If Liberals Had Their Way

"Civilization is built on a number of ultimate principles...respect for human life, the punishment of crimes against property and persons, the equality of all good citizens before the law...or, in a word justice." ~ Max Nordau


Original artwork provided by yours truly.

The scene is a room somewhere on the grounds of GITMO at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. The room is bare except for a desk, and three folding chairs, upon which three men are seated, one behind the desk, one in front of the desk and one sitting at a slight distance behind the man at the desk. The man behind the desk is an anonymous CIA Interrogator. The man in front of the desk is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, leading al Qaida terrorist. The man in back is a referee, selected by the Obama administration to make sure the interrogator doesn't employ any illegal torture techniques.

Interrogator: Now, Mr. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Please tell me anything you know that might possibly be helpful to us in helping us prevent further Terrorists attacks on America. Pleeeeeease?

KSM: You will see soon enough, Pig!

Interrogator: Aw, c'mon Khalid, pretty please?

KSM (grinning): Nope!

Interrogator: I'll give you a cookie if you tell us.

KSM: With sprinkles?

Interrogator: Uh...sorry, Mr. Mohammed, we only have chocolate chip.

KSM: Then....no!

Interrogator: OK, OK, OK, we'll get cookies with sprinkles. Someone get Mr. Mohammed a cookie with sprinkles! But remember, if I give you a cookie with sprinkles, you'll tell us when the next attack is coming, OK?

KSM: If it's a good cookie, with lots and lots of sprinkles, I'll tell you. I promise.

Interrogator (handing KSM a cookie. With sprinkles): Here. Here's a cookie with sprinkles. Would you like some milk to wash it down?

KSM: Yes, thank you. (eats cookie, and washes it down with a cup of milk)

Interrogator: OK, now. Tell us what we want to know.

KSM (grinning ever wider): Ha Ha ha! You will know soon enough! Ha Ha Ha!

Interrogator (slams his palms down on desk, exasperated): Darn! Now what can we do?

Referee: Well, unless you have a nicer, more polite interrogation technique, I guess you'll have to let him go.

Interrogator: Darn. I really thought we were close this time.

MSNBC news in background: A 747 jet airliner has just crashed into the Federal building in Los Angeles. Estimates are that there are as many as 5,000 people inside. So far there is no word on who's responsible, but MSNBC analysts suggest it was an attack perpetrated by former President George W. Bush, in retaliation for the loss of the election to our revered Messiah, Barack Obama. Now, for a word from our sponsors.

KSM: He he he he he!

The preceding dramatization could be the result of Obama's stupid, naive, "One world of Peace" political philosophy.

Prosecution May Be A Slippery Slope

"Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends." ~ J. R. R. Tolkien

The reports that Obama has bowed to pressure from Liberals are true. He had promised America that he wouldn't seek prosecution against individuals responsible for what he perceives to be war crimes, that is, rather forceful, but effective interrogation techniques, meant to illicit vital information from enemy combatants that posses knowledge of potential future terrorist attacks on our country.

But now, he has recanted, due to pressure from outspoken America-hating, "blame America first" Liberals.

Now, he has suggested that his legal department may seek legal action against the Bush administration's legal department for certain memo's they wrote regarding the method by which interrogators received information that ultimately prevented many terrorist attacks on the American people and infrastructure. At least one of these prevented attacks (the flying of airplanes into a building in Los Angeles) would have been similar to the amount of death and destruction sustained in the infamous attacks of September 11, 2001.

For the record, I personally differ from my Conservative comrades on the subject of whether the practice known as "waterboarding" can be called "torture".

I understand the practice of waterboarding is part of the standard training of CIA and other covert operative trainees. I have heard (although I can't know for sure), that no one has ever withstood more than 2 minutes under this interrogation technique. Even hardened, battle tested veterans of the CIA have failed to last more than 2 minutes.

I am loathe to disagree with so many of my Conservative heroes, such as Mark Levin, Sean Hannity, and Rush Limbaugh etc, but in my humble opinion, any technique that will cause everyone, including all CIA operatives, trainees or experienced, to break in less than two minutes is definitely torture.

How can it not be?

That said, I have no qualms whatsoever in applying any technique, torture or not, to any enemy combatants and/or terrorists, if it will save human lives.

Flaming bamboo jammed underneath fingernails? Yep. Inserting glass rods into penises and then breaking them, resulting in excruciating pain the rest of their lives every time they urinate? You betcha! Hooking testicles up to battery leads? Go for it! Attaching a bag full of ravenous rats to the face? No problem!

Whatever it takes to save American lives. Damn the Geneva Convention. They want to play rough? I say, "oblige them".

But that is not my point. So, I digress.

Not that I care if Obama gets himself into trouble, but in my opinion, Barack Hussein Obama needs to be very, very careful in going this route. Prosecuting these attorneys on Bush's staff could well be the tip of the proverbial iceberg.

If he can successfully prosecute them, what's to stop him from then going after George W. Bush himself?

This is where I believe Obama would do himself a huge favor by not heading for this slippery slope.

(I feel safe giving him this free advice because I know this will never get back to him.)

I may be wrong, and if I am, any attorneys that read this will please correct me, but there is a little term called "Legal Precedence".

Unless I'm wrong, it is very hard to break new ground, jurisprudentially (is that even a word?) speaking, unless legal precedence can be established first.

Prosecuting a former President for war crimes, or even complicity in war crimes would be a devastatingly unprecedented groundbreaking legal maneuver. And, if Obama attempts it, and is, God forbid, successful, he would be establishing legal precedence, thereby making the prosecution of a former President much easier the next time.

Therefore, should Obama go that route, he could be putting his own future in serious jeopardy.

Obama is pretty brazen, as we have seen. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he tries it. He certainly has the required arrogance.

I almost hope he tries to prosecute Bush.

It would almost be worth it to see Obama frog marched out of the courthouse in chains.

Of course, in my opinion, he doesn't have to do anything that outrageous. He already deserves prosecution for trying to mount a quiet revolution contrary to the Constitution, in his overt attempt to change the United States of America into the United Socialist States of America.

There is also another little thing called "providing aid and comfort" to the enemies of The United States of America.

And, attempting a [violent] overthrow of the United States of America.

FYI: I finally published an introspective type piece on my other (religious) blog, "God's way/My way" today, in case anyone wants to peruse the religious side of Mark. The link is in my blogroll.

Evidence Of Obama's Narcissism

"I'm grateful that President Ortega did not blame me for things that happened when I was three months old.” ~ Barack Hussein Obama

During the Summit of the America's meeting, Nicaraguan Dictator----oh, sorry, wrong word, again---- President Daniel Ortega launched an incredible fifty minute long diatribe against the United States accusing our country of all manner of evil oppressive, terrorists acts against such freedom loving Democratic Republics as Cuba, Venezuela, and of course, his own Nicaragua.

According to FOX news, Obama sat on his hands during the rant, removing them from under his posterior only occasionally, to take notes.

I must assume, since Obama doesn't seem to object to the concept of Socialism in general, that he was taking notes he could refer to when considering better, more effective means of enslaving and oppressing American citizens during the remaining first term (he probably won't have more than one term) of his Presidency.

He certainly didn't seem to find fault with Ortega's faulty recollections of South American/U.S. Relations.

I pointed out in my last post, that the simple handshake between Obama and Chavez was no big deal, that it was simply a matter of being polite. And I stand by that position.

But, I do not condone Obama's seeming agreement to the majority of Ortega's condemning remarks.

In this case, I believe Obama should have at least stood up and left the room during the speech, thereby showing defiance and strong disagreement. It would probably be asking too much of the Marxist American so-called President to jump up and shout "liar"!

But then again, I suppose expecting Obama to do anything other than nod in agreement over America's perceived human rights abuses would be expecting too much, also. Anyway, these supposed abuses don't have anything to do with Obama, himself.

And therein lies my point.

Singular in it's audacity, was Obama's comments offered afterward, in response to Ortega's vilification.

During a seventeen minute response to Ortega's address, Obama went off script (and presumably, off teleprompter) to offer this gem:

"To move forward, we cannot let ourselves be prisoners of past disagreements. I'm grateful that President Ortega did not blame me for things that happened when I was three months old.”

Well, there we have it. Evidence of what I've been saying all along about Barack Hussein Obama's narcissism.

It really is all about Obama, isn't it?

At least, as far as Obama is concerned, anyway.

The Handshake

"One of the greatest victories you can gain over someone is to beat him at politeness." ~ Josh Billings *

So. According to the Liberally biased Media, Conservatives are grumbling with displeasure at the now famous photograph of Barack Hussein Obama shaking hands with Venezuelan Dictator---oops! Sorry, wrong word--- "President" Hugo Chavez.

For the record, As a Conservative, I often am displeased with Obama, but not over something as innocuous as a handshake. Just sayin'.


Well, maybe they are. I've been busy this weekend and haven't had a lot of time to peruse my blogroll.

Wait. I'll go do that now. Don't go away. I'll be right back.

In the meantime, why don't you amuse yourself by watching this hilarious comedy routine by belly busting comedienne Janine Garofolo? I'll be back in a minute.



Ok. I'm back.

I just checked several Conservative blogs on my blogroll, and found very little outrage at "The Handshake". I even checked blogs that usually go postal over the most insignificant things, and there are indeed some blogs that mention "The Handshake", but nowhere near the outrage the media claims.

Say it ain't so, Joe! The media wouldn't exaggerate, would they?

Michelle Malkin expresses outrage more at the apparent fawning and slobbering love for Chavez demonstrated by Obama than "The Handshake".

Mike, from Mike's America, merely echoes Michelle's observation, "At least he didn't bow," and casually wonders if Obama means to emulate Chavez's charming way of oppressing and jailing his opposition.

I guess the media's perception of reality differs somewhat from mine.

Here's my perception:

Obama and Chavez were both attending a summit meeting involving most, if not all the South American countries. They were both there. I will assume both were invited, but, either way, it is most likely inevitable that sometime during the conference they would meet. It is also most likely that upon meeting each other, they would exchange handshakes.

What should we expect Obama to do? Stick his tongue out at him?

I think when a meeting occurs between two Socialists, the last thing we need to worry about is whether they shook hands or exchanged pleasantries.

It's no surprise that there might be a sort of "mutual admiration society" between the two.

They are, after all, both Marxists.

Chavez gave the gift of a book to Obama. (I have no knowledge of what gift, if any, Obama may have presented Chavez) The book is a chronicle of the United States oppression of South American countries written in Spanish, virtually assuring Chavez that Obama will never read it or even take the time to have it translated.

After all, Obama is much too busy to wade through mounds of Communist propaganda.

He has television appearances and photo ops to make. That surely leaves little time for him to read. (he's probably already read the book, anyway)

Especially when he has his own ideas of how to create a Marxist society out of the United States of America. He needs no help. He is doing quite well on his own.

Again, I think "The Handshake" is the least of our worries. I worry much less about their initial greeting at the conference than I do about what they talked about.

From what little I read, one thing they talked about is this: Obama has apologized to South America. For what, I'm not sure. And, he has reiterated his belief that America is an evil, evil country.

In conclusion, I'm okay with Obama shaking Hugo's hand. As long as he washed it afterwards.

* Probably, if anyone read the quotation at the beginning of this piece, you are wondering which of the two participants in "The Handshake" won this particular battle. Well.... so am I.

More On ( Moron) Liberal Bias In The Media

"The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools." ~ Herbert Spencer

In the wake of all the grass roots Conservative tax and spend protests, called tea parties (in reference to the famed "Boston Tea Party" of 1774), all across America, the Liberally biased media are having a field day voicing their now blatant derision of everything and everyone that's holy, just, and truly democratic (as opposed to what the socialist Democratic party has in mind) in The United States of America.

Can there be stronger evidence of Liberal bias in the media?

For example, CNN proudly trumpets their Liberal agendaa with some rude, classless reporter's (I don't know what her name is, and I don't care) treatment of a father who is, quite frankly, fed up with Obama's socialist wealth distribution plan of spending massive amounts of taxpayers money, by throwing it at every Marxist social program of which he is made aware. And that's a lot, since every money grubbing Liberal group imaginable has come crawling out of the woodwork since "that one's" election to suckle at the government teat.

Here's a CNN reporter berating that aforementioned father for standing up for the Constitution at one tea party:



For the record, this protest might be anti-government (although, I would call it anti-Obama, but that's just me), and it's undoubtedly anti-CNN, but "not family viewing"? What the heck is that supposed to mean?

Notice how she asks him a question, then continually interrupts when he tries to make his point. Also, notice how apparently, one of her crew yells at him to shut up so she can "educate" him on Obama's stimulus plan which will ostensibly give him a whopping 400 dollar credit in a whole year, and shuttle 50 billion (that's "billion" with a "B", folks) dollars to Liberal social programs within the state of Illinois alone.

Those billions aren't going to fall out of heaven, my friends.

Unknowingly, this fiduciary "genius" CNN reporter proves the point of the tea partiers everywhere with her ignorant support of the very programs that will inevitably cost her and her heirs trillions of dollars in increased taxes. Not to mention all the psychological problems the plethora of Obama's social engineering plans will cause.

In addition, MSNBC's favorite lesbian, Rachel Maddow and her lesbian buddy, Ana Marie Cox sunk to an all time low in mocking Conservatives.

Note:It might help to Google the term "tea bagging" before watching this video so you can understand the sarcasm and/or why they are giggling like naughty schoolgirls. If you can stomach the thought. It is pretty disgusting.



It only proves what kind of profound, perverse proclivities possess the pea-sized brains of these potty mouthed Libtards.

Maddow and her butch friend have managed to prove one point which I have stated often:

Homosexuals are completely, totally obsessed with sex. I've witnessed this phenomenon hundreds of times among homosexuals. If they can turn a phrase or a word into some sexual reference, no matter how obscure, they will. They have sex on their minds at all times. Sex is their God. Sex is "Numero Uno" to the homosexual. It dominates their conversation, their actions, and their lives. They place their perversion above everything else in their lives.

Even God.

Even if homosexual behavior wasn't expressly forbidden by God in Leviticus 18:22 (that's in the Bible for those Liberals and homosexuals who accidentally stumble across my blog by googling the word, "sex"), It would still be considered a sin because it violates the first commandment, "Thou shalt not have any other gods before Me".

For the record, it also violates the second, fifth, seventh, and tenth Commandments.

Rachel Maddow and her sarcastic friend tittered and snickered like five year olds who hear the word, "underpants".

Well, we still have freedom of the press and freedom of speech in this country, so I suppose we shouldn't call for the firing of these unprincipled, blatantly biased reporters at these blatantly biased news organizations.

Really, we shouldn't, should we?

Will these tax and spend protests grow the necessary wings to become airborne?

Not if the Liberally biased media can stop them.

A Talented Scot

"Susan, you can go back to the village with your head held high, and three yesses." ~ Simon Cowell

When I woke up this morning, I discovered that I actually awakened early enough to catch the final forty-five minutes of USA network's scheduled airing of a re-run of "Monk".

Well, I love that program, so I hurried into the living room and turned on the television, only to discover the channel was already tuned to ABC, and the morning news program "Good Morning America".

Before I had a chance to turn the channel, I caught the very last of a video they were airing from Great Britain's version of American Idol, "Britain's Got Talent".

I was very impressed with this lady's talent. She is from Scotland, hence the title of my post. I thought I'd share it with both of my readers.

Notice the contrast of the audience reaction before her performance and then, after.

This is priceless!

Separated At Birth: Redacted

“The true hypocrite is the one who ceases to perceive his deception, the one who lies with sincerity” ~ Andre Gide

Just for fun, today, I want to link to three different blogposts, by three different bloggers, and I want both of my readers to notice the difference between how each blogpost is presented. The first is mine, from April, 2006, in which I noted a similarity between a bad photo of Cynthia McKinney and Rocket J. Squirrel. I want you to notice how a particular blogger, whose name I will not publish, responded, so please be so kind as to read the comment thread as well.

Then I want you to follow this link to Lone Ranger's blog, where he made an equally humorous observation.

Lastly, Follow this link to the nameless bloggers blog and read that comment thread, as well.

Note, if you will, that all three blog posts are humorous, but also notice how the three are presented. Two were funny but not mean spirited. One was funny but mean spirited. The interesting thing to me is that out of the three, the only blogger whose post really was mean spirited, is the one who accuses the other of being mean.

Go figure.

Obama's Decisions

"A weak man has doubts before a decision, a strong man has them afterwards." ~ Karl Kraus

Finally, after five days and numerous requests from the media for some reaction, any reaction, to the Somali Pirates taking an American ship captain hostage on the high seas, Barack Hussein Obama threw caution to the winds and ordered the Navy to use lethal force if necessary to secure Captain Richard Phillips' release.

The Navy, in turn, wasted little time in following these orders, which leads me to ask one seminal question:

What took him so long?

Does Obama not realize it is the United States official position to never negotiate with anyone who takes hostages?

Here is the process (I think) by which this thing transpired:

Obama, ever the attention seeker, initially, and as usual, wrongly, thought this little crisis was not worth taking his time to bother with, especially since finally deciding on a family dog was certainly a more important decision for him to make.

However, after news media continued to press him for some reaction to the situation, on which, I might add, he refused to answer, he sought the council of his advisors to help him decide which would be the better course of action. That course would necessarily be whatever action would garner him the most accolades from his adoring fans in the media (Which is practically all of the media, excluding some Fox news commentators and, of course EIB).

Probably, someone whispered to him, "You really should consider taking some strong action to resolve this matter. MSNBC is even starting to question your decision making skills."

Naturally, not wanting to jeopardize his long time loving relationship with Chris and Keith, he decided to give the matter a little more than just cursory consideration.

So, after days of carefully considering how the rest of the world might judge him, he reluctantly conceded the fact that something more forceful than shaking his fist at the pirates might be in order.

After five days, in which Captain Phillips' life hung in the balance, Obama finally issued an order, not to finally end this thing with extreme prejudice, but to use lethal force only if considered absolutely necessary to avoid further risk to the captain's life and/or Obama's political career.

The Commander of the USS Bainbridge interpreted this devastatingly forceful order as permission to send the scumbags to Davy Jones' locker. In a split second decision, as soon as one of the pirates made the fatal mistake of playfully pointing his rifle at the captain's head, the order to fire with intent to kill was issued, and the pirates were quickly and efficiently dispatched to cavort with their seventy-two virgins.

Problem solved, and in less than a minute, too.

Oh, I love things when they zip along!

Let me add here, that I applaud Obama for at last doing something right.

It's just a shame we had to wait for him to decide if such an order was politically expedient first.

Otherwise, the crisis would have been over the first day.


On a lighter note:

Obama's new dog is a Portugese Water Dog, who the girls promptly named Bo. The fawning news media immediately reported the dog was named for Bo Diddley, the now deceased rock and roller. But I'll bet he is named for Obama himself. After all, BO is Obama's initials, right?

This would fit perfectly with the observation that Barack Hussein Obama is a narcissist.

He Is Risen

"Vain the stone, the watch, the seal, Alleluia!
Christ hath burst the gates of hell, Alleluia!" ~ Charles Wesley



Have a blessed Easter!

New Names

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." ~ George Bernard Shaw

I got these from The Endive, a Conservative comedy website. The Endive is a web site created to be the antithesis of the Onion, which is a Liberal comedy website. My own edits are in color.

The Obama administration has been hard at work renaming many of the improperly named things we took for granted during the Bush administration. Here’s a handy guide to help you understand what everybody’s talking about these days:

The War on Terror is now
The Overseas Contingency Operation

Terrorist Attacks are now
Human-Caused Tragedies

Drug Dealers are now
Alternative Medication Providers

Enemy Troops are now
Improperly Oriented Gunmen

Dead people are now
Subterranean Contingency Humans

Kidnappers are now
Man-made Human Relocation Disaster Forces

Serial Killers are now
Repetitive Life-Removal Technicians

PONZI Schemers are now
Democrat Congressional Representatives

Illegal Immigrants are now
Misplaced Alternative American Nationals

Those who practice Bestiality are now
Alternative Animal Usage Inflictors

Death Row Inmates are now
The Appeal Generation Task Force

Terrorists are now know as
Moderate Head Removal Technicians

Retarded People are now know as
The Obama Bowling Force

Muslims Are People, Too...Right?

"Our obligations to our country never cease but with our lives." ~ John Adams

Barack Hussein Obama says we need to respect Muslims for "what they have done for America".

What have they done for America?



Why have we elected this man to be our President? Do the words, "Aid and comfort to the enemy" ring a bell?

Yes, yes, I know not all Muslims are terrorists, but how many "good" Muslims have publicly denounced terrorists acts against the United States?

Those are rhetorical questions.

I already know the answers.

Gimme That Old Time Religion

"Aint gonna need this house no longer, I'm getting ready to meet the saints." ~ Stuart Hamblen

Here in the "Community for active seniors" where I live, some of the more active residents often host short (about 1 hour) free concerts by small groups of old time Gospel singers. For the first time, I attended one of these concerts by a group called "Peggy Lee". No, it isn't the Peggy Lee, of "Sorry" fame. It is a duet consisting of a woman named Peggy and her husband, Lee.

I had so much fun, and was so uplifted, I attended the next concert by a trio called "The Traveling Pilgrims".

The songs are about Heaven and going home to meet Jesus face-to-face, and no more suffering, pain, and crying in the hereafter, and so on. For the residents of our community, the majority of whom are well past the age of retirement, these are songs of comfort and hope. One of the ladies who attended will be celebrating her one hundred first birthday in a few days.

Those of us who know the songs sing along, and are encouraged by the singers.

Sitting there in the second concert, which featured many old gospel songs that were actually new to me, I thought of some of the old songs I used to sing with my family when I was young. I kind of hoped to hear some of them in the concerts, but the only one of them either group did was "I'll Fly Away", which was more than worth the price of admission. If there was an admission.

Anyway, I found this old song on Youtube, which isn't one of the songs performed, but one I used to enjoy listening to many years ago. It was one of my father's favorites:

Happy Tartan Day!

"It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom -- for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself." ~ From the Scottish Declaration of Independence, signed at Arbroath Abbey, April 6, 1320

Today, April 6, is National Tartan Day. What is Tartan Day?

One might well ask.

This is the day when people of Scotch heritage, all around the world, celebrate their heritage. If you are Scot, and if you have anything that represents your clan's tartan plaid, such as a kilt, or a hat, or a tie, you should wear it. Wear it proudly. Today's the day.

It was on this day in 1320, that the Scottish declaration of Independence was signed in a place called Arbroath Abbey. The quotation at the beginning of this post contains an excerpt from the document. It also heads this blog, just under the title.

I am of Scot's heritage, a sept of the Clan Gunn. Below is my Clan's tartan plaid:



Here is the Gun Clan Crest:


Here is a brief history of my clan.

Happy National Tartan Day!

Waiting For God

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." ~ William Shakespeare

This is my weblog. This is the vehicle I use to express my opinion about whatever I choose to opine. I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. I do not write the things I write about to argue. I am only stating my opinion here, on the internet, somewhat anonymously. One does not have to agree with me, just as one doesn't have to comment on whatever I write.

It is the readers choice.

That is why I haven't written anything for a while. I simply cannot believe the things that are happening in my beloved America. I don't possess the words to describe the things I see happening before my eyes.

We have this person who claims the office of President who obviously doesn't have America's interests at heart. I will not call him President because he has not shown the capabilities of representing the office with even a tenth of the dignity it deserves. He has violated, and is violating his oath of office with every word he speaks, with every action he takes, and with every speech he makes.

He is systematically dismantling the Constitution of these United States while his willing accomplices in the media sit idly by and pretend they don't see plainly the things he is doing.

And yet, there are still those, who otherwise appear to have the capacity of abstract thought, who continue to ignore what seems to me to be obvious. Is this what mass hallucination causes? If so, why am I not affected?

When I was younger, there was a popular movement about, when eschatology was all the rage. That is the study of what is best referred to as "The end times". We read books by Hal Lindsey, Jack van Impe, and others who write continuously on present day events that perhaps signal the end of the world as we know it, and usher in the age of apocalypse.

Well, we got over it, didn't we? That particular fad went the way of so many others. We had simply allowed ourselves to be led along in the emotion of the moment. The popularity of the movement waned, faded, and petered out, and reason, once again took over. We sighed in relief that the end of the world was still a long way off. We wouldn't have to worry about it. That was for our children's children's children to worry about. Not us. All of us would be long gone by that time.

Now, we see that those prophecies appear to be coming to fruition before our eyes and we pretend not to notice. Why fight it? If we say something we will be labeled a nutcase. No one will listen to us anyway.

Skeptics will no doubt conclude I've lost my reason. They will insist I'm an alarmist. But I'm not. I may be wrong. I admit it.

But I may be right.

So what? It's just an opinion I express when I see events in America unfolding that seem to point to the very things escatologists have been predicting based on scriptures culled from various sources and interpreted in so many different ways it's impossible to put the pieces together.

Where to start? Where to start?

Obama using his new found, but carefully cultivated power to take over corporations and dictate who has the right to earn their salaries and previously agreed upon bonuses, and to make personnel decisions.

Obama seeking unprecedented power not authorized by our Constitution to make changes in the way our Government is intended to work. Changes that may soon adversely affect the lives of millions of Americans.

Obama going over to Europe and attempting to dictate to the world how other countries should run their respective Governments.

I'm not going to declare Obama the anti-Christ. I have neither the expertise or the accumulation of facts to support such an outlandish claim. I'll leave that to the eschatologists to argue.

Is the evidence is in front of our eyes? Are we closer to meeting God face to face than we think? Is the One World Government, otherwise known as the "new World Order" right around the corner? Can Obama complete a nefarious plan for world domination in a mere four years without anyone noticing? Anyone that people will listen to, anyway?

Ok. Now I have a choice. Should I publish this rambling discourse or should I hit the delete key? Have I sufficiently established myself as a full blown conspiracy nut with dangerous paranoid fantasies? Should I care?

Does it matter?

Another Solitary Life

"Sports serve society by providing vivid examples of excellence." ~ George F. Will

Trader Rick, who is a Florida University graduate and a football fan often posts entries about Florida football, and in particular, Tim Tebow, Florida's award winning quarterback.

Today, Rick had a video about Tebow posted on his blog, but because of some kind of problem with my computer, or browser, or something, I cannot hear the video. It plays, but there is no sound. I have this problem on several blogs. In order to hear the video's posted on various blogs, I have to click the video, which opens a window with the original video. But I still get no sound, so I have to copy and paste the title of the video, then open up the first page of Youtube, when finally, I can hear this video:


Interestingly enough, The videos I post on my blogs have sound. Go figure.

But I digress.

Because of the way my mind works, I suddenly became interested in why Tebow chose Florida, of all universities, at which to play football. So I accessed his bio at Wikipediato find out, and I found this:

Tebow was born on August 14, 1987 in the Philippines to Bob and Pam Tebow, who were serving as Christian missionaries at the time. While pregnant Pam suffered a life-threatening infection with a pathogenic amoeba. Because of extremely strong drugs used to bring her out of a coma and to relieve her dysentery, the fetus had experienced a severe placental abruption. Expecting a stillbirth, doctors recommended an abortion to protect her own life. She carried Timothy to term, and both mother and child survived.

All of the Tebow children were homeschooled by their mother, who worked to instill the family’s deep Christian beliefs along the way.

Now, several commentaries came to mind when I read this.

First, I wondered if my brother knew the Tebows. My brother was the business manager for the Southern Baptist Philippine missions at that time. The article didn't say whether they were Baptists or not, but my brother knew many missionaries from other denominations. I've made a note to ask him next time I talk to him.

Next, consider this: If Tim's parents had been Liberals and believed in abortion, Tim Tebow might not have even been born.

If they had been Liberals and allowed him to be schooled in the public (Government) school system because they think public schools are preferable to school choice, he might not have had the grades to get into Florida University. He also might not have had the moral and conservative values that were instilled in him by homeschooling parents.

A public school that teaches these values is rare in today's society.

He could have gotten involved in gangs like so many of his age. Or, he might have simply learned that to underachieve, as long as he passes, is good enough. This is the kind of education that is being received by students in most government schools today.

He might not have had the motivation to pursue such a lofty goal of becoming a nationally ranked quarterback for a national championship team. He might have been encouraged, instead, to underachieve so he could be handed government benefits and assistance paid for by the American taxpayers.

There is most likely no better reason to support the pro-life position and school choice (among other things) than his inspiring story.

If his parents had been Liberals, Tim Tebow's life would have been markedly different. Indeed, his life might not have begun at all.

There are theories around advancing the idea that if even the minutest things that happen in our everyday lives were to happen differently they would change an entire life, and even, by chain reaction, the entire world.

How different would this world be had Tim Tebow's parents decided to abort their baby to save his mother's life?

FYI: When I started blogging back in 2005, I didn't know how to post videos and audio files to my blogs. (I still don't know how to post audio files). Since I now know how to post videos, I spent a considerable amount of time, a couple of days ago, posting videos to my Scot songs blog, a blog I started for myself, which was nothing but the lyrics to Gaelic folk songs. Now, I've added some corresponding videos of the songs.

If anyone's interested in Gaelic folk songs, you're welcome to visit.

What Was In My Head When I Awoke

(Scroll down for my latest posts.)

What's In My E-Mail

"I think of a hero as someone who understands the degree of responsibility that comes with his freedom." ~ Bob Dylan

The following was sent to me by e-mail this morning:

Missing from the news


You're a 19 year old kid, critically wounded, and dying in the jungle in the La Drang Valley , 11- 14-1965, LZ Xray, Vietnam . Your infantry unit is outnumbered 8 to 1, and the enemy fire is so intense, from 100 or 200 yards away, that your own Infantry Commander has ordered the MediVac helicopters to stop coming in. You're lying there, listening to the enemy machine guns, and you know you're not getting out. Your family is half way around he world, 12,000 miles away, and you'll never see them again. As the world starts to fade in and out, you know this is the day.

Then, over the machine gun noise, you faintly hear that sound of a helicopter, and you look up to see an un-armed Huey, but it doesn't seem real, because there are no Medi-Vac markings on it. Ed Freeman is coming for you. He's not Medi-Vac, so it's not his job, but he's flying his Huey down into the machine gun fire, after the Medi-Vacs were told not to come. He's coming anyway. And he drops it in, and sits there in the machine gun fire, as they load 2 or 3 of you on board. Then he flies you up and out through the gunfire, to the waiting doctors and nurses. And he kept coming back....... 13 more times..... and took over 30 of you and your buddies out, who would never have gotten out.

Medal of Honor recipient Ed Freeman died September 26, 2008, in Boise, Idaho, at the age of 80.

Paul Newman died that day too.

But I guess you knew that.

Herding Cats

"I don't know if you're familiar with who runs that business but I assure you it's not the boyscouts." ~ Rodney Dangerfield



Over at American Descent, a blog who's creator showed a complete lack of common sense and intelligence by asking me to be one of the administrators (as Groucho said, "I don't care to belong to a club that accepts people like me as members"), a thread has developed in the comments section of an entry about house bill H.R. 1388: Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act, in which lawmakers have proposed creating a volunteer, yet mandatory civilian youth force.

Of course, mandatory volunteerism is an oxymoron. If it's mandatory, it can't be voluntary.

And vice versa.

Naturally, such a well written and well thought out blog post has brought the Libtards out of the woodwork, as most good Conservative commentaries so often do, to object and to ridicule with all the typical Liberal half truths, obfuscations, spin, and distractions.

My own contributions to the thread are not particularly insightful or very well thought out, I admit, but I have been feeling unusually surly and curmudgeonly lately, and am pretty much fed up with the blind Obama worship being exhibited by mindless Liberal Obamaphiles since Obama burst onto America's political scene. So, I just let 'er rip without regard to sensitivities.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

But a few hours ago, while I was traveling to Northern Virginia to do some of my own voluntary (but not mandatory) volunteer work, a thought occurred to me:

It would be almost worth allowing such a bill to pass just so we can watch Obama and his minions attempt to force America's youth into volunteering for anything.

Anyone who knows teenagers know they will never willingly do anything that any authority figure wants them to do.

We all know that Obama's plan to subject America's youth to this indoctrination program is specifically targeted towards the youth in our inner cities. Of course, it doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hell of being successful, especially among inner city young people.

The youth in our inner cities have only three main goals in life:

1. Getting both rich and high off Drugs.

2. Playing Basketball.

3. Becoming a rap star. (not necessarily in that order)

Now, knowing the inner city youth of America has these lofty goals in mind, what makes Mr. Obama think they will put those goals aside to volunteer to do anything if it doesn't include basketball, drugs, or rap? Even if he makes such voluntary projects mandatory?

For that matter, does he really expect suburban youth to acquiesce? Especially those who's parents make over $250,000 a year?

It just aint going to happen.

Obama's plan will be as easy as pushing a rope.

Uphill.

I'd really like to see how Obama is going to do what parents of teenagers have failed to do since time began. Make teenagers do what they're told.

I wonder. When it becomes obvious he has bit off much more than he can chew, how will he react? Will he attempt to punish them for their disobedience? What punishments will he suggest?

He might as well try to herd cats. In fact, herding cats would be easy compared to trying to make American teenagers volunteer to do anything constructive.

Now, if Obama wants them to destroy or demolish something, I'm sure he will find little difficulty finding volunteers.

But finding teenagers willing to help? That's a laugh.

Underestimating Obama

"Crime does not pay ... as well as politics." ~ Alfred E. Newman

I've been thinking. We might be underestimating just how effective Barack Hussein Obama's policies are.

I discussed The bonuses awarded to AIG's executives in a previous entry, in which I mentioned bonuses generally are awarded to employees that surpass certain goals over and above their every day duties, but in doing so, I led readers to assume the AIG executives who received those bonuses didn't deserve them.

In point of fact, I don't really know if they deserved them or not. It could be, that the executives who were awarded bonuses were employees who actually did reach the goals established in their respective contractual agreements. Perhaps the employees who failed to meet the qualifications stipulated in their contracts didn't get any bonuses at all.

I assume it is possible that some employees did their jobs exceptionally well, while the rest of the corporation foundered.

Be that as it may, We now are hearing reports of hundreds of people converging outside the private homes of various AIG executives to protest the awarding of these bonuses. They are outraged that taxpayers are funding the bonuses.

The perception is that these unnamed executives are greedy, callous, and altogether evil for daring to accept money freely given to them by their superiors in appreciation for their work, or at least because bonuses were written into their contracts regardless of achievement.

I am trying to picture these evil, evil bonus recipients:

I can picture a middle aged, bespectacled, balding, white man, bursting into his boss's office and demanding bonus money. I can picture him ranting and raving, spittle flying out of his mouth, while he's waving his arms about wildly, and screaming about how he will quit, or sue, or something much more drastic, if he isn't given hundreds of thousands of dollars for his hard work which inexplicably resulted in the failure of his entire department.

And I can picture his supervisor, quaking in fear before his underling, dropping to his knees in supplication before this intimidating spectacle, and pledging undying devotion, along with blustery promises that he would never, ever, "as God is my witness" deny his employee his just due.

Is this the picture Obama and his cronies are painting? Is it believable? In who's twisted world is this scenario even a remote possibility?

This is Obama's agenda. He wants to create a situation in which the corporations are evil and the government is the hero. And these hundreds of naive citizens are playing right into his hands.

The fact is, These bonuses were awarded by the upper echelon administrators of AIG, with the full complicity of the Legislative and Executive branches of the United States of America. And their unabashed willing accomplices in the American media, who helped to propagate all out class warfare.

They had Carte Blanche to dole out these bonuses directly from Obama's omnibus spending bill, which the "transparent" Obama simply had to rush to sign before the wheels of Congress spun completely off the rims. He portrayed the economic problems of America to be an urgent crisis.

But that isn't how Obama's administration has spun it, is it?

Obama has nothing to do with this turn of events. His hands are clean. Geithner, the tax cheat, is blameless. Dodd, and Franks, and the other miscreants in Congress and the cabinet are spotless, aren't they?

It's all the evil, evil AIG executives who are at fault. The ones who received the bonuses. Not the one's who sprawled prostrate at the feet of Congress, begging for help in the form of enormous bail-out funds, the bulk of which they promptly deposited into several foreign banks.

The money distributed to their own in the form of bonuses was miniscule in comparison.

But Obama and his gang made sure the outrage was directed to the right sources.

But now, thanks to Obama's press agents, also known as the American media, these same evil executives are cowering inside their spacious homes, petrified with fear over the prospect that their lives, and the lives of their families are in imminient danger.

Blood may end up being spilled before it's all over.

And why? Because Obama needs to distract the American people from the real crime. His economic policy, which is crippling, and perhaps even destroying America's economy.

Obama's arrogance and insensitivity towards everything this great country holds dear, the democratic American dream, has moved to institute policies which may eventually destroy our country.

Look, there is a distinct possibility that many of these executives who received bonuses shouldn't have received them. But that is AIG's business. Not Obama's.

None of these companies should have been bailed out in the first place. The free market works just fine when it's left alone. It's not unlike Darwin's theory of "survival of the fittest" for business. Only the strong or wisest should survive. If the companies cannot make it without help, they should be allowed to die, and better stronger companies take their place. That's free market capitalism, and it's worked pretty well since the founding of this country.

The true reason Obama wanted to hand out taxpayer money wasn't to help business or the economy. The real reason was so he could wrest control of them.

When corporations allow the government to bail them out whenever they fail to manage their money responsibly, they give up control to the government. It's part of the package deal. "If we help you out of this present situation, you, in turn, will have to do as we say".

That's what Obama wants. To control the corporations.

Today, the corporations. Tomorrow it may be you.

Introducing A New Blog And Another Obama Gaffe

"You have all the characteristics of a popular politician: a horrible voice, bad breeding, and a vulgar manner." ~ Aristophanes

Yesterday, I received the following announcement in my e-mail:

Being from Illinois, I understand politics- It's a pay for play world. As such, I, President Barry O, has a deal for you. Not as good as an AIG exec, but pretty good none the less.

In an effort to reach out to my fellow Americans, I have launched my very own secret blog. Problem is, it's too secret. So Rahm had a great idea. I should offer a primo adviser gig to whoever sends us the must hits. I don't understand what that means, but Ram runs the show around here- so the offer stands. The link is http://presidentbarryo.blogspot.com/

President Berry O

What this means is whoever sends us the most traffic gets a charechter named after them. Mention us in a post, refering traffic to us, and we will count up the referals from sitemeter. Whoever sends us the most traffic gets a weekly or better link as his or her charechter appears. All participants will be named to the Presidents Economic Board of Advisers. Think of it- you and Volcker hanging out at the fed-- Rahm

In spite of all the misspellings, (doesn't Barry know about spellcheck?)which normally puts me off, I visited his site and found it (if I ignore the misspellings) quite humorous.

I'm not sure how important it is to me to "get a character", or get a "weekly or better link", but I have to give him points for his marketing efforts.

So, for that unique marketing effort alone, I urge my few readers to visit Barry's site. I will recommend it for now, as long as it doesn't get too silly to endorse in the future.

Now, speaking of Barry... By now, I'm sure everyone has heard about his reference to The Special Olympics on last night's "Tonight Show", with Jay Leno:

(Listen closely after he mentions his 129 bowling score)



I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and agree that his remark was simply intended as self-deprecating humor, and not a veiled, understated slur of the mentally handicapped. I've said worse on occasion.

But then, I'm not the President.

This same man (and his devoted followers)who pretends to be offended at the slightest hint of an insensitive remark should know better than to let slip any comment that could be interpreted by the ever-increasing super thin-skinned segment of our population as so egregious and condescending.

He should know one can't make any kind of remark that might offend anyone.

I have a special needs child myself, but I wasn't particularly offended by his remark. I'm just not as thin-skinned as some.

It could have been simply an unfortunate, naive, less-than-sensitive joke, with no bad intentions, but it could have been (and most likely was) a glimpse into the true character of this lying fraud who pretends to be a hero to the oppressed, underprivileged, and downtrodden.

He's been in office for less than 60 days and already he has embarrassed himself and the office of President several times.

Obama is the real joke.