the government, live in the large cities, like New York, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Oklahoma City. The places that will be the first to be hit.

To them I say, "You made your bed, You die in it."

I live in a village with a population of 450 people, far out of range of any nuclear fallout. I will survive to be given the choice of worshipping Allah or God. No one in my family lives in a potential danger zone except for my brother near Philadelphia and he is in an advanced stage of MS, so death is imminent to him, anyway. And both he and I know where we're going when we die.

So I am not worried. As for the rest of you, may God have mercy on your soul, because the Democrats won't.

Winning the next election is so much more important than that.

Tokyo Rose

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court" --U.S. Constitution article III section 3

Yesterday, I was listening to Mark Simone(sp?), who was sitting in for radio host Sean Hannity while Hannity is on vacation, and he brought up the name of Tokyo Rose. Tokyo Rose is the name given to at least two, and possibly more female English speaking broadcasters of WWII, who broadcast propaganda for the Japanese for the purpose of demoralizing the American servicemen.

So I decided to do some research on her via the internet. What I found was mildly surprising. I had always thought Tokyo Rose was one woman, who worked for the Japanese, but what I learned was she was a fictional person cobbled together from scraps of real history. There's no proof that such a woman existed.

Mark Simone explained that the propaganda machine of the Japanese Empire invented her, and wrote the copy for whoever was Tokyo Rose at the time. He described the three main subjects that the Japanese used in their efforts to undermine the American war effort:

1. The American President lied to convince the people to support the war against Japan.

2. The Americans cannot win the war against Japan.

3. The reason American troops are fighting and dying is because of the big corporations and big war profits.

Sound familiar?

The Iraq war's Tokyo Rose goes by the names of Dean, Reid, Shumer, Biden, Kennedy, Kerry, Pelosi, Murtha, Clinton... In short, many of the Democrats in Congress.

By referring to these topics when criticizing the President and the war in Iraq, I believe they are giving aid and comfort to the enemy, which, according to The Constitution of the United States, Art. III, is the definition of treason against the United States.

I admit, it is only considered treason if it is intended to give aid and comfort, and I don't really believe that those Senators and Congressmen are doing it purposely to commit treason.

But that leads me to question exactly why they are constantly repeating the 3 things that the Japanese had determined demoralized the troops most effectively.

Can it be mere politics?

Sadly, I think it is.

All The News Fit To Print?

"Speaking of the motto of the New York Times, 'All the news that's fit to print:' It is hard to think of any group of seven words that have aroused more newspaper controversy". --Gerald White Johnson

According to a recent New York Times article, "Months after the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials."

I have a couple of things to say about this.

In the first place, I am skeptical of it's credibility. This is the same newspaper that has employed some rather unscrupulous reporters in the past, and don't seem to have any reservations about employing them still. Does the name, "Jayson Blair" ring a bell? How about "Charlie LeDuff"?

Additionally, The New York Times was one of the 36 news organizations that admitted in a court of law to lying in the Karl Rove/Valerie Plame case.

Another red flag is the use of the familiar "anonymous sources" in a blatant attempt to conjure up credibility where there is little or none. One doesn't have to be a newspaperman to know a story about anything, especially a controversial one, needs expert testimony to make it believable. Just making accusations out of whole cloth without them wouldn't even be printed. So cue the anonymous sources.

In this story, the Times has gone the extra mile to assure credibility with this statement:

"Nearly a dozen current and former officials, who were granted anonymity because of the classified nature of the program, discussed it with reporters for The New York Times because of their concerns about the operation's legality and oversight".

Nearly a dozen! Wow! That's a lot! You sold me!.... Not!

So the old adage, "Don't believe everything you read" applies here. In spades.

But let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the story is true.

Another thing that jumped out at me in this article:

"Under a presidential order signed in 2002, the intelligence agency has monitored the international telephone calls and international e-mail messages of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States without warrants over the past three years in an effort to track possible "dirty numbers" linked to Al Qaeda".

Duh. A Presidential order makes it legal.

By the way, If the FISA court and Senator Jay Rockefeller, and others knew about it, it wasn't secret.

Another point:

Is it just a coincidence that this story came out the day after Iraq's historic election that established a free and independent democracy when the Times claims they have been sitting on the story for more than a year? Why the delay? Could it be they were waiting for just the right moment, for something positive to happen so they could use the story to distract America's attention from a monumental Bush victory?

It surely appears that way.

My opinion? I think anything we can do that ferrets out terrorists and prevents more 9/11 type attacks on the innocent American citizens in our country and around the world is wholly justified. I don't care if eavesdropping on suspected terrorists and terrorists sympathizers is legal or not. Desperate times call for desperate measures.

Does anyone think the terrorists would stop and consider whether they are violating some law before they attack? Does anyone think they would abandon plans to bomb us when they found out, to their surprise, that murder is illegal?

Pu-leeeez.

Here is my suggestion to the NSA:

Wiretap them. Put microphones in the homes, in their cars, in their offices, in their clothes. Set up hidden cameras everywhere they are likely to be. Monitor them 24/7/365. Surgically implant microchips in their brains. I don't care.

What I do care about is the safety of my family, my children, my neighbors, my fellow American citizens, all innocent people.

If it takes illegal wiretaps or any other illegal activity to insure a victory in the war on terrorism, I'm all for it.

If we allow the New York Times, or anyone else to pressure the President, or the NSA, or any other agency to stop following up on suspected terrorists and their activities within the United States, another attack will almost certainly take place.

The next target could be you. Or your family.

For all we know, the New York Times may be the next intended target.

Wouldn't that be ironic?

A Life Remembered

No blogging today about National news. Nothing about the war, or Democrats, or Republicans, or bad laws, or stupid people. I won't be commenting about what Jesus said, or meant.

Today is a day of remembrance at my house. Remembrance for a life cut short by a fire. A fire that cares nothing about politics or religion.

Today, my son has asked me to take him to the wake for his friend, Jon Barnes.

From the Hagerstown, MD, Herald Mail Newspaper:

Jonathan R. Barnes, 17

AUG. 19, 1988-DEC. 11, 2005


SHARPSBURG - Jonathan Ray Barnes, 17, of 3818 Mills Road, Sharpsburg, died Sunday, Dec. 11, 2005, from injuries sustained in a house fire in Keedysville.

Born Aug. 19, 1988, in Silver Spring, Md., he was the son of Robert and Carole Bern Barrett of Sharpsburg.

Jon was a senior at Boonsboro High School.

He loved to skateboard and had recently participated in and won a competition at New Covenant Fellowship Church in Fairplay, Md. Jon's dream was to one day have a skateboard facility in this area for all present and future skateboarders to use and enjoy.

He was known and loved by all as an exuberant, smiling, happy young man who could light up any room no matter where he was or what he was doing. Jon always carried a bright, loving smile on his face. He was an inspiration to all and will continue to be an inspiration in many different aspects of the lives of those who knew him. He will truly and sadly be missed by everyone forever.

In addition to his parents, he is survived by two sisters, Kaitlyn Marie Barrett and Brooke Lynn Barrett, both of Sharpsburg; his godmother, Crystal Lewis of Sharpsburg; maternal grandparents, C. Ronald Bern of North Carolina and Barbara and Edward Steiner of Florida; paternal grandparents, Pong and Larry Barrett of Gaithersburg, Md.; and his uncle, Kevin Bern of North Carolina.

Private services will be at the convenience of the family.

The family will receive friends Sunday, Dec. 18, from 2 to 4 p.m. and 6 to 9 p.m. at Bast Funeral Home in Boonsboro.

In lieu of flowers, memorial donations may be made to Jon Ray Barnes Memorial Fund, c/o Hagerstown Trust Co., 207 N. Main St., Boonsboro, MD 21713.

When I wrote about this tragedy in an earlier post, one commentary asked if a memorial fund would be set up and if so, where to send gifts. That question is answered in the last line of the obituary.

I can't explain it, but for some reason, this death seems to have affected me more than it has my son. Maybe he is just better at concealing his emotions than I.

I Am Offended

"The ultimate determinant in the struggle now going on for the world will not be bombs and rockets but a test of wills and ideas-a trial of spiritual resolve: the values we hold, the beliefs we cherish and the ideals to which we are dedicated." --Ronald Reagan

Recently I was told I offended somebody with my comments about Democrats. I admit that I shouldn't have made it appear that I thought ALL Democrats are anti-American. I don't think that at all. I sincerely regret giving that impression.

That said, let me state for the record that I am offended, too.

I am offended that some people want to minimize the great accomplishments of our armed forces in Iraq.

I am offended by the members of the American media who refuse to report on the positive things happening in Iraq and focus on the negative things, giving hope and support to the terrorists that are attacking innocent men women and children in Iraq.

I am offended by some people who decry the questionable treatment of Terrorist detainees while ignoring the fact that innocent people are being beheaded by those same terrorists they seek to protect.

I am offended that some people call our President a liar.

I am offended that some people say our President intentionally led us into the war by manipulating false information.

I am offended that some people would undermine the efforts of the military and embolden the enemy just to energize their own political base.

I am offended at Howard Dean and others who say we cannot win the war in Iraq and that our soldiers are terrorists.

I am offended that some people call the terrorists "freedom Fighters" instead of the cold blooded murderers that they are.

I am offended that some people refuse to acknowledge the monumental accomplishment of the Iraqi people who voted for a free and independent parliament in numbers that put our people to shame.

I am offended by politicians who minimize that accomplishment and then find something else to attack the President about.

I am offended that some Democratic leaders offer aid and comfort to the enemy.

I am offended by Republican leaders who fail to call for the indictment of those same Democratic leaders for Treason.

I am offended by some people who say they support our troops but continually denigrate them and their leader.

I am offended by some people who liken our brave American servicemen to Nazi's, and other repressive, oppressive regimes.

I am offended by some people who liken the President and his staff and his party to Nazi's and other repressive, oppressive regimes.

I am offended that some people seem to want us to lose the war in Iraq because it will help them win elections in 2006 and 2008.

I am offended by Hillary, who thinks the country is so dumb that we can't see that her so-called move to the middle is motivated by her ambition to the presidency.

I am offended by the mother of a brave fallen soldier who uses her son's death to embarrass our country and throw support to our enemies.

I am offended by some people who want to inhibit the efforts of the President to do whatever he can to protect the people from future 9/11 type attacks.

I am offended that over 2,000 men and women have died to protect the rights of those people who would rather divide our country than unite us.

I am offended by some people who want to abolish God from our country, our classrooms, our holidays, and our hearts.

I am offended by some people who say they love our country but do everything they can to tear it apart.

I am offended by some people who propagate racism in the name of tolerance.

I am offended, angered, and saddened by the many attempts to destroy our country from within by people who claim to be patriots.

Yes, these are just some of the things that offend me. There are many more. The entire list could fill the pages of a book.

So, if my truths offend you, I am sorry.

Not sorry that you are offended by me voicing my convictions.

Sorry that you have been blinded by the propaganda from those who seek to destroy our country from within.

Democrats Lose Another Election

"Anybody who doesn't appreciate what America has done and President Bush, let them go to hell." -- Iraqi Citizen, voter Betty Dawisha

In the beginning, Iraqi's voted to become an autonomous Democracy, and darkness was on the face of the Democrats.

Yesterday, Iraq held democratic elections to select their own parliament. For the first time in decades. Perhaps for the first time period. I confess I don't know all their history.


A guest host on the Glenn Beck program, whose name I didn't catch, made a great observation: How wonderful it must have felt for the 80 year old man to express his honest opinion openly for the first time in his life without fear of being hauled off and cut into little pieces!

It is estimated that as much as 80% of Iraq's eligible voters braved threats of death to stand in long lines for hours just for the privilege of voting for the candidate of his or her choice. Think of the sheer joy they must have felt to be able to at last have a say in the workings of their government. Some of the people brought their entire family with them even though the children were not old enough to vote. They wanted their kids to relish this moment for the rest of their life. Remember, with terrorists attacks so common, it is very dangerous to bring your children with you. One Iraqi citizen held up a purple stained finger and said, "Every purple finger is a bullet in the chest of terrorism."

How many of our country's citizens would face death just for the privilege of voting?They put us Americans to shame for our apathy in the election of our leaders. I wonder why we are so apathetic.

No I don't.

We are so used to having the freedom to come and go at will, to voice our approval or opposition to the prevailing government, to vote in free elections, that we no longer treasure the freedoms we enjoy. How sad. We can learn something from the Iraqi's.

Something valuable.

In every part of Iraq, people stood in lines that stretched down the block and around the corner to vote. Democrat politicians had little to say about this historic event. Democrat Senator Joseph Biden, who was visiting Iraq during the election, was unusually positive, saying, "The question is whether we trade dictatorship for chaos."

Chuckie Shumer ignored the election entirely, opting instead to return to the attacks against Karl Rove.

Unbelievable.

Leave it to the Democrats to throw a wet blanket over this momentous occasion.

The truth is, we are winning this war against terrorism and the Democrats can't stand it. It proves Bush is right and they are wrong. They know that if we win the war, they will not win the next election. Their whole agenda is to defeat the Republicans in the next 2 elections, and they were counting on failure in Iraq to accomplish that goal. Other than that, they have no plan.

It's as simple as that.

Nominated for 7 Golden Globes

"I grew up a-dreamin' of bein' a cowboy, and Lovin' the cowboy ways." -- Willie Nelson

The biggest movie out now, if you believe the Hollywood hype, is "Brokeback Mountain", a film about the relationship of two cowboys in Montana set in 1969. What kind of relationship you might ask?

A homosexual relationship.

That's right. An entire film about gay cowboys. The film has been nominated for 7 Golden Globe Awards. Why is this not surprising?

Because Hollywood filmmakers are the ones that give out the awards. And they have no concept of reality. They want to try to convince real people that homosexuality is normal. They will fail. Most Americans know it is perversion. They just won't admit it.

The fact is, if this film didn't receive so much self congratulatory hype, no one would go see it. Well, no one except homosexuals.

In point of fact, few people want to see men making out. And even less want to see men having sex with each other. But Hollywood will hype it because it furthers their perverted agenda.

I predict now that Brokeback Mountain will no doubt win all 7 Golden Globe awards. And that is scary.

Why is it scary?

Because it will encourage other filmmakers to make pro-gay movies. Soon all America will be awash in homosexual movies. We won't be able to swing the proverbial dead cat without hitting one.

It might actually prove to be a good thing in the long run. Initially, people will be curious and go see them. But eventually, they will grow tired of watching men having sex with other men and the attendance will drop significantly.

The majority of Americans are sickened by homosexuality. Brokeback Mountain will fail to convince real thinking people that homosexuality is normal.

In an online opinion poll, the last time I looked at it, 93% of those polled said they would rather see "King Kong" over "Brokeback Mountain", and yet, "King Kong" received no nominations at all. What's wrong with this picture?

Hollywood is what's wrong.

My Conviction On Abortion

"It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish." --Mother Teresa

A Comment in the thread left after Yesterday's post made some interesting points, but not any that we haven't seen before:

"Abortion is the act of an individual, allowable under the law. I oppose it. But in the clash of rights and responsibilities and right and wrong and liberty that IS "the abortion question," and absent any clear guidance from Scripture, I stand with those who would continue to allow women to make the decision and deal with the consequences both here and in the hereafter. That's what "pro choice" means."

It is my opinion that the above statement is wrong in many ways. Here is my response:

The first thing that pops out and glares at me is the oft repeated argument that abortion is legal. This is oftentimes the first argument brought up in an abortion discussion. Are the proponents of abortion saying that since it is legal, it is moral? The usual line is this:

"Well, I don't think it's right but it's legal".

Do the proponents of abortion think the same of other issues? The comment was part of an anti-death penalty comment. The death penalty is legal. Does that make it right? My respected commentator doesn't think so. Why, then, does he use that argument to support abortion?

At the risk of offending some people, I have to say it is my conviction that anyone who says they support choice while personally opposing abortion is being hypocritical.

How can you support something you oppose? That just doesn't make sense.

Point made: Just because something is legal it doesn't make it right. Why do you think we Christian conservatives have been fighting so hard to make it illegal?

What gives women the moral right to choose to kill their own baby? The Government? If we follow that logic then everything the Government decides is morally right. Even execution. Even the current war. So, if Government is the final arbitrator, why would one oppose some of it's policies and support others? That's illogical. Maybe it's best to just shut up and let the World go to Hell in a hand basket.

"...absent any clear guidance from Scripture". What part of "Thou shalt not kill" is not understood here? Never mind. Don't answer that. We've heard the arguments about that, too. How about this?

"And if men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him; and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life." (Exodus 21:22-23)

By the way, further reading in that passage in Exodus, as well as in Leviticus and Dueteronomy supports the Biblical reasoning that Capital punishment is right and moral in God's eyes.

The Mosaic law tells us that a man who induces an abortion or miscarriage is to be punished, indicating that God values life before birth. A verse from Hosea 3 says that abortion is a punishment for sin, indicating God views it as bad. Likewise, God expressed His disgust for the Ammonites, who "ripped open the pregnant women of Gilead".

One might argue that Jesus repealed the Mosaic law. He did not. He said, "I have not come to change the law, but to fulfill it." The only problem Jesus had with the Mosaic law was the way the religious leaders of the day perverted it for their own humanistic purposes. Much the way we see Earthly governments today doing.

Finally, let me add my own response to those who say execution is wrong and abortion is ok. The key word in all this is the word, "innocent". Tookie Williams was far from innocent. Unborn babies are the only innocent life on Earth. Why should it be right to kill babies and wrong to kill vicious murderers?

Is it only about choice? Obviously Williams had a choice. His choice was to not give his victims a choice. Did his victims have the right to choose? Do you suppose they chose to die? Should he be given the choice to decide not only if he should live but if his victims should?

I had made up my mind to leave religion out of my posts, but since the commentator brought up the word "scriptural", I felt I owed him a response. And since the religious point of view has been broached, let me explain what convinced me, personally, that abortion is wrong.

I didn't always believe abortion is wrong. I once had the attitude that it is a woman's choice, and besides, it's legal.

One crisp autumn morning, while waiting for the office I worked at to open up, out in the parking lot, listening to the radio, my whole view changed. I was switching stations on my car radio when I happened across a program hosted by Rev. Chuck Swindoll, who was, at the time, President of Dallas Theological Seminary.

My whole argument was that a fetus wasn't a baby until it was born. Rev. Swindoll shot down that theory with the use of two short scriptures.

One was the scripture found in Jeremiah that says, "Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you." The other one was the story of the visit Mary, the mother of Jesus, paid to her cousin Elizabeth, who was the mother of John the Baptist. Elizabeth was 6 months pregnant at the time with John, and Mary had just been told she was pregnant with the Son of God. When she told her cousin the news, Elizabeth's baby leapt with joy within her womb.

On the surface, one wouldn't think those simple scriptures would make a dent in my hardened heart, but there was something more powerful than words at work within me at that time. Somehow, and I am not going to attempt to explain how, my mind about abortion was changed at that moment.

Yes, I changed my mind. It took God to change my heart.

Tookie, Tookie, Goodbye

"Well, any human being will cast about in a moment of stress" -- Ulysses Everett McGill (from "O Brother, Where Art Thou?")

It is now 12:05 AM EST. In a little less than three hours, Stanley (Tookie) Williams will be dead. He will be executed by lethal injection, according to the laws of the State of California.

He had his last appeals, to the appellate court, the Supreme Court, and to the Governor of California, Arnold Swartzenegger.

He has been turned down.

Twenty five years ago, Stanley Williams took the lives of four people, all of them strangers to him, for a little bit of money. He gave them no final meal, no final words, no final appeals. And they didn't die quietly, painlessly, in their sleep, as he will. They died painfully and slowly, while, in at least one instance, Stanley laughed at the sound of the death rattle.

And yet, there are those who say that the execution of Stanley Williams is unfair and unnecessarily cruel. They say he has reformed, that he no longer represents a threat to others. They say he has devoted the last few years to attempting to persuade young people to stay away from street gangs, and the drugs and violence associated with them. He has written children's books to that end. It has been reported that he has been converted to God.

But has he? Only God knows for sure.

But let's look at the evidence.

First of all, he refuses to admit guilt, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. He refuses to show remorse. He shows no sympathy for the victims and their families. Even if he wasn't guilty, it seems to me that he would at least feel sorry for the victims of this horrific crime. But he doesn't.

He is a founder of the infamous street gang known as the Crips. A gang that has grown to national prominence, with thousands of murders to their "credit" over the past 25 years or so. He has ordered gang hits from his prison cell. He has been in many fights in prison over the last 25 years. He has assaulted the prison guards.

Sunday afternoon, I caught part of an interview with Williams on the radio. He was asked if he was afraid of death. He said he doesn't fear death because he doesn't fear the unknown.

He must be the only person on Earth that doesn't fear the unknown. He said no one has ever been resurrected from the dead and come back to explain what is in store for those who are facing death. I find this to be a strange statement coming from someone who has been converted. After all, Jesus was resurrected and came back to warn us of what is in store for us after death. If Stanley has been converted, wouldn't he know that?

I don't fear death because I know what will happen to me after death.

I think anybody would do anything they can think of to avoid death. Including reforming himself, at least until he can get out of the situation. It is human nature. I don't think Stanley Williams is any different in that regard.

In an interview, Mike Farrell, the actor famous for his role on TV's MASH, said the government doesn't have the right to take the life of Stanley Williams. He said it would cut his life short before he could make amends with the Lord.

Personally, I see this as an opportunity few of us get. To actually know in advance the exact time and day of your death. No one can ask for a better opportunity to get your affairs in order and to repent and ask forgiveness. If he refuses to do so, he has no one to blame but himself.

Seems to me, Stanley Williams, in that, is a very lucky man. For his sake, let's hope he will avail himself of the opportunity.

Tragic News

" ...for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day."--2 Timothy 1:12

Many of you may recall a post I made about a month and a half ago regarding a skateboard competition in which my son placed 2nd.

Yesterday morning, Sunday, we received some tragic news. The young man that won the competition, along with two other teens, was killed in a house fire.

KEEDYSVILLE, MD- Residents in Keedysville woke up to flames on Sunday morning as fire and rescue teams rushed to the scene on Mount Hebron Road.

"A house was on fire; there was a total of six occupants. Three occupants were accounted for and three are deceased," said John Latimer, Director of Washington County Fire & Emergency Services.

School officials from Boonsboro High confirm the students who died were seniors Brian Daigle, Jon Barnes, and Mike Abell.

Read the rest here

I am not good at eulogising. I will say this: He was a good friend of my son. I only met the young man once, at the competition, and I recall a very polite, friendly young man. I liked him instantly.

Oddly enough, This is not the first time a friend of my son was killed in a house fire. Back in Kansas City, one of his classmates was also killed in a fire along with the child's younger brother. It is hard to read my son, to know what he is thinking. He is, like me, not given to outward signs of emotion. I hope he is handling this news as best he can.

Tragedies like these force us to come face to face with our own mortality. It is a stark and shocking reminder that none of us ever know when it is our time to go. It is essential, then, that we are prepared, both in mind and in spirit, for that eventuality.

I was raised to believe that if you are not a Christian, you are not prepared for eternity. I realize some people might not like to read this, but this is how I feel. I know that it seems exclusive and offensive to some, but just because it is unpleasant to hear, it doesn't mean it's not a fact.

I think Jon (my son's friend) was a Christian, but no one but he and God knows that. I know he belonged to the church that held the skate competition, and that he was wearing a t-shirt emblazoned with the church's name when I met him. Of course, being raised in a church doesn't make one a Christian any more than being raised in a garage makes one a car. We who survive can only hope that he is with Jesus now. It is too late to pray for his salvation.

This is what I am thinking:

Maybe it's time for further introspection. At the risk of being accused of proselytizing (is that really a bad thing?), I just want to say here, that if you don't know where you will spend eternity, maybe it is high time you consider that. I know where I will be the instant I draw my final breath.

Do you?

Introducing Grey Eagle

"We have, as all will agree, a free Government, where every man has a right to be equal with every other man. In this great struggle, this form of Government and every form of human right is endangered if our enemies succeed." --Abraham Lincoln

I don't suppose there is much point anymore in revisiting this topic. Those of us who believe the current war we are fighting in Iraq is a necessary evil to help preserve freedom and democracy in the world, and to insure our continued existence, will always believe thus.

Those who believe the war is unjust, illegal, and started for greedy and selfish reasons, with lies and misinformation will most likely always assert their position to be true.

There is some conjecture that those who oppose the war the most have never been in the military and hence, don't know what they're talking about. I'm not so sure that's true, especially in the light of Representative Murtha's recent statements.

But I would like to introduce my readers to Grey Eagle, a female soldier, who is currently deployed in Iraq and is experiencing the war first hand. She knows what is going on there. She understands why we are there. She sees the difference between what the media reports on the war and what is truly happening over there. I have linked to her on my blogroll.(With a tip of the hat to Lone Ranger)

We should pay attention to her and to the others who are actually engaged in combat, defending the rights of those who say we shouldn't be there. On her site, she has reproduced the e-mail that a young soldier wrote to his mother:

Mom,

Be my voice. I want this message heard. It is mine and my platoon's to the country. A man I know lost his legs the other night. He is in another company in our batallion. I can no longer be silent after watching the sacrifices made by Iraqis and Americans everyday. Send it to a congressman if you have to. Send it to FOX news if you have to. Let this message be heard please.

My fellow Americans, I have a task for those with the courage and fortitude to take it. I have a message that needs not fall on deaf ears. A vision the blind need to see. I am not a political man nor one with great wisdom. I am just a soldier who finds himself helping rebuild a country that he helped liberate a couple years ago.
I have watched on television how the American public questions why their mothers, fathers, brothers, and sisters are fighting and dying in a country 9000 miles away from their own soil. Take the word of a soldier, for that is all I am, that our cause is a noble one. The reason we are here is one worth fighting for. A cause that has been the most costly and sought after cause in our small span of existence on our little planet. Bought in blood and paid for by those brave enough to give the ultimate sacrifice to obtain it. A right that is given to every man, woman, and child I believe by God. I am talking of freedom.

Freedom. One word but yet countless words could never capture it's true meaning or power. For those who have fought for it, freedom has a taste the protected will never know. I read that once and it couldn't be more true. It's not the average American's fault that he or she is "blind and deaf" to the taste of freedom. Most American's are born into their God given right so it is all they ever know. I was once one of them. I would even dare to say that it isn't surprising that they take for granted what they have had all their life. My experiences in the military however opened my eyes to the truth.

Ironically you will find the biggest outcries of opposition to our cause from those who have had no military experience and haven't had to fight for freedom. I challenge all of those who are daring enough to question such a noble cause to come here for just a month and see it first hand. I have a feeling that many voices would be silenced.

I watched Cindy Sheehan sit on the President's lawn and say that America isn't worth dying for. Later she corrected herself and said Iraq isn't worth dying for. She badmouthed all that her son had fought and died for. I bet he is rolling over in his grave.

Ladies and gentleman I ask you this. What if you lived in a country that wasn't free? What if someone told you when you could have heat, electricity, and water? What if you had no sewage systems so human waste flowed into the streets? What if someone would kill you for bad-mouthing your government? What if you weren't allowed to watch TV, connect to the internet, or have cell phones unless under extreme censorship? What if you couldn't put shoes on your child's feet?

You need not to have a great understanding of the world but rather common sense to realize that it is our duty as HUMAN BEINGS to free the oppressed. If you lived that way would you not want someone to help you????

The Iraqi's pour into the streets to wave at us and when we liberated the cities during the war they gathered in the thousands to cheer, hug and kiss us. It was what the soldier's in WW2 experienced, yet no one questioned their cause!! Saddam was no better than Hitler! He tortured and killed thousands of innocent people. We are heroes over here, yet American's badmouth our President for having us here.

Every police station here has a dozen or more memorials for officers that were murdered trying to ensure that their people live free. These are husbands, fathers, and sons killed every day. What if it were your country? What would your choice be? Everything we fight for is worth the blood that may be shed. The media never reports the true HEROISM I witness everyday in the Iraqi's. Yes there are bad one's here, but I assure you they are a minuscule percent. Yet they are a number big enough to cause worry in this country's future.

I have watched brave souls give their all and lose thier lives and limbs for this cause. I will no longer stand silent and let the "deaf and blind" be the only voice shouting. Stonewall Jackson once said, "All that I have, all that I am is at the service of the country." For these brave souls who gave the ultimate sacrifice, including your son Cindy Sheehan, I will shout till I can no longer. These men and women are heroes. Their spirit lives on in their military and they will never be forgotten. They did not die in vain but rather for a cause that is larger than all of us.

My fellow countrymen and women, we are not overseas for our country alone but also another. We are here to spread democracy and freedom to those who KNOW the true taste of it because they fight for it everyday. You can see the desire in their eyes and I am honored to fight alongside them as an Infantryman in the 101st Airborne.

Freedom is not free, but yet it is everyone's right to have. Ironic isn't it? That is why we are here. Though you will always have the skeptics, I know that most of our military will agree with this message. Please, at the request of this soldier spread this message to all you know. We are in Operation Iraqi Freedom and that is our goal. It is a cause that I and thousands of others stand ready to pay the ultimate sacrifice for because, Cindy Sheehan, freedom is worth dying for, no matter what country it is! And after the world is free only then can we hope to have peace.

SGT Walter J. Rausch and 1st Platoon
101st Airborne Division (Air Assault)

Visit Grey Eagle's blog. Read it. And learn.

Bad Week For Democrats

"Never give a sucker an even break" -- W.C. Fields

This hasn't been a good week for the Democrats. Democrat hack Ronnie Earle had one bogus charge thrown out in the Tom Delay case. John Kerry used an unfortunate choice of words in an interview on CBS's Sunday news program, Face the Nation. And Howard Dean opened his mouth and once again, inserted his foot.

In the Delay case, the Charge of conspiracy was thrown out because it was proven that the law that Earle claims Delay broke was not a law when the so-called "crime" occurred. Once the other charges go before a jury, they will be dismissed, too. Mr. Earle will have to find another Republican to harass.

John Kerry (Viet Nam war veteran) chose some unfortunate words when he said, "There is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the -- of -- the historical customs, religious customs. ... Iraqis should be doing that."


Although the last thing I would want to do is defend Mr. Kerry, I believe in being fair, and in this case, I think it is only fair to point out that the only thing Kerry did this time, was to fail to clarify what exactly, he was trying to say.

This is how I see it: He was referring to the American soldiers going into houses searching for al-Qaida operatives, and disrupting the lives of the poor terrorist sympathizers who live in them. I am sure they have, on occasion, mistakingly entered the wrong houses and I can imagine that the innocents in those cases would indeed be frightened.

I think if there are women and children harboring terrorists, they don't have a complaint if a squad of soldiers invade their home. If they are innocent, they won't be harrassed, anyway.

Personally, it vexes me to hear Conservatives intentionally misinterpret what amounts to nothing more than an honest mistake on a Liberals part. There are so many intentional stupid remarks and lies they can point to without resorting to what is usually a Liberal tactic.

Still, he did say Iraqis should be the ones doing the terrorizing, didn't he?

What's even more outrageous is the fact that his spokesman didn't simply explain Kerry's intention the way I did, but instead launched an invective filled attack at those who reported it in an unfavorable light:

"Ken Mehlman's filthy and shameful lie about a decorated combat veteran is disgraceful. Political hack Ken Mehlman and draft-dodging doughnut-eating Rush Limbaugh have something in common. Neither of them know anything about how to make American troops safe".

So often, Democrats attack instead of admitting mistakes, which would have been easier and less offensive. Now, we are left wondering if maybe Kerry really meant what he said after all.

On the other hand, Howard Dean was just being typically (for him, at least) moronic, when he said:

""I wish the President had paid more attention to the history of Iraq before we had gotten in there. The idea that we're going to win this war is just plain wrong."

This is just another in a long litany of stupid statements he has made since he became Democratic Party Chairman. Would anyone like to take bets on when the Democrats finally jettison this human flotsam?

Here, again, instead of apologizing and/or at least owning up to the fact that he said something moronic (again), Chairman Dean's spokesmen went into full CYA mode by attempting to explain his statement away:

"Here we go again, the Republicans are cherry picking Governor Dean's words just like they cherry picked the pre-war intelligence."

By the way, even many Democrats are backing away this time. Some have said "he doesn't speak for them" and what he has said is "an embarrassment".

Here is what is really happening in Iraq instead of losing, as the Democrats would have us believe:

The Department of Defense reports that the citizens of Ramadi have turned in an al Qaeda terrorist known as "the Butcher of Ramadi." The townspeople brought him to an Iraqi and U.S. forces military base, where he was taken into custody. He was wanted for criminal activities including murder and kidnapping.

In one of his recent speeches, President Bush noted that the number of actionable intelligence tips received from Iraqi citizens is up about ten fold since earlier this year (from something like 400 per month to more than 4,000). This clearly is an important sign of progress, and the handing over by Iraqi citzens of "the Butcher of Ramadi" constitutes good anecdotal evidence of that progress.

It seems that the Democrat leadership are the suckers, and Conservatives don't intend to give them an even break. And why should they? Democrats would certainly do the same if the roles were reversed.

LIberals Prove Themselves Intolerant (Again)

"Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." -- Winston Churchill

Is it just me, or does anyone else see the irony in this?

Conservative columnist Ann Coulter cut short a speech at the University of Connecticut amid boos and jeers, and decided to hold a question-and-answer session instead.

Coulter's appearance prompted protests from several student groups. About 100 people rallied outside the auditorium where she spoke, saying she spread a message of intolerance.

"We encourage diverse opinion at UConn, but this is blatant hate speech," said Eric Knudsen, a 19-year-old sophomore journalism and social welfare major who heads campus group Students Against Hate.

That's kind of like the pot calling the kettle black, isn't it? Apparently, the only thing Liberals are intolerant of is tolerance of Conservatives.

Look, I allow that Ann Coulter can be acidic and sarcastic at times, but she is funny and more importantly, she is right. As in correct. Liberals don't like her because they can't out argue her, which was demonstrated at the University of Conneticut the other night. Instead, they resort to attempting to shout her down.

If you ask me, I would say she scored a huge victory against the left wing Liberals by their very reluctance to listen to what she had to say. Nothing proves my oft repeated point that Liberals are mean spirited and closed minded better than this.

This is not to say that all Liberals are not intelligent and cannot form a legitimate argument. It only says that Ann Coulter's protestors on this night couldn't.

Most extreme left wing Liberals are this way. They don't have ideas. They don't have solutions. They don't have a plan. They don't have answers. To any problem. All they know how to do is launch personal attacks and indulge in name calling and accuse Conservatives of lying.

When was the last time a Liberal speaker had a pie thrown in their face? I don't know of any time when a Liberal speaker was booed off the stage but it is fairly common for Liberals to do that to Conservative speakers. Is it because they are afraid of hearing the truth?

I think so.

A Quiz

Notice To all my respectful regular readers and commentators: I felt sorry for Bruiser and took comment moderation off so he could comment without fear of getting deleted, but he abused the privilege when he left a comment on a previous post which said, among other objectionable things, "I know you are Asian Nantoonkut I saw you drive."

Racial attacks will not be permitted on this blog, and especially when they are directed toward my friends. I am sorry for the inconvenience to the respectful commentators here. I personally do not like comment moderation as it doesn't allow any one to see comments between the time they add them and the time that I am able to publish them, but Bruisers rudeness has necessitated this change.

Pakistan school officials have decided to delete a poem from a textbook. Read the poem, and see if you can figure out why. Uneducated Blogger points for the correct answer.

ISLAMABAD: The government is excising from the new English textbook for class XI a poem titled "The Leader":


"Patient and steady with all he must bear,
Ready to accept every challenge with care,
Easy in manner, yet solid as steel,
Strong in his faith, refreshingly real,
Isn't afraid to propose what is bold,
Doesn't conform to the usual mold,
Eyes that have foresight, for hindsight wont do,
Never back down when he sees what is true,
Tells it all straight, and means it all too,
Going forward and knowing he's right,
Even when doubted for why he would fight,
Over and over he makes his case clear,
Reaching to touch the ones who won't hear,
Growing in strength, he won't be unnerved,
Ever assuring he'll stand by his word,
Wanting the world to join his firm stand,
Bracing for war, but praying for peace,
Using his power so evil will cease:
So much a leader and worthy of trust,
Here stands a man who will do what he must."

"We have decided to delete the poem from the book, published by the National Book Foundation (NBF) and prescribed for the federal board students of intermediate," a visibly embarrassed official of the federal education ministry told The News. "

Pearl Harbor Day

"Yesterday, December seventh, 1941, a date which will live in infamy, the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan." --Franklin D. Roosevelt

64 years ago, on this day, combined forces of the Japanese Army, Navy, and Air Forces ruthlessly attacked our Naval base at Pearl Harbor, in the Hawaiian Islands. For a more complete history, read Pero's outstanding account here.

I think it's interesting to note the similarities to the attacks on the WTC and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. The attack initially came from the air, and was aimed at symbols of American power in the world. Including the missing, we lost about the same number of Americans in both attacks.

And in 1941, as in 2001, the entire country was outraged, giving way, in a matter of a few short months, to dissent from opponents of war.

There were the isolationists who objected to getting involved in the initial preparation for war, and then, after we entered, they were the first to complain that Roosevelt hadn't properly prepared us against possible attacks against America.

It has been said by many, Americans have a short memory, and that is the primary reason that we were caught unaware, both at Pearl Harbor and on 9/11. It is also a partial reason why there is so much dissent, anti-Americanism, and lack of support for our troops in Iraq today.

The more things change, the more they remain the same.

"Remember Pearl Harbor" became a rallying cry in 1941, and it sustained us as a people thoughout the rest of the conflict with Japan, and went a long way toward our eventual defeat of Japan in 1945.

In the same way, we need to make "Remember 9/11" a rallying cry to further strengthen our resolve to defeat the current threat to America, freedom, and democracy worldwide.

We can defeat this enemy, but we have to unite to do so. Nevermind why we are in this fight. The fact is, we are in it, and, as Benjamin Franklin said, "We must all hang together, or most assuredly, we will all hang separately."

Our future, and our status as the greatest country on the face of this earth, is at stake.

Happy (Christmas) Holidays!

"In the United States Christmas has become the rape of an idea." --Richard Bach

There has recently been a flap over the secularization of Christmas, as there is every year. The focus of the controversy this year revolves around the policy some stores have implemented of requiring employees to say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas", in the interest of political correctness. Or at least, in an attempt to remain inoffensive to people.


I wonder just how many people are really offended by the name, "Christ" in Christmas. Certainly it doesn't offend me, but then, I am a Christian. But I wonder just how many non-Christians are offended by the name of our most popular holiday. Then, I think of my feelings about the words "Happy Hannukkah" or "Happy Kwanzaa".

Nope. Not offended by them. Not at all.

Yesterday, after hearing some more noise on the subject, I did an little informal research study of my own. As I drove my car up to Pennsylvania, I listened to the radio and made a note everytime a commercial came on advertising something as a "Holiday" gift idea, as opposed to a "Christmas" gift idea. Also, although I primarily listen to talk radio, I changed stations now and then, to an "all holiday music, all the time" station, and noted whether each song was a secular Christmas song or a sacred one.

Actually, I am offended by the radio station I used to listen to Laura Ingraham on changing their format to all holiday music. There are advantages as well. I don't have to worry about stumbling across Ed Schulze either.

But I digress.

The results are this. In both commercials and songs, the ratio of secular over sacred was 5-1. The number Commercials talking about "Holiday" gifts and Secular songs, like "Jingle Bells", and "Winter Wonderland", etc. were something of a surprise to me. Maybe I just haven't been listening. Actually, "Jingle Bells", one of the most famous Christmas songs, isn't really a Christmas song at all. It never was. It is a winter song.

A couple of years ago, I went into Walmart to find Christmas cards to send to my family. I was astounded at the few "religious" Christmas cards there were to choose from. Hundreds of secular cards but only 3-4 depicting Christ's birth. It's troubling to me that the "reason for the season" isn't the reason anymore.

But this flap over retail employees being required to say something other than "Merry Christmas" is way overblown in my opinion. It doesn't bother me that I don't hear "Merry Christmas". In fact, I've been paying attention since this whole thing erupted and, to tell the truth, I haven't heard many of them say anything other than "Thank you". Just to see what they say in response to "Merry Christmas", everyone I greeted that way responded with a "Merry Christmas" of their own. Even at Target.

As far as saying "Happy Holidays", I have no problem with that, either.

M. Brandon Robbins, in a comment over at ER's place, made the observation that "Numerous holidays are celebrated this time of year, and to say 'Merry Christmas' is to show preferential treatment and possibly exile a huge number of customers."

I agree with that. Except the "huge number" part. Huge numbers don't care one way or the other. Oh, and I don't agree it shows preferential treatment, either. It is merely tradition to wish each other "Merry Christmas" this time of year. Maybe it shows perceived preferential treatment, but that perception, in this case, would be mistaken.

He also said, "Don't these money-grubbers realize that saying "Happy Holidays" is more smart marketing than de-Christianizing Christmas?"

I don't see that as smart marketing as much as it is the result of "money grubbing". And, in my opinion, that tactic backfired. In the interest of trying not to offend, they have alienated a lot more people than they would have had they simply left the issue alone.

But then, Robbins is smarter than me. After all, he has a degree in English and I, alas, never graduated college. (Sorry, Brandon, couldn't resist.)

I swear I saw someone on ER's site say that the actual reason for the season is to celebrate the Winter Solstice, but when I went to retrieve that quote I couldn't find it. Maybe it was my imagination, but I swear I saw it! I thought Brandon said that, too.

That, of course, is balderdash. I think that statement must have been made by someone in their 20's who never experienced life in pre-political correctness America. It is Christmas. A day set aside (at the wrong time of the year) to remember the birth of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the founder of Christianity.

I grant you that it was meant to replace the heathen celebration of the winter solstice, but Christ is the reason for celebrating the Christmas season. And the advent of winter is the reason for the celebration of Winter Solstice.

Why celebrate the first day of winter? All you're doing is celebrating the fact that you've survived up till now.

That makes even less sense than celebrating birthdays.

Also: While searching for "Christmas" in Google images for a picture to add to this commentary, I found it took me through 11 pages before I found an image of the Nativity. So even Google has forgotten what the reason for the season is.

And that is truly disturbing.

Feeling Old

"The first thing I do everyday is read the obituaries. If my name isn't in them, I have breakfast. If it was in them, I'd have breakfast anyway. No sense going on an empty stomach." --George Burns

When one celebrates a birthday, they aren't really celebrating the actual birthday, but the anniversary of the day they were born. No one has more than one birthday. But for the sake of brevity, I will refer to the anniversary of the day of birth as a birthday.

What are we celebrating when we celebrate birthdays anyway? The fact that we survived another year. Is that a noteworthy accomplishment? It seems to me, unless you lead a reckless lifestyle, just surviving isn't much of an accomplishment. So when we acknowledge another milestone of existence with a celebration, we are really only saying that avoiding the grim reaper is a good thing.

But is it?

I see death as a graduation. A promotion to what I once heard referred to as "The Church Triumphant". The older I get, the more I look forward to it.

"This world is not my home,
I'm only passing through.
My treasures are laid up
Somewhere beyond the blue.
The angels beckon me from Heaven's open door.
And I don't feel at home in this world anymore." --William Walker, 1809-1875

I don't fear death. I really don't. I fear incapacitation, and pain, and infirmity, and Altzheimers. But I don't fear death. There are times when I would welcome it. A birthday is one of those times.

I also fear being alone when I go. I know that sounds weird, but that is something that really bothers me. I am single, and except for my son who lives with me, I have no one who will be with me when I die, and that bothers me. I do not want to die and my body not be discovered for several days. I wouldn't want to be the one to discover someone's body that way, and I wouldn't want to put anyone else through that.

My grandfather suffered with emphysema, and died of it at the age of 84. At he end, he became philosophical. My brother lived with him and my grandmother shortly before he passed. My brother, who was undergoing some introspection of his own at the time, asked him, "Does the thought of dying bother you?" My grandfather's answer was profound in it's simplicity. This is what he answered:

"It's not the dying that bothers me, it's the gettin' on with it."

That's how I feel on my birthdays.

I remember when I had my first grandchild. My oldest brother didn't have any grandchildren yet and he is over 10 years older than me. I remember asking him if it made him feel old when he considerd that his youngest sibling was a grandfather. I'll never forget what he said in reply:

"I never feel old."

I like that attitude. It just doesn't happen to be mine. I do feel old. And it is on my birthday that I feel the oldest. Last week, I was in Wendy's with my son, and the counter person told me he gave me the senior citizens discount. I didn't ask for it. That made me feel old.

By the way, I always go into the restaurant instead of going through the drive-through. I never miss an opportunity to use the rest room. That is something you learn as you grow older.

The way I see it, there is something narcissistic in celebrating birthdays. It is a time when we announce the occassion to our friends in an effort to surround ourselves with other narcissists who will offer the concilliatory pats on the back to make up for all the times they failed to acknowledge real accomplishments during the preceding year.

I still remember when I was in my teens, back when the earth was cooling, I used to say "I hope I never live to be 30". I did make it to 30. And 40. And 50. And so far, beyond.

Birthdays make me reflect on past failures. I've missed a lot of opportunities. That is my own fault, really, most of the time. Maybe that's why the pain cuts so deeply. If I had tried and failed, I could at least have the satisfaction of knowing that I made an effort.

On my birthday, I recall the words of my hero, Cyrano de Bergerac who said:

"How Fate loves a jest. Behold me ambushed. Taken unawares. My noble foe, a lackey. My battlefield, a gutter. It seems too logical. I have missed everything. Even my death."

By the way. In case you're wondering. I am 54.

New Policy: Zero Tolerance for Jerks

"Shake a leg Junior! Thank God your mammy died givin' birth. If she'd have seen you, she'd have died o' shame." -- Governor Menelaus 'Pappy' O'Daniel from "O brother, where art thou?"

I have had just about all I can take from the likes of the anonymous "Bruiser". For that reason I have re-enabled comment moderation because I discovered, during my recent experiment with it, that it seems to repel Bruiser and others of his ilk.

I have tried to be tolerant of his lunacy and up to now, have allowed him to post whatever poison he wanted to, but I see now I was wrong to do that. My purpose for doing that was so that the readers who frequent my blog could see moonbattery lunacy at it's worst but it seems allowing him to comment only encouraged him to be bolder and more offensive.

Apparently, the only reason people like him bother to comment on our blogs is so they can see their own hateful words in print. None of them even tried to leave a comment on my blog when moderation was enabled, which tells me that if they can't be seen, they don't even consider their own opinions worth voicing.

It is what I expected. All they want to do is instigate fights. They have nothing to lend to the conversation. Incidently, this is so typical of the Liberals in this country. They have one platform:

Hate Bush. Hate Bush. Hate Bush. Nothing more. Nothing positive to offer. No Solutions. No ideas. No brains. If Bruiser wants to spew his hateful venom on the internet I suggest he start his own blog.

Bruiser and his kind causes one to understand why some animals eat their young. Perhaps Bruiser was just too fast for his mother to catch before he got away.

Note to Bruiser and his cohorts: If you want to comment and you have something pertinent and respectful to say, even if you disagree, as long as you are respectful, I will post your comment.

Culture of Corruption

"You can't cheat an honest man." --W.C. Fields

A frequent and usually unwelcome commentator to my blog here who calls himself "Bruiser" has inspired this comment today. Those who frequent this space will recognize the name of the commentator who continually uses my blog as a forum to voice his hatred for President Bush and the Republican Party in general. More often than not, his comments have little or nothing to do with the thread in which he is commenting.

One wonders, since he has so much to say, why he doesn't have a blog of his own, but I digress.

Recently he has been bringing up a name of Jack Abramoff, a wealthy lobbyist and attorney who has been connected with no small amount of scandals in Washington. I suppose, since Abramoff is a Republican, Bruiser is using Abramoff as evidence of the corruption of the Republican party as a whole.

I did a Wikipedia search on Abramoff and according to them, Abranoff is indeed a pretty smarmy little worm, involved in many different scams and scandals involving some members of the Republican party, but he hasn't exactly confined his deeds to the Republicans. He has also been involved with some Democrats, as well. But, as W.C Fields said, "You can't cheat an honest man."

My conclusion is this:

Abramoff is a snake. And so are some Republicans. But he is not representative of the Republican party as a whole. And he certainly has nothing to do with the President, who is Bruiser's real target.

By the way, Bruiser, Has he been convicted of anything yet?

Now. Let's talk about the Democrats.

Democrats are the party that supports murdering babies.

Democrats are the party that supports dehydrating brain damaged people to death.

Democrats are the party that supports letting murderers get away with murder by trying to abolish the death penalty.

Democrats are the surrender party, as evidenced by their continual call to the President to cut and run, leaving the people of Iraq to fight terrorists on their own.

Democrats are the party that supports doing nothing when attacked, which inspired Osama bin Laden to characterize America as a "Paper Tiger" and, ultimately, were probably the indirect cause of the terrorists attacks on September 11, 2001.

Democrats are the party that supports the abolishing the right to free exercise of religion, unless the religion is anything other than Christianity or Judaism.

Democrats are the party that supports removing of the word "God" from our currency and from the pledge of allegiance.

Democrats are the party that supports Un-Americanism of every kind, and appeasement of our enemies, and the abdication of our power to the United nations, a corrupt organization that is basically useless.

I am sure I left out many other examples of Democratic lunacy, but I have to take my son to Arlington, VA again today and I don't have time to elaborate anymore, but I think you get the picture. I think, while I'm there, I will visit the National cemetery, where the bodies of our brave men who fought and died for our country are resting, many of whom were not supported by the Democratic Party.

Now, I have to go. Have a good day.

Crime And Punishment

Pete: The Preacher said it absolved us.
Ulysses Everett McGill: For him, not for the law. I'm surprised at you, Pete, I gave you credit for more brains than Delmar.
Delmar O'Donnell: But they was witnesses that seen us redeemed.
Ulysses Everett McGill: That's not the issue Delmar. Even if that did put you square with the Lord, the State of Mississippi's a little more hard-nosed. --From O Brother, Where Art Thou?"

Credit for this story comes From Mercury news:

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - "Crips co-founder Stanley Tookie Williams moved a step closer to the death chamber Wednesday when the California Supreme Court refused to reopen his case in four murders and halt the state's highest-profile execution since the death penalty was reinstated.

In a last-ditch legal move, Williams alleged that shoddy forensic testing and other errors wrongly sent him to San Quentin State Prison, where he is scheduled die by lethal injection Dec. 13.

Lawyers for the convicted murderer who claims he redeemed himself on death row by penning anti-gang books for kids wanted to re-exam ballistics evidence that showed Williams' shotgun was used to kill three people during a Pico Rivera motel robbery in 1979."

This case reminds me somewhat of the case of Karla Faye Tucker, the first woman executed in Texas since the Civil War. What made her case unique was the fact that while on death row, she was converted to Christianity. Because of her conversion, many evangelical leaders, as well as anti capital punishment advocates and politicians rallied to her side, expressing a wish that her sentence be commuted to Life without parole. Karla Faye herself did not ask for pardon, only commutation of her death sentence to a life in prison that she can atone for her crime by working in the prison's hospital.

According to Wikipedia, "While on the death row, Karla Tucker become a born-again Christian and married by proxy the prison chaplain Dana Lane Brown whom she was allowed to see during the marriage ceremony only through a Plexiglas barrier. On February 3, 1998, Karla Faye Tucker was executed by lethal injection and pronounced dead at 6:45 p.m."

I remember personally, an interview she did wherein she stated that she deserved execution and that she was prepared to meet her God with a clear conscience, knowing that God had forgiven her for her sins. She accepted her punishment with grace and aplomb. Upon hearing her testimony, I was convinced that she indeed had been converted, however, becoming a Christian did not absolve her from the crime for which she was convicted, according to the law. Her victim was still dead and she had been sentenced accordingly. She accepted that and so did I.

In my opinion, her execution was just.

The difference in the two cases is this: Karla Faye Tucker admitted her guilt and shouldered responsibility for her crime. Stanley Williams still protests his innocence. His crime was much worse than Karla Fayes as she was convicted of two murders, and he was convicted of four. Penning anti-gang books for kids does not un-commit the crime. He may indeed be reformed but his victims are still dead, and he has not admitted responsibility. The sentence should be carried out.

Have Pity On Cindy

"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Then quit. There's no point in being a damn fool about it." -- W. C. Fields

I have to admit it. I was all ready to defend poor misguided, mistreated little Cindy Sheehan. After all, I have a heart. When I saw her in that photo sitting there all forlorn and lonely, and looking so vulnerable at her book signing, my heart went out to her.


I figured that some photographer had seized upon the opportunity to make her look even more pitiful than she is by catching her in a moment when there just didn't happen to be anyone having a copy of her book signed. I've never been to a book signing, (I did happen to wander in to a music store one time when Charlie Pride was autographing his new album, but I wasn't there long, so I can't say how many he actually did sign) so I assumed there is sometimes a lull in the activity from time to time.

I was right.

According to AP reports, Cindy took offense that the media was making things appear much worse than they were, with their slanted reporting of the failure of her book's debut. She said, if my memory serves me correctly, that they sold out their entire on-hand inventory of 100 books and made $2,000.00 for the Casey fund.

Good for her!

And just as I suspected, some unscrupulous photographer had sneaked in and caught her in an unguarded moment, making it appear that no one showed up for the party.

The Washington Post reported it this way:

"Sheehan found herself addressing a crowd of only about 100 on Saturday afternoon. The large tent where supporters had erected a stage hung with the banner 'Speak Truth to Power' was only partially full. Earlier, Sheehan signed copies of her new book for an even smaller crowd."

Interestingly enough, I can't seem to find any of the articles I read just 2 days ago about the low turn out at her book signing.

At any rate, as I said, I was all ready to come to her defense and tell those evil Conservatives to get off her back. She's had her moment in the sun. Several in fact. And she deserves some respect for her tireless efforts to put an end to what she believes is a needless war with needless deaths, including that of her son.

And then I heard that any book signing by Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter has lines that stretch around the block full of people wanting to buy and have their own copies of their respective books autographed. They both said signing 6,000 books in one day was common.

That makes Cindy's 100 books sold seem pretty insignificant.

I think Ms. Sheehan has begun to lose her effectiveness in her war against the President. From the information I read, but can no longer retrieve, there really aren't even very many reporters hanging around her anymore. I suppose the few that are there are assigned to her, just in case she does or says something either monumental or stupid enough to generate some interest to their audience.

I think it's time for her to salvage what's left of her dignity and just go home. She has become irrelevant. And I will admit to feeling some compassion for her predicament. She has unfortunately lodged herself between the proverbial rock and the proverbial hard place, and extrication will take some doing. She will need help. She cannot get out of this one on her own.

Actually, I do feel sorry for Ms. Sheehan. I feel sorry that she has allowed herself to become a pawn of the anti-Bush crowd. I feel sorry that her original mission has become lost amid the pomp and circumstance of the various lunatic fringe movements, such as the American Socialists and the American Communist Party. I think even Cindy would admit that they have done more to distract attention from her cause than they have helped. I feel sorry that her entire life has become a media circus, and something of a comic strip.

I also feel sorry for her because she has lost focus within the glare of the spotlight. No longer is the story about the loss of her son, who fought bravely and died for her very right to protest. The story now is Cindy Sheehan herself.

And that, I believe, may be the real tragedy.