Right Equals Might

Faith

2012-01-28T14:43:00.000-08:00

~~ “Amen, I say to you, if you have faith the size of a mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you.”
--Jesus Christ (Matthew 17:20) ~~

What do you think about Faith? Not only the “religious” kind… but Faith in general.
As we live and age, it seems to become harder and harder to find that magical “believe” center of our self. We want to, but so much happens in our life that works to take away that center of Faith. Even though we are usually pleasantly surprised on those occasions where we actually do use real Faith, we still find ourselves far more often falling back to the so-called “rational” side of things.

We spend so much time hearing and seeing scientific “proof” of this and that. We often chase answers out of context of the big picture. Ironically, the minutia of fact keeps us from seeing the whole of truth… and takes us away from the extremely valuable virtue of Faith. We rely now more than ever before on “experts” to tell us the things we should know. We want them to lay it out for us so that we don’t have to think too much and make tough choices.

~~ “Faith is a knowledge within the heart, beyond the reach of proof.” --Kahlil Gibran ~~

It seems to me that Faith is, for our human spirit, the bridge between what we think we know and what we want to, but do not or cannot yet, know. It has always been this way, and there have always been people on both sides of the issue.

To some folks, the notion of Faith is ridiculous. Believing in something beyond our senses, these skeptics will say, is foolish. There is some irony—or something worse—in that, since every person relies on Faith of one sort or another every day. If they did not, then no one would ever set foot on a ship or airplane, or even walk up the stairs of their own home. After all, we take it as a matter of Faith that the ship won’t sink, the plane won’t crash, and the stairs won’t collapse and send us crashing down to a broken neck.

Is that sort of Faith the same thing as “religious” Faith? I think it’s very close. A person has Faith in the ship/plane/stairs because, after all, these things have worked before many times and there are so many people who have been helped by these things countless times, thereby proving their value and efficacy.

~~ “Do not put your faith in what statistics say until you have carefully considered what they do not say.” --William W. Watt ~~

As for the motivations driving a person of religious Faith; it would be impossible to estimate the number of human beings over the millennia who have lived their lives with strong Faith in God and His plan. For them, Faith worked in their lives many times and helped them in many different ways (thereby proving its value and efficacy, no?), just as the ship/plane/stairs have helped our skeptics.

We are peculiar machines, it would seem. Every day, we trust in things we cannot see or even explain; and if we did not, then living would become virtually impossible. There seems to be something hard-wired into us—even those of us not “religiously” inclined—requiring us to see beyond our raw intellect. It is as if our programming is such that we can function quite nicely even when we cannot see all of the facts pertaining to our situation. In fact, we no doubt function better this way, than if we were to examine every aspect of our daily lives before we moved forward. For the so-called “rational” person of science and fact, this realization must be a healthy dose of cognitive dissonance. Once they grasp the concept, though, it can be liberating.

~~ “Reason's last step is the recognition that there are an infinite number of things which are beyond it.” --Blaise Pascal ~~

I believe strongly that reason and Faith can and should work together in a harmonious way.

The challenge is to take facts and proofs and weave them into the tapestry of truth that will satisfy that part of our hearts that is always seeking it out. Philosophy—even the religious type—used to go hand-in-hand with science in numerous cases. Many of the great ancient philosophers used science to balance and even to prove aspects of their Faith… and, perhaps more importantly, they used Faith to build bridges to where their science could not yet take them.

Saint Thomas Aquinas— inarguably one of the smartest men ever to live—was a devoutly Faithful Christian, as well as a strong proponent and user of science and reason. He wrote convincingly on the subject of absolute truth and that the things we learn through our scientific and philosophical examination of nature, provided that they are unquestionably and demonstrably true, cannot ever contradict things we learn directly from God through revelation. If revelation and science disagree, then one of them is being used incorrectly. If you think about this long enough, it will make sense.

Faith, like electricity, is invisible… but its light is not. I take the philosophy of Saint Thomas to mean that we must hone both our reason and our Faith if we are to ever get at the real and absolute truth.

~~ “Faith... must be enforced by reason...When faith becomes blind it dies.” --Gandhi ~~

Another aspect of Faith is its proven ability to motivate people and get the absolute most out of them. It often works in a group environment like some kind of benevolent virus—infecting one then another as it spreads its mysterious way across the assembly. The interesting thing is how humans in groups begin to have Faith in one another. Not really so curious when you consider that the Faith in another person is usually buoyed by the reason of knowing something about him or her. In other words, we have Faith that Linda will do this one thing correctly because we have seen her do it before. This is much different from the blind Faith we would need if we had never seen Linda do the thing before. That is why I tend to think of blind Faith as more of a Hope thing.

As a case study, let’s look at the 2011 Denver Broncos and their controversial and polarizing quarterback, Tim Tebow. When he was drafted, the common opinion—supposedly derived from reason—was that it was a mistake and that he, although an unquestionably great college player, could not make it in the professional game. The experts would say in one breath that Tebow was a great athlete at this and that… but then in the next breath they would say he will fail miserably. As we all know now, once he began starting games, seemingly “impossible” things began to happen. People were calling it “miraculous” when the Broncos would produce a comeback victory with Tebow as their leader.

This reminds me of a passage from the prologue of an obscure book: “…miracles are only sparks to the fire, and the fire is Faith. Faith is the fire that has kept humanity warm since the very beginning, and miracles have been used here and there to keep it alight. Man doubts, you see. You know this because you yourself doubt. You can feel yourself slipping into dread and despair and, at those times, you call for a miracle.”

As a Bronco fan, I can tell you that I was definitely dreading and despairing of the season when we started 1 and 4 under the old quarterback. So, the “miracle” that we fans clamored for did come along for us. Was it a real miracle, though, or just a young man and his team who very quickly developed an incredible team dynamic, through which they found Faith in one another to go along with their Faith in God?

~~ If you believe, then unbelievable things can sometimes be possible. --Tim Tebow ~~

I will say that some of the things Tebow and the team accomplished were pushing the limits of believability. It was, in some instances, almost an Old Testament kind of thing, wherein God gives His champion the power to defeat foes in battle—often against all odds. Using reflection and reason, though, I can see that it was really a group of men—most of them believing strongly in God, in their own selves, and in one another—who refused to quit.

The fact is that, when mixed properly and in the right order, Faith in God, Faith in self, and Faith in others form an overwhelmingly powerful elixir. This lesson is plain to see in the Broncos.

The Tebow haters—as those pitiful souls have come to be called—are correct in one sense: Tebow is not the one winning these games… it is the TEAM. What they are missing, though, is that one man can make the difference. Ironically, the difference Tebow has made is to help the rest of his team also make a difference. He has done this through Faith, even when the experts’ reason contradicted itself.

~~ “Faith is the art of holding on to things your reason has once accepted in spite of your changing moods.” --C.S. Lewis ~~

An amazing part of the story of the 2011 Broncos team is how they came to really and truly believe in one another. Faith in God and Faith in oneself are difficult enough to attain and very special when attained, but once a group begins to really believe in one another, then extraordinary things can happen. I have seen this multiple times in my own experience—primarily in the Marine Corps, but also in other team dynamics. Before one game, the coaching staff asked Tebow to give a pep talk to the team. He chose to frame his short talk around a bible verse: Proverbs 27:17:

~~ “As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another.” ~~

His teammates later told how this profoundly sank in with them. Their young quarterback was telling them that he believed in them, and that they made him better than he really was, and that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. They responded in kind.

Not one of the experts could have predicted that this pathetic 1 and 4 team would go to the playoffs and wind up defeating the number one defensive team in the league. You see, their self-proclaimed reason told them it was not possible.

~~ “Faith is believing in things when common sense tells you not to.” --George Seaton ~~

The problem is that “common sense” often is not common at all… and what may look like reason may actually be a mixed bag of faulty paradigms and personal prejudices. Ironically, if the experts had used real and true reason, it would have led them to the same expectations of the Broncos that many “true-believer” fans (and the team itself) arrived at via Faith. Real reason will tell any expert that when a team of gifted athletes begins to believe in and push themselves and one another and refuses to quit, then some good things are going to happen.

(Painting by Jessica Wersky, Copyright 2012)
[Click image for larger view]

The team had nothing else to hold onto, and so they held tightly to one another. Teamwork for the Broncos became a matter of Faith, plain and simple… and it resulted in the most dynamic thing to happen to the Broncos franchise in many, many years—all starting with one man not listening to faulty reason and refusing to be the failure that his detractors called for. This is still quite flummoxing to the haters… and they are the most blind, since they refuse to see.

As for me, I have found new energy in my own soul, thanks to Tim Tebow and his merry band of Faithful teammates. The iron of their Faith has helped me to sharpen my own. I believed, along with countless Bronco fans... and as we believed, we watched the players and coaches believe. It was an amazing group experience that no doubter can ever take away from us.

Meanwhile, those who loudly profess “reason” will continue to loudly eschew Faith— even as they unconsciously use it every day in so many ways. I will find it eternally ironic that they will remain ignorant of how Faith is the very thing—the very bridge—that can bring them closer to fundamental truth, if they would only acknowledge its power.

~~ “To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible.” --St Thomas Aquinas ~~

-kmg

Round-Up of Some Greatest Hits

2010-08-11T07:50:00.000-07:00

This is the one that really got a lot of attention-- and got me invited onto Fox News:

Murtha Letter

The 2008 Presidential election brought me a wave of inspiration (proving that good can come from bad).

What Now?

Potential Patriots

Unity

Crises

Moderation

Hope

Change

Charity

Prestidigitation

Elenchus

Principles

Form

A few "character" essays, and a gratuitous religious rant:

Resolve

Identity

Gratitude

Resurrection

A few of the earlier essays, discussing that most taboo of topics...

On Souls And Desperation

Laus Deo

-

Elenchus

2010-04-03T13:18:00.001-07:00

-

I've come to understand that there is no way for us to win the ideological battle with the progressive statists, so long as we continue to let them pervert our First Principles through obfuscation designed to make the "common man" believe that the lefties are on the side of those very principles. They are very careful to not let their mask slip-- because they know that whenever it does, the American public rejects them forcefully.

We absolutely have to transform the battle to a definition of terms. We must first ensure that we fully understand what it means to support our Constitution, and then we must pass that knowledge on whenever and wherever we can.

Most importantly, though, we must begin to challenge those who would enslave us on basic fundamentals. We have to get them to admit who and what they are-- then the American people will have the open and honest choice between liberty and the alternative offered by the progressive statist: soft tyranny (thanks to the Great One, Mark Levin, for that delicious term).

I've been thinking a lot lately about how the great thinkers of the past would address such things. For starters, they would not agree to any false premise that is impossible to argue against once you allow it to be considered acceptable in the debate. The bottom line is that anyone who champions rational thought would insist that the terms of the debate be open and transparent. Therefore, the progressive statist cannot build his famous straw-men arguments with impunity... unless we let him-- which we have done all too often in the past.

Since we broke the seal on the philosophy package in the previous essay, let's continue with a sample Socratic elentic refutation-- one form of the Socratic method of argument. Using the elenchus, Socrates gets his opponent to refute himself out of his own mouth. The opponent makes a proposal that is shown to conflict with other claims to which he agrees. To be consistent, the opponent must give up one of these claims, and he usually abandons the original proposal.

Let's try one using universal health care as the topic. For the sake of this exercise, we will make our progressive/statist an honest fellow who answers truthfully. A stretch, you say? Probably... but we won't get anywhere if we don't state things as they truly are.

Conservative: Hello, friend! I understand that you claim to support the American Constitution's protection of individual rights?

Progressive/Statist (PS): That is correct. I am a strong proponent of the Constitution and the little guy.

Conservative: Excellent! Can you give me an example of how you would help the individual secure his rights?

PS: Of course! Universal health care is a good example of how I strongly support the right of poor and oppressed individuals to health care that they otherwise would not get.

Conservative: I notice that you have added a descriptor to the individual, i.e., "poor and oppressed." Have we decided to separate one individual from another for our discussion? If so, where do you find this distinction in the Constitution?

PS: Not everyone has the same socio-economic status and therefore some cannot afford to pay for basic necessities and rights like health care.

Conservative: Very well, let's let that one stay for now. So health care is a right? Who should pay for the "poor and oppressed" individual's health care right?

PS: Well, the evil insurance companies have to be done away with, and the rich and others who can afford it can chip in to pay for the poor and oppressed.

Conservative: But what if an individual seeks to start an insurance company-- you would tell him no?

PS: Gaining profit from people's suffering is evil. That individual can start another kind of company.

Conservative: I see. So, the insurance industry must be outlawed and the taxpayer must pay for the health care of the "poor and oppressed" individual, because health care is a right?

PS: Yes. We're the richest nation in the world and we can afford it.

Conservative: I'm sure you've put a lot of thought into how we came about being the "richest nation" in the world. Anyway, just so that I fully understand: you are saying that the tax paying individual now has the duty to pay for the right of another individual?

PS: Yes.

Conservative: And if he refuses to pay for it?

PS: He will be fined.

Conservative: And if he refuses to pay the fine?

PS: He will be arrested.

Conservative: So, the penalty is the loss of his liberty for the tax paying individual who will not pay for the rights of the "poor and oppressed" individual ?

PS: That would be his choice.

Conservative: I see. He can choose between loss of financial freedom or loss of physical freedom?

PS: I suppose.

Conservative: Very well, then. Since we've established that health care is a right, may I now ask who will pay for the tax paying individual's health care?

PS: He can afford to pay for his own.

Conservative: So, the tax paying individual's right to health care is predicated on his ability to pay for it... but the "poor and oppressed" individual's right to health care is predicated on his inability to pay for it?

PS: Yes.

Conservative: For the sake of argument, does it sound to you as if these two individuals have an equal right when it comes to health care?

PS: Well, they both will have health care.

Conservative: But they come about it in drastically different ways, no?

PS: Yes, but they have it.

Conservative: So, with universal health care you have helped the "poor and oppressed" individual?

PS: That is right.

Conservative: So, the government must help the "poor and oppressed" American citizen at the expense of the non-oppressed American citizen?

PS: Yes, the government has to step in to make things fair.

Conservative: Do you find irony in that this process will now make the tax paying individual "poor and oppressed" through government action?

PS: It has to be fair.

Conservative: Since you will admit that there is no such language in the Constitution, what are we to make of your original support for the Constitution's protection of equal rights for all individuals? Do you care to re-examine that? It sounds as though your "poor and oppressed" individual is somehow "more equal" than the other individual, no?

PS: It's about fairness. The Constitution gives us equal rights and the right to happiness. How can you be happy if you don't have health care?

Conservative: You're trying to trick me, right? You're smart enough to know that the Constitution only seeks to secure the rights that we were born with as a gift from our Creator... and surely you don't mean the pursuit of happiness (which is in the Declaration of Independence, by the way)? You are educated and must understand that the Constitution speaks of fairness only in the sense of all men being created equal, and having equal opportunity?

PS: Well, that is oppressive language. There is not equal opportunity and lots of people can't achieve happiness unless the government levels the playing field. That is why we have to update the Constitution when we find the need.

Conservative: And how do you propose we go about "updating" the Constitution?

PS: That's why Congress passed the health care bill.

Conservative: So, legislation is sufficient to "update" the Constitution?

PS: Well, they did it.

Conservative: They certainly did. I am starting to think you are fooling with me, though-- and that you are just pretending that you don't understand how the Constitution can be legally changed. Since we have agreed that the Constitution, as it currently reads, has no provisions for this health care bill, your answer is that Congress can fix that simply by voting on a bill?

PS: That's what they did. It's law now.

Conservative: Very well. So, to sum up your position-- and correct me if I go astray: 1) no one has the right to operate an insurance company, 2) certain individuals deserve to have certain "rights" paid for by other individuals, who have no such right, 3) if the individual whom the government has decided must pay for others' "rights" refuses to pay, he will be imprisoned, 4) because the government has a duty to make everything "fair", 5) The Constitution must be flexible and can be changed by legislative fiat without regard to the amendment process. Is that about it?

PS: Yes, I'd say that was accurate.

Conservative: And to you, this applies to far more than just health care, does it not?

PS: There are many areas where there is fundamental unfairness.

Conservative: I see. So, back to the original question... it sounds to me as if your position is at odds with the Constitution, as it is now worded and interpreted. In other words, you do not support the current Constitution, since it does not address "fairness" in a way that you prefer. Is this accurate?

PS: I would say so.

Conservative: Excellent! May I offer a suggested amendment that would no doubt properly address your position?

PS: Of course.

Conservative: How about "From each according to his means-- and to each according to his needs."

PS: That's brilliant!

Conservative: Indeed. Have a nice day.

-

Principles

2010-03-27T15:10:00.001-07:00

-
~~ "The principles of Jefferson are the definitions and axioms of a free society." --Abraham Lincoln ~~

Of which principles do we speak?

First Principles. Our First Principles.

We can start with a definition of what we mean by "first principles." Looking around, you'll find many ways to say it, but the gist is: "those principles from which all others are derived."

A quick and unfortunate note about our First Principles... or, for that matter, about principles in general: they are often misunderstood, misrepresented, and otherwise perverted.

~~ "Almost anything that can be praised or advocated has been put to some disgusting use. There is no principle, however immaculate, that has not had its compromising manipulator." --Percy Wyndham Lewis ~~

With your indulgence (and my apologies), I will now take a slight turn into the realm of logical philosophy. Trust me, it makes my brain hurt, too!

Let's look at the famous logical syllogistic example: "Man is mortal. Socrates is a man. Socrates is mortal." In this, "man is mortal" would be a premise-- as would be "Socrates is a man." From them, we deduce that poor Socrates is mortal (although we knew that from the unfortunate hemlock affair).

As with the above premises, so it is with first principles. They are really not negotiable. They are, in fact, set right there for us to see (if only we would look). Let's try this: "Each person is created by God with certain rights. America's Constitution creates a government to secure those rights for each American. Each American has those rights."

~~ "Every science has for its basis a system of principles as fixed and unalterable as those by which the universe is regulated and governed. Man cannot make principles; he can only discover them." --Thomas Paine ~~

Not to disagree with Mr. Paine-- but man can do much more with principles than discover them. He can live by them. He can avoid them. He can pervert them. He can even argue that they don't really exist.

~~ "There is no arguing with one who denies first principles." --Latin Proverb ~~

You've seen many times examples of the famous school of thought that says that there is no universal truth, only relative truth. "Hey, don't box me in with your truth, man!" This school of thought would argue that if the weather appears cold to you but hot to me... well, knowledge is nothing but perception, so then we must both be correct. This is known as a Protagorean argument-- one that supposes that what we perceive is all that exists.

Fortunately, we have Aristotle (and many others) to battle this. His famous Law of Non-Contradiction says that "The firmest belief is that opposite assertions are not true at the same time... it is impossible to hold (suppose) the same thing to be and not to be."

Relating this to our First Principles, we must say that all men are either created equal, and therefore have perfectly equal individual rights... or they are not and so they do not. So, state your case for either and then live with your decision-- if you can.

Aristotle explains that we can make comparative judgments (as in how the weather feels to us), even if we do not make absolute judgments (that there really is only one weather condition at the time), but that these comparative judgments themselves presuppose some absolute standard. In short, it doesn't matter if you think it's cold, the fact is the temperature is whatever it is, your "feelings" notwithstanding. Not everything can be relative to perception, as Aristotle explains-- there is something beyond perception that causes the perception and is prior to it.

By the way, Aristotle extends this discussion to opinions, arguing that not all opinions are equally authoritative. He points out that when it comes to questions about our future health, for example, the opinion of the physician is not the same as that of a lay person.

So, hold onto that thought and let's get back to our nation's First Principles. They are proclaimed in our Declaration of Independence, and relentlessly repeated and extolled in writings and speeches by our Founders and their posterity.

Summation of the big ones-- Unalienable rights: Life - Liberty - Pursuit of Happiness. Government is instituted among men only to secure these rights.

~~ "The best principles of our republic secure to all its citizens a perfect equality of rights." --Thomas Jefferson ~~

Now that is worthy of some discussion, don't you think? "All" citizens have a perfect equality of rights. "All"...? "All" meaning "each", which means "person" and not "people". Our country's founders are virtually obsessed with the power and rights of the individual.

Are we living up to this mandate for the individual? Well, to Aristotle's weather-feeling interlocutor, we might be. However, to any elementary student of rationality and logic, we are most certainly not. In fact, to most Americans, it is intuitive that we have lost many of our individual rights. Even those who are not dedicated students of our history just plain get it.

~~ "We've gone astray from first principles. We've lost sight of the rule that individual freedom and ingenuity are at the very core of everything that we've accomplished. Government's first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives." --Ronald Reagan ~~

The modern Progressive/Statist (hereafter known as PS) will take the bait and argue this point... and we should welcome that. This is the battle over whether the modern progressive movement is seeking to rescind individual rights in favor of the collective. This is the battle we should relish-- because it is the battle which, if we wage it properly, can have only one outcome: truth.

The PS will present the captious argument that helping "the people" is the only way to really secure individual rights. Progressive logic 101: false conclusion derived from a true principle. He will also tell us that we have to make sure that "oppressed" classes of people have the same privileges as everyone else. He will, by the way, tell us this in grandest straw-man form-- with anecdotes designed to tug and pull on the strings of our black Conservative hearts. He will sell the masses on the privileges of "spreading the wealth" until there is no more wealth to spread... and then he will sell the idea of "mutual suffering."

~~ "A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both." -- Dwight Eisenhower ~~

It's easy to let the PS win the small ones. So hard to fight the incremental "adjustments" to our First Principles. Many of these "adjustments" are imperceptible, unless we are hyper-vigilant. Are we? Maybe now that the PS has gotten greedy and began to overreach... but we most certainly have not been for the past fifty or more years. We forgot so much...

~~ "Important principles may and must be inflexible." --Abraham Lincoln ~~

...and...

~~ "The spread of evil is the symptom of a vacuum. Whenever evil wins, it is only by default: by the moral failure of those who evade the fact that there can be no compromise on basic principles." --Ayn Rand ~~

No compromise.

No compromise on First Principles. None.

Easy to say... very, very tough to do.

In a nutshell, that is what gives the PS the basis for his relentless straw-man arguments. To wit: If we won't compromise to save the life of a starving orphan... then what kind of monsters are we? If we won't compromise to demonstrate a little charity to share with our neighbor... then how cold are we? If we would not compromise and thus begrudge that single mother her subsistence... then how can we live with ourselves?

See how they play? So... we give in. We say:

~~ "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others." --Groucho Marx ~~

...and then we find that:

~~ "He that always gives way to others will end in having no principles of his own." --Aesop ~~

That's what we've been doing-- giving way. It has been far easier to just let the incremental tide wash over us, rather than make the effort to strengthen the dike. Also, truth be told, it does hurt to always be called a monster and a baby killer.

So... we relaxed a bit and compromised. We sought the alchemical magic of consensus instead of confirming what our hearts and minds knew to be true. Ah, sweet consensus: the seductive siren that is bringing us "climate change cap and trade" and "sweeping immigration reform."

~~ "To me, consensus seems to be the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies. So it is something in which no one believes and to which no one objects." --Margaret Thatcher ~~

Well said, Lady Thatcher! That should help snap us all out of this malaise of "compromise" that we have awoken to find ourselves mired in.

What now? We draw a line in the sand and we drive the tent stakes of our principles deeply into the earth to strengthen our resolve. That is step one.

~~ "In matters of principle, stand like a rock." --Thomas Jefferson ~~

Then, we challenge all PS comers to battle over America's First Principles. We do that by first reminding our fellow citizens of the true definitions of the Principles, so that we have many allies.

Next, we use our God-given rational minds to defeat the PS in open debate.

Stop laughing. I was serious.

~~ "'Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death." --Thomas Paine ~~

We don't need to go to death just yet... but keep that option as we may need it in the future. For now, let's steel ourselves to do rhetorical and intellectual battle. The fight has been on their terms for too long. It is our turn now to define the battlefield.

~~ "An army of principles can penetrate where an army of soldiers cannot." --Thomas Paine ~~

Remember Aristotle's Law of Non-Contradiction from above? Time to put it in play. The PS fights on the grounds that he is actually on the side of individual rights and liberty. He fights on the grounds that he is actually the one who cares for the little guy. Mostly, he fights on the grounds that only an inhuman monster would begrudge the "less fortunate" some crumbs from the table of "the richest country in the world." The PS frames all of his arguments with these false premises.

We must learn to address them logically. Here are some of the biggies.

1. "Charity." Don't be too harsh on all the liberals in this area. Some of them are just responding to the vacuum left when they lost their personal moral compass and replaced it with a government one. PS Premise and Message: Charity begins with the government righting the social wrongs. We could argue the finer points of why this is, but I believe it is because they are bereft of the individual religiously or morally charitable heart. The mantra is "Don't be a selfish, greedy capitalist." Logical fallacy: Who should decide which cause (if any) my money goes toward helping? Is it not a violation of my own individual rights to take money from me and give it to a cause that I do not support? Conservative Battle Point: America is the most generous nation that has ever existed. Average Americans give 'til it hurts to every sort of charity imaginable. By the way, polls show that Conservatives give much more to charity than do liberals. This is not remotely surprising and proves that the liberal feels far more charitable with other people's money than he does his own.

2. "Equality." A better example of a perversion of a principle cannot be found. PS Premise & Message: Equality is achieved not by the lifting up of some, but by the dragging down of many. Also, greedy Conservatives need to share with the "less fortunate". Logical fallacy: Equality to them means, in the immortal words of our First Lady, that in order for some people to get some pie, "others will have to give up some of theirs"-- thereby infringing on the rights of the "others". This is a worldview issue. Conservative Battle Point: Our goal is to get the PS to state what he really thinks (as the First Lady did). Only this way can average Americans finally start to see these people for who they are-- then we can have an honest and open debate on the merits of their way and our way.

3. "Rights vs. Responsibilities." This one is almost too easy, right? PS Premise & Message: The PS will create a "right" (progressive-speak for entitlement program) out of whole cloth. He will then proceed to tell us that this new "right" will be given to some at the expense of others. Again, greedy Conservatives need to share with the "less fortunate". We are seeing this one play out with the new health care legislation (aka the Liberty Extinction Act of 2010.) Logical fallacy: To create a right for one American citizen at the expense of another American citizen is to admit that citizens do not and should not enjoy equal rights. This is a logically bankrupt case that can only be made with emotion (which, by the way, is how the PS makes virtually all of his points). Conservative Battle Point: Shout from the rooftops when we uncover the giveaways. Call the PS out on each and every handout of tax dollars-- and, most importantly, we must not flinch in the face of the inevitable cries of "monster" and "selfish pig" and all the other things they will say. We know the truth about our generosity vs. our refusal to let the government be "generous" with our money.

4. "Richest Country..." I hear this one more than almost any other. PS Premise & Message: The PS loves to remind us that we are the "richest country" in the world. Oh, he is not in any way bragging about it. No, no, no. Instead, it goes a little something like this: "Why can't we, the richest country in the world, find it in our hearts to provide {insert entitlement here} to those in need?" Logical fallacy: We became the "richest country" in the world through rugged individualism and HARD WORK, not through socialism. Conservative Battle Point: Our salvo against this nitwittery is to remind any and all listening that there is a very good reason why we are the "richest country" in the world (hint: it isn't by punishing success and creating historic debt).

5. "Fortunate/Less fortunate." One of my personal favorites. PS Premise & Message: You will often hear this from the PS who is rich/well to do. "I'm so lucky to have what I have... must give to the government programs for the less fortunate." If you have anything at all, you didn't really earn it and so the government should divide it up equally for all others. The rich are only rich by pure luck, and thus they owe the rest of the world something. Logical fallacy: Assertion that success is an accident (yes, I know it is for some, but that is the exception that proves the rule) and poverty is just dumb luck. The fact is that most well-off people in America got that way through years of hard work. Conservative Battle Point: For starters, we must stop using their language-- when we refer to ourselves as "lucky" and "fortunate", we are falling into the trap. Much better to praise our own hard work, and our blessings from God (after all, does He not help those who help themselves?), and then turn the discussion to private charity.

The key for us is that we must talk about principles, First Principles, as often as we can. We must explain them and how utterly important they are to the survival of our country. We must make sure the PS is no longer allowed to confuse people about them. We must be crystal clear in what they are and what they are not. For example, they are not "values"-- they are far more than that.

~~ "Everyone has values; even criminal gangs have values. Values govern people's behavior but principles govern the consequences of those behaviors." --Stephen Covey ~~

I think we've made a pretty good case for the importance of our principles-- our First Principles. Now it becomes a matter of living them and taking on the swarming tide of progressive statism that seeks to dilute and even eliminate them.

All it really requires for us to successfully battle this is our brains. We have to keep the intellectual high ground and beat back the emotions and histrionics that are the weapons of choice for the progressive tyrant. Remember Descartes' famous proclamation (improved upon here):

~~ I think, therefore I am (a Conservative). ~~

We close with two giants of virtue who each knew a thing or two about principles.

~~ "Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." --John Quincy Adams ~~

~~ "Some men change their party for the sake of their principles; others their principles for the sake of their party." --Winston Churchill ~~

-

Donald's Requiem: A Short Story

2009-12-02T05:43:00.000-08:00

-

“Damn you, Donald! Why did you do this to me?”

Well, that one wasn’t too bad. At least no one else is around to hear this time. I do wish I could stop doing it, though— it’s quite odd and certainly not dignified. I don’t know where it comes from. Just slips out without warning. I think I can open a window now… surely another one won’t come this soon. Ah, but sometimes they do, don’t they?

So hard now to get up and going every day. I never realized how much Donald pushed me through life. He thought going through the day was supposed to be more than a chore. Maybe that’s why I’m snapping at Donald like this. It’s not easy with no one to push you. It’s not easy without Donald. Maybe I hate him now for this.

No. I really don’t think I hate Donald at all. After all, I know he didn’t want to die and leave me here alive. I think he wouldn’t mind still being here with me… well, of course he wouldn’t. Donald always told me he could not and would not ever make it without me… that he had to go first. Could be that sort of thinking helped bring it about. Could be that he subconsciously wanted to die and that’s why he slipped away so fast. They told me that he would probably last for months longer… that they would keep him comfortable with the pills.

The pills. Much better than surgery or procedures, they say. I can’t wait until they start me on them. So much easier and so much less intrusive on the System. Why fight an uphill battle with time and money when you can just take the pills? Perfectly reasonable. You get to a certain age and that’s that. Donald didn’t like the pills, did he? Once he got the cancer he couldn’t refuse them. I tried to reason with him… tried to tell him that it was best. He told me that the pills would kill him faster and worse than the cancer— because they’d kill his mind, he would say. No, he most surely did not like the pills. Maybe that was it. He was always so clever… maybe he found a way to stop taking the pills. That’s my Donald. He was clever and stopped taking the pills…

“Why did you do it, you bastard? You left me here like this!”

Oh, dear. That was out loud, wasn’t it? So soon after the last one. The facilitator at the Wellness Center told me they would go away soon, but I think he was wrong. He seemed rather surprised that I admitted it to him. Told me that people don’t like to open up so much to strangers, and I better keep it quiet if I know what’s good for me. Well, I suppose he must know what’s good for me, since he’s at the Center. He was nice, but very nervous. What was his name? John…or Henry… Henry— that’s it. Henry from the Center.

Donald hated the Center. Even when we were younger, he always said it was a bad thing. I never paid any of it much mind. Maybe I should have. Doesn’t matter now. Donald doesn’t matter now, either, I suppose. He used to tell me that the Center was the place where people lost their joy of living. If he had so much joy, then why did he go so quickly? Sure, sure— it was the cancer… but why should he go so quickly and not me?

“Why? You selfish son-of-a-bitch! You should have stayed longer like they said you would!”

Another one already? My… that’s the quickest ever, I think. I should go for a walk in the air before someone calls the Center on me. Donald loved walking in the air with me. Said it made him feel happy. I guess it made me a bit happy, too, but I never seemed to get the same kick out of it as Donald did. When I think about it, he seemed to get a kick out of most anything.

When I went to get the death certificate, Henry told me Donald was different. He said he didn’t meet too many like Donald at the Center. I laughed at that and told him he was surely right. I told Henry that Donald tried forty-seven times to get a permit for us to have a child. “Forty-seven times?” Henry asked me. He couldn’t believe it. He wanted to know why Donald wanted a child so much. It seemed a bit odd to Henry— and to me, I suppose—that I didn’t know the answer. I told Henry the truth that it didn’t bother me much that we never got the permit. What on Earth would I have done with a child? Besides, they were smart enough to know who should get the permits. Have to manage that process very carefully, you know.

Oh, it’s a bit cold out here today. Kind of early for cold weather… but they did say on this morning’s Broadcast that it might be chilly. Something about ocean currents. They’re always right. Donald didn’t think so. He hated the Broadcasts and I never quite understood why. After all, they told us everything we needed to know. They gave us the weather and told us what we needed to know about the local happenings— they even told us what we should do in the evenings. Donald always talked about the old days when his grandfather was young. On and on about more voices and more information and more choices. I’d always ask why more choices are so great. That would put Donald in high dudgeon every time, to be sure. Mercy, I will not miss that!

Maybe it’s good that he’s gone. He’d just be going on and on about how pretty I look on the walking track. Or, he’d want me to imagine we were at the ocean, walking in the sand and feeling the sun. Then he’d hold my hand and squeeze it so tightly while he kisses my cheek and whispers nonsense in my ear. On and on he’d be going. On and on.

“I can’t believe you left me here, Donald!”

Well, that’s it. I have to go to the Center now before they come get me. I hope Henry’s there. I trust him. They’ll have to start me on the pills now. Back inside to get a coat. Should have listened closer to the Broadcast. What’s this notice on the Public Access Screen? Oh, dear… it’s from the Stewards. Did I really leave the hall light on again? Oh, now they’ll be coming for sure. I can’t believe I did that.

Donald used to do it on purpose. He hated the Stewards. He loved to make them turn off the lights remotely. He liked reading the warnings when we’d return home. I’d ask him why… and he would just laugh and say “they’ll have to work for it from me.” Whatever that was supposed to mean. Cost us a lot in fees, and I’d remind him of that every time. “Worth it,” he’d say… every time. It’s probably his fault that I’ve done it so many times since he died. My mind can’t remember everything, now can it?

There. All the lights are off and I’ve sent an apology to the Stewards. Now, off to see Henry. What’s this in my pocket? A note. A note from Donald? Dated a week before he died…

“Dearest,

I know I’m leaving soon. I feel it inside. I’m only sorry that I’m
not going to be there for you anymore. All I ever wanted was to take
care of you. I know you think I didn’t need to because they would
take care of us all.

I’m smiling right now because I’m imagining holding your warm hand.

I’m sorry about the pills. I know you thought they were good, but I
didn’t take them. The people at the Center thought I did, but I fooled
them. Never mind how. Just know that my final thoughts are on how good
it feels to be free enough to decide something for myself. I know you
will probably be on the pills soon enough. If that’s what you want,
then do it.

Make sure you turn off the lights now that I’ll be gone. I don’t want
those sons-of-bitch Stewards giving you a hard time.

My Grandfather told me there was something better awaiting us when we
die. I think he’s right. If there is, I’ll wait for you. Maybe we can hold hands there.

Always,

Your Donald”

Found a way to surprise me one more time, didn’t he? Let’s just put this note back in the pocket. Now, then, where was I going? To the Center?

Maybe later…

First, I think I should take a walk in the ocean air.

I Love you, Donald— you wonderful bastard.

-
....... ©2009 kmg

Form

2009-08-16T08:19:00.001-07:00

Before we begin, a few quick definitions are in order; so that we will start at the same implicit level of understanding.

Form: The shape and structure of something; the essential nature of a thing; the component of a thing that determines its kind.

Reform: To put or change into an improved form or condition; to amend or improve by change of form or removal of faults or abuses; to put an end to an evil by enforcing or introducing a better method or course of action; to induce or cause to abandon evil ways.

Transform: To change in composition or structure; to change in character or condition-- convert.

The "Form" in our discussion is our national governing philosophy and practice. The United States was created to be a constitutional republic, with a federal government body that acts only within the scope of specifically limited and enumerated powers. This is the fact, and is not subject to opinion. I will remind you of it periodically throughout this piece.

It is obvious that any enterprise where people are involved is subject to imperfections, abuses, and mistakes. Our national Form is no exception to this. Even in the early days of our republic, human beings were tinkering with the levers of governmental control in order to shape the national direction. Never before, though, has our national Form been faced with the virtually existential threat it is under today.

We see an example of this in President Obama's own words. In a discussion where he was lamenting how the Warren Court fell short of economic and social "justice," he said: "It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution... that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can't do to you-- says what the federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf."

[ Our Form: The United States was created to be a constitutional republic, with a federal government body that acts only within the scope of specifically limited and enumerated powers. ]

The feelings he expressed regarding the Constitution's shortfalls provide the basis for Mr. Obama's quest to bring, in his own words, "fundamental change," "transformation," and "reform" to America. Does he miss the obvious point that the Bill of Rights is all about the individual? Does he not understand that the Founders meant to make it that way? Hardly. In fact, that is the whole point of the left's war on the Constitution. All that individual rights stuff does not float the statist's boat. Hence, "fundamental change" is necessary.

Michelle Obama clearly agrees with her husband: "Help us fight this fight to change, - transform - this country in a fundamental way. This chance won't come around again."

Sounds as if she was channeling the same sort of speeches the world has heard many times.

~~ "It is absolutely essential that the oppressed participate in the revolutionary process with an increasingly critical awareness of their role as subjects of the transformation." --Paulo Freire ~~

Typically, the leftists speak of fundamental change and transformation in the macro-- e.g., Michelle's above quote. Conversely, they speak of reform in the micro-- e.g., "health care reform."

I find that distinction particularly alarming. Should not the fundamental changing and transformation be applied only to the individual and specific "broken" policies and procedures, rather than to the very fabric and Form of the Republic? The truth is, fundamentally transforming our nation's Form is at once the holy grail to the statists, and pure anathema to the Conservatives. Therein lies the great battle.

[ Our Form: The United States was created to be a constitutional republic, with a federal government body that acts only within the scope of specifically limited and enumerated powers. ]

Now that the leftists are in power, "change" is flowing from every artery in the governmental body. They mean to bring their fundamental transformation to America. Before they can do it, though, they must strip away the remaining vestiges of the "old way"-- much like reducing the sculpture back to clay to be remolded into another, completely different form. At times, it is breathtaking to consider the scope of it. Almost as if the children have taken over the day care center.

~~ "Every genuine boy is a rebel and an anarch. If he were allowed to develop according to his own instincts, his own inclinations, society would undergo such a radical transformation as to make the adult revolutionary cower and cringe." --John Andrew Holmes ~~

Not that changes should not be considered. In fact, Conservatives want broken things to be fixed, every bit as much as anyone else. Programs and policies of the government must always be monitored to see where changes should and must be made. In so doing, though, we have to exercise a solid amount of realism and pragmatism. We Conservatives understand that lurking behind the shiny cloak of "change" is often something else... something insidious.

~~ "Every reform, however necessary, will by weak minds be carried to an excess which will itself need reforming." --Samuel Taylor Coleridge ~~

"Excess" in our nation's case would appear to have come a long time ago. The federal government has been increasing in size and scope for decades, and we now seem to be reaching some sort of pinnacle. With Cap and Trade legislation and "universal health care," the final strands of federalism, and indeed liberty itself, will finally snap.

[ Our Form: The United States was created to be a constitutional republic, with a federal government body that acts only within the scope of specifically limited and enumerated powers. ]

Fortunately, a new and legitimately grassroots movement seems to be afoot. Sober minds are now calling for a halt-- or even a slowing so that people can catch their breath and take account of what is happening. "Regular" Americans, most of them for the first time in their lives, are taking to the streets to try to slow the unprecedented growth of the government leviathan.

Remember, though, what we consider "excess," the leftists consider progress. From the very birth of their sacred "progressive movement" in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, they have sought to reduce the United States to its clay basis in order to remake it to their Utopian specifications. They are very clever in their tactics and their language. They use words like "reform" very effectively-- often casting the Conservatives as villains for standing in the way of necessary change.

[ Our Form: The United States was created to be a constitutional republic, with a federal government body that acts only within the scope of specifically limited and enumerated powers. ]

We must stop falling into that trap. We must remind ourselves and our countrymen that reform is a serious business that we do believe in, but that we must operate with great care.

~~ "Every abuse ought to be reformed, unless the reform is more dangerous than the abuse itself." --Voltaire ~~

In the final analysis, of course, it all comes down to worldview. We take it as an article of faith that our First Principles are the sacred blueprint we must return to. The left does not subscribe to the idea of individual rights trumping the "collective," and so seeks the usurpation of those founding principles.

The main tool they have used to bring about their desired transformation is their ostensibly good intentions. Virtually all of the successes they have enjoyed in breaking our constitutional code have come from what they paint as the emotional high ground. Manipulation of the electorate through perversions of altruistic concepts like "compassion" and "empathy" have brought the leftists a long, long way. In recent decades, they have learned their lessons well-- primarily from their master strategist, Saul Alinsky.

Using the emotions of the masses to create social upheaval is, of course, not new. The world has seen this countless times. What is different now for the United States is that the "transformers" have taken almost all of the controls of the federal government and are currently running it like a steam roller over constitutional and societal precedence.

[ Our Form: The United States was created to be a constitutional republic, with a federal government body that acts only within the scope of specifically limited and enumerated powers. ]

At key times, such as the November 08 elections, they have convinced a majority of the electorate that they can deliver Utopia. Again, this is hardly new, but now that they have pulled off this ultimate sleight of hand, they are running with it as never before.

Our best hope lies in the wisdom of the American voters. If they continue to awaken from their apathetic slumber, as they now seem to be, then we have a chance to at least slow the obscenely burgeoning federal beast. We must use every intellectual and rhetorical tool at our disposal, though, for the statists will continue in their blatant demagoguery to the bitter end.

We will fight that with truth and common sense, reminding ourselves and the voters of timeless axioms such as this one from a former Speaker of the House:

~~ "One of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope that the evils in this world are to be cured by legislation." --Thomas Brackett Reed ~~

Keep thinking and keep talking. We're going to prevail... we have to prevail-- for the sake of our precious Constitutional Republic and for our very freedom and individuality.

-

Charity

2009-07-26T13:34:00.000-07:00

-
"Proximus sum egomet mihi."

So said Terence, also known as Publius Terentius Afer- a 2nd century Italian Philosopher and Playwright. By this, he apparently meant "charity begins at home."

To that famous quotation, many would add the admonition: "but it should not end there." So, once you have taken care of your family and your personal needs, you should give, give, give... keep giving and then give some more. In fact, give 'till it hurts.

Right?

Well, that is certainly one view of it. Many people feel that giving to charity is not only a virtue, it is a requirement for any kind of real happiness. Most organized religions subscribe to this concept to one degree or another. In particular, Christianity most definitely espouses the importance of charity. After all, to borrow a phrase from antiquity:

~~ "Charity looks at the need and not at the cause." --German Proverb ~~

Indeed. A good case in point came to visit me just today in church. The Gospel reading was from the 6th chapter of John: specifically, the story of how Jesus fed the multitude with five loaves and two fishes. This was followed by a homily (sermon) that dealt with charity and giving, and how the Christian community must be something of a collective.

I'm perfectly all right with this concept, for as far as it goes. Just listen to one of the wise voices that helped shape our founders' philosophies:

~~ "No sound ought to be heard in the church but the healing voice of Christian charity." --Edmund Burke ~~

Still, as I sat listening, I was yet again struck by the notion that not everyone sees charity the same way. When it comes right down to it, we have a fundamental disagreement in this country on the subject of charity.

Take for example this telling moment from last year's presidential campaign. During an interview with then candidate Obama, Bill O'Reilly asked something to the effect of "why must I have more of my money taken away from me so that you can give it to other people?" Obama's answer typified the leftist view of the whole thing. Essentially, he said "because it's the neighborly thing to do."

This is the point that Obama and his brethren use with masterful skill. What kind of inhuman person would argue with being "neighborly" and taking care of the less fortunate? It is, as we've already covered, the Christian thing to do.

The point Obama makes is, of course, the ultimate straw-man. The real argument is not that people need help and ought to get it. The germane argument is how that is best accomplished.

Some people feel very strongly about charity-- and rightfully so, I believe.

~~ "If you haven't got any charity in your heart, you have the worst kind of heart trouble." --Bob Hope ~~

Others, though, believe that we've got it all wrong, and the whole charity craze is not a good thing for humanity.

~~ "Charity degrades those who receive it and hardens those who dispense it." --George Sand ~~

Some even present counter-intuitive arguments against charity.

~~ "Charity creates a multitude of sins." --Oscar Wilde ~~

Still other voices are more to the point of why we may want to be judicious in how we dispense charity.

~~ "Charity is injurious unless it helps the recipient to become independent of it." --John D. Rockefeller ~~

That is really just another way to say "give a man a fish and he eats for a day..." Hard to dispute such a clear and logical argument. Too bad we're not dealing with logic.

Instead, we must contend with the emotional and propagandistic whirlpool that the left uses as a club against Conservatives every time the issue of entitlements and taxes comes up. We are routinely hit with a barrage of rhetoric that demands "social and economic justice" (whatever that means) and help for those who have not "won life's lottery." When confronted with this nonsense, it truly is difficult to decide which battle to take up.

Should we pursue the argument that life is not a "lottery," but instead is a series of difficult-- and potentially rewarding-- challenges that some people just refuse to take up for themselves? Maybe we should cry out that the government is not empowered to decide which charity gets our individual donations. Or perhaps we should stick to the old stand-by discussion on how it is simply and patently unfair to confiscate money and/or property from one person to give to another.

Not to sound defeatist, but no matter which way we choose to engage them, we are faced with the stone walls of willful ignorance and emotional irrationality.

As for the need for charity and whether or not there is enough of it: it's not as if Americans are not charitable on their own. As John Stossel points out in this piece from a few years ago: "After the Asian Tsunami two years ago, the U.S. government pledged $900 million to tsunami relief. American individuals donated $2 billion -- three times what government gave -- in food, clothing, and cash. Private charities could barely keep up with the donations."

Hmmm... that seems to say that Americans are pretty generous. In the same column, Stossel points out that, according to measurable data, Americans are far, far more charitable than any other country on Earth. Upwards of 300 billion dollars per year in charity comes from private American donations.

How about that? The good old USA is apparently comprised of some pretty decent folks.

Why, then, do the leftists insist that we must take from the "rich" to give to the "poor?" Why do they keep throwing things like universal health care (the ultimate government mandated "charity") in our face?

Without too much strain or mental toil, we can boil down the whole thing to its basic essence. The bottom line is, without question and without doubt, the left seeks to control the individual for the good of the collective. In case you missed it, the key word in the preceding sentence was "control."

They seek the subjugation of the person for the supposed sake of the people. They do this in a number of ways: perhaps by telling us what kind of light bulb we must use, or maybe by confiscating our money to pay for abortions and euthanasia procedures in the Utopian universal health care world they seek to create. Whatever form the attempt at control comes packaged in, it has the same odor: that of totalitarianism. The Great One (Mark Levin) calls it a "soft tyranny." He is, as always, absolutely spot-on.

Whatever their motives and whatever their grand intentions, one thing is inarguably true: when they are redistributing wealth and seeking to make life "fair," the leftists are acting completely outside the boundaries of the Constitution of the United States of America. They are, in all truth, outlaw scoundrels of the worst order.

Don't believe me? Let's ask one of our founders. By the way, as sure as night follows day, if he were with us today, the left would brand him a king-sized meanie for saying this.

~~ "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." --James Madison ~~

If that doesn't do it for you (or even if it does), then please take the time to read the famous
"not yours to give" story of Davy Crockett.

Study it close... there will be a test.

--

Resurrection

2009-04-12T10:31:00.000-07:00

At daybreak on the first day of the week they took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb. They found the stone rolled away from the tomb; but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus.

While they were puzzling over this, behold, two men in dazzling garments appeared to them. They were terrified and bowed their faces to the ground.

They said to them, "Why do you seek the living one among the dead? He is not here, but he has been raised. Remember what he said to you while he was still in Galilee, that the Son of Man must be handed over to sinners and be crucified, and rise on the third day."

--Luke 24:1-6

And so began the march of Christianity. The joy brought from the good news of Easter is unspeakable-- just to know that He is with us and always will be.

Still... it is on days such as this that we must remember those for whom Christ's love and mercy are most needed. So while also celebrating the Easter joy, I choose to think today of the poor, the disabled, the oppressed, and, most especially, the babies who never had a chance.

Even as we smile to heaven in thanks for the miracle of Jesus Christ's death and resurrection, we must ask God to help us in our most imperative mission of ending the horror of abortion.

Smiling horror strikes...
~~ Choice ~~
change has come to help...
~~ Choice ~~
unthinkable thoughts being forced out...
~~ Choice ~~
more tiny hearts stopped cold...
~~ Choice ~~
more maturing limbs ripped asunder...
~~ Choice ~~
more growing personalities destroyed...
~~ Choice ~~
more silent screams thrown at cold ears...
~~ Choice ~~
saints and angels cry against it...
~~ Choice ~~
innocence has no champion against the monsters...
~~ Choice ~~
hope seems as cold and dead as the babies...

Thank God for...
~~ Choice ~~

-

May God bless and keep all of you.

kmg

Free At Last

2009-04-01T06:00:00.000-07:00

I've decided that resistance really is futile. Why continue to push against progress and change? Why should I put myself out in the cold when so many of my fellow Americans have embraced the new direction?

Philosophically, I realize that the times call for getting outside our box and joining the world.

My struggle is over. I now welcome our new President's plan for America.

"Yes, we can."

Prestidigitation

2009-03-14T17:41:00.001-07:00

~~ "The magician and the politician have much in common: they both have to draw our attention away from what they are really doing. --Ben Okri ~~

As we watch our new President navigate through the rough waters of domestic and international policies, it is hard to miss the fact that he is quite the masterful illusionist.

Bear with a small detour into semantics. "Prestidigitation" is a cool way to say "sleight of hand." From the Middle French, it is "legerdemain," and in German it's "fingerfertigkeit." They all mean pretty much the same thing: getting people to watch one hand while the illusionist does something else entirely with the other hand.

The President and the people in his power circle have shown a great talent in this art form. They are showing us and telling us one thing, while something else entirely is actually happening. As is the case with most politicians, we hear one thing from them while they practice something else. This is regular, garden-variety political hypocrisy and it is so common that we are mostly numb to it. That is what helps team-Obama in their quest to take America to their desired place. They know the cynicism of the people and they are quite deftly using it as a skilled craftsman uses his hammer and saw (or sickle, as the case may be).

We hear President Obama say "fiscal restraint" even as he proposes trillions upon trillions in spending and deficits. We hear "equality" and "justice" even as we see money taken from earners and given to non-earners. Indeed, we do see European-type socialism in some of their actions... but the truth is far more insidious and far more accurate. They are taking great care to keep the audience focused on the shiny object in front of them-- even as the real workings go on in the dim background.

~~ "We must not let daylight in upon the magic." --Walter Bagehot ~~

Change has come to America-- as everyone knows only too well. The economic scare of last fall (intentionally caused?) became, in Mr. Obama's words: "the worst crisis since the Great Depression," and was responsible for pushing him into the White House. Now that he is safely elected and the trillions upon trillions of dollars he wants have been all but secured, the President is beginning to change his tune... suddenly, things "aren't so bad, after all." Go back to sleep... you were all getting way too worked up there.

What the hell is going on here? We the People are so scared... so worried... so concerned about our lives and our money that we are only too happy to let the nice man in the White House save us. We the People only want assurance from Washington that everything will be okay. We the People want someone else to pay our way-- and we want the real achievers punished with a drastically increased tax burden. We the People have become so soft... so pampered... so... so... ugh!

~~ "People are always looking for the single magic bullet that will totally change everything. There is no single magic bullet." --Temple Grandin ~~

Okay, so we have had the label of "socialist" flying at Mr. Obama from all quarters. In fact, the term has really lost much of its shock value, if you ask me. Which is-- again, if you ask me-- exactly what the illusionists want. They are very happy, I believe, in half-heartedly fending off the "socialism" moniker, while at the same time, seeming to embrace it. The President even said he wanted the "Swedish model" for parts of our economy... but don't call him a socialist.

I agree with the President that the term is inaccurate. In fact, I think that European socialism is what we may well be begging for if Mr. Obama's team ever fully gets what it really wants. Tyranny does not always come at the point of a gun. So, the question is: can this illusionist's obvious talents and smoothly effective style really bring the United States of America to voluntary fascism? Some would argue that he is so good that we already effectively have it.

~~ "The real secret of magic lies in the performance." --David Copperfield ~~

The idealist in me would love dearly to say no way... but the pragmatist in me sees too many "We the People" who are ready, willing, and able to hand this man their very lives in exchange for a taste of his greatness. In the view of many of these "regular" Americans, life is just too hard... too unfair. To these people, spiteful covetousness, petty jealousy, and malicious envy are common emotions.

After all, the American Constitutional Republic, as designed by our divinely inspired Founders, is hard work for the "regular" people, don't you see? They don't want to take on the responsibility of making their own trail through life... not when a "charismatic demagogue" (all credit and honor to The Great One, Mark Levin) is only too ready to make it for them. In the President's own words, "only government" can fix what ails our country. Hell, then why on earth should any of us face harsh reality when the messiah in D.C. will face it for us?

~~ "I don’t want realism. I want magic!" --Tennessee Williams (A Streetcar Named Desire) ~~

Nothings says rugged Americanism like giving up all of your individual liberties in exchange for hope and change-- nebulous though they may be. All sarcasm aside, is it really possible that Americans are going to continue walking down this perilous road, drinking the kool-aid and applying the snake oil they were sold last November?

It all depends upon the magical talents of the demagogic pied piper out front, doesn't it?

~~ Cold late night so long ago
When I was not so strong you know
A pretty man came to me
Never seen eyes so blue
You know I could not run away
It seemed we'd seen each other in a dream
It seemed like he knew me
He looked right through me, yeah
"Come on home, girl" he said with a smile
"You don't have to love me yet
Let's get high awhile
But try to understand
Try to understand
Try try try to understand
I'm a magic man."

--Ann and Nancy Wilson (Heart), "Magic Man" ~~

Change

2009-02-15T14:32:00.000-08:00

~~ "We change, whether we like it or not." --Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~

Well, it's been almost a month now. Had enough Change yet?

I do hope not, because they are just getting started. As stated by the President himself, when referring to the trillion dollar "stimulus" bill: "...it's only the beginning of what, I think, all of you understand is going to be a long and difficult process..."

He campaigned on Change, and people were screaming for Change. I wonder exactly how many knew that the Change they voted for was, in reality, a renewed assault on the individual in favor of the Collective?

~~ "Life is change. Growth is optional. Choose wisely." --Karen Kaiser Clark ~~

Indeed... it will be a long and difficult road to strip America of the remaining vestiges of its true self. It won't be easy to completely ruin the most successful economy in the history of the human race. It will be a challenge of the highest order to "remake" our nation, as the new President called for here: "Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America."

Remaking America? Some people wondered exactly what that meant. Not me. I know just what he meant by it. Many among us will not recognize it for what it is... until it's far too late-- which it may already be, in some respects. The leftists are deadly serious about their agenda... and now they have a charismatic leader to smile charmingly as they force said agenda down our throats.

~~ "Men do change, and change comes like a little wind that ruffles the curtains at dawn, and it comes like the stealthy perfume of wildflowers hidden in the grass." --John Steinbeck ~~

So is Change itself really bad? I certainly do not think it is inherently bad at all. In fact, whether or not people like Change, they must deal with it, since it cannot be avoided.

~~ "Because things are the way they are, things will not stay the way they are." --Bertolt Brecht ~~

...and...

~~ "Nothing endures but change." --Heraclitus ~~

...and...

~~ "There are no permanent changes because change itself is permanent." --Ralph L. Woods ~~

...ad nauseum. No, the question is not avoiding Change... the trick is knowing what should be changed, and when. I believe there to be no greater sin than "change for change's sake." Change should be thought of as a very important tool-- like a gun, maybe-- and used when necessary; but never, ever used gratuitously and flippantly, at least where a nation is concerned. Therein lies the main difference between "progressives" and "Conservatives." I cannot imagine anyone saying it better than this:

~~ "The art of progress is to preserve order amid change, and to preserve change amid order." --Alfred North Whitehead ~~

In case you have not been keeping track, we are losing order at an alarming rate. Chaos and crises are swirling all around us as the leftist magicians practice their sleight of hand. They craft plan after plan, all the while telling us to focus not on their actions, but on the horrible, terrible, awful state of the country. This is actually working on many-- who are only too eager to say, "Yes, do something... anything to save us!" It's almost mystical, don't you think?

~~ "Behold, I show you a mystery; we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye..." --Corinthians ~~

Change is coming to us now. Certainly not for the first time, and certainly not for the last time. The key difference now seems to be that so many people have been frightened into almost begging for it. There is no universal understanding of the truth of our history. Most Americans do not seem to know that we have weathered bad times many, many times before-- and that we have made some of those times much worse when we tried to "remake" America.

~~ "Never swap horses crossing a stream." --American Proverb ~~

Yes, it seems almost a sure thing that we are destined to relive the ugliness of the Great Depression era-- wherein self-appointed saviors foisted their Utopian vision upon a suffering and pleading populace. Oh, it is so much sweeter when the victim begs for it!

The Utopias failed, though, and most Americans quickly forgot-- or never knew-- that they had been scammed on a historic level. The New Deal and the Great Society did not come close to achieving the heaven-on-Earth that their engineers promised. That is not opinion, by the way. From any objective measurement, the sweeping socio-economic changes that were designed to "fix" poverty and suffering did nothing of the sort. They did manage to clog the gears of the free market, though, and that alone makes them worthwhile to the committed leftist/"progressive," for whom consistency and stability are not desirable attributes for a society.

~~ "Continuity in everything is unpleasant." --Blaise Pascal ~~

In any case, the design of these socialist/collectivist Utopian plans had a fatal flaw that their authors never took into account. They thought (and still think) that they could bring their brightly packaged "Change" and make it take root here. The problem is, the soil in America is not hospitable for that kind of seed. Oh, it will grow for a while; like a weed that grasps at a well-cultivated lawn. It can't sustain itself, though, because both the gardener and the lawn itself eventually beat back its progress.

Collectivism has been a miserable failure everywhere it has been tried. The reason for it is beyond simple, it is fundamental: human beings always look out for Number One, and the human spirit was not made to accept "average" as the thing to strive for.

~~ "Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself." --Leo Tolstoy ~~

That's the problem, Leo... it is virtually impossible for humans to change their own basic design. Of all systems of government ever devised by man, only the American Republic addresses the truth of human nature. Our Founders knew that self-interest and individual rights had to be respected, if the system was to succeed. They had seen the very worst governments, and they had learned from them. The Founders knew that if allowed, government would always default to tyranny and despotism.

~~ "Things alter for the worse spontaneously, if they be not altered for the better designedly." --Francis Bacon ~~

People have lived under collectivist systems in the past-- and many do so now-- but there is little success there to brag about. More importantly, without addressing individual rights and self-interest, the systems fail to give the people what they really yearn for. Surely some are satisfied with the mediocrity that comes with collectivism... but suppression of the Self in favor of the Collective is intrinsically alien to the human psyche-- and that is where the wheels always start coming off the train of tyranny.

So, of Change, I would say that we can't expect-- nor should we want-- to avoid it; but we absolutely have to ensure that it is the right kind of Change. Ironically, we must strive to avoid any Change that works against the Self, and instead always seek to change toward the betterment of the Self-- since the Self is the only enduring thing the human race will ever have.

~~ "There is nothing wrong with change, if it is in the right direction." --Winston Churchill ~~

Anything we do, then, that takes away from the power of the individual is doomed to failure, because the individual is eternal and:

~~ "All that is not eternal is eternally out of date." --C. S. Lewis ~~

Every American's challenge is to deal with Change effectively. Here is a great beginning strategy: close your eyes, clear your mind, and say the following at least once a day:

~~ "God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference." --Reinhold Niebuhr ~~

Finally, recognize the truth and be philosophical about it. A sense of humor can always help, too. To wit:

~~ "Change is inevitable - except from a vending machine." --Robert C. Gallagher ~~

-

Hope

2009-01-17T14:53:00.000-08:00

~~ "Hope springs eternal in the human breast." --Alexander Pope ~~

~~ "Hope is the thing with feathers that perches in the soul, and sings the tunes without the words and never stops at all." --Emily Dickenson ~~

Well, it's almost time. The dream of millions of Americans is soon to come true as Barack Obama assumes the office of the President of the United States.

It is still quite amazing to consider that he made it. There are a million technical reasons why (see "How Obama Got Elected" for starters), but the truth of it is that he rode to victory on a horse named Hope.

What exactly did this brand of hope promise and preach to the masses? Was it the theme of hard work and personal achievement leading to prosperity? Was it the timeless message that individual greatness is always possible in the United States of America, if one puts forth sincere and significant effort? Unfortunately, it was none of that. This campaign's message of hope was one that said if you vote for Obama, others will carry you to utopia... that you needn't work harder than your neighbor because he will be made to share his pie with you.

Beyond simply being the theme of his campaign, hope is the one thing that all of his supporters can relate to. They hope. True that some of their hopes are, putting it mildly, ambitious; but still, they hope. The detractors among us-- of which, I suppose I am one-- will say that this is not good... and it's hard to argue that point with so many people having only blind hope for mortgage payments and full fuel tanks.

~~ "The trouble with most people is that they think with their hopes or fears or wishes rather than with their minds." --Will Durant ~~

For others, the hopes are more universal and far reaching. For example, there is the common hope that the end of the tyrannical Bush Administration will make the world like America more. I wish them luck with that one. In fact, I wish them luck with all of their hopes, because I know they are mostly doomed to crash and burn. The reason for this is simple-- they have nothing to support the hopes... no substance to link the hopes to reality. They have only The One.

~~ "A ship ought not to be held by one anchor, nor life by a singe hope." --Epictetus ~~

The storyline is that the hopeless have become the hopeful-- those in the dark wilderness have been brought to the light. Still, I can see only a dark future until some substance has been attached to the hopes. The hopeful masses will be strung along with platitudes and displays of public ceremony-- all designed to keep the air in the hope balloons, even as the air in our nation's financial and security balloons is escaping at an alarming rate.

~~ "Hope is the worst of evils, for it prolongs the torments of man." --Friedrich Nietzsche ~~

All of this is not to say that hope is a bad thing. Quite the contrary. In the interest of full disclosure, I must confess that I am a creature of hope. It is hard-wired into me as much as breathing is. Sometimes, I am amazed at how powerful the emotion can be. In fact, I strongly believe that we cannot reach our full potential without a healthy dose of hope.

~~ "If you lose hope, somehow you lose the vitality that keeps life moving, you lose that courage to be, that quality that helps you go on in spite of it all. And so today I still have a dream." --Martin Luther King, Jr. ~~

We have to use hope responsibly, though. We have to fasten our hopes to our actions and to the reality that surrounds us, without becoming slaves to the idea that reality is binding as it is. Sound paradoxical? It may be, just a bit... but it is also the secret aspect of hope that releases its true power.

~~ "Sanity may be madness but the maddest of all is to see life as it is and not as it should be." --Don Quixote ~~

Yes, I am saying we can affect the nature of our own reality through the power of hope. Furthermore, I assert that hope can bring an improved reality to not just ourselves, but others around us. Like a strong drug, hope can help with the maladies that ail us. Hope can bring about the things we see and wish for, deep inside ourselves.

~~ "Hope is the dream of a soul awake." -French Proverb ~~

Also like a drug, though, hope can only do these things if-- and only if-- we use it properly. What, then, is the proper way to use hope? As mentioned above, it must be tethered to other things. Hope is only one of the dogs that pull our sled. The others are things like work, vigilance, discipline, etc.

~~ "He that lives upon hope alone will die fasting." --Benjamin Franklin ~~

By combining hope with honest effort and sincere rationality, we can bring to fruition amazing and wonderful things. For people whose political heroes use hope as a campaign tactic, without tying it to substance, only disillusionment awaits. They will, at some point, reach the end of the line on the hope express... and reality will be there waiting for them. Disappointment will be followed by the natural affliction of such people: hopelessness.

~~ "The setting of a great hope is like the setting of the sun. The brightness of our life is gone." --Henry Wadsworth Longfellow ~~

It is beyond ironic that hope will ultimately lead to hopelessness. I see it as making perfect sense, though. To describe these people as the "hopeless" who found hope in One man, you are really saying that they never had true hope to begin with. In fact, their false hopes were lassoed by a phony gimmick that came packaged in bright and shiny wrapping. The sad truth is that the gleaming knight these people have invested their very identities in is, himself, destined to meet an unforgiving reality head-on.

~~ "Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment." --Warhammer 40k, PC platform ~~

There is no doubt that the charlatans leading Obama's hope express have realized the power hope-- even false hope-- can hold over people. They know that to tap into the human soul's capacity to hope is to tap into an immense well-spring of visceral energy. They know, as all good puppeteers know, that people can be controlled by runaway, false hopes. That common folks can become uncommon working drones when properly motivated.

~~ "Strong hope is a much greater stimulant to life than any single realized joy could be. --Friedrich Nietzsche ~~

The real beauty-- and the real crime-- of it is that anyone who calls their scheme what it truly is will be labeled as cynical and anti-hope. After all, what kind of person would want to rain on the parade of so many hopeful citizens? Hope is nothing but good, you know... hope is a quality whose character must never be questioned, and anyone who does is... well, just plain mean.

~~ "Hope is the only universal liar who never loses his reputation for veracity." --Robert G. Ingersoll ~~

At the end of the day, though, the hopeful masses and the One of Hope himself will have to find a way to deliver on the promises. The start of the era of Obama seems to be bright enough, but for the light to keep shining, hope must be augmented with effort. The results of such are what history will use to judge Obama.

~~ "Hope makes for a good breakfast, but a poor supper." --Francis Bacon ~~

My humble suggestion for The One is to grow out of the demigod role and find a way to use the hope he has called for in real and concrete ways. Rather than leading through empty rhetorical flourishes and slogans, it is better by an order of magnitude to use hope as a real and dynamic force that operates hand-in-hand with hard work and reality-based expectations. Better to keep hope inside as a fire that keeps the elbow grease warm.

Looking to the future with optimistic eyes, all the while working methodically and honestly, is the only way to have true hope. Optimism is hope expressed as a philosophy. Churchill found it useless to be anything but an optimist, and others have similar thoughts.

~~ "I steer my bark with hope in the head, leaving fear astern. My hopes indeed sometimes fail, but not oftener than the forebodings of the gloomy." --Thomas Jefferson ~~

Tie your hopes to your own abilities and your own best intentions. Tie your hopes to your family and your God. Tie your hopes to your own hard work... and keep your eye always on the light that is the future. Think of it as such-- as a light-- but make yourself work toward the light, instead of just watching it and hoping you get to it through someone else's benevolence.

~~ "Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow. --Albert Einstein ~~

I believe strongly that hope is the one thing that can bring a human being closer to his or her full potential-- because it is only with hope that we can even see our full potential. In a world devoid of hope, life would be little more than a series of activities, the results of which may or may not matter, and the reasons for which are perfunctory and uninspired. Also in a world without hope, human suffering would be rightly thought to be never-ending, and humanity could not long survive, let alone thrive, with that notion.

~~ "The important thing is not that we can live on hope alone, but that life is not worth living without it." --Harvey Milk ~~

~~ "Were it not for hope the heart would break." --Scottish Proverb ~~

So, let's keep hope alive and well inside our best selves. Let's nourish our human heart with hope's power, while keeping ourselves honest with hard work, accountability, and integrity.

If we can just do that, then there is no reason to expect a new sign to be hung over America's door that proclaims:

~~ "All hope abandon, ye who enter here! --Dante Alighieri ~~

-

Resolve

2009-01-01T12:17:00.000-08:00

That time again.

Time to start on the list-- however short or long-- of things we need to do to make ourselves better. Time to take a hard look at our lives and figure out what needs some minor tweaking (or major reconstruction).

Time for the New Year's Resolution(s).

For some people, that is.

I have long found it curious that someone would choose one short period per year to work on self improvement. It seems to subtract from the sincerity of the act of resolving, rendering it more an ephemeral fancy than something to be taken seriously.

~~ “It is always during a passing state of mind that we make lasting resolutions.” --Marcel Proust ~~

The sad truth is that for most people, the New Year's Resolution is a short-lived attempt to make one feel better about oneself. Usually, the thing is relegated to the dust-bin of personal history after a brief, if sincere, effort. It follows all the other faddish things that burned hot for a minute, before flaming out in the harsh cold of reality.

Still, there is no arguing the importance of seeking self improvement. Why, then, does our society reserve the process only for the new year? Perhaps it's indicative of a society that is too busy for daily personal reflection, but still recognizes the need for it and so makes it into a custom of sorts.

~~ “Making resolutions is a cleansing ritual of self-assessment and repentance that demands personal honesty and, ultimately, reinforces humility. Breaking them is part of the cycle.” --Eric Zorn ~~

They do get broken, don't they? Should we assume that is because people are inherently weak and unable to improve themselves? That is certainly true of some folks-- I can attest to that. In the macro sense, though, I'm not so sure it is that simple.

As humans, we are hard-wired to think about ourselves. Call it selfishness or call it a survival mechanism-- it is real. We always think of and look out for number one. So it really shouldn't be a trick to figure out what needs a'changin' and then change it. Right?

~~ “Resolve to perform what you ought; perform without fail what you resolve.” --Benjamin Franklin ~~

Sounds simple enough. Why, then, do the resolutions continue to break like fine crystal on a granite counter? Why do people go through the rituals and effort and expense-- only to fail again and again?

I say it's because of the once a year timetable. How is one supposed to be proficient in the process of successful resolving with only one time per year to practice it?

~~ “Good resolutions are simply checks that men draw on a bank where they have no account.” --Oscar Wilde ~~

A writer cannot compose one piece of work per year and remain in top form. A football player can't play one game per year and expect to be a champion.

No. The truth is that one has to make resolution a regular part of the life cycle. One must practice it in all things, great and small-- making it very much a part of one's regular operation. The all-important fire of Resolve will burn only in the heart that keeps its flames stoked.

~~ “Be stirring as the time, be fire with fire, threaten the threatener, and outface the brow of bragging horror; so shall inferior eyes, that borrow their behaviours from the great, grow great by your example and put on the dauntless spirit of resolution.” –William Shakespeare ~~

It is through the practice of simple, daily resolutions that greater ones will succeed. It is only in making Resolve a personal sacrament that we will achieve the elusive improvement that all people should seek.

How can one begin to get in this desirable and beneficial habit? At the risk of over-simplification, I think that resolving to resolve would be a good place to start.

~~ “Always bear in mind that your own resolution to succeed is more important than any one thing.” --Abraham Lincoln ~~

There it is, then: we practice to succeed by resolving to succeed in all things. The little ones do matter-- I cannot stress that enough, can I?

I certainly do not intend this as an advice column to be taken as gospel from someone who knows "The Truth." The fact is, I find myself caught up in the resolution struggle as much as anyone. It's just that I long ago started asking myself about the value of doing it once a year... and I have been working on it since then. Just trying to think of it often is half the battle.

~~ “Clothe with life the weak intent, let me be the thing I meant.” --John Greenleaf Whittier ~~

For me as a Catholic, the season of Lent is an amazing time to practice Resolve. It is marvelously satisfying to me to take the forty-day journey into myself every year... seeking to come out of it better and somehow cleaner than before.

~~ “Resolve, and thou art free.” --Henry Wadsworth Longfellow ~~

Even during ordinary days and weeks, though, we can and should practice. Resolve is a truly powerful weapon that we humans possess-- even if many of us do not yet know how to use it. Once we do, though, great things happen.

~~ “You may be whatever you resolve to be.” --Thomas Stonewall Jackson ~~

With true Resolve, one can begin to see obstacles as invitations to courage.

~~ “Either I will find a way, or I will make one.” --Philip Sidney ~~

Finally, once one learns to use Resolve, life becomes much more under the control of the self... and less under the control of chaos.

~~ “Those who resolve to conquer or die, are rarely conquered.” --Pierre Coneille ~~

Happy New Year!!

kmg

-

Identity

2008-12-13T08:45:00.000-08:00

All this recent talk about unity and "the people" has got me to thinking about identities, and I figured it was time to ask a few questions. I'll start with the basics:

Who are you?

For that matter, who am I?

~~ "Trying to define yourself is like trying to bite your own teeth." --Alan W. Watts ~~

Well, I like to believe that I know who I am-- and I imagine you also think you know who you are. I truly hope we're right. It would not be a good thing to go around thinking we know who we are and being wrong about it. So, if I'm me and you're you... how did we get to be me and you? Do we find our identity, or do we make our identity? Where the heck does this thing come from-- and does it ever change?

Well, it does appear that seemingly key parts of my identity have changed. For example, as a child and into early adulthood, I used to think I was a democrat. I grew up surrounded by them, and it was simply the thing to be. It was a big part of my identity-- even though I knew virtually nothing whatsoever about what it really meant, since I received only the sales version of what democrats stand for. I didn't know that being a democrat means supporting abortion and a decaying social/family values system and a weakened military. All of these things are pure anathema to everything I and my family-- the very people who support the democrat party-- believe in. Quite curious, no?

Not really. Those things were not a part of the "old school" democrat party that my family and I associated ourselves with. The very identity of the party has changed-- swinging so far left that someone objectively on the outside can see it as plain as day. Some people on the inside, though, have not yet awoken to the reality that the party's identity no longer reflects their own.

If a political party can change its identity, then it stands to reason that individual people can, as well... right? This would seem to indicate that an identity is malleable and prone to whatever forces might come along to shape it. Running with this supposition for a moment, let's discuss some potential ways an identity might be forged and/or changed.

Is it my occupation that makes me who I am? I suppose it could be satisfying to build my identity based upon a noble profession. Still... what if my employment was just something I did to make money and it held no personal power inside my heart and soul? I suppose, for now, we'll settle for saying that what I do can contribute to who I am without absolutely defining who I am.

Is it, then, what I do for enjoyment that makes me who I am? This is a bit harder for me to pin down, since I have-- as do many people-- several divergent interests that I find pleasant. Maybe I'll settle again and say that what I like to do also contributes to who I am.

How about the people with whom I choose to associate-- do they add to my identity? There is a very old adage about being known by the company we keep. So, at least what some others might think of my identity seems to be tied to the people around me. Does that penetrate inside me and actually affect my real identity? As before, I will, for now, put this in the column of contributing to who I am.

~~ "Identity is such a crucial affair that one shouldn't rush into it." --David Quammen ~~

Upon further review, the above settlements are somehow less than satisfying to me. Something keeps nagging at my brain... suggesting that maybe-- just maybe-- I do what I do, and like who I like, not to contribute to who I am, but because of who I am. So, maybe I am drawn to things because of an already established identity?

Hmmm... okay, let's look at that. On the surface, it suggests a bit of pre-destination, does it not? I became a Marine because of who I am (a healthy male seeking to be among the best-- and a glutton for pain). I like playing football because of who I am (a healthy, competitive male who finds sports fun and rewarding). I like to read and write poetry because of who I am (an unapologetic lover of words and Lord Byron fanatic). Etcetera.

Yes, it makes some sense that there is a magnetic attraction between me and the things and people that I have a proclivity for; and my identity is the reason for it.

Well, I think we are now getting somewhere. With apologies to Popeye: I am who I am. Then it just becomes a matter of going around looking for the things I want to do and the people with whom I want to do them, and I'm living my identity. Problem solved.

~~ "First say to yourself what you would be; and then do what you have to do." --Epictetus ~~

Oh, damn. Wait a minute.

What if I find a magnetic attraction to something or someone that is not really good or right? Should I just do it anyway, because that is who I am? Or, should I resist doing it because it's not good or right? Well, if I do that, then I'm not being who I am, am I?

Or... is who I am something larger than what I have a magnetic attraction to-- with those attractions being things for me to consider on a case by case basis? In other words, if I surrender to iniquitous lodestones, then I am a person who surrenders to iniquitous lodestones. If I resist them (or try to resist them), then I am a person who does (or tries to do) what is right, thereby trying to forge my identity in the fires of personal discipline.

It is a given that all people have certain attractions that they should probably try to resist for the good of the self-- if not for the good of others. So that may be defined more as a trait of humanity, rather than an aspect of personal identity. The key to it would then be how the individual handles the attractions, n'cest pas? A major key to strengthening and maintaining my identity is always examining the attractions and my response to them. This makes it a matter of consistently judging myself-- which is no easy task, but a very worthy one.

The aforementioned democrat party is a very good example for us here. Many (many) democrats are normal, decent people who think of themselves as... well, good and decent people. Many (many, many) of these democrats have in the past few decades become former-democrats, because they found themselves faced with the tough identity questions. They saw their party become a place where magnetic attractions are never to be questioned... where no personal choice should ever be condemned... where individual rights are to be sacrificed for the rights of "the people." They saw these things and they measured them against their own identity... and they bailed out of that ship that was sailing with no moral rudder.

Pressing on here, we move to the next logical part of the identity discussion: self versus group identity. Must my identity in a society be like a snowflake when it lands in the drift, or a drop of water when it meets an ocean? Do I retain my identity if I surrender to the group identity? Can I ever be truly free without a free identity? Okay, that was too many questions in a row.

Let's deal with the last question-- being free-- since it encompasses and transcends the others. I submit that real freedom absolutely requires an individual identity. The notion of a collective identity that reigns supreme is patently insulting (and frightening) to anyone who holds dear their own personal identity. Those former democrats mentioned above are key in this aspect of the discussion, since their personal identity apparently won out over the group identity.

The political season we just survived is a macrocosm of this concept. We saw massive groups of people, on both political sides, attempting to display their identity to anyone watching. To someone observing the rallies and speeches-- the big exhibitions of group enthusiasm and the emotional power displayed at them-- it would appear that Americans on both sides were only too willing to join a group identity. To a point, that idea is correct; but if you drill a bit deeper into the core of it, you will see a difference.

In this election, I saw two kinds of people in these groups. For one kind, the rallying group gives them an identity. For the other, it was a celebration of a party that allows them to have their own identity. Which is better? I suppose some people need a collective to solidify their identity... but I much prefer to be patriotic because my rare and special country allows me to be me.

I think it is empirically obvious that Conservatives-- for the most part-- flocked to Sarah Palin rallies, not because they needed her to fill in some blank in their identity; but because she represented their already established (and cherished) identity. They were seeking a candidate that was going to fight for their right to retain their individual rights and identities. They wanted leaders who seek a bigger pie for everyone, rather than leaders who demand some give up their pie so others can have more.

Conversely, those at a typical Obama concert were there to feel like a part of "Change," and to feel the "Hope" that was sweeping the nation. Exactly what Change were they all Hoping for? Don't bother asking. If you get an answer at all, it will be a different one from every person. One thing is certain, they did not want to be bothered by the details of the various magnetic attractions their messiah was unable to resist. Unlike the former democrats, the true Obamatons were enthusiastic about submerging their individual selves in the murky waters of the collective identity.

~~ "Search others for their virtues, thyself for thy vices." --Benjamin Franklin ~~

Too often, people look to others to find themselves. The phenomenon that was the Obama campaign was perfectly illustrative of this point. The candidate himself said that "...I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views." I'm not so sure about the "vastly different political stripes" part of that quote, but the rest of it is spot on.

Americans can be as guilty as anyone of using a charismatic demagogue (a brilliant expression borrowed from the great Mark Levin) to give their empty lives meaning-- and there are few greater charismatic demagogues than President-Elect Obama. What exactly does he offer them, with respect to their identity? I'm really not sure, but it appears to be a simple case of "he's great and I support him, thus, I'm great, too."

Perhaps it's just like the sports-fan phenomenon, wherein a person gets a real and provable improvement in mood and self-esteem when his team wins. "They're champions, so I feel like a champion." Pretty normal, right? For sports-fans, I would say yes, quite normal. It is worth noting, however, that for most fans, it's at best a satisfying, but temporary, escape. Most don't carry it too far by developing the bulk of their personal identity from a group of strangers playing ball. So the sports analogy only goes so far.

The real test of an identity is how it stands up to a powerful populist assault that can tear through a population like the most virulent plague. Several previous generations of Americans were tested by this as we are being tested now. Their results were mixed, but generally show that the idea of the American as an individual is quite powerful and not easily defeated. That is not to say that some Americans have not had their identities usurped-- or even destroyed-- by collectivism. In fact, the opposite is blatantly obvious to anyone who lived through this past election.

Even with many Obama voters, though, there was a sense of denial that individual identities were being sacrificed. You could see that they knew intrinsically that giving up their values and identity to the collective was wrong. So even Americans who were voting for Obama, and thus against American principles, somehow knew it was wrong. These Obamatons who were still struggling mightily to retain some vestige of personal identity would find cold solace in saying things like, "oh, he didn't really want to kill babies who survived botched abortions," or "oh, he didn't really know how bad all those people he associated with were," or "oh, he's not going to attack the 2nd Amendment," or "oh, he is actually going to give almost everyone a tax cut."

This is the denial that spells the beginning of the end for their individual identities-- and the saddest part is that the people surrendering themselves to the collective are, somewhere inside of themselves, aware of how bad that really is, but too weak to fight it. It seems that perhaps the greatest of all magnetic attractions one should fight against is the one that seeks to pull the individual into the collective.

As our previous, only slightly sarcastic, "Unity" discussion showed, the founding of America is based on the individual. The individual identity fed the individual purpose, which combined-- without melding-- with others to build all the great institutions of our nation. Our Founders knew that the only way to truly unleash the power inside humanity was to appeal to the individual. Only when we act in our own self-interest do we retain the full power of our own identity-- which is the power that brings out our very best talents and efforts.

Take a military example, which I can relate closely with. Does a soldier, sailor, airman, or Marine risk his life for the concept of some collective utopia? Well, I can honestly say I never have or would. No, it is the individual who makes the sacrifice-- for the sake of the individual. I believe that our designer hard-wired into us a strong propensity for self-interest and survival, and as Americans, we deeply cherish that. This leads to the altruism-- the empathy and charity-- necessary to say that we will fight for not only our own individual rights and interest, but for those of our fellows, as well. Once you fully understand how valuable an individual right is, you are far more likely to defend it for any one person's sake.

So, is it a paradox to say that our national identity should be one of individual identity? If it is, then it is a beautiful and deeply satisfying paradox; and one I am happy to embrace and share with all the enthusiasm, and none of the vacuousness, of a typical Obamaton.

Well, it is becoming clear that this question of identity is not so complicated, after all. Going back to my original question, then: who am I?

I am an individual who believes in the simple but profoundly meaningful formula that states that no collective right holds any validity whatsoever, so long as it infringes on any individual right.

I am an individual who will gladly and enthusiastically join a group of like-minded individuals to accomplish any task that makes life better for me and for others, without taking away from anyone's personal freedom.

I am an individual who thinks personal identity is worth working hard on, and worth fighting for.

I am an individual who wants to be who I think I should be, and I am willing to judge myself and act accordingly-- even in the face of repeated personal failures.

Finally, I am an American who will always want what is best for me and my family, because I know that is ultimately what is best for my country.

Now, then, who are you?

-

Gratitude

2008-11-27T09:08:00.001-08:00

Since this is the day for it, let's talk thanks.

Appreciation, thankfulness, gratefulness... call it what you will; it's mighty powerful stuff, this ubiquitous, but often oddly empty, notion of gratitude.

Although I believe gratitude to be one of the most important emotional conceptions that human beings can ever consider, I also find it to be at times the most hollow and insincere. Even given that, there is still a nobleness to gratitude that seems to transcend its sincerity level. Sounds like we have a genuine paradox on our hands here.

It is as if we all understand that we should feel appreciation; but if we cannot, then we should fake it. Yes, unlike other key emotional concepts, we are openly taught that gratitude can and should be expressed even if we don't really feel it. This is a commonly acknowledged contract among people that plays out on a regular basis almost everywhere. In fact, the very gold standard of the "white lie" seems to be old-fashioned appreciation.

Even if the Christmas gift you receive from crazy old Aunt Sadie is bizarrely out of fashion-- and even slightly frightening to look at-- you are still expected to smile warmly and gush out a hearty-- if not heartfelt-- "thank you." Truly, if you were taught any kind of decent manners by your parents, you will know that you must reward kindness with thankfulness. To do otherwise is to invite the well-intended giver to walk away muttering unrepeatable phrases about "that damned ingrate" and other such spirit-blackening slogans. This is unthinkable to the responsible parents and so their admonition, of course, is that you must still practice the nicety, even if you don't actually like the product or action offered.

So, my first question is: does it make a difference whether you actually feel gratitude, so long as you show and express it?

I think it does make a difference. Whether or not they were able to articulate it, our parents were really trying to make us actually feel the gratitude-- to learn the art of appreciation-- so that we could express it sincerely. Most people seem to instinctively understand the power that is in it-- even if they cannot put their finger on the exact reason why. If you just know, almost instinctively, that you should say "thanks" for something, then it follows that you should feel thanks, as well, does it not?

My next question, then, is: what should you do if you do not actually feel it?

You can start by learning to differentiate between the product or action in question, and the motive behind its offering. You might argue that a motive is related to an intention, and we all know about the road to hell being paved with good ones of those. Indeed, when it comes to concrete and empirical results, I agree that motives are worth scant consideration-- but when it comes to this gratitude discussion, things change. In fact, I will posit the audacious suggestion that there is very little to really appreciate in the product or action because the only thing worth your gratitude is the motive.

The motive is what drives a person to offer the product or action in the first place. The motive is the magic spark that lights the fire of generosity. True enough that it is often tainted by selfishness and conniving self-interest; and yet, the potential for purity is just as often there. Only cynicism prevents us from looking for that purity. I say look for it every time.

What, then, are we to do when we look sincerely for the motive and we find selfishness and conniving self-interest? Well, depending on the circumstance, this is either a good time to practice some measured honesty, or to just throw out the old-fashioned, insincere "thank you." Just remember that any expression of gratitude tacitly condones the motive-- good or bad.

Speaking practically, there is sometimes nothing wrong with selfishness and conniving self-interest. From a Randian-- and basic American-- perspective, this is what makes people succeed in life. Working for our self-interest is, in some ways, the highest human calling. That is the practical side, and I find no deceit in an offer of product or action that is practical in nature. I would call this "practical giving;" and my gratitude for it, then, will be more earthly and practical, and less ethereal and idealistically centered.

In any case, the power of gratitude is liberating. Somehow, it allows our karma to be balanced-- either by a give and take exchange, or by the purity of a simple expression of human emotion. Simply stated, I find the practice of gratitude to be incredibly-- almost supernaturally-- enriching to my spirit.

Beyond the practicality of daily life, I want to look for and find the pure motive-- even though I often end up like Charlie Brown after Lucy pulls the football away... even though people will often live down to the lowest of motivations... even though cynicism is always poking at my conscience. Still, I will try to reward with my gratitude the spark of goodness that "impractical giving" holds.

In the big picture, I strive to be grateful to God for the people and the things that I have in my life. More basically, I strive to be grateful to God for the life that these people and things are in. Looking for His motive in granting me life, I find no selfishness or conniving self-interest. I find only Love, the depth of which I will not grasp so long as I live.

That makes me seek to feel a gratitude of equal depth... and equally lacking in selfishness and conniving self-interest. I will not succeed in matching His motive, but that will not keep me from trying.

~~ "If the only prayer you said in your whole life was, "thank you," that would suffice." --Meister Eckhart ~~

Happy Thanksgiving to all-- and to those of you who deserve it (and you know who you are), I say: THANKS!!

-

Moderation

2008-11-21T21:25:00.000-08:00

Let's talk extremes.

Political extremes, that is.

"Polarized" is a word that is being thrown around a lot lately to describe our country's political climate. The middle ground is ignored more now than ever before, according to the worriers. If there is any hope for the country, we have to return to a spirit of bi-partisanship. In fact, both presidential candidates bragged an awful lot about wanting to "reach across the aisle" and appeal to "moderates" and independents.

Hmmm... moderates and independents, eh? Middle of the road'ers.

Okay, while all the socialists and their army of useful idiots are busy congratulating themselves on beating that ultra right-wing extremist, John McCain, let us take a moment to consider this middle thing that everyone seems so enamored with.

I suppose we start by asking just what the heck a "moderate" really is. Now, I've thought through this one for a long time, because it just seems so damned nice of a concept on the surface. I mean, who could vilify someone who's just a thoughtful person trying to avoid those "extremist" views? After all, moderates are people who just want to get along, right? They seek only the sweet utopia of rapport and compromise.

~~ "From the beginning of our history the country has been afflicted with compromise. It is by compromise that human rights have been abandoned." --Charles Sumner ~~

I'm not sure that compromise is really the only grease that slicks the moderate's engine. Somehow, that definition doesn't work for me. No, compromisers usually are calculating and/or cowardly individuals who know full-well what they want. I've seen too many schemers and cowards who use compromise like chess moves.

~~ "I'm a compromiser and a maneuverer. I try to get 'something.' That's the way our system works." --Lyndon B. Johnson ~~

Compromise is, by itself, a tasty subject for a lengthy essay. It is the buzzword that gets people feeling all warm and squishy inside, while its real essence is too often concealed by the feel-good wrapping.

~~ "Compromise is but the sacrifice of one right or good in the hope of retaining another--too often ending in the loss of both." --Tryon Edwards ~~

So, I think we have to say that for the purposes of our discussion, compromisers do not necessarily equal moderates. Although, it is fair to say that moderates will use compromise-- even wearing it as a badge of honor at times. In fact, compromise is a key tool in the moderate's limited storehouse. Still, there's more to the definition of a moderate than that.

I found a website that is all about the glory of being a moderate. Here's a proud exclamation I found there: "We moderates are suspicious of certainty."

Now that really stuck with me. I mean, here you have people who are very proud to say that they are never certain about anything. As if it is a virtue to walk around in a perpetual state of gray fog... happily moving from one issue to the next without the burden of actually forming a view on it.

~~ "I’d rather argue with a leftist than a centrist any day. The leftist at least has a structure to push against. Arguing with a ‘moderate’ is like snot wrestling." --Quote seen on the Internet ~~

This made me wonder whether the moderate's uncertainty is due to being uninformed (as opposed to misinformed, as is the case with many of the aforementioned useful idiots), either intentionally or just because he or she lacks the time or desire to study issues. If it is not a case of being uninformed, then that would mean that the moderate is informed, but then still refuses to make a decision. I would like to think that it is the former, as the latter would indicate a much deeper character problem, would it not? Still, we'll consider both.

Let's start with the argument that the moderate is not certain because he is uninformed. A very useful example of this would be the abortion debate. Most moderates take the pro-abortion side, saying that no one really knows exactly when life begins.

Take our new President-Elect, for example: he famously said that the knowledge of when life begins is "above his pay grade." So, for the sake of argument, this admittedly makes him uninformed about when life begins. In the context of the abortion issue, this is certainly the main and crucially important point. Since we are talking about human life, would it not be the definition of prudence to err on the side of caution and not destroy the thing? Even if you're not sure... I mean, just in case, you know? Is this not especially true when we are talking about a man who will have tremendous influence on this subject?

To review, our new President-Elect feigns ignorance by stating that he does not know if life begins at conception. Given that point, now consider the fact that he is a vociferous supporter of abortion. This is most certainly not erring on the side of caution.

*** WARNING: AYN RAND QUOTES AHEAD. MAY CAUSE COGNITIVE DISSONANCE IN SOME PEOPLE. ESPECIALLY MODERATES. ***

~~ "To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality is to sanction it." --Ayn Rand ~~

Now, how about those who claim to be informed and believe that life begins at conception, but are still pro-abortion? (In fairness, they much prefer the more aesthetic sounding "pro-choice." As for me, I'm okay with either "pro-life" or "anti-abortion," since they are both true.) In these ranks we find the moderates who love to say "I would never do it myself, but I won't force my beliefs on anyone else." Now that is a powerfully moral statement, isn't it? Really shows the deep conviction of the person uttering it. No judgment here-- only a respect for everyone else's beliefs. The very essence of Americanism, wouldn't you say? Well... maybe not so much.

~~ "The real moral precept to adopt...is: Judge, and be prepared to be judged." --Ayn Rand ~~

To see something as intrinsically wrong-- even immoral-- and then to say that you wouldn't judge others for it is to say that there are no metaphysical rights or wrongs... there are only "personal values." What is wrong for me is right for you. One man's crime is another man's daily ritual. Now, that is a world we all want to live in, isn't it? Oh, wait... that is a world we are already living in-- at least almost.

These moderates apparently treasure the thought of a society whose moral foundation is more of a mosaic patchwork of shifting mores and values. Moral equivalency and multiculturalism are doctrines that forbid judgment and eschew civilized principles and standards of behavior. So, the good moderate is only being true to the ways of the world when he says he won't expect others to tow a moral line.

~~ "There is no escape from the fact that men have to make choices; so long as men have to make choices, there is no escape from moral values; so long as moral values are at stake, no moral neutrality is possible." --Ayn Rand ~~

Aside from the difficult "moral" issues, there are plenty of other things that our intrepid moderate will want to be in the middle of (positionally speaking, of course). Whether it's taxation, welfare, foreign policy, or immigration, the moderate wants desperately to avoid taking a side that could be labeled as extreme. The fact is, moderates who walk down the middle of the road are usually crushed by those with direction moving on the left and right sides of the road.

This really brings us squarely back into the uninformed-versus-informed discussion. What my life journey has shown me, above all else, is that there really is a right and a wrong. Good surely does exist, and so does evil. The more I know about an issue, the more I am able to decide for myself where I stand on it. If I don't know much about an issue, my inclination would not be to say "oh, both sides must have a point." My inclination is always to say either "I need to learn about that and form an opinion," or "I really don't care about that issue and so I will stay completely out of it."

The latter statement, of course, is a luxury reserved for us peons, and is not really an option for elected leaders who are supposed to know and care about issues. If I don't want to take the time to learn the intricacies of a bill on medical record privacy concerns, then that is not really a problem. For the legislator who is to vote on it, though, it is vital to learn all he can of the issue, then hold it up to his personal principles compass (everyone does have one of those, don't they?) to see how he should vote. To do otherwise is to be either a hack who sells his vote, or simply a fool-- and both of these are dangerous.

So, where does this leave the highly respected moderate? Clearly, it leaves him out in the intellectual and moral cold. I see a moderate as someone lacking either the courage or the conviction-- or both-- to lead a principled life. I see in the moderate a person for whom "getting along" is preferable to doing what is right.

Most moderates are just normal people who think that being in the center is a noble and good thing. The reason they think that is because they are, by their very noncommittal nature, unable-- or unwilling-- to think deeply about things. They have been spoon fed multi-cultural pablum by the media for their whole life, and they eat it up because, frankly, it is easier than taking the time and effort to dissect issues and form positions.

At the top of this piece, I made a comment about "ultra right-wing extremist John McCain." Now, to me and most anyone on the right side of things, this is a patently facetious comment. To the socialists and the useful idiots, though, it is true. There are actually people-- not joking here-- who say that McCain lost because he is too Conservative. He should have been more moderate. He should have picked a more moderate VP candidate. He should have tried harder to appeal to moderates. Yes, they say this with a straight face. To make this even better, many of the people saying this claim to be Republicans. Yep... seriously.

There is a very (very) simple equation to consider here. It is an empirical truth that anytime a democrat "runs to the center" in a national election, he wins; and anytime a Republican "runs to the center" in a national election, he loses. Let that soak in for a minute. It clearly says that for someone who is seen as "left" to move to the right is a good thing-- and for someone who is seen as "right" to move to the left is a bad thing.

The reason for this is that, in spite of the media usurpation of our collective world-view, America remains very much a center-right nation. That is precisely because right and wrong do exist and that knowledge is built into our DNA. The equivocating position of not "forcing my beliefs on someone else" is purely a product of the left's media sponsored all-out assault on societal virtue. People still hold their values strongly, for the most part, but they have been whipped relentlessly into thinking they are intolerant for having those values-- and if they don't want to be labeled as xenophobicly racist gender criminals, then they had better keep that value stuff to themselves, by God (oops... by gosh).

There. We've hit the truth of it. There is how a moderate is born. He is a person who has decided that the left is correct in saying that expressing belief in a principle is tantamount to intolerance. How great the irony that the most intolerant of all are those very voices crying "intolerance!"

Choosing a favorite Ayn Rand quote is virtually impossible for me, but one passage does stand out... and if forced, I might say it is my favorite. I shall close with it, since it is certainly germane to this discussion.

~~ "There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil. The man who is wrong still retains some respect for truth, if only by accepting the responsibility of choice. But the man in the middle is the knave who blanks out the truth in order to pretend that no choice or values exist, who is willing to sit out the course of any battle, willing to cash in on the blood of the innocent or to crawl on his belly to the guilty, who dispenses justice by condemning both the robber and the robbed to jail, who solves conflicts by ordering the thinker and the fool to meet each other halfway. In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit." --Ayn Rand (John Galt's Speech) ~~

Crises

2008-11-17T14:13:00.001-08:00

Boy, this sure is some economic storm we have going, isn't it? Well, actually, it's more of a crisis, I would think. In fact, that's pretty much how everyone has been describing it: the banking crisis, the stock market crisis, etcetera. Yep, I'll have to amend that earlier statement to say that this is some kind of crisis we have going here.

Nothing like a full-blown crisis to make us all yearn for a strong leader to guide us through the rough waters.

~~ "Any excuse will serve a tyrant." --Aesop ~~

Nothing like a crisis to create a sense of community (wow- did you ever notice that the word "unity" is contained in "community?" I'm just saying.).

Nothing like a crisis to get people into lock-step and keep everyone's oars going the same way.

Nothing like a crisis to bring like-mindedness to a group of people who should all, ostensibly, have the same stake in the resolution of said crisis.

There is also nothing like a crisis to allow certain inconvenient rights and privileges to be held in abeyance... only until the crisis passes, of course. The leader must do what is right, and he can't be afraid to let old-fashioned rules and regulations get in the way of doing what is right. Right?

~~ "I begin by taking. I shall find scholars later to demonstrate my perfect right." --Euripides ~~

Indeed, without a crisis, how would a soft-totalitarian, populist leader ever get political traction? How would he get the people fired up enough to take to the streets and demand that someone take care of the damn crisis? I mean, someone has to do something-- anything! Don't they?

~~ "Under conditions of tyranny it is far easier to act than to think." --Hannah Arendt ~~

History is replete with examples of crisis born authoritarianism. Nary a dictator has been created without the vital ingredient of a crisis-- or crises, if he is very skillful. Crises, in fact, are always welcome to the despot-- or would-be despot.

~~ "This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when he first appears he is a protector." --Plato ~~

If Fortune cannot be relied upon to send along a crisis, then the enterprising tyrant must be willing and able to manufacture his own. If one does come, but is insufficiently severe, then the autocrat must be able to embellish it to the point that the magic kicks in.

What magic, you ask? Why, the mesmerizing magic that comes from a population being controlled by fear. Something almost mystical happens when large groups of people are caught up in panic and fear. True to human nature, they look to someone-- anyone!-- to get them through the frightful circumstance.

~~ "'Necessity' is the tyrant's plea. --John Milton ~~

So, you see, appealing to the most basic insecurities and concerns will almost always guarantee the dictator the fealty of the masses-- that is, if he is skillful enough to play those fears like a well-tuned instrument. This almost always involves a call to do this or that for the "good of the people," or "the common good," or for "national unity." (There's that word again!)

~~ "The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience." --Albert Camus ~~

History offers many examples of this-- and not just the obvious ones. For every Hitler or Mussolini, there is a Wilson or an FDR. The main difference is that the latter two were burdened with some semblance of power-checking, which kept them from overstepping the way the former two did, and thereby allowed them to fare much better in the long-term P.R. department. They also avoided the over-the-top excesses that helped bring down the curtain on Il Duce and the Mad Corporal.

~~ "A great wave of oppressive tyranny isn't going to strike, but rather a slow seepage of oppressive laws and regulations from within will sink the American dream of liberty." --George Baumler ~~

What they all do have in common is that crises either brought them to power, or solidified their power to the point where they were virtually almighty. The poetic beauty of that is that all of the aforementioned leaders assumed to their thrones on top of an enthusiastic population-- because the huddled masses honestly believed these men to be deliverers; and they were, to a large extent, just that.

~~ "But thou know'st this, 'Tis time to fear when tyrants seem to kiss." --William Shakespeare ~~

Remember, the truly gifted potentate will always give something of value to the hordes he controls; and will try to maintain the ratio of fear-to-leadership that got him to the top in the first place. To do otherwise usually leads to very unpleasant endings-- as we see in cases such as Caligula and Nicolae Ceausescu. Still, it is in the "goodies" that the tyrant offers where we see the truth of the whole thing.

Almost without fail, they offer the impossible-- or, at least that which cannot be sustained. It could be Hitler's promise to lead the Aryan people to the promised land of racial purity and Valhalla on Earth. Maybe it's Wilson's pledge to establish God's own kingdom in America. Or, perhaps it could be miraculous tax cuts that go to ninety-five percent of the population, and yet the money for which has no real discernible source of origin.

Whatever they offer and give, though, is tainted by the fine print which states that acceptance of the leader's magnanimous gifts implies loyalty and acceptance of the rest of the package... and the rest of the package is never what the trusting souls expected or wanted.

~~ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive." --C.S. Lewis ~~

No matter how we look at it, the stark truth of the matter is that people under tyranny almost always get there voluntarily. Why is it so common and so hard to avoid? I suppose that the nature of man-- or rather "men"-- is the real culprit. Every civilization has buried inside of it a flock of scared sheep, wanting nothing more than to be taken care of. This is endemic to the human animal-- and most especially visible where people live together in large numbers.

It is also worth mentioning that the idea of being a benevolent dictator is powerful stuff, and does not always begin with evil intent. Many a good man started out his march to despotism with grand goals and a sincere heart. Plus, it must be said that the perks are inarguably attractive. Who wouldn't want to be "The Man?"

~~ "Slaves would be tyrants were the chance theirs." --Victor Hugo ~~

How, then, is a thinking populace to avoid such a thing? I believe the answer is that "the people" cannot avoid it. Really, only "the person" can fight off this cancer. That is, along with his fellow "the persons," of course.

I would put forth that whenever a populace acts in the collective, it advances its own march toward tyranny. The populace would be well served to understand that the "common good" most certainly leads to common misery, and even outright slavery.

In fact, by my account, there has been exactly one social experiment in the history of the world that stood a chance against impending totalitarianism. Care to guess which experiment that was?

Only in America has the world seen a government put in check; with its very design compelling it to defer to the individual.

Only in America has the individual been allowed (encouraged, rallied, cheered) to seek his own way and go as far as his own talents and will would let him-- all without interference from government; so long as he did no wrong to another individual's rights.

Only in America has the idea of a benevolent "nanny government" been seen and called what it really is: soft-tyranny.

Our founders absolutely knew of the dangers of creeping authoritarianism. They knew them and they called them out by name. The framers of our great system swore to one another and to their posterity that they would-- and we should-- remain vigilant and fight against this Leviathan at all times and at all costs. Truly, they felt there was no higher calling than to ensure freedom's fire stayed lit.

I'll close with a few choice words from men whose equal I will never be, but whose example I will treasure and strive to emulate all the days of my life.

What do you say, fellow person... want to join me?

~~ "The liberties of our country, the freedoms of our civil Constitution are worth defending at all hazards; it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors. They purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood. It will bring a mark of everlasting infamy on the present generation – enlightened as it is – if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence, without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of designing men." --Samuel Adams ~~

~~ "Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value." --Thomas Paine ~~

~~ "I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." --Thomas Jefferson ~~

-

Unity

2008-11-11T05:25:00.000-08:00

Have you heard it?

It's the proclamation that's sweeping the nation!

It's the command from the left that must be obeyed!

It's the message of fundamental change!

It's Unity.

Yes, all the cool kids are singing the praises of "Unity." From every hilltop, they are calling for a big old American group hug. They are ready to let bygones be bygones and move into the changeful (I might have made up that word) future.

I know what you're thinking-- where the heck were these people for the past eight years? Well, come on now-- that's just loser talk. Let's not keep getting caught up in the old politics of divisiveness and hate.

Unity.

Yes, yes, yes... I realize that President-Elect Obama has spent the last two years trashing America and the Constitution-- telling us that the sins of America are why the world is such a horrible place. I understand that Obama has shown his utter disdain for "regular" Americans and their peculiar habit of clinging to certain things. It is true that he is friends with a good many people who actively hate America-- and some who have actually tried to destroy America through violence.

All of this is true, but inconsequential. The only thing that matters now is that he won the election, and that means...

Unity.

You know, like when George W. won in 2000 and 2004.

Oh, no, wait... not that kind of unity. That was different, you see. Bush was evil and it was patriotic to call him childish names and "fight" against everything he tried to do. Remember, Hillary told us all that "dissent is patriotic." Of course, that was while they were trying to defeat Bush in 2004. Anyway, that is all in the past and we have to move into the future now-- and the future is Unity.

Now, please understand: the Unity they are calling for now is not anything new, so please don't be afraid. This brand of Unity has been tested many times, and it works very well-- so long as your goal is totalitarianism. In fact, some of the great "unifiers" in history used calls for Unity to do all sorts of wonderful things. Take for example the recent opening ceremonies for the Beijing Olympics. Now that was some Unity! Please don't bother reading the back story on all the human rights violations and what not that went into it. The important thing is that they all beat those drums together... in unison!

Heck, just go back to the 20th century to see what Unity accomplished: Mussolini "made the trains run on time," even if it meant the loss of most individual rights-- in the name of Unity! Wilson got us into World War I and used brute squads and other, less compassionate measures to make sure no one back home spoke against it-- in the name of Unity! Hitler made sure those dirty Jews paid for their sins-- in the name of Unity! Stalin killed several million "haters" to prevent them from ruining the Communist dream for everyone else-- in the name of Unity! Castro and Che Guevara forged a paradise in Cuba by eliminating filthy Capitalists and other "traitors to the revolution"-- in the name of Unity! Pol Pot got rid of a few million pesky enemies of the people-- in the name of Unity!

Even President-Elect Obama's friends got in on the act. Bill Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohrn had a perky little group called the Weather Underground who wanted nothing more than Unity. In fact, they even knew that if they were to achieve it, they would have to first overthrow the U.S. Government, and then eliminate an estimated 25 million "haters" who would just not understand Unity and were, therefore, a threat to it.

Now we can add Barack Obama to the long and illustrious list of famous and charismatic leaders who successfully used Unity to advance their gentle causes.

Remember: whenever you are doing something in the name of "the people," then you can't really be wrong, now can you? After all, how could anyone who is trying to do something for "the people" possibly be anything but altruistic and pure?

The only thing we have to overcome to achieve the utopia that Obama promises is our outdated and "selfish" notions of individual rights. How can we possibly attain Unity if we're all running around worrying about ourselves, instead of the collective-- oops! Didn't mean to use that word. Anyway, the idea that we can move forward as individuals is ridiculous. What have individuals ever accomplished?

Yes, I know that our Founding Fathers gave a lot of lip service to "individual rights." I think we can all agree, though, that they were just posturing to get a point across to that evil King George. Besides, that was a simpler time when things weren't as nuanced as they are now. They didn't yet understand the bliss that can only come with Unity.

Think of how great our country could have been if those early Founders had instituted things like universal health care and state funded abortions! Why, I can't even imagine how our early economy would have soared if they had only had a "progressive" tax system that punished those who over-benefitted from their own success! No, as smart as those men seemed to be, the real truth of Unity escaped them. That is further evidenced by the fact that they put in place so many "checks and balances" that were ostensibly designed to prevent the glory of one-party rule-- which is, when you think about it, an important road to Unity.

No, it seems that Americans have for centuries been brainwashed into thinking that individuals matter more than the people do-- that the rights of "the person" trump the rights of "the people." Just look at what that old-fashioned General Patton said: "If everyone is thinking alike, then someone isn't thinking." Come on! That is ridiculous! He just said that everyone was thinking alike-- and that must mean that they were thinking-- right? See how confusing all of these advocates for individualism are?

As a much more enlightened nation today, we have to listen to people like Michelle Obama, who wisely noted that "Someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more." Now that is clear as a bell.

What else do we need to know? Well, how about democrat Congressman Jim Moran of Virginia's now famous statement that we've too long been guided by a "simplistic notion that people who have wealth are entitled to keep it." Also very clear, right?

If an achiever gains wealth and actually keeps it, then that means an un-achiever (okay, I made that one up, too) won't have any. Is that fair? Is that enlightened? Is that unifying? Hell no! I say more pie for everyone! And don't bother asking me who will make all these pies-- that's just more confusing and gratuitous fact-flinging.

We have an historic opportunity here. We have finally elected another leader like Wilson and Roosevelt and Johnson... one who gets it. Those three aforementioned Presidents tried their level best to achieve Unity and, truth be told-- they made good progress. After they were out of power, though, we always seemed to slip back into the old ways of selfishness and individual rights and all that malarky.

Now, Presidents Carter and Clinton wanted to get us to Unity, but they were just victims of bad timing and circumstance. Carter tried to make us understand that we were in a period of "malaise" after he successfully brought the economy down where it belonged; but then along came that has-been actor, pumping up all the individuals with his optimism and economic solutions. Clinton tried, in his first two years with a democrat controlled Congress, to get taxes back up where they belong and punish the succeeders (that word is real). His dreams of Unity were crushed, though, by the individualistic Newt Gingrich and a Republican revolution in Congress in 1994. After that, all we got was a better economy and a lot of feel-good legislation to protect commerce and rights. What a waste.

It's different this time... this time we can do it. We can go all the way. I know we can, because Obama says we can. Don't believe me? Just ask any one of the people who support him-- ask them: "Can we do it? Can we become a full-blown Marxist state?" They will undoubtably answer:

"Si se puede!"

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Nationalism is power hunger tempered by self-deception."

--George Orwell

Potential Patriots

2008-11-06T13:08:00.000-08:00

Let's play with some words, shall we?

First, "patriot." Depending on which dictionary you use, there are many variations of the definition. They are all fairly close, though-- the consensus definition being something along the lines of "one who loves and loyally or zealously supports one's own country."

Next, "revolutionary." With this one, the consensus definition is "someone wanting to bring about a sudden, radical, or complete and fundamental change in political organization; especially the overthrow or renunciation of one government or ruler and the substitution of another fundamentally different socioeconomic situation."

Finally, since it is germane to this discussion, let's take a quick look at one of President-Elect Obama's favorite words: "fundamental." As in: "we are going to fundamentally change this country." Going back to our trusty dictionary, we find fundamental defined thusly: "of or relating to essential structure, function, or facts -- belonging to one's innate or ingrained characteristics."

Okay, so, how are we to label someone who supports their country, what it stands for, its founding principles, and its actions domestically and around the world? Well, using the above dictionary definition, that person would be a patriot.

Following that, then, how do we label someone who supports what they think their country could possibly become, rather than what it has historically been-- and wants to fundamentally change the founding principles of the country? Again, using a dictionary definition, that person would be a revolutionary.

Now that we've defined these terms, can we move into some intellectual honesty? Can we agree that someone who loves America only for what it has the potential to become is not-- by definition-- a patriot?

Can we then further agree that someone who seeks "fundamental change" to America is not-- again, by definition-- a patriot? If we can just get that far, then maybe we can begin to get a handle on what is happening in America today.

On November 4th, millions of people voted for "change"-- that cannot be argued. Some of them, it can be reasonably assumed, actually had some ideas on what kind of change it should be. These are people who do know and understand Mr. Obama, and who want America to be something besides what it is and what it has been. These people are what I will term, for now, "potential patriots."

On the other side, there were millions more who also voted-- but these people voted for "conserving" what they see as the America of the past. Their ideas of change do not involve any fundamental shifting in how our country operates. Instead, they seek a return to the principles that America was founded upon: small government, free enterprise, and above all else, individual rights. These people are, then, "actual patriots."

If the potential patriots-- hereafter logically called "revolutionaries"-- would stop acting injured whenever an actual patriot tells them they are not patriotic, then we could openly and honestly advance the dialogue. If they would just speak the words "we don't like the old America-- we want a new one," then we might be able to get somewhere.

The facts are clear and obvious. We must get past the silly notion that a patriot can be defined as one who seeks "fundamental change" to America's principles. This is simply-- not to mention grammatically-- inaccurate.

If the revolutionaries want the actual patriots to respect them, then they must start being intellectually honest in the arena of ideas. Only by presenting both cases to the "masses" (they love that word), can we get a fair and honest hearing on what America wants to be. Only when ideologues on both sides openly and honestly state their cases can the individual person be allowed to make a real and fair judgment.

I have no doubt that a significant number of people who voted for President-Elect Obama are "actual patriots." I think that they have absolutely no idea that he has openly admitted his disdain for our Constitution. I am sure that they do not know that our newest President favors international law over American law. In fact, there are innumerable items in Mr. Obama's ideological closet that bear very little resemblance to anything those other "guys on the dollar bills" believed.

Deliberately and masterfully, the Obama campaign-- aided and abetted by the useful idiots of a willing, if often ignorant, media cartel-- concealed his true ideology, and used obfuscation as a very potent weapon in the election. As all successful leftist/fascistic movements do, they knew that reason would not fare well in a war with passion and faith-- and so they used our humanity against us by appealing to the most base emotions and desires of their chosen sheep. They were supremely successful in presenting the case for a man that nobody really seems to know. The masses of people who voted for "change" are, for the most part, completely ignorant of just what it is Barack Obama stands for. Furthermore, I am convinced that they do not have an inkling of just how much "change" is coming our way.

Sadly, most of them-- and the rest of us-- will find out soon enough.

As for the revolutionaries who knowingly voted for change: they know only too well what is coming, and they are gleefully anticipating it. Many of them have even more disdain for our founding principles than does the new President-Elect. Many of them have been openly hostile to America. In fact, some of them have openly expressed their contempt for all things American. The change that Mr. Obama is bringing is something these people have craved for decades.

So, what is a staggeringly divided nation to do? What can the actual patriots do in this electric environment of change? Well, we can try to support the new President-- always keeping a weather-eye on the change meter. We can try to give him the benefit of the doubt-- that he will actually "govern from the center," as Bill Clinton was forced to do at times. We can pray that he will come to an epiphany-- once he is surrounded by the trappings of the office and the real, tangible problems he will face-- and try to do the right thing... at least some of the time.

What happens, then, when none of that happens-- when the change crosses the line? Will it be a civil war of sorts? Or, as is usually the case, will the American electorate snap out of this daydream and vote to change things back to some semblance of American principles? That is, if it is not too late.

2010 will be the first chance for us to find out which way that wind will blow.

In the meantime, maybe the revolutionaries will come out of their closets and begin to engage us openly and honestly on the field of ideas. I, for one, welcome that opportunity and will relish it should it ever come.

I am not hopeful that it will come, though.

-

I'm Back...

2008-11-05T10:11:00.000-08:00

...for a minute, anyway. I wanted to share this thing that I wrote for my family and friends.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now What?

Wow. That hurt, eh? Can we get a recount—oh, never mind.

The strangest things can pop into your mind at a time like this. As I sat contemplating all the bad things that are sure to befall our country under this new administration, I had a sudden recollection of a sappy but sincere little poem that I wrote some years back. It is about overcoming pain, sadness, and sorrow to find a good and happy future. The key, according to my witty little verse, is not being controlled by fear—which is, as we all know, the great motivator.

Well, fear is what motivated all of us to get out and vote on Tuesday, and we see where that got us. The reason it didn’t work is because it was too late. We waited for fear to motivate us, instead of maintaining real vigilance on our country. We were too complacent for too long, and it caught up to us… they caught up to us. Accept that so we can move on.

At the close of the Constitutional Convention on September 17, 1787, as Benjamin Franklin left the hall in Philadelphia, he was asked, "What kind of government have you given us, Dr. Franklin?" He replied: "A republic, if you can keep it."

For generations, most people who read that quote were not sure exactly what he meant. How about now? Does it make more sense now?

The perspective necessary to understand today’s problem cannot be achieved until one understands our history. Before anyone thinks that this is the worst thing that has ever happened to America, allow me to mention a few other “progressive” democrat Presidents with aspirations of dictatorial powers who came before our new messiah.

Under Woodrow Wilson and—less than a generation later—Franklin D. Roosevelt, America was under the thumb of virtual totalitarianism. Individual rights shrank at a level inversely proportional to the mushrooming size of the federal government. The good of “The People” soundly trumped the good of the person. Never in our history had individual rights been so curtailed. In fact, Obama—as our newest would-be Il Duce—will have to work very hard to get to the level of fascism that Wilson and Roosevelt attained. If he does not succeed, I am sure it will not be for lack of trying.

How, then, did we ever recover from such periods? The real answer is that we never really did. Fortunately, the American people swung back the other way after each of those periods—first by electing Harding and Coolidge, then with Truman and Eisenhower. This allowed the country to regain at least some of its equilibrium. The damage, though, was real and lasting. Rather than viewing the Wilson and Roosevelt eras as individual anomalies, it is far more accurate to say that they were the ice breakers for “the movement.”

The next standard bearer for the movement was LBJ, who brought us the “Great Society.” Like the New Deal before it, this was another grand scheme that grew the government exponentially while promising to end poverty and bring prosperity and fairness to all. LBJ’s plans, coming on the cusp of the “counter-culture revolution” of the sixties, were designed to take maximum advantage of the fears and financial hard times that some people were feeling, while simultaneously demonizing “the rich” (sound familiar?).

Also noteworthy was the stunning hypocrisy of LBJ and the democrats—evidenced by their campaigning against Barry Goldwater by calling him a warmonger, as they themselves were embroiling us in Vietnam.

{ As a more than slightly disturbing side-note: look back at the last hundred years and see who got us into wars… was it the “warmongering” Republicans? WW-I: Wilson (d), WW-II: Roosevelt (d), Korea: Truman (d), Vietnam: Kennedy/Johnson (d). }

All of these past democrat tyrants have much in common. First, through populism and class warfare rhetoric, they fooled a significant portion of the population into supporting them. Next, they used their power in an attempt to force “fairness,” which was really just another way to say socialism. Finally, they all attracted a certain kind of thuggish followers, who were more than willing to use force and corruption to further the movement. You can ascribe evil to these past Presidents’ motives if you wish—but I like to believe that, for the most part, they really did believe in their ideas and wanted what they thought was best for the country. The problem was, they lost sight of the fact that America was never designed to be shaped by government. In fact, the exact opposite is true.

Again the question comes: how did this happen? Well, you need look no farther than one of our old enemies to find the answer:

“We can't expect the American People to jump from Capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of Socialism, until they awaken one day to find that they have communism.” --Nikita Khrushchev, former Soviet Premier

The Marxists were a lot of things, but stupid wasn’t one of them. They knew us and they knew that our fundamental weakness would be that our society would get soft and complacent over time. And, indisputably, we did.

So, there’s our brief history detour—now, back to today. We have a choice to make right now. We can choose to stick our heads in the sand and just wait out this newest crisis of government; or, we can take this as the final wake-up call that it is and get involved. I mean really get involved. We must absolutely ensure that we never again let fear be our last resort. How, you ask?

For starters, we can get to know what is happening with local politics. It all starts with the school boards and the city councils and the county commissions. There is no one closer to our everyday lives than our local politicians… and yet we have come to systematically ignore them. All of these social degradations—schools, culture, etc.—came about because we were all too busy with our lives to get involved.

Next, we can take a lesson from the leftists and make our voices heard when something goes against what we know to be right. Not just on the big things like illegal immigration, but on everything that could affect our lives or the lives of our children. I know we all have jobs and lives and cannot be professional demonstrators like the “anti’s” are… but still, when it counts, we have to let ourselves be heard. The era of the silent majority has brought us to where we are today, and we have to stop that trend immediately.

Finally, we can remain strongly attached to the principles that we claim to have. The only way to do that is to live them and defend them. This means we constantly remind ourselves what is important to us and what we will not tolerate. It means that we will teach our children right from wrong, and enforce those things in everyday life. No more sliding into decadence (or, as Judge Robert Bork so eloquently put it: Slouching towards Gomorrah).

So, what are you going to do with your life now? As an American, as a Conservative, and mostly as a Christian and a family man, I am going to rededicate myself to the principles that brought America to life. I am going to make it my business to redouble my efforts to educate my fellow citizens whenever I can. I am going to keep my eye on our elected officials—because I am going to remind myself time and again that they work for us!

My advice to all of my fellow Patriots:

Feel right… because you are.

Live right… because you should.

Remember, everyone sets an example, one way or another. So, set the right example and keep your head up with the pride that comes from living right.

I’ll close as I opened: with my sappy little poem. I just now read it again, and I have to say that it is some pretty damned good advice… I think I’ll take it, and I hope you do, too.

The Other Side

On the other side of sorrow,
I tell myself each day,
Is a doorway to tomorrow,
Through which we'll find our way.

On the other side of sadness,
It must be true as well,
The answers to our madness,
O'er there must surely dwell.

On the other side of all that pain,
Just waiting to be found,
Is all the good we stand to gain,
Once fear stops leading us around.

....... ©1998 kmg

Kurt M. Grinstead, Gunnery Sergeant, USMC (Retired)

The Last Word (for now)

2007-07-28T07:36:00.000-07:00

-
Wow-- time does fly, doesn't it? Two years ago today saw the humble beginning of this very humble site. I think I related the origin before... how my daughter Rachel and I came up with the idea after a somewhat acrimonious "discussion" with some family members who are stuck in the old "union democrat" paradigm. We decided that we had to make a difference and try to educate and help bring knowledge to the ignorant and all that. Two years...

In that time, I have spouted off on just about every subject under the sun. I have also met many great people who have shown me exactly what I needed to see: that I was not alone out here. I've been linked to by Michelle Malkin and Charles from Little Green Footballs-- giving this site massive waves of incoming traffic.

Someone with more time would have been in a position to press that advantage and really turn this into a big site. Of that, I am sure. Sadly, I was not that person. Time is the one thing I have been running thin on for a while now. For a long time, I posted lengthy entries and did more than just link to stories. My inner voice, though, finally won out and I returned to my one, true calling. Which brings us to today's post.

It is time for me to put this site on hiatus so that I can spend any and all extra time I have on my books. The impetus for this was my being struck by a bolt of... something from above. Oddly enough, it was Rachel with me again when I had the revelation. That was last December, and since then I have written and now published the story that had to be told. I had already finished my other novel-- one with a completely different subject, by the way-- but it had to take a backseat to this one.

It is called "Guardian Dear" and it is about angels and love and a whole lot more. I will be spending all my time now on publicizing this one and also finishing/polishing my other one... plus, I have about five more waiting to come out. Obviously, it is time for me to pursue this writing thing.

So... here we are. I want to say a huge thank you to those of you who have been with me all along. Also, to those of you who came along later and hung around. I appreciate all the comments and emails and good energy. I would love to stay in touch with all of you, so please don't be strangers. Oh, and I will probably find some time in the future to post something here-- so, if you want me to notify you of such happenings, then just send me an email now telling me so.

Finally, some shameless plugging. Here is the website I put up for the new book... complete with a link to the publisher's site for ordering a copy for that reader on your gift list. I think it will also be on Amazon and Barnes and Noble in a month or two.

Guardian Dear

Goodbye for now, everyone. Be well and stay motivated!

Semper Fidelis,

kmg

-

Refreshing Common Sense

2007-07-27T06:39:00.000-07:00

-
Here's a nice little editorial on global warming insanity from IBD. I think it's only a matter of time before most people just stop listening to the enviro-nazis.

Tempest In A Teapot

I wonder if algore will read this. Things like this usually send him into a rage and bring him to lash out at the "traitors" who dare question him.

It can also lead to explicit threats.

Gotta love those enlightened liberals.

-

Hmmm...

2007-07-27T06:38:00.001-07:00

-
...it could be time to break out the scare quotes.

I wonder what they were making in this "ordnance depot?"

I guess that is one batch of explosives that won't make it to Iraq to kill our people.

Explosion At Syrian "Ordnance Depot"

Just a standard "work" accident, I suppose...

-

Outraged!

2007-07-26T07:41:00.000-07:00

-
So... they are upset that the Sheriff has the nerve to give people a hotline to call when they see criminals...?

You know, seeing what "outrages" a person can tell you a lot about them. For example, I'm outraged when I see people who are NOT Americans flagrantly violating our laws and abusing our social systems.

Oh, well... I guess we all have to respect one another's outrage... right?

Latino Groups Outraged Over Sheriff's Hotline

-

Howdy, Y'all!

2007-07-26T07:39:00.000-07:00

-
Checking in from the dusty road... I'll try to post again tomorrow... plus, stay tuned for the big two-year blog-iversary post.

Hope you are all well and happily baking away in this summer of global warming!

-

Off Again...

2007-07-21T08:04:00.000-07:00

-
...and again, and again.

I'm on the road again. Gone for a few weeks.

I will be checking in as possible. Also, I have a nice surprise coming up to co-incide with my two year anniversary of doing this site.

Take care of each other and stay tuned!

-

obama And The Party Of Ideas...

2007-07-21T08:02:00.000-07:00

-
...like giving Kindergarten children sex eduation.

Another "Oboy" Moment

Can we really afford for people like this to be in charge of nuclear weapons?

-

Shocking!

2007-07-20T09:31:00.000-07:00

-
Ah, you have to love it when the nanny-state gets a cold slap of reality.

Turns out that kids don't want to be told what to do by busybody liberals... just like most adults.

Study: Anti-Smoking Ads Have Opposite Effect On Teens

Wait, do you mean that teenagers are... rebellious??

I never woulda thunk it...

-

I Wish He Was My Senator!

2007-07-19T05:16:00.000-07:00

-
Although this is amazing and wonderful to hear... it is also somewhat confusing. To hear a politician speak so plainly and truthfully and honorably... well, it's just strange.

Here is a good, old Kentucky Conservative-- the Honorable Jim Bunning-- giving it to the dumocrats and their surrender schemes.

[[ The ink isn't even dry on the President's plan and Democrats are already declaring it a failure. This type of defeatist strategy is irrational and unfair.

It is important to remember the dangerous effect our debate here in Washington can have on the message we are sending to our enemies. Make no mistake our enemies are watching us.

They are watching us and using our debate on the war on Iraq to strengthen themselves. Just this morning the new National Intelligence Estimate declared that the United States is at an elevated threat level. ...

But Democrats have already decided the surge has failed before it has had a chance to work. These are the same people who voted to overwhelmingly confirm General Petraeus and are now refusing to wait to hear his report in September.

This is the exact type of message our enemies want to hear. Well, I for one am working hard to send our enemies a message - the United States will not back down from this fight. I stand behind our troops and General Petraeus.

I promised General Petraeus that I would wait to hear his report this fall. And I intend to keep my promise. I urge my colleagues to do the same. ]]

A Pointless Political Play

-

In These Times Of Great Danger...

2007-07-18T04:45:00.000-07:00

-
...let us teach our children...

...about global warming and drugs.

Wow, just when the West could really use some of the inspiration of past generations, the moonbats are eradicating the greatest leaders from the textbooks.

Winston Churchill Out, Global Warming In

We're doomed...

...doomed.

-

VDH Speaks!

2007-07-17T05:10:00.001-07:00

-
It's been too long, so let's take a quick listen to the professor as he takes down the old york times.

As usual, I am left slack-jawed... wishing I could have written this stunningly insightful and brilliant piece. Please read and share.

The new york times Surrenders

-

They're Going To Help Us

2007-07-16T04:25:00.001-07:00

-
...whether we like it or not.

This is THE classic example of liberalism at its finest. I don't even know what to say here... except wow.

This is in the U.K., but we all know that our own moonbats love to get their inspiration from their British cousins.

Fat Tax Could Save Lives

God bless 'em... they just want to save lives with their taxes...

-

What's That Sound?

2007-07-15T10:14:00.000-07:00

-
Oh, it's just the deficit plummeting... again.

Deficit Falls to $205 Billion

Hmmm... that's roughly half of what it was three years ago... and that is pretty much what Conservatives have said would happen as a result of those evil tax cuts.

Now the real fun begins: watching the liberals scamper away from this devastating fact.

-

How Do We Blame The Jews For This One?

2007-07-14T07:31:00.001-07:00

-
The bad news is that islamic savages have killed fourteen Philippine Marines-- and beheaded most of them. The good news is that the bbc has managed to avoid the horror of this by finding ways to blame the victims. Oh, and they are calling these muslim murderering pigs "rebels."

Rebels Behead Philippine Troops

Now, how is the media and hollywood going to tie this one to Israel's oppression of the poor, innocent "Palestinians?"

-

Oboy, obama!

2007-07-13T05:27:00.002-07:00

-
Well, even the magically wonderful barack hussein obama isn't immune to the death grip of the teacher's unions.

Apparently, he dared to hint that teachers should be competent and that rewards should be based on said competence. This never, ever goes over well with these people (just ask the Governator).

Still, obama did try to appease them by reminding them that he is against the evil practice of school vouchers and anything else the child-hating Conservatives support. You have to love how the dumocrats are so adept at pulling those puppet strings by invoking the evil right-wingers.

obama On Hot Seat With Teachers

-

What Now For Iraq?

2007-07-13T05:27:00.001-07:00

-
As the anti-American forces in Congress prepare for another full-court-press against our military, the President seems to be ready to stand up to them again. The question is, how much of this can our war effort take? Answer: not much more.

It is not just my never-humble opinion that the dumocrats have seriously degraded our war effort. It is painfully obvious that they have given the greatest wartime intangible to our enemy: hope. As Ralph Peters says in his latest column:

[[ EVEN as our troops make serious progress against al-Qaeda-in-Iraq and other extremists, Congress - including Republican members - is sending the terrorists a message: "Don't lose heart, we'll save you!" ]]

Here's the column. The Quit Iraq Caucus

As stated above, the "surge" has yielded much progress... but the media and Congressional dumocrats will not succumb to that truth. Instead, they will continue to undermine our President-- and subsequently our military-- in every way possible.

Here is Rich Lowry with a good take on the truth of the current situation:

[[ The surge has succeeded in reducing sectarian killings in Baghdad and civilian casualties overall, but at the cost of increased U.S. casualties and without the Iraqi legislative accomplishments that were established as "political benchmarks." Those benchmarks shouldn't be fetishized. The reason that they were considered so important is that they were thought necessary to entice Sunnis away from the insurgency. Instead, the Sunnis have swung our way anyway, in reaction to al Qaeda brutality and to our strength. ]]

The rest of his column: The Fantasy Of Retreat

All in all, a fair, unbiased, and factually supported statement on this mess would be "it is clear that our military could win this war in fairly short order if only the media and Congress would stop abetting the enemy."

-

Now For Something Highly Technical

2007-07-12T05:19:00.000-07:00

-
**WARNING: Global warming information ahead.**

Okay, here's one of the money lines:

[[ The amounts of carbon dioxide entering the atmosphere have increased about 1.8% per year since pre-industrial times, rising from about 280 ppmv to 383 ppmv now -- the highest in 160,000 years. However, pre-industrial temperatures were much higher than current temperatures, when carbon dioxide concentrations were at the much lower 280 ppmv. ]]

This article could do more for the world than all the Live Earth concerts combined... if only people would read it. Yes, it is stuffed (and I mean STUFFED) with science-talk and facts and figures and charts... but it is also one of the most succinct and complete arguments for common sense that I have ever read.

Please take the time to read this and, for goodness' sake, share it. The next time you are in a "discussion" with one of our enlightened lefty friends, you can use this to wake them up. Although... I must admit that since they are mostly immune to facts, you would probably have better luck printing it off, rolling it up, and hitting them on the nose with it.

Anyway... here you are:

Global Warming and Solar Radiation

Ah, knowledge... freedom for us and poison for them.

-

Hallelujah!

2007-07-12T05:18:00.001-07:00

-
More of this, please!

Marine Investigator Recommends Dropping Charges in Haditha Killings

-

Yeah, And Bush Is The Evil Dictator

2007-07-11T05:05:00.001-07:00

-
This kind of story always comes as such a surprise to the lefties. They just can't seem to wrap their little brains around the fact that their buddies in places like Cuba, Syria, Venezuala, and China are serious thugs.

Here's an associated (with terrorists) press story about China executing a government official for being corrupt. Let's deconstruct one especially mind-boggling sentence, shall we?

[[ His death sentence was unusually heavy even for China, believed to carry out more court-ordered executions than all other nations combined, and indicates the leadership's determination to confront the country's dire product safety record. ]]

In that one sentence, the writer expressed her shock that China would do this ("unusually heavy..."), tried to defend the communist regime with faint protective words ("believed to carry out..."), and then wraps up by deciding that it was a good effort by the regime to fix a serious problem ("...the leadership's determination to confront...").

It is surreal. Allow me to translate what she really meant:

"The valiant People's government had to perform this very rare execution to prove their ultimate committment to the People."

China Executes Ex-Food & Drug Chief

I know, I know... moral relevance. Abu Graib, Gitmo, Halliburton... it's all the same...

-

Quiz Time!

2007-07-10T05:32:00.000-07:00

-
This should be an easy one. It is a page with statements that come from either al gore or the Unabomber.

Piece of cake, right?

TEST PAGE

So... how'd you do?

-

aclu: Still The #2 Enemy Of The State

2007-07-09T04:16:00.001-07:00

-
In this time of global jihad, it's easy to forget another great threat to our freedom. They've been kind of quiet lately, but here they are with one of their signature moves:

aclu Sues City Over Jesus Painting

Classic!

Now, if you haven't been watching Fox News' new comedy show, "The Half-Hour News Hour," you are really missing out. Here are some of their "commercials" for the aclu. They'd be much funnier if the things they are parodying were not true...

aclu Commercial 1

aclu Commercial 2

aclu Commercial 3

aclu Commercial 4

aclu Commercial 5

Here are a few other sites that speak to the truth about the aclu.

Communist Beginning For aclu

Uncomfortable Truths

Finally, from our friends at Stop The ACLU:

American Communist Lawyer’s Union

They are truly despicable. Let's keep their threat in our minds and not give them any quarter.

-

Oh. My. Lord.

2007-07-06T11:34:00.001-07:00

-
Well, this is the logical conclusion to al gore's environmental religion. I thought I had seen pretty much everything those numbskulls could throw at us... but I was wrong.

Human Greed Takes Lion's Share Of Solar Energy

Yes, they used the word "greed."

Remember this story of how humans are a "virus" on the planet?

I miss the good old days when they talked about how American greed was using all of the planet's resources, and America was a virus... now it's all humans. I guess America just wasn't evil enough for them... darn!

-

"Hello, Pot, You're Black," Said The Kettle

2007-07-05T09:35:00.002-07:00

-
Hillary is upset that President Bush intervened in the Scooter Libby affair. Yeah... right.

If anyone... and I mean ANYONE... complains to you about Scooter Libby's sentence being commuted, please shove this down their moonbat throat.

List Of bill clinton Pardons

End of conversation. Period.

-

Another One Is Gone

2007-07-05T09:35:00.001-07:00

-
Soon, all of these amazing people will be gone... and we will be so much the worse off for it.

This man's story is incredible. Such a different generation... such a different caliber of people. Read this one, please...

Top WW-II Sub Commander Dies At 93

Apparently, the ny times still has a tiny sliver of its soul left... so kudos to them for printing this.

-

Happy Birthday To Us!

2007-07-04T06:33:00.000-07:00

-
What a great country we live in! God has truly blessed us.

I hope everyone has a great Independence Day... have fun and remember:

-

Couldn't resist this final one:

See ya soon!

Enemies Within

2007-07-03T06:14:00.000-07:00

-
These two stories are seemingly unrelated.

One is about left-wing extremist Mexican "activists" who want all white people to be deported to Europe so that they can have "their" country back.

The other is another tale of the usual whining from CAIR... this time about Conservative comments after the U.K. terrorist attacks. The evil Conservative's comments are "incitement," you see, and must be addressed.

What these stories show is that there are real, true enemies residing right here in our own country. Enemies who are fanatically committed to the overthrow of our government and our way of life. This is not my supposition... it is a very clear and very obvious fact. No sane person could argue the point in any lucid way... and yet...

Why won't the liberals see this? Why won't they join us in trying to protect our country from these threats? These are more than just rhetorical questions. These questions are the very heart of what is wrong in America now. We have a substantial portion of our population that does not see the above stories as a problem.

Comforting, eh...? I think I'm going to go and buy another gun tonight...

-

Hmmm... Think We Could Learn Something Here?

2007-07-02T04:08:00.000-07:00

-

[[ After their military defeat by regular forces, the occupied population produced terrorists who engaged in bombings, sniping, poisonings, and other attacks on occupation forces and on the civilian population. They operated as irregulars in small terror units, armed with automatic weapons and bazookas.

Women and minors as young as eight participated in the terror attacks. They attempted to build weapons of mass destruction, using chemical poisons. They assassinated officials of the occupation regime. They had a special obsession with torturing and murdering "collaborators." They murdered hundreds of civilians, while thousands of the terrorists themselves were killed by the occupation armed forces. The occupiers responded to terror with brutality and force, sometimes using collective punishment. ]]

A must read. Please do so now...

The Anti-Terror Campaign That Succeeded

-

Important Safety Tip, Kids...

2007-06-29T06:04:00.000-07:00

-
...never, EVER, put your hand into a Marine's pocket.

Not such an easy target, after all, eh?

Former Marine, 72, KOs Pickpocket

Beat him bloody... wow, I really love stories like this!

Semper Fi, old-timer!!

-

Did You Miss Me?

2007-06-28T05:21:00.001-07:00

-
I am back... kind of.

Sorry for being away so long... these are crazy times we're living in.

Back to business now... what's going on in the world?

-

Once Upon A Time...

2007-06-28T05:17:00.000-07:00

-
...twenty-five years ago today, to be exact...

A young man from a small town in Colorado stepped off of a bus at Marine Corps Recruit Depot, San Diego, California and saw these:

...and then he saw this:

Even with that horror, the young man decided to stay around for a few decades.

Then, a few years after he had hung it up for good, he dusted off the old uniform and went to watch his son climb off of those same yellow footprints.

Crazy world, eh?

Happy first day at boot camp to me.

Off I Go

2007-06-11T06:58:00.000-07:00

-
Well, I'm all saddled up and heading out into the desert. I'll be gone for a couple of weeks... but I'll do my best to post something here as possible.

Please take good care and be nice to one another.

Here is a great little site for you to visit every day... it'll help keep you occupied with positive things. Remember, idle hands are the devil's playground!

See ya soon!

This Day In History

-

Do You Need More...

2007-06-10T07:51:00.001-07:00

-
...evidence of their hypocrisy?

If so, I offer this:

A Liberal Mix Of Religion And Politics

They do hate history... it is full of facts and other things that always get in their way.

-

Misogyny Is Them

2007-06-09T18:02:00.000-07:00

-
Here's a nice little story of a strong, liberal Western woman who comes face-to-face with the truth about islam's view of women.

View From Behind The Veil

Heartwarming, eh?

-

Gee... Maybe We Should Listen To Them

2007-06-08T04:58:00.002-07:00

-
Here are the voices of experience... why can't our leaders hear them?

Former Border Patrol Agents Discuss Shamnesty Bill

What? Listen to subject matter experts? Ha!

-

Dear Lord, We Are In Serious Trouble

2007-06-08T04:58:00.001-07:00

-
I have no words.

Children Of Jihad Vs. Children Of The West

-

When Is Enough Enough?

2007-06-08T04:57:00.001-07:00

-
abc news is reporting another case of Iran being caught providing weapons and explosives to terrorists who are actively engaging our troops.

When do we have the right to defend ourselves from this?

Iran Caught Red-Handed

-

Our Future?

2007-06-07T04:43:00.000-07:00

-
I say, this is something of a sticky-wicket, eh, what?

[[ Mohammed will likely become the most popular name for baby boys in Britain by the end of the year, The Times reported on Wednesday, citing government data. ]]

The Times, They Are a'Changin'

Blimey!

-

Diversity Means...

2007-06-07T04:42:00.000-07:00

-
...group think? Apparently so.

Gotta love the old college tradition of tolerance and acceptance of anyone and everyone... right?

Riiiight...

Think Like Us, Or Else

I like to throw out little reminders like this one from time to time... just to keep us all thinking straight on who we're up against.

-

Not Just Another Day

2007-06-06T05:00:00.000-07:00

-

[[ Losses heavy. Difficult to get runners through. Some have never returned. Morale excellent, but troops about all in. Men exhausted. ]]

6 June 1918 was the day that forever changed the face and heart of the United States Marine Corps. This was the day that saw the beginning of the Battle of Belleau Wood in World War I.

If you are not familiar with this battle, you should take the time to look into it just a bit. I'll give you a few highlights... starting with the darkest one: on 6 June 1918, the U.S. Marine Corps suffered more casualties than it had in the entire 143 years of its existence up to that point.

Those Marines fought... oh, Lord, how they fought. Even though the French had other suggestions for us. From the USMC web site:

[[ As American forces arrived on the scene, Captain Lloyd Williams of 2nd Battalion, 5th Marines Regiment was told by the retreating French army that turning back was the best course of action. He declined, giving the now-famous reply, "Retreat, hell! We just got here!" ]]

As the battle raged, our legendary marksmanship training paid off:

[[ With little to no cover, Marines maneuvered through an 800-yard wide-open wheat field, trying to reach the heavily entrenched German soldiers. The Marines began their advance with unwavering courage and the use of precision long-distance marksmanship. According to Gilles Lagin, a Belleau Wood historian, the Germans were familiar with British snipers, but the Marines’ ability to hit a target from more than 500 yards away stunned them so badly they believed there was an entire regiment of Marine snipers attacking. ]]

Here's part of the account given by Navy Secretary Josephus Daniels:

[[ In Belleau Wood the fighting had been literally from tree to tree, stronghold to stronghold; and it was a fight which must last for weeks before its accomplishment in victory.

Belleau Wood was a jungle, its every rocky formation containing a German machine-gun nest, almost impossible to reach by artillery or grenade fire. There was only one way to wipe out these nests - by the bayonet. And by this method were they wiped out, for United States marines, bare-chested, shouting their battle cry of "E-e-e-e-e y-a-a-hh-h yip!" charged straight into the murderous fire from those guns, and won!

Out of the number that charged, in more than one instance, only one would reach the stronghold. There, with his bayonet as his only weapon, he would either kill or capture the defenders of the nest, and then swinging the gun about in its position, turn it against the remaining German positions in the forest.

Such was the character of the fighting in Belleau Wood; fighting which continued until July 6th, when after a short relief the invincible Americans finally were taken back to the rest billet for recuperation.

In all the history of the Marine Corps there is no such battle as that one in Belleau Wood. Fighting day and night without relief, without sleep, often without water, and for days without hot rations, the marines met and defeated the best divisions that Germany could throw into the line. ]]

One more thing about Belleau Wood... it is the battle where Marines earned the nickname "Devil Dogs." A captured diary from a German officer stated that the "American Marines fight like tuefel hunden (devil dogs)."

God bless the souls and hearts of those men... I will never forget them and I will do my level best to help others remember them.

Semper Fi, Marines!

-

-

Words To The Wise

2007-06-06T04:59:00.001-07:00

-
Here is some more dirt on the shamnesty illegal immigration bill from Senator Sessions.

20 Loopholes

Geez... they are really trying to railroad us with this thing.

-

THE Human Shield

2007-06-05T06:19:00.000-07:00

-
This is a must see. Although, I guarantee you that the soldier doesn't think it's anything special... just doing his job.

SEE IT

See? Told ya...

-

I Never Woulda Thunk It

2007-06-05T04:44:00.001-07:00

-
Mon Dieu!

Who could have predicted that America would need to take a lesson from the French?

Well, we sure as hell do need to. Check out this little gem:

France Gets Tough On Illegal Immigration - Sets Quotas For Arrests & Expulsions

Wow... where can we get a leader with such mad skills?

** (Hint) **

-

Testify!

2007-06-04T08:55:00.000-07:00

-
Wow, this is a good one. Wish I had written it.

A Letter To danny glover

Remember, glover is THE reigning champ of hollywood ass-clowns. He is worse than rosie and babs combined.

-

Fred Thompson Time

2007-06-01T06:39:00.000-07:00

-
Okay, I'm going to start showing a new meter on all my postings that involve Fred Thompson. It will indicate how close I am to dropping everything and campaigning shamelessly for Mr. Thompson. The scale will be the standard 1 to 10, with 1 being: "No way, Freddie." and 10 being: "FRED, FRED, FRED!!!!!"

For the past few weeks, the scale has hovered between 3 and 4.5... mostly because I was and am still gathering information.

This morning, it moved to 7.5.

Why, you ask? Well, I've been doing more and more research into his background and life... and I finally found his Senate voting record. He is right on the money on the vast majority of these votes. I am troubled by a few things there, but we'll see how they flesh out as time goes on here.

Fred Thompson On The Issues

So, that moved the scale a bit... but it wasn't until I read this piece in the Weekly Standard that it leapt mightily upward. Take the time to read this... trust me. It gets really good on the second page.

From The Courthouse To The White House

Listen... I'm a man who has recently been let down badly by a politician. I am hurt and bruised and battered by my President's current behavior on this immigration fiasco. So, I am not ready yet to jump blindly behind another "Conservative" politician.

Having said that, I will add that Fred Thompson is starting to look incredibly, amazingly good. So good, in fact, that the meter has moved again since I've been typing this!

Fred Thompson Meter: 8

-

Sad, Sad Days

2007-06-01T05:03:00.001-07:00

-
Ironically, one of the things we like most about him is his steadfastness... unfortunately, it applies even when he is dead wrong.

President Bush Insults His Most Loyal Supporters

What a legacy... to stand as a strong President and then be remembered as an advocate of open-borders and illegal aliens invading America.

Here is Peggy Noonan's take on it:

Too Bad

Just sad... that's all.

-

The Poster Child...

2007-05-31T04:42:00.000-07:00

-
...for incompetence is jimmuh carter. Period.

When he called President Bush the "worst in history," it was laughable. Now, Investor's Business Daily has launched a ten part series on the real worst President ever.

I highly recommend saving this one and sharing it. Whenever someone starts talking about the worst President... you can pull out the truth and stuff it down their throat.

Scroll down and start at part one.

Profiles In Incompetence

DISCLAIMER: This in no way eases the extreme anger I am feeling toward President Bush over the illegal alien amnesty bill.

Just sayin'...

-

Gloryoski!!

2007-05-30T06:45:00.000-07:00

-

"The Fred has landed."

My favorite part is the comments from the liberals-- who are no doubt quaking in their Birkenstocks at this news.

By the way, Fred Thompson's take on the new Shamnesty Bill?

[[ "A nation without secure borders will not long be a sovereign nation," he said. "No matter how much lipstick Washington tries to slap onto this legislative pig, it's not going to win any beauty contests." ]]

Run, Fred... run.

-

marx & lenin Alive And Well...

2007-05-30T04:51:00.000-07:00

-
...in hillary's campaign.

Ah, yes... I do love it when they prove our point with their own words.

If you ever needed more proof that hillary is a communist down in her black little heart... here you go:

clinton Says: America Needs "Shared Prosperity," Not "Ownership" Society

Gotta love the slogans. Check out this little number:

[[ "Fairness doesn't just happen. It requires the right government policies." ]]

Yep. She actually said that. I am not surprised at all... that is exactly how the liberals think. They believe that it is the government's job to institute "fairness" into all aspects of life. Fairness, that is, that comes from their perspective.

The line could not be more clear. Either you want elitist liberals deciding what is best for you and your family, or you want to decide that for yourself.

-

How Did You Spend Memorial Day?

2007-05-29T13:42:00.000-07:00

-
I bet it wasn't like this:

Washington State: Veterans' Graves Desecrated, Flags Burned And Replaced With Swastikas

...or this:

Pennsylvania: Veterans' Sanctuary Desecrated With Swastikas

...or this:

Massachusetts: Teenagers Arrested For Throwing Eggs At Color Guard During Memorial Day Parade

What a wonderful and enlightened nation we are becoming. God bless those liberals and their free speech!

-

We Remember

2007-05-28T13:14:00.001-07:00

-
Here's an amazing tribute for Memorial Day.

Remember Me

Thanks to SAJ for sending this to me.

-

Awesome Cartoon!

2007-05-27T09:26:00.000-07:00

-
If you haven't been reading Chris Muir's brilliant comic strip, "Day By Day," then you have been missing out-- big time.

Here is his Memorial Day cartoon... and it is a keeper Click on it to increase the size.

-

HERE is the link to it.

-

Happy Birthday, Duke!

2007-05-26T11:07:00.001-07:00

-

Sergeant Stryker also said:

"A lot of guys make mistakes, I guess, but every one we make, a whole stack of chips goes with it. We make a mistake, and some guy don't walk away - forevermore, he don't walk away."

Here's a great tribute to the Duke on his 100th birthday:

100 Reasons To Love John Wayne

-

Overdue

2007-05-25T07:05:00.001-07:00

-
It's been too long since I broke out the Glass Of Optimism.

These two stories are definitely worth clinking our glasses together.

al quaeda On The Run In Al-Anbar

...and...

donkeys Retreat And Draft Funding Bill Without Retreat In It

Life is about the small victories...

-

Giving Credit Where It Is Due

2007-05-25T07:04:00.001-07:00

-
Here is a real shocker: a muslim group that is against suicide bombers!

The Free muslims Coalition was rightfully upset over the results of the Pew poll that showed large numbers of young muslims in the U.S. support suicide bombings.

I (cautiously) find this very encouraging and hope it can spread. I also worry for these muslims' safety. The jihadis don't take kindly to any muslim who steps out of line.

muslims Against Suicide Bombings

Now that is a headline we don't see very often!

I hope they stay safe... they are now going to be HUGE enemies of the religion of peace's main wing.

-

What Do You Do...

2007-05-24T04:54:00.002-07:00

-
...when you want some real truth on a subject?

Simple, you ask Dr. Sowell.

Here is his take on the new Shamnesty immigration bill that our dear President and his congressional buddies are trying to foist upon us.

[[ Just as we don't need to solve every crime and catch every criminal, in order to have deterrents to crime, neither do we have to ferret out and deport every one of the 12 million illegal aliens in this country in order to deter a flood of new illegal aliens.

All across this country, illegal aliens are being caught by the police for all sorts of violations of American laws, from traffic laws to laws against murder. Yet in many, if not most, places the police are under orders not to report these illegal aliens to the federal government.

Imprisoning known and apprehended lawbreakers for the crime of illegally entering this country, in addition to whatever other punishment they receive for other laws that they have broken -- and then sending them back where they came from after their sentences have been served -- would be something that would not be lost on others who are here illegally or who are thinking of coming here illegally.

Just as people can do many things better for themselves than the government can do those things for them, illegal aliens could begin deporting themselves if they found that their crime of coming here illegally was being punished as a serious crime, and that they themselves were no longer being treated as guests of the taxpayers when it comes to their medical care, the education of their children, and other welfare state benefits.

Incidentally, remember that 700-mile fence that Congress authorized last year? Only two miles have been built. That should tell us something about how seriously they are going to enforce other border security provisions in the current bill. ]]

Yeah... they were going to get right on that fence thing... right after the election... right?

But these illegals today are just like your grandpa and grandma who came to Ellis Island in 1907... right?

[[ Analogies with immigrants who came to this country in the 19th century and early 20th century are hollow, and those who make such analogies must know how different the situation is today.

People who crossed an ocean to get here, many generations ago, usually came here to become Americans. There were organized efforts within their communities, as well as in the larger society around them, to help them assimilate.

Today, there are activists working in just the opposite direction, to keep foreigners foreign, to demand that society adjust to them by making everything accessible to them in their own language, minimizing their need to learn English.

As activists are working hard to keep alive a foreign subculture in so-called "bilingual" and other programs, they are also feeding the young especially with a steady diet of historic grievances about things that happened before the immigrants got here -- and before they were born.

These Balkanization efforts are joined by other Americans as part of the "multicultural" ideology that pervades the education system, the media, and politics. ]]

Read both of these... you really need to!

The Amnesty Fraud, Part I

The Amnesty Fraud, Part II

-

Talk About Spinning A Story... WoW!

2007-05-24T04:54:00.001-07:00

-
The latest Pew poll is all about muslims in the United States. Check out this post from Ace to see how the liberal media does major gymnastics to avoid tellings us that 25 percent of the young muslim males in our country want to kill us all.

Media Spins Disturbing Findings

This is what the "new media" of the blogs and talk radio give us... finally, the old media's lies and distortions are being challenged and shown for what they are. Twenty years ago, this crap would have gone largely uncontested.

Go, Conservative bloggers!!

-

R.I.P. Sergeant Randall

2007-05-23T04:49:00.000-07:00

-
You just cannot beat the British when it comes to obituaries. They still honor their old warriors (and others) with great style and flair. I just love the way they write these things.

Take, for example, the case of Sergeant Peter Randall:

[[ Peter John Randall was born on August 20 1930, the son of a sailor who served in the Royal Navy in both world wars and was awarded the US President's medal for rescuing American seaman ar sea. After school at Fareham, Hampshire, at 14 Peter embarked on a series of jobs; one, in a bakery, ended when he threw a handful of dough at the baker. At 16 he joined the Royal Sussex regiment as a clarinet-playing bandsman, then was switched to 4th Queen's Own Hussars. ]]

You absolutely have to read the rest of this extraordinary man's story. It's not very long, but it will be with you for a long time.

Another British Hero Dies And Is Remembered

Remarkable just doesn't begin to cover it. Thank God the Brits still do this. I hope Americans spend some time remembering our own fallen on this coming Memorial Day.

-

pelosi's Diplomacy Pays Off

2007-05-22T05:45:00.000-07:00

-
Lots and lots of people predicted this. It wasn't exactly hard to see... pretty easy, actually, for anyone with even a drop of common sense.

After pelosi’s Syria Visit, Dissidents Cower

Nice move, nancy... way to show American unity.

She is a very dangerous fool.

-

More Elitist Fun

2007-05-22T05:41:00.000-07:00

-
Remember, even though it looks and smells exactly like gross hypocrisy, it's not. Just like when al gore or his little protege, dicaprio, use "evil" private jets... it's okay because they are part of a bigger message.

edwards Charges $55,000 To Students For Speech... About Poverty

On a serious note... who the hell would pay ANYTHING to hear the silky pony speak??

-

Let's Play "Finish The Sentence"

2007-05-21T04:32:00.001-07:00

-
Ready?

"Convert or ..." ?

Give up?

muslims Tell Christians: "Convert Or ..."

Ah, you knew all along, didn't you?

Love that religion of peace!

-

Shocking!

2007-05-19T06:45:00.001-07:00

-
Did anyone... and I mean anyone... really expect them to play by the rules?

dumocrats "Bend" Rules & Break Pledge

I'm so surprised...

-

Que?

2007-05-18T06:13:00.000-07:00

-
This sort of thing creates all kinds of horrible twistings inside my brain.

The mayor... the mayor...?

Oh, Lord, we are in serious trouble.

L.A. Mayor Joins Illegal Immigrants In Protest Of L.A. Police

Well, thanks to Congress, there will be no more need for illegals to protest anything... the country is being handed over to them.

-

A Tale Of Two "Journalists"

2007-05-18T06:12:00.000-07:00

-
Here's Michelle Malkin's column on undercover journalists... please read and share, for it shall make you even smarter and, unfortunately, sadder.

Can You Guess Why They Are Treated Differently?

HERE is the video report.

-

Hypocrites R Them

2007-05-17T06:23:00.000-07:00

-
This is a great reminder of how hollow the liberals' "convictions" really are. They bill themselves as the champions of the oppressed and the "minorities."

Then, along comes Ayan Hirsi Ali, the amazing woman who is a living example of the power of the human spirit to overcome pure evil. She is a case study in everything these enlightened liberals supposedly believe in.

She writes a book that details her astounding journey from the oppression of islam to the freedom of the West. They ignore it.

This column will help anyone understand the blatant hypocrisy that our dear lefties wield so deftly.

Please read the whole thing and consider buying her book.

"Infidel" Ignored By Infidels

-

Rotten To The Core

2007-05-16T07:14:00.000-07:00

-
This is a new low. Despicable does not begin to cover it.

john edwards-- the "Silky Pony" himself-- is an insensitive, disgusting, egomaniacal jerk-off.

But enough about his good qualities... his latest stunt is too much, even for a deranged moonbat. He is trying to politicize Memorial Day.

He... oh, just read this.

American Legion Responds To Moronic, Anti-American john edwards

Ask our fallen heroes how they feel about this filthy rich, pretty-boy lawyer who never came near a uniform and his tactic of turning their sacrifice into his own political message.

Oh, wait... you can't ask them because they DIED FOR US! Memorial Day is their day... not john edwards' or anyone else's.

What a POS.

-

This Is Progress??

2007-05-15T05:39:00.000-07:00

-
You know, I have a fifteen-year-old daughter...

These people are monsters. I mean that in every sense of the word. I believe they are doing the devil's work each and every day... one murder at a time... equalling millions upon millions upon millions of dead babies.

This time, though, they can't hide behind laws that protect the killing of innocent children. This time, they got caught doing something they do every day.

This time, someone better hand it to them.

Planned Parenthood Shines Again

Monsters... dirty monsters.

-

Comforting News

2007-05-15T04:42:00.000-07:00

-
This will help you rest easily at night.

Inside islamberg

Yes, good question... why has the FBI/DHS not gone after this with the same gusto they used at Waco and Ruby Ridge?

Oh... right... because there are no white Christians in "islamberg."

Got it.

Go back to sleep, America... no problem here... everything is A - Okay.

-

What Are Your Kids Watching...

2007-05-14T06:56:00.000-07:00

-
...at school??

Saw this on Michelle Malkin's site.

I normally don't endorse lawsuits... they are a big problem in our country... usually. This time, though, I think they should be asking for a whole lot more money than what they are.

Here is what the teacher said as she had the kids close the door to the classroom:

"What happens in Ms. Buford's class stays in Ms. Buford's class."

Teacher Shows "Brokeback Mountain" To 12 Year-Olds

Sick. Disgusting. Twisted. Illegal.

The liberals are out of control. There is no denying it.

-

He Left Out Some Words

2007-05-14T06:00:00.000-07:00

-
This is disgusting. It has become chic to say outrageously horrible things about our President... and so all the good little dumocrat presidential candidates try to one-up each other.

Here's one from obama that is a great example of this.

[[ "The day that this president steps down, the entire world will breath a sigh of relief." ]]

What kind of thing is that for a sitting Senator to say about the President of the United States?

obama Attacks President With Stupid And Anti-American Declarations

Anyway... he is partially correct. The entire islamic/communist/moonbat world will, indeed, breath a sigh of relief.

-

Umm...

2007-05-12T11:05:00.001-07:00

-
Is anyone else thinking "Monty Python and the Holy Grail?"

Police Chase One-Legged Armless Man... Again

Wow, he has gumption!

-

Oh, Geez!

2007-05-11T04:35:00.000-07:00

-
Give me a break... please... please...?

MPAA To Consider Smoking In Ratings

Mind numbing amounts of gratuitous violence, obsessive flaunting of "gay this and gay that," and rampant sexuality on television and the big screen are okay for kids... but the liberals are going to make a stand when it comes to a character having a smoke!

This just might be a clue as to why our culture is going straight down the flusher...

-

What Do You Call It...

2007-05-10T04:23:00.000-07:00

-
...when people go crazy because they don't like the results of an election?

"Civil unrest?" "Legitimate protest?"

...

How about ""Anarchy?" or "Denial?"

Just like here in the good, old U.S.A., the French liberals and muslims are seething and whining and stomping their feet because they don't like living in a country where people get to vote.

Insanity Continues In France - Students "On Strike"

On strike?? What the hell does that mean?

If the government doesn't overturn the fair election, then the students will... what?? Stop learning? Yeah! That'll teach those evil Conservatives to win a fair election!!

-

Pat Benatar And Michael Jackson...

2007-05-09T07:12:00.000-07:00

-
...would salute this man.

Continuing the off-beat tone of the day, we have a strange tale from Connecticut.

I know it's sad... believe me, I know. I am sorry for him and his family and they have my prayers.

Still... this is just like something out of the eighties music video world.

Man Dies During Dance Fight

-

Huh?

2007-05-09T07:09:00.000-07:00

-
And now, for something offbeat...

This is an interesting story... but a sad one, if you are a moose lover.

In the second to last paragraph, please note what future precautions the couple will take.

Grizzly Bear Kills Moose In Driveway

-

Interesting Group Of People

2007-05-08T04:50:00.000-07:00

-
The White House held a super-exclusive and very (VERY) formal dinner for the Queen of England.

For some reason, the reporters never have the same last name as their spouses.

Anyway...

Here is the guest list...

Man, nancy pelosi had to feel extremely out of place-- what with all the human beings around and all.

-

Ah, France

2007-05-08T04:49:00.001-07:00

-
Well, the "youths" are still having lots of fun in France... I guess having a Conservative become the new boss-man is not setting well with them.

Anarchy Continues In France As muslims Show Their Peaceful Ways

...and more of the same

Wonder why they're so upset?

-

God Loses Again

2007-05-07T05:35:00.000-07:00

-
At some point, He is surely going to get tired of this.

Signs Removed From Classroom

-

With Support Like This...

2007-05-07T05:34:00.000-07:00

-
...who needs enemies?

In case you didn't hear about this... and on the off chance that you care at all what this disgusting creature thinks...

rosie o'donnell Slams Troops While "Supporting" Them

What a piece of garbage.

-

The Owners

2007-05-06T06:20:00.001-07:00

-
Lorie Byrd borrows Mr. Limbaugh's words to make a very salient point.

dumocrats "Own Defeat"

This is a nice piece that will remind you of how far gone these idiots are.

-

Straight Talk From (And About) A Straight Talker

2007-05-05T08:02:00.000-07:00

-
Let's devote some time to our next President, shall we? The Fred Thompson wagon is starting to build up speed... and it won't be long before we all hop onboard.

I admit that I am still gathering information on Mr. Thompson to see how solid I think his positions are... but it sure does look good so far. The very best thing about him is his ability to just speak plainly and very intelligently-- without sounding like one of these dancing clown politicians.

Okay, we'll start with this one:

Images Of Oppression

Go, Fred!

Here is more on the soon-to-be candidate.

Thompson And His Ideas Are Now Online

Here is Mr. Thompson shedding some light on the truth about communist health care and how our dingbat liberals are so impressed with it.

The Myth Of Cuban Health Care

Now, a great one here-- the future President talks about the anti-American feelings in the world today.

Sticks And Stones

Finally, some humor. Frank J.-- the intrepid master of the brilliant IMAO blog where Yours Truly is featured in the Peace Gallery-- is the keeper of the Fred Thompson facts... and he now has a T-shirt with many of the good ones listed on it.

Fred Thompson Facts - T-Shirt Edition

Come on... you know you want to buy one!

-