As time goes by so do all things change; and while my belief in Conservatism (tinged with a bit of Libertarianism) is unchanged, I will soon be changing this blog from political/social commentary to something more personal. It's now time for that. In a few days my first post on this new life journey will appear. Until then, may God bless you all.
I'm not one for doing book reviews but I downloaded this to my Kindle--it was free--yesterday and finished it yesterday. It's not a long book but it makes you take a long look at yourself.
The world looks at what are now euphemistically referred to as "Special Needs Children" with pity then, having said the politically correct thing and quickly noted the similarity or dissimilarity of the child to other "normal" children, moves quickly on with life. Most people don't stop to really look at the child and realize that they are alive and although they don't react, think or speak the way others do, they still feel. They are still capable of great love and great sorrow. They are still capable of joy and sadness. They may be unable to show or express themselves as others do, but their soul is the same as everyone's. It is only their physical nature that is different.
And that is the central theme of The Book of Jotham by Arthur Powers. God doesn't care about a person's physical nature and a person's physical nature may conceal a soul that is more perfect than we "normal people" can imagine.
Jotham is in his day a simpleton but now would be a Special Needs person. When you open this book prepare to enter into Jotham's world and his encounter with Jesus and pure love from Jotham's viewpoint. When you finish you will never look at another human being like Jotham and stop at the surface of their similarity or dissimilarity to everyone else. And despite it being a fictional story of Christ's last days, you will never again doubt that all are equal in God's eyes. You will even be envious of Jotham.
We all use our intellectual capability to read and absorb an author's ideas. In reading this book I strongly suggest that you read not only with your eyes and your brain, but with your heart. You will not regret it.
While we can make jokes about this, we must recognize that all contact sports are, by nature, dangerous. I don't think there is anything we do in life that is absolutely safe and I've always felt that the risks taken by football players were one of the major justifications for the huge salaries that they are paid and the high price of tickets that are collected by the team owners. And let us not forget the money paid by TV networks to the NFL for broadcast rights. (That it is a rugged sport is why I played football in high school as sort of a rite of passage into acceptance as a man. I was just a country boy and my first helmet as a freshman was leather but did have a faceguard. Times have changed) There are great concerns for the number of head injuries in football. Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) as we know from our wounded military heroes, is something that can haunt someone their whole life or even shorten that life so it is encouraging that the NFL is looking for ways to protect the players. But I ask you this: If they make football as safe as being a bookkeeper (except if your Al Capone's bookkeeper), would you...will you...still watch it?
President Obama's lack of preparation for the debate mirrors
his lack of preparation for the presidency and the result was the same:
failure. But also painfully
obvious was his inability to face criticism of his policies and his anger at
being called on the lies that he and his minions have propagated over the last
4 years and during the campaign.
The maddening slavishness of the Main Stream Media's love affair with
Obama, which failed to criticize him, his policies or his appointees over the
last 4 years contributed directly to his downfall and his abject failure in the
debate. Obama has not had to face
direct criticism before thus he has failed to develop the natural mental
toughness that comes when one must directly confront such opposition. Could his narcissism and character (or lack of) have
contributed? Obviously. But regardless of why, it remains that he went into the debate
psychologically unprepared for any criticism of his positions resulting in a
palpable, barely concealed anger that clouded his ability to react. He was unable to mentally focus on the
questions at hand and to nimbly and logically defend his positions and
statements. His statements, which
previously were always taken at face value, were challenged directly and to his
face and he didn’t know how to react.
Obama arguably did better in his debate against Clint Eastwood at the RNC.
Logic and the ability to clearly and succinctly state one’s position are key. Debates are truly won and lost not on personality or cool but on clearly stated logic and last night—as over the last 4 years—the logic to clearly and truthfully explain his positions was no where to be found. Instead, he was put in the position of not having a press that would run interference; and, of not being at a podium with the power of the presidency to use to shut up the occasional dissenter from the White House Press Pool. Obama's lack of mental toughness was never more evident than in those instances when Romney was looking him in the eye and calling him on inaccuracies. Obama’s response was to studiously and with tightened lips look down at the podium and refuse to make and keep eye contact with his challenger. He could not mentally handle being contradicted and called a liar. The most he could do, four years later, was pitifully blame Bush and try to divert attention from his economic failures of the last four years. One thing was abundantly clear to the American people last night—something that has been clear to America's enemies for some time—Obama is a house of cards, lacking substance and when called on the lack of substance, one who petulantly retreats and avoids the confrontation rather than lead.
This is not to say that Obama is not dangerous. He is supremely dangerous politically as only one who is ultimately weak can be. (One might say militarily as well but that doesn’t apply domestically as his options of using a drone within the United States are non-existent.) Rather than Machiavelli we can expect Saul Alinsky with a vengeance for the weak never attack to your face. I would expect that over the next few weeks leading to November 6, the Obama surrogates will be sniping at Romney and Ryan hoping to do damage and inflict wounds. Are Romney and Ryan perfect? The answer is no. But are they flawed to the point that the wounds will be fatal? Again, the answer is no.
The wild card in all this is, of course, the Main Stream Media. They are seeing their creation, their idolized hero, crash in flames and that has to make them nauseous. CBS, ABC, NBC and MSNBC are used to controlling the direction of political discourse and, like Obama, are unable to fathom why people don't automatically go in the direction they favor. Like the petty tyrants of history who smelled the aroma of power and clung to it with all their might, it can be expected that they will either circle the wagons and assist in the coming witch hunts that will surely be encouraged by the Obama camp; or, they will turn on him like hungry wolves angered by the failure of their champion to fulfill the promise that they alone created, and devour him.
A few minutes ago I heard a TV pundit pontificate that like John Kennedy’s loss to Nixon in the first 1960 debate, Obama would do better later. I could only shake my head in disbelief. Had Obama won last night, the debate might have been partly comparable to that first-ever televised debate, except that Obama is, in many ways much more like Nixon than JFK. The exception being, of course, that Nixon was very well prepared for the presidency (as was Kennedy).
Today, besides Mitt Romney, the other politician in the United States that is smiling broadly is former President Jimmy Carter who can finally envision there being a modern President with a worse record than his. Now on to the Vice Presidential debate! The big question here is, what will be Joe Biden’s gaff this time? It should be interesting, instructive and entertaining seeing the performance of the man—a clown without makeup—who is a heartbeat from the presidency as he faces-off against an articulate opponent in Paul Ryan. I am looking forward to that debate and hope you’ll all watch.
I’ve been on a hiatus for the last few months due to being extremely busy trying to ensure that there was food on the table and bills were paid…a situation faced by many readers of this blog and many more Americans across the nation; but also because I tried my hand at Twitter which I found both enjoyable and educational. Enjoyable because of the thoughts that are passed by thousands of individuals around the world and educational because it forces one to express thoughts concisely.
It’s an interesting time we live in but do bear in mind that to live in interesting times is an old Chinese curse. Just today I see that VP Joe Biden is telling a reporter who asked him a question about the propriety of Biden’s warning that the GOP ‘s failure to pass Obama’s jobs bill—at least he didn’t try to spell it with three letters this time—“Don’t screw around with me.” Clearly Biden means what he says about rape and doesn’t want to be on the receiving end.
Actually, Joe is an expert of the subject but as a perpetrator and not a victim. Perhaps that is why he’s shouting a warning that is clearly meant for Democrats rather than the GOP. The GOP, after all, is trying it’s best to stop the rape and pillage of our nation by the Regime to which Biden belongs.
I see that the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) crowd has tried to support Joe’s theory of forthcoming violence with a sexual assault being reported in Cleveland and out in Oakland where a reporter was threatened with violence. You can always count on the Liberals to have their ground troops follow their vocal lead after it is trumpeted by the Left Wing Media.
As for the OWS urban terrorists being compared with the Tea Party, anyone with common sense can hear, see and smell the difference. Anyone, of course, except the Left Wing Media and the Obama Regime, both of which are doing all they can to turn the OWS into a real movement of substance instead of a rabble that prefers violent confrontation to working in the system. If you look at the make-up of the OWS you find pure anarchists, Communists, National Socialists, anti-Jewish racists, SEIU-organized thugs and out-of-control, drug-addled youths frustrated that they aren’t getting Wall Streets money for doing nothing—step children of the Democrat party all. Together they are doing all they can to insult America and bring the Republic down around our collective heads. What a wonderful group to be praised by the Democrat leadership, don’t you think!
Add to this the increasing desire of Obama to govern—no a better word is rule—without the consent of the governed through Congress and you have a clear picture of what the modern Democrat Party has become. John Kennedy is certainly spinning like a top in his grave.
So now Ghaddafi is dead. Did you miss Hillary’s gauche reaction? While I do take solace in the fact that Justice was done—albeit street justice that bodes ill for the future of Libya—I can’t take such laughing joy at the death of someone even though he was an enemy. Had he died with a weapon in his hand I would say to the soldiers (rebels?) involved “Well done!” but you saw the video. Dragged beaten and bleeding through the streets then shot like a dog with a pistol at close range. There is no pride in such an act. A trial and hanging would have been more appropriate. (I would have said “civilized” but nothing about war, and even less about armed revolution, is civilized.) I’ve heard comparisons between Ghaddafi’s demise and that of Benito Mussolini’s in WWII (Gen X’s can Google the name if you missed that in high school history) but even though Mussolini ended up hung from the heals like meat there aren’t any giggling comments recorded by our leaders of the time. To the contrary, realizing the hell of a world war and all that it entailed, they let the moment pass and turned their attention to Mussolini’s allies. But Hillary’s reaction was a sobering moment and shows the complete lack of character of our current leadership. She epitomized the gangster mentality encouraged by Obama.
It makes me wonder if Obama will put a paper maché copy of Ghaddifi’s head alongside the one of Osama on the White House’s front lawn for Halloween this year. Or will he save that for October 2012 hoping it will help him in November 2012?
We should continue to keep the Libyan people in our prayers for the worst is yet to come. The street justice meted to Ghaddafi, like that of the French Revolution where the Revolutionary courts dispatched countless people besides the King and Marie Antonette to the guillotine and Madame Defarge for something as minor as being Catholic. That’s what happens when a revolution is taken to its logical conclusion and in the history of the world only one revolution avoided that conclusion: the American one. That’s something to contemplate especially when you hear a liberal tearing down the country and, like a significant portion of those involved in OWS advocating “revolution.” I know that the Democrats and Obama are hoping against hope that the rabid coalition of socialists, communists, National Socialists and racists festering on the streets of NYC that they have taken to applauding will morph into the Left-Wing equivalent of the Tea Party, but the chance of that happening is akin to the proverbial chance of a snowball in hell. The Tea Party followed and follows the ideals of our Founding Fathers. OWS follows the ideas and tactics of people like Mao, Stalin, Lenin and Castro to name a few. It’s easy to see where and how their kind of revolution would end.
Enough for today. Time for a cigar and a glass of whisky, straight up, of course. After all, it’s 5:00 PM somewhere.
Every generation comes along--and I'm not excluding my own--thinking that they have discovered new truths that somehow escaped every generation that went before. And then they run into the brick wall of reality. Amy Winehouse was an exceptionally talented girl who decided that drugs were wonderful and until now they gave her a way to avoid reality. Unfortunately, the history of drug use was something that was ignored in her education. Had it not been, she would have seen, and hopefully heeded, the warning signs left by Jimi Hendrix, Jim Morrison, Janis Joplin, Elvis Presley and Kurt Cobain, to name just a few of the famous ones. One wag, I forget who, said, “Cocaine was just God’s way of telling you that you had too much money;” but that just makes a poor joke of a deadly situation.
Amy had been in and out of treatment for years but her enablers kept her supplied with the drugs her body craved and which eventually wore it out until it just stopped. And now she’s dead. I’m sure that she wasn’t ready to die--at least there has been no announcement of a suicide note--so she’s probably wondering WTF (and that’s not ‘Win the Future’ here, folks) happened? Keep her--and Jimi, Jim, Janis, Elvis and Kurt--in mind next time someone tells you drugs are cool and it’s just “the man” that keeps them from the people and that they should be legalized as a libertarian principle. Keep them in mind when you hear pundits and politicians talk about the “failure of the War on Drugs” and how we should just give up and legalize them. Keep them in mind when you hear that, ask yourself, “Should we just give up fighting something thats bad just because we’ve not done a perfect job of defeating it already? Or should we realize the reality that drugs aren’t bad because they are illegal but that they were made illegal because they were bad?”
That’s just my rant for the day as I hate to see young people die needlessly whether they are talented as Amy was, or just some kid who never had a chance because he was poor, from a broken family and lived in a city suffering from decades of liberal political policies.
Our Founding Fathers included the 2nd Amendment in the Bill of Rights for sound historical reasons as well as to ensure that the God-given, thus unalienable, right of self-defense was clearly protected. Without the Bill of Rights, the Constitution would never have been ratified and our nation would have quickly devolved to tyranny. Despite the protections set forth in that the basis of all our laws, there have been those who disagreed with those protections and who since its ratification have been bent on the destruction of the Constitution as envisioned by the Founders. Through history they have been called by different names and now they use the sobriquet of "Progressive" even though the policies they support are entirely regressive in nature. We must always be watchful of their actions for while their words drip with sweet concern for mankind, the sweetness conceals poisons intended to destroy our liberty.
In this case we have a perfect example of such words. The president speaks of wanting to ensure that criminals in Mexico do not have access to weapons from America but it is not the criminals that are restricted or punished with increased bureaucratic red tape but the law-abiding citizen. That this Regime could see fit to send guns illegally to Mexico then use the fact that those guns were used in crimes in Mexico to justify additional gun control measures to limit the right of Americans to keep and bear arms is an unconscionable assault on our Constitution and our liberty. We must call for the removal, and if necessary the impeachment, of those involved in the act and in the cover-up that is ongoing.
History shows us that tyranny begins with movements to disarm the citizenry for its own good. We are told time and again that the central government only wants what is best for all and to ensure that all are protected we must surrender our right to self defense and rely on the state for protection. The truth of the matter is that there is no safety in the state. It cannot be relied upon to be there when we are in personal danger for when seconds count, help is truly minutes away. The truth is that only law abiding citizens comply with such laws which gives the criminal class complete freedom to exercise its depredations with impunity. The truth is that the primary distinction between a free man and a slave is the right to bear arms yet there are those who choose slavery thinking that it will make them free.
Follow the title link for more. It won't appear in the NY Times, the Washington Post or the any of the major networks other than Fox because those are the promoters of progressive thought and lapdogs of the political elite currently in power.
When I first heard about this I asked myself what was the goal of "Fast and Furious?" Having worked international law enforcement for over a decade I knew that without the other country being "on-board" and cooperating you were just pissing into the wind and were likely to get wet. It is clear now that the goal was not to arrest the drug lords--Mexico had no idea what was going on and only they can arrest people in Mexico--but to ensure that there were statistics available to fan the outrage in the media as a way of smoothing the path for more onerous gun control laws. Laws that we know affect only lawful owners and which criminals will ignore just as they ignore the plethora of gun laws on the books today.
Now we have an announcement that the UN will be meeting this week on the gun control treaty that they plan to use to disarm all but the ruling elite in all countries. (See: http://bit.ly/jUf6so) This is the same treaty that Hillary Clinton and Obama have already said that they will support and sign and is clearly part of the "under the radar" moves that Obama let slip during a meeting with gun-control advocates a few weeks ago.
Late last week Obama's spokesman told us that we can expect an announcement soon on "reasonable measures" to ensure gun safety which in all likelihood will have less to do with gun safety than to impinge on legitimate gun ownership. It would appear that Obama, et al., are using two-pronged approach to get America looking one way at one hand while they stab us in the back with the other hand. We must keep our eyes and ears open and ensure that we contact our Senators and Representatives and tell them "No!" when it comes to the UN treaty and Obama's anticipated Executive Order.
Dr. Krauthammer is quite correct and the double standard that is in play is fascinating. It only proves the oft heard saying from Conservative commentators that if it weren't for double standards, liberals would have no standards at all. Especially liberals in the media. The lies that were broadcast and repeated about President George W. Bush were pernicious in that the Left Stream Media repeated them over and over and over clearly following Goebbels theory that a lie, repeated often enough, becomes fact. Obama is the choice of the Left Stream Media but, like Dan Rather's story on W's National Guard Service, is part of a greater lie repeated over and over and over.
Instead of the deep thinker they promised, we have one who apparently doesn't think and hates making decisions. Instead of a post-racial president we have one who thrives on racism. Instead of a president for all the people, we have one that says one thing while doing another. Instead of a president who tries to help the nation we have one who says "Get used to it" or "You'd better buy a smaller vehicle" when questioned about the price of gasoline. Instead of a president who is willing to "stand the heat in the kitchen" we have one who is trying to halt political speech in violation of the 1st Amendment because he can't stand criticism or dissent from We the People.
In the case of W it was the Left Stream Media that worked overtime to delegitimize the President. In the case of Obama, he does it all by himself and Conservatives only point out what he is doing.
After 31 years of government service, most of that in Law Enforcement and the rest in the military, it goes without saying that I'm a bit conservative. I believe that the Constitution needs no improvement and has certainly been over-interpreted by zealous, liberal politicians and judges. I believe that the United States was founded as a Christian nation but with freedom of religion for all. I believe that efforts to remove God from the government are wrong because the government needs all the ethical guidance it can get. While I like many places on this earth, and have enjoyed traveling and living in those places, I believe that none of them are good as the United States. We have our problems and we are not perfect, but there is a reason that there are long lines of people outside the American Consulate awaiting their turn for a visa just to come and visit. And I know, without a doubt, that there are those, both within and without, who wish to destroy America because of the very success that we have had as a nation. I pray every day that, in the end, we will pass on to our children and grandchildren a nation as great as the one we inherited from our forefathers.