Tuesday, December 30, 2008


The other day, on the TV show, "The View," Whoopie Goldberg got into a discussion" with Elizabeth Hasselbeck about continued "racism" in this country.

Whoopie continually interrupted Elizabeth with strident tones insisting that we still have "race problems" in The United States.

Well, Whoopie is right to an extent.

There are, indeed race issues still to be dealt with.

Whoopie is a very articulate person, who is very able to put together sentences that make sense and that express her thoughts and feelings well.

However, in my humble, but correct, opinion, she is not a part of the solution, but is part of the problem.

When I was in college at Stetson University, in Deland, Florida, I spent some time living in nearby St. Augustine.

In June of 1964, while I was there, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. came to town to march and to stage sit-down protests at area restaurants and diners.

Being in agreement with what Dr. King was trying to accomplish, I joined the march and sat down with the black community at the local corner Rexall Drugstore's lunch counter.

As I left the diner, I was stopped by a couple of guys who looked like NFL offensive guards...big!

The "leader" said, "Here's one of them now. Let's take him out back and paint him black with shoe polish."

Needless to say, I was more than a bit nervous.

Fortunately for me, a Sheriff's deputy pulled up to the corner and stopped for the red light.

I quickly stepped over to the Sheriff's car and started a conversation with the deputy at the wheel.

The two guards sort of ambled on down the side walk, and I made my escape back to my room at a nearby hotel.

My point is that I had been, since my high school days in Warner Robins, Georgia, of all places, involved in one way or another in the Civil Rights movement, because I believed then (and believe now) that the Declaration of Independence means it when it says, "...all men are created equal."

Having said that, I admit that I am no longer "actively" involved in the movement, because the movement has left its core concept of peaceful protest.

In my mind, at least, people like Whoopie Goldberg, Jesse Jackson, Alcie Hastings, Maxine Waters and Charles Rangel have done more to perpetuate the issues of racism in this country than they have done to help solve it.

Their speech is consistently inflammatory, their hatred for "white folks" is evident and their actions dissuade many from healing the wounds that have infected this country for too long.

Unlike a few years past, I encounter more people today who are blatantly expressive about their opinions of the black population, as well as of Hispanics and Arabs. Many of them base their feelings on reactions to those in leadership who think it helpful to ignite heavy passions. It is almost as though they wish to incite racism, rather than to mitigate it.

Is it, after all, to their advantage financially to perpetrate hatred and/or fear of people whose skin is a different color?

Whatever their motives, I wish we could all make an effort to adopt and realize the dream of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., as he expressed it, that people (he was specifically referencing our children) should "...not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

Now we have elected our second black President (Bill Clinton was the first...remember?).

Aside from his politics, with which I strongly disagree on most points, I hope that he can effectively further the racial healing that needs to take place in our land.

I am hopeful, but not overly so.

There are still too many inciters whose mouths are in perpetuating motion.

Saturday, December 27, 2008


I have visited several "liberal" blogs recently.

They have been writing about the economic mess we are in, and each one has tried to make the case that unregulated capitalism is dead, because that is what led to the mortgage lending crisis.

So, what do they do with the fact that bad loans were made to unqualified people because the federal government forced lending institutions to reach a quota of loans, which the feds then guaranteed if something went wrong?

I mean, do we just ignore that part of the equation?

Do we just pretend that didn't happen?

Are liberals convinced that if they just say it didn't happen that makes it so?

Are they really that dumb?

Are they really that arrogant?

Are they really that hypocritical?

Or are they just blatantly dishonest, with themselves and us?

Without being forced under penalty of federal law, lending institutions would have NEVER loaned money to those they knew could not pay it back.

They are in the business of making loans that they KNOW can be paid back.

How many times have we heard the old saying, "To borrow money you first have to not need to borrow money."

That's because financial institutions have to know that those to whom they lend money can pay it back...that's HOW THEY MAKE MONEY!!

I challenge liberal politicians (and you liberal bloggers, by the way), to for once in their lives to be honest and to tell the WHOLE story, not just the part they want to accept.

Capitalism has worked, does work and will always work, because it generates opportunity, and rewards for those who engage in it untethered by the intrusion of the federal government.

It was REGULATED capitalism that did not work.

The feds got involved, under the guise of, "We just want to help the little guy have a piece of the 'American Dream.'"

Well I have news for you.

The American Dream is not for all of the people.

It is not for those who will not work.

It is not for those who will not educate themselves.

It is not for those who have an entitlement mentality.

The American Dream is an opportunity to get educated, work hard, make personal and family sacrifices and to stretch through adversity, stumbling blocks and hardship to achieve one's goals, no matter what those goals are.

When it is just handed to people, it is neither a dream nor a reality.

It is a farce, perpetrated on Americans by the very government charged with the responsibility to, "...promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."

Did you get it?

"...to secure the blessings of liberty...," defined by the Constitution as freedom from excessive government intrusion.

It is, after all, inspite of BO's desire that it tell what government can do for us, a document that tells what the government cannot do.

And, oooo, it's so good!

Saturday, December 20, 2008


For the Christian, this is a very special time.

For the non-Christian, it may be a time for gift getting, gift giving, partying, having time off from school or work, getting caught up in the hustle and bustle of the "season," or just a bunch of hub-bub about nothing.

For the Christian (not the nominal Christian, but the genuine person of faith), Christmas is special on many fronts.

The word, "Christmas," has two roots: 1) Christ - The Greek translation of the Old Testament Hebrew word, "Messiah;" and 2) Mass - the Latin word for birth.

In other words, the word "Christmas" means: Christ's Birth.

The birth of Messiah was predicted in the Old Testament. There are more than 300 references to the coming of, the life of, the death of, the resurrection of and the return of the one whose title is Emmanuel, and whose name is Jesus.

These predictions were made by different people at different times, many of whom had had no contact with the others, yet their predictions meld together into one continuum that was lived out in a little town called Bethlehem, the city of Nazareth and the Holy City of Jerusalem.

Jesus is God, incarnate.

That means that God came down to us to reveal Himself, to show us His plan of salvation and to make it possible for us to enter into a personal relationship with Him.

In Christ, God has made possible for anyone who wants it to have a gift that exceeds any gift you could find in a JC Penney catalog, at Walmart, or at Macy's: the gift of eternity in Heaven with Him.

Like any gift, you do not have to pay for it.

When I give gifts to my children, I do not ask them to pay me back for them.

By definition, a gift requires no payment by the recipient.

But a gift costs someone something.

A gift may be bought at a store. It might be hand-made. A gift might be something you already own and wish to give to someone else.

The gift God offers costs you nothing, but it is not free.

God, Himself, offered Himself, in the person of Jesus, to pay a debt we owe. It is referred to as a "sin debt," the debt we owe as a result of our having not lived up to the perfect standard required by the High Moral Law of God.

"Joe, why are you trying to cram your belief down my throat?" you may ask.

I'm not.

You don't have to believe any of it if you don't want to. That's your choice.

But I can tell you this, based on my own experience and on the Word God has given us, if you choose to believe in faith (not blind faith, but intelligent, Bible-guided faith), trusting in the work of salvation Jesus completed at the cross of Calvary, your life will take on an unimaginably new meaning.

There are those who will scoff (predicted in the bible, by the way), ridicule (predicted in the bible, by the way), and reject this idea (predicted in the bible, by the way).

That is their choice (and yours, if that's what you want).

But for those who choose to discover God's character, His love for His creation and His plan for its redemption (as found in the Bible), Christmas is the most special time of this or any other year.

Note: This is usually where I post articles about my political beliefs and stances; however, I am suspending that until Saturday, December 27. I'll be back with more political stuff for you to enjoy then. I know you will stand by with shrimp in your mouth (baited breath...get it?). See you then.

Friday, December 19, 2008


I AM!!

Just got clearance from the cardiologist to get back to normal (or in my case, abnormal) activities, so here I am.

My two stents have given me renewed energy and I don't feel tired after walking six feet across the room.

I have watched a lot of news and that helped calm me down when I was stressed...yeah...right.

There are several issues that are burning a hole in my brain at this time, so I will take a few moments to address them.

The one the press seems so uptight about right now is the use of Rick Warren to give the invocation at the inauguration of President Elect BO.

The gays are up in arms over it, claiming that the choice of Warren is a slap in the face to them.

Well, frankly, some of them need a good slap in the face, but that's another story.

What if the choice had been Billy Graham?

He has given the inaugural invocation before and has served as spiritual counselor to many presidents.

He believes homosexuality is contrary to nature and an affront to God, and that abortion is an abomination.

What is wrong with "you people" that you think freedom of speech applies to you but not to Evangelical Christians?

"Well," I hear you say, "Someone who does not believe in Christianity might have to hear something Christian at a 'public' function."

To you I say, "Get over it!"

We have to hear you spout off your paganistic hedonism in public places, so what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

It's a PRAYER! Get it? A PRAYER!

It's supposed to be religious.

If you don't hold the religion of the pray-er, don't pray with him/her.

I don't pray with the pray-er when the pray-er is a Muslim!

Yet his/her prayer has never hurt me one bit.

If BO had chosen a Muslim, that would have been his to choose, and that would have been OK.

What he HAS signaled by choosing Rick Warren is that he, himself, is not Muslim (which was a red herring to begin with), and that he is willing to allow freedom of speech to take its course.

That's more than the average liberal is willing to do.

I am the very LAST one to support BO on almost anything he stands for or intends to do.

But for a real, grown up, mature American, this should be a non-issue.

Are you one of those?

Well, this has gotten my blood flowing, so I might as well go on to the second thing that has my attention: The Auto Company and Other Bail-outs.

I was doing some studying about the Great Depression in my down time.

The fact is, depressions come and go.

They sometimes happen all over the world, as they did in the Great Depression, and to different degrees and at different times.

The one thing they have in common is that they afford the government an opportunity to act as "savior," which has inevitably led to a prolonging of the depression.

"But," says the 'well meaning' government, "We have to do something or else it will look like we are not doing anything."

Well, la-dee-da.

Let's give that a try!

The best thing that could happen to our economy at this time, Keynes and the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act notwithstanding, is for the government to do exactly what it is supposed to do: NOTHING.

But Americans have made the government the nanny of us all and we think they should get us out of this mess.

They can't.

Whatever they do will only prolong the agony.

But they will, nevertheless, and Americans will say, "Oooo, they're so good," thinking that, when the natural rebound of the economy takes place, although postponed somewhat by government intervention, the feds actually helped.

It will not be so.

Look. This is the greatest country in the world, a world leader of leaders.

We are better than Great Britain, better than France, better than Pakistan, better than India, better than Kenya, better than Canada, and better than Finland.

While there are individuals who do their best to tarnish our image at home and abroad, we continue to rise above them and continue to be what we were destined to be.

There will always be Bernard L. Madoffs in the world, many of them right here in the United States.

Given time, they will be caught, prosecuted and removed from society.

Sadly, in the mean time, many people will be hurt.

It would be nice if we did not have people who think that they should have everything there is to have, even if they have to steal or kill to get it.

I did not say we are a perfect nation...I said we are the greatest nation.

People are still trying to come here, both legally and illegally, more than to any other nation on earth, because, even in the middle of a recession there is more freedom and opportunity here than any other place in the known universe.

BO will be President and we will survive.

We will survive because of our people, not because of our government.

Like some families, we will fuss and fight with each other, but in the end, we are a nation-family and we will continue to rise to new height after new height.

We will recover from this recession and be the stronger for it, with or without the government's help.

We don't have double digit inflation, unemployment or bankruptcies.

In spite of the ridicule he took for saying so, John McCain was right.

Our economy is temporarily in a mess, but it is fundamentally sound.

I, for one, will continue to fight for freedom from unbridled government control and for the opportunities afforded to all willing to take advantage of it.

Join me!

Wednesday, December 17, 2008


I will no doubt be out of the picture for a few more days.

Sunday morning my heart launched an attack against me...one that threatened to be successful.

I was taken to our local horsepistal, where, recognizing that they knew more about horses than about humans, they med-flighted me to a hospital that knows how to treat living people.

Indeed, the best thing to come out of all of this, other than that I survived, was that I got to fly in a helicopter, something I've never done before.

They put two stents in my arteries, warned me not to get an MRI (stents are metal and MRIs operate with very powerful magnets...not compatible), kept me until today and told me not to behave strenuously until I have seen the follow-up doctor(s).

So, I'll be back soon...probably next week.

Don't spend too much time missing me, but pray for me, if you are so inclined.

Saturday, December 13, 2008





Thompson on how we got here and how to get out.

Friday, December 12, 2008

Wednesday, December 10, 2008


That's how you pronounce it.

He's gutsy, if nothing else.

But you know what?

He's just one of many.

Don't get me wrong, I do not diminish what he has done, I'm just saying that he is representative of a pervasive attitude of "What's in it for me?"

We have become a nation of self-servers.

Its a "Make all the money you can, 'cause when the bottom drops out you might have to be standing in line waiting for a government bail-out" philosophy that seemingly few people realize is deadly.

If you're making all the money you can, you are neglecting some of the most important things in life: family; friends; country; God; health and rest.

Trouble is, money is mesmerizing. It grabs some people and won't let go.

In the end, they will do anything for money.

If it's a little illegal, well, everybody does it, so what's the harm?

So, if everybody jumped off the....oh never mind.

What's at stake is integrity, or wholeness as a human being and member of society.

The idea is that what's mine is mine and I'll keep it; what's yours is mine (or should be) and I'll take it.

If I want it, I should be able to have it, no matter what.

Different people have different "no matter what" levels, but there is very little difference in the end between a little "no matter what" and a lot of "no matter what."

The attitude is killing our society because it is destroying our ability to trust.

If one has to lie to get what one wants, or cheat, or steal, or maim, or kill, well, so be it.

We seem to be unable to do without or to defer gratification.

We aren't really that much different from "Blah-GOY-uh-vitch."

Monday, December 8, 2008


So, Congress has decided on a 15 billion dollar "bail-out" for the auto companies.

But this one will work.

After all, it requires that the auto companies be accountable to the taxpayers.

Accountable to the taxpayers?

Since when is a corporation accountable to taxpayers?

Accountable to stockholders, yes.



Oh, but wait!

They get government help.

That changes all the rules.

I've said before, what the government pays for, the government controls.

See, from Nancy Pelosi's point of view, the government equals the taxpayer.

Or something like that.

Accountable how?

No longer may the auto companies engage in the activities and practices that got them in this "mess."

Does that mean they can't hire union workers any more?

Oooo. That would be a good thing.

Alas, it does not mean that.

In fact, there is no clarity about exactly what it means, except that the head(s) of these corporations should no longer be the heads.

So says the government.

Since when does the government get to say who can head a corporation?

Since they decided to give the corporations taxpayer money, that's since when.

We are in a downward spiral into depression, emotional and economic.

Brought on by our friends in Congress.

I guess there is no accounting for government action.

Saturday, December 6, 2008

"In the midst of the worst economic situation since the Great Depression it would be an unmitigated disaster."

Those were the words of Barney Frank.

Never mind that he was part-and-parcel of the cause of "the worst economic situation since the Great Depression..."

Barney Frank, and his friends, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and all of the other conivers who told us, out loud and publicly that there was no problem at Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG and all the other corporations now in need of BAIL-OUT, are the ones who required that bad loans be made in the first place.

I'm not sure why this isn't resonating with the politically savvy portion of the general public. It's as though they were some collective Judge Lance Ito and the mislead jury of the first O.J. Simpson trial.

Frank and his cohorts have been let off the hook, receiving not so much as a scolding from anybody.

They have not even been seriously challenged, let alone accused of wrong-doing, by so-called "conservative" Republicans.

I absolutely cannot imagine what power they must hold over their fellow lawmakers, to buy their silence.

In the meantime, they continue to blast away at the automakers' corporate heads, accusing THEM of mismanagement.

How on earth would they (Frank, et.al.) recognize mismanagement? Most of them have never owned a hot dog stand, let alone a large corporation.

But there is hope on the horizon, and I'll tell you why.

O. J. Simpson is an arrogant, selfish, spoiled brat who literally got away with murder.

But his, "I want what I want, when I want it, where I want it, how I want it, and I am O. J. Simpson, and by the power of my name alone, I intend to get it" attitude eventually caused him to step over a line of safety and make a mistake that got him caught.

This time he was convicted and will serve some jail time, maybe as much as 33 years.
In the same way, sooner or later Frankandfriends will overstep their power, make a mistake and will pay the proverbial piper.

When they do, perhaps they will suffer a political fate similar to the legal fate of OJ.

That's if, and only if, conservatives develop enough guts to require a reckoning of those who perpetrated the deed(s).

Don't hold your breath, but hold out hope.

What goes around, comes around.

Or so I've heard.

Tuesday, December 2, 2008


So...we are in a recession.

So says the government.

And we have been in one for a long time.

As usual, the government is a bit slow on the up-take.

Mostly 'cause they want you to believe that everything is hunky-dory and they are handling their power well.

That and other lies they're embroiled in.

Economists have long postulated that: "A recession is when your neighbor loses his job. A depression is when you lose yours."

A recession is defined by some economists as two consecutive quarters of economic contraction, or a decline in real gross domestic product.

Using that definition, we have, indeed been in recession for quite a while.

The sad thing, though, is the government's response to recession.

Presidents, Congresspersons, Senators, and judges seem to think they know how to control the economy and bring us out of recessions and keep us from depressions.

Presidents don't have a very good track record.

Raising tariffs is one of the reasons blamed for the Great Depression of 1929.

Herbert Hoover energetically tried to combat the oncoming depression with volunteer efforts and government action, none of which produced economic recovery during his term.

(Does the idea of volunteer efforts and government action resonate with anyone out there today? Think: Barack Obama)

In 1932, the Revenue Act increased the top tax rate from 25% to 63% and was Herbert Hoover's idea of how to get it together economically. Economists and I agree that this is one of the dumbest things HH did.

(Now we seem primed to repeat that experience).

During Jimmy Carter's administration, the economy suffered double-digit inflation, coupled with very high interest rates, oil shortages, high unemployment and slow economic growth.

On November 15, 2007, Economist.com had this to say: "In 1929, days after the stockmarket crash, the Harvard Economic Society reassured its subscribers: “A severe depression is outside the range of probability”. In a survey in March 2001, 95% of American economists said there would not be a recession, even though one had already started. Today, most economists do not forecast a recession in America, but the profession's pitiful forecasting record offers little comfort." (Underlineing is mine-JS)

Congress, both the House of Representatives and the Senate, have an even more dismal record.

In addition to going along with Herbert Hoover, Jimmy Carter, et. al., they now are themselves proposing the very actions that led to previous deep recessions and even the Great Depression!

What on earth is their problem?

Pseudo-psychiatrists say, "Doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results is the very definition of insanity."

So why can't lawmakers understand that doing the same things that led to recession and depression before will lead to recession and depression again?

Is brain-deadness a pre-requisite for congressional or senatorial service?

OK...I've vented enough.

I will now tell you (and all of the Senators and Congresspersons who regularly avoid reading this blog) exactly how to get out of this recession and how to prevent one in the future.

Are you ready?

Here goes:

President Bush, President Elect Obama, "honorable" Congresspersons and Senators, get your cotton-pickin' hands off of our economy!

It is above your pay-scale!

You are nothing but a bunch of lilly-livered, yellow-bellied, sap-suckers. You are beslubbering, beef-witted barnacles. To call you mammering, beetle-headed clotpoles would be elevating you beyond reason.

Get your hands off of our banks, our insurance companies, our auto-makers, our schools and any other entity you can think of.

Spend your time uniting this country, maintaining the justice system, keeping us peaceful, defending us against enemies without and within, promoting (not providing) our welfare, and ensuring that we are a free people...free from the unreasonable restraints of the federal government.


Saturday, November 29, 2008


Are you familiar with geometric progression?

In mathematics, a geometric progression, also known as a geometric sequence, is a sequence of numbers where each term after the first is found by multiplying the previous one by a fixed non-zero number called the common ratio.

OK...that's tough.

Simplified it means a series of numbers resulting from multiplying any number by something and then multiplying each resulting number by the same something.

3 X 3 = 9; 9 X 3 = 27; 27 X 3 = 81.

Each result in the above example is multiplied by the same number, "3."

A special case of geometric progression is when a number doubles constantly.

3 X 2 = 6; 6 X 2 = 12; 12 X 2 = 24, etc.

This geometric progression demonstrates the reason why you would be a fool NOT to go to work for someone who offered to pay you a penny the first day of work and to double every day, 7 days a week.

By the end of the first month, you would be a millionaire.

That is what has happened in our government (formerly "public") education system.

In 1887, a very influential educator named, John Dewey, was an educational psychologist at the University of Michigan. He published two books: Psychology and Leibniz's New Essays Concerning the Human Understanding.

There were others, as well, but what you need to know is that his books set about to change the discipline of psychology, especially as it relates to the field of education.

He is the father of educational behaviorism, what has evolved into educational humanism, almost universally followed by teachers in government schools.

It was also from Dewey that we began the process of extricating religious thought from school.

Dewey, while honoring the important role that religious institutions and practices played in human life, rejected belief in any static ideal, such as a theistic God. Dewey felt that only scientific method could reliably further human good.

His ideas eventually became widely accepted in academia (though never 100% so).

So what has this to do with geometric progressions?

He taught a given number of students, a certain percentage of whom adopted his beliefs and teaching model.

A certain number of those students became professors and taught those beliefs and models in their classrooms.

In turn, a certain number of those students accepted their professors' beliefs and models and so-forth and so-on ad infinitum.

At a certain point, the majority of professors and teachers of teachers were teaching one form or another of "Deweyism," especially as it relates to the philosophy of education and its methodology.

It took years for "Deweyism" to reach the half-way point in terms of adherents, but then it snowballed until today, most government school teachers utilize his ideas.

Today, very few teachers know where the methods and ideas they teach by came from, but in one way or another most of them, in the educational system, can be traced back to Dewey.

To be sure there have been hundreds of variants on Dewey's philosophy revealed in his books, but the basics are still there.

In my state, using the methods Dewey espoused in one or more of their many variations, we graduate students from high school, 30% of whom cannot read their own diploma.

This has caused considerable concern among educational leaders who have seen as the solution a more stringent application of the methods and philosophies that haven't yet worked.

One of the methods used unsuccessfully in our government schools has been: a behavioral psychological approach that has diminished the requirement of knowledge and has replaced it with good intentions.

Thus if a student had the math problem: 2 + 2 + __, and put a "5" in the blank, and if in the opinion of the teacher, the student was really trying and meant well, the fact that he/she got the wrong answer is overlooked and credit is given for the effort.

Students taught by this approach are NOT the ones I want piloting the airplane on my next flight.

We need to contact our lawmakers and tell them that we would like to start a new geometric progression in education...one that returns our students to creating a foundation of knowledge upon which we can build in them logical, critical thinking by which they can arrive a correct conclusions about a problem, math or otherwise.

Also tell them that we would like control of our school systems returned to the local level, so that we will once again have public schools, not government schools.

Note: Schools became government schools when they began accepting greater and greater amounts of government money, with which came more and more government rules.

Friday, November 28, 2008


I have been accused of being full of it before, but let me tell you, today, beyond any shadow of a doubt, without fear of contradiction, as sure as taxes and death, today...


Turkey, dressing, gravy, sweet potatoes, green beans, 7-layer salad, cranberry sauce, and apple pie, that is.

Thursday, November 27, 2008


I listened with interest and wonder as a newscaster proclaimed how he "...loved Thanksgiving because it came with no religious baggage."

Actually, it comes with plenty of Christian "baggage."

To begin with, the first thanksgiving meal was very like a church covered dish dinner.

The party lasted three days.

Now THAT's my kind of covered dish dinner!

It was held by the Mayflower survivors, of the Plymouth Plantation, after their first harvest, and was a celebration of food and feasting in the fall of 1621.

Indian chiefs Massassoit, Squanto and Samoset joined in the celebration with ninety of their men in the three-day event.

It was a day of thanksgiving to God.

Not to the Indians, as is often taught today, but to God for His provision.

Originally, the band of settlers had lived in Great Britain.

Unhappy because they were pressured to become part of the Church of England, and wanting to worship God in theie own way, they left the country and went to Holland.

Holland's politico/religious climate was not all it was cracked up to be, so they finally set sail for the New World, where they would have freedom of worship.

There were many hardships and illnesses, both at sea and when they reached what is now Plymoth Rock.

They held regular prayer meetings and worship services, asking God to bless their homes and their crops.

The harvest of 1621 was bountiful, leading to the covered dish affair mentioned above.

During the 1700s, it was common practice for individual colonies to observe days of thanksgiving throughout each year.

A Thanksgiving Day two hundred years ago was a day set aside for prayer and fasting, not a day marked by plentiful food and drink as is today's custom.

In 1789, George Washington issued a Thanksgiving Decree entitled "General Thanksgiving." The decree appointed the day "to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God."

Here is the complete text of the proclamation:

General Thanksgiving
By the PRESIDENT of the United States Of America A PROCLAMATION
WHEREAS it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favour; and Whereas both Houfes of Congress have, by their joint committee, requefted me "to recommend to the people of the United States a
DAY OF PUBLICK THANSGIVING and PRAYER, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to eftablifh a form of government for their safety and happiness:"
NOW THEREFORE, I do recommend and affign THURSDAY, the TWENTY-SIXTH DAY of NOVEMBER next, to be devoted by the people of thefe States to the fervice of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our fincere and humble thanksfor His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the fignal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpofitions of His providence in the courfe and conclufion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have fince enjoyed;-- for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to eftablish Conftitutions of government for our fafety and happinefs, and particularly the national one now lately instituted;-- for the civil and religious liberty with which we are bleffed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffufing useful knowledge;-- and, in general, for all the great and various favours which He has been pleafed to confer upon us.
And also, that we may then unite in moft humbly offering our prayers and fupplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and befeech Him to pardon our national and other tranfgreffions;-- to enable us all, whether in publick or private ftations, to perform our feveral and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a bleffing to all the people by conftantly being a Government of wife, juft, and conftitutional laws, difcreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all fovereigns and nations (especially fuch as have shewn kindnefs unto us); and to blefs them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increafe of fcience among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind fuch a degree of temporal profperity as he alone knows to be beft.
GIVEN under my hand, at the city of New-York, the third day of October, in the year of our Lord, one thousand feven hundred and eighty-nine.
(signed) G. Washington
In 1941, Thanksgiving was finally sanctioned by Congress as a legal holiday, as the fourth Thursday in November.
So there you have it.
A holiday rooted in Christianity still celebrated, but fewer and fewer people know why.
But now YOU know why.

Tuesday, November 25, 2008


I believe we have reached the point of critical mass.

What I mean by that is that we have ceded enough power to the federal government that there is no turning back.

The power has made them drunk and they will do absolutely anything to: 1)keep the power; 2) garner more power; 3) use that power to control the population (that's you and me).

This power is not exclusive to the Democrats.

This power has found its way into the Oval Office, the President's Cabinet, government bureaucracies, the Democrat controlled Congress, the Democrat controlled Senate and the Supreme Court of the United States.

The yielding of that power has reached the electorate, who are pleased to elect those who seek and know how to wield that power.

We have, in my humble, but correct, opinion, reached critical mass.

Monday, November 24, 2008


I know! I know!

Here's what we'll do: We'll set aside $750,000,000,000.00 to apportion out to AIG, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and a couple of others, and we'll be out of this mess in a heartbeat.

No! No! No!

It won't escalate.

$750,000,000,000.00 tops. That's all.

No! No!

There's no slippery slope.

Trust us...we're your government.

We know what we're doing.

Why you tax payers will hardly notice.

Just $750,000,000,000.00...a trillion dollars, tops.

Not a penny more than a trillion-and-a-half.


Look...what we need is only half the value of everything produced in the nation last year.

Just $7,000,000,000,000.00. (For you public school students, that's seven-trillion dollars...just short of ten times the original estimate).

That's all.

(My grandchildren thank you, Feds)

Want to know more?: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=arEE1iClqDrk

Addendum: Please go here" Social Sense and watch the video. It's not too long, but it reveals everything you need to know.

Saturday, November 22, 2008


I have been reading other blogs with posts about the mess we are in.

For the most part, they are well thought out, logical essays on where we are. A few offer some form of solution.

One of my current favorites is The Oklahoma Patriot, whose "Manifesto" post suggests some viable solutions, or at least a solid philosophy.

Another, Social Sense , has a video you need to see.

Then there is solution oriented, Conservative Convictions.

Fact is, almost all of the blogs in my blog-roll are worth the read, but are not the only ones around.

I have a slightly different viewpoint as to where the actual, if unlikely, solution is found.

It is my belief that the Main Stream Media, has gone beyond getting in bed with the political left, and has actually become one with them.

Their unmitigated delight at the election of BO is so obvious as to be more than a little sickening.

They have gone so far as to join with Al Sharpton in calling him President Obama.

To the best of my knowledge, George Bush is still the President of The United States of America until January 20th.

So my proposal is that we begin the process of finding ways to infiltrate, buy out or otherwise take over the MSM and return it to a protector FROM the government, instead of a protector OF the left wing side of government.

I would like your serious suggestions as to how this might be accomplished, if, indeed, it can be.

Friday, November 21, 2008


Governor Sarah Palin pardoned a turkey today.

What made the news?

The fact that other turkeys were being slaughtered behind her.

Newscasters all read the story from the same whatever news feed, as they lamented the plight of the poor birds behind her.

Well, I wonder where people think that Thanksgiving feast comes from?

That golden brown, crisp, flavorful thing in the middle of the table, the one with the two little stubs sticking up and the crooked little thingies on the side and the little heart shaped gizmo on the back end we used to call "the pope's nose" (the tail, for those of you who don't get it), was in days of yore a feathered frenzy of stupidity, gobbling away on some turkey farm.

Then, some weeks before it got to your table, it was unceremoniously dispatched, de-feathered, washed and frozen. After that it was shipped to your local grocer, where it sat until you had mercy on it and bought it for your Thanksgiving meal.

My sister, having learned how animals are "prepared" for consumption, became a vegetarian.

That's a good thing.

Left more meat for me.

Eat your celery-heart out, PETA! I'm having turkey for Thanksgiving and, as long as "they" kept the salmonella out, I don't much care where it came from or how it came to be in my local supermarket.

I can hardly wait to sink my teeth into that succulent bird.

I want one of those behind Sarah Palin.

Being a sort of gross type, my favorite parts are (in order): the tail, the heart, the liver and the back...you know, the part with all the bones.

I have made myself hungry.

I'm going for a sandwich.

A turkey sandwich.

Thursday, November 20, 2008


How's your Civics?


Leave your score in the comments section (if you dare).

I socred 91%, but I still think they are wrong on one.

Can you guess which one I think they're wrong on?


And you thought Tom Daschle was not a leftest.
(leftist, for you purests)

Wednesday, November 19, 2008


The United States of America is different.

We are not France.

We are not Great Britain.

We are not Germany.

We are neither Canada nor Mexico.

We are unique.

Abraham Lincoln saw it. In his Gettysburg Address he used the phrase: "...that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

He recognized that this is a nation under God.

No one had told him that the founders set up a secular nation. That idea had not yet been invented.

He believed, as did they, that the God who created the universe led men and women who knew and followed His principles to set forth this nation as a part of His great plan.

Lincoln's words, "...shall have a new birth of freedom..." was a confirmation of the Declaration of Independence's thought that, "all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights..."

Then he said one of the most fundamental statements ever uttered, "...that government of the people, by the people, for the people..."

That was a summation of the intent of those who set up this government: that it is not a government that should rule over the people, but is a government directed by its citizens by way of a representative republic.

As we know, however: power is infectious. Power corrupts people when unrestrained. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

One of the things against which we must guard is giving too much power to our governing authorities.

Today, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has been given too much power.

Watching him testify before Congress, it is evident that he is enjoying his power a little too much, and is on the brink of crossing the line into monetary despotism.

He said, “...it is only prudent to reserve our TARP (Troubled Assets Relief Program) capacity, maintaining not only our flexibility but that of the next Administration.”

In other words, he does not want Congress to mess with the power he's been given...in fact, he wants to keep it.

With the soup line growing for those who are hungry for a piece of the bail-out pie, it is time for us to exercise our government of the people, by the people and for the people.

Call, write, email or visit your Congressperson today.

If you ask for my advice as to what to say, I would tell you to tell them in no uncertain (but polite) terms to back off this bail-out stuff and practice fiscal conservatism, placing the responsibility for the ills of these corporations where it belongs: on Congress first, for requiring lending institutions to make bad loans; and on the corporate heads for not screaming out their objection to the government's intrusion into their business.

If we do not take control of this anarchical government, we will realize Lincoln's fear that we will soon perish from the face of the earth.

Tuesday, November 18, 2008


Let's make it simple.

You manufacture thingamadoodles.

Each thingamadoodles you make costs you $.30 in raw material.

So, you sell it for $.60 and make $.30 on each one, right?


The cost of material is not all that goes into the cost of making your thingamadoodles.

There is the cost of productions machinery, which is amortized over the life of the machines.

Then there is the cost of the building you build your thingamadoodles in.

Added to that is the cost of the utilities you use to build thingamadoodles: electricity, water, sewer, etc.

By far the largest cost to most manufacturers is the cost of labor.

Let's say you pay your workers $30.00 per hour to produce thingamadoodles for you.

They also want you to pay for health insurance and to provide them with a retirement fund.

By the time you add in all of these factors, it costs you $1.00 to produce a single thingamadoodle.

Now let's say you decide to sell each thingamadoodle for $3.00.

You make $2.00 per thingamadoodle, right?


The government taxes your business (because your business sells 250,000 thingamadoodles per year, bringing in $250,000.00 per year).

The tax rate is, let's say, 39% of your earnings after "deductions" and "loop-holes," or about $97,500. Subtract that from your $250,000.00.

That brings your earnings down to $152,000.00.

That's an additional $1.52 for each thingamadoodle you make.

So now your "landed" cost (the cost after all other factors have been added in) is $2.52!

If you sell your thingamadoodles for $3.00, you make only $.48 on each one.

In order to make $250,00.00 now, you must sell 520,000 thingamadoodles per year.

Since the market will only support 250,00 thingamadoodles, you must make adjustments to your "landed" costs.

That might mean lay-offs, cuts in health insurance or wherever you can find things to cut.

Now the employee come along and tell you they won't work any longer without making $45.00 per hour and they want a bigger retirement plan and more health coverage.

Do you see what happens?

Exactly what has happened to the auto industry.

Add to that the costs of government required, but not relevant to your industry, "green" standards, etc., and your company makes even less and in fact may face bankruptcy.

Raise the price of my thingamadoodles?

People won't buy them at that price.

So you am stuck between a rock and a hard place, so to speak.

What happens if the government WITHDRAWS from its requirements that you pay so much in taxes and "green" regulations?

Then you can make money and contribute to the productivity of my country.

That, my friends, is why the capitalistic system needs to be allowed to function without interference from the government.

This is not to say that they should be allowed to abuse their employees, the environment or anything else.

It means that there are certain things the government does NOT do well.

Business is one of those things, because business is profit driven and the government is not.

Business gets its money in exchange for productivity.

Government gets its money by confiscating it from people...you and me.

Business, as it relates to the government, is none of their business.

Monday, November 17, 2008


There are some people who do not know the difference between right and wrong.

They adjust their belief(s) according to the circumstances.

That is called, "situational ethics."

What is true in this situation is not true in that. What is right in this circumstance is wrong in that.

I watched the 60 Minutes interview of President-elect, Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle (my belle).

He actually said some good things.

However, the "good" things he said contradicted the statements he made during his run for the White House.

That begs the question, "Which is the real BO?"

What is he really going to do when he ascends his throne?

I say that it depends on which way the wind is blowing at any given moment.

He wants to bail out the auto industry, but does not want to hurt the tax payer in doing so.

Where does he thing the money to bail out the auto industry would come from, the Money Fairy?

Of course, Washington has its own money tree.

That tree has two branches: The printing press and the tax payer.

In the interview, BO went on to list a few other things he wants to accomplish, but in the end, he was non-committal on most.

I have to give him this, though: he looked very intense and sincere.

It is my opinion that this is a time when we have to be very vigilent.

Since BO must go through Congress to get his agenda done, we need to be in constant touch with our law makers, letting them know what we think of his bills and pending legislation.

Here is a link that will help you know what is coming up legislatively: What's Happening in Congress .

Here is a link that will lead you to your law makers: Contact Your Congressperson .

Don't restrict your contact with just your own legislator.

The others may not directly represent you, but what they decide affects your life. Include as many as you can in your contacts, especially Nancy Pelosi; Barney Frank; Chris Dodd and others.

Keeping in touch with them will let them know where YOU stand on issues and DOES influence them, especially when contacts on a given subject are many.

Friday, November 14, 2008


I am absolutely opposed to the bail-out program on every level.

I believe it was a result of the poorest of governmental interference and blindness.

The government regulated what did not need regulating and refused to regulate what needed regulating.

One of the cries heard often when the "rescue" plan was first introduced was "If we do it for one we will have to do it for everybody."

That is exactly what has brought on the auto industry's groveling for a piece of the federal bail-out pie.

Now sit back and learn, 'cause I'm about to tell you how to "save" the auto industry in the United States of America.

I bought a Saturn SL2. It came with a crooked finder, a door handle that was not fully installed, a defective alternator and a cruise control that worked only spasmodically, at best.

I bought a Honda Accord. It came with no unfinished parts and no defects.

That's the difference between what is happening to American auto companies and what is happening to "foreign" auto makers (most of whose "imports" are no longer imported, but are made in America).

So here's what needs to be done.

American auto makers need to produce a product that delivers on its promises.

They need to make a car free of defects (yes, it CAN be done).

They need to price their products in a way that is fair to the consumer as well as to the manufacturer.

They need to employ workers who are dedicated to building a great product, rather than to making all they can for as little work as they can get away with.

This is accomplished by management, their enthusiasm, their proficiency and their absolute dedication to the needs of their employees.

Most American management says, "I'm the boss. Do what I say, when I say it, as soon as I say it and don't make any suggestions, 'cause that will make me feel like I'm not the boss."

Most American workers say, "Pay me top dollar, don't make me show up on time, don't make me be dependable, and don't expect me to be creative."

This mix is deplorable. It will NEVER work.

The problem with management is ego and power.

The problem with labor is wanting as much as possible for as little productivity as possible. What it boils down to is Management vs Union. That's sad.

If labor trusted management to treat them well, they would be treated better and would work based on pride, not only on pay.

If management trusted labor, they would let those "in the trenches," who deal with the product day-by-day, pass on good ideas that would garner serious consideration.

They don't trust each other, and each one behaves in ways that preserve that mutual distrust.

The only ones who really benefit from all of this are Union Leaders.

They end up serving themselves while convincing Union Members that they are serving them.

They do that very well.

Ask most Union members and they will tell you that the Union is the only way to go. Argue with them on this point and watch them explode.

That's a testament to how well Union Leadership has done its job. Not the job of representing the Union Members, the job of representing themselves.

What the American auto industry must do is to reinvent its methods of providing the product that Americans absolutely love: well made; good looking; dependable vehicles that last at least as long as the warranty.

The answer is not in technology, as important as that is. The answer is in relationship.

If they keep going like they are, no bail-out or "rescue" plan will be of any help at all. In a short period of time they will be right back where they are now.

Thursday, November 13, 2008


Editor's Note: Only Mark is likely to understand where this came from, as he seems to be a Pogo fan, as am I.

I am a Member of S.W.I.N.E.

That stands for Seniors Wildly Indignant about Nearly Everything.

I stole the title of my organization from Walt Kelly's comic strip called "Pogo."

Back then the word "Seniors" was "Students," but I got older.

My church members tell me that I must think that indignance is one of my spiritual gifts.

Be that as it may (or may not), I do find myself being extremely indignant about those things that contradict my experience with, and understanding of, what our country is supposed to be and how it is to be represented in the world.

Raised the son of a United States Air Force officer, I was taught a great deal about the war we were involved in at the time (WWII), as well as the history of our country.

My father often read to me at night.

Sometimes he read adventure stories.

Often, he read to me the writings of our founding fathers.

Contrary to what you might have been taught in government schools (before they started taking so much federal money they were public schools...they are no more), our country was NOT founded as a secular nation.

The Declaration of Independence is VERY clear that our rights come from our Creator.

The Constitution is built upon that premise, and assumes those rights as untouchable by the government. Never mind that the government continues to seek ways to touch those rights.

Furthermore, the Constitution is constructed around the principles of religious and civil law laid out in the Old Testament.

Where did YOU think those ideas (that were considered by the rest of the world to be inappropriate for government) came from?

Why did you think otherwise? Could it be that you were taught that we are a secular nation in your evolving government school system?

Since we get our rights from our Creator, and since the majority of those who originated this great nation wrote extensively about Him, it bothers me when the principles they set out are disturbed.

It occurs to me that it makes sense to hearken back to why we were formed as a country and what was expected of us as a nation by our historical leaders, to measure whether we are keeping faith with that vision.

One of their very strong visions was for a centralized government that was minimally involved in the daily goings on of our society, that is: a SMALL federal government.

Other nations had (and have) strong central governments that kept citizens in constant check, even to the point that they told on each other whenever someone strayed from the path set by the government.

We were quite the opposite. We believed in individual freedom, manifested in the First Ten Amendments to the Constitution and the Constitutional guarantees of life, liberty and property.

A few things were placed in the government's purview: 1) to form a more perfect Union; 2) to establish Justice; 3) to insure domestic Tranquility; 4) to provide for the common defence; 5) to promote the general Welfare; and 5) to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.

Those things that were not specifically covered by the Constitution were supposed to be left up to the individual states to determine for themselves.

As is the want of government, over the years the feds have usurped more and more of our freedoms and have become more and more involved, not only in the states' matters, but in matters of individual liberty.

This is an anamatha (a Greek word) to me, and causes be to react indignantly.

Thus, I am indignant when the federal government "nationalizes" private companies, "to keep them from going under."

They do this under the guise that if these large corporations fail, the country could be hurt and they are not supposed to let that happen.


If a private institution fails, and if our country is affording the opportunities it is supposed to, another will come along to take its place.

While this might be temporarily painful, the end result will be a stronger nation, not a weaker one.

But the government as assumed the roll of mega-nanny and watches over us.

That is as scary as anything that was imagined in novels such as "1984" and "Animal Farm."

And that, my friend, is why I am a conservative and a founding member of S.W.I.N.E.

Wanna join?

It's free.

Wednesday, November 12, 2008



Remember them?

They're the large insurance company so vexed by the "current economic conditions" that they just HAD to be rescued by the federal government.

Last week the company held a conference in Phoenix, Arizona at a place called "Point Hilton Squaw Peak Resort."

That's all well and good, except that AIG spent $20,000.00 of taxpayer bail-out money on the event.

The total cost to AIG was $343,000.00 but $320,000.00 of that was supposedly paid by "sponsors."

In the mean time, AIG has received $85,000,000,000.00 in "rescue" money, and now tell us that the total amount of our money they need to survive is up to $150,000,000,000.00.

Now, in the grand scheme of things, $20,000.00 may not seem like a lot of money to you.

If that is the case, simply put your contact information in my comments section and I will contact you about sending me $20,000.00, with which I could buy several tanks full of gas in my car.

The point is, of course, the lack of integrity, lack of honesty and unmitigated gall of those executives who would be so gutsy as to spend taxpayer money on a company "party."

Now is a time when we need to contact our lawmakers and object to "rescue" money being used to pay for a party pretending to be a "conference."

In my humble, but correct, opinion, the bail-out was a mistake and an open invitation for fiscal abuse.

Is that the way you want YOUR tax dollars to be spent?

Tuesday, November 11, 2008


Conservative Convictions

Social Sense

Palace for a Princess

Pasadena Closet Conservative

The Right Is Right

Have a great day honoring those who are serving and who have served in our Armed Services as well as those who have given their ultimate for our freedom.

Sunday, November 9, 2008


It is my opinion that in order to get the United States of America back on track, we the people must become more involved.

Each of us has an opinion on just about every law or potential law before Congress.

Trouble is, Congress does not know what your opinion is, and they are not going to canvass you before every vote.

You, therefore, must communicate with them.

There are several ways you can do that.

You can call the Congressional switchboard and ask to be put through to your Congress person's office. The number is: 202-244-3121.

When you get your Representative's office, be polite (a lost art on some people).

It is OK to be firm, but it is never helpful to be abusive or derisive.

The second way is by mail.

The address of your Representative can be found at: https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

Writing is slower, but gives a pure paper trail.

The day before yesterday I got a personal reply from Connie Mack to a letter I had sent him about six weeks ago.

The third method is to use email.

I'm not sure how effective email is, although I have gotten responses from emails I sent to Representatives from my own Party (Republican).

Finally, you can visit the local office of your Representative.

If he/she is out of town, talk to the office staff. If you are friendly and polite, they will hear you.

Which ever way you choose, be specific. Don't ramble. Stick to one topic at a time and don't be distracted from your point.

Be polite.

Politeness is a lost art, but is really appreciated when it is tried.

A favorable response to your message is more likely to be forth-coming if you are pleasant.

So, be polite.

And did I say, "Be polite?"

That is because I think you should


It is little to ask of one who wants to be involved in issues of government, so be polite.

You can find out about upcoming bills and legislation at several sites, especially if you know from what committee the bill you are interested emanates.

Sites like: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/committee.xpd?id=SSJU will show the people on the committee and pending legislation.

It requires some wading, but it is useful for specific items.

A comprehensive listing can be found at http://www.govtrack.us/ , with which you can follow the status of federal legislation.

Anyway...I hope this helps you become more involved.

And by the way: be polite.

Saturday, November 8, 2008


See, I am from Miami (the one in Florida).

Therefore, I am a Dolphins fan.

I can't help it, I am.

Part of the reason is that I personally knew so many of the members of that 1972 team...the one with the perfect season.

I knew Earl Morril, Tim Foley, Nick Buonticonti, and Norm Evans.

And I still think Bob Griese was the best tactician to ever play the game.

The year 2007, however, was a very different story.

The Dolphins found a way to lose a game, even in the rare instances when they were in the lead with only moments to go on the clock.

They were just plain awful.

This year they are rebuilding and are doing an admirable job of it.

Conservative Republicans find themselves in a similar situation.

We conservatives look back on the Reagan years with great nostalgia.

After Reagan we had George H.W. Bush.

Remember, "Read my lips...no new taxes?"

Then it was George W.

Most fondly remembered for, "Mission Accomplished!"

And now we are like the 2007 Dolphins.

We must rebuild...but how?

Let's start with the basics.

We did not lose this election because we did not embrace enough people who were "moderates" (read: stand for nothing), or because we did not "reach across the aisle."

We lost this election precisely because we DID embrace the wrong folks.

And because we stood for nothing.

Until Governor Sarah Palin entered the race as VP candidate.

Then, nine weeks (out of over two years of campaigning) before the election she comes in and shows John "reach across the aisle" McCain what he should have been doing all along.

He tried to get the idea, but it just never jelled with him.

He was obviously uncomfortable when he tried to be on the attack against Barack Obama (BO), and looked stilted, almost robotic, war injuries notwithstanding.

If conservative Republicans want to make any headway in the next elections (two years away), they must re-find themselves, totally DUMP the so-called moderates and left-wingers among them and focus on, and only on, those Palinesque leaders who will champion the real conservative cause.

If you are a "moderate" Republican, why don't you just get out of the Party and join the Democrats. At least then we'll know who you are and where you stand.

If you are a "lefty," what on earth are you doing in the Republican Party to begin with?

We don't need you.

We don't want you.

Go away and let us get on with being who we are.

"But Joe!" I hear you whining, "Won't that lessen our numbers and give us less of a chance to win?"

Absolutely NOT.

It will come as a surprise to you who think this way, but there are MORE conservative Republicans than there are of you.

Many conservative Republicans stayed away from the polls, or even went so far as to vote Democrat, to show their disgust with the state of the Republican Party.

So I'm telling you, dearly beloved Republicans, if you want to win next time, and the time after that and so on, you had better heed my advice.

Get back to your roots.

Once again be the anti-slavery party; the Party of Abraham Lincoln; the Party that passed the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments to the U.S. Constitution; the party that passed the Civil Rights Acts of 1866 and 1875; the Party that founded the NAACP; the Party that sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools; the Party that established the Civil Rights Commission in 1958; the Party of Earl Warren, who drew up the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision ending school segregation; the Party who cast the most votes for the Civil Rights Acts of the 1960s; the Party of the FIRST Affirmative Action program in 1969 and the Party that approved the spending of over $200 billion to fight AIDS in Africa.

We need to become the Party of Judeo-Christian values; the Party of Economic initiative (so that no Democrats can ever again reject suggested regulations on entities like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac); the Party of trust and integrity; the Party of smaller centralized power and the Party of Constitutionalism.


We'll see.

Friday, November 7, 2008


We live in what has variably been called "a democratic republic," or "a constitutional republic."

Most Americans believe that we are a democracy, but that is not true in the classical sense of the word.

At any rate, we have a voice in our government.

The government, however, often behaves as if it is deaf to our voice.

We proved our power, however, as the fed's first attempt at a bail-out (now called "the rescue plan") failed because of a blitz of phone calls, letters and emails against it.

So here is our hope: When a bill is sent to our law makers by soon to be President BO, if it is one that advances one of his socialistic ideas, we must inundate the Congressional switchboard with objections to it.

Our involvement is the most likely deterrent to a move toward socialism.

The only other hope is the Supreme Court, which could declare a particular proposal as unconstitutional, but that will depend upon whether or not BO has yet nominated, and has had confirmed, his cadre of liberal judges.

So get ready, stay informed and be VERY active in the process.

BO is already building a core of very liberal heads of departments for his cabinet, etc., so we will really have to be diligent.

As the Boy Scouts motto says: BE PREPARED!

Thursday, November 6, 2008


Yesterday I asserted that we could look for certain things from a BO presidency.

Several commenters challenged my conclusions, saying they are warnings with no basis.

Well, I'd like to challenge the challengers to get their heads out of the sand and just look at what the man, himself, has said.

In a morning radio interview in Chicago, BO said the following:

"As radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it has been interpreted -- and Warren Court interpreted it in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can't do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you. But it doesn't say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf. And that hasn't shifted, and one of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court-focused, uh, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change. And, uh, in some ways we still suffer from that."

Do you understand what he said?

He said the Constitution was written on a flawed premise: what the government cannot do, rather than what it must do.

He went on to say that the Constitution is "...a flawed document."

Those are not my words, they are his.

Yet he is willing to stand before the American people and place his hand on a Bible, or some other "sacred" work and say:

"I, Barack Hussein Obama, I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

He will swear to you that he will preserve the Constitution.

He will swear to you that he will protect the Constitution.

He will swear to you that he will defend the Constitution.

Notice that there is nothing in the oath of office that promises what the president will do for you.

Now, either he will fulfill his oath or he will act on his belief that the Constitution is flawed and will try to change it.

Based on his assertion that he is an honest man, I expect that he will do his best to change the Constitution into a "less flawed" document by re-writing it to say what the government is obligated to do for you.

That will require a Constitutional Convention, and that is a very dangerous idea.

In another interview, BO stated that he intends to place "clean air" restrictions on the coal industry that it will become too expensive for them to comply and that if they choose to build new plants they can do so, but it will bankrupt them.

I didn't say that, he did.

Is he honest?

Will he really do what he said he will do?

That is a matter of trust.

If he can be trusted to accomplish his goals, there will be consequences that are beyond anything we have ever had to endure.

Are you aware of the importance of the coal industry to our economy and to the well-being of citizens presently dependant on coal for heating their homes and providing them with electricity?

New energy sources are fine, but the logistics of developing, constructing and distributing these new sources will take a great deal of time, as we do not currently have the technology or the infrastructure to make efficient use of them.

In the mean time, we must continue to rely on what we have, as responsibly as possible.

On the topic of energy, did you notice that as soon as the US announced that it would consider drilling for oil in places it has not been drilling the price of a barrel of oil began to drop?

See, oil prices are based on anticipated supplies and demands, not on today's use.

As soon as OPEC and others are convinced that we will not drill in the near future, they will conclude that the supply will not be increasing and they will be able to raise the price of a barrel of oil once again, bringing them great profits on their oil.

We, then will pay more for gasoline at the pump.

BO has frowned on the idea of drilling for oil off shore or elsewhere, leaving us at the mercy of foreign sources.

As you know, computers work on an "if-then" basis. If certain conditions exist, certain things will occur.

My assessment of the things that will be coming our way in a BO presidency are based on the same principle: if this happens, this will be the result.

So I stand by my predictions, based not on some Nostradamical prophetic ability, but on a logical extension of the beliefs BO, himself has stated he believes and will do.

You don't have to agree with me.

This is still America, and you have the right to be wrong.