Remember When Komen Caved on Planned Parenthood...

...and PP SWORE (pinky finger swear!) that they would INCREASE the number of mammograms they offered?

Yeah.

That happened...NOT!

I'm Feeling So Blessed

My daughter just posted on Facebook - her husband's cancer scan came out clean - he's still free of cancer.

After a rocky spring last year, chemo treatments in the summer and fall, and having to stop treatments because of the side effects (nerve damage), this is GREAT news!

 

To Live Together, or NOT?

Mona Charen wrote about The Marriage Divide - the fact that the lower classes, and, increasingly, the lower middle classes are choosing to build their families without marriage.  She, and I, think that's a bad thing - for reasons that she makes clear in her post.

Mona cites the advice of Carolyn Hax to a young woman asking when she should think about moving in with her boyfriend (of 5 months).  Carolyn sneers at the mom's advice.  I started to reply on the site, but didn't want to bother with registration.

My take:

The mother is sensible - she suggests that the girl wait until it appears that marriage is seriously considered. The girl ties her arguments to what married people have advised; clearly, she is NOT just looking for a wild time. She is serious about her personal feelings; she at least envisions marriage as a possibility.

There is NO indication that the boy in the scenario is anticipating marriage in any serious way.

Like it or not, women have a "sell-by date" - the tick of the biological clock makes their time precious, and short. If, as many women do, she wants to have a family, it makes sense to hedge her bets until at least a ring is offered (Not that I'm all that crazy about a hunk of pressurized carbon. I think it's ridiculous to spend several months gross salary on a piece of jewelry. But, it does put some financial legs into a vague promise of a future together).

[I wrote that above, realizing that there are some women who will use that phrase "sell-by date" as an excuse to trash the whole argument.  I'm simply suggesting that biological fertility is a perishable item.

Men, not having biological pressures, tend to let time slip by. It makes for an uneasy situation, where one is more and more pressured to marry by the clock, and the other lazily resists a final step, because - well, he CAN.

Nothing to do with cows and milk. The mother isn't suggesting that the girl stay a virgin until the day of the wedding (Although, it's not, as you suggest, a bad start to a marriage. At the least, you're limiting the spread of diseases that antibiotics and modern medicine are reaching the end of their ability to curb.)

The mom is just stating the obvious - by staying in her own place, the girl retains a lot more power in the relationship - including the option to break it off without a hassle, date others, if desired, and occupy herself how she likes without worrying about what her boyfriend will think. It may well be the TRUE liberated woman's solution to single life.

Some Disturbing Information About "What Muslims Believe"

I was taking a break from housework (yes, I do it - no, I don't like it), and found a link - I'm glad I followed it.  It's a fairly comprehensive examination of Muslim writings that are often misinterpreted by non-Muslims.

Just one part, about how the Crusades were an "unjustified invasion and slaughter of innocent Muslims".

Really?

The Facts:

The first Crusade began in 1095… 460 years after the first Christian city was overrun by Muslim armies, 457 years after Jerusalem was conquered by Muslim armies, 453 years after Egypt was taken by Muslim armies, 443 after Muslims first plundered Italy, 427 years after Muslim armies first laid siege to the Christian capital of Constantinople, 380 years after Spain was conquered by Muslim armies, 363 years after France was first attacked by Muslim armies, 249 years after the capital of the Christian world, Rome itself, was sacked by a Muslim army, and only after centuries of church burnings, killings, enslavement and forced conversions of Christians.

By the time the Crusades finally began, Muslim armies had conquered two-thirds of the Christian world.

Europe had been harassed by Muslims since the first few years following Muhammad’s death.  As early as 652, Muhammad’s followers launched raids on the island of Sicily, waging a full-scale occupation 200 years later that lasted almost a century and was punctuated by massacres, such as that at the town of Castrogiovanni, in which 8,000 Christians were put to death.  In 1084, ten yearsbefore the first crusade, Muslims staged another devastating Sicilian raid, burning churches in Reggio, enslaving monks and raping an abbey of nuns before carrying them into captivity.

In 1095, Byzantine Emperor, Alexius I Comneus began begging the pope in Rome for help in turning back the Muslim armies which were overrunning what is now Turkey, grabbing property as they went and turning churches into mosques.   Several hundred thousand Christians had been killed in Anatolia alone in the decades following 1050 by Seljuk invaders interested in ‘converting’ the survivors to Islam.

Read the whole thing - it's worth the time.

Please Shop at These "Good Guys"

...companies that DIDN'T force their employees to work on Thanksgiving Day.  I only know of a few, so far (in alpha order):

American Girl

Apple

BJ's Wholesale Club

Burlington's

Costco

Dillard's

DSW

Home Depot

Marshall's

Nordstrom's

Patagonia

Radio Shack

REI

Ross

T J Maxx

Please send me information in the comments if you know more companies to add to the list.

Also, there's a petition to boycott those stores that WON'T close.  Head to the link if you agree.

After the Shutdown

I've been too busy with RL to do more than observe the posturing of various politicians over the last few weeks. I have, however, a few remarks to make about this time:

1. Both sides bear some blame.
   
   Various factions of the Republican Party are jockeying for position, leadership, and media attention. As a result, some important points about the future of this country are getting lost. Lets make this less about the individuals, and more about the nation, OK?



2. My major comment about the Democrat party is that they seem to exhibit remarkable cohesion on their party discipline, and, as a result, their message does reach the voter clearly.
   
   Too bad that their message is: We won, so all y'all taxpayers have to cough up as much cash in taxes as we want - forever. If we run out of money to pay off our campaign donors, just suck it up and give us more. NO reduction of spending - no matter how wasteful or ridiculous - can EVER be considered. If you protest, we're gonna talk about starving babies and homeless old people.



3. I'm so excited that average citizens stood up to the Park Service Nazis, and put those Barrycades on the White House sidewalk. That's the sort of American Action I like to see - in this country, the Government doesn't tell law-abiding citizens where they can go.



4. The settlement may be the best we can hope for. We should use the next few months to educate the American public about the dangers of long-term debt. I'm working to put together a Youtube presentation about it - it'll be a first for me.



5. TV is boring. They don't actually analyze any of the issues. They just look for cool soundbites.



6. I haven't read a newspaper in months. Most of my information is gotten from websites (OK, they are sometimes web editions of newspapers, such as the Wall Street Journal or Fortune), TV news, government sites (well, until the shutdown).



7. For those who think the answer to the government running out of money is to raise the debt ceiling:
   
   

   Consider a family who spend without regard to their budget, and eventually ran out of money, and maxed out their credit cards. If they then went to their creditors, and said, "We can't pay our bills. Our solution is for you to raise our credit limit."
   
   How many of you think their creditors would think that a good idea? How many would think their response would be, "Find a way to make do with the money you have coming in. Cut out the luxuries and frills."

   
   

THE GREAT OBAMACARE/BUDGET/OVERREACH CRASH

Hard as it is for the dedicated, loyal Obamanuts to imagine, The Great and Powerful O is well on the way to crashing and burning - in a mess of his own making. Some of the most recent ways he is screwing up:

• Obamacare Website Fiasco. Few can get through the initial creation of a sign-on and password. Even fewer can navigate the system to sign on, and select a plan. Those persistent few who WERE successful have NO IDEA how much it will cost them. In the process, they have had to give their financial and medical information to a government that routinely violates privacy protections, agree to let a credit agency release their credit information (and pay more if they have a low credit rating), and passively accept whatever terms the Feds want to give them.
  Bad planning, bad coding (by an outsourced CANADIAN company - hey, I thought only the EVIL Republicans/Capitalists did that!), and bad decision-making.
• The shift from Friendly Park Service Employees to Terrifying, Brown-Shirted (literally), Uber-Nazis.
  See Here, Here, and Here.


• For a man that was touted as the MOST INTELLIGENT PRESIDENT OF ALL TIME, Obama sure makes some DUMB moves.

Cowards!

The following members of the House Oversight Committee didn't have the GUTS to stay there and listen to the testimony of these people:

Patricia Smith and Charles Woods. Ms. Smith is the mother of Sean Smith, an information management officer killed in the 9/11 Benghazi attack. Charles Woods is the father of Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods, who was also killed.

I decided to see just much interest they display on their websites for the Benghazi investigation - since, according to the official statements, the Democrats would have LOVED to stay and listen to the parents, but, alas, they just HAPPENED to have these scheduling conflicts.

Membership names taken from the House site:

• Rep. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14)

AMAZINGLY, the link to a puff piece about the Rep. receiving an award from the Association of Americans Living Overseas doesn't work - but if you click here, it will.  Wonder how those Americans who DIED in Benghazi feel about her not having the guts to listen to their parents talk about how the administration failed them - AND lied about it - AND are STILL lying about it.

Inscribed on the award is a message that reads, “In Gratitude For Her Unfailing Support For the Rights of Americans Living and Working Overseas.”

Well, Unfailing Support EXCEPT for those people who died in the Embassy attack.  Ya know, the peons who don't count.



 

 

 

• Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D.C.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• Rep. John Tierney (MA-6)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• Rep. Wm. Lacy Clay (MO-1)

• Rep. Stephen Lynch (MA-9)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• Rep. Jim Cooper (TN-5)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• Rep. Gerald Connolly (VA-11)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• Rep. Jackie Speier (CA-12) - aside from the Ranking Member Elijah Cummings, she's the ONLY one that stayed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The above statement on Speier's page is the single most substantive that I was able to find.  I give her credit for the support in it.

• Rep. Matt Cartwright (PA-17)

No Search function on his website

• Rep. Mark Pocan (WI-2)

• Rep. Tammy Duckworth (IL-8)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• Rep. Danny K. Davis (IL-7)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• Rep. Peter Welch (VT)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• Rep. Tony Cardenas (CA-29)

 

 

 

 

 

 

• Rep. Steve Horsford (NV-4)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

• Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham (NM-1)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Names include links to their websites - DO GIVE THEM A SHOUT-OUT, won't you?  Let them know how you feel about their COWARDICE in leaving the room.  AND maybe you can ask those that have NO RESULTS in the search for the term "Benghazi" why that is.

Cloward-Piven, Again

It's the same tactics, in a new war.

For those who, unlike myself, did not attend a liberal college, this may be new to you.  Here's a link explaining the technique.

Here's a link explaining the strategy with their OWN WORDS.  Social service activists have taken over the field of social work, USING the poor/desperate deliberately to move their revolutionary goals.  The social worker who is in the job because she/he want to help people is pushed to cooperate with anti-American movements, that want to bring down the system, no matter who it hurts.

Here is a deeper analysis of the way that crises are deliberately manufactured to promote the destruction of American society.

The efforts to overload the American System to the point of breakdown continues.

One of the little-known (by the general public) institutions that have a LARGE impact on American policy is the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) - Wikipedia reference:

The Institute for Policy Studies is the largest and most influential of the far left think tanks in Washington. Since its founding in 1963 it has steadily followed a pro-Marxist line on foreign policy, defense and the economy and has spawned a large number of spin-offs, other think tanks and public affairs organizations following the same radical agenda.^[2]

To put its policy recommendations into action, IPS built networks of contacts among Congressional legislators and their staffs, academics, government officials, and the national media.

Some affiliated people are:

• Frances Fox Piven - the mother of the Cloward-Piven Strategy


• Barbara Ehrenreich - wrote Nickled and Dimed - an "experience" working in the minimum-wage job industries that "proved" it was not possible to survive, let alone get ahead.  For a different experience, read Scratch Beginnings.  Adam Shepard, the author, started off in a strange city with just the clothes on his back and $25, and at the end of a year, had money, a home, and transportation.


•  Leon Panetta - THIS came as a surprise - I think of myself as reasonably well-informed, but had no clue.


• Noam Chomsky - Super-Leftist.


• Tom Hayden - Ditto, also founder of SDS.

We have to think of the current situation as the result of a Long March of Progressives.  They laid the groundwork, and are now beginning to make their influence felt.

Fortunately, they are mis-managing the economy, military, education, and other American institutions so thoroughly that they may well doom themselves to a footnote in history, if the American public catches on and votes them out.

Benghazi Update

Once again, the Republicans have gained possession of the political football, and fumbled it.

Why, oh, why, do the Republican leadership let the Obama administration get away with 1/2-truths, outright lies, and evasions? Why can the American public not get the straight story about what actually happened - including EXACTLY what Obama was doing/not doing that fateful night of the Benghazi attack?

Here's a link to a post that addresses that exact issue.

Common Sense for the Modern Era

I just read the Krauthammer post, and was moved to tell you - go read it.

It's a cogent explanation of WHY Obama's policies for the Mid-East make no sense.

.Obama defends the vast NSA data dragnet because of the terrible continuing threat of terrorism. Yet at the same time, he calls for not just amending but actually repealing the legal basis for the entire war on terror, the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force.
Well, which is it? If the tide of war is receding, why the giant NSA snooping programs? If al-Qaeda is on the run, as he incessantly assured the nation throughout 2012, why is America cowering in 22 closed-down embassies and consulates? Why was Boston put on an unprecedented full lockdown after the marathon bombings? And from Somalia to Afghanistan, why are we raining death by drone on “violent extremists” — every target, amazingly, a jihadist? What a coincidence.

This incoherence of policy and purpose is why an evacuation from Yemen must be passed off as “a reduction in staff.” Why the Benghazi terror attack must be blamed on some hapless Egyptian-American videographer. Why the Fort Hood shooting is nothing but some loony Army doctor gone postal.

NAME the enemy - Islamicism, which is the political use of the Quran to impose tyranny on all who oppose that religion.

We Are Called to be Saints

Boy, do I ever feel unworthy of that ambition!

From Catholic Stand:

We are called to be saints. Granted, it is a rather lofty directive. Few people ever really feel up to the challenge. We struggle with our earthly duties and challenges while viewing sainthood as a celestial attainment reserved for “the chosen.” However, Scripture clearly tells us that we must“strive for that holiness, without which you will not see the Lord.” (Hebrews 12:14) Yet how often do we view people who seek holiness with skepticism and criticism? Perhaps the doubts are not about the person’s sincerity in achieving conversion, but more about the uncertainty of achieving our own sainthood.

From that perspective, I REALLY am spinning my wheels - not only am I hopeless in accomplishing anything on this Earth, but I'm failing miserably in Heavenly accomplishments, as well.

Have I sinned greatly - well, too much for comfort, but, compared to others, not that badly.

But I can't measure myself against the rest of the world - what counts is that I act according to the best that I am able.

We need to begin organizing ourselves into something like this Mastermind Group - but, not with secular purpose - instead, with spiritual growth as our goal.  As was suggested in my study group's reading this spring, we need to have regular meetings with a study group, dedicated to providing support for our achieving our spiritual best.

Click on the link for a free copy of the book that got me so excited - it only costs shipping and handling for a single copy.  6 copies are only $3/each.

WHY the Comprehensive Immigration Bill is a BAD Idea

It's going to hurt the poorer Americans - those that are CITIZENS, who live here LEGALLY.

 

Some of them are White Americans.  MANY of them are Black Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Who-Knows Americans.

 

So, why are you against Black People?  Who, BTW, currently have an unemployment rate of more than 40%.

 

Here's a brief look at the numbers behind the bill, and how those numbers are being manipulated by special interests and advocates to make it LOOK as though this bill will be good for poor people.

 

Take note of those numbers, and get clear the difference between an overall rise in the wealth of the nation, and a PER CAPITA rise.  Use this as part of your Conservative Self-Education.  Focus on the impact that this bill has on minorities, and, remember, ONE factoid at a time.

 

That's how we will wear down resistance to reality - one slowly dripping fact at a time.

Once Again, It's the Culture

Mark Steyn writes about the difference between civilized countries and those that bristle with factions, coups, and tribal wars.

Waiting for a Verdict

The mood on Facebook and the blogs is grim.  Nobody likes to think about the possible outcomes:

• Zimmerman is acquitted - riots destroy not only Sanford, but possibly other cities


• Zimmerman is convicted of SOMETHING - probably NOT 2nd degree murder, but manslaughter - a man loses a good portion of his life and money, although not objectively guilty of the crime


• Hung jury - contrary to the idea that this would be GOOD for Zimmerman, it just puts off the inevitable.  The next jury thinks, he got lucky the first time, and convicts him (particularly since Zimmerman is unlikely to have the cash for another set of lawyers).  If not prosecuted, see first bullet point (no pun intended).

Sultan Knish has a rather thoughtful piece about these cases, and why they so often involve the lower-middle classes.

The fact is, Zimmerman's neighborhood was being victimized by thugs.  The residents did not have the money to escape the problems.  Society thought that the rights of the perps were more important than the right of Zimmerman and his neighbors to be safe in their own homes.

Was Martin one of those thugs?  Who really knows?  There was no direct evidence at the scene to prove that he was - on the other hand, he apparently had time enough to go back to his father's fiancee's house and stash anything incriminating.  He may well have been just what his family and friends said - a kid in the wrong place at the wrong time.

That having been said, he had NO right to attack Zimmerman, let alone to smash his head in concrete.  That Zimmerman felt threatened was a natural extension of Martin's actions.  So, in that sense, the killing was justified.

It is, in all ways, a Shakespearean tragedy.  Hubris, youthful aggression, family dynamics, death.

Preaching to the Choir

Here's an example of a post that should ONLY be forwarded to someone who is already on-board with the Conservative agenda:

http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/2013/06/26/why-do-republicans-want-to-prop-up-a-scandal-plagued-president/

It contains good arguments, links, and multiple examples of WHY elected Republicans should be like sharks circling a downed animal, nipping at the perimeters.

Great, right? PERFECT for sending to a Liberal-leaning friend/relative!

Ah, NO!

It's TOO much at once - remember the Cardinal Rule - NEVER overwhelm an on-the-fence potential recruit with facts.

Instead, use a SINGLE fact, and get agreement:

• Gee, it seems like using the IRS to attack your political opponents might not be a good precedent, don't you agree? (use of a psuedo-question, single issue, mildly stated - all good)


• I don't know, this Dr. in Philadelphia- Kermit, wasn't that his name - didn't seem to properly protect his patients against infection. Imagine, letting cats wander around a sterile area, not sterilizing instruments, letting untrained people administer drugs! (Offer to send a link to a SHORT FACTUAL article from a mainstream source).


• (Neutral subject - not directly related to Liberal/Conservative) This is something you should think about - ask FIRST how they feel about a subject, and LISTEN - for example: "I've been hearing about this Edward Snowden character who released information about the NSA surveillance of Americans. Some are saying he's a hero, others a traitor. I don't really know what to think - what do you think?" This is great for getting a sense of what concerns that person.



• Send this link to someone - ask - simply - do you agree?



• Ask: Do you agree with this link?

In every case, note the neutral tone - NOT designed to persuade, but to gather information about their leanings. You really shouldn't waste your knowledge on a rabid opponent; still more important, don't push someone too far beyond their comfort zone at a single meeting. Instead, think of your efforts as the steady drip, drip of a leaky faucet. Slow, persistent, eventually wearing away granite.

I'm reminded of the Revolutionary Fathers - all were dedicated to the work of years - which is what it took to finally ignite the Revolution. They were friendly, helpful, and a good source of news. They led by letting others make the decision for themselves.

You can't persuade people - you can only lead them to discover the facts, and support their gradual change of mind.

Third Parties in America

Once again, talk of a 3rd party has surfaced. Often, this is seen as a futile effort, and arguments opposing it are standard established wisdom.

After reading this, I'm not so sure. Check out the link, and post a comment.

Vegetative States Revisited

There's a link to a story about a man who was presumed to be comatose for 23 years.  When a state-of-the-art PET scanner was used, doctors found that the man's brain was functioning normally.

But, he was paralyzed and unable to speak.

He lived in a nightmare of inability to communicate with the rest of the world.  Thankfully, he has been hooked up to a device by which he can "talk" to others.

My big objection to the euthanasia of Terry Shiavo was the fierce determination of her husband NOT to determine whether or not she had any consciousness left.  In other words, he WANTED to think of her as "non-human", so he could put her down like a dog.

Scratch that.  Dogs are better treated than Terry was.  She was slowly starved and dehydrated over a period of weeks.

A Picture That Sums Up America

I found this on Ace of Spades.  LOVED the sentiment!

First Lesson - Conservative Self-Education

I found this post on American Thinker, and thought it emphasized an important point:

Control the language

Don't let the pro-abortion people (or any other Leftist group) define the issues in THEIR words. Replace 20 weeks with 6 months - it's the same time period, but put in words that most people have a general sense of, in terms of fetal development.

My advice to folks talking about this is to use "six months" instead of "20 weeks." Emphasize the familiar: we all know what six months of pregnancy looks like. Banning abortions after 20 weeks means banning abortions inside the sixth month. 20 weeks is almost clinical and nobody really thinks in those terms, anyway.
We all have an instinctive feel for two weeks' time, four weeks' time, maybe even six weeks' time. But after that, most people think in terms of months. And, as I said, everybody knows what six months of pregnancy looks like. There's no way to make the usual intellectual dodge -- "it's just a clump of cells" work at that point. Not even close.


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/07/laguage_lesson_for_pro-life_people.html#ixzz2XzVmd7ep
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Mark Steyn's Latest

As always, the best

.

Bullies on the Left

One sad facet of our divided political structure is that a small group can use it to push an agenda that almost all of the rest of us DON'T want. So many come to mind, but let's just take ONE:

The agitation to drive Christian adoption agencies out of business, on the grounds that they won't violate their religious principles to allow gay couples to adopt.

A recent book by Kathryn Joyce is drawing attention for its demonization of the Christian orphan care movement. This attention highlights the unseen reality that faith-based child welfare agencies regularly come under attack by state action designed to force them to either abandon their constitutionally protected religious beliefs, or lose their ability to serve orphaned and vulnerable children. With an estimated global orphan population of 153 million, children, not politics, should come first.

People of principle should not have to abandon them to suit the changing political atmosphere. Or in the words of the Communist Saint, Lillian Hellman:

I cannot and will not cut my conscience to fit this year's fashion.

Read the article at the link for further examples.

The Big Problem With the Amnesty Bill

I'm not excited about the new amnesty bill heading to the House, for reasons of:

• Flooding the job market with relatively unskilled, uneducated competition for unemployed Americans


• The new "immigrants" - really, those who were so self-centered as to break the law to enable themselves to bypass normal immigration laws - will be permitted to avail themselves of all kinds of services, as long as they have a kid. No, the illegal will TECHNICALLY not be eligible for welfare and other benefits. However, the kid will - and guess who will be collecting that money on behalf of the young citizen?


• It continues to encourage uncontrolled entry into the USA.


• Border control is NOT mandatory. It is "nice IF the administration feels like doing it, but failure to impose will not affect the status of the newly Democratic voter".


• NO requirement that the newly amnestied learn English, acquaint themselves with our customs, laws, culture, or norms, or pay back for any benefits they have already received. God forbid that they have to follow the same rules as the taxpayers. Crimes are ignored, including use of ID, drunken driving, and gang activity.

But, other than that, there are major problems, as shown in today's National Review post. What John Fonte calls "patriotic integration" is ignored.

Alexander’s “patriotic integration” proposals were incorporated into both the 2006 and 2007 immigration bills. They called for the “patriotic integration of prospective citizens into the American way of life by providing civics, history, and English . . . with a special emphasis on attachment to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, the heroes of American history (including military heroes) and the meaning of the Oath of Allegiance.”

Isn't that all retro nonsense?

No. How can we expect these new citizens to begin thinking of themselves as Americans, unless we purposefully teach them what that means? Without some effort to bring them into our culture, they will remain separate.

That way lays tribalism, a concept that keeps permanent divisions between the sub-groups. In other countries, they have tribal groups that NEVER integrate - in Japan (even after generations living in the country, Koreans are NOT accepted), the Mideast (Shia and Sunni, but also Kurds, Christians, and Jews), and even France (the Basques, historically, but more recently, Algerians and other Muslims).

This has generally not been the case in America. Only a few small groups are separate - the Amish and other groups that marry along religious lines. After 1 or 2 generations, most immigrants start "mixing it up", producing the typical American mix.

Most of us have some idea of our family heritage. Over time, it gets more muddled, and only a few distinct customs differentiate us from our neighbors.

Regardless of the degree of intermarriage in a given family, it was always expected that the individuals would be taught basic American law, custom, and political structure. They would know the basic history of our country, and the individuals that were responsible for it.

Isn't that history exclusionist?

No. Everyone can be a part of it - most minority groups contributed in their own way. But, I'm against making things up. An example of that is the new push to teach children that Muslims were involved in America from the first.

Well, yes, they were involved in early history - but I want to maintain my right to point out that, at that time, that included such things as the earliest use of Marines in a foreign war - against the Barbary Pirates. Other than that, nope, not until around the 20th century.

Does their lack of inclusion in early American History indicate that they aren't a part of America today?

No, any more than pointing out that no Asians signed the Declaration of Independence or Constitution. They just didn't have sufficient numbers here, at that time.

That's OK. LOTS of Americans are latecomers to the American Experience. Doesn't make them less of an American. Being here early doesn't make anyone more American.

What makes you an American is that you buy into those concepts of freedom, self-government, pursuit of happiness, and all that stuff. You can walk off the plane, learn about them, and say, "Yeah, I agree" - and become an American in your heart (and, eventually, in reality, once you fulfill all of those requirements of residency, learning about our culture and laws, and paperwork).

Try that in most of the world - can't be done. There, it's all about the bloodlines.

Here, we accept you, no matter what your color, religion, or accent.

Does that mean that EVERYONE will love you? No. A few will never accept you, or your kids.

But, for almost all of us, Ted Cruz, Bobby Jindal, or any other immigrant, and their descendants are Americans.

If You Still Wonder What Is Going On...

...Read here.

And here.

I'm beginning to feel like John Adams in 1776 - does anyone see what I see?  Does anyone hear what I hear?

Obama is not uniquely anti-American.  By anti-American, I mean that he is RULING (not serving as an executive) like a 3rd World Dictator.  He makes his Pronouncements (Executive Orders), and the Peasants and Middle-Class of HIS country must fall in line with his RULE.

There's a reason we have elected Representatives and Senators - their role is Legislative, and it serves as a check on despotism.

No more.  We have rule by fiat.

There have been Presidents who tried to run everything THEIR way before - Lincoln, during the Civil War, basically was a one-man ruler.  Wilson, in whose term we had the Palmer Raids, ignored such niceties as Constitutional Rights.  By comparison, Nixon was a pussycat - and he, unlike his predecessors, got slapped down by Congress.

Obama's agenda is screamingly Leftist, with a CAPITAL L.

He feels NO push to compromise or work with others.  He uses the media, cynically, to push HIS legislation, HIS plans, HIS way.

Yet, he complains about the Republicans and Conservatives.  They are, according to him, too extreme.

He is willing to hold up a budget, or any attempt to reign in spending, by threatening old folks and children.

The Voting Rights Act Case Decision

Why is this so important?

Because formerly solidly-Democrat regions of the country (much of the South) are in DANGER of turning Republican.

The only way to prevent that is to flood the voting ranks with phony registrations, particularly in dense parts of the states involved.  You can't as easily do that if you have to phony up some identification.  So, the ID laws slow the "progress" of the Progressive's taking over the state (and, through their domination of the votes at the state level, the federal vote - executive and senatorial).

In some of these states (the Carolinas, for example), MANY non-citizens try to vote - often, they succeed.  Other chronic offenders are the "sunbirds" - those seniors that split their time between a Northern state and a Southern one.  SOME of them vote twice - once in the summer state, and once in the winter state.  Increase in the absentee voting has facilitated that fraud.

Yes, I do call it fraud.  In some cases, the senior may not be smart enough to realize that they are committing a crime (their dimness leads some conservatives to believe that these are Democratic voters - not me, but some).

Look for changes to be in effect by the next fall elections.  Should be interesting.

How to Talk to Liberals/Those on the Fence...

...so that they will actually listen to what you have to say, rather then reflexively tune out.

This came up when I was talking to my brother-in-law, Mike.  He is another politically aware person, who does not just get his news from the approved sources.  As a result, when I mention "Benghazi" or "Fast & Furious", he knows the events behind the news, is conversant with the controversies and issues, and has an informed opinion about the event.

Unfortunately, the same cannot be said about most people.  They have no knowledge about the events (except PERHAPS a superficial acquaintance with the "facts" - heavily filtered by the established media bias that "there is NOTHING to it - just conspiracy theory"), would require much patient teaching about the events, tend to tune out when the explanation gets over a minute or two, and, when challenged to think, fall back on ridicule of any facts that contradict the standard factoids.

In other words, they have a ferociously and determinedly closed mind.

It is possible to guide people to consider that they are living in a media-saturated false matrix.  It takes effort.  It takes patience.

Most of us want to "unload" the knowledge we have gained through careful attention to the events of our time.

Don't.

It is too much, too soon.

The unaware mind will resist.

Instead, pick ONE topic, ONE focus.

Use it carefully, as a way of creating a breach in the wall of resistance.

In a sense, it is a long war that we face, one that requires patience and a willingness to think long-term.

We have to slowly lead people to consider, just lightly entertain the possibility that their thinking is limited by their reliance on the conventional wisdom.

Once they reach the point that THEY start seeking information, they will find that it is readily available.   The real work is getting people to that point.

Over the next few months, I'm going to be adding to the Conservative Self-Education section of this blog.  I'm going to focus on providing "chunks" of info, coupled with suggestions for how to broach topics, AND limiting the flow to what is manageable.  Consider it to become a "script" for limiting their exposure to a level of SLIGHT discomfort - not so much as to blow them out of the water, but enough to raise concern that they might want to find out more.

MY Red Line

I found this post on Ace of Spades.  It brings up the idea of a Red Line - the absolutely non-negotiable issues that will lead you to reject a party nominee.

Such as the Amnesty Bill - it WILL eliminate any possibility of keeping a border.  Our borders will turn into a turnstile, manned with guards who produce a "Yes, Master" cringing response when ANYONE - for ANY reason - decides that they chose to walk across the border.

Do I want immigration?  Not particularly.  I'm not against someone coming to this country and ASKING for a chance to become a citizen.  I just see no reason why the American citizens who are unemployed have to watch aliens given preferential treatment to take any available jobs.

But-but-but, you see, there are all these RULES in the bill that keep that from happening....

Crap.  EVERY one of those "rules" can be waived by order of the executive branch - and they already are, in that deportation orders are negated, agents are ordered to let criminals go - ACTUAL criminals, who have committed felonies.

It's a bad bill.  Also, the way the "reconciliation process" is structured, once a bill passes both houses, ANY and ALL changes that a small committee agrees to, even if they have been rejected by one of the chambers, gets into the bill.

UPDATE:  It looks as though the Liars have come up with a "compromise" that includes SOME of the restrictions that the opponents have looked for.

Have you learnt NOTHING, Charlie Browns?  Lucy will pull that football from under you, AGAIN.

I find it hard to believe that the Stupid is so deeply ingrained in some people.

Frankly, the ONLY thing that makes sense is widespread blackmail.  Given the Thug-in-Chief's history, it's a reasonable assumption.

Powered by Qumana

Some Random Thoughts About the News

I'm home for a few days.  Have to clean and organize, get laundry done, and prepare for another round of workshops.

But, first, some FUN political stuff!

In no particular order:

• Obama is trying to pull an FDR-type court-packing scheme.  Follow the link, and send along your comments to your reps in Congress and the Senate.


• Not precisely political, but USED by politicians to promote their agendas, Climate Change.  I'm not unwilling to consider the possibility that the climate is changing, but let's not over-hype it - nor, use it to pass a Progressive agenda.  There simply is NOT good evidence that man caused the problem.  There is EXCELLENT evidence that this is a cyclical phenomenon, with some relationship to the sunspot cycles.  For some opposing arguments, backed up by EVIDENCE, link here, and here.


• Here's a graphic that shows the extent of the hype.

 

 

 

 

 

More random links:

• You think you know what Conservatives are like?  Read this.


• Liar, liar, pants on fire.


• Why shouldn't we pass "comprehensive immigration" bills?

That's all I have the time for now - more later this week.

Back Again With Regular Postings

I'm finally out of school, and, although not free of commitments/responsibilities, with more control over my time.

Hence, I'll be blogging more regularly.

The REAL Censorship Issue - Part One

I've been watching the recent revelations about the NSA snooping on Americans with fascination, and a little paranoia.  Over-the-top?  You might want to read this, about what metadata (the information that the NSA was collecting) can tell about your life - ALL of it.

It's bringing back memories of those dystopian novels Baby Boomers had to read, in the 60s and 70s.  I'm referring to 1984 and Brave New World.

Orwell's novel chilled me.  I've seen Youtube snippets from the movies, and the look of it fit what I imagined at the time.  I remember, however, wondering, why didn't he just resist the re-programming that he endured at the end?  I had a hard time imagining how a person could be so beaten-down that they just caved on issues of freedom.

No longer.  I've discovered the Great Secret of Big Brother - he doesn't censor, he coerces individuals until they, and those who sympathise with them SELF-CENSOR.  We've gradually been hectored, nagged, coaxed, and pushed towards stifling our root beliefs, feelings, words, and, eventually, thoughts.

Words:  the "N" word - even referring to it in order to condemn it has been made taboo.  Unless, of course, you're Black.  Woe betide anyone singing a song with "that word" in it - you will be subjected to all that the Liberals can throw at you - loss of employment, fines, expulsion from school, threats.  The same goes for someone who uses a REAL WORD that, unfortunately, someone ASSUMES is the "N" word - no amount of apologies or explanations saved his job.

Unless, of course, you're a White Democrat - who, BTW, was a leader in the clan in his youth.

Beliefs:  Public prayers - off limits. Unless, of course, you're a member of a favored religion, in which case the government actively provides public assistance in furthering your religious practices, on the job.  Again, this was NOT a case of the adherents being allowed to use their OWN money - it was a government freebie.  Also, Government/authority refusal of ability to choose freely about abortion*, Biblical interpretation, appropriate teaching about morals, support of abortion through Obamacare, right to hold a minority opinion (or, a majority opinion that Liberals find repugnant).  You don't have to like or approve of Dan Cathy's opinions.  He is, however, a private citizen, who runs his own company according to his faith beliefs.  He takes a serious hit, financially, for keeping his restaurants closed on Sundays.  There is NO evidence that he discriminates against gays in hiring, promoting, or providing service to them as customers.  Would that his opponents were so civil.

Targeting by Government:  IRS, EPA, ATF, DHS**.

* I found this through other sources, but the information is nicely bullet-pointed here:

In a national study of women, 64% of those who aborted felt pressured to do so by others.¹  This pressure can become violent.²  65% suffered symptoms of trauma.¹ In the year following an abortion, suicide rates are 6-7 times higher.³

...

Reasons women give for having abortions:

• Forced by mother

• Father opposed
• Husband or boyfriend persuaded me

• No other option given
• Would have been kicked out

• Loss of family’s support
• Lack of support from society

• Clinic persuaded me⁴

In 95% of all cases, the male partner plays a central role in the decision.⁵  Of men interviewed at abortion clinics 45% recalled urging abortion, including 37% of married men.⁶  Many of these men reported being justified in being the primary decision maker in the decision to have the abortion.⁶

Whatever your position on abortion, you have to admit that the above DOES NOT indicate a true choice - it is indicative of strong efforts to coerce, if not force, an abortion on an unwilling mother.

** I do agree that there are SOME conservative organizations that border on the paramilitary, who legitimately fall under the reasonable category of: should be watched.  Those organizations MAY eventually cross the line between genuinely ticked-off citizens to outright rebels against the government.  However, that is NOT the norm.  Most just want the government off their back, providing a level playing field with rules that apply to everyone, and not using federal power in a thuggish way.

WHY Are Multicultural Efforts on the Part of States Failing?

I found a provocative article online, that asks:

Why is Sweden becoming so polarized about its new immigrants?

Part of the answer: Sweden is sensitive ONLY to the culture of its immigrants, not the natives.

From the point of view of immigrants, therefore, the Swedish state is warm and generous, but Swedish society is cold and distant. The more Sweden spends on “integrationspolitik,” the worse things appear to become. Sweden takes in more immigrants than almost any other country, but immigrants do not feel welcome here. In response to failed integration, the establishment has redoubled its efforts to push multiculturalism down Sweden’s throat, blaming the Swedish people for the failure of integrationist policies.

Keep in mind that Sweden was never an easy country to integrate into culturally. Swedes tend to be reticent, solitary, and reserved. Theirs is a complex culture, full of subtle rules and opaque codes of conduct. Lutheran Sweden is defined by strong behavioral norms enforced through social pressure. Swedes are conformist and quite intolerant of deviation from group norms, whether it’s immigrants or Swedes who break with protocol. Immigrants who do not conform to expected behaviors are looked down upon and often sense low-level hostility in their private encounters with Swedes. Icy Scandinavia was never a particularly well-chosen testing ground for the multiculturalist experiment.

The Multi-Culti Elites CANNOT, WILL NOT accept that the native culture has ANYTHING of value to transfer to the immigrants. In an Elite's thinking, their country is DEEPLY flawed, irretrievably racist, and, frankly, should meekly bow down to anyone who is willing to supplant the inhabitants, and replace their LACK of a culture with a rich, deeply meaningful ethnic culture. Which, of course, EVERYBODY except the locals have.

What a croc!

It's the typical Elitist "I have a passport and have traveled widely" snobbism that considers their having hit the hot spots for college-aged, moneyed gentry to be evidence of their superiority and fitness for leadership. Think of it as the John Kerry syndrome. The more "primitive" (although, don't you DARE use that word!) the culture, the better.

Don't think that they plan to let "those people" exercise their autonomy - the JK types plan to be the one, gently guiding the "superior culture" towards a political end that best benefits the JKs.

Reading Right Now

I've been reading To Set the Record Straight: How Swift Boat Veterans, POWs and the New Media Defeated John Kerry, by Scott Swett and Tim Ziegler. I'm a little over 1/3 of the way through it, and I can't put it down.

It is a chronological history of the process of how the Swift Boat vets got started, how they mobilized vets to provide their contribution to the book and website, and how the Kerry campaign responded to their refutation of his "story" - and, story it was.

Some of this, I had heard about during the campaign; most of this was new to me. If all that you have heard about Vietnam was that it was an unpopular war filled with dastardly American war criminals - I urge you to read it.

One down side of the Kindle is that you can't easily lend someone a book that you have enjoyed, as you can with the physical copies. Very little conservative reading is available at libraries or through e-book loans. I'd like some latter-day Conservative Carnegie to set up a matching donation program - for every dollar raised locally, a matching amount would be donated to improving the library's collection.

Scandalous Times

The term "scandalous" has lost much of its panache; in a time when big-name politicians can, without a blush, blatantly lie about matters related to their office, does the word have any meaning for the public?

Apparently so.  At least, when the scandals pile up upon each other, and the president is so gauche as to threaten one of the Holy Media.

The interesting thing about looking at the record is that it's hard to cage the examination.  Once started, the press has begun to fall over themselves to be the first to point out THE SAME OUTRAGES THE CONSERVATIVES HAVE BEEN COMPLAINING ABOUT FOR OVER 4 YEARS!

Sorry for the caps; I just lose it, sometimes.

In no specific order:

• The AP government snooping scandal.


• The drone war - when Rand Paul (that's the son, who appears both rational and electable) filibustered, asking for answers about apparently unconstitutional killing of American citizens without due process, for the media, it was all a big yawn.  He's still asking questions, and people are starting to listen.  On ABC with Martha Raddatz, Paul says that there is:

...still a question in my mind of what he (Obama) thinks due process is. Due process to most of us is a court of law, it is a trial by jury. And, right now, their process is him looking at some flash cards and a PowerPoint on ‘Terror Tuesdays’ at the White House.

•  In all fairness, some in Congress (Rep. Peter King is a prime example) don't want the drone program eliminated. There is some discussion about whether killing of American citizens as a by-product of targeting terrorists is regrettable, but not illegal, or is totally wrong.


•  BTW, I'm one who believes that the "protest" of the Code Pink activist was a put-up job.  Obama could have kept her out, or chosen to let security do its thing.  He didn't; he wanted her to speak her piece, so he could have an opportunity to address a topic that is of interest to many in his camp.


• The IRS targeting Tea Party and other conservative activist groups, which included - slowing down to a crawl approval of 501(c) status.  (See rules below)  Interestingly, Code Pink - the very essence of a completely political organization - DOES have that 501(c)(3) status.  If the rule was applied the same for both conservative and liberal organizations, I'd have no problem with it.  However, fair means FAIR - no giving advantage to groups you like, while denying that status to those you don't.

[A 501(c)(3) qualified nonprofit organization is not allowed to be involved in politics, so steer clear. Political nonprofit groups operate separately from this classification. Organizations that either support or oppose political candidates may face an excise tax or may even risk losing their tax-exempt status. The Internal Revenue Service offers guidelines at www.irs.gov/charities.]

• BTW, some clarification for those who don't understand why this is so important.  501(c)(4) organizations are very similar in their tax status.  Conservative organizations don't want that status, because their membership and donor lists would become public, giving Leftists a chance to harass them, threaten members/donors employment/education/life. (That link - a GREAT source of balanced news - has ALL ends of the political spectrum.  I like it because I get to read a range of news/opinion - something that is lacking from most newspapers/news shows)

Amazingly, Newt Gingrich is a voice of reason.  He points out that "getting even" or even impeachment is NOT the goal. On CNN, Newt said:

I think this is a really important moment for Republicans in particular to make a decision: Is this a gotcha moment or is this a major educational opportunity?  

 

Memorial Day, 2013

This year, I have 2 vets to remember.

The first, my dad, was in WWII.  He served in the artillery, which likely contributed to the major hearing loss he suffered from in his senior years.  Even when younger, he consistently turned the TV to a fairly loud setting.

I've spent some time looking into his service - apparently, his unit was moved around a bit, and the command changed several times.  He did serve in the Battle of the Bulge.  He told my mother (she later told me) that he had seen some of the survivors of the concentration camps; it so haunted him that he buried the memory for years.

He mostly told funny stories of his time in the war:

• Cutting across a minefield to avoid being late for dinner


• Coming across a barn with SS uniforms left behind.  He and his buddy tried them on, and admired their panache.  He almost got shot by another soldier who saw the uniform - fortunately, the other soldier fooling around was his buddy, Red, and the hair made the soldier hesitate in pulling the trigger.


• He had little to say that was good about the French - he thought them crude and vulgar.  He did admire the German people - even after bombing, the housewives would rise in the morning and sweep the steps, walk, and street.

So, the sanitized version of war that I received was not unlike that of many other children.  Later, in school and in photomagazines, we saw some of the more grim facets (although in black and white).

My dad died after a long, and largely successful battle with cancer.  At 60, he was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer - that type usually kills within a short time.  He elected to try an experimental surgery, and survived another 16 years.

Dad was affected by his service, but was able to re-build his life after the war.  He married, raised a family, and enjoyed a wide circle of long-time friends.

My brother's war was one that was televised - the Vietnam War.  He was not a combat soldier, but repaired the mobile communications equipment.  However, he did serve in a combat zone, and saw and experienced much of the stress that comes with war zones.

Like my dad, he didn't talk much about the war, other than a few funny stories.  Like my dad, he didn't join the VFW.  Instead, he found a job, and tried to blend into society.

He was partly successful, for a time.  He functioned, although he never married or had children.  He had one long-time girlfriend; after they broke up, she married someone else.  To my knowledge, he never had another serious relationship.

Fairly early on, he started drinking.  For a long time, he kept his consumption manageable - going to bed with a buzz on, saving the major drinking for the weekends.  Over time, it accelerated.

After a major life crisis (his best friend died), he started deteriorating.  He eventually lost his job, his house, and what life he had.  He started living on the streets.

He was on the streets for about 10 years.  Some of that time, he'd find a temporary place to live - a shelter, a few days with an acquaintance, or he would talk his way into staying with a family member.

My brother and sister took the brunt of the work of dealing with his alcoholism.  They fed him, sometimes housed him, and, when they could no longer live with the chaos his presence caused, made the decision to ban him from living with them.

It had to be hard to watch my brother destroy any hope of a life.  He would show up at their door, dirty, hungry, and confused.  Sometimes, they would let him in for a shower and a meal.

He bounced around for many years.  As soon as he got access to money, he spent it on booze - one major reason that I WON'T give money to bums.  The VA was helpful, and he went to rehab multiple times - always returning to his ways after checking out.

Just before he died, he was assisted in getting into an apartment.  For years, every winter, I worried about him freezing to death in the streets.  He was just 63 when he died.

There are too many vets like my brother, who just never manage to get back to a normal life after service.  I can't fault the VA, who did all that they could to help him recover.

In his case, isolation was a major factor.   He was a man with few friends, even before the war.  He lacked many of the social ties that anchor men, and help them adjust.  He was an introvert, a loner, and a man who used alcohol to ease him into social situations.  With booze, he could talk freely with women (not QUITE as bad as Raj on The Big Bang Theory, but close).

He liked children well enough, at a distance.  He didn't want children, his own or otherwise, and that had to limit his potential female partners.  He didn't date women with children.

In some ways, he was a throwback.  Loners were common enough in the early days of the United States.  Being disinclined to socialize was not that unusual, particularly in the more isolated frontier or the mountains.

His burial, at the Western Reserve National Cemetery, was beautifully done.  By his choice, he was cremated, and the urn was to be placed in a setting with his fellow soldiers.  The people at the cemetery spoke about him and his service, and he received an honor guard volley.

After the service, we went back to my sister's house, and dealt with the paperwork and talked.  One VERY funny moment occurred when we had to decide what inscription/symbol to put on his marker.  The inscription was easy, but the symbol was tough.

Mary and I wanted this - as a SERIOUS Star Trek nut, Mike would have LOVED it.



 

 

 

 

 

 

Ron talked us out of it - after a LOT of discussion. We decided on an eagle.

Still, I know that Mike would have preferred the "Live Long and Prosper" symbol.

Before You Judge Someone...

...walk a mile in his shoes.

Have you ever talked about someone you KNOW is EVIL - a RACIST, a GAY-HATER, a HATE-THE-POOR person?

Someone, like, perhaps, Rush Limbaugh?

In other words, you've judged them.

Fair enough. You actually listened to what they had to say, and made your decision.

Oh, you didn't? You never listened to them (for more than a few seconds), read their writings, or interacted with them in any way?

Then, how do you know all that about them? From other people? Who, maybe, made their decision on the basis of NO information?

Gee, sounds like pre-judgement to me. Which, you may realize, is the same as prejudice.

Folks, I don't like Obama's policies, character, or actions. But, before I made a decision about him, I learned about him. I read Dreams From My Father AND The Audacity of Hope. I listened to what he had to say. Only after that, did I make a judgement.

In other words, I EARNED the right to decide about his character, his actions, his philosophy.

When he makes a speech, or provides his side of an issue, I always go to the transcript.  I don't believe in filtering my information.  In other words, I get my information from the horse's mouth.

I know MANY people who trash-talk Rush and Palin, who know NOTHING about them, other than what has been said/written in the partisan press.  They couldn't tell you what their position is on any given topic, what the state of investigations against them ultimately showed, what they said (as opposed to what a Saturday Night Live character said), or even listened to them for 15 lousy minutes straight, without dismissively changing the channel, snarking about their "stupidity".

Let's see - refusing to learn about a topic, but insisting that your opinions about that topic are valued and important.

Who's stupid?

If I sound angry, I am, a little.  I'm sick of people who feel that they can trash-talk people (and laugh about sexual rape of them) who have done them no wrong.  People who, whether or not you agree with them, have earned the right to respect for them as one of God's children.  Who should NOT have their garbage picked through, their emails hacked, their neighborhood invaded by snoops, or their family publicly held up to shame.

Ask yourself:  would you be OK with shaming Malia, should she become pregnant before marriage?

Do you think Mary, mother of Jesus, should have her name written on churches "Mary is a slut - LOL!"

If you don't speak up, you're as guilty as those that engage in this low-class, partisan behavior.

I would probably NOT vote for Palin for President, although I do enjoy her straight talk - I think she's better doing what she is - raising funds for Republicans, appearing on TV occasionally.

But, she does NOT deserve the abuse she gets.

As for another conservative that has been savaged by the Liberal Left, I've never listened to Rush Limbaugh.  Don't generally listen to the radio, and am not generally free in his time slot.

Yes, when he had back pain, he eventually moved to abusive levels of Oxycontin.  He should have been dealt with like other first-time offenders - slap on the wrists, and treatment.

Instead, the SAME PEOPLE who argue for leniency for drug users who aren't White and Rich, howled for his imprisonment.

Instead, the Dogs of the Liberal Left started their frenzied barking to get him HARD TIME.

Why?  Because he's an unashamed conservative.

The Leftists base their morality on class and race.  If you're not in one of their favored categories, you deserve to have the load of bricks fall on you.

Still HATE Rush?  Why don't you try what another Liberal did, when confronted with an opposing opinion?   He examined the record, and used his brain constructively.

 

Work - Full-time, Part-time

It's been a long year. I've been watching the employment figures, which make no sense compared to the people I know. According to the stats on unemployment, we are improving steadily.

But, when I compare that "improvement" with people I know to be looking for work - the numbers just don't match.

Certainly, SOME people are improving their situation. I've gotten a job in the last year, my husband has likewise moved from unsteady part-time jobs to full-time. Even my son, a young man in the middle of the Guess-what-just-fell-in-on-me group of White, skilled semi-unemployed males, has FINALLY moved to a full-time job.

They liked him at work - they just couldn't afford to pay him more, or give him more hours, until their business improved. Which, finally, it has.

But, we're the exceptions. Most long-term unemployed or underemployed are NOT finding full-time work.

For Conservatives, the answer is self-evidently Obamacare. Liberals dispute this.

Perhaps this graphic below will make the connection clear.

Reading On the Trip

I got smart and downloaded two books I've wanted to read for some time (I regularly put books on my Wish List for future purchases).

The first, Lift at the Bottom, by Theodore Dalrymple, is a true treasure. I enjoyed it because it focused on specific examples of areas in which British culture has coarsened, cheapened, and declined, as well as WHY the social policies - so beloved by Leftists, and so thoroughly put into play in modern Great Britain - have led, not to Paradise, but to a figurative Dante's Inferno.

Leftists identified lack of money as a problem - therefore, money is given to those who haven't a job. If they got a job, they'd have to work, but get no more money than they had prior to employment. This financial support can exist indefinitely.

Is it really a surprise that they stay unemployed?

Similarly, housing is provided, free of cost to the "poor" - many of whom have LOTS more money to spend than the working people. Just like in American public housing, trash, condoms, and "adult" beverage bottles are everywhere.

Not surprised? You might be a potential conservative...

An even more disturbing outcome of the Welfare State is that family life is disintegrating. Few bother to get married. Each child is another mouth for the PUBLIC to feed, so who cares? Family dinner hour is virtually nonexistent - along with the life lessons imparted there.

Dalrymple interviews many criminals in the course of his work - he is also a medical doctor. Few of the people he talks to take any responsibility for their actions - whether it's committing a crime, fathering/birthing a child, drifting from one place to another, drinking/drugging, or helping their children to acquire the skills to succeed in life. All of life's decisions and responsibilities have been abdicated to the State, along with the blame when their lives turn out badly.

Great Britain started this process before the USA. I'm hopeful, but not confident, that we can learn from their mistakes before it's too late to stop the process.

I strongly urge all to read this book. In harrowing detail, it is a warning of what WILL happen here, if Leftists are not stopped.

The other book I've been reading (just started) is Bullies by Ben Shapiro. Leftists worry about bullies - by which they mean those nasty people who disagree with them, even those who take no action, speak respectfully, and act civilly. What they do NOT worry about are the MANY bullies of the Left:

• Government - which is increasingly using underhanded tactics against dissenters. This includes the IRS, police (SWATTING is directed almost solely against conservative dissenters), and the courts. Even if provably innocent of charges, the cost of litigation forces most to make a settlement.


• Media - You may HATE Sarah Palin. However, the vicious tactics used against her, her family, and her private life, which reached a level of anti-woman hate crime FAR worse than any endured by ANY Leftist - and I specifically include Hillary Clinton - was laughed off as deserved by many Democrats, Progressives, and Liberals.
  
  NO person - man or woman - should have to endure being referred to as "cunt", "bitch", "mother of a retard", or other slur. But she was - often and unashamedly. Her daughters were referred to as "whores" (were they Liberals, they would be "brave, free, and courageous").
  
  Would she have been at least as good a VP as Biden? She could hardly be worse. He regularly gives evidence of non-functional brain cells. Notice that I disparaged him WITHOUT using profanity, trashing his very accomplished wife, or commenting on the sex life of anyone related to him?
  
  The Left might take that as an example of how to fight political fights without hitting below the belt.



• Thought Crimes - better NOT even think less than approving thoughts about Gays or other "protected" minorities. Don't DARE use words that might be confused with slurs (can we say "niggardly"), belong to a church that disapproves of homosexual activities, or complain that students who have not demonstrated verifiable qualifications are accepted into programs before other, less privileged minorities - like Jews and Asians.
  
  The Left will come out in force to destroy your business, your employment, your reputation, your home and your neighborhood (picketers think nothing of terrorizing children living in your house by gathering in thuggish groups, trespassing, and refusing to leave when ordered by police). MIchelle Malkin had to move her family due to having her home address published. This a a woman who gets DEATH THREATS against herself and her family. What does she do? She publishes a conservative blog.

Many, if not most, of these actions are of questionable legality. Some of the governmental actions are unconstitutional. All use force to achieve Progressive goals.

I Have Been Blessed

In my life, I have been blessed:

• I have a roof over my head.  True, it did come with a big mortgage, but I am sleeping warm at night.


• Along with the above, my neighbors are great, and watch out for the neighborhood.


• I have enough to eat - so much so, that I am having to spend energy on dieting.


• I have money from my job to pay for that mortgage and other things.  True, I was unemployed for almost 7 months this year, and had to dip into retirement savings, but I had savings to dip into.


• The job I have now is the best I've ever had - great co-workers, good kids, excellent administration.  I have to pinch myself to make sure that it's not a dream.


• I have good kids and wonderful grandkids (yes, I DID notice that the adjectives changed, but that's due to the fact that I don't HAVE to discipline my grandkids).  They're working and making lives for themselves.


• I have a husband who has stuck by me for many years.  He is supportive of my endeavors (in general), and we're currently on our 39th anniversary year.


• BTW, over the last 1-1/2 years, my youngest grandchild has moved from illiterate to literate - it's amazing, that transformation that happens in so short a time.  God bless K-3 teachers!


• I live in America.  On an American's WORST day, they're living better than perhaps 90% of the world.  Our poor people live better than middle-class people in most of the world.


• I have 24/7 access to the Internet.  For a reading junkie like me, this is like living in a crack library.


• I belong to a strong and caring Catholic community - both at my church, and through association with others - in my daughter's community, in the parishes we attend when traveling, and on the Internet.  Bless them all.

Nothing else special in this - I just wanted to express my gratitude for all that God has given me.

Chugging Along

I'm just sitting here, watching the pre-Oscar festivities. Den is flipping between Catwoman and the pre-Oscars.

I actually enjoyed Catwoman. Few people who aren't classic comics geeks know that there were actually 2 Catwomen - one in the Batman series, and one (like the Halle Berry character) who was a thief and general semi-bad girl. The movie gets the conflict right.

I'm watching the promos for Immortalized - the Taxidermy Competition. I truly can't believe that these freak shows get the audience they do.

I should get busy grading - I have a lot of stuff to catch up on.

I've worked hard today, even without getting to the schoolwork. I finished the coursework for the Oceanography class this week (couldn't have done it without my husband), worked in the yard, helped prepare dinner, and caught up on preparation for my next week's lessons.

The Pope Resigns!

This was a shocker!

At first, when another teacher said that Pope Benedict would resign at the end of the month, I thought it was an Onion spoof.

But, I checked - it's really happening. Go to the Vatican site , and see for yourself.

I'm flabbergasted. I never expected this.

But, I'm going to think of it as an opportunity. It's a chance for a new breeze to blow through the Church walls.

Several things occurred to me:

1. Compared to the Cardinals from the JPII era, the Cardinals have been through intensive scrutiny re: the Child Abuse Scandals. Those that stayed, have been vetted.


2. The Church has retired many of the most egregious "Vatican-Lite" personnel. Those that remain are, generally, committed to upholding Church teachings, even against opposition.


3. The retirement will bring in new blood at a time when the Church needs to stand firm, opposing the US Government's intrusion into the policies of its hospitals and other charitable organizations. It's going to be a battle, I suspect straight to the US Supreme Court. (After that, if the answer is not favorable, it may have to go to the Ultimate Supreme Court of God). Both Clergy and Laymen will be tested, and will have to show their backbone.


4. This may set a GOOD precedent. In a time when the clergy of a parish have to retire at a certain age. it's probably a good idea to have SOME sense that the head of the Church might want to pack it in at some time. It's a good argument for basing PART of the vote on the candidate's age. That being said, I'd rather have SOME older people than younger - it truly depends on the individual.


5. Perhaps some orders of priests and nuns might want to consider this precedent, as well. Leadership in the modern age demands a lot of the leaders - both physically and mentally. There are a few of them that might want to re-think their roles in light of this announcement.

I'm choosing to look at this as a GOOD thing.

Life After the Election

It's over 1 week into the last term of Obama (if you don't believe that it's possible that he may try a power grab near the end of his term). Many people looked at their paychecks, and said "What!" It's difficult to believe that they, somehow, thought that the tax increases would just pass them by. I have to bite my tongue to keep from saying "I TOLD you so" in a smarmy voice.

It's just the beginning - we'll be facing WAY more in Ooops, Surprise! from the administration. To give the public everything they asked for without raising taxes is simply not possible.

The part of this all that I am beginning to truly fear is this summer. I live in a city, as does most of my family. If sequestration does take effect, expect the "poor" (I put it in quotes to distinguish them from the truly impoverished - most of the former are making more, if you count their access to EBT, heat subsidies, rent subsidies, and all the rest, than the people to work to provide them with the benefits) to express their displeasure in LOUD, DESTRUCTIVE, and FRIGHTENING WAYS.

It's COLD! It's REALLY, REALLY COLD!

Well, I've been in colder - in the North. But, for the Charlotte, NC area, this is bad. We've got freezing rain, sleet, and some small snow accumulation.

NOT our typical weather. My husband and I got sprung from school early on Friday. We used it to take care of some business with V-----n - we are NOT happy with the changes in our contract, and it looks like, at this point, it's going to the lawyers.

Today, I woke up to snow - yes, SNOW - on the ground. I expect that many people will stay home. The few on the road will either be transplants from the North, or timid souls with no clue about how to drive in the snow.

I got up early to start cleaning the house - I really do try to keep it up, but it's low on my list of priorities, at times. The kitchen is about 1/2-way done; I'll be putting on laundry in a little shile.

I'm not only cleaning up; I'm also tackling the lesson plans. I've been interspersing school-housework for the last 2 hours. I've found that to be the best way to handle it - moving around, sitting down for a quick blitz, then getting up again.

Somehow, I'm not sure how I did it - I lost a post that I'd been working on since early morning. I'm going to take that as a sign from above that I need to blog on different topics.

The controversy about the President using children as "props" for his agenda continues. Yes, it was a cynical exploitation of the young. No, I don't expect any Liberal to agree. But, if you doubt that it was intended to convey that Democrats were the "child-lovers", while bad, nasty Republicans, who favored 2nd Amendment rights, were "child-h8ers", consider this:

By putting those children out front, the President essentially co-opted them to his cause. He sent a message to the country that people who support his measures are gentle folks who love children. Those who oppose his approach do not care about the welfare of our youth.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Gun owners as a class do not have fewer children than gun control types. They do not invest less time and money and energy in their children. In fact, I would love to see someone do an experiment. Take the NRA mailing list and send them a solicitation to donate to Joe DiMaggio Children’s Hospital, then do the same for a list of equal size populated with gun control activists. The results might be instructive.

Leon Panetta has done American women - and men - a real disservice with his latest directive. Putting women into combat positions will weaken, not strengthen, the military. To point out just one, very obvious, objection - we are fighting an enemy that believes the appropriate way to deal with women who are "uppity" is to gang-rape them.

This is a real concern. Women who work forward have a real risk of falling into enemy hands - quite barbarous hands. Yes, Israel did have women in direct combat in the early days. They stopped that when it became obvious that such a practice had directly exposed women to unspeakable horrors, before their deaths.

Military history is ignored. The Soviet Union sent women into battle in World War II. Israel used women combatants in its 1948 War of Independence. Stalin’s experiment was shrouded in propaganda, and the results are unclear, but Israel said never again. Male soldiers lost control when they saw women being blown apart, and women, when taken captive, were brutalized sexually. Women reduced the combat effectiveness of Haganah units, Moshe Dayan said later, because men moved to protect them from capture. The thought of pregnant women in danger would have been insupportable. Responding to both military necessity and moral imperative, Israel barred women from combat.

That's EXPERIENCE talking.

Read some of the arguments here.

Further, more specific, arguments against the change are:

Pentagon figures show that during the hostilities in the Persian Gulf, naval women were 3.7 times more likely to be “nondeployable,” or out of action, than naval men. Moreover, the berthing spaces assigned to women on shipboard can only be filled by other women. Thus the Navy must find a female radar technician, say, to replace the pregnant or otherwise nondeployable radar technician who has departed. If one is not available, the warship must do without.

Look, women in the military have done some wonderful things. Nurses are, in fact, often exposed to danger - some have been captured, wounded, or died in combat. However, we make extraordinary efforts to minimize those risks, for just those reasons mentioned above.

Every woman in a non-combatant position frees up a man to fight. Should we put women into combat, only to use those men in the back offices?

Women who argue for changes in tradition need to be consistent. If women are "just like men" in combat, should we then negate the Violence Against Women Act? What purpose does it serve, if we all are alike? Surely, pro-women-warriors wouldn't want to suggest that women are WEAKER, or need protection?

What WAS That Book?

...Used in the private White House swearing in ceremony?  It certainly wasn't one of the two Bibles used in the public ceremony.

Here's a picture of the public ceremony, on January 20, 2013.



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You can clearly see that both Bibles are fairly thick, even though they are of different sizes.

So, my question is, what is the book that was used yesterday, shown in the picture below?



 

 

 

 

 

 

It can't be the top book; it's too big.  It doesn't really look like the book on the bottom.  There's another picture that shows it more clearly.



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It looks a book inside a book cover.  What book was it?