Archive for November, 2008

Good Cop Bad Cop

Thursday, November 27th, 2008

In view of the terror attacks in Mumbai; an unambiguous reminder of the mindless, heartless cruelty of the foe we face, it might be the perfect time for George Bush to become the warmonger the Democrats and their minions in the prehistoric press have long made him out to be. He could cowboy-up a little and, as Slim Pickins so colorfully articulated \”work up a number six on \’em\”. After turning Mongo and the full weight of the Us military loose on them and the donkeys they road in on, between now and January 20th, Barack and Hillary could then do what they do best and make an apology tour of the world in February, making nice with our friends and the survivors. What can anyone do to Bush now; impeach him? Wouldn\’t it be nice, after all the disappointments, for George Bush to leave behind a safer world as he leaves the White House?


Wednesday, November 26th, 2008

We Americans, above all other people who live or have lived in any other place or time, should be the most grateful people of all. God has blessed us richly. The wisest and wealthiest in the history of this world would be envious of almost all of us; this in spite of the difficulties we face. Perhaps our difficulties are what inspire us to aspire to ponder, to imagine, to invent, to create, to build, to achieve, to enjoy, to have joy. Perhaps our greatest challenges are ultimately our greatest blessings, after all.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Is That All?

Tuesday, November 25th, 2008

First of all, it is not the government\’s business to create jobs. Government\’s business is to sustain an environment in which private citizens are free to create business, which creates jobs. The greenies are so focused on the physical environment that they have damaged the economic environment. The greening of America should never put the greenback in the red. What is offered as a solution; more of the same? Barack is promising 2.5 million new jobs by 2011. Is that all? How much will it cost for the government to do this? We have a whale of a problem.

I can tell him how to create 4 million jobs by the end of Spring, 2008. Cut regulation, lower taxes for everyone (including corporations), perhaps even eliminating the income tax and substituting it with a national sales tax, lower the capital gain\’s tax, eliminate the death tax, cut non-military government spending by 50%, and stand aside. The engines of private enterprise will take over from there and the Treasury will have to add new warehouses just to store the tax revenues.

Will this happen? No. The Democrats are not interested in solutions. Their only desire is to maintain the problems to make themselves relevant, powerful and rich.

Where\’s Monica?

Thursday, November 20th, 2008

Is the talent pool in the Democrat Party so shallow that Obama must re-inflate all these old Clinton hacks to get his administration up and afloat? It appears pretty clear that he had not given sufficient thought to all this cabinet stuff before the election. He must have been as surprised as I that his very thin message of change and hope was actually able to persuade the majority of the electorate to vote for him. He, like Clinton in \’92, had initially thought that this campaign would provide him a better platform for a future run at the presidency. Clinton publicly stated, as he was working with his transition team, that he felt like the dog that finally caught the car he was chasing and was not then sure what to do with it. We saw what he did with it. Not much! Perhaps this new Clinton Administration will actually do something this time, apart from partying and \”playing\” government in the White House. I fear that they will.

More Math in the Aftermath

Wednesday, November 19th, 2008

$3,000,000,000,000 (given away by the Fed on behalf of the Treasury) divided by approximately 85,000,000 taxpayers is $35,294 per taxpayer. That amount given to each taxpayer would be a great stimulus to the economy and would allow the American voter/taxpayer/consumer to invest in or purchase what he/she elects to be most suitable. The best ideas and technologies will succeed, the rest will fail. This approach would be much better than allowing a few to loot the treasury, which is what is happening now.

Witness to History

Tuesday, November 18th, 2008

We are about to witness an historic moment far more important than electing (by a 52-48 percentage point vote) the first black man to the presidency. We are about to find out whether or not our votes actually count or whether elections really mean anything at all. 44 legislators and Governor Schwartzenegger (all elected by a majority of their respective constituents) are about to ask the California Supreme Court to once again revisit this issue (the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman) and again overturn the will of the majority of California voters. Doing so will not only disenfranchise the majority (in a world where disenfranchising the minority is viewed as unforgivable), it will render all elections effectively meaningless and end speculation, once and for all, as to whether or not government is the servant of the people. This realization will naturally lead to other understandably inescapable conclusions.

All members of the three parts of the government have taken an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the US and, in this case, California, against all enemies, foreign and domestic. As Proposition 8 (passed by the same 52-48 margin hailed as a \”landslide\” for Obama) made the definition of marriage part of the California Constitution, all are obligated to uphold it. Failure to uphold and defend this law will make them, by definition, individually and collectively, enemies of the state.

In view of what this realization represents, I have a suggestion as the budget is reconsidered; we could save the taxpayers a whole lot of money if we simply stopped holding elections.

letter to Governor Schwartzenegger

Friday, November 14th, 2008

Dear Governor,
As an ardent supporter I have appreciated your counsel to the residents of the state regarding the debate over the definition of marriage. You stated earlier that the people had spoken, and after the Supreme Court ruled against Prop 22, you asserted that the people would have an opportunity to vote on this again. Now that this has happened your most recent comments have given the \”No on 8\” crowd undue encouragement (if not license) to continue their demonstrations, that this might somehow bear the fruit they claim has been forbidden them.

As part of these demonstrations we have seen a cross torn from the hands of an elderly woman and trampled, churches vandalized, good people forced to resign their positions, children hassled at school by fellow students and teachers, and many have been forced to listen to the most vile and obscene utterances imaginable. This is just the beginning if the radicals in this movement are not discouraged. It was bad enough that Jerry Brown intentionally misrepresented this initiative on the ballot (a misrepresentation that still appears on your website). With \”No\” demonstrations scheduled for this weekend, I respectfully call upon you to publicly demand civility and denounce any form of vandalism or violence; to encourage the people of California to observe and respect the American tradition of peaceable disagreement when understanding is not the likely result of interaction.

Math in the Aftermath

Thursday, November 13th, 2008

The Presidential Election Result
Obama-52%: McCain-48% \”Landslide!\”
CA Prop 8 Result
Yes-52%: No-48% \”Razor Thin!\”
The prehistoric press\’ choice in electing such diverse headlines, in view identical numbers, might best be understood via the following:
Three hairs on a man\’s head is very little hair but three hairs in a bowl of soup is a whole lot!

Some people who do not like the results resort to changing the process. Some just go to court.

When the Fed trouped out ashen-faced George Bush, begging for $700 Billion with the express purpose of decontaminating the economy from the \”toxic\” mess left by Freddie\’s Fannie, the predictions were dire and extreme. Now, as of yesterday, we are told that the nearly $3 Trillion (most of which the Fed has secretly doled out) has stabilized the US and the world markets and that the \”toxic\” mess that supposedly started this does not need to be cleaned up after all. What transpired between then and now that changed all of this without addressing, let alone fixing, the so-called root problem? Barack Obama? It is rumored that the president of the NY Federal Reserve will be the next Treasury Secretary, now endowed with super powers; like his boss. Or will the Treasury Secretary be Obama\’s boss?

In the aftermath, here is a math assignment for someone with the appropriate access to the marriage records of the 17,000 same gender unions performed between the time the CA Supreme Court overturned the will of the electorate and the time the voters put the court back in its place. It would be very informative to compare the average ages of the women with the average ages of the men in those documents. I would speculate that the women would be older, on average, by far; the reason being that the lifestyles led by homosexual men are more dangerous (by their own accounts-see the account of the former New Jersey governor), causing their life expectancies to be far lower than both the average straight male and the average female of the thespian persuasion. It will be discovered that the behaviors of the males lead to a substantial reduction in life expectancy; 46 years (already actuarially assessed) as opposed to 74 years among the general male population. If homosexuality is, indeed, a genetic condition instead of a behavioral matter, is genetics contributory to the dramatic reduction? Is there any science that points to this as fact? If the reduction is, instead, behavioral, two things become obvious; one, homosexuality is dangerous and should be labeled as such by the Surgeon General and two; as a behavior, homosexuality and associated social mechanics do not qualify as a civil right.

I am for re-introducing the \”Fairness Doctrine\” (more correctly known as political censorship), presently being contemplated the Democrats, if it includes TV, newspapers, teachers and professors, union organizers, the Congress, the Presidency and the courts.

Thank You Veterans

Tuesday, November 11th, 2008

Thank you brave veterans and all who presently defend our nation. I love, revere and respect you for your willingness to sacrifice for the rest of us. You protect the rights of Americans to freely disagree, among all the other freedoms we enjoy. May God bless you!

Four Proposition 8 Stories

Tuesday, November 11th, 2008

A black Christian minister living and serving in Northern California was quoted, upon the passing of Prop 8, as saying that he had \”met many former homosexuals but never any former black men\”. This short phrase speaks volumes about the fallacy of the argument that same gender marriage is a \”civil right\” and is in any way related to the equality movements involving women and racial minorities. When we give protected status to one behavior we will have to give that same status to other behaviors. Where is the line? The only reason politicians like Jerry Brown support such a twisted view of this issue is the money (the \”mother\’s milk\” of politics) they bilk from their gender-challenged constituencies.

A 19 year old girl approached a group of \”Yes on Prop 8\” supporters who were waiving their signs at an intersection, and asked them why they were doing what they were doing and why they were so hateful. One of the group replied that they did not hate anyone and then challenged the young woman to look into the faces of the proposition\’s supporters and then then into the faces of the proposition\’s opponents, stationed across the street. Some moments later the young woman returned and asked if she could have a \”Yes on Prop 8\” sign to waive.

I was standing on a corner waiving my sign when I was approached by a man who had parked his car after seeing a group of us at a suburban intersection. He asked me why I was doing what I was doing. I told him I was supporting the restoration of the traditional definition of marriage that had been struck down by a single vote in the California Supreme Court. He asked me what I had against homosexuals and I said, \”Nothing at all.\” (I did, however, admit to having a problem with the political agenda of the radical elements of the homosexual community who had become so hypocritically intolerant of contrasting opinions.) I told him that the initiative contained 14 words, none of which addressed the issue of homosexuality. He identified himself as being a homosexual and that he was trying to determine whether our motives were to harm him and those like him. After 15 minutes of sincere and respectful conversation, and after he was thoroughly drenched by the season\’s first rain, he shook my hand and told me that the matter was resolved in his mind, that our cause was obviously not about hatred or bigotry or denying his rights. It was a wonderfully therapeutic moment for us both as we openly and reasonably discussed the issues important to us. I hope he shares this story with his friends. I hope others will have the courage to engage in this type of honest dialogue.

On the Saturday preceding the election, approximately 2000 like-minded citizens representing different religious and secular communities, nearly all of whom live within a couple of miles of the county\’s busiest retail district, lined its principle boulevard for a distance of nearly seven miles to peaceably waive their \”Yes on Prop 8\” signs in the rain. A group of approximately 50 \”No\” supporters (the largest portion of which were bussed in from the Bay Area), occupied a single intersection. Of the four local network affiliates, only one sent a news team in spite of the fact that no one had ever seen seen such a demonstration in the history of the county, except for organized rallies at the State Capitol Building. When that single news team showed up, after dark and after the majority of banner-waivers had retired to their homes, the \”newsies\” determined that the size of the respective groups of Pro and No supporters were fairly equal. The story focused on a drunk who was arrested for resisting arrest. \”Watching\” the news takes on a whole new meaning after their blatant bias was openly displayed for all to see. Read between the lies, folks. You are getting very little truth from the prehistoric press. Here is what really happened;

Let\’s Be Fair

Saturday, November 8th, 2008

The voters of California, arguably the most liberal state in the Union, pass a law restoring the traditional definition of marriage and now some radical homosexual organizations want to boycott Utah. This makes sense!?

I would wager that these same people, and those who side with them, were the first people to claim that Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11, and that we should never have gone to war against Iraq. But then they would say \”But the Mormon Church, headquartered in Utah, encouraged its members to contribute money and time in support of Prop 8.\”, to which the proper response is, \”Yes, and Saddam\’s regime actually paid the families of suicide bombers $25,000 each and encouraged everyone who would listen to strike America in any way possible.\”

If we shouldn\’t have gone to war in Iraq, we have no business boycotting Utah. If one is to be intellectually honest, one must be intellectually consistent.

The truth is, it was the California LDS community, in concert with Catholics, Protestant groups, the Greek and Russian Orthodox communities,the majority of the family-oriented Hispanic community and the majority of African American voters along with secularists, who bristled at the arrogance of the court, who joined together to restore what has always been, in every place and in every time (except perhaps Sodom), accepted as the true definition of marriage.

This is not about discrimination or civil rights, as previously noted. The people who voted for Prop 8, including myself, do not hate, neither are we bigoted but our ears are still ringing from the viciousness of the accusatory language (if one can call it language) and the ferocity of the attacks. But in this age when the culture has so corrupted the meanings of good and evil, we should not be surprised.

The members of the homosexual community are looking for something to relieve them of their naturally occurring guilt. They have not found it here; they cannot find it here. One cannot restore his spiritual equilibrium by changing the meanings of words.

Anxiously Engaged

Thursday, November 6th, 2008

I have been anxiously engaged in several good causes, of late; activities that have prevented me from posting most of my thoughts, which may actually have been a great benefit to you, dear reader. I take heart at the results of our election process both from a positive and a negative perspective. We all have much to gain if we apply ourselves and similarly apply correct principles to the challenges we face. And if it all goes south, history will treat us with the scorn we deserve.

For those of you new to this page, I am a lifelong independent who morphed, politically, from a 60\’s Berkeley radical to a rock-ribbed conservative after having observed the effect and impact of foundational principles (that don\’t morph) in the world around me. As a culture we accept scientifically defined laws as gospel but tend to resist gospel laws as being somehow irrelevant or overly-constrictive of human freedoms. My impression is that most people who thumb their noses at religious oriented truth are those whose noses are out of joint because of the consequences of violating those laws. Still, they are free to choose.

I offer the following thoughts on the election.

Though I voted for him, I am very happy that John McCain is not our next president, especially after the way he used, abused and trashed his conservative running mate, Sarah Palin. He and his campaign staff have gone out of their way to throw her under the \’STRAIGHT TALK EXPRESS\” after prohibiting her from freely expressing her conservatism. In this he once again (along with his legislative record of cozying up to the Democrats) showed his true stripes and his great lack of understanding and vision. It is now better to organize against the adversary we know than to organize around someone who is as morally tepid as John McCain. All of his \”reaching across the aisle\” stuff is not a virtue. This present circumstance, however, is one in which conservatives can arch their backs and stiffen their resolve, and their spines. The last time we faced this kind of political dilemma, we ended up with Ronald Reagan four years hence. We have every right, and the absolute duty, to be that optimistic now.

The Republicans are the ones who really created this problem by holding themselves out to be the party of principle and then ignoring the principles they espouse. They are now being held to account. If the party should not survive as a result of corruption and ineptitude, that leaves room for serious minded reformers to seek other options. The conservatives handed the ball to the GOP and they fumbled it repeatedly. George Bush, who is a good man but who is not a conservative, did not help the cause. It wasn\’t really the war that got the liberals in a knot; it was that he was openly Christian. They just couldn\’t openly chastise him for that without taking a political beating for that stance, so they hit him with everything else they could. But his signing of the McCain/Feingold bill and his position on illegal immigration, among other very unconservative actions, did not endear him to anyone. He vowed to change the tone in DC and he did; it got much louder and much uglier because he did not stand up to the hypo-critics. He unwisely turned the other cheek and thereby enabled and encouraged an onslaught of savage punditry, the likes of which we had not seen in our generation. Even Milquetoast Harry Reid was allowed to spew invective without ever being challenged for it. It is completely acceptable to publicly reject the unacceptable. The GOP, paralyzed by PC, seems loathe to stand up for what is right and proper and now they have been asked to stand down.

Democrats, however, have long been unconstrained by principle and in spite of all their \”values\” rhetoric, no one really expects them to seriously observe any. But when all the campaign commitments they made to the hungry hordes are proven to have been promises they are unable or unwilling to keep, their former supporters will turn on them like a pack of ravenous, half-tame dogs. I almost feel sorry for them. Almost. But this time they won\’t have a Nixon to kick around or a Bush to bash. They will break a lot of china before they get tossed out in 2010 and 2012.

Jerry Brown, California\’s Attorney General, did a great disservice to his state by intentionally misrepresenting Proposition 8 (the defense of marriage initiative) in selecting the language used on the ballot and in every public reference thereto and in the official election guides. The Proposition adds 14 words to California\’s constitution (to prevent activist judges from again overturning the will of the electorate on this issue); \”Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in California\”. The AG took the negative approach to the concept and crafted the following language to adorn the initiative; \”Changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same sex couples to marry.\” This created the impression that this proposition was discriminatorily aimed at denying equal rights to some Californians when the actual point of the initiative was to restore the law that had been approved by 61% of the electorate in 2000 (which was in response to previous tampering by the courts) and had subsequently been overturned by one radical judge. Now people are hyperventilating over a \”civil rights\” issue that never had anything to do with civil rights. Brown manipulated this misstatement in order to avail himself of all the campaign cash that will blow his way from the homosexual community as he prepares to seek another term as Governor Moonbeam after the Terminator\’s term is terminated in 2010.

We live in very interesting times but take heart; Chicago politics has proven the existence of the afterlife. If we can vote after we\’re dead, there is no telling what else we will be able to do.

There Will Be Change

Wednesday, November 5th, 2008

If PT Barnum or HL Menken were around today they might have said something like, \”No one has lost any money underestimating the intelligence of the average American voter.\” And they would have been right. Barnum also said something like, \”You can fool most of the people some of the time.\” He was right about that, as well, as regards any victory by the Democrats and their minions in the prehistoric press. They will now have the chance to prove their metal. They have failed in the past and will do so again because they do not operate on the basis of principle but rather on the presumption of power. Thankfully, \”You can\’t fool all of the people all of the time.\”

Though I have been wrong on a number of occasions, mostly due to overestimating the intelligence of the electorate and a personal overabundance of raw and baseless hope, I was right (within 1%) about CA\’s defense of marriage initiative and take heart in its passage. Proposition 8 had been maliciously misrepresented by its opponents as a civil rights issue, and as hateful and discriminatory, but the majority of voters in the most liberal state in the union rejected that attempt at deception. The American \”family\” survives another low blow; for now. But the foes of the family are far from finished. Other states will need to place similar language in their respective constitutions and we must all remain vigilant.

Relative to the Obama presidency, I am completely comfortable and quite willing to publicly speculate that those who were fooled into supporting him will be far more disappointed in him than those who did not. As the curtain is pulled away, \”smartest man in the world\” will soon be revealed for charlatan he truly is. He will be unable to deliver on the most basic of his sweeping promises, except for one; there will be change. We won\’t be in Kansas anymore. There may not even be a Kansas anymore. It won\’t be the kind of change that anyone voted for, but the winds of change are blowing. Hold on to your hats, and your wallets.

State of the Golden State

Tuesday, November 4th, 2008

Would it really surprise you if McCain won California, and thereby the presidency? Proposition 8, the restoration of the definition of traditional marriage, will pass today. Many who would not ordinarily vote will cast their ballots for this initiative today, and vote for president while they are at it. Obama, who is against homosexual marriage is against Prop 8; only one in a great string of malignant hypocrisies now known to plague the few principles he has managed to maintain. The voters McCain can rely upon are well-known to all; the only group it is still PC to hate, white Christian males. To this group must now be added all who believe that a woman should be VP; those voters who have not fallen for the prehistoric press\’ endless abuse of Sarah Palin. Latino voters have usually turned out for Democrats but are historically ill at ease with African Americans. Barack is one of the few truly \”African\” Americans known to exist in the USA. California is also home to a few plumbers and a host of other regular Joe\’s.

Regardless of the outcome, one thing is certain; this election is a referendum on American culture and how far we have descended from the nation\’s founding principles. The culture war will continue, long after November 4. Remember the greatest lesson of this campaign; the mainstream media cannot be trusted, and neither can the majority of politicians. Sharpen your wits. Dig for your own news and interpret it for yourself. Read between the lines. Remain suspicious. Stay involved. Don\’t accept the unacceptable. Keep the faith. Pray.

Responding to the \”NO on 8\” People

Tuesday, November 4th, 2008

To the No on 8 folks,

We disagree and largely because you do not believe, as I do, that the family is under attack and that NO on 8 is a crucial element in that battle. This is your right. You probably also don\’t believe, as I do, that God oriented us this way (man and woman, mother and father) for His own wise purposes; like procreation and the appropriate nourishment of the offspring. That is also your right. You probably believe that this is a matter of civil rights. It is not. Civil rights are about human elements over which a particular human has no control; race and skin color come immediately to mind. Homosexuality is a behavioral condition. You will say that you are wired that way, and I will say that many natural inclinations are designed to be resisted; like the desire to clobber someone with whom you disagree.

But I stray. Prop 8 is about restoring the traditional definition of marriage for a host of good reasons, not the least of which is to prevent the \”NO\” people from their inevitable infringement of religious liberties. Remember what the ACLU has done to the Boy Scouts? That\’s nothing compared to what they\’ll do with this. There is no other time in human history when this would have ever been a question. That we have to answer it now as a culture is an indictment of this culture. It is your right to disagree, but you will still be wrong.

Election Day is Upon Us

Monday, November 3rd, 2008

Pray and vote, and pray some more. Our nation will require all the prayers of the faithful and all the wisdom that the neo-secularists will be able to muster and maintain. Expect difficulties but keep the faith, no matter the outcome. The ultimate battle has already been won. Of course this does not mean that we can kick back and put our feet up. There is always work to do.