Modern Leftists should start flipping coins when it comes to deciding their positions on major issues--they'd be right a lot more often.
Global warming's done. It will probably take decades to undo the damage that Al Gore has done, along with the activist media, but you'll see, in another 10 years or so, it'll be another looming global disaster to talk about, 'cause Folks--we ain't gonna die from the Earth's warming...
As a matter of fact, this winter was one of the coldest on record. The ice pack that was receding in Antarctica, you know, the one that took 100 years to shrink to it's levels last year, it's back to it original size after only one really cold winter.
This article is really going to depress the Greenies. They'll be so sad that we're not going to fry because of our cars and Barbecues...
http://www.dailytech.com/Temperature%20Monitors%20Report%20Widescale%20Global%20Cooling/article10866.htm
That's right, it's been so cold this winter, that the net increase in temperature has all but been wiped out. Scientists are just as bad as everyone else when it comes to speculation. Remember, if scientists can't see it, they really don't know, just like you and me, and the thing they're really bad at is figuring out causality, which is what the global warming issue is really about--blaming us Capitalists meat-eaters for everything. Always be suspicious of any scientific study that tells what the exact cause of anything is. Remember the whole cholesterol-causes-heart-disease thing? It was wrong. Fat is bad for you? Wrong again...Neither of these statements were ever shown to be true in labs, and actually the opposite has been shown.
Again, the Leftist are on the wrong side.
Saturday, March 1, 2008
Friday, February 29, 2008
John Stewart!!!
Where are you, John!? I'm still waiting to be invited onto your show! (echo...)
Why do you hate America, John? Perhaps you'd be better off in Cuba as a propagandist--five bucks a day, I hear!
Why do you hate America, John? Perhaps you'd be better off in Cuba as a propagandist--five bucks a day, I hear!
There's nothing new with Obama
It's the same old thing. Over and over...
Barak Obama trumpets change, but so far, the things he has to say are just what the Democrats have been saying for fifty years: Big Business is bad, the poor need more entitlements, the American military does nothing but make the world a worse place...yada, yada, yada...
Obama is nothing more than Jimmy Carter employing a voice honed to auditory perfection by cigarette smoke. Plus, he has the advantage of being able to claim whatever race happens to gain him the most votes; he's half black, half white, so, for now, until the general election when white conservatives may have a gander at his policies, he's black and proud.
I see nothing different in Mr. Obama than in any of the other Democrats who've run in my lifetime. He believes that the best way to solve America's problems is to increase taxes and throw money at people and institutions that have proven time and again to have no idea how to properly spend it. He doesn't think that the poor should ever have their training wheels taken off, and it's this type of thinking that keeps the poor that way generation after generation.
Mr. Obama--educate the poor. Tell them how it is, and that there is no glory in victimhood. If you really want to bring change to your party, and in turn to this country, if hope is really your message, tell the people that through education, hard work, family values and optimism, in America, all things are possible, if not easy...
Barak Obama trumpets change, but so far, the things he has to say are just what the Democrats have been saying for fifty years: Big Business is bad, the poor need more entitlements, the American military does nothing but make the world a worse place...yada, yada, yada...
Obama is nothing more than Jimmy Carter employing a voice honed to auditory perfection by cigarette smoke. Plus, he has the advantage of being able to claim whatever race happens to gain him the most votes; he's half black, half white, so, for now, until the general election when white conservatives may have a gander at his policies, he's black and proud.
I see nothing different in Mr. Obama than in any of the other Democrats who've run in my lifetime. He believes that the best way to solve America's problems is to increase taxes and throw money at people and institutions that have proven time and again to have no idea how to properly spend it. He doesn't think that the poor should ever have their training wheels taken off, and it's this type of thinking that keeps the poor that way generation after generation.
Mr. Obama--educate the poor. Tell them how it is, and that there is no glory in victimhood. If you really want to bring change to your party, and in turn to this country, if hope is really your message, tell the people that through education, hard work, family values and optimism, in America, all things are possible, if not easy...
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
William F. Buckly Jr. 1925-2008
A short time ago, I announced the spiritual death of conservatism in America. Now, conservatism has died bodily...
William F. Buckly Jr. was found dead in his study on Wednesday. Possibly he was working on a column or yet another book.
I remember Buckly, back in the days of the Firing Line show. Then, I didn't know who he was or what he stood for, but I knew the guy was damn smart. Actually, I thought he was an Englishman, so lofty was his language.
Buckly paved the way for so many in what we call the Conservative Movement. More and more though, I'm trying to avoid that terminology, for it's too narrow, too cliche. What I believe this "movement" entails, are parameters for unlinear but right (correct) thinking. It's not a cult, it's not popularism; it's what works best for the Republic.
He penned some 55 books, many of them spy novels. Buckly himself was a graduate of Yale University and a former CIA agent.
The best thing about William F. Buckly Jr. was that, despite his intellect, he was never rude or demeaning. He always took the time to listen to some one's point of view and on only one occasion did he lose his public cool; during a television show airing a debate between he and Gore Vidal. I can forgive him for that to be sure...
What pains me is the thought of the gleeful dances and hand-wringing some on the left are doing. Buckly routinely had to fight through crowds of angry leftists at book signings, even though he surely would have been the first to stop and help any one of them were they injured or in need of assistance. The thought reminds me of a very liberal acquaintance of mine back in college, whom upon hearing of Ronald Reagan's Alzheimer's diagnosis, uttered "Good" under his breath. Yes, this is the Left that has a monopoly on compassion.
Buckly combined everything, in my mind, that an American Conservative should strive for: Intellect, patience, humor, joy, education and strength.
I'm not sure we have anyone left to carry his mantle. He was Rush Limbaugh's mentor. He was a titan in the fight against encroaching atheism, socialism, and cynicism.
William F. Buckly Jr, I wish that I would have been able to meet you before you passed from this world, and I hope that I can accomplish one iota of what you did.
Go now to God for your rest...
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Bill's lost lesson from, The Prince
I once heard that Bill Clinton used to sleep with a copy of Niccolo Machiavelli's classic treatise on politics, The Prince, under his pillow. I wonder though, if he missed one of Machiavlli's chapters.
In chapter three, Machiavelli states, "Thus the Romans, seeing inconveniences from afar, always found remedies for them and never allowed them to continue so as to escape a war, because they knew that war may not be avoided but is deferred to the advantage of others."
And that is precisely what occurred during the Clinton administration. Bill Clinton became a victim of his own 1960's indoctrination. That word, the V-Word; Vietnam, would forever paralyze him when it came to the use of military force. Thus, Clinton did not fully understand the State. The welfare of his State--America--was not the primary directive of Bill Clinton, it was his own ego and his longing for legacy.
He refused to act against Al-Qaeda, though America was repeatedly attacked both overseas and on our own soil. There was the first attack upon the World Trade Center. A huge truck bomb was placed under one of the towers in hopes that upon the tower's collapse, the second tower would also be brought down. We should remember that the only reason many more people did not die on 9/11 is because there was a thirty minute window in which people were evacuated. The terrorists who perpetrated the first attack hoped to kill 250,000 people. As it was, 6 people died, hundreds were injured, and who knows how much property damage was done. Clinton's administration refused to admit that Al-Qaeda was involved, and all the time, that dancing, giggling court jester known as the mainstream media brought the King his wine and played him merry music...
Next were the attacks on the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia. The towers served as barracks for US troops. 19 US soldiers were killed by another truck bomb. Clinton quickly promised to bring the bombers to justice. A few low-level conspirators were beheaded by the Saudi government, however the administration placed little pressure on the Saudis to move forward with investigations. It was never mentioned in meetings between Clinton and Saudi officials during future diplomatic meetings. Currently, 14 individuals have had US indictments placed on them, but none of them are in US custody.
By then, terrorists around the world sensed Clinton's weakness. They proceeded to bomb three embassies in Africa, killing over 200 people. This became known as the "wag the dog" scenario, with Bill launching some Tomahawk cruise missiles into Afghan encampments thought to house Osama Bin Laden. By then, no one could deny Al-Qaeda's and Bin Ladin's involvment.
Finally, the American war destroyer, Cole, was rammed by a ship carrying jihadists and a huge amount of explosives. The resultant detonation ripped a gaping hole in the ships port side, and took the lives of 17 sailors. Again, Clinton used grandiose words like, "despicable" and "cowardly" but left out more appropriate remarks such as "act of war."
Here's a segment of an article written by journalist Byron York for the National Review in 2006. York quotes former Clinton advisor Dick Morris throughout the portion:
In early August 1996, a few weeks after the Khobar Towers bombing, Clinton had a long conversation with Dick Morris about his place in history. Morris divided presidents into four categories: first tier, second tier, third tier, and the rest. Twenty-two presidents who presided over uneventful administrations fell into the last category. Just five — Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Wilson, and Franklin Roosevelt — made Morris’s first tier.
Clinton asked Morris where he stood. “I said that at the moment he was at the top of the unrated category,” Morris recalls. Morris says he told the president that one surprising thing about the ratings was that a president’s standing had little to do with the performance of the economy during his time in office. “Yeah,” Clinton responded, “It has so much to do with whether you get re-elected or not, but history kind of forgets it.”
Clinton then asked, “What do I need to do to be first tier?” “I said, ‘You can’t,’“ Morris remembers. “‘You have to win a war.’“ Clinton then asked what he needed to do to make the second or third tier, and Morris outlined three goals. The first was successful welfare reform. The second was balancing the budget. And the third was an effective battle against terrorism. “I said the only one of the major goals he had not achieved was a war on terrorism,” Morris says. (This is not a recent recollection; Morris also described the conversation in his 1997 book, Behind the Oval Office.)
But Clinton never began, much less finished, a war on terrorism. Even though Morris’s polling showed the poll-sensitive president that the American people supported tough action, Clinton demurred. Why?
“He had almost an allergy to using people in uniform,” Morris explains. “He was terrified of incurring casualties; the lessons of Vietnam were ingrained far too deeply in him. He lacked a faith that it would work, and I think he was constantly fearful of reprisals.” But there was more to it than that. “On another level, I just don’t think it was his thing,” Morris says. “You could talk to him about income redistribution and he would talk to you for hours and hours. Talk to him about terrorism, and all you’d get was a series of grunts.”
Full article here:http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NzhjODk1ODg4M2NiODU4Yzc3YWE1OTA1MDNmYWQ5M2Y=
So here we are, with George Bush taking the heat for what Bill Clinton should have done long before. Machiavelli's lesson went unlearned, with Clinton deferring war to a later date and a later president and costing America a savage blow as the Twin Towers fell.
In chapter three, Machiavelli states, "Thus the Romans, seeing inconveniences from afar, always found remedies for them and never allowed them to continue so as to escape a war, because they knew that war may not be avoided but is deferred to the advantage of others."
And that is precisely what occurred during the Clinton administration. Bill Clinton became a victim of his own 1960's indoctrination. That word, the V-Word; Vietnam, would forever paralyze him when it came to the use of military force. Thus, Clinton did not fully understand the State. The welfare of his State--America--was not the primary directive of Bill Clinton, it was his own ego and his longing for legacy.
He refused to act against Al-Qaeda, though America was repeatedly attacked both overseas and on our own soil. There was the first attack upon the World Trade Center. A huge truck bomb was placed under one of the towers in hopes that upon the tower's collapse, the second tower would also be brought down. We should remember that the only reason many more people did not die on 9/11 is because there was a thirty minute window in which people were evacuated. The terrorists who perpetrated the first attack hoped to kill 250,000 people. As it was, 6 people died, hundreds were injured, and who knows how much property damage was done. Clinton's administration refused to admit that Al-Qaeda was involved, and all the time, that dancing, giggling court jester known as the mainstream media brought the King his wine and played him merry music...
Next were the attacks on the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia. The towers served as barracks for US troops. 19 US soldiers were killed by another truck bomb. Clinton quickly promised to bring the bombers to justice. A few low-level conspirators were beheaded by the Saudi government, however the administration placed little pressure on the Saudis to move forward with investigations. It was never mentioned in meetings between Clinton and Saudi officials during future diplomatic meetings. Currently, 14 individuals have had US indictments placed on them, but none of them are in US custody.
By then, terrorists around the world sensed Clinton's weakness. They proceeded to bomb three embassies in Africa, killing over 200 people. This became known as the "wag the dog" scenario, with Bill launching some Tomahawk cruise missiles into Afghan encampments thought to house Osama Bin Laden. By then, no one could deny Al-Qaeda's and Bin Ladin's involvment.
Finally, the American war destroyer, Cole, was rammed by a ship carrying jihadists and a huge amount of explosives. The resultant detonation ripped a gaping hole in the ships port side, and took the lives of 17 sailors. Again, Clinton used grandiose words like, "despicable" and "cowardly" but left out more appropriate remarks such as "act of war."
Here's a segment of an article written by journalist Byron York for the National Review in 2006. York quotes former Clinton advisor Dick Morris throughout the portion:
In early August 1996, a few weeks after the Khobar Towers bombing, Clinton had a long conversation with Dick Morris about his place in history. Morris divided presidents into four categories: first tier, second tier, third tier, and the rest. Twenty-two presidents who presided over uneventful administrations fell into the last category. Just five — Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Wilson, and Franklin Roosevelt — made Morris’s first tier.
Clinton asked Morris where he stood. “I said that at the moment he was at the top of the unrated category,” Morris recalls. Morris says he told the president that one surprising thing about the ratings was that a president’s standing had little to do with the performance of the economy during his time in office. “Yeah,” Clinton responded, “It has so much to do with whether you get re-elected or not, but history kind of forgets it.”
Clinton then asked, “What do I need to do to be first tier?” “I said, ‘You can’t,’“ Morris remembers. “‘You have to win a war.’“ Clinton then asked what he needed to do to make the second or third tier, and Morris outlined three goals. The first was successful welfare reform. The second was balancing the budget. And the third was an effective battle against terrorism. “I said the only one of the major goals he had not achieved was a war on terrorism,” Morris says. (This is not a recent recollection; Morris also described the conversation in his 1997 book, Behind the Oval Office.)
But Clinton never began, much less finished, a war on terrorism. Even though Morris’s polling showed the poll-sensitive president that the American people supported tough action, Clinton demurred. Why?
“He had almost an allergy to using people in uniform,” Morris explains. “He was terrified of incurring casualties; the lessons of Vietnam were ingrained far too deeply in him. He lacked a faith that it would work, and I think he was constantly fearful of reprisals.” But there was more to it than that. “On another level, I just don’t think it was his thing,” Morris says. “You could talk to him about income redistribution and he would talk to you for hours and hours. Talk to him about terrorism, and all you’d get was a series of grunts.”
Full article here:http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NzhjODk1ODg4M2NiODU4Yzc3YWE1OTA1MDNmYWQ5M2Y=
So here we are, with George Bush taking the heat for what Bill Clinton should have done long before. Machiavelli's lesson went unlearned, with Clinton deferring war to a later date and a later president and costing America a savage blow as the Twin Towers fell.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Obama: Prophet of the left
Can there be any doubt as to the leanings of our country at this point in time, given the numbers that election polls are showing?
The nation has surrendered, bowled over by a deluge of negative war and Bush stories. There will be no talking sense to our people now; we'll have to learn the hard way--again. The Bolshevik Revolution took place in 1913. Who would have thought that almost 100 years later, some would still have to argue as to whether socialism works? The farther into a socialistic quagmire a country wades, the closer to its own destruction it comes. It's so easy to see what happened to the Communists and how many of the once-great European nations have faded: Germany: Double-digit unemployment for over a decade; France: Massive immigration issues made worse by a staggering economy; Britain: high unemployment and a depleted national identity. All this despite the fact that Europe's military budget was minuscule thanks to US overseas deployment. Venezuela, Cuba, Russia, North Korea, Australia. All of them suffer from similar problems, and yet the hypnotic effect of government give-aways pulls them closer to the edge of oblivion. It's like a chunk of rotting meat in a bear-trap, the aroma pulling the bear closer until the jaws snap shut--then it's too late.
It appears that Obama, transcendent and messianic, will be our next president. He has already secured the Holy Grail of the presidential run: Media Approval. Yes, the most liberal senator there is, will be our president...
The nation has surrendered, bowled over by a deluge of negative war and Bush stories. There will be no talking sense to our people now; we'll have to learn the hard way--again. The Bolshevik Revolution took place in 1913. Who would have thought that almost 100 years later, some would still have to argue as to whether socialism works? The farther into a socialistic quagmire a country wades, the closer to its own destruction it comes. It's so easy to see what happened to the Communists and how many of the once-great European nations have faded: Germany: Double-digit unemployment for over a decade; France: Massive immigration issues made worse by a staggering economy; Britain: high unemployment and a depleted national identity. All this despite the fact that Europe's military budget was minuscule thanks to US overseas deployment. Venezuela, Cuba, Russia, North Korea, Australia. All of them suffer from similar problems, and yet the hypnotic effect of government give-aways pulls them closer to the edge of oblivion. It's like a chunk of rotting meat in a bear-trap, the aroma pulling the bear closer until the jaws snap shut--then it's too late.
It appears that Obama, transcendent and messianic, will be our next president. He has already secured the Holy Grail of the presidential run: Media Approval. Yes, the most liberal senator there is, will be our president...
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Why I'm still supporting John McCain
About a year ago, I stated to some that I saw McCain as being a person that would appeal to the widest spectrum of people as a presidential candidate. This was not an endorsement of McCain, it was merely an observation and I believe that it has proven to be true. I must of course admit that the wide support for John McCain, as with almost everything in this flip-flopping nation, has to do with the media coverage he gets. As we can now see after the New York Times most recent innuendo posing as journalism, the media may be turning on him. They were content to let Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh do their work for them in the recent past, but now that Limbaugh and Hannity have relaxed a bit on McCain, the leftists in the media are cranking up their attack-machine with extreme prejudice.
Back in September, I wrote a blog supporting McCain for president. Here it is: http://neoconessay.blogspot.com/2007/09/mccain-at-least-he-has-spine.html
I stand by that, despite what my favorite conservative talk-show hosts say. McCain seems to have one thing going for him that few people do, not to speak of politicians: An ability to be honest with himself. I know that conservatives have some major issues with McCain. I have at least one: His seeming affection for globalism, mostly driven by the environmentalist agenda. That's a big problem for me. The rest of the world will inevitably drag America down to their level. That's the way these things always work. America must lead, not follow or try to fit in. Plus, global-warming is the biggest scam since Amway.
But let's look at the positive things that McCain brings to the table:
1) He is extremely consistent in his speeches about the necessity of maintaining the fight against Al-Qaeda and fundamentalist Islam. This in itself separates him from almost every liberal I know.
2) Though he doesn't control the legality of abortion, he has, for twenty-five years of record, been anti-abortion. Again, I don't know any liberals that take this stance.
3) For better or worse, he does what he says. Many say that what he says and does proves to be wrong, but McCain's honesty with himself, I believe, at least makes it possible that he could see errors he has made and correct them in the future.
4) McCain doesn't suck-up to anyone. He just doesn't. In fact, he has a temper, which his conservative critics have used in their arguments against him. I say good; we need a president with some fire. We haven't had one in a long, long time. It's one of Bush's weaknesses--he's too nice. He never turns up the heat on those that attack him because he believes that by being "classy" the bad people will make themselves look like the idiots they are. But in a world who's knowledge is controlled by the media, it doesn't work out that way. They can cover up their mistakes too easily and they can cover the mistakes of the people they favor--something they did with Bill Clinton for two terms.
5) I don't think McCain worships power. This fact, in effect, makes him more powerful.
6) He plainly states that we must control our border.
The argument that conservatives should not vote for McCain because to do so would bring destruction to conservatism and also to this country, does not hold water. McCain, quite obviously, is not a socialist of the caliber of Clinton or Obama.
I fear the narcotic effect of socialism, how it can drag a nation's people down, chipping away at their will for greatness bit by bit, and all the time, the people can't see it. Government-run health-care will do just that. It will make things worse, but the people will be unable to perceive this, and unable to give away something they think they're getting for free.
Please, do the right thing, conservatives. I know you know that McCain is not as bad as the Democratic candidates. McCain himself has plainly stated in recent speeches how awful Obama and Clinton could be, so we shouldn't assume that he wants to play nice with the Dems.
Back in September, I wrote a blog supporting McCain for president. Here it is: http://neoconessay.blogspot.com/2007/09/mccain-at-least-he-has-spine.html
I stand by that, despite what my favorite conservative talk-show hosts say. McCain seems to have one thing going for him that few people do, not to speak of politicians: An ability to be honest with himself. I know that conservatives have some major issues with McCain. I have at least one: His seeming affection for globalism, mostly driven by the environmentalist agenda. That's a big problem for me. The rest of the world will inevitably drag America down to their level. That's the way these things always work. America must lead, not follow or try to fit in. Plus, global-warming is the biggest scam since Amway.
But let's look at the positive things that McCain brings to the table:
1) He is extremely consistent in his speeches about the necessity of maintaining the fight against Al-Qaeda and fundamentalist Islam. This in itself separates him from almost every liberal I know.
2) Though he doesn't control the legality of abortion, he has, for twenty-five years of record, been anti-abortion. Again, I don't know any liberals that take this stance.
3) For better or worse, he does what he says. Many say that what he says and does proves to be wrong, but McCain's honesty with himself, I believe, at least makes it possible that he could see errors he has made and correct them in the future.
4) McCain doesn't suck-up to anyone. He just doesn't. In fact, he has a temper, which his conservative critics have used in their arguments against him. I say good; we need a president with some fire. We haven't had one in a long, long time. It's one of Bush's weaknesses--he's too nice. He never turns up the heat on those that attack him because he believes that by being "classy" the bad people will make themselves look like the idiots they are. But in a world who's knowledge is controlled by the media, it doesn't work out that way. They can cover up their mistakes too easily and they can cover the mistakes of the people they favor--something they did with Bill Clinton for two terms.
5) I don't think McCain worships power. This fact, in effect, makes him more powerful.
6) He plainly states that we must control our border.
The argument that conservatives should not vote for McCain because to do so would bring destruction to conservatism and also to this country, does not hold water. McCain, quite obviously, is not a socialist of the caliber of Clinton or Obama.
I fear the narcotic effect of socialism, how it can drag a nation's people down, chipping away at their will for greatness bit by bit, and all the time, the people can't see it. Government-run health-care will do just that. It will make things worse, but the people will be unable to perceive this, and unable to give away something they think they're getting for free.
Please, do the right thing, conservatives. I know you know that McCain is not as bad as the Democratic candidates. McCain himself has plainly stated in recent speeches how awful Obama and Clinton could be, so we shouldn't assume that he wants to play nice with the Dems.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Calling all liberals...
If there are any liberals who read my blog, will you please answer a question I have. Why, why oh why, do you think America is such a bad place? Seriously. Why do you complain about everything this country does, from its over-seas policies to its domestic law? It's a common thing that I find amongst all the leftist writers, especially those that populate the New York Times and Newsweek.
The strange thing is, it seems like not only do you hate most things about the greatest nation ever constructed, but you don't even want said nation to do the things you want, because then you'd have to stop the complaining. You guys remind me of some old codger who's all alone and constantly makes up problems so that someone will talk to him.
Any libs reading? Give me an answer. Do you want us to win in Iraq? Or would you rather we turned into France?
The strange thing is, it seems like not only do you hate most things about the greatest nation ever constructed, but you don't even want said nation to do the things you want, because then you'd have to stop the complaining. You guys remind me of some old codger who's all alone and constantly makes up problems so that someone will talk to him.
Any libs reading? Give me an answer. Do you want us to win in Iraq? Or would you rather we turned into France?
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Barak's Michelle
This past weekend, Michelle Obama, wife of Barak Obama, made a speech in which she stated that, for the first time in her life, she is truly proud of her country. She says she's proud because the country is demanding change. Barak quickly clarified his wife's statement, saying that she meant, for the first time she was proud of American politics.
How many times is a person running for president, or in a position of power, going to allow their fate to be controlled by someone close to them? When will they learn to grab the microphone from their wives's hands before she says something stupid. Remember Tipper Gore? Where'd she go? Bill Clinton too has all but ruined Hillary's chances, by showing his a side of himself that the media used to help him hide. But then he did the dumb thing and attacked the media itself. He found that no power on earth can withstand the American media's wrath, not even Slick Willy...
Michelle Obama finds herself on the cover of the leftist rag called Newsweek. I don't know about you, but the bias in that magazine drips off the pages and makes a mess on my floor. Mark my words, Michelle Obama will make no more speeches before the primaries. She's done, or hopefully she is, for the sake of Barak's hopes of socialized utopia. He'd best just hand her a bottle of Vicodin and stock the cupboards with Rum and Coke, then buy her the complete first season of Desperate Housewives. "Honey, why don't you just stay home and relax, watch a movie. I'll be at Oprah's if you need me...)
How many times is a person running for president, or in a position of power, going to allow their fate to be controlled by someone close to them? When will they learn to grab the microphone from their wives's hands before she says something stupid. Remember Tipper Gore? Where'd she go? Bill Clinton too has all but ruined Hillary's chances, by showing his a side of himself that the media used to help him hide. But then he did the dumb thing and attacked the media itself. He found that no power on earth can withstand the American media's wrath, not even Slick Willy...
Michelle Obama finds herself on the cover of the leftist rag called Newsweek. I don't know about you, but the bias in that magazine drips off the pages and makes a mess on my floor. Mark my words, Michelle Obama will make no more speeches before the primaries. She's done, or hopefully she is, for the sake of Barak's hopes of socialized utopia. He'd best just hand her a bottle of Vicodin and stock the cupboards with Rum and Coke, then buy her the complete first season of Desperate Housewives. "Honey, why don't you just stay home and relax, watch a movie. I'll be at Oprah's if you need me...)
In the Army Now...
So I went through my MEPS processing yesterday, and let me say that it was a long, irritating and downright bad experience. At 6 am I arrived in Jacksonville after getting only three hours sleep. It was a three hour trip there. I went through the physical exams and such, which took hours. Finally, near the end of the day, I went to see the army liaison, whose job it is to seal the deal on my contract. Basically, I had to hold my ground on the job I wanted. They tried every trick in the book, from trying to make me look dumb and like I didn't know what I wanted, to sweetening me with car salesman talk on jobs I didn't want. Through the ordeal, I made it clear to them that I was not changing my mind on job preferences, and that the jobs I told them I was interested in were the same ones that I had spoken to my recruiter about when I first walked into the recruiting station two months ago.
The liaison, couldn't get my job title correct, nor its series number. He repeatedly told me that the jobs I wanted were not available. I told him I'd have to walk out without a contract if that were the case. He got huffy-puffy, slammed some papers down on his desk, and told me to call my recruiter. When I had her on the phone, I explained the situation. Now, I give her credit; she went out of her way many times to tell me the truth and she drove me to Jacksonville on the same amount of sleep I had. Needless to say, she wasn't impressed with what the liaison was trying to pull, which was sell me a mediocre job and save the good ones for later. What irritated me, is that my ASVAB score was a 94. Who the hell was he saving the job for? James Bond?
When my recruiter finally arrived at the MEPS station, I was told to go to another area of processing so that my finger prints could be taken. As I sat giving my info to a civilian employee so that she could log the info, the liaison walked up to me, looking disgusted, and held his finger under a line on my contract. The line said: "Intelligence Analyst", the job I had been pushing for and that supposedly was not available only ten minutes prior. I had wanted to go 18 x-ray, (Special Forces) but since they wouldn't give me a contract that day guaranteeing the spot as I need to see a specialist for my knee, I decided to go with my original choice of Intel. When I'm in, I can always try out for Special Forces if I choose. Adding fuel to the liaison's fire, the woman processing me stated, "Oh, you got a good job!" I smiled. She told me that prior to the civilian position she now held, she had worked for Naval Intelligence and said that she enjoyed it immensely, but since her husband was a career Navy man, she decided to get out because their children needed someone to be at home with them.
Also on my contract is a two-week Airborne school at Fort Benning. The Intelligence school is a 19 week program in Sierra Vista, Arizona. My signing bonus is $16,000.
All in all, I'm happy with this. It's not set in stone yet, as I still need to have my knee cleared with the specialist, and to have my Top Secret clearance accepted. The training I'll get here will prepare me for a possible career in the CIA or NSA, or maybe if I like things enough, I'll do twenty years in the army.
The liaison, couldn't get my job title correct, nor its series number. He repeatedly told me that the jobs I wanted were not available. I told him I'd have to walk out without a contract if that were the case. He got huffy-puffy, slammed some papers down on his desk, and told me to call my recruiter. When I had her on the phone, I explained the situation. Now, I give her credit; she went out of her way many times to tell me the truth and she drove me to Jacksonville on the same amount of sleep I had. Needless to say, she wasn't impressed with what the liaison was trying to pull, which was sell me a mediocre job and save the good ones for later. What irritated me, is that my ASVAB score was a 94. Who the hell was he saving the job for? James Bond?
When my recruiter finally arrived at the MEPS station, I was told to go to another area of processing so that my finger prints could be taken. As I sat giving my info to a civilian employee so that she could log the info, the liaison walked up to me, looking disgusted, and held his finger under a line on my contract. The line said: "Intelligence Analyst", the job I had been pushing for and that supposedly was not available only ten minutes prior. I had wanted to go 18 x-ray, (Special Forces) but since they wouldn't give me a contract that day guaranteeing the spot as I need to see a specialist for my knee, I decided to go with my original choice of Intel. When I'm in, I can always try out for Special Forces if I choose. Adding fuel to the liaison's fire, the woman processing me stated, "Oh, you got a good job!" I smiled. She told me that prior to the civilian position she now held, she had worked for Naval Intelligence and said that she enjoyed it immensely, but since her husband was a career Navy man, she decided to get out because their children needed someone to be at home with them.
Also on my contract is a two-week Airborne school at Fort Benning. The Intelligence school is a 19 week program in Sierra Vista, Arizona. My signing bonus is $16,000.
All in all, I'm happy with this. It's not set in stone yet, as I still need to have my knee cleared with the specialist, and to have my Top Secret clearance accepted. The training I'll get here will prepare me for a possible career in the CIA or NSA, or maybe if I like things enough, I'll do twenty years in the army.
Sunday, February 17, 2008
Firebase Cobra Part II
Here's Part II of the Firebase Cobra series. It depicts US Special Forces in Afganistan...
Friday, February 15, 2008
A long jump into the darkness...
Well the Army recruiting thing is just about over. I go to MEPS on Tuesday and will be sworn in if they guarantee me the spot they've offered. They offered me a Special Forces slot (18X). It will be tough I know, but I couldn't pass up the opportunity to serve my country, with the army's best men.
The process goes like this:
1) 16 weeks of infantry combat training at Fort Benning, Georgia. This includes basic and advanced training.
2)3 weeks of Basic Airborne Course at Benning.
3)14 days at Special Forces Prep Course 1, at Fort Bragg, North Carolina
4)At this point, there will be a selection process. Not all who make it through the whole deal will be selected; only those that the trainers feel are best suited. Those that remain will be allowed to enter the Special Forces Qualification course. 4out of 5 people remaining at that point will fail.
5)Then to the Primary Leadership Development Course.
6)Special Forces Prep Course II-- 10 weeks of SERE (Survival, Escape, Resistance and Evasion) traing, plus hand to hand combat and disarming.
7) Next, I'll be assigned to one of five specialty Seargent postions, Medical, Engineering, Communicaton, Weapons, SF Officer, depending on what I have shown proficiency in.
8) 8-12 weeks of language school--depending on what language I'm assigned.
9) I will then take place in a large scale unconventional warfare exercise, Codename: ROBIN SAGE. Then I will be awarded the Special Forces tab and the coveted Green Beret.
This will be tough. I'm taking nothing for granted. I'm not assuming I'm smart enough, tough enough, good enough. I must take each portion one at a time. People think I'm nuts, but I've never argued with that. It will be, without question, the toughest thing I have ever done. It's all about pain tolerance, calm under pressure, and mental and physical endurance. Ouch.
Say a prayer for me. Actually, it's possible I could just fail my physical on Tuesday and it'll be a moot point....
The process goes like this:
1) 16 weeks of infantry combat training at Fort Benning, Georgia. This includes basic and advanced training.
2)3 weeks of Basic Airborne Course at Benning.
3)14 days at Special Forces Prep Course 1, at Fort Bragg, North Carolina
4)At this point, there will be a selection process. Not all who make it through the whole deal will be selected; only those that the trainers feel are best suited. Those that remain will be allowed to enter the Special Forces Qualification course. 4out of 5 people remaining at that point will fail.
5)Then to the Primary Leadership Development Course.
6)Special Forces Prep Course II-- 10 weeks of SERE (Survival, Escape, Resistance and Evasion) traing, plus hand to hand combat and disarming.
7) Next, I'll be assigned to one of five specialty Seargent postions, Medical, Engineering, Communicaton, Weapons, SF Officer, depending on what I have shown proficiency in.
8) 8-12 weeks of language school--depending on what language I'm assigned.
9) I will then take place in a large scale unconventional warfare exercise, Codename: ROBIN SAGE. Then I will be awarded the Special Forces tab and the coveted Green Beret.
This will be tough. I'm taking nothing for granted. I'm not assuming I'm smart enough, tough enough, good enough. I must take each portion one at a time. People think I'm nuts, but I've never argued with that. It will be, without question, the toughest thing I have ever done. It's all about pain tolerance, calm under pressure, and mental and physical endurance. Ouch.
Say a prayer for me. Actually, it's possible I could just fail my physical on Tuesday and it'll be a moot point....
Monday, February 11, 2008
A look back
The following article is one of the best I've read on the justification of the Iraq War and the Left's idiotic attacks on the Bush administration, in particular, those by that lying, ginormous, dunderhead, Michael Moore. Ahhh--too bad the article is scribed by Christopher Hitchens, whose vitriolic attacks on religion usually amount to nothing more than emotional arguments against the church establishment. But hey--at least he knows Al-Qaeda's evil, something his leftist brethren still can't figure out 1000 carbombs later...
Link here: http://www.slate.com/id/2102723/#back
Link here: http://www.slate.com/id/2102723/#back
Friday, February 8, 2008
What I've learned in the last year....
What I’ve learned in the last year
The last year has been a challenge for me, in so many ways. Following the maxim that "Whatever does not kill me, makes me stronger", I learned several valuable lessons. Here's to your learning too.
1) Be thankful for all things. Everything. Your clothes, your meals, the soap you wash your hair with. I found that when everything was taken away from me, I naturally became thankful for the smallest thing. When I thanked God for a meal I was about to eat, the feeling of gratitude replaced any gloomy misgivings. The mind can hold but one thought and emotion at a time, so when I consciously made the effort to feel and be thankful, the worries left me.
2) It can always get worse--and it very well may. Just when you think you've hit rock-bottom, there's probably more room for you to fall. And again. And again. But in that is the corridor to the next lesson...
3) Pear your desires instead of increasing them. We can never fulfill all our desires. In fact, the more our desires are fed, the more ravenous they become. It's always more, more, more. There are basic needs all humans intrinsically require, and we should be greatful when those needs are met. Just like Mom said when you wouldn't eat your spinach, "There are kids starving in Africa". Paradoxically, my satisfaction is inversely proportional to the number and girth of my desires.
4) Helping others helps you. There's nothing like helping other people. It makes you feel good, accomplished, and takes your thoughts off yourself.
5) Don't waste talent. When you find something that you're good at and enjoy, pursue it with everything you have. To me, there are two things that a person should want: A happy family, and job they enjoy or can at least see themselves doing for the rest of their lives. Chase both of these, and when you find them--don't let them go.
6) Life is hard. No amount of money or stuff will make life what we thought it would be when we were kids. That being said, every man should pursue the best life he can for he and his family. But life is rough; horrible events can happen to us, shock us to our core. Nonetheless, perhaps our role here on earth, is to go on, no matter what. So, laugh at the absurdity of life, laugh at it, but acknowledge it, don't try to deny it, because that will make it all the more painful when one is stomped by the undeniably dark universe.
In work--meaning. In sleep--rejuvenation. In family--joy. In God--all.
The last year has been a challenge for me, in so many ways. Following the maxim that "Whatever does not kill me, makes me stronger", I learned several valuable lessons. Here's to your learning too.
1) Be thankful for all things. Everything. Your clothes, your meals, the soap you wash your hair with. I found that when everything was taken away from me, I naturally became thankful for the smallest thing. When I thanked God for a meal I was about to eat, the feeling of gratitude replaced any gloomy misgivings. The mind can hold but one thought and emotion at a time, so when I consciously made the effort to feel and be thankful, the worries left me.
2) It can always get worse--and it very well may. Just when you think you've hit rock-bottom, there's probably more room for you to fall. And again. And again. But in that is the corridor to the next lesson...
3) Pear your desires instead of increasing them. We can never fulfill all our desires. In fact, the more our desires are fed, the more ravenous they become. It's always more, more, more. There are basic needs all humans intrinsically require, and we should be greatful when those needs are met. Just like Mom said when you wouldn't eat your spinach, "There are kids starving in Africa". Paradoxically, my satisfaction is inversely proportional to the number and girth of my desires.
4) Helping others helps you. There's nothing like helping other people. It makes you feel good, accomplished, and takes your thoughts off yourself.
5) Don't waste talent. When you find something that you're good at and enjoy, pursue it with everything you have. To me, there are two things that a person should want: A happy family, and job they enjoy or can at least see themselves doing for the rest of their lives. Chase both of these, and when you find them--don't let them go.
6) Life is hard. No amount of money or stuff will make life what we thought it would be when we were kids. That being said, every man should pursue the best life he can for he and his family. But life is rough; horrible events can happen to us, shock us to our core. Nonetheless, perhaps our role here on earth, is to go on, no matter what. So, laugh at the absurdity of life, laugh at it, but acknowledge it, don't try to deny it, because that will make it all the more painful when one is stomped by the undeniably dark universe.
In work--meaning. In sleep--rejuvenation. In family--joy. In God--all.
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
A Writer's Diary Part III: On Style
Style; what is it? Style is the matrix of vocabulary, sentence rythym, context and mood that a writer chooses to employ in his story. It is the atmosphere created by the author, and in many ways, it is he, manifested as letters, commas, ideas...
I say chooses. That is not the best term, however. Since a good writer's style is him, or a part of him, he can no more choose his overall style than he could choose his hair color. His style is formed from his world-view and his experience, his educatiuon, loves and hates. Yes--it's that complicated!
What the beginning writer tries to do, is write what he has seen before. There is nothing wrong with this. It's like a child copying his father, wanting with all his being to be like Papa. But in the end, the child will find his own way. The father will provide him the scaffolding on which to build his life, but it up to the child to find his own way, figure out the details and solve life's annoying and miniscule problems. And let me tell you, there's nothing wrong with the likes of Tolstoy or Conrad fulfilling the role of literary Papa!
As the writer matures, his own personality must emerge if he is to become a professional. Otherwise, his words and sentences will never flow, never express a new thought. They will be like the Frankenstein Monster, a patchwork of styles, and yet not truly art.
After about a year of serious writing, a writer should have gained enough confidence to forget about all of the great authors he's payed homage to while reading. Blasphemy? Yes. You must have confidence. You must think your potential to be the equal of the greatest authors, for only by aiming for the highest art, can you hope to write anything worth publishing. The best thing to do with your "style" at this point is forget about it; enter the trance that I've spoken of before, and just write. Keep writing, let your words be you, truly, let them be what you think, feel. Let your characters speak and act as they would, according to your vision of them, not as you think other authors would make them speak or act.
Relax. Be you. And this is the gift of writing. You'll find out what you REALLY think and believe. The outside influence of the world will take a back-seat to your own observations, and I guarantee that if you're doing things right, you'll discover aspects of yourself that you never knew existed.
I say chooses. That is not the best term, however. Since a good writer's style is him, or a part of him, he can no more choose his overall style than he could choose his hair color. His style is formed from his world-view and his experience, his educatiuon, loves and hates. Yes--it's that complicated!
What the beginning writer tries to do, is write what he has seen before. There is nothing wrong with this. It's like a child copying his father, wanting with all his being to be like Papa. But in the end, the child will find his own way. The father will provide him the scaffolding on which to build his life, but it up to the child to find his own way, figure out the details and solve life's annoying and miniscule problems. And let me tell you, there's nothing wrong with the likes of Tolstoy or Conrad fulfilling the role of literary Papa!
As the writer matures, his own personality must emerge if he is to become a professional. Otherwise, his words and sentences will never flow, never express a new thought. They will be like the Frankenstein Monster, a patchwork of styles, and yet not truly art.
After about a year of serious writing, a writer should have gained enough confidence to forget about all of the great authors he's payed homage to while reading. Blasphemy? Yes. You must have confidence. You must think your potential to be the equal of the greatest authors, for only by aiming for the highest art, can you hope to write anything worth publishing. The best thing to do with your "style" at this point is forget about it; enter the trance that I've spoken of before, and just write. Keep writing, let your words be you, truly, let them be what you think, feel. Let your characters speak and act as they would, according to your vision of them, not as you think other authors would make them speak or act.
Relax. Be you. And this is the gift of writing. You'll find out what you REALLY think and believe. The outside influence of the world will take a back-seat to your own observations, and I guarantee that if you're doing things right, you'll discover aspects of yourself that you never knew existed.
Sunday, February 3, 2008
Ayn Rand
A week ago I began reading Atlas Shrugged, written by the late Ayn Rand. It is considered one of the most influential books in America--and for that I am sad.
For those of you who do know of Ayn Rand (Pronounced INE), here's a quick biography: Rand was born Alisa Rosenbaum 1905 in Russia. Her parents were Jewish. Rand's family life was severely disrupted by the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917. Eventually she gained a visa to visit the United States and was amazed by our open and free society; she knew she would not go back to Russia. She married actor Frank O'Connor and they remained married for 50 years. As an American citizen, she wrote several novels, the two most well-known being The Fountainhead and her Magnum Opus--Atlas Shrugged.
Rand was an empiricist. That is, if she could not directly see, touch or hear something--or use any of her senses, to her, such a thing could not exist. This way of thinking she is said to have gained from Aristotle, her favorite philosopher.
Eventually, Rand developed her own belief system, which she termed, Objectivism. She was a very strong anti-communist and a staunch advocate of capitalism. She also loved America.
But I must split with Rand, when her Nietzschean beliefs creep out--and believe me, they do quite often.
First--she hated religion of any type, believing it to be irrational. Secondly, she had the bizarre idea that altruism (the helping of others at the expense of self) was wrong in all instances. Now, I can appreciate wanting people to be the best they can and help themselves when they're able, but the idea that it's immoral to at all disadvantage yourself by helping others, is aberrant. I reject it.
Her awful ideology of selfishness is so pervasive in her novels, that reading them makes me feel physically ill. Now granted, for some reason, ever since I was a child, reading certain pieces seemed to effect me more than other people. Maybe this is why I picked up writing. But I can read Nietzsche and sometimes come away with a good feeling--I don't get that with Rand. 50 or so pages into Atlas Shrugged, I was ready to light the book on fire. And the plot is interesting! But sick.
I'll even go as far as to say that Ayn Rand was a genius, but genius is no prophylactic to bad ideas, nor to the severe unhappiness, which I believe that Rand must have suffered from.
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Conservatism--A Eulogy
Today we have gathered to honor a great ideology that has passed on. Taken from our midst by cruel fate, by willful self-deceit and by an agenda-driven media.
Yes, Conservatism was plainly the blanket upon which our Founding Fathers wove the greatest nation the world has yet known. Control taxes and spending. (Applause)
The power of the individual, of the mighty American Citizen, to make himself great, not asking of his government that which no government can provide: Spirit, Will, Drive. (Applause)
Conservatism measured its accomplishments not by the number of people on the government dole, but by the number who no longer required a handout, because more than anything, Conservatism was a way of thinking, a way of interpreting known facts.
Conservatism knew that weakness does not serves humanity, that there is no honor in being destitute, and that with a gentle prodding and edification, perhaps the man who wallowed in his victim-hood--even enjoyed his own pain--could be made to stand, himself, and become great.
So, let us pause and consider what we have lost. Bow your heads and remember. For in losing this great thing, Conservatism, perhaps there will be one less poor man. But he will be replaced by 100 more. (Applause)
There are refreshments at the back and a thirty minute social time. Thank you.
The wake's over, so let's talk facts. Conservatism died of strangulation. It was murdered by socialists, 60's hanger-ons, parroting undergrads, ambulance-chasing lawyers and the peddlers of victimology.
A further investigation by authorities shows it was a slow, lingering death, first beginning with student rebellions and the anti-industrial movements of the 60's. Those of education were taught to despise the Capitalist, forever misquoting the Bible, which they believed to be mythology: "Money is the root of all evil."
The "shock and awe" media, led by the likes of The New York Times, Newsweek, and MSNBC que their phrases. "Big Oil. Big Tobacco. BIG BUSINESS." It all equals Big Bad to them. The journalists are above all of that of course. Perhaps their cars run on peace and love.
Ask a youngster what it means to be a Conservative. If he is insightful, he'll say it means to inhabit a graveyard, in which Communism, Zoroastrianism and Cherry Coke have been laid to rest. Though most every high school student couldn't write a single sentence describing a Reagan policy, I'm willing to bet the same could write a fair essay on global-warming, or why the Civil War REALLY happened. And the student surely knows we can end poverty with government cheese and food stamps.
The Conservative message is, at first, a harder sell. It requires the individual to take the training wheels off. It gives him a greater responsibility for his own happiness. But its rewards are far greater then any other attitude.
Americans have no enemy that can defeat us, but ourselves. And I fear that we are succumbing to a sighing self-hatred very similar to that experienced by Europeans. But France reaped the rewards of the liberal and socialist agenda. Those agendas and problems are the same ones we face here. Do we keep people working or do we make the government take care of them? What about immigration and border control? The French people had had enough with their experiment. They elected a president who made it clear what his intentions were and did not bend to fashionable weakness. Nicolas Sarcozy is his name, and a person running for president in this country who would call himself a Conservative, would do well to study that man.
I don't like predictions. They almost never work out. But I believe that the next 8 years will see more change within America than any previous 8 yrs of my life. Americans, completely out of touch with their own history, guided by bumper stickers and witty one-liners will vote for a liberal. Hillary, Barak, or McCain. Take your choice. They're all socialists and globalist and hold no respect for OUR traditions, for what made us great. They want to change it. Yes change, that sacred word of Barak Obama. Think what it means people, to change the colossus that is us. It most likely means a change for the worse.
CONSERVATISM: 1776--2008.
"Nothing good is easy and weakness is no virtue."
R.I.P.
Yes, Conservatism was plainly the blanket upon which our Founding Fathers wove the greatest nation the world has yet known. Control taxes and spending. (Applause)
The power of the individual, of the mighty American Citizen, to make himself great, not asking of his government that which no government can provide: Spirit, Will, Drive. (Applause)
Conservatism measured its accomplishments not by the number of people on the government dole, but by the number who no longer required a handout, because more than anything, Conservatism was a way of thinking, a way of interpreting known facts.
Conservatism knew that weakness does not serves humanity, that there is no honor in being destitute, and that with a gentle prodding and edification, perhaps the man who wallowed in his victim-hood--even enjoyed his own pain--could be made to stand, himself, and become great.
So, let us pause and consider what we have lost. Bow your heads and remember. For in losing this great thing, Conservatism, perhaps there will be one less poor man. But he will be replaced by 100 more. (Applause)
There are refreshments at the back and a thirty minute social time. Thank you.
The wake's over, so let's talk facts. Conservatism died of strangulation. It was murdered by socialists, 60's hanger-ons, parroting undergrads, ambulance-chasing lawyers and the peddlers of victimology.
A further investigation by authorities shows it was a slow, lingering death, first beginning with student rebellions and the anti-industrial movements of the 60's. Those of education were taught to despise the Capitalist, forever misquoting the Bible, which they believed to be mythology: "Money is the root of all evil."
The "shock and awe" media, led by the likes of The New York Times, Newsweek, and MSNBC que their phrases. "Big Oil. Big Tobacco. BIG BUSINESS." It all equals Big Bad to them. The journalists are above all of that of course. Perhaps their cars run on peace and love.
Ask a youngster what it means to be a Conservative. If he is insightful, he'll say it means to inhabit a graveyard, in which Communism, Zoroastrianism and Cherry Coke have been laid to rest. Though most every high school student couldn't write a single sentence describing a Reagan policy, I'm willing to bet the same could write a fair essay on global-warming, or why the Civil War REALLY happened. And the student surely knows we can end poverty with government cheese and food stamps.
The Conservative message is, at first, a harder sell. It requires the individual to take the training wheels off. It gives him a greater responsibility for his own happiness. But its rewards are far greater then any other attitude.
Americans have no enemy that can defeat us, but ourselves. And I fear that we are succumbing to a sighing self-hatred very similar to that experienced by Europeans. But France reaped the rewards of the liberal and socialist agenda. Those agendas and problems are the same ones we face here. Do we keep people working or do we make the government take care of them? What about immigration and border control? The French people had had enough with their experiment. They elected a president who made it clear what his intentions were and did not bend to fashionable weakness. Nicolas Sarcozy is his name, and a person running for president in this country who would call himself a Conservative, would do well to study that man.
I don't like predictions. They almost never work out. But I believe that the next 8 years will see more change within America than any previous 8 yrs of my life. Americans, completely out of touch with their own history, guided by bumper stickers and witty one-liners will vote for a liberal. Hillary, Barak, or McCain. Take your choice. They're all socialists and globalist and hold no respect for OUR traditions, for what made us great. They want to change it. Yes change, that sacred word of Barak Obama. Think what it means people, to change the colossus that is us. It most likely means a change for the worse.
CONSERVATISM: 1776--2008.
"Nothing good is easy and weakness is no virtue."
R.I.P.
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Their Finest Hour
I implore Americans to read books again. It will be difficult at first, have you given up reading for some time. But I want Americans to force themselves to read. Whatever they read, they should throw a history book in every once in a while, even if the reading is a bit dry, they can push forward knowing that they'll possess knowledge few others do.
Right now, I'm reading, Their Finest Hour, by Winston Churchill. The book opens like this:
MORAL OF THIS WORK:
In War: Resolution
In Defeat: Defiance
In Victory: Magnanimity
In Peace: Good Will
THEME OF THIS VOLUME:
How the British people held the fort ALONE till those who hitherto had been half blind were half ready.
In the theme of course, he spoke of Roosevelt.
Right now, I'm reading, Their Finest Hour, by Winston Churchill. The book opens like this:
MORAL OF THIS WORK:
In War: Resolution
In Defeat: Defiance
In Victory: Magnanimity
In Peace: Good Will
THEME OF THIS VOLUME:
How the British people held the fort ALONE till those who hitherto had been half blind were half ready.
In the theme of course, he spoke of Roosevelt.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Recession-Not
The sky is falling yet again. CNN told me so. Not only does global warming threaten wipe out Manhattan in a CO2 powered deluge, but the world hates America, millions are dying around the world because of American Imperialism, an Imperialism powered by us Capitalist Pigs. But, CNN and NPR told me that there's a recession looming. Thank goodness. Maybe people being out of work will finally cause Capitalism's implosion, as Hillary seems to want.
But wait. There's a problem. What the heck does the word recession mean when it comes to economics? Ummm, folks. We're not even close. Yes the economy has stopped growing at the rate it had been for several years. (Around 7 percent) It's grown about 1.7 percent in the last month. But as the word itself alludes, a recession is marked by a contracture of market growth for 6 consecutive months. I'll be sure to set my doomsday clock when the FIRST month of recession takes place.
Alas. It seems I was duped again by politicians who's only hope of election is to make me believe that I can't live without them, can't make do without THEIR system. Mostly their system is comprised of taking my money and my stuff. Hey Hillary--how about a smaller system? Would that be OK? Would Karl Marx approve?
For the next few months, until the general election, maybe I'll sit around, eating Soylent Green (It's people after all, and they're not THAT important), driving my Hybrid, and toting luggage made of Hemp. Great stuff that Hemp. But I don't light Hemp on fire--it messes with Serotonin, which is kinda important. And if on election day, I still feel like everything is just bad, bad, bad, I'll vote for the Party of Defeat. You all know which one that is.
More likely though, I'll vote for whoever will create jobs by cutting taxes, maintain the best military in the world, and continue to allow America to be the world leader in virtually everything good.
Till then.
But wait. There's a problem. What the heck does the word recession mean when it comes to economics? Ummm, folks. We're not even close. Yes the economy has stopped growing at the rate it had been for several years. (Around 7 percent) It's grown about 1.7 percent in the last month. But as the word itself alludes, a recession is marked by a contracture of market growth for 6 consecutive months. I'll be sure to set my doomsday clock when the FIRST month of recession takes place.
Alas. It seems I was duped again by politicians who's only hope of election is to make me believe that I can't live without them, can't make do without THEIR system. Mostly their system is comprised of taking my money and my stuff. Hey Hillary--how about a smaller system? Would that be OK? Would Karl Marx approve?
For the next few months, until the general election, maybe I'll sit around, eating Soylent Green (It's people after all, and they're not THAT important), driving my Hybrid, and toting luggage made of Hemp. Great stuff that Hemp. But I don't light Hemp on fire--it messes with Serotonin, which is kinda important. And if on election day, I still feel like everything is just bad, bad, bad, I'll vote for the Party of Defeat. You all know which one that is.
More likely though, I'll vote for whoever will create jobs by cutting taxes, maintain the best military in the world, and continue to allow America to be the world leader in virtually everything good.
Till then.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Reagan years--the greatest job growth in world history
This is an article published in the New York Times in 1990. 18.7 million jobs created because of Reaganomics. But the Dems still can't get it right. They still want to push the Marxist agenda, bleeding cash out of hard-working Americans, thus destroying "Big Business" (Darth Vader music, please). Ever been employed by a poor person? If you have been, I guarantee you were poor too. Corporate America is lefty codeword for "Tax Sink". When they speak of the rich--they're not talking about all the millionaire Hollywood actors hiding their cash in overseas accounts. They'd prefer to tax the hell out of these businesses, already burdened by near-crushing regulation, until there's no one left to employ you or me. And guess what? When there's no one left to employ, there's no one working to feed our welfare system or help Africans learn to stop annihilating themselves.
Article here: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CE1DC153BF934A25752C0A966958260
Article here: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CE1DC153BF934A25752C0A966958260
Who said this? Answer tomorrow...
Do you know who said this?
"Together we must also confront the new hazards of chemical and biological weapons, and the outlaw states, terrorists and organized criminals seeking to acquire them. Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade, and much of his nation's wealth, not on providing for the Iraqi people, but on developing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. The United Nations weapons inspectors have done a truly remarkable job, finding and destroying more of Iraq's arsenal than was destroyed during the entire gulf war. Now, Saddam Hussein wants to stop them from completing their mission. I know I speak for everyone in this chamber, Republicans and Democrats, when I say to Saddam Hussein, "You cannot defy the will of the world," and when I say to him, "You have used weapons of mass destruction before; we are determined to deny you the capacity to use them again."
"Together we must also confront the new hazards of chemical and biological weapons, and the outlaw states, terrorists and organized criminals seeking to acquire them. Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade, and much of his nation's wealth, not on providing for the Iraqi people, but on developing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. The United Nations weapons inspectors have done a truly remarkable job, finding and destroying more of Iraq's arsenal than was destroyed during the entire gulf war. Now, Saddam Hussein wants to stop them from completing their mission. I know I speak for everyone in this chamber, Republicans and Democrats, when I say to Saddam Hussein, "You cannot defy the will of the world," and when I say to him, "You have used weapons of mass destruction before; we are determined to deny you the capacity to use them again."
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Fire Base Cobra--Part I
This is the story of Fire Base Cobra--a US special forces outpost in Afghanistan. Enjoy....
Tuesday, January 8, 2008
The Iranians win again
The Iranians have won three victories against the West, in the last year or so.
First, there was the capture of British sailors--in which those sailors never fired a shot as they were being boarded and captured. Those same sailors were then paraded in front of television cameras by Iranian officials and forced to "confess" that they had veered into Iranian waters. Their confession was a de facto violation of the Geneva Convention--not perpetrated in secret with the hopes that no one would find out, but on international television with the hopes that everyone wouldfind out.
Next--the National Intelligence Estimate comes out and announces to the world that Iran is no longer trying to get the bomb. Hurraaaay! Party at the Ayatollah's place! Leftists were suddenly orgasmic over the NIE--the same entity that stated in 2003 that Saddam had WMD. And, even if Iran has ceased its bomb-making protocols, it's still enriching Uranium, which is the most time consuming and difficult part of attaining nuclear weapons. Once the Uranium shells are complete--it's a snap to build an atomic bomb.
Lastly, Iran again slapped us in the face with their little dance in the Strait of Hormuz. These tests are well-planned and thought-out missions. They are not haphazard and random flybys and harangues. There were certainly recording devices nearby on shore, taping the energy profiles of each American ship as the Iranians closed the distance. When did the American's first react? What was the active-radar profile at such and such a distance? How did the Americans manuever?
The Iranian ships should have been annihilated. They radio'd to the Americans that they were going to explode, then they began dumping boxes overboard as if they were unloading mines. The American ships inaction will cost more American blood in the future.
Al-Queda and Hezbollah believe the West is crumbling, weakened and degenerate.
They're right.
First, there was the capture of British sailors--in which those sailors never fired a shot as they were being boarded and captured. Those same sailors were then paraded in front of television cameras by Iranian officials and forced to "confess" that they had veered into Iranian waters. Their confession was a de facto violation of the Geneva Convention--not perpetrated in secret with the hopes that no one would find out, but on international television with the hopes that everyone wouldfind out.
Next--the National Intelligence Estimate comes out and announces to the world that Iran is no longer trying to get the bomb. Hurraaaay! Party at the Ayatollah's place! Leftists were suddenly orgasmic over the NIE--the same entity that stated in 2003 that Saddam had WMD. And, even if Iran has ceased its bomb-making protocols, it's still enriching Uranium, which is the most time consuming and difficult part of attaining nuclear weapons. Once the Uranium shells are complete--it's a snap to build an atomic bomb.
Lastly, Iran again slapped us in the face with their little dance in the Strait of Hormuz. These tests are well-planned and thought-out missions. They are not haphazard and random flybys and harangues. There were certainly recording devices nearby on shore, taping the energy profiles of each American ship as the Iranians closed the distance. When did the American's first react? What was the active-radar profile at such and such a distance? How did the Americans manuever?
The Iranian ships should have been annihilated. They radio'd to the Americans that they were going to explode, then they began dumping boxes overboard as if they were unloading mines. The American ships inaction will cost more American blood in the future.
Al-Queda and Hezbollah believe the West is crumbling, weakened and degenerate.
They're right.
Monday, January 7, 2008
A Writer's Diary Part II
Here we are again--in make believe.
In the first installment, I gave you a little bit of history about myself, as far as the writing life goes. Today I want to talk about something called the Writer's Trance.
I believe that if you are ever to attain a high level of competence as a writer, you must be able to enter a trance-like state. It's a kind of euphoria in which your mind is moving so easily and fluidly, that your fingers move on their own over the keyboard, the characters are speaking to you--and you're simply recording their actions and statements, as a journalist.
Is the trance something that can be attained at will?
Yes.
But it takes practice, and beyond that, it takes confidence. If any of you have played a particular sport for any extended period of time in your life--perhaps college athletics, or just weekend softball--you've probably experienced something referred to as, The Zone. Professional athletes seek the help of psychiatrists so that they can achieve The Zone at will, or at least more frequently. Here are some tips that I have for achieving the trance while you write:
1) Write a lot. The more you do it, the more comfortable you'll be. And believe me, it's all about comfort. Things need to flow. You can't feel anxious, stressed, or tired. Flow, relax, be Zen or whatever--just don't be worried.
2) Chuck the dictionary and the thesaurus on your first draft. You'll break your stream of thought if you're referring to Webster every minute. In my experience, I only have a couple, maybe three hours worth of writing time a day, in which I can write well. So I must cram as much typing into a two-hour period as possible. After that amount of time, I'm just too tired to write anything worth reading. Just keep typing and imagining--worry about the specifics later, in your second or third drafts. The first draft is for ideas--not grammar.
3) Be arrogant. Imagine yourself as a great writer. Believe that the great writers of the past are no better than you. Know that they all started at the same place; with no idea of what they were attempting and no objective way to tell if what they were writing was garbage or legendary prose. And they all started with the same cocky attitudes that said: "I'm good. There's something in me, even though others don't see it or know about it. That something drives me to write and to write well. Boy when people see this, they'll be amazed!" As a man thinketh--so is he.
4) Throw out the rules of style and the structures of schoolbooks. If you're writing fiction, that is. Write what YOU want. Rules are great, especially for beginners, but rules also make us consider the process more than the content, and this leads to anxiety. There are no rules in writing fiction. Read James Joyce's Finnegan's Wake or Ulysses or even better--Thomas Pynchon's Gravity's Rainbow. These are extreme examples and not every one's cup of tea, but they show that there are people who will be drawn to your originality; they may even join you in your trance when they read your stuff.
5) Read a lot. Everyday if you can. Nothing can take the place of reading, in helping you to become a good, if not great, writer. If you don't have the time to read--you don't have the right to write. Read, and earn the right.
6) Stop caring so much. In caring less--you'll care more. Here we go with the Zen again. But caring really means worrying, and as we've said, you can't worry and write well at the same time.
Over time, after putting my suggestions into play, you may find that simply by remembering the feeling you had during previous writing sessions, you can summon the trance to do your bidding.
In the first installment, I gave you a little bit of history about myself, as far as the writing life goes. Today I want to talk about something called the Writer's Trance.
I believe that if you are ever to attain a high level of competence as a writer, you must be able to enter a trance-like state. It's a kind of euphoria in which your mind is moving so easily and fluidly, that your fingers move on their own over the keyboard, the characters are speaking to you--and you're simply recording their actions and statements, as a journalist.
Is the trance something that can be attained at will?
Yes.
But it takes practice, and beyond that, it takes confidence. If any of you have played a particular sport for any extended period of time in your life--perhaps college athletics, or just weekend softball--you've probably experienced something referred to as, The Zone. Professional athletes seek the help of psychiatrists so that they can achieve The Zone at will, or at least more frequently. Here are some tips that I have for achieving the trance while you write:
1) Write a lot. The more you do it, the more comfortable you'll be. And believe me, it's all about comfort. Things need to flow. You can't feel anxious, stressed, or tired. Flow, relax, be Zen or whatever--just don't be worried.
2) Chuck the dictionary and the thesaurus on your first draft. You'll break your stream of thought if you're referring to Webster every minute. In my experience, I only have a couple, maybe three hours worth of writing time a day, in which I can write well. So I must cram as much typing into a two-hour period as possible. After that amount of time, I'm just too tired to write anything worth reading. Just keep typing and imagining--worry about the specifics later, in your second or third drafts. The first draft is for ideas--not grammar.
3) Be arrogant. Imagine yourself as a great writer. Believe that the great writers of the past are no better than you. Know that they all started at the same place; with no idea of what they were attempting and no objective way to tell if what they were writing was garbage or legendary prose. And they all started with the same cocky attitudes that said: "I'm good. There's something in me, even though others don't see it or know about it. That something drives me to write and to write well. Boy when people see this, they'll be amazed!" As a man thinketh--so is he.
4) Throw out the rules of style and the structures of schoolbooks. If you're writing fiction, that is. Write what YOU want. Rules are great, especially for beginners, but rules also make us consider the process more than the content, and this leads to anxiety. There are no rules in writing fiction. Read James Joyce's Finnegan's Wake or Ulysses or even better--Thomas Pynchon's Gravity's Rainbow. These are extreme examples and not every one's cup of tea, but they show that there are people who will be drawn to your originality; they may even join you in your trance when they read your stuff.
5) Read a lot. Everyday if you can. Nothing can take the place of reading, in helping you to become a good, if not great, writer. If you don't have the time to read--you don't have the right to write. Read, and earn the right.
6) Stop caring so much. In caring less--you'll care more. Here we go with the Zen again. But caring really means worrying, and as we've said, you can't worry and write well at the same time.
Over time, after putting my suggestions into play, you may find that simply by remembering the feeling you had during previous writing sessions, you can summon the trance to do your bidding.
Friday, January 4, 2008
What is God?
Ask yourself--do you believe in God? If your answer is yes--then ask yourself, what exactly is this object--God--that you believe in?
It is an important question to ask, for no man can be expected to believe in that which he cannot define. If there are no words to describe something, it is doubtful that anything else would do the job.
I defer to St. Augustine in his Confessions 400 AD, when he was 43 yrs old. Here is the philosopher/theologian/writer supreme at his best:
"...This is which I love when I love my God.
And what is this? I asked the earth, and it answered me, 'I am not He'; and whatsoever are in it confessed the same. I asked the sea and the depths, and the living creeping things, and they answered, 'We are not Thy God, seek above us.' I asked the moving air; and the whole air with his inhabitants answered, 'Anaximenes was deceived, I am not God.'...And I turned to myself, and said to myself, 'Who are you?' And I answered, 'A man.' And behold, in me there present themselves to me a soul, and a body, one without, the other within...These things did my inner man know by the ministry of the outer: I the inner knew them; I, the mind, through the senses of my body. I asked the whole frame of the world about my God; and it answered me, 'I am not He, but He made me.'
So you see, Augustine knew that there was no corporeal existance for God. That God exists beyond His creation, beyond all of the images that we bring to mind when we think of God. God is known from the objects we perceive in space/time--but those objects are in no way God. There is no place we can go in this reality that will bring us to God.
I wish that modern Chrisianity would move back to the thoughts of Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas. In the day and age of science and rationalism, Christians need to present their case in rational terms, to show the world, that a rational mind can--indeed must--conclude that even though we cannot ever be absolutely sure beyond any doubt that God exists(just as we cannot for anything), it is most likely that God does exist. Christian theologians must explain, that in order to believe in God--a person must first have the WILL to believe. Will comes before rationality and faith, both. One must will himself to be rational. One must will himself to have faith. Even in the case of God though, rationality leads to belief. "For by the things that ARE seen, we know of the things UNSEEN."
Stop putting God in a shoebox. The person who does this either wishes his own concept of God to be small--so that through logic he can intentionally disbelieve,(that is, WILL himself to not believe) or is being intellectually lazy, and appearing a fool in our rational times, thus causing unbelief in others.
It is an important question to ask, for no man can be expected to believe in that which he cannot define. If there are no words to describe something, it is doubtful that anything else would do the job.
I defer to St. Augustine in his Confessions 400 AD, when he was 43 yrs old. Here is the philosopher/theologian/writer supreme at his best:
"...This is which I love when I love my God.
And what is this? I asked the earth, and it answered me, 'I am not He'; and whatsoever are in it confessed the same. I asked the sea and the depths, and the living creeping things, and they answered, 'We are not Thy God, seek above us.' I asked the moving air; and the whole air with his inhabitants answered, 'Anaximenes was deceived, I am not God.'...And I turned to myself, and said to myself, 'Who are you?' And I answered, 'A man.' And behold, in me there present themselves to me a soul, and a body, one without, the other within...These things did my inner man know by the ministry of the outer: I the inner knew them; I, the mind, through the senses of my body. I asked the whole frame of the world about my God; and it answered me, 'I am not He, but He made me.'
So you see, Augustine knew that there was no corporeal existance for God. That God exists beyond His creation, beyond all of the images that we bring to mind when we think of God. God is known from the objects we perceive in space/time--but those objects are in no way God. There is no place we can go in this reality that will bring us to God.
I wish that modern Chrisianity would move back to the thoughts of Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas. In the day and age of science and rationalism, Christians need to present their case in rational terms, to show the world, that a rational mind can--indeed must--conclude that even though we cannot ever be absolutely sure beyond any doubt that God exists(just as we cannot for anything), it is most likely that God does exist. Christian theologians must explain, that in order to believe in God--a person must first have the WILL to believe. Will comes before rationality and faith, both. One must will himself to be rational. One must will himself to have faith. Even in the case of God though, rationality leads to belief. "For by the things that ARE seen, we know of the things UNSEEN."
Stop putting God in a shoebox. The person who does this either wishes his own concept of God to be small--so that through logic he can intentionally disbelieve,(that is, WILL himself to not believe) or is being intellectually lazy, and appearing a fool in our rational times, thus causing unbelief in others.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
