Posts
On September 11,2011, only a stones throw away from the site of the World Trade Center where over 3000 innocent Americans died as a result of Islamic Terrorism, a mosque will open. It purpose is said by it's founders to be to help heal the wounds left by the events of September 11, 2001. It will help educate Americans and New Yorkers about Islam, and promote understanding and tolerance. The City of New York is ok with this.
Though our enlightened leadership may eagerly grant cultural equivilence to a 6th century culture and mindset and blissfully ignore its' insults to the basic humanity of man, I can not.
I understand that Islamic Terrorists attacked innocent men and women on 9/11. I understand that Islamic Terrorists lob missiles daily into Israel killing and maiming men, women and children. I understand that Islam treats women as chattel. They may not venure out, drive, or make decisions for them selves. I understand that the Fort Hood shooter was an Islamic Terrorist. I understand that man who shot up the Army Recruiting Station in Arkansas was an Islamic Terrorist. I understand that Islam is at war with us.
This mosque at Ground Zero won't really be a mosque. It will really be a monument. It will be a symbol in the Islamic world to celebrate and commemorate the attack that killed 3000 innocent men and women. Why else would it be scheduled to open on the 10th annaversery of the attack?
It is either a testiment to our belief in and practice of freedom that these people have an opportunity to build this mosque at Ground Zero, or it is evidence that our enemies have so little regard for us as to take this opportunity to build this monument on the graves of our murdered mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters. When you think about it, these murderous bastards have no interest in the freedoms America affords it's people. On the contrary, freedom is against everything they espouse.
The truly ironic thing is that our enemies will have their monument to 9/11 at Ground Zero before we will.
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Monday, May 31, 2010
Memorial Day
They have stood like men in formation in a park in Easton, Pa for over ninty years. At the base of each trunk, a concrete marker sets and a metal plack displays a man's name, his rank, his date of birth, the date of his death, and the location. They are huge trees now, hardwood. They tower over the park.
On Memorial day seventeen years ago, Landi and I discovered these trees. They were planted some ninty years ago so that these men would not be forgotten. In all likelyhood, they were planted on Memorial Day by Boy Scouts. There was probably a picnic, and speaches about how these men died protecting American liberty.
In the vast Gardens of Stone scattered across Europe, today American Flags will flutter in the breeze. The old men and women remember when America came to their rescue, and after fighting across all of Europe, asked only for land to bury her dead. Europe will honor these men this day.
Traditionally, on Memorial Day the President visits Arlington. This place, once the home of Robert E. Lee, is now home to heros of many conflicts. Men who defended America in every conflict, on every continent since the Civil War are honored here. At some point today, the President normally gives a speech honoring these men at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. On this day, the president and our Government remembers the sacrifices of these men, and their families.
This year, to honor these men, the president went to Chicago.
On Memorial day seventeen years ago, Landi and I discovered these trees. They were planted some ninty years ago so that these men would not be forgotten. In all likelyhood, they were planted on Memorial Day by Boy Scouts. There was probably a picnic, and speaches about how these men died protecting American liberty.
In the vast Gardens of Stone scattered across Europe, today American Flags will flutter in the breeze. The old men and women remember when America came to their rescue, and after fighting across all of Europe, asked only for land to bury her dead. Europe will honor these men this day.
Traditionally, on Memorial Day the President visits Arlington. This place, once the home of Robert E. Lee, is now home to heros of many conflicts. Men who defended America in every conflict, on every continent since the Civil War are honored here. At some point today, the President normally gives a speech honoring these men at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. On this day, the president and our Government remembers the sacrifices of these men, and their families.
This year, to honor these men, the president went to Chicago.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
The Stamp Act
On March 22, 1765, the English Parliament passed the Stamp Act. This was a tax on every piece of printed paper sold in the Colonies. In response to it, Patrick Henry drafted his Stamp Act Resolves, and the journey to revolution picked up some momentum.
On March 22, 2010, America awoke to a changed country. We are no longer a free people. We are ruled. Congress has subjugated us. The people we sent to Washington to represent our interests have failed us. They have sold their souls, and our liberty to false vision of communal wealth and enforced commonality. Except, of course, for those who are employed by the Crown, or who live in Nebraska, or belong to the UAW. They are exempt. They are 'special'. The rest of us are second class, and a caste system more rigid than any ever experienced in this country is descending on us. With the full might of the federal government brought to bear, you and I are now subjects.
On March 22, 1765 the Stamp Act galvanized public opinion in the Colonies and helped pave the way for a revolution that freed us from the English Crown, and set about the Great American Experiment. Men risked their liberty, their wealth, and their lives to proclaim their emancipation from servitude to the English Crown.
Today is different. In November, You just have to vote the bastards out.
On March 22, 2010, America awoke to a changed country. We are no longer a free people. We are ruled. Congress has subjugated us. The people we sent to Washington to represent our interests have failed us. They have sold their souls, and our liberty to false vision of communal wealth and enforced commonality. Except, of course, for those who are employed by the Crown, or who live in Nebraska, or belong to the UAW. They are exempt. They are 'special'. The rest of us are second class, and a caste system more rigid than any ever experienced in this country is descending on us. With the full might of the federal government brought to bear, you and I are now subjects.
On March 22, 1765 the Stamp Act galvanized public opinion in the Colonies and helped pave the way for a revolution that freed us from the English Crown, and set about the Great American Experiment. Men risked their liberty, their wealth, and their lives to proclaim their emancipation from servitude to the English Crown.
Today is different. In November, You just have to vote the bastards out.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
A Deadly Embrace
The person who first observed that power corrupts made as fundamental an observation about man as could possibly be made. The venal mortals who wander the halls of congress pretending to be gods mistake their ability to enact legislation for wisdom. In Federal Government's exercise of their constitutional duties, some of us are enriched; some of us are seduced; others are outraged; and we all, whether we choose to acknowledge it or not, are fleeced.
It's not that the members of congress have always been vile, thieving, self-serving, chattel. Most began as honorable citizens who "saw a wrong, and tried to right it". What these good people failed to recognize is that not all "wrongs" are subject to a Federal fix. The founders recognized this. They explicitly wrote a constitution that limited Federal power and said that not all things are a 'Federal' problem. That worked pretty well, until the power of the Federal Government, as exercised by Congress, the President, and the Supreme Court exceeded the ability of good men and women who make up those bodies to resist corruption. It was at that point that the Federal Government wrapped it's cold dead hands around the throat of the struggling American Tax Payer, and the deadly embrace began. As the taxpayer finds it harder and harder to keep their head above water while carrying the ever growing weight of Federal entitlements and mandates, the Federal Government tightens it's grip.
In the 2nd Amendment, we, as a people, are guaranteed the right to keep and bear arms. Before the Supreme Court of the United States is a case testing that right. The quesiton before the court is to what degree a city or state can restrict a constitutional right. An elderly man in Chicago wants to keep a pistol at home for self protection. Chicago is dangerous place. Home Invasions are not uncommon. Chicago has outlawed hand guns, rendering the elderly gentleman defenceless.
The Congress of the United States is in the midst of a battle to push through a Health Care Bill that will cost many of them thier seats. The public is profoundly against this bill, yet, through parlimentary manouvers, it will in all likelyhood pass. This bill does more than take away your ability to make decisions for your self. It takes away your independence. You will now be dependent on the state for health care, and the state will make your health care decisions.
The President of the United States, claiming to be 'saving jobs', seized control of General Motors, the Student Loan Program,and the Mortgage Industry. How does Ford Motor Company compete with 'Government Motors'. When you get to print money, give it to whom you choose, and sell and finance cars that you manufacture, how can anyone compete with that? What sort's of litmus tests will be applied to the Student Loan program? Since we are being taxed out of existance, everyone will be dependent on Student Loans for college. Dissent, anyone?
The wing nutts who feared President Bush's Patriot Act will never even recognize what President Obama, the Congress, and the Supreme Court has done. They are sheep chasing butterflys. Those of us who do see what has happened to our wonderful country have a great task before us: Elect people who will reduce the power and reach of the Federal government. The next election will be a contest between those who chose to be governed and those who yearn to be ruled.
It's not that the members of congress have always been vile, thieving, self-serving, chattel. Most began as honorable citizens who "saw a wrong, and tried to right it". What these good people failed to recognize is that not all "wrongs" are subject to a Federal fix. The founders recognized this. They explicitly wrote a constitution that limited Federal power and said that not all things are a 'Federal' problem. That worked pretty well, until the power of the Federal Government, as exercised by Congress, the President, and the Supreme Court exceeded the ability of good men and women who make up those bodies to resist corruption. It was at that point that the Federal Government wrapped it's cold dead hands around the throat of the struggling American Tax Payer, and the deadly embrace began. As the taxpayer finds it harder and harder to keep their head above water while carrying the ever growing weight of Federal entitlements and mandates, the Federal Government tightens it's grip.
In the 2nd Amendment, we, as a people, are guaranteed the right to keep and bear arms. Before the Supreme Court of the United States is a case testing that right. The quesiton before the court is to what degree a city or state can restrict a constitutional right. An elderly man in Chicago wants to keep a pistol at home for self protection. Chicago is dangerous place. Home Invasions are not uncommon. Chicago has outlawed hand guns, rendering the elderly gentleman defenceless.
The Congress of the United States is in the midst of a battle to push through a Health Care Bill that will cost many of them thier seats. The public is profoundly against this bill, yet, through parlimentary manouvers, it will in all likelyhood pass. This bill does more than take away your ability to make decisions for your self. It takes away your independence. You will now be dependent on the state for health care, and the state will make your health care decisions.
The President of the United States, claiming to be 'saving jobs', seized control of General Motors, the Student Loan Program,and the Mortgage Industry. How does Ford Motor Company compete with 'Government Motors'. When you get to print money, give it to whom you choose, and sell and finance cars that you manufacture, how can anyone compete with that? What sort's of litmus tests will be applied to the Student Loan program? Since we are being taxed out of existance, everyone will be dependent on Student Loans for college. Dissent, anyone?
The wing nutts who feared President Bush's Patriot Act will never even recognize what President Obama, the Congress, and the Supreme Court has done. They are sheep chasing butterflys. Those of us who do see what has happened to our wonderful country have a great task before us: Elect people who will reduce the power and reach of the Federal government. The next election will be a contest between those who chose to be governed and those who yearn to be ruled.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Get A Job
In November, we will have the opportunity to change our government. Washington is broken. The White House is occupied by an articulate fool who is completely overwhelmed by the troubles of the country. The Senate, the 'deliberative body', is completely out of touch with the mood of the country, and the House is dominated by the left wing of the lunatic fringe of the Democrat Party.
When I step into the ballot box in November, I am going to help my Senator and my congressman regain their perspective. They have lived and worked in Washington for quite some time. They have gone to the parties, and dinners, and rubbed elbows with the lobbists, and taken their money to do their bidding. They have drafted laws, and bills to benefit all manner of folks and causes, and generally worked very hard to secure the blessings of the federal government for their benefactors. In short, they have done everything EXCEPT REPRESENT YOU AND ME.
I'm going to fire the bastards. I'm going to fire every one of the bastards. If they are in office now, fire them.
Message to them: Get a job. Get the hell out of my government.
When I step into the ballot box in November, I am going to help my Senator and my congressman regain their perspective. They have lived and worked in Washington for quite some time. They have gone to the parties, and dinners, and rubbed elbows with the lobbists, and taken their money to do their bidding. They have drafted laws, and bills to benefit all manner of folks and causes, and generally worked very hard to secure the blessings of the federal government for their benefactors. In short, they have done everything EXCEPT REPRESENT YOU AND ME.
I'm going to fire the bastards. I'm going to fire every one of the bastards. If they are in office now, fire them.
Message to them: Get a job. Get the hell out of my government.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
A Federal Rash
Our country used to be a federation of sovereign states. The federal constitution was a limiting document that limited the power of the federal government. This unique feature guaranteed that the people of the states could to a large degree govern themselves as they saw fit. That in it self was a tremendous expression of the freedom that the federal constitution guaranteed all citizens. If we don't like the way one state governs, then we are free to move to another that better suits us. We are a free people, governing our selves and neither beholdend nor dependent on an onerous federal government.
All that changed as the power of the federal government became apparant. Today, instead of individual, sovereign states governing, within the limits laid down by the consititution, state's governments are mostly impotent and utterly dominated by the reach of the federal government. Federal judges find meaning in the constitution that could have never been contemplated, or worse, would have been completely abhorent to the drafters of the constitution. In these imaginary meanings, the federal bench has stripped away the ability of the people of the states to govern themselves and relegated us to subserviance to the exhaulted high court. The ultimate arbitor is a group of 9 old lawyers living a protected and priviledged life in suburban Washington, DC. It is from them that all federal 'wisdom' comes.
The quesion to consider is this. Are we better off in a country as large and diverse as ours, to have questions fundamental to our way of life decided by an isolated group of jurists whose intent and goal it is to homogenize the country, or are we better off to have these questions decided by expressions of the people of the states? Are we still a free people when our law is 'dictated' to us by a collection of aging lawyers whom we neither elected nor selected, and whom we can not fire?
It is my position that if the good people of New Jersey believe and pass a law to the effect that abortion is ok, that is their right. I also believe that if the Pennslyvania believe that abortion is wrong, it is their right to ban it. That's a state level decision. It's not a federal question, it's a recognition that the people of different states have different positions on difficult questions.
While the court has found 'rights' somehow written between the lines of the constitution, it somehow has missed this clear construct. Where do you stand on it? Are your rights and your states right's originating from the all knowing, all seeing federal court, or is your sovereignity vested you? Are you ruled, or do you consent to being governed?
If you are thinking that the federal courts should not be legislating, nor governing from the bench, congradulations. You and Sara Palin are on the same page. Tina Fey might be able to see Russia from her house, but Sara Palin understands the constitution.
All that changed as the power of the federal government became apparant. Today, instead of individual, sovereign states governing, within the limits laid down by the consititution, state's governments are mostly impotent and utterly dominated by the reach of the federal government. Federal judges find meaning in the constitution that could have never been contemplated, or worse, would have been completely abhorent to the drafters of the constitution. In these imaginary meanings, the federal bench has stripped away the ability of the people of the states to govern themselves and relegated us to subserviance to the exhaulted high court. The ultimate arbitor is a group of 9 old lawyers living a protected and priviledged life in suburban Washington, DC. It is from them that all federal 'wisdom' comes.
The quesion to consider is this. Are we better off in a country as large and diverse as ours, to have questions fundamental to our way of life decided by an isolated group of jurists whose intent and goal it is to homogenize the country, or are we better off to have these questions decided by expressions of the people of the states? Are we still a free people when our law is 'dictated' to us by a collection of aging lawyers whom we neither elected nor selected, and whom we can not fire?
It is my position that if the good people of New Jersey believe and pass a law to the effect that abortion is ok, that is their right. I also believe that if the Pennslyvania believe that abortion is wrong, it is their right to ban it. That's a state level decision. It's not a federal question, it's a recognition that the people of different states have different positions on difficult questions.
While the court has found 'rights' somehow written between the lines of the constitution, it somehow has missed this clear construct. Where do you stand on it? Are your rights and your states right's originating from the all knowing, all seeing federal court, or is your sovereignity vested you? Are you ruled, or do you consent to being governed?
If you are thinking that the federal courts should not be legislating, nor governing from the bench, congradulations. You and Sara Palin are on the same page. Tina Fey might be able to see Russia from her house, but Sara Palin understands the constitution.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
And Now For Something Completely Different...
Years ago, when the sound of 'Dixie' echoed across Hemingway Stadium, the stands would explode into a sea of Confederate flags as the Ole Miss Rebels ran onto the field. Throughout the game, either in celebration or an attempt to rally the Rebels, the band would strike up 'Dixie', and the crowd would come alive, and 'Hotty Toddy' would echo across the field. The Rebels, the music and the flag were all part of what made Ole Miss special. For generations of fans across the country, 'Dixie', the Confederate Flag, and Col.Rebel all symbolized Ole Miss football.
But, times have changed. The Flag was the first to go. I have always found it ironic that those who saw the Flag as a symbol of Ole Miss football were branded as racists, while those who saw the Flag through a purely racial lense were not. Think about that.
Dixie was the second to go. The story was the same. Those for whom the song brought back memories of Archie and the Rebels thrashing Tennessee were again branded 'Racists', while those who harboured a hatred for the song were not.
Col. Rebel is now under assault. The last of the traditional symbols of the Ole Miss Rebels sports program is about to be banished, and those who defend him will be called 'insensitive', 'racist', and worse. Those who assault him will claim that until he is gone, Ole Miss will be at a disadvantage recruiting black athletes because of Col. Rebel, that other schools will use this 'against' us, and we will get 'negative' press coverage.
First and foremost, if you factor everything through racial impacts, you are the racist, not me. Secondly, getting rid of Dixie, and the Flag did not stop other schools from calling Ole Miss "racist" and neither will getting rid of Col. Rebel.
So long as Ole Miss allows itself to be flogged with this crap, it will be flogged with it. The solution to this problem is clear to me.
Ole Miss should return to the high academic standards that it has historically had, and should embark on a program to graduate all of it's athletes. When the football factories at Alabama, Arkansas, etc. paint Ole Miss as 'racists', Ol Miss needs to point out to 'Momma' that Ole Miss graduates more of it's athletes than anyone else, and that the football factories just use them and casts them aside when they are hurt. We need to graduate more athletes into real degrees than anyone else. Everyone wants to play in the NFL, but 'Momma' needs to know the truth is that most don't. She needs to know that whether or not her son is NFL material, he will get that degree that will give him the opportunities in life and the future that she wants him to have. After all, shouldn't this be about getting these kids an education?
Back to the real world, in the grand scheme of things, this is all mouse nutts. The past controversies weren't about the Flag, or Dixie, and this isn't about 'Col. Rebel'. It's about control. If the race baiters can call you 'racist' and control your actions and limit your choices by boycotts, and intimidation, then what have you become?
There are many possibilites, but one thing is clear. You're no Rebel.
But, times have changed. The Flag was the first to go. I have always found it ironic that those who saw the Flag as a symbol of Ole Miss football were branded as racists, while those who saw the Flag through a purely racial lense were not. Think about that.
Dixie was the second to go. The story was the same. Those for whom the song brought back memories of Archie and the Rebels thrashing Tennessee were again branded 'Racists', while those who harboured a hatred for the song were not.
Col. Rebel is now under assault. The last of the traditional symbols of the Ole Miss Rebels sports program is about to be banished, and those who defend him will be called 'insensitive', 'racist', and worse. Those who assault him will claim that until he is gone, Ole Miss will be at a disadvantage recruiting black athletes because of Col. Rebel, that other schools will use this 'against' us, and we will get 'negative' press coverage.
First and foremost, if you factor everything through racial impacts, you are the racist, not me. Secondly, getting rid of Dixie, and the Flag did not stop other schools from calling Ole Miss "racist" and neither will getting rid of Col. Rebel.
So long as Ole Miss allows itself to be flogged with this crap, it will be flogged with it. The solution to this problem is clear to me.
Ole Miss should return to the high academic standards that it has historically had, and should embark on a program to graduate all of it's athletes. When the football factories at Alabama, Arkansas, etc. paint Ole Miss as 'racists', Ol Miss needs to point out to 'Momma' that Ole Miss graduates more of it's athletes than anyone else, and that the football factories just use them and casts them aside when they are hurt. We need to graduate more athletes into real degrees than anyone else. Everyone wants to play in the NFL, but 'Momma' needs to know the truth is that most don't. She needs to know that whether or not her son is NFL material, he will get that degree that will give him the opportunities in life and the future that she wants him to have. After all, shouldn't this be about getting these kids an education?
Back to the real world, in the grand scheme of things, this is all mouse nutts. The past controversies weren't about the Flag, or Dixie, and this isn't about 'Col. Rebel'. It's about control. If the race baiters can call you 'racist' and control your actions and limit your choices by boycotts, and intimidation, then what have you become?
There are many possibilites, but one thing is clear. You're no Rebel.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)