I made it safe and sound to my destination! The only real inconvenience on the trip over from Oregon ocurred about 20 miles west of Lakeview OR, where I encountered a horde of grasshoppers in full flight. I departed Grants Pass that morning with a clean bike, only to stop for gas in Lakeview with the bike covered in pieces, parts and organs of grasshoppers. I had to clean my windshield (which had protected ME from being covered in those same pieces, parts and organs) three times to get all the bug crud off it. Other than that, and a five minute conversation with a herd of cows in Nevada, it was a relatively uneventful trip.
I must say that those cows were quite attentive during that time, but they obviously had BADD (Bovine Attention Deficit Disorder), because they turned and left as I was in the midst of briefing them on Barack NObama's latest gaffe. Or, perhaps they were Demoocrats ... it could happen! They know that the Republicans would eventually send them to the abbatoires (rendering plants) and turn them into hamburger - something useful and productive - and the Dems would have them on a pedestal.
Well, it's time for me to go now - some people need to get to bed, and I'm occupying their bedroom desk.
Gil
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Friday, July 25, 2008
"The Third Time Is A Charm" ... or so they say
Alrighty then ... here's what's happening. Much to the dismay of the intelligent masses, and to the relief of the left-wing, bleeding-heart-liberal, blame-America-first crowd, my blog may be inactive for the next month ... unless perhaps I can access it using my beautiful, talented and brilliant daughter's computer while I'm there.
I'm taking my third almost annual motorcycle ride back to see my kids, and some old friends, who are about 865 miles away. Hopefully, this ride will be relatively uneventful. This is how the first two went:
Trip 1: Departed Grants Pass OR the morning of the 8th of June, in drizzling rain. Not a big deal inasmuch as I knew neither the bike nor I would melt. It quit raining about 50 miles east of Grants Pass. About 20 miles later I saw the first sign that read Snow Zone Ahead. It stirred a premonition within me, and, sure enough ... **SNOW** began falling from the sky. To make a long story short - I hit 4 snowstorms and 3 thunderstorms that first day out, and only made half the distance I had planned, which also qualified it as the most miserable day I had spent on two wheels in the entire 49 years I had been riding motorcycles (Yes, it was even more miserable than the day I totaled a bike in Las Vegas and was taken to the hospital.)
The visit itself was lovely, and then there was the return trip, during which I had a run-in with a yearling range calf. This animal had obviously placed himself in the middle of this two-lane road, waiting to ambush some human being. I had just passed a slow-moving pickup truck and was doing about 75mph when I saw it. I slid back over into my lane as soon as I could, keeping an eye on the errant calf the whole time. Not knowing what, if anything, it was going to do, I moved as close to the right-hand shoulder as I could without getting into the gravel. I was south bound and the calf was facing east - this was a good sign ... until I got within about 100 feet of it. I had slowed to about 50mph when the calf suddenly turned 180º and began ambling toward the right shoulder. "Ambling" is an excellent word to describe his movement ... not a trot, or a canter, or gallop ... just a leisurely sort of strolling movement - like what cowboys refer to as "moseying". Knowing that I didn't have sufficient time or space to go behind him, and that he could just as easily change directions again even if I did try to go behind him, I held my line along the shoulder of the road. The first thing his head hit was my left highway peg, spinning it around 180º, the second thing was my left knee (imagine being hit in the knee by a bowling ball traveling at 50mph, and then, as a final gesture of defiance, he ripped the front strap off my left-side saddlebag. I looked in my mirrors to see what the aftermath was, and I saw the calf staggering off the road and I assume that he survived our encounter. The rest of the trip was uneventful.
Trip 2: Wishing to avoid a recurrence of weather problems, I waited about 2 weeks longer to begin my second trip, leaving on the 18th of June this time. That was a good move. Other than some bothersome highway construction on I-215 and I-15 from the Salt Lake City International Airport all the way to Davis and Weber Counties 30 miles north (and perhaps even beyond, but that was as far as I was going), the trip over was relatively uneventful. I did notice that when I would come to a stop on the 2nd day of my trip, my oil warning light would come on momentarily, and then go back off. The 2nd day I was there I took the bike to a local Kawasaki dealer and asked what they might think it was, and their answer basically suggested that it was "nothing major," but that I "might want to keep an eye on it". Okie-dokie ... I can do that. A couple of days later, as I was going through one of Utah's many scenic highway construction zones, I noticed a sign that read, Speed Limit 30MPH. Glancing at my speedometer, it was reporting 100mph which, considering I was barely moving, impressed me as being an inaccurate representation of my forward velocity. As soon as I cleared the construction, I stopped the bike and looked at the speedometer which, sitting dead still, continued to register 100mph. About 3 days, and $300, later I had a shiny new, functional speedometer. Another lovely visit ... and then, there was the return trip.
Remember that little "nothing major" thing that I should "keep an eye on"? I noticed a bit of clutch slippage the last day I was there in Utah, but nothing disconcerting. It only happened when I hit the throttle with some gusto - no biggie. Or at least, no biggie while I was in civilization. Leaving a gas stop in Battle Mountain NV, I noticed that all of a sudden I had to release my clutch fully before it would even start to engage. This was not a good sign. As I returned to traveling I-80W in a hopeful manner toward Winnemucca NV, I noticed my speed increasing - gradually - and, 10 miles later, I was almost (68mph) up to the posted speed limit of 75mph. In the 11th mile, I lost all forward motion, and came coasting to a stop on the shoulder of I-80W at high noon on the 2nd of July - ambient air temperature 106º, and probably 115º coming off the concrete of the highway. I had been hoping to reach Winnemucca, knowing that there was a Kawasaki motorcycle dealership there, but it wasn't meant to be. Of course my cell phone wouldn't reach anybody out in the middle of nowhere, except 911, whom I called and explained my situation. About 45 minutes later a very nice Nevada Highway Patrolman named Cory something-or-other, showed up and summoned a tow truck for me out of Winnemucca. About 2 hours later the truck actually appeared. To make a long story even longer, while the truck operator was strapping down my bike, I rested on the trailer tongue. When he said, "Okay, all done.", I got up, took about 2 steps and went flat on my face - heat stroke! I got back up, probably within a few seconds, climbed into the air conditioned truck and rode to Winnemucca feeling like I had been under a truck. The Kawasaki dealership ordered a new clutch for me, and 3 days and $486 later, I was ready to finish my trip, the remainder of which was uneventful.
Two weeks later I sold that motorcycle, and bought a NEW 2007 Honda VTX motorcycle, which is what I'm riding over on this trip. I don't expect any problems with the bike, which has less than 6,000 miles on it today. With cooperative weather, and timid animal life, I am looking forward to a totally uneventful month on the road. (I wonder what the odds are of being struck by a sociopathic nun, thrown by an albino dwarf from a 747, while the plane, piloted by a myopic Icelander, is cruising at 25,000 feet ...)
I'm taking my third almost annual motorcycle ride back to see my kids, and some old friends, who are about 865 miles away. Hopefully, this ride will be relatively uneventful. This is how the first two went:
Trip 1: Departed Grants Pass OR the morning of the 8th of June, in drizzling rain. Not a big deal inasmuch as I knew neither the bike nor I would melt. It quit raining about 50 miles east of Grants Pass. About 20 miles later I saw the first sign that read Snow Zone Ahead. It stirred a premonition within me, and, sure enough ... **SNOW** began falling from the sky. To make a long story short - I hit 4 snowstorms and 3 thunderstorms that first day out, and only made half the distance I had planned, which also qualified it as the most miserable day I had spent on two wheels in the entire 49 years I had been riding motorcycles (Yes, it was even more miserable than the day I totaled a bike in Las Vegas and was taken to the hospital.)
The visit itself was lovely, and then there was the return trip, during which I had a run-in with a yearling range calf. This animal had obviously placed himself in the middle of this two-lane road, waiting to ambush some human being. I had just passed a slow-moving pickup truck and was doing about 75mph when I saw it. I slid back over into my lane as soon as I could, keeping an eye on the errant calf the whole time. Not knowing what, if anything, it was going to do, I moved as close to the right-hand shoulder as I could without getting into the gravel. I was south bound and the calf was facing east - this was a good sign ... until I got within about 100 feet of it. I had slowed to about 50mph when the calf suddenly turned 180º and began ambling toward the right shoulder. "Ambling" is an excellent word to describe his movement ... not a trot, or a canter, or gallop ... just a leisurely sort of strolling movement - like what cowboys refer to as "moseying". Knowing that I didn't have sufficient time or space to go behind him, and that he could just as easily change directions again even if I did try to go behind him, I held my line along the shoulder of the road. The first thing his head hit was my left highway peg, spinning it around 180º, the second thing was my left knee (imagine being hit in the knee by a bowling ball traveling at 50mph, and then, as a final gesture of defiance, he ripped the front strap off my left-side saddlebag. I looked in my mirrors to see what the aftermath was, and I saw the calf staggering off the road and I assume that he survived our encounter. The rest of the trip was uneventful.
Trip 2: Wishing to avoid a recurrence of weather problems, I waited about 2 weeks longer to begin my second trip, leaving on the 18th of June this time. That was a good move. Other than some bothersome highway construction on I-215 and I-15 from the Salt Lake City International Airport all the way to Davis and Weber Counties 30 miles north (and perhaps even beyond, but that was as far as I was going), the trip over was relatively uneventful. I did notice that when I would come to a stop on the 2nd day of my trip, my oil warning light would come on momentarily, and then go back off. The 2nd day I was there I took the bike to a local Kawasaki dealer and asked what they might think it was, and their answer basically suggested that it was "nothing major," but that I "might want to keep an eye on it". Okie-dokie ... I can do that. A couple of days later, as I was going through one of Utah's many scenic highway construction zones, I noticed a sign that read, Speed Limit 30MPH. Glancing at my speedometer, it was reporting 100mph which, considering I was barely moving, impressed me as being an inaccurate representation of my forward velocity. As soon as I cleared the construction, I stopped the bike and looked at the speedometer which, sitting dead still, continued to register 100mph. About 3 days, and $300, later I had a shiny new, functional speedometer. Another lovely visit ... and then, there was the return trip.
Remember that little "nothing major" thing that I should "keep an eye on"? I noticed a bit of clutch slippage the last day I was there in Utah, but nothing disconcerting. It only happened when I hit the throttle with some gusto - no biggie. Or at least, no biggie while I was in civilization. Leaving a gas stop in Battle Mountain NV, I noticed that all of a sudden I had to release my clutch fully before it would even start to engage. This was not a good sign. As I returned to traveling I-80W in a hopeful manner toward Winnemucca NV, I noticed my speed increasing - gradually - and, 10 miles later, I was almost (68mph) up to the posted speed limit of 75mph. In the 11th mile, I lost all forward motion, and came coasting to a stop on the shoulder of I-80W at high noon on the 2nd of July - ambient air temperature 106º, and probably 115º coming off the concrete of the highway. I had been hoping to reach Winnemucca, knowing that there was a Kawasaki motorcycle dealership there, but it wasn't meant to be. Of course my cell phone wouldn't reach anybody out in the middle of nowhere, except 911, whom I called and explained my situation. About 45 minutes later a very nice Nevada Highway Patrolman named Cory something-or-other, showed up and summoned a tow truck for me out of Winnemucca. About 2 hours later the truck actually appeared. To make a long story even longer, while the truck operator was strapping down my bike, I rested on the trailer tongue. When he said, "Okay, all done.", I got up, took about 2 steps and went flat on my face - heat stroke! I got back up, probably within a few seconds, climbed into the air conditioned truck and rode to Winnemucca feeling like I had been under a truck. The Kawasaki dealership ordered a new clutch for me, and 3 days and $486 later, I was ready to finish my trip, the remainder of which was uneventful.
Two weeks later I sold that motorcycle, and bought a NEW 2007 Honda VTX motorcycle, which is what I'm riding over on this trip. I don't expect any problems with the bike, which has less than 6,000 miles on it today. With cooperative weather, and timid animal life, I am looking forward to a totally uneventful month on the road. (I wonder what the odds are of being struck by a sociopathic nun, thrown by an albino dwarf from a 747, while the plane, piloted by a myopic Icelander, is cruising at 25,000 feet ...)
~ Courtesy of The American Taxpayers ~
"CONGRATULATIONS! You've won an all expense paid trip around the world!" That may as well have been the way yesterdays news article began. Barack NObama's access to Secret Service "candidate protection" since May of 2007 - a record for the earliest candidate protection ever provided - prompted the Secret Service to request a budget increase of $9.1 million, due to the increased expense of "providing transportation" and security for the candidate.
Providing transportation?? I must be confused ... what is the purpose of campaign contributions? Why is the non-campaign supporting U.S. taxpayer being forced to pay for transporting either candidate? And, since we are paying for it, why isn't the travel restricted to locations where U.S. military personnel - potential voters - are the focal point of the visit, rather than schmoozing with some foreign political big-wig who doesn't get to vote in our elections ... yet?
What's wrong with this picture? It was reported today that "Obama Gets Rock Star Welcome in Berlin". That sounds innocuous enough, right? Now let's look past the spin - NObama got a "rock star welcome" from 200,000 German people (none of whom are voting in our election) because there was a free rock concert held at the same location at the same time! Did the press mention that fact ... NO! The turnout wasn't as much for him as it was for the free rock concert.
Right now, NObama has in excess of 300 "advisors" on his campaign team ... and he hasn't been elected yet! How many advisors will it take to tell him what to do if he is elected? It should be obvious that he doesn't have a clue!
Here's something else to think about - why should we concern ourselves if other countries love a particular candidate for President of this country? The reason for concern is not that the candidate himself is well-liked. The reason for concern is that most countries - for any number of reasons - wish to see the United States fail! And when our known enemies express support for a particular candidate, that should be a BIG red flag for us. If Castro, or Hugo Chavez, or Ahmadinejad is smitten by one of the candidates, that should be a real warning to the American voter that that particular candidate may not have the best interests of our country at heart!
NObama puts on a good show ... he can stir an audience ... but then, so could Adolf Hitler!
Providing transportation?? I must be confused ... what is the purpose of campaign contributions? Why is the non-campaign supporting U.S. taxpayer being forced to pay for transporting either candidate? And, since we are paying for it, why isn't the travel restricted to locations where U.S. military personnel - potential voters - are the focal point of the visit, rather than schmoozing with some foreign political big-wig who doesn't get to vote in our elections ... yet?
What's wrong with this picture? It was reported today that "Obama Gets Rock Star Welcome in Berlin". That sounds innocuous enough, right? Now let's look past the spin - NObama got a "rock star welcome" from 200,000 German people (none of whom are voting in our election) because there was a free rock concert held at the same location at the same time! Did the press mention that fact ... NO! The turnout wasn't as much for him as it was for the free rock concert.
Right now, NObama has in excess of 300 "advisors" on his campaign team ... and he hasn't been elected yet! How many advisors will it take to tell him what to do if he is elected? It should be obvious that he doesn't have a clue!
Here's something else to think about - why should we concern ourselves if other countries love a particular candidate for President of this country? The reason for concern is not that the candidate himself is well-liked. The reason for concern is that most countries - for any number of reasons - wish to see the United States fail! And when our known enemies express support for a particular candidate, that should be a BIG red flag for us. If Castro, or Hugo Chavez, or Ahmadinejad is smitten by one of the candidates, that should be a real warning to the American voter that that particular candidate may not have the best interests of our country at heart!
NObama puts on a good show ... he can stir an audience ... but then, so could Adolf Hitler!
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Is It True ...
That in trying to prove that he is a "citizen of the world" during his visit to Berlin today, Barack NObama, using his best German, said what translated into English as, "I am a jelly doughnut"?
The U.N. ~ STILL Trying to Control the Sovereign Nations of the World!
From Reuters News Service, today, July 24th, 2008: "The United Nations human rights committee said on Thursday Britain should ease back on tough "anti-terror" measures and take firm action to combat "negative public attitudes" towards Muslims."
and
"In separate comment, the 9-member body, composed of legal experts from a range of countries, also called on Ireland to open up its largely Catholic primary school system to secular education, and to moderate tough abortion laws."
EXCUSE ME?? I'm not sure the Crown, or its subjects, would benefit greatly from lax anti-terror laws. As for "negative public attitudes", could it be that those attitudes have been earned by the Muzzies? The Muslim community has probably been responsible for more terrorist acts within England than has the IRA. And, inasmuch as Ireland's population is PRIMARILY CATHOLIC, could that have something to do with the fact that Ireland's school system is primarily Catholic? Ya think? Why shouldn't their school system reflect that? Has the U.N. even suggested that the Arabic nations modify their Islamic school systems (such as they are)? NO! They wouldn't want to "offend" the Muslims ... but to offend Christians, of any stripe, is fine with the U.N.. The curriculum of school systems is, and always has been, reflective of the national culture. In many countries, education always takes a back seat to theological and political indoctrination. Instead of providing "secondary education", education becomes secondary! That doesn't make it right, but it is the way it is.
I hope, for their own sake, that the British government summarily rejects the bogus U.N. Human Rights Committees recommendations, tells them "Piss off and mind your own business!", and then drops out of the United Nations. But, that's just the way I see things ...
Gil
EXCUSE ME?? I'm not sure the Crown, or its subjects, would benefit greatly from lax anti-terror laws. As for "negative public attitudes", could it be that those attitudes have been earned by the Muzzies? The Muslim community has probably been responsible for more terrorist acts within England than has the IRA. And, inasmuch as Ireland's population is PRIMARILY CATHOLIC, could that have something to do with the fact that Ireland's school system is primarily Catholic? Ya think? Why shouldn't their school system reflect that? Has the U.N. even suggested that the Arabic nations modify their Islamic school systems (such as they are)? NO! They wouldn't want to "offend" the Muslims ... but to offend Christians, of any stripe, is fine with the U.N.. The curriculum of school systems is, and always has been, reflective of the national culture. In many countries, education always takes a back seat to theological and political indoctrination. Instead of providing "secondary education", education becomes secondary! That doesn't make it right, but it is the way it is.
I hope, for their own sake, that the British government summarily rejects the bogus U.N. Human Rights Committees recommendations, tells them "Piss off and mind your own business!", and then drops out of the United Nations. But, that's just the way I see things ...
Gil
Is Being "Commander-in-Chief" Easier Than Performing Brain surgery?
Putting Barack NObama in the White House, as Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces, makes about as much sense as letting the person who grooms your pets perform brain surgery on your child! If you were in the military, would you want all the life and death decisions being made for you and your comrades to be made by a person with NO military experience ... none at all? Not even Jr. ROTC training! But, even more than that, the President of the United States makes life and death decisions about the entire COUNTRY! WAKE UP AMERICA! Shake off the bonds of that hypnotic trance you seem to be in, and PAY ATTENTION to what the man has done, has said, and what he has proven he stands for (if you can quantify 'nothing').
Gil
Gil
NObama Snubs America's Fighting Men and Women ... Is Innaccurate
If you have read any of my previous postings, you will know that I am not Barak NObama's #1 fan. However, I received the following email yesterday and felt it was worth bringing to your attention (whoever you may happen to be). Knowing the love affair the media has for NObama, it wouldn't surprise me to discover this was absolutely true. On the other hand, understanding the dirty tricks of politics, I would be equally unsurprised to find that it's nothing more than a believable lie.
So, after much soul-searching, I decided to post it only with the following disclaimer: I have not been able to ascertain/verify the origin(s) of this email, nor do I know it to be true and accurate reportage in any degree. If it is untrue then shame on those who prepared it, and I apologize in advance for being taken in by their chicanery. If it is true, then shame on our own media for not reporting it. (The press was not granted freedom by the 1st Amendment so they could lie to the American people, but rather to protect them from retribution when they were telling the truth ... rare as those occasions may be these days). The following is that email, in it's entirety and unedited by me - (I discovered on 30 August 2008 that the following is incorrect, and quite possibly designed to make NObama look worse than he really is - if that's humanly possible)
In service,
CPT Jeffrey S. Porter
Battle Captain
TF Wasatch
American Soldier"
Personally, I have some strong doubts about any statement which cannot be easily traced back to it's source - especially political statements. However, on the chance that there is any truth to the above email at all, I would rather "err on the side of caution", and attempt to bring it to the attention of the American people. Ultimately, as in all things, it's your call.
Gil
So, after much soul-searching, I decided to post it only with the following disclaimer: I have not been able to ascertain/verify the origin(s) of this email, nor do I know it to be true and accurate reportage in any degree. If it is untrue then shame on those who prepared it, and I apologize in advance for being taken in by their chicanery. If it is true, then shame on our own media for not reporting it. (The press was not granted freedom by the 1st Amendment so they could lie to the American people, but rather to protect them from retribution when they were telling the truth ... rare as those occasions may be these days). The following is that email, in it's entirety and unedited by me - (I discovered on 30 August 2008 that the following is incorrect, and quite possibly designed to make NObama look worse than he really is - if that's humanly possible)
"Hello everyone,
As you know I am not a very political person. I just wanted to pass along that Senator Obama came to Bagram Afghanistan for about an hour on his visit to "The War Zone". I wanted to share with you what happened. He got off the plan and got into a bullet proof vehicle, got to the area to meet with the Major General (2 Star) who is the commander here at Bagram. As the Soldiers where lined up to shake his hand he blew them off and didn't say a word as he went into the conference room to meet the General. As he finished, the vehicles took him to the ClamShell (pretty much a big top tent that military personnel can play basketball or work out in with weights) so he could take his publicity pictures playing basketball. He again shunned the opportunity to talk to Soldiers to thank them for their service. So really he was just here to make a showing for the American's back home that he is their candidate for President. I think that if you are going to make an effort to come all the way over here you would thank those that are providing the freedom that they are providing for you. I swear we got more thanks from the NBA Basketball Players or the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders than from one of the Senators, who wants to be the President of the United States. I just don't understand how anyone would want him to be our Commander-and-Chief. It was almost that he was scared to be around those that provide the freedom for him and our great country.
In service,
CPT Jeffrey S. Porter
Battle Captain
TF Wasatch
American Soldier"
Personally, I have some strong doubts about any statement which cannot be easily traced back to it's source - especially political statements. However, on the chance that there is any truth to the above email at all, I would rather "err on the side of caution", and attempt to bring it to the attention of the American people. Ultimately, as in all things, it's your call.
Gil
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Hero - A Word Synonymous With Unbelievable Courage
After receiving an email about this, I did a quick check of the facts and found some additional information, which I have appended at the bottom. Sadly, none of the references I found were national media, but various individual and organizational blogs. This fact speaks poorly, but accurately, of our liberal, left-wing, 'blame America first' national news media.
"PO2 (EOD2) Mike Monsoor, a Navy EOD Technician, was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor posthumously for jumping on a grenade in Iraq, giving his life to save his fellow Seals.
During Mike Monsoor's funeral in San Diego, as his coffin was being moved from the hearse to the grave site at Ft. Rosecrans National Cemetery, SEALs were lined up on both sides of the pallbearers route forming a column of two's, with the coffin moving up the center. As Mike's coffin passed, each SEAL, having removed his gold Trident from his uniform, slapped it down embedding the Trident in the wooden coffin.
The slaps were audible from across the cemetery; by the time the coffin arrived grave side, it looked as though it had a gold inlay from all the Tridents pinned to it. This was a fitting send-off for a warrior hero."
This should be front-page news instead of the crap we see everyday. Since the media won't make this news, I choose to make it news by posting it for all to see. I am damned proud of those who serve in our military. If you are proud too, please pass this on. If not then rest assured that these fine men and women of our military will continue to serve and protect.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
"On 29 September 2006, 25-year-old Petty Officer 2nd Class Michael A. Monsoor was killed during operations in enemy-held territory at Ar Ramadi, Iraq, when he threw himself on top of a grenade in order to save the lives of his fellow SEALS. In April 2008, Michael Monsoor (who had already been posthumously awarded the Silver Star for his actions in a 9 May 2006 incident, when he and another SEAL pulled a wounded team member to safety amidst gunfire) was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor. His funeral, attended (in the words of President Bush) by "nearly every SEAL on the West Coast," was held on 12 October 2006 at Fort Rosecrans National Cemetery in San Diego." Actions such as this define the TRUE meaning of the word HERO! Simply being captured by the enemy does not make one a hero, even if the government designates it as such because they feel the need to identify a female "hero" in Iraq. Any fool can get captured. The real heroes were those military members who risked their own lives to retrieve the captive female soldier. Heroism is an heroic act - above and beyond what one could reasonably expect from a human being under the existing circumstances. Why trivialize the one word that truly should describe exemplary performance in the face of overwhelming odds? For those of you who have no real concept of the term 'hero' I would suggest you research two names:1. Sergeant Alvin C. York (most decorated U.S. combat soldier of WWI)
2. Audie L. Murphy (most decorated U.S. combat soldier of WWII)
Through no fault of their own, both these fine soldiers survived their war. They placed themselves in harm's way repeatedly during their years of service. After the war York returned to Tennessee, where he raised money to improve education in his valley, and lived the relatively normal life of a Tennessee mountain man during the early-to-mid 1900's. He died at age 76.
During a successful film career, Murphy was plagued by the mental residue of war (which we now recognize as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder). He was killed in a plane crash at the age of 46.
"Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends."
God bless Michael Monsoor and those who have served and still serve in the defense of our nation!
Gil
Saturday, July 19, 2008
Whatever Happened To Common Sense?
Whatever happened to our ability to judiciously apply something called 'common sense' in the USA? It appears that more and more we see less and less of it! Take our penchant for suing people/corporations and other entities. We have become the most litigious (sue happy) society the world has ever known. Right now, I can almost hear you thinking, "Yeah ... why is that?" Like all other things that simply are, it is because we permitted it to be, and we continue to do so right up to whatever day you're reading this! Our legal system is overwhelmed by the demands of morons and their money-hungry, ambulance-chasing shyster lawyers. One would think that there would be a point at which our courts would say, "No, you have no case - thank you so much for bothering us - but you may not bring suit against anybody for that." Case in point ... the little old lady who sued McDonald's, and won a $7 million judgment against them, because she chose to place a container of hot coffee between her legs (no fault of McDonald's), the coffee spilled (again, through no fault of McDonald's), burning what was probably a little-used part of her anatomy and causing her great discomfort. Yeah, I know it's old news, but it is THE prime example of this posting's title, so let's follow the steps here:
But, instead, many courts are hearing more nuisance cases each week, and finding in favor of the plaintiff! Could it be that it's a matter of the legal profession taking care of it's own? Insuring a substantial income for even the least qualified of their brethren? This is the same reason our laws have become so complicated that the average person can no longer understand them. They used to be pretty straight-forward: "You don't do this or you go to jail." Now there are at least 11 excuses, 15 exceptions, and 47 acceptable explanations that allow the criminal to avoid going to prison. But, sadly, there are no such compensations for the victim.
We are "a nation of laws". There is no requirement for justice in our legal system any more. The law rarely takes justice into consideration these days. If you should ever have to go to court, and you go expecting justice, don't be surprised when you don't get it. Law is generally the only item on their menu ...
- The old bat willfully and of her own volition, drove her automobile into a McDonald's Drive-Thru lane.
- Upon reaching the speaker box, she probably said in a loud, clear voice (or maybe in a cracking, enfeebled voice) "Coffee."
- When people order "coffee" at a restaurant - even a "fast food" restaurant (a designation which prompts some people to question validity of either word) it is normally served in a cup, at a temperature required to produce said beverage. The only exception to this would be if the patron said, "iced coffee."
- When we order "coffee" we do not expect to get coffee beans or an empty container which at one time may have held coffee. Nor do we expect to get a handful or pocketful of coffee. What we have foolishly come to expect, is that the coffee will be presented to us HOT and in a vessel of some kind. Where we choose to place this vessel of HOT liquid is entirely up to us. The restaurant does not try to influence us in this decision by having suggestions printed on the cup, like "TRY BALANCING THIS CUP ON YOUR HEAD AS YOU DRIVE AWAY!" or "HOT COFFEE PLACED BETWEEN YOUR THIGHS ON A COLD DAY FEELS GREAT!"
But, instead, many courts are hearing more nuisance cases each week, and finding in favor of the plaintiff! Could it be that it's a matter of the legal profession taking care of it's own? Insuring a substantial income for even the least qualified of their brethren? This is the same reason our laws have become so complicated that the average person can no longer understand them. They used to be pretty straight-forward: "You don't do this or you go to jail." Now there are at least 11 excuses, 15 exceptions, and 47 acceptable explanations that allow the criminal to avoid going to prison. But, sadly, there are no such compensations for the victim.
We are "a nation of laws". There is no requirement for justice in our legal system any more. The law rarely takes justice into consideration these days. If you should ever have to go to court, and you go expecting justice, don't be surprised when you don't get it. Law is generally the only item on their menu ...
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
"World Court" Says U,S, Must Delay Mexican Death Sentences
The "World Court" has ordered the United States of America to suspend the execution of 51 Mexican nationals sentenced to death, because they weren't informed of their 'right' to contact the Mexican Consul. Did I just hear you ask, "Who the hell is the World Court to be issuing orders to anybody?" Well, the official name is the Permanent International Court of Justice, and it is the judicial arm of the United Nations. These Mexicans were not sentenced to death for jaywalking - they obviously took a life, or were engaged in an activity that resulted in the willful taking of a life.
This is the same United Nations that brought us the infamous Article 29 of their 'Universal Declaration of Human Rights', which reads -
2. In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
3. These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations. (red emphasis added)
Well, the purpose of the U.N is world domination, through the eventual establishment of a One World Government, and their principles are certainly questionable!
And here are our options:
1. Comply with the order (and move one step closer to giving up our sovereignty and being ruled by an outside entity).
2. Ignore the order (sending a message to the U.N. that we will not be dictated to by anybody.)
3. Ignore the order, nationalize the building and the property on which the U.N. sits, send the U.N. to France or some other communist/socialist left-wing country.
Personally, I favor the 3rd option. The U.N. is controlled by 3rd world countries with little insight into the workings of a democracy, and little understanding of the term 'human rights'. The U.N. has never exhibited any ability to influence the dictators of the world, or to sway them from their goals. U.N. 'Peacekeeping Forces' keep the peace by becoming invisible, and hiding inside their armored vehicles. The U.N. is basically nothing more than an international vacation spot for the political big wigs of the world, whose positions are entirely dependent upon sticking to the ideals of the government of their Mother country! Oh, yeah ... and they can literally get away with murder while they're in this country, because they have 'diplomatic immunity'! Why should we have to put up with them?
The Texas Supreme Court has already as much as told the PICJ to 'piss off and mind your own business' (good for them!), and the national government should follow their lead.
"GET THE U.N. OUT OF THE U.S." is a favorite saying among members of an American organization that some people think is radical, but to me it makes sense. We benefit in no way from the presence of the UN on U.S. soil. In fact, as our reward for having them here, we are permitted to pay annual 'dues' that are higher than those paid by the next 5 highest nations combined!
This is the same United Nations that brought us the infamous Article 29 of their 'Universal Declaration of Human Rights', which reads -
Article 29
1. Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.2. In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
3. These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations. (red emphasis added)
Well, the purpose of the U.N is world domination, through the eventual establishment of a One World Government, and their principles are certainly questionable!
And here are our options:
1. Comply with the order (and move one step closer to giving up our sovereignty and being ruled by an outside entity).
2. Ignore the order (sending a message to the U.N. that we will not be dictated to by anybody.)
3. Ignore the order, nationalize the building and the property on which the U.N. sits, send the U.N. to France or some other communist/socialist left-wing country.
Personally, I favor the 3rd option. The U.N. is controlled by 3rd world countries with little insight into the workings of a democracy, and little understanding of the term 'human rights'. The U.N. has never exhibited any ability to influence the dictators of the world, or to sway them from their goals. U.N. 'Peacekeeping Forces' keep the peace by becoming invisible, and hiding inside their armored vehicles. The U.N. is basically nothing more than an international vacation spot for the political big wigs of the world, whose positions are entirely dependent upon sticking to the ideals of the government of their Mother country! Oh, yeah ... and they can literally get away with murder while they're in this country, because they have 'diplomatic immunity'! Why should we have to put up with them?
The Texas Supreme Court has already as much as told the PICJ to 'piss off and mind your own business' (good for them!), and the national government should follow their lead.
"GET THE U.N. OUT OF THE U.S." is a favorite saying among members of an American organization that some people think is radical, but to me it makes sense. We benefit in no way from the presence of the UN on U.S. soil. In fact, as our reward for having them here, we are permitted to pay annual 'dues' that are higher than those paid by the next 5 highest nations combined!
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Terror Suspects Can Challenge U.S. Detention: Court
The 4th U.S. Court o f Appeals , in Richmond, VA, today ruled that the President can order the imprisonment of an al Queda suspect in the United States, but the detainee must be able to challenge his status as an "enemy combatant." This has some interesting implications:
1. Are people engaged in combat against U.S. Military forces not de facto enemy combatants?
2. If not, then why were they carrying AK-47 assault rifles, and shooting at our soldiers? Did they confuse the 1st Infantry Division with a very large, noisy mob of rabbits?
3. If their capture was not the product of direct combat (i.e. not shooting or involved in obvious guerrilla activities, such as storing weapons, making/planting IEDs, etc.), but rather captured on reliable intelligence information indicating that they were enemy agents, should they be tried by a military tribunal, or in the civilian court system?
Let's assume that conditions 1 & 2 are both met, and the people we're talking about are genuine 'enemy combatants.' Historically, and in keeping with established U.S. military tradition and regulations, Prisoners of War (POW's) have been incarcerated without further legal proceedings for the duration of the conflict, whether it was 6 days or 10 years.
Suddenly somebody wants to change 200+ years of legal precedent to accommodate the uniqueness of the ongoing Iraq War. They want these terrorist hairballs to be tried in civilian U.S. courts! Could it be that shyster attorneys see an opportunity to make a lot of taxpayer money by defending these POS? Oh - my error - POWs! Another historical precedent is that anybody engaging in actions against the military, who was not wearing the uniform of the opposing military, was considered a spy and summarily executed - post haste! None of these cowardly, bottom-feeding scumbags wears a uniform of any kind (but if you're a left-wing, bleeding-heart, commie pinko, 'blame America first', Jane Fonda liberal, you've probably convinced yourself that the consistent lack of a uniform is their uniform, and should therefore be accepted as such).
Absurd actions, such as trying these bozos in civilian courts, will not only clog our Federal Court System, but will burn up tens of millions of our tax dollars that could otherwise be put to much better use. If they were involved in any manner working against our forces, then they are not 'civilians', but enemy combatants, and should be dealt with as such according to military law! But that's just my thoughts on the matter ... KILL 'EM ALL, and let their mythical Allah sort 'em out!
1. Are people engaged in combat against U.S. Military forces not de facto enemy combatants?
2. If not, then why were they carrying AK-47 assault rifles, and shooting at our soldiers? Did they confuse the 1st Infantry Division with a very large, noisy mob of rabbits?
3. If their capture was not the product of direct combat (i.e. not shooting or involved in obvious guerrilla activities, such as storing weapons, making/planting IEDs, etc.), but rather captured on reliable intelligence information indicating that they were enemy agents, should they be tried by a military tribunal, or in the civilian court system?
Let's assume that conditions 1 & 2 are both met, and the people we're talking about are genuine 'enemy combatants.' Historically, and in keeping with established U.S. military tradition and regulations, Prisoners of War (POW's) have been incarcerated without further legal proceedings for the duration of the conflict, whether it was 6 days or 10 years.
Suddenly somebody wants to change 200+ years of legal precedent to accommodate the uniqueness of the ongoing Iraq War. They want these terrorist hairballs to be tried in civilian U.S. courts! Could it be that shyster attorneys see an opportunity to make a lot of taxpayer money by defending these POS? Oh - my error - POWs! Another historical precedent is that anybody engaging in actions against the military, who was not wearing the uniform of the opposing military, was considered a spy and summarily executed - post haste! None of these cowardly, bottom-feeding scumbags wears a uniform of any kind (but if you're a left-wing, bleeding-heart, commie pinko, 'blame America first', Jane Fonda liberal, you've probably convinced yourself that the consistent lack of a uniform is their uniform, and should therefore be accepted as such).
Absurd actions, such as trying these bozos in civilian courts, will not only clog our Federal Court System, but will burn up tens of millions of our tax dollars that could otherwise be put to much better use. If they were involved in any manner working against our forces, then they are not 'civilians', but enemy combatants, and should be dealt with as such according to military law! But that's just my thoughts on the matter ... KILL 'EM ALL, and let their mythical Allah sort 'em out!
Defining The Word "Obscene" in Practical Terms
The CEO of Occidental Petroleum Corp., Ray Irani was compensated at the rate of $34,700,000.00 in 2007. That's $133,461.53 per day (which is a bit more than 5 times the average annual income of working-class Americans), or $219.23 per minute! I do understand the basic tenets of the "free market", but at what point does compensation for services rendered become obscenely ludicrous ?
During a time when the average American worker is worrying about housing, feeding, and clothing his/her family, Irani is making the workers weekly wage in approximately 2 minutes and 13 seconds! How can we even imagine that someone living at that level has the slightest concern about Joe Average? Granted, Irani is the highest paid oil company CEO in the USA, but the other gas bandits are right up there in the same rarefied atmosphere, drawing anywhere from $5.6M to $25M compensation packages.
How much money is the time and talent of one human being, who has not personally created the business from the ground up, worth? The entrepreneur is worth whatever he can make. On the other hand, someone who is basically a nothing more than a manager should have more realistic compensation.
During a time when the average American worker is worrying about housing, feeding, and clothing his/her family, Irani is making the workers weekly wage in approximately 2 minutes and 13 seconds! How can we even imagine that someone living at that level has the slightest concern about Joe Average? Granted, Irani is the highest paid oil company CEO in the USA, but the other gas bandits are right up there in the same rarefied atmosphere, drawing anywhere from $5.6M to $25M compensation packages.
How much money is the time and talent of one human being, who has not personally created the business from the ground up, worth? The entrepreneur is worth whatever he can make. On the other hand, someone who is basically a nothing more than a manager should have more realistic compensation.
Sunday, July 13, 2008
Another Round of "Who Cares?" - Pitt and Jolie Aren't The First People to Have Twins
Why does anybody really care about Angelina Jolie giving birth to twins? This is not the first set of twins in recorded history, for Pete's sake! It is, however, and indication that the Brangelina's are now buying into their own "super star" status, that elevates them above the rest of humanity. I could understand the hoopla if Angelina had given birth to a litter of octuplets ... or even octopi ... either of which would have certainly been a newsworthy event. But, she didn't ... and, in order to insure her goddess-like stature was maintained for this essentially mundane event, the Pitt-Jolie empire bought the entire 5th floor of a maternity hospital in France for the final weeks of the 'event!' I wonder how many "lesser women" got less-than-excellent treatment at that facility during this egregious display of stellar selfishness? One room with, perhaps, two bodyguards posted outside the door, should have provided more than enough exclusivity to satisfy the privacy needs of any mortal woman.
And the press is guessing that the first 'official' photographs of the twins will be worth between $10M-$15M! Photographs of the baby Jesus might be worth that much to somebody. Or if the kids have two heads or six legs each, that might be worth a bundle! But, as far as I am aware, these are just two normal, healthy, human infants. If it's all about the money, maybe Angelina could auction off some of their dirty diapers on eBay, and pick up a few extra dollars that way, too. Perhaps the parents chose to have the babies born in France so the kids could be French citizens - which is much classier than being Americans ... at least in the eyes of the liberal left. Hollywood is entertaining, but most of the people who are in the industry seem to confuse the Hollywood culture/ethics/elitism with the real world. That's like comparing Disney's Magical Kingdom to Fidel Castro's Cuba!
Are our lives as working-class Americans so boring that we feel a need to deify celebrities? Keep in mind that these are people who don't even know YOU exist!
And the press is guessing that the first 'official' photographs of the twins will be worth between $10M-$15M! Photographs of the baby Jesus might be worth that much to somebody. Or if the kids have two heads or six legs each, that might be worth a bundle! But, as far as I am aware, these are just two normal, healthy, human infants. If it's all about the money, maybe Angelina could auction off some of their dirty diapers on eBay, and pick up a few extra dollars that way, too. Perhaps the parents chose to have the babies born in France so the kids could be French citizens - which is much classier than being Americans ... at least in the eyes of the liberal left. Hollywood is entertaining, but most of the people who are in the industry seem to confuse the Hollywood culture/ethics/elitism with the real world. That's like comparing Disney's Magical Kingdom to Fidel Castro's Cuba!
Are our lives as working-class Americans so boring that we feel a need to deify celebrities? Keep in mind that these are people who don't even know YOU exist!
Saturday, July 12, 2008
China and Russia Veto U.N. Zimbabwe Embargo
Exactly WHERE is the element of surprise in that? China and Russia are not well known for their support of either freedom or fair and open elections.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Constitutional Erosion In The United States of America
If you have read my previous postings, particularly those of July 8, 2008, you are probably aware that I believe there are some very serious problems in the liberal courts interpretations of our Constitution (the Federal 9th 'Circus' Court of Appeals in San Francisco, California is probably the worst offender). I refer to the rapid degradation of the supposed individual and collective "rights" provided by our Constitution as "Constitutional Erosion". The First Amendment is under constant attack by those who are envious, resentful, or simply hateful toward us for reasons both real and imaginary.
In less than 250 years, we have built a country and culture that has surpassed, in almost every respect, cultures with hundreds - and even thousands - of years head start on us. We are a constant reminder that unbridled creativity, ambition, effort, and ingenuity, coupled with the right of the individual to profit from the fruits of his/her labors, can easily surpass lock-step, sloth, laxness, and 'state owned' industries. Who are these enemies of Democracy? Just pick a continent from the list below.
These are the Constitutional Articles of Amendment most frequently under assault or abuse - (Amendments 1-10 inclusive, constitute the Bill of Rights):
1st - Freedom of religion, speech, the press, and peaceful assembly, and petitioning the government for redress of grievances. (assault/abuse)
2nd - Right to keep and bear arms. (resolved last week by the "Supremes") (assault)
4th - Right to be secure in your person, home, papers and effects, and against unreasonable search and seizure. (abuse)
That's 30% of our Bill of Rights either under constant legal attack, or being abused by representatives of various government agencies. When will we wake up and smell the coffee (or Postum, Pero, Caro, etc.)? When will we demand that our elected 'representatives' begin representing the expressed will of their constituencies? When will we take back our streets and schools from punks?
In less than 250 years, we have built a country and culture that has surpassed, in almost every respect, cultures with hundreds - and even thousands - of years head start on us. We are a constant reminder that unbridled creativity, ambition, effort, and ingenuity, coupled with the right of the individual to profit from the fruits of his/her labors, can easily surpass lock-step, sloth, laxness, and 'state owned' industries. Who are these enemies of Democracy? Just pick a continent from the list below.
- Europe? The government of France has been resentful of the United States ever since we stopped German from becoming their national language in the 1940s. Initially they were overjoyed, until they realized that their only real source of pride during WWII was the French Underground. They also discovered that French General Charles De Gaulle got to lead the victory parade down the Champs Elysees only because of the magnanimity of the United States of America. Italy? They chose to be on the wrong side. Germany? They were the wrong side, but did take 3rd place in the war!
- Asia? Well, let's see ... China? Seems that from 1898 to 1900 there was a bit of unrest there called the Boxer Rebellion, which was designed to eliminate all western influencein China. U.S. sailors and marines made u a large part of the 2,100 man international force that quelled the rebellion. Japan? Japan gets the 2nd place ribbon for WWII, but has adjusted nicely for the most part.
- Africa? Although not as openly hostile toward the west, most African nations are jealous of what we have accomplished. With well over a thousand years of history behind them, they have chosen to remain living in the dark ages.
- South America? Generally dictatorships and controlled elections are the order of the day in South American countries. Venezuela is the only South American country that is openly hostile toward the USA at this particular point in time, but given South America's history, that is subject to change at a moments notice ... as is the government of any S.A. country.
These are the Constitutional Articles of Amendment most frequently under assault or abuse - (Amendments 1-10 inclusive, constitute the Bill of Rights):
1st - Freedom of religion, speech, the press, and peaceful assembly, and petitioning the government for redress of grievances. (assault/abuse)
2nd - Right to keep and bear arms. (resolved last week by the "Supremes") (assault)
4th - Right to be secure in your person, home, papers and effects, and against unreasonable search and seizure. (abuse)
That's 30% of our Bill of Rights either under constant legal attack, or being abused by representatives of various government agencies. When will we wake up and smell the coffee (or Postum, Pero, Caro, etc.)? When will we demand that our elected 'representatives' begin representing the expressed will of their constituencies? When will we take back our streets and schools from punks?
Freedom of Speech vs The "Fairness Doctrine" = The U.S. Constitution vs. Congress
Here we go again ... House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has decided we should - once again - ignore that pesky old document called the Constitution, and do things the way the loony left thinks they should be done. That damned First Amendment just keeps impeding their progress toward turning the USA into a genuine 3rd world country. Amendment I says, in part, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press ..." etc. I added the emphasis for ... emphasis! Where is the need for discussion there? Does some moron not understand the meaning of the word "abridged"? Here's the first 3 meanings shown in one 'Dictionary of The English Language':
I'm assuming that - if you have read that - you can, in fact, read! Comprehension is an entirely different skill though, so let me make it eve more clear: Congress cannot make into law anything that would lessen your ability to say what you wish ... other than the recently created concepts of "hate speech" and "hate crimes", anyway. (Am I wrong, or is defining hate speech, and making it illegal, creating a law that abbreviates our right to free speech? Keep in mind though, that through the exercise of hateful free speech, you may discover the meaning of "Can o' Whup-ass".) Nowhere in the Constitution does it guarantee us the right not to have our feelings hurt!
At the same time we must understand that the Constitution does not require the Government, or any other entity, to provide a platform for your free expression of thoughts. If there is no commercial support for the way you exercise your 1st Amendment rights, then you have no right to expect somebody else to pick up the tab! The so-called "Fairness Doctrine" would be more appropriately called the "Liberal Left Loser Doctrine". If the ultra-liberal NPR (National Public Radio) can't hold its own in the marketplace - even with the assistance of George Soros' millions of dollars - that should be an indication that the vast majority of American citizens don't believe in the crap that's being broadcast on NPR!
| 1. to shorten by omissions while retaining the basic contents: to abridge a reference book. 2. to reduce or lessen in duration, scope, authority, etc.; diminish, curtail: to abridge a visit; to abridge one’s freedom. 3. to deprive; cut off. |
At the same time we must understand that the Constitution does not require the Government, or any other entity, to provide a platform for your free expression of thoughts. If there is no commercial support for the way you exercise your 1st Amendment rights, then you have no right to expect somebody else to pick up the tab! The so-called "Fairness Doctrine" would be more appropriately called the "Liberal Left Loser Doctrine". If the ultra-liberal NPR (National Public Radio) can't hold its own in the marketplace - even with the assistance of George Soros' millions of dollars - that should be an indication that the vast majority of American citizens don't believe in the crap that's being broadcast on NPR!
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
NObama Has Testicular Cancer? Jesse Jackson to Perform Surgery!
Apparently Senator Barack NObama has testicular cancer. My assumption is based upon Jesse Jacskon's remark today, that, speaking of NObama, he would "like to cut his nuts off." I didn't know that Jackson had a degree in medicine ... but hey, go for it, Jesse! (Funny how a man's true character shows when he thinks nobody is watching, and how he says what he really thinks when he believes the microphone is turned off.)
How Long Is Not A Chinaman ...
it's a question about my Blog. How long will it last, you ask? As long as there are issues that continue to gripe my ass ... and there seems to be a never-ending supply of them!
While I'm On The Subject of The Constitution ...
and the United States Supreme Court, the "Supremes" finally clarified a question that's been in dispute for decades. Does the Second Amendment to the Constitution give private citizens the right to keep and bear arms? And the answer was ... (drum roll, please) ... YES! (I know that somewhere out there is a dyslexic who now plans to keep and arm bears, but that's a whole different issue). Although it was a close call, the 5-4 vote was a long-overdue victory for those of us who believe in the Constitution as it was written. After the revolutionary war, we didn't have much of a standing, professional army, hence: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The "Militia" were volunteer citizens who would bear arms for the public defense. Following the line of thought in my preceding post, once again the importance of this Amendment is emphasized by its being placed in the second position of the Bill of Rights - which are the first ten Amendments to the Constitution.
The Court, by majority opinion, ruled that the citizens of this country have the Constitutionally guaranteed right to own firearms, but stopped short of saying everybody has the right to "bear" them. One of the 19 definitions given for the word bear in the American Heritage Dictionary is "to carry from one place to another; transport". We are well aware that there are certain people who should not be allowed to even spell the word gun, much less own or carry one! Under what circumstances, and in what manner, should this 'right' be modified? I do not believe that convicted felons, or those persons adjudged mentally ill, or convicted of any crime of violence should be allowed to own or carry firearms. And that is, at present, the way the Federal law is written. I would add "gang members" to that list.
Federal requirements for registration of firearms ... I have mixed feelings about this one. I think the arms owning/bearing citizenry would feel more secure if the owner of firearms was registered, as opposed to registering by make, model, and serial number each weapon owned by the individual. The Feds could still require their $10 phone call, but only to verify that the applicant has been subjected to a background investigation by the FBI, and they could find nothing in that persons history that would disqualify him/her from purchasing an additional weapon. They do not need to know how many of what the law abiding citizen has in his/her possession. That would make a 'gun grab' by the government, or invaders, just too easy.
Those of us who hold a CCW (Carry Concealed Weapon permit), issued by any state, should be permitted to carry concealed in all states, inasmuch as all CCW holders must have the same FBI background investigation, over and above the basic Federal authorization to purchase a firearm. As for variations from state-to-state for the qualifications (background investigation, training, and/or demonstration of proficiency, etc.) such requirements should remain within the purview of the Tenth Amendment ("The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.") provision for "States' rights". However, the Feds have a way of leveraging states into submitting to their collective will - the threat of withholding Federal tax monies that have been earmarked for things like schools, highway improvements, and various "pork" projects.
Before it becomes a perfect system, there will have to be many concepts proffered, many definitions clarified, and precise procedures established to ensure the Constitutional application of the Second Amendment, while State governments ensure that the general population is protected from those who have, through personal actions, and adjudication, proven themselves to be less- than-good risks around firearms. There has to be a provision for the application of common sense for the common good involved.
The Court, by majority opinion, ruled that the citizens of this country have the Constitutionally guaranteed right to own firearms, but stopped short of saying everybody has the right to "bear" them. One of the 19 definitions given for the word bear in the American Heritage Dictionary is "to carry from one place to another; transport". We are well aware that there are certain people who should not be allowed to even spell the word gun, much less own or carry one! Under what circumstances, and in what manner, should this 'right' be modified? I do not believe that convicted felons, or those persons adjudged mentally ill, or convicted of any crime of violence should be allowed to own or carry firearms. And that is, at present, the way the Federal law is written. I would add "gang members" to that list.
Federal requirements for registration of firearms ... I have mixed feelings about this one. I think the arms owning/bearing citizenry would feel more secure if the owner of firearms was registered, as opposed to registering by make, model, and serial number each weapon owned by the individual. The Feds could still require their $10 phone call, but only to verify that the applicant has been subjected to a background investigation by the FBI, and they could find nothing in that persons history that would disqualify him/her from purchasing an additional weapon. They do not need to know how many of what the law abiding citizen has in his/her possession. That would make a 'gun grab' by the government, or invaders, just too easy.
Those of us who hold a CCW (Carry Concealed Weapon permit), issued by any state, should be permitted to carry concealed in all states, inasmuch as all CCW holders must have the same FBI background investigation, over and above the basic Federal authorization to purchase a firearm. As for variations from state-to-state for the qualifications (background investigation, training, and/or demonstration of proficiency, etc.) such requirements should remain within the purview of the Tenth Amendment ("The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.") provision for "States' rights". However, the Feds have a way of leveraging states into submitting to their collective will - the threat of withholding Federal tax monies that have been earmarked for things like schools, highway improvements, and various "pork" projects.
Before it becomes a perfect system, there will have to be many concepts proffered, many definitions clarified, and precise procedures established to ensure the Constitutional application of the Second Amendment, while State governments ensure that the general population is protected from those who have, through personal actions, and adjudication, proven themselves to be less- than-good risks around firearms. There has to be a provision for the application of common sense for the common good involved.
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Separation of Church and State - What Is SO HARD To Understand?
The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States says (in part), "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .". There is absolutely no other reference in the Constitution to the so-called edict requiring separation of church and state. Simply that Congress will not establish a [understood as national] religion, nor will they interfere with the individual or organized group practice of religion. That's it. Period! End of discussion.
How do we get so bogged down in the issue of SOCAS? Notice the placement of this Amendment ... 1st! Not 6th, or 14th or 21st ... FIRST! That should tell us how much importance our founding fathers put upon this principle. It was the most important of all the considerations in the development of an embryonic Democratic Republic. The bottom line is that the Constitution restricts the government from meddling in the affairs of any church, supposedly protecting religious institutions from being dictated to by outside forces. Yet the government does so incessantly!
Where has the 'government of the people, for the people, and by the people' encroached upon our Constitution? Everything from -
There is something else provided for in our Constitution, it is called "States rights." Here are the items I personally think should be States Rights issues:
How can we make something so simply written, in our own native language, so complicated? It's called an agenda, and there are a lot of people with multiple agendas - each bringing us one step closer to the elimination of our Democratic Republic.
How do we get so bogged down in the issue of SOCAS? Notice the placement of this Amendment ... 1st! Not 6th, or 14th or 21st ... FIRST! That should tell us how much importance our founding fathers put upon this principle. It was the most important of all the considerations in the development of an embryonic Democratic Republic. The bottom line is that the Constitution restricts the government from meddling in the affairs of any church, supposedly protecting religious institutions from being dictated to by outside forces. Yet the government does so incessantly!
Where has the 'government of the people, for the people, and by the people' encroached upon our Constitution? Everything from -
- 1. the removal of prayer (which was always voluntary during my years in school) in the public schools, to
- 2. the display of manger scenes on public property at Christmas, to
- 3. allowing suit for the removal of the words "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance (a person could just not say them if they didn't believe in God),
- 4. the removal of the Ten Commandments and the Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court from that courthouse, and, most recently,
- 5. upset over the state of South Carolina offering a "Christian" license plate to S.C. motorists
There is something else provided for in our Constitution, it is called "States rights." Here are the items I personally think should be States Rights issues:
- 2. (above) - Is there something I fail to comprehend about the term "public property"? Is that not property that is either owned by or, at least open to the PUBLIC? And, are not church members of any persuasion also members of the PUBLIC? The term 'public' is all-inclusive, thereby encompassing even the dreaded and feared "Christians". You can display the Crescent of Islam, and the Menorah and Star of David of Judaism, and probably the symbols of Taoists, Hindus, Rastafarian's, Shakers, Quakers, Mennonites, Rosacrucians, Russian Orthodoxy, and Dukhobors. But, God help you if you should show any Christian symbols during the recurring annual period known as ... oh, yeah - CHRISTMAS!
- 3. (above) - DUH! If you don't understand that one, get somebody who speaks English to read it to you.
- 4. (above) - The architrave above the main west entrance to the Supreme Court of the United States bears the inscription "EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER THE LAW" (some obviously more 'equal' than others), and both the Supreme Court and the United States Congress open each session with prayers! Am I the only one having a problem with their demonstrated logic (or lack thereof) here?
- 5. (above) - According to the Lieutenant Governor of South Carolina they offer well over 100 group-specific license plates, and will make specific plates available to any group or organization of appropriate size that requests them through the proper channels. Where is the problem there? If you don't want one, don't BUY one! They aren't FREE. You have to pay money and select the one you want! Sheeeesh ... dumb-ass.
How can we make something so simply written, in our own native language, so complicated? It's called an agenda, and there are a lot of people with multiple agendas - each bringing us one step closer to the elimination of our Democratic Republic.
Election '08 - A Package Deal
Although I am not a fan of Barack NObama, I am a lesser fan of his wife, Michelle. From what I have seen and heard of Mr. NObama, I believe he is culturally at odds with the full protections guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States of America. It is also possible that there is some latent racism lurking in the darkest recesses of Barack NObama's heart. On the other hand, Michelle NObama seems to have a more active black revolutionary character, obviating the use of the term 'latent'. Notice I said, 'seems to' ... I have read what is available of her senior thesis from Princeton, and came to the conclusion that there is little in the way of overt racism in (what I could find of) her thesis. What I found are excerpts interpreted by others, rather than the full document itself. There does seem to be an undercurrent - depending on the readers mindset - that could be interpreted as racism.
Personally, I do not believe a NObama administration would be beneficial to the constitutional precepts upon which our great nation was founded. I base my belief upon his history, actions, and statements to the media - as well as those of his wife. Remember, a married President does not enter the White House alone, nor does he live there alone. Officially, the First Lady has no governmental powers, but realistically she has greater access to the President than any staff or cabinet member, or any other elected official. Add her questionable allegiances to his, and you have the formula for serious social unrest in America.
If you would like to see the excerpts from Michelle NObama's 1985 senior thesis go to http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8642.html but please keep in mind that the commentaries that accompany the excerpts are the interpretations of another individual. I caution you to draw your own conclusions.
Personally, I do not believe a NObama administration would be beneficial to the constitutional precepts upon which our great nation was founded. I base my belief upon his history, actions, and statements to the media - as well as those of his wife. Remember, a married President does not enter the White House alone, nor does he live there alone. Officially, the First Lady has no governmental powers, but realistically she has greater access to the President than any staff or cabinet member, or any other elected official. Add her questionable allegiances to his, and you have the formula for serious social unrest in America.
If you would like to see the excerpts from Michelle NObama's 1985 senior thesis go to http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8642.html but please keep in mind that the commentaries that accompany the excerpts are the interpretations of another individual. I caution you to draw your own conclusions.
Saturday, July 5, 2008
A Sense of Entitlement Will Get You in Serious Trouble!
Our younger generation (anybody born after about 1978) seem to have an innate sense of entitlement. They are entitled to everything they want, and they want it now. Understanding this attitude goes a long way toward explaining the extremely high credit card debt in the U.S., and the significant defaulting against student loans and mortgages. Here's what you are entitled to:
- Everything you earn through personal labor or achievement.
- An opportunity to apply your talents and abilities. (You may have to create that opportunity yourself)
- Making those payments with which you voluntarily chose to encumber yourself.
- Unemployment compensation if you have not lost your job "for cause".
- Oddly enough, you are entitled to obligating yourself for the largest mortgage you could ever hope to afford ... only to discover down the road, that your hopes were well outside the realm of reality.
- You are not entitled to welfare or Medicare, although it is provided to many - a few of whom may even be deserving of it. These are the two most abused public services our government provides. (They are almost as abused as are the salaries and perks our lawmakers have voted for ... for themselves.)
- You are not entitled to a credit card. Especially a credit card for which you have no idea of making the payments as required.
- You are not entitled to stand on the street corners begging for money that other people had to earn! (You could, however, do the rest of us a favor by placing yourself directly in front of rapidly moving traffic without warning.)
- You are not entitled to physically accost another human being, or use a weapon in order to relieve them of the burdensome contents of their wallet, purse, vehicle, or home. (Bear in mind that such actions could, at any point in time, prove to be a life-ending experience for you)
FAREWELL, AMERICA! Announcing the Destruction of a Young Democratic Republic ...
and that destruction will come from the enemy within. Those outside our 'borders' - if you can call them borders - are the least of our worries. The individual terrorist is virtually impotent from outside the USA ... BUT, that same individual from inside the United States presents a very powerful and deadly threat. He, or she, could be anybody - your friend, your neighbor, your child's second grade teacher, the clerk at Wal-Mart, your pharmacist, your physician, ad infinitum, ad nauseam. "Not anybody", you say quickly. "Mo is my best friend. We work together, we go fishing together, our kids play together, and our families picnic together." That's the "Mo" you know - the Mo of yesterday. Today's Mo may be someone entirely different. Yesterday's Mo may have gotten a one word message last night - "Insha'Allah" - and awakened this morning as Mohammed who is directed "by the will of Allah" to kill the infidels. "Who are these infidels?", you ask. They are you, your wife, your children and anybody else nearby that's not Muslim - or in really extreme cases, Muslims too, but just Muslims who do not believe exactly the same way Mo does.
We've all heard of the "sleeper cells", and we also know we have several very large concentrations of Muslims in various cities throughout our country. Middle Eastern Terrorists have a patience that the average American cannot even begin to fathom. Some have waited for generations to extract revenge - or "justice" as they see it. Could terrorist activities of the past 30 years be retribution for Muslim losses during the Crusades? I know it sounds far-fetched to us, but it's not beyond the realm of possibility for Muslims. I wouldn't give odds on it being probable, but it isn't impossible.
The term "Sleeper Cell" is a pretty accurate description of how they function. The briefing probably goes something like this: "Fit in, keep a low profile but be seen in the community. Build a reputation as a "nice person", find employment so there will be no reason to question where your money comes from. Renounce Islam in public but maintain it in your heart, for it is the will of Allah - praise be unto Him - that it be done in this fashion. Do whatever is necessary for the success of your mission, for it is required by Allah - praise Allah." What we're talking about here is recruiting people who are capable of absorbing training and using 21st century technology , but who, intellectually and emotionally, are stuck in the 14th century. People who can present themselves as your friend today, and cut your throat without a second thought tomorrow, because you are the "infidel" - not any more human than the other infidel beasts of the world. If martyrdom for Allah is so wonderful, and the rewards in Paradise are so great, why have the leaders not committed mass murder with a body bomb strapped to themselves?
There are those who would have us believe that the floods in the Midwest, and the fires in California, are retribution of a higher kind, rather than any "natural phenomena". Retribution for "falling away" from the straight and narrow ... for legalizing unnatural acts and protecting those who engage in them, for corruption in our courts and government, and for not taking an active stand against such things. I suppose that could be true ...
"UNITED WE STAND" ... however there are so many more indicators of disunity in this country than those of unity, that one must wonder - are we still united enough? We are divided along lines of race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and gang affiliations. We no longer seem to define ourselves by our positive accomplishments, but instead by our salaries, the type of automobile we drive, the school(s) from which we graduated, and the names we can drop when talking with our business associates. We are, bit by bit, selling out our country - either C.O.D. (the Arab countries have endowed prestigious U.S. universities with hundreds of millions of dollars for "special considerations" by their administrations; several U.S. toll highways have been sold to overseas interests, etc.), or to show how liberal, accepting, and humanitarian we are (foot baths in airports for Muslims? Can't they wash their feet at home like everybody else?). Do we have the will, the fortitude and the stamina to set those differences aside, present a united front, and defend this great nation "against all enemies foreign and domestic"? Our courts and government agencies are bending over backwards to satisfy the demands of any religious belief except Christianity (followed closely by Judaism). Thanks to the elimination of our steel mills, our military grade steel is now purchased from China, of all places! And, as hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens pour across our southern border each year, American corporations are "off-shore outsourcing" tens of thousands of American jobs! The looney left now wants to endow illegal aliens with all the rights to which genuine Americans (both born and naturalized) are not entitled. Citizenship within 24 hours after applying (most naturalized citizens have waited 5-15 years to be granted citizenship), even if a background investigation has not been completed. Free medical care and education, and head of the line preference in each of those as well! We are incarcerating those we charge with securing our borders (Google: Campeon and Ramos), and rewarding those who enter the country illegally to conduct trade in illegal products!
Farewell, America ... it was grand knowing you when you had good sense, and most of us will miss you!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)