The Next Objective

NRO: The Thanks that Keeps on Giving

2009-11-25T16:19:00.000-08:00

Perhaps in gratitude for my banner ad below, Lucianne Goldberg over at National Review Online wrote the following today as part of their Thanksgiving Day Symposium:

This Thanksgiving, more than ever, I am deeply grateful for the large, strong, loving heart of the average American. That heart beats within those who love this country enough to die for it.

It is also a tolerant, forgiving, and gracious heart. But there are limits to how far it can be assaulted. It has a voice and we are beginning to hear it speak. At first it was a murmur, then a rumble, then — as the tea parties assembled and the buses and trains and automobiles began to roll toward the hundreds of town halls and open parks and street corners — it became a shout.

As we pause, heads bowed, to give thanks for all we have and all we are, let’s remember to enjoy it, for it may be the last quiet moment we will have for some time.

People ask their leaders and each other, “What can I do?” Here’s the answer. Take your big strong heart and big loud voice . . . and scream!

For this we shall all be eternally grateful.

The "Average American" is grateful as well

Marx and Me vs. Darwin

2009-11-25T15:48:00.000-08:00

In honor of the 150th anniversary of the Origin of Species, I would like to take the rare opportunity to agree with a Marxist. In a column some time ago, which appeared in the cynical New York Times, liberal college professor Stanley Fish reviews the Marxist Terry Eagleton's book about Atheism. Here is a quotation:

By theological questions, Eagleton means questions like, “Why is there anything in the first place?”, “Why what we do have is actually intelligible to us?” and “Where do our notions of explanation, regularity and intelligibility come from?”

The fact that science, liberal rationalism and economic calculation can not ask — never mind answer — such questions should not be held against them, for that is not what they do.

And, conversely, the fact that religion and theology cannot provide a technology for explaining how the material world works should not be held against them, either, for that is not what they do.

When Christopher Hitchens declares that given the emergence of “the telescope and the microscope” religion “no longer offers an explanation of anything important,” Eagleton replies, “But Christianity was never meant to be an explanation of anything in the first place. It’s rather like saying that thanks to the electric toaster we can forget about Chekhov.”

A good point, and one to keep in mind regarding my earlier post. Toasters are fine, but Checkov, much less the Eternal Soul, should not be relegated to the realm of domestic appliances. Of course, I can only agree with these guys so much. In some ways they are worse than the most hard-core atheists. They remind me of the type of person referenced in Revelation 3:16 -- "So, because you are lukewarm--neither hot nor cold--I am about to spit you out of my mouth." These guys will bash Atheists one minute and then refuse to answer even the simplest questions about their own faiths. We are left to think that Checkov has replaced God for them and they are just engaging in empty polemics with their academic peers. What is at question here is not just the art of the Bible, but its very TRUTH. The Bible is the LAW and as Christians we are called to WITNESS that LAW, not hide behind puzzling intellectual arguments!

2012

2009-11-24T06:15:00.000-08:00

Is the world going to end in 2012? Perhaps, but only if Barry gets reelected. Otherwise, I wouldn't count on it. Besides the fact that Christ himself said that no man can ever know the time of his return, this supposedly "ancient prophecy" is just another set of speculations based on poorly understood artifacts, culled together and disseminated by internet conspiracy theorists. This is not to say, however, that the apocalypse cannot be near. Recently, some French media outlets have been reporting that Bush at least partially justified his invasion of Iraq with apocalyptic prophesies. How should we react to all of this? First, God IS coming, sometime. History is like a clock that God wound up and it will eventually run out. Although I am quite skeptical that foreign wars are capable of provoking the return of Jesus, I do think that the general situation in Israel and the Middle East does offer sufficient evidence to believe that we are moving toward a serious confrontation and, at some point, apocalypse. There is no way to know when, though. It could be tomorrow, it could be in another thousand years. It could come in 2012, a time when, truly, all believers should least expect it.

Grilling "Global Warming" "Scientists"

2009-11-22T08:21:00.000-08:00

A hacker broke into the email archives of some climate scientists and released them on a Russian website the other day. The most shocking stuff has to do with efforts to suppress dissent and manipulate evidence:

I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.

The "decline," of course, is in global temperatures. That's right, in case you didn't know, they are falling. Of course, the massive industry based around this nonexistent threat must perpetuate itself and its massive funding apparatus, and so it must use "tricks" to make the data fit their model. Those who disagree with them are summarily jettisoned from the community:

This was the danger of always criticising the skeptics for not publishing in the “peer-reviewed literature”. Obviously, they found a solution to that–take over a journal! So what do we do about this? I think we have to stop considering “Climate Research” as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the editorial board…What do others think?

I will be emailing the journal to tell them I’m having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor.”“It results from this journal having a number of editors. The responsible one for this is a well-known skeptic in NZ. He has let a few papers through by Michaels and Gray in the past. I’ve had words with Hans von Storch about this, but got nowhere. Another thing to discuss in Nice!

Circle the wagons! How long will it take before some Americans see that "science" is not a science. It is an ideology, and unlike the even the most extremist political groups, "science" purports to be "objective" and "apolitical." These emails should be sufficient to demonstrate that this is ridiculous. "Science" as we know it is the realm of a small group of elite liberals dedicated to using this pseudo-objective method to further their radical, secular humanist, anti-religious agenda. It should not surprise us that Marxism got a lot of traction for a long time because people thought it was "scientific." Perhaps if society had paid more attention to the kinds of moral and ethical issues addressed in the Bible and less to a half-baked 19th century theory of history, some of the last century's greatest disasters could have been averted. Now, I'm not anti-science. I like my iphone and my sprinkler system as much as the next guy. But when science becomes a political tool--and not a technological means--I get very suspicious, especially when the people wielding that political tools are a bunch of Democrats.

A Worthy Cause

2009-11-21T08:39:00.000-08:00

And the Demmy goes to...

2009-11-20T03:07:00.000-08:00

So, this week's Demmy is perhaps not the most obvious choice. Likely you were expecting me to reward some specimen of bigoted bile from the Palin-bashers or Dobbs doubters, but, on my Google quest, I found something too hilarious to pass up. Meet The People's Liberation Front. On a lark, I searched for "Jesus was a Communist" and found this excerpt in a recent post:

The most obvious evidence of Jesus' communist sympathies manifest in his most common teachings, ones that have been the underlying factor in an endless series of review and re-write over the past few millennia.

1. Jesus definitely said "blessed are the poor, woe to the rich". Somewhere in St. Luke's gospel. Rough quote, general area of citation.

2. Love one another, love thy neighbor, love thy enemy. All tenants of community.

3. A rich man asked Jesus what he could do to "get in the favor of the Lord" Jesus told him to use his money to help the poor. Spread the wealth around a little.

4. He criticized the Roman government, the current oppressive empire and even organized people in peaceful defiance of unfair ruling. If that is demagoguery, then what is?

5. He was crucified for these things, very similar to what has happened to Communist idealists in America over the past century.

Is there a commentary needed here? Somewhere in Luke? Tenants of Community? (Community = Communism?) Charitable giving = taking Joe the Plumber's money? Demagoguery? In Classical Antiquity? What Communist idealist have been "crucified"? The handful of admitted traitors who lost their Hollywood jobs in the 1950s, a time when the US was under an existential threat from Stalin's nuclear weapons? Boo-hoo. I don't recall there being a cross involved. Communism is a giant failure, and the aptly named "Liberal Thinker" is proof that the mainstream left wing is obsessed with resurrecting a system that, before its ignoble death, managed to ruin the lives of billions of people. This guy engages in the same sort of arguments that people ignorant of history tend to use: Communism has never really even been given a chance to work. Hmmm...has he ever heard of Collectivization or The Great Leap Forward? This is NOT Fascist behavior. This is pure Marxist Communism. Whenever people try to use these arguments, I just say that, well, Capitalism has never existed either. Every nation that calls itself capitalist actually has a massive socialist entitlement program. So if neither twentieth century capitalism nor twentieth-century communism was pure, then I think we can tell which one works best in its most realizable form, and this is why we must be vigilant to protect our freedoms against "liberal thinkers" whose blogs may be short on posts, but whose brains are never short on crazy. We cannot let these people take our over our country!

Skip to my Lou

2009-11-19T09:28:00.000-08:00

So Lou Dobbs is "retiring" from CNN. Apparently, the network is claiming that they want to move toward a "drier," more "middle of the road" kind of reporting. Question: What does "middle of the road" mean? To my mind, Lou Dobbs is about as middle of the road as it gets. This is a serious issue today with the media. If "middle of the road" becomes "far left," then true centrists become "right wingers" and true right wingers become "dangerous right wing extremists" and the true dangerous extremists fall off the map. On the other side of the spectrum, the far left becomes simply "liberal," while the dangerous left wing terrorists are seen as simply "left wingers." The entire political scale has been make-weighted on the right side in order to make media elites feel more in touch with what they imagine to be mainstream America. People wonder why folks like Glenn and Sarah have so much traction right now, and I just can't believe their surprise. they represent those of us in the center who have been disenfranchised by this skewed criterion of American politics. The media people need to wake up out of their beltway bubble and realize they the people they take for right wing extremists are really just good old average American centrists wondering what happened to the great country they helped to build. And as long as people like Lou Dobbs allow themselves to be purged from places like CNN in the name of creating a more "centrist" image, the more this fallacy of the false center will be able to perpetuate itself and inveigle its way into the larger political unconscious.

The Hunters and the Hunted

2009-11-17T10:09:00.000-08:00

Here's a choice excerpt from Sarah Palin's new book:

At one point we jumped out of the van to film in front of the pipeline when a truck full of hunters swung in on their way to a moose camp up the highway. They asked for a picture, and I was delighted. Charlie straightened his collar, but the guys in their hunting gear and camo vests just handed their camera to Charlie and asked him to take snapshots of me standing with them by their truck.

Then we headed to Wasilla, where Charlie wanted to interview me inside my old high school gym. Same thing happened. Some teachers and students stopped us, handed Charlie the camera, and he patiently snapped the pictures of me in Warrior territory. They seemed not to recognize him — or maybe they just figured, hey, he’s the media guy, let him take the picture. Charlie was a great sport and appeared to take it in stride, but he did seem a bit grumpy during the later segment filmed at my home in Wasilla, where he peered skeptically at me over his bifocals like a high school principal.

I can only imagine how miffed Gibson must have felt to have found himself relegated to a job he'd last had when he was 19, all in the name of documenting the presence of a woman he loathed among what he must have considered to be a bunch of redneck barbarians. Well, I got some news for you Charlie-my-friend, this country isn't unilaterally composed of uptight, pointy-headed scoff-and-mockers. Some of us enjoy our outdoors and our guns, and perhaps your inability to understand that accounts for your inability to contain your prissy annoyance as you "interviewed" defenseless Sarah on your biased news channel.

Kosher

2009-11-16T09:21:00.000-08:00

A brief note on Kosher and the Bible:

Luke 13:10-17 (New International Version)

A Crippled Woman Healed on the Sabbath

10 On a Sabbath Jesus was teaching in one of the synagogues, 11 and a woman was there who had been crippled by a spirit for eighteen years. She was bent over and could not straighten up at all. 12 When Jesus saw her, he called her forward and said to her, "Woman, you are set free from your infirmity." 13 Then he put his hands on her, and immediately she straightened up and praised God.

14 Indignant because Jesus had healed on the Sabbath, the synagogue ruler said to the people, "There are six days for work. So come and be healed on those days, not on the Sabbath."

15 The Lord answered him, "You hypocrites! Doesn't each of you on the Sabbath untie his ox or donkey from the stall and lead it out to give it water? 16 Then should not this woman, a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan has kept bound for eighteen long years, be set free on the Sabbath day from what bound her?"

17 When he said this, all his opponents were humiliated, but the people were delighted with all the wonderful things he was doing.

...

Matthew 15 (New International Version)

10 Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen and understand. 11 What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.' "

12 Then the disciples came to him and asked, "Do you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this?"

13 He replied, "Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots. 14 Leave them; they are blind guides.[e] If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit."

15 Peter said, "Explain the parable to us."

16 "Are you still so dull?" Jesus asked them. 17 "Don't you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body? 18 But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man 'unclean.' 19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. 20 These are what make a man 'unclean'; but eating with unwashed hands does not make him 'unclean.' "

...

Acts 10:9-15 (New International Version)

Peter's Vision

9 About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10 He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11 He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. 12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles of the earth and birds of the air. 13 Then a voice told him, "Get up, Peter. Kill and eat."

14 "Surely not, Lord!" Peter replied. "I have never eaten anything impure or unclean."

15 The voice spoke to him a second time, "Do not call anything impure that God has made clean."

...

I think these passages speak for themselves. Let it be noted, though, that Christ, upon overturning Levitical and Deuterocanoical laws, did NOT say that the Old Testament was not the Word of God. He simply came to fulfill a new covenant, thereby rendering the former covenant (one based primarily on LAW) obsolete. We, as Christians, are called to live this new covenant. Thus, while we may ignore some of the laws in the OT, this in no way means that the creation story, for example, should also be disregarded. Nowhere does Christ say "Hear ye, a 'day' in Genesis really means 'a billion years.' Hail Darwin!" As Christians, we are called by God to embrace the mystery of the true faith! If your faith is so weak that some 19th century theory is enough to shake it, then you've got big problems in the next world!

Sore Winners

2009-11-15T06:57:00.000-08:00

As usual, liberal dems are attacking. Man, these people like the sound of their own voices, as if the massive MM echo chamber weren't enough for them! I must say, however, that the reason the blog seems so "skimpy" is that a LIBERAL computer hacker (likely a fellow Demmy recipient) wrecked my last blog and replaced it with this. Tasteful, indeed. I guess the only other worthwhile criticism this guy (?) makes is that my blog is lacking in images. This may be somewhat true, but it is because I write for a LITERATE audience. Unlike some liberal democrats, I read books. Lots of 'em. At least 2 or 3 every month. This is pretty good, especially considering that I work two jobs and participate in two sports and have two pets. But disgruntled Demmy winners (whiners) are nothing new. If only they would dream up something original to say!

In more interesting matters, I saw the movie "Pirate Radio" yesterday. It was pretty good, and contained a very interesting and true message about freedom. Basically, the movie is about some rock and roll DJs who start broadcasting their music on boats because the BBC has a monopoly on the airwaves. What the movie shows is that freedom tends to prevail wherever it can, no matter what. Government control not only doesn't work, but it also can't even operate correctly (Note to "Healthers"). Try to imagine King George and King Richard running a radio station. Would you ever listen? Now imagine some cool rock and roll guys running one. Which would you choose? Let me add that, not coincidentally, the most free (if also most profane) character is an American. Coincidence? I think not! Now, as you all know, I'm no great fan of rock and roll. Besides a few bands (U2, Creed, early Third Eye Blind), I generally like more Classical music like Beethoven and John Williams. The movie also has some nice "human-interest" elements, like a subplot that involves speculation about which one of the station's staff might be a young boy's father. Of course, I oppose single parenting, and I'll let you go see the movie and decide for yourself how this film deals with this thorny issue. Overall, B+.

And the Demmy goes to... (too)

2009-11-13T16:00:00.000-08:00

Thought I'd forgotten my pledge to give out two Demmys today? Well, unlike Prez. Barry, I keep my promises, and so, without too much more delay, is part two of two of today's blog:

Since Ayn Rand has been making something of a popular resurgence lately, we thought it inevitable that there would be a liberal backlash abrewing. Well, we, as usual, were right. "Ayn Rand sucks" were the search terms, and, lo and behold, we came upon a Democrat blog with that very title. It's not clear where the Ayn Rand portion of the blog is, but it is clear that its author is a walking stereotype. Foul-Mouth? Check. College professor? Check. Snob? Check. Moron? Check. And he doesn't even allow comments on his blog, so that makes him a wuss on top of everything. Besides, how are we supposed to notify him of his award? Anyway, for his (or her) pedantic opinions, incredibly inappropriate title, and spattering of pretentious modernist poetry and art that even the NYT knows is terrible, this blog gets today's second Demmy. Congrats!

And the Demmy goes to...

2009-11-13T15:38:00.000-08:00

Awarding Demmies is an art form. Like a writer, the awarder has to get inside the head of his potential recipients, understand what makes them tick, justify and predict the kinds of things the deserving party will say and do. This week, as you know, Sarah Palin is back in the news. This, of course, activates the freak-out centers in most liberals' brains. It's as if the idea of a conservative mother wishing to affect public policy is so anathema to their boorish mindsets that whatever sense they had rattling around in their over-educated skulls clinks out through their cocaine-widened nostrils and into the kitty litter. So, I thought, what's the dumbest nickname someone could come up with to mock my favorite Alaskan? "Sarah-I-Don't-Care-Ah"? Doesn't make much sense, even for a liberal. Then it came to me: Nailin' Palin. Crude sexual metaphor? Check. Violent connotations? Check. Clear indication of liberal humorlessness? Double check. So I ran it through the search and got this. Now, as far as I can tell, this guy is about as self-hating as they come. Christian veteran who hates the US and Jesus. As I've said before, YOU CANNOT BE CHRISTIAN IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE BIBLE. PERIOD. I wish the libs would just give up trying to straddle the line between atheism and Christianity, between reason and faith, between patriotism and perpetual America-bashing. It makes them look, well, insane. So, SANSEGO, if that's your real name, the Demmy goes to you. Now, go find a better hobby.

PS

2009-11-09T19:19:00.002-08:00

Since there was no Demmy last week, there will be TWO, count 'em TWO Demmies this Friday.

Communism

2009-11-09T19:19:00.000-08:00

Hey everyone. I'm back after abrief vacation. The problem with vacations is that afterward you have to do tons of work just to catch up. So this post must be brief. I was struck by this interesting column by Cal Thomas about the media and Communism. He writes:

The Media Research Center (MRC) has compiled reports, editorials, articles and commentary that extend over the last 22 years revealing how the pre-Fox, pre-talk-radio liberal media were the handmaidens of one of the greatest totalitarian evils to strike the planet. The underlying myth in much of their "reporting," notes the MRC's Rich Noyes, was that free-market capitalism was a greater threat to human happiness than communism.

Reading these quotes, in light of history, resembles a "Saturday Night Live" comedy skit.
In 1987, before the wall collapsed, CBS anchor Dan Rather said, "Despite what many Americans think, most Soviets do not yearn for capitalism or Western-style democracy."

Strobe Talbott, then of Time magazine and soon to be an influential member of the Clinton administration, wrote on Jan. 1, 1990, "[Soviet leader] Gorbachev is helping the West by showing that the Soviet threat isn't what it used to be, and what's more, that it never was." How is it possible to simultaneously have been a threat, but not a threat? The millions who died in gulags, starved to death or were assassinated might have a different interpretation of Russian history under communism.

Indeed! And it's the same today. We are told that Communism is not a threat! Hello? Have you met the twentieth century? Is the average liberal memory that short? Even BEFORE the wall fell they were already talking about how the USSR wasn't so bad. All that means is that today, just like then, Dems are in denial about the people they chose to support. Now, I think Americans should be able to say whatever they think, but Dems should not be taken seriously if they keep up this kind of Anti-American rhetoric. Do you think either will really happen?

The Next Ayn Rand?

2009-11-05T10:40:00.000-08:00

Is Kira Peikoff the next Ayn Rand? Judging by her portrait, I doubt it. Her new book seems kind of, well, trashy. Religion vs. capitalism vs. socialism, all wound around a convoluted, "ripped from the headlines" plot.

A lot of people ask me how I can be an Ayn Rand fan and a Christian. I tell them that there are always compromises to be made. Thomas Jefferson had slaves, Ronald Reagan ran up the deficit, and Ayn Rand was an atheist. The way I look at it, modern day liberal-democrat socialism is exactly the kind of "religion" that Rand warned us about. American Christianity stresses independence, moral rectitude, and justice. Liberal democrat socialism, on the other hand, is all about handouts, "collectivity," and moral relativism. Faced with these two poles, I don't think we need to wonder what Rand would have chosen.

Peikoff, on the other hand, just seems in it for the money. Check out this excerpt:

"Look Trent, I owe you an apology. I haven't been completely honest with you."

"Ok..." In spite of the irony, his heart began to race; was this the moment of her confession? He hadn't imagined it like this--with his opponent bandaged and broken, a suddenly weaker match. But why would she tell him now about a secret lab?

"I have malignantly progressive multiple sclerosis. I lose my balance sometimes, and my limbs go numb out of nowhere, which is what happened today. I shouldn't have been riding anymore, but I hate letting it interfere with my life. Which is also why I didn't tell you. You may not mean to, but I don't want you to start treating me with pity, like I'm some cripple. Because I'm not. Maybe it's only in my mind, but I'm not." Her voice rose, lifted by self-respect. "And if you still want anything to do with me after this, you'll have to get that straight."

Trent's mind swirled with a montage of instantly linked events: her limp, her stumbling into the lobby, her foot thrust into the spokes of the wheel. He had never known anyone with MS, had no idea what it involved or implied.

"Jesus, Arianna. I had no idea! I can't believe you were still biking, when you knew the danger, you're a doctor for God's sake!"

"Oh, and don't even dare patronize me. I will live my life however I choose and take whatever risks I want. If I decide to skydive tomorrow as my last life's wish, then you can either wave to me from the ground or--"

"Your last life's wish?" he interrupted. "What? What are you talking about?"

"It's malignantly progressive. Soon I'll be in a wheelchair, and after that...." After a pause, her voice dropped to a hard note. "I like you, Trent, but you'd be wasting your time to date me."

Yikes!

Decision: Afghanistan

2009-11-04T19:32:00.000-08:00

Is Afghanistan a quagmire? What is our mission there? Does this country have any real hope for democracy? It all depends on Obama. If he says that we should stay, will he provide the resources the troops need? If he thinks we should leave, how can he keep us safe from the Taliban? Something tells me that, no matter what decision he makes, it'll be the wrong one. He lacks the kind of leadership and moral fiber that allowed Reagan to shut down the Soviets when they invaded Afghanistan. He's too wishy-washy, even some of my friends in the military have told me so. I don't envy Obama's position right now, but I also don't think I should be president--yet.

Vampires

2009-11-03T07:52:00.000-08:00

So apparently there is a big fight breaking out in my parents' house right now over the Twilight books. Basically, my sister wants to read them and my mother thinks that they're inappropriate. Now, I think I'm going to have to side with my mother on this one. The question about it is not necessarily whether it's obscene, but whether it serves a purpose. Something can be obscene and even satanic and still be good, as long as the moral is one about good triumphing over evil. I'm sure you all remember this from my Harry Potter piece a few years back. Unlike Harry, "Twilight" serves no purpose. They might as well be teenage romance novels. Kids don't need this kind of junk clogging up their brains. If they're going to read (which I hope they do), I can think of a few books that would be better than "Twilight."

1. Barry Goldwater - The Conscience of a Conservative

2. Peggy Noonan - When Character was King

3. Ayn Rand - Atlas Shrugged

4. Robert Frost

5. Fight Club

6. The 5,000 Year Leap

Any more suggestions?

Eh, Congressman?

2009-11-02T19:52:00.000-08:00

In case you haven't noticed, the New York race for the 23rd district has generated a lot of speculation about the future of the GOP. And rightfully so. The party cannot afford to give up any ideological ground to the socialist Obama liberal democrat agenda. If this were to happen, and it were to become acceptable for conservative candidates to compromise on core conservative issues, we would see a massive rift develop in the ranks of the Republican party, effectively rendering all sides disfunctional. One side would be nothing more than the "conservative" wing of the liberal democrats. The other would veer rightward, for better or for worse, and alienate right-center independents. With the Republican brand so tarnished, I imagine some of the more fastidious party elements may be contemplating surreptitiously unloosing their lifeboats, but they should be assured that the water is big, and the cruise ship more comfortable without them. Liberals do not know how to run a country, much less the ocean. Good riddence.

And the Demmy goes to...

2009-10-30T11:05:00.000-07:00

Some people seem to think capitalism and Christianity are incompatible. I suggest they take a look at all the non-capitalist countries that have sprung up over the last hundred or so years for evidence to the contrary. "Capitalism" is, in essence, another word for "freedom." True freedom to accumulate and distribute capital is available only under circumstances that maximize individual liberty. Additionally, it is only in societies that offer near-maximal liberty that true religious freedom can exist. In Europe, where crypto-socialism has become the norm, religion is largely a thing of the past. When the state begins providing services that the individual can provide on his own, self-reliance and personal liberty decline, and with them goes religiosity. Faith in God is replaced by subservience to the welfare state and a silly belief that it will always be purely altruistic. We all know the state would never turn on its people, right? Finally, capitalism is not just about money. It is also about freedom from money. One must be able to choose whether one wants health insurance, welfare, public transit, stock options, etc. Without choice, no liberty. Without liberty, no freedom. Without freedom, no conscience. Without conscience, no God. Simple as that. The byproduct of this mode of thought is a drive toward small government. Small government is good for business, good for liberty, good for religion. Why do you think I live in Utah and not, say, Illinois or Missouri? This wasn't the first home of my church....

In light of this little rant (as Duke would say), you can imagine my dismay when I punched "God is dead" into my google blog search. Expecting to stumble onto the site of some porn-addled philosophy major, I instead found Valley Rise Up, a liberal Christian blog for Al Gore apologists (judging by the hippy pictures). Here is a quote:

We nod, in this country, to a separation between church and state; but the reality is that we bow to a powerfully deceptive theology. And that's the theology of unfettered free market capitalism. Looking for a good read? Check out an essay called "Family" in a book called THE DEATH OF ADAM by Marilynne Robinson. She writes of the devastating grip this 'faith' has on our nation: the belief that human beings are born to out-earn and compete with one another; the belief that the common good is pursued at the expense of individual happiness and freedom; the belief that governments are simply intrusive, barriers to free market innovation and wealth. There's an orthodoxy in this that's as rigid and as seductive as any humankind has known. And it threatens, I think, to suck the democratic energy right out of us.

Hmmm. I won't repeat what I've already said, but there are some obvious problems with this kind of reasoning. First, "the belief that the common good is pursued at the expense of individual happiness and freedom" is the OPPOSITE of free market thought. The idea is that individual happiness and freedom is the SOURCE or the common good. Unlike certain socialist "Christians," we here tend to think that no freedom--including that of conscience--is worth sacrificing so that the collective may flourish. We begin with the principle that God created all men free and they deserve to be treated as such. If man is responsible for his choices, he sould be allowed to make those choices. Second, government is not a barrier to wealth only. If someone wants to get rich, fine. If someone wants to give all his money to the poor, great. If someone wants to live in a tent in the woods, be my guest. The idea is not for everyone to get filthy rich by preying on others. The idea is to MAXIMIZE LIBERTY because when liberty dies, so does TRUE FAITH, which must be acquired FREELY and without COMPULSION. The free market is a product of a free country, and you can't have the latter without the former. Enjoy your Demmy, mountain man.

Evo-whatever

2009-10-29T08:13:00.000-07:00

There's an interesting article on evolution on the Fox site today. In it is the following:

"Because the evidence for evolution is so overwhelming, we must consider it to be a truth about the natural world -- the world which we as people of faith believe was created by God, and the world made understandable by the reason and natural senses given to us by God. Denying science is a profoundly unsound theological position. Science and faith are but two ways of searching for the same truths."

Basically, the author is wondering whether '"Christianity and Darwinism mutually exclusive." Then he realizes that "fortunately, as I've come to find out, there's a growing movement between the two fronts that says one can have faith in both religion and science."

Ah, yes, "fortunately." Well I got some news for you my friend, "faith" as defined by God, has nothing to do with "science." Faith is an exponent of Grace, of God's divine gift of knowledge of Him to each and every one of us as revealed through scripture. "Science" is the attempt to render this faith obsolete. No one has faith in science. All they have is hidebound dogmatism in reason's capacity to "explain". Science and Christianity are not looking for the same truths. Science wants to know the age of some rock it dug up in its backyard. Christianity doesn't want to KNOW anything. All has already been revealed in scripture. We are charged with carrying out this revelation on earth until Jesus comes again to "judge the quick and the dead." A true Christian does not care about electrons or calculus. A good Christian fears and loves his God above all things and spreads HIS message all over the green and blue earth. Simple as that.

The Public Mandate

2009-10-27T08:53:00.000-07:00

Well, it's official. Barrack Hussein Obama's beloved "public option" is going to be part of the health care bill and will be voted on very soon. There is no Republican support. So much for the "bi-partisanship" that Obama pledged to work toward when he was running for office. Instead we have a radical liberal democrat bill that in all likelihood will ruin the most effective health care system in the world. Now, there is going to be an "opt-out" clause, which means that states can vote to exclude the public option from their state insurance plans. So, most of the South, Utah, and some of the midwest will be able to salvage what's left of their insurance after the rest of Barry's "reforms," which don't have such opt-out clauses, kick in. What will be the consequences? First, there will be a massive population shift across demographics. Young people, pregnant women, seniors, students, all will be fleeing the chaos of socialized medicine as soon as they get the first whiff of its disastrous consequences. The economies of these states will quickly improve, creating massive new wealth within their new "smart-medical-cities." Soon, these successful entrepreneurs will get fed up with their increasingly expensive federal income tax bills and stage what amounts to a revolt. If the socialized states continue to demand that these innovators cough up huge chunks of their income in order to underwrite Barry's tyranny, I think we'll see an all out civil war before the end of the next decade. I am not kidding. This is the final economic straw that's going to break the social-issue camel's back. As a patriotic American, I sincerely hope it does not come to this, but, if it does, I think you know whose side I'll be fighting on and what I'll be packing.

Free your mind, dude!

2009-10-26T07:45:00.000-07:00

Every notice how liberals are always advocating "open-mindedness" when it comes to supporting their own causes, but automatically shut down any time they are asked to consider someone else's values? Well this is what we're seeing all across Washington right now. Republicans want Dems to consider a health bill that doesn't force companies to bankrupt themselves buying expensive insurance for employees. Dems won't do it. Conservatives advocate listening to the generals on the ground in Afghanistan. Dems won't do it. Christians want to be treated like regular citizens who can express themselves in public. Dems won't listen. Fox News gives a fair and balanced look at the media. Dems want to shut it down. They have their AGENDA, and "open-mindedness" is just a gimmick for getting it through. Hey Dems, why do you want to give everything to everyone except Republicans? If you could open your eyes and see things from our point of view, you might just change your minds about a few things. But then you might lose some of your precious welfare-queen demographic. Can't have that. IF you were really open-minded, you'd be republicans.

Star Czar

2009-10-24T09:49:00.000-07:00

You probably know about Obama's secretive, unconfirmed czars by now. These are people who have unprecedented access to the White House and federal information regarding everything from cars to bombs. There's already been a lot of outrage about Van "Pinko" Jones (not the "car czar," despite the first name) and Kevin "man-Boy" Jennings. But have you ever heard of the science Czar, John Holdren? Click on the link for detailed excerpts from his book, which includes his support of euthanasia, forced sterilization, coerced abortions, and a worldwide-government. Folks, I was a little skeptical at first about all the Nazi rhetoric surrounding this administration, but this strikes me as a clear case of eugenics. Eugenics, as you know, was at the center of the Nazi social engineering plot. I, for one, am absolutely terrified. Is this what "science" has come to mean. Godless, murderous, and fascist? America, you have lost your way! Atheists, repent, tun back to God before it is too late and people like John Holdern start telling us all what to do with our bodies, faith, and babies! Rise up, friends, and tell Washington that we will not go down without one HELL of a fight!

And the Demmy goes to...

2009-10-23T09:09:00.000-07:00

It wasn't too tough this week, folks. In honor of the White House's recent attempts to silence the opposition through harassment, ignorance, and all around skulduggery, this week's search phrase was simply "Fox News sucks." The lucky winner is the not very prolific founder of the "Feathers and Bones" blog, whose sole post consists of the following:

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

Fox News Sucks: Boycott Fox News Advertisers
www.foxnewsucks.com
An Artist Site dedicated to the downfall of Fox News
Posted by siskiyou at 8:10 PM

Wow! Creative! So much evidence! So much information! By the way, the hyperlink takes you to an equally moronic and content-free website consisting entirely of two videos, one of Keith Olbermann, one of someone named Henry Rollins, both whining about REAL JOURNALISTS doing their jobs by telling the AMERICAN PEOPLE about the LIES of this administration! Hey, liberal America, is this all you got? An entire media apparatus dedicated to smearing the right wing, and all you can muster are a few lousy websites? Here's to hoping pot gets legalized. It will make these people so lazy they can't even vote.

A Few Questions For Barrak Hussein Obama

2009-10-22T07:23:00.000-07:00

Where were you born? Do you have proof? Why are you requiring health workers to get the flu vaccine when it hasn't been properly tested? Why are you attacking members of the media? Why are you attacking free speech? Is the UN going to play an increased role in American politics? Are you going to cut and run in Afghanistan? Are government bureaucrats going to be deciding what kind of health care I get? Who are your "czars" and why didn't the senate have to confirm them? Do they have more power than they should? Are they targeting average Americans, like me? Are you a Muslim? Do you agree with Black Liberation Theology? Do you think the US is a Christian nation? Should the Fairness Doctrine be reinstated? Do you plan to take over any more banks or private companies if you see fit? Are you a socialist? Are you aware that several of your "czars" have expressed socialist views? Do you think Rush should own a football team? Do you think we should be able to arm ourselves to protect ourselves and our families not only from criminals but also from a government takeover? Do you believe that people are responsible for their own actions? Do you think handouts are the answer to social problems? Is China going to make us default on our loans? Can you ever make us feel safe again?

Believes

2009-10-21T08:59:00.000-07:00

So I have a question for all you atheists out there: what do you tell your kids at night? Yesterday I was babysitting my cousin and she asked me whether God ever got tired. If I were an atheist, I guess I would have said "God doesn't get tired, Maddy, because he isn't real. See, the universe accidentally started one day when a bunch of particles blew up. Then, presto, here we are. Nothing matters, there are no laws besides those of science, so you can pretty much kill me if you want." But I am not so arrogant and self-centered to believe I can know this sort of thing, so I just told her "I don't know. But if he does, he probably takes really long naps."

America, why are you so arrogant? Why do you abandon your faith? I saw on TV the other night Richard Dawkins going on and on about Darwin. You haven't left God, you have just found a new one! Darwin is your idol, Richard Dawkins! Never mind that atheists are responsible for practically all the genocides of the 20th century. Never mind that science takes as much faith as religion to believe in (if not more!). Never mind that our country is falling apart before our very eyes as it seeks further and further into the slime pit of secularism! Guys, I am worried about my cousin...

Brains

2009-10-20T09:41:00.000-07:00

I found this amusing picture over at conservapedia:

I think this is great! All that's missing is the Atheist Cortex and the George Bush Derangement Syndrome center. In light of this, I think it's clear that liberalism is not something easily cured. It takes years and years of intense brain therapy to get a liberal to "come back down to earth." Sometimes, there's just no hope. Question: Is liberalism a "pre-existing condition" or is it learned? I think maybe both, since conservative parents tend to have conservative kids, I think it's genetic combined with upbringing. Basically, if you're born with a liberal brain AND have liberal parents, you might as well be locked up, cause you aren't ever gonna get anywhere in a free country.

The iPhone dilemma

2009-10-19T16:17:00.000-07:00

I know I have always been against the iPhone on principle because Steve Jobs is a big liberal donor, and because Bono, famous now from my previous post, is the phone's poster boy. But I don't know if I can hold out much longer. The apps are killer, and I can watch The Office during boring office meetings (BTW, the "cold calling" part of the last episode brought back really painful memories from my college job). Plus, the warranty on my old phone is finished and I'm going to need to buy a new plan soon anyway. I was debating it today, and then I found this, which should come in handy with some other debates, specifically with my brother in Portland:

Oh no...Bono!

2009-10-18T08:06:00.000-07:00

Like most people my age, I grew up listening to U2. For a long time, they were even one of my favorite bands (and, even recently, "Vertigo" has been #1 on my gym playlist). Put politics and art don't always work, especially when those politics are liberal. Here is a quote from the opening of his little love letter to leftist liars in yesterday's NYT:

When Mr. Obama takes the stage at Oslo City Hall this December, he won’t be the first sitting president to receive the peace prize, but he might be the most controversial. There’s a sense in some quarters of these not-so-United States that Norway, Europe and the World haven’t a clue about the real President Obama; instead, they fixate on a fantasy version of the president, a projection of what they hope and wish he is, and what they wish America to be.

Well, I happen to be European, and I can project with the best of them. So here’s why I think the virtual Obama is the real Obama, and why I think the man might deserve the hype. It starts with a quotation from a speech he gave at the United Nations last month:

“We will support the Millennium Development Goals, and approach next year’s summit with a global plan to make them a reality. And we will set our sights on the eradication of extreme poverty in our time.”

They’re not my words, they’re your president’s. If they’re not familiar, it’s because they didn’t make many headlines. But for me, these 36 words are why I believe Mr. Obama could well be a force for peace and prosperity — if the words signal action.

So... the "real" Obama is the "speech" Obama because that's what Bono wants him to be? All the singer is doing is explaining why he likes the Obama fantasy. But...it's still a fantasy! Whatever "change" there is has to be more than rhetorical. And you don't have to be an egotistical rock star to notice that things are changing. Look at the census, for one thing. Look at health gate. Look at Afghanistan. Just because Bono wants Obama to end poverty doesn't mean the rest of us should avert our eyes while he boot-stomps the Constitution! Next thing we know Bono will be our "poverty czar," coming over to distract us with lofty melodies while The Edge and Larry Mullen, Jr. raid grandma's jewelry box for the "poor" pimps and prostitutes taking over our small towns.

So, Bono, if I write that all wars should end right now, is that enough to get a 1.4 million dollar prize? Does it matter if I'm serious? Does it matter if I throw a baby off a bridge behind my back while I do so?

And the winner is…

2009-10-16T11:41:00.001-07:00

The anonymous clown who runs the terrifyingly overlinking Soot and Ashes blog. The search terms for this priceless find were "Glenn Beck is definately." Nothing like some simple spelling errors to drive home the emptiness of your ignorant rant. The thing that tipped this baby over the top was the reference to the murder-rape allegations. I love how libs accuse Beck of being a conspiracy theorist and then concoct something ten times as crazy sounding. I may not agree with everything Beck says, but I do love the fact that he makes the hamsters that run the wheels in liberals' brains start sprinting like a coke-addled Kennedy after an underage prostitute. So, anonymous, the Demmy is yours! Keep up the good work, and we'll see you in 2012!

The Demmys are Back!

2009-10-16T08:37:00.000-07:00

That's right, after a not-so-long delay, the weekly Demmy awards have returned! This afternoon one lucky liberal blog will get the award for being the most painstakingly stale! Who will it be? What lucky search terms will discover it? Tune in to find out...

Adam-ondi-Ahman

2009-10-15T07:27:00.000-07:00

Hello everyone. I think I'm going to start calling you the silent majority. Just kidding. Anyway, did you know that exactly 170 years ago Joseph led the hundred-man defense of Adam-ondi-Ahman? I've been there, by the way. I've got an uncle with some farm land in Daviess County, and we made the trek on August afternoon with the whole family in the bed of an old Chevy pick up truck. The altars are still kind of there, but time and modern farming have definitely taken their toll.

What's important here, of course, is the issue of persecution. Like many Christians, I am afraid that Barry O. supports a secular, liberal, and ultimately fascist agenda much more than he believes in God. Besides, we know what his faith consists of. There's a case at the Supreme Court right now that's get ready to be heard. It concerns a monument-cross. Now, in my opinion, which I think is reasonable, a monument-cross is different than a pure-Jesus-cross. The pure-Jesus-cross is the kind of thing we keep in our homes and churches, a sacred object that God lives in. A monument-cross, on the other hand, is a symbol of our country and its heritage. Newsflash, liberal naysayers (the silent minority, at least here), this is a country with a Christian heritage. The monument-cross celebrates everything that makes this country great. Now, my question is, if it starts with a monument-cross in the desert, can our pure-Jesus-crosses be far behind? What if the liberal bug exterminator gets offended? Will we be dragged into court by the ACLU? Disturbing questions, but significant ones....

It's about liberty, stupid

2009-10-14T09:46:00.000-07:00

Over at the Corner, Jonah Goldberg points out the following interesting fact:

Democratic members of the House of Representatives now represent most of the nation's wealthiest people, a sharp turnaround from the long-standing dominance that Republicans have held over affluent districts.

A USA TODAY analysis of new Census data found that Democrats represent a far different constituency today than they did in 2005, when they were the minority in the House, or in 1990, when they were the majority.

The Democratic-controlled House is now an unusual combination of the richest and poorest districts, the best and least educated, and the best and the worst insured. The analysis found that Democrats have attracted educated, affluent whites who had tended previously to vote Republican.

Democrats now represent 57% of the 4.8 million households that had incomes of $200,000 or more in 2008. In 2005, Republicans represented 55% of those affluent households.

Goldberg lets the numbers speak for themselves, but I'll try to draw a few obvious conclusions. First, the Democrat party is the party of the liberal elite and the helpless. The former want to feel good about themselves and impose their secular ideology on everyone who doesn't agree with their urban nihilism. The latter want bigger and bigger handouts. Easy as that.

Second, the Republican party (of which I am not a member, because I am an independent) can no longer be called the party of "rich, white men." Rather, it is now simply the party of freedom. It is the only organized voice of the middle class, of "real America" that is very scared about what's going on in their country. It's not about money, either getting it or keeping it. It's about liberty.

Finally, isn't it funny that Obama is everything that the Democrat party represents. Affirmative action for minorities, handouts to single mothers, Ivy league indoctrination, urban snobbery, municipal corruption, massive wealth, and shameless demagoguery. Luckily, most Americans who aren't completely tied to the welfare/secular humanist state understand the dangers of such a political party and its leader.

Camp Williams

2009-10-13T19:57:00.000-07:00

I don't know if anyone has picked this up yet, but the government is starting work on a giant spy base at Camp Williams. Hmm, how am I not surprised. Barry gets into office on pledges to shut down all of our international, anti-terror spy networks and turns around and builds the biggest data mining operation in the world. Gosh, I wonder what's going on? Since Barry's already made it clear that he doesn't want to spy on America's enemies, I guess this base could only be used for spying on HIS enemies. Big surprise. So he figures out who has guns, who goes to church, who votes "Republican" (even though most Republicans are just common-sensed independence), and then he turns the screws. First it's your taxes, then it's your internet, and your mail, and you children, and your doctor. Pretty soon, you've got a dozen lawsuits pending and Washington has taken over the Home Depot! And you know the CJCLDS is high on the list. Why do you think they're building it where they are? I mean, we all know that Camp Williams is underdeveloped. You know I'm not a conspiracy nut, but this president is taking things way farther than we could ever have imagined. It's time to wake up, or else...

Vaccines

2009-10-13T08:31:00.000-07:00

There's a lot of talk about the flu vaccines recently. Many reasonable objections have been raised about whether they have been properly tested and, most importantly, whether big government should be regulating our white blood cells and lymph nodes.Add to this the fact that Christians are being sent to jail for NOT "immunizing" their children, and you've got a page straight out of Stalin. What's next, everyone going to some government clinic every week to see how their "levels" are doing and then getting some "medicine" shot into their arms to put their "levels" back on track? Everyone knows that the government has ways of brainwashing people with chemicals, so why should we be lining up to have them shoot us up with what could well be poison, especially if you're a conservative?

People, what is happening in this country? How did we get here? Most importantly, what are you going to do about it?

"Hipsters"

2009-10-12T10:23:00.000-07:00

I was walking in Jordan Park this morning during my lunch break and I saw these kids in the park smoking cigarettes. You know that I was against the public ban because I oppose all restrictions on personal liberties, even if they are completely justifiable. But the ban passed. It's the law now. You can't smoke in the park. Not only is it not healthy, it's downright dangerous. We as citizens have an obligation to obey these laws.

So I went up to the kids to tell them to cut it out. They were all wearing tight jeans and one of them had a mustache. They gave me this nasty look and stomped their cigarettes out on the ground. I told them to pick them up, that they were litterers. I overheard one of them say some profanity under his breath before they wandered off. I decided it wasn't worth going after them and just checked to be sure their cigarettes were out (they weren't).

Well, when I got back to work and told Bill about this, he told me that the kids were definitely hipsters. Hipsters, in case you don't know, are spoiled rich kids who dress like they're poor (and gay) in order to show that they're better than everyone else. I'm pretty sure I even heard one of them say the word "deck." They eat vegan food and listen to horrible music and think they're radicals because they ride bikes and voted for Ralph Nader. Hey hipsters, keep it up!

Rights

2009-10-11T04:58:00.000-07:00

There has been a lot of talk on the left about the supposed "right" to health care. Of course there is a right to buy health care. But as soon as this "right" is mandated, it is no longer a right. It is a compulsion, forced on the citizenry by a bloated, out of control government.

The Second Amendment says that every American has the right to bear arms. Like health care, we know that gun ownership makes us safer, and therefore more healthy. Does this mean that everyone should have to buy a gun and keep it in their home? Can you imagine the screaming, crying fit the liberals would throw if George W. Bush would have proposed this policy? If he started using tax dollars to give vouchers to poor people in the inner city so that they could go out and buy Glocks?After all, it is their right!

The right to purchase a product in the market place is not the same as entitlement to that product. This is one of the central principles of free market capitalism. And besides, health care, unlike gun ownership, is mentioned nowhere in the Constitution. There is no reason to distinguish it from buying a car or a book. Cars help people get around and keep them away from the communist consumptives who tend to take buses or trains. Since it's now in the auto business, will the government start handing out cars anytime soon? Not as long as Al Gore's flying around on his private jet complaining about fossil fuels. Reading is healthy, and everyone has the right to read whatever they want. Should the government start handing out books? Which ones? I can tell you one thing, it won't be Anthem.

Prize Surprise!

2009-10-10T12:58:00.000-07:00

Of course the big thing in the news right now is the Nobel Prize. Did Barry deserve it? Of course not. Does that matter to the Stockholm Socialists? Of course not. It's just another stupid way for old Europe to pass itself off as a relevant world power. Too bad that power consists solely of conferring tiny sums of money to their favorite cowards. Basically, all it means is that the US deserve a pat on the back for no longer being led by someone who thinks that real threats to world peace actually exist and that weapons inspectors and negotiations with terrorists are the best ways to protect the free world from bloodthirsty, genocidal maniacs. We'll see what tune they are singing when they are outnumbered by immigrant Muslims who, when not busy sexually assaulting helpless women, are planting bombs in subway cars and government buildings.

When will this country wake up to the threat it faces? Now, I'm not one of these misinformed folks who think Barry's a Muslim (although I totally understand why this would be the case), but I do think that Muslim violence in America is here to stay. I know this may sound controversial, especially coming from an objectivist libertarian like me, but it's just common sense: what rights can we guarantee Muslims in this country and still be assured of our safety? While I definitely think that everyone has the right to own a gun, I don't know whether I would want certain Muslim extremists to have access to automatic weapons. Since they are often so suicidal, is it so hard to imagine a bunch of them doing some Columbine-style shooting at a kindergarten or something? It's not the same as being crazy or mad. It's part of their religion. It's a tough call, but I think that it's important to keep in mind that these are not the people who founded the country and it wasn't for them that the Constitution was written. Worth keeping in mind.

The Full Ginsburg

2009-09-20T08:24:00.000-07:00

Don't freak out. The "Full Ginsburg" refers neither to the former Fed chairman's bachelor party schenanagans nor to what happens when a certain Supreme Court Justic forgets to fasten her robe all the way. Rather, it references the indefatigueability of Monica Lewinsky's attourney William Ginsburg, who appeared on all five major Sunday morning news shows in a single day. And now we have the Full Barry. That's right, today you can tune in to see him push his health care agenda on every MM network. After all, what else should he be doing? Playing with Bo? Bringing Michelle breakfast in bed? Spending time with his family? Running the *@*$%^! country???

But what do we expect? This is a president whose entire campaign was built on scripted charm, and, now that he's won the White House, he intends to use it to further his socialist agenda. So, in honor of the "Full Barry," I suggest a few other ways he can help get his message across:

--Start his own reality TV show, aptly--and plagiaristically--titled "Big Brother."

--Spamming people with emails that read "Hello, I am a dispossessed, very wealthy Kenyan. I just need your bank account number so I can transfer the treasury of the United States to ACORN. It'll make you rich too, I promise."

--Creating his own brand of pop-up ads that come up every time you visit a conservative website. They would say "Take our free Census survey and get put on the rolls of "Anti-Americans."

Motown

2009-09-18T06:16:00.000-07:00

Man, I love Motown music. I just picked up the complete 1966 singles, and boy are they good. It's hard to say what my favorite is. Of course, classics like The Supremes and Marvin Gaye are indispensable, but lesser lights like Marvelettes or Brenda Holloway are incredible ... and fresh! You know, it also goes to show you how low the music industry has sunk today. What happened to the craftsmanship that went into these albums? Where did all the love, all the soul, go? Nowadays it's all just rap and repetitive crooning songs about sex remixed with auto-tuning and beats that, even at a low volume, make my car shake. Anyway, I'm going to get back to this great music, which I adore indiscriminately and recommend to everyone.

Yesterday's Dinner

2009-09-16T08:35:00.000-07:00

So Barry is following up on Bush's ill-considered plan to save the Pacific salmon. I must say I'm confused by the conservationists. On the one had I understand the fact that certain elements of the environment need to be preserved. That's why we have national parks. I love national parks. However, 99.9% of species are extinct. Extinction is a fact of life. I guess if salmon go away, the ecosystem will change somewhat, some fishermen will have to start catching other kinds of fish or find new jobs, and we will not eat Pacific salmon anymore. I can live with this. The fact is, being alive means that things are going to change. Disasters will happen, species will go extinct, pets will die, soccer games will be rained out. Would we support building massive domes over all childrens soccer fields if we could be convinced that a potential rainstorm was perhaps caused by human activity somewhere else on the planet? Of course not. God gave us the world. He said go forth and multiply. We have. If he wanted there to be more fish in the sea, the HE would multiply THEM.

Happy Face the Truth

2009-09-15T09:35:00.000-07:00

In his wonderful book, Liberal Fascism, Jonah Goldberg makes reference to George Carlin's famous quote the fascism will come to America with a happy face. It's an interesting point. In the history of tyranny, you have, as far as I can tell, three models. The first is the revolution. This is what happened in the USSR. One group overthrows the government, seizes power, and starts inflicting its will on helpless citizens using mass arrests, executions, etc. The second is the model of the first ruler. The first ruler is the leader who is the first to have the resources to bring an entire country under his auspices. Thus, what was formerly a peasant country held together as a sort of feudal state becomes an autocratic engine of self-preservation via the centralization of natural and human resources. The ruling party must break the will of the people through violence in order to build a big enough army and industrial infrastructure to ensure the continued reign of the powers that be. This is a model we have seen time and again in Latin America. Then there is the "mass hysteria" model. This is basically what happened in Nazi Germany. A leader is democratically elected during a time of economic crisis and, through scapegoating, government takeovers, and the redistribution of wealth, returns the country to a state of nominal functionality while crushing all the rights of its people. This, of course, is the road we are on. Instead of scapegoating the Jews, however, Obama and co. are scapegoating conservatives. Suddenly, we are the ones who are to blame for the economic crisis. We must be kept from power for this country to get back on the right track. Talk radio, cable TV -- these last outlets for conservative thought are already on the chopping block. Make no mistake, it is the objective of this administration and its allies to silence the opposition and use the government to take over nearly every aspect of the country and its economy. After all, the recession proves that individuals cannot be trusted to make their own financial decisions. But we will strike back! We will not give up our faith, freedom, or finances. We will recognize that happy face for what it is: the pathetic facade of the most awful kind of tyrrany.

Failure to Approve

2009-09-14T06:54:00.000-07:00

Obama's approval ratings are plunging. I think there are a number of reasons for this. First, his health care speech was nearly identical to his campaign stump speech. People want a leader, not a politician. Second, his health care plan itself is weak, socialist, and dangerous. People know a bad bill when they see one. Third, although he is dragging this country in very much the wrong direction, it's the same wrong direction that Bill Clinton dragged us in for eight years. This alarms more than just your average American. Obama came promising change, and some on the left art unhappy (just watch The Daily Show for evidence) that changed hasn't been big enough. I guess the fact that conservatives aren't in concentration camps has some on the left feeling anxious.

I know that it may be unfair to compare Bush's approval ratings and Obama's at this point during the respective first years of their presidencies. Obviously, the terror attacks helped to unite the country around our leader during a time of crisis. But, think about it, if we were attacked tomorrow, would Obama's numbers soar similarly? Of course not. This is because the country knows that Obama has totally underestimated the terror threat. Bush, on the other hand, came out with all guns blazing and went after them where they were hiding. He opened up special prisons and started special programs to hunt down the terror killers. Obama has shut these programs down. Thus, in the case of another attack, which is becoming more likely every day, it is my prediction that the country--including the military--will revolt and he, along with "Average" Joe Biden, will be lucky to escape charges of treason.

9/12

2009-09-12T10:23:00.000-07:00

Today is 9/12. To be honest, I'm not terribly excited about the tea party protests and everything else Glenn Beck has put together. Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan, and I think that what Glenn has to say is very important in our current political atmosphere, but I guess I'd just rather see something BIGGER. Something that goes beyond TV show hosts and (relatively) small crowds of (relatively) unorganized protesters. What do I have in mind? Well, ideally, I would like to see someone come into national politics--not a pundit, not a careerist--and shake things up once and for all, take us somewhere new and exciting. I just worry that the system won't allow it. Can these paltry surroundings produce someone prodigious enough to redeem a government seemingly broken by its own anti-capitalist, anti-religious tendencies?

The other day I told a "friend" about these yearnings, and he/she translated the following song from a foreign language. I think it was a really good choice (with, of course, some very real discrepancies between the singer's mood and mine), and I reproduce it here:

In vain I seek an mighty prophet
To carry me away, to carry me away to any place,
Like the foaming billow of a thundering current,
Swirling, carries into the distance a blossom it has washed away .

Life can be wasted on anything,
Wherever it goes, I don't care... Without a word
I will stoically lift the heaviest cross,
But if only the pain of fatal doubt would quiet
And the mindless howl of "What for?" sounding in the depths of my soul would cease!

Vain dream! There are no prophets... Degenerate,
The wretched world lacks the strength to make them;
There is only a tireless herd of swindlers,
And pathetic banality, and petty avarice.

And whoever carries the banner of lofty convictions,
Is he who is so weary from thought, oppression, and suffering,
That you will not know what speaks within him -- genius
Or an enraged, tortured sickness.

Never Forget

2009-09-11T09:55:00.000-07:00

Eight years ago today this country suffered the greatest terrorist attack in its history. Nearly 3,000 people died, many of them leaping from the tops of skyscrapers amidst black smoke and hellfire. Where were you? I was in college, cramming for an economics quiz that I hadn't studied much for. I turned on the TV to check the weather just as the second plane hit. I couldn't believe it. It had to be a joke or a movie or something. But it wasn't. Honestly, for a second I thought it may have been the Apocalypse. Jesus said it would come when it was least expected, and when is one expecting the apocalypse lass than before an economics quiz during the eighth month of the first evangelical president's tenure? Instinctively, I called my family. Were they alright? Were there other buildings burning? But the phone lines were flooded. What was going on? In a fog, I walked to class. The quiz was canceled and we were told that we could go home if we wanted to. Those of us that stayed carried on an intense, emotional conversation with the professor about the future of this country, Christianity, capitalism, and the world as we know it.

The professor told us that this was a reminder of the power of chaos. In the Middle Ages, he said, chaos was symbolized by the devil. This was his greatest attribute. Not temptation, not lechery, not curses and moaning and chains, but just good old fashioned chaos. You would think this too, he said, if you lived on a little farm and were at the mercy of plagues, floods, famines, and marauders. We have forgotten about chaos and the devil's role in it. We have become so used to order, predictability, and the availability of certain consumer goods that we are no longer aware of man's weakness in the face of chance and destruction. These terrorists, he said, are just like the barbarians of the days of yore. They are a satanic force, and it is our holy mission to combat them. For, when chaos reigns, freedom is impossible, and without freedom, one cannot choose to let Christ into one's heart.

Have we forgotten about this chaos? Have we forgotten about the Islamic threat already? I don't want to be some crazy who thinks Barry's a terrorist or anything, but I do think that his election betrays a certain misguided complacency on the part of the American voter. We shall see in the coming months whether he is an agent of chaos or an agent of protection, order, and freedom. God knows I want the latter, but I am more than ready to protect myself from the latter.

New URL

2009-09-10T20:52:00.000-07:00

Hey everyone! I finally got everything back up and running. Sorry for the delay!

In the next few weeks I should have the layout figured out and most of the links up and running. One of you mentioned to me that you already had most of the links bookmarked. If no one finds them helpful, then I won't bother to put them up. Just let me know here or elsewhere what you think. After much though, I have decided that I won't try to continue the old blog as it was, although the beloved Demmys won't be going anywhere. "The Objective" died a martyr's death, but I think that it's time for a new start anyway. From now on, there isn't going to be any talk of the Iraq war in general or enhanced interrogation specifically. It looks like Obama is so focused on his health care agenda that persecutions (no sic!) are on the back burner for now. Ditto for the Iraq war defeatists. Afghanistan, on the other hand, is becoming a big issue, but I am going to wait and see how Barry H. handles it before weighing in. I want to give him some room to make an ass out of himself before I pounce.

So the big story today is of course the bold, courageous action of Representative Joe Wilson, the Republican senator from South Carolina. Wilson, I stand by you! Although he has of course been made to apologize by the outrage machine that is the liberal media, I think we can all rest assured that this man feels no compunction about his speaking truth to authority the other night. Frankly, there needs to be more of this type of outrage. The talk radio waves, blogs, and TV shows are going nuts over the audacity of this administration, and our supposed representatives in Washington are just going to stand by and take it? I should hope not! Give 'em hell, angry Joe!

It's good to be back.