The Founders Were Not Deists

Some in this nation get very uncomfortable if anyone mentions the religious heritage of our nation.  They immediately go on the defense, calling our Founders "deists", like they fear someone forcing them to wear a burkha.  One has to wonder if these people even know what a deist is.

The simplest way to understand deism is that it is a belief that there is a Supreme Being, but once this Supreme Being sets forth certain laws, he does not intervene in the affairs of men.  It is often called the "watchmaker theory" which states that once the watch is made and wound, the watchmaker does nothing else.

A deist would not pray for God's blessings on human endeavors because that would be futile and violative of their beliefs.  A "watchmaker" God would not and could not bless anyone or anything.  Deists know this and consider prayer a foolish exercise.

In spite of this what does history teach us about our Founding Fathers?  Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson are always cited as the most deistic of any of our Founders, yet Franklin, himself, stated, "I believe in one God, the Creator of the universe.  That he governs it by his Providence.  That he ought to be worshipped."  A watchmaker God could not and would not govern the universe by his Providence.  Jefferson said, "I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just and his justice cannot sleep forever."  A Deist's God could not do anything about it, even if his sense of justice was offended.  

George Washington, at Valley Forge, when the nation seemed at its most vulnerable prayed, "...look down from heaven in pity and compassion upon me Thy servant...."  Who would care if a God of a Deist had pity or compassion on someone?  A Deist certainly would not consider himself to be a "servant" of such a God.

The facts are that from their writings and known congregational associations, the majority of our Founding Fathers were church members.  The very first act of the Continental Congress was to pray for Divine Providence in the face of the British bombardment of Boston.  A watchmaker is incapable of Divine Providence in a crisis.

Our Founders were not Deists. Our Founders knew that only God could see this nation through its early trials and tribulations, and only God can see this nation through today.

Does The Left Believe In Choice?

Those that set the agenda for the Democrat party claim to have faith in the American people. Do they really mean it?  They constantly demand that women should have control of their bodies when it comes to abortion.  They call themselves "pro-choice".  But, are they?

These are the same elites who do not believe that you can be trusted to know what job and what job conditions are good for you. They must meddle, because you are not smart enough to walk away from low pay, long hours and unsafe conditions. They must interject themselves into the individual contractual relationship between employer and employee.

These elites do not trust you to make the right decision on what vehicle to purchase. Instead of realizing that car manufacturers make the cars and trucks that consumers want to buy, they want to restrict the types of automobiles that can be sold. Why? Because car makers are greedy and you are too stupid to purchase a safe, fuel efficient, environmentally friendly car.  If left alone, you might not make a wise choice.

These elites do not believe that you can make proper choices concerning what you eat. They seek to regulate McDonald's and other fast food places to the extent that their advertising would be restricted and their exposure to liability is increased. Why? Because you are incapable of making appropriate food choices for you and your children. 

These same elites want more Federal standards for education and oppose vouchers to encourage school choice. They don't even believe that you can decide what is best for your child's learning.

They oppose lower taxes because the Great White Father in Washington can spend YOUR money better than you can. In fact most domestic governmental programs are full of "Father Knows Best" paternalism.

These elites claim to "trust the people". They really only trust you when it comes to killing a baby.  Otherwise, they know best.

I Don't Understand

While watching some of the debate regarding the partial-birth abortion bill, one would have thought that Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer were being ordered by the government to wear burkhas and chastity belts.  Their level of passion to defend an indefensible procedure was stunning.  I truly don't get it.

Whether you are pro-choice or pro-life regarding abortion in the first trimester, how can you support partial-birth abortion?  I'm sorry, the "it isn't a baby, it's a fetus and it's the woman's body" argument doesn't cut it here.  Partial birth abortion occurs in the third trimester when anyone who has watched an ultrasound or felt their own baby kick knows that what is in there is a separate living thing.

You can't scream that the government shouldn't be allowed to get involved, either.  Most of you who support partial birth abortion would chain yourself to an iceberg to force the government to get involved to prevent baby harp seals from being clubbed.  You would have no problem with the government putting hundreds of loggers out of work to protect a spotted owl.  I would like to know how you rationalize a spotted owl or harp seal being more valuable than a viable fetus.

Doctors who perform the procedure even play mental gymnastics to justify it.  Somehow a baby who is purposely delivered breech can be killed, but not so with an identical baby coming out head first.  Almost eighty percent of partial birth abortions are performed because of fetal defects.  I'm sorry folks, that doesn't improve your argument, it just makes you sound like selfish versions of Dr. Mengele.  My wife's baby sister was born with cerebral palsy and I cannot imagine life without her.  When we were first married, my wife worked in a group home for mentally challenged adults.  Trust me, these people have value.

The partial-birth abortion law provides for an exception for the life of the mother, so that arugment isn't valid either.  It is a gruesome, horrible procedure performed on a viable fetus that has its own separate heart, brain, emotions and personality.  If partial-birth abortion is not murder, then there is no such thing.  Like I said, I don't understand.

Oh, and don't whine about the baby harp seals.

The Elites Know Best

The elites among us have consistently tried to tell us two things about the War on Terror.  First, they tell us it is not about religion.  Secondly, they tell us that the fundamentalists make up only a very small minority of the Muslim population.  Now, since opinions are like noses, let's look at some facts.

The terrorists themselves and their supporters say this is about religion.  Every pronouncement from the jihadists talks about Allah commanding them to fight us, the infidels.  They claim that the Holy Qu'ran demands it.  I know that elitists like to tell people what they are supposed to feel, think and believe; yet, if the terrorists say this is about religion how can the elitists say otherwise?

Now as for the claim that only a tiny percentage of Muslims subscribe to this fundamentalist view, the facts call that into question as well.  The examples of Saudi Arabia, Iran and Egypt are very illuminating.

The excuse given for why the House of Saud cannot help in the fight against terrorism is that the Wahabbists want to overthrow them and put in a theocracy.  If they are that much of a threat, they must control a large portion of the population.

Iran has already imposed a fundamentalist theocracy and even though they are Shi'ites, they are permitting Al Qaeda Wahabbists to keep camps and conduct training there.  Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak's biggest threat is from the militants who would take over if he did not remain vigilant.  Those militants are fundamentalist Islamists.

The KLA in Kosovo, the terrorist army trying to take over the Philippines, a large portion of the population of Yemen; they are all fundamentalists.  In fact, the only two predominantly Islamic nations that do not have significant fundamentalist movements are Jordan and Kuwait; both of which are tiny by Muslim standards.  Even Turkey has problems with its religious zealots from time to time.

The elites say that there are plenty of moderate Muslims that do not support terrorism.  I am glad to hear it.  Where are they?

Trying To Understand Leftists

Surprisingly to some, I don't consider leftists to be evil people.  I don't consider them, by and large, to be stupid people.  Yet I consider leftism to be as dangerous as terrorism to the United States of America.

It is hard for me to understand leftism.  I have tried, since I first encountered professors who had opposed the Vietnam War and didn't believe that the Soviet Union was the "evil empire".  I had seen people like that on television, but to actually discuss issues with them and ask them questions was a shock.

The first thing I learned was that equality, to them, is actually more important than liberty.  They view inequality itself as a form of oppression.  Yes, I know, people can be unequal in condition without someone else causing that inequality, but leftists see the condition as evidence of oppression.

Next I learned that leftists are uncomfortable with the idea of the United States as a "superpower".  In the eyes of leftists, America is too controlled by corporate interests, which are inherently evil, to be allowed to be so dominant in the world.  The Soviet Union actually did a service by keeping some of our more insidious corporate interests in check. 

I further learned that leftists have an inherent NEED to look at the world objectively.  This notion of the United States of America being "our team", is juvenile in their eyes.  They see the hope of a peaceful unified world where there is no need for borders and armies.  The entire concept of borders, to them, is inherently discriminatory and xenophobic.

Further, they see differences in viewpoint, rather than good and evil when it comes to relations between nations.  Now admittedly, they see good and evil, or rather, oppressed and oppressor, in relations between business and employee or consumer.  The United States is too big to be the good guy in their eyes.  We fit the part of oppressor much better than the oppressed in their eyes.

Having said this, I still don't get it.  They see a nation that has done better at living up to ideals than any other, and they still cringe at the thought of us being "good".  They see a nation where economic mobility is the norm rather than the exception, and they still see a negative picture.  I know this old country boy isn't the smartest guy in the room, but ...

Searching For Nuance

Leftists constantly criticize conservatives for seeing issues in terms of right and wrong, good and evil, black and white with no shades of gray.  According to leftists, we are not capable of seeing the nuances of a particular situation, particularly in the area of foreign policy.

Amazingly, they even accuse us of this when it comes to the War on Terror.  Now, very few of them are willing to say publicly that we brought 9/11 on ourselves; but they do get very uncomfortable if we view the battle in terms of a war between good and evil.  They tell us that we are being narrowminded.  They tell us that we need to give some consideration to the terrorists' point of view.  They say we need to look for the nuances.

Therefore, I am going to search for some nuance in this conflict.  Al Qaeda and its associates believe that murder is an appropriate way to get closer to God.  If that is not evil, then there is no evil on this earth.  These terrorists believe that women are nothing more than property and should not even be permitted to leave their home without a family member accompanying them.  Even leftists would agree that is evil.  So far, no nuance needed.

These people see nothing wrong with asking their children to become human bombs.  They see nothing wrong with killing your children simply because they believe differently.  That is evil.  There is no other way to describe it.  Nuances don't apply.

There can be no serious argument made that our opponents in the War on Terror are not evil.  There can be no nuance that grants them a legitimate justification for their beliefs or their actions.  Yet, the leftists don't want us calling this a war of good vs. evil.  The leftists want us to find some nuance.

Wait a minute.  Now I understand.  The leftists don't have a problem with calling our enemy evil.  The problem is that they can't bring themselves to call the United States "good".  That is the nuance they want us to see.  I should have known.

Hell Refuses To Freeze Over

I have never been a Cubs fan.  I was raised a Yankees fan and became a Braves fan by virtue of geography and cable television, so I never could understand the warm fuzzies that people got over a team that seemed destined to finish among the also rans every year.  I was simply of the opinion that their ownership didn't want to spend the money and make the committment necessary to win.  Thus, I had a hard time sympathizing with them.

However, having seen the sport that I love fall on hard times, and seeing the interest that the Cubs and Red Sox generated in this year's playoffs; I changed my mind.  I began cheering for the law of gravity to be repealed along with millions of other baseball fans.  This team seemed to have destiny on its side.  Against Atlanta, Wood and Pryor looked unstoppable, and they were up three games to one on the Marlins, a team that even the most die hard baseball fan has a difficult time appreciating.  Satan was breaking out the long underwear.

The Cubs then lose on Sunday in a game that they never seemed to want to play.  It was okay, though.  They were still up three to two and going home to the friendly confines.  All seemed to be going according to some divine plan.

On Tuesday night, the Cubs were five outs away from exorcising all the demons that had plagued them for decades, then fate, chance, the forces of evil or something snatched it all away.  The fan did nothing wrong.  He was simply trying to grab a piece of history.  He never intended to make history.

Last night was academic.  The Cubs made a gallant effort, but those of us who understand the baseball gods knew what would happen in the last chapter.  Hell is still hot and the Cubs are still cursed.  As a baseball fan, that makes me sad.

Finding Truth With The Democrats

There are two common themes that resonate through the Anybody But Bush crowd.  First, Bush's tax cuts are stated to have only benefitted the wealthy and have ruined the economy.  Second, Bush is alleged to have lied as to the justifications for the War in Iraq.  Oh sure, there are other arguments that Democrats and ABBers make, but those two are constant repetitive "amen" lines in ANY Bush hating crowd.

Unfortunately, neither charge is accurate.  Now before the Bush haters scream that I am merely a sheep repeating something that Karl Rove whispered in my ear during my daily brainwashing sessions, my information comes from two serious Democrat candidates for President.

Richard Gephardt made a surprising visit to "The O'Reilly Factor" recently, and was asked pointblank whether the administration misled him on the intelligence regarding Iraq.  Gephardt said, without equivocation, "No."  He then explained how he examined the intelligence personally and had a personal meeting with George Tenet.  He was satisfied with the intelligence then and is still satisfied with the intelligence.  So there you have it from a leading Democrat.  Bush did not lie to get authorization for war.

My source regarding taxes is none other than John F. Kerry.  In a recent debate, a woman mentioned her tax burden as a small business owner.  Gephardt was reminded that he wanted to repeal the entire Bush tax cut.  John Kerry, and this is not the first time he has done so, pointed out in some detail how eliminating the Bush tax cut would harm "working" families with children.  The bottom line is that repealing a tax cut would not harm someone if the tax cut did not initially benefit that person.  Thus, "working families" must have received a benefit from the Bush tax cuts, and recent news about consumer spending has confirmed this.

Thus, by the Democrats' own mouths, their two major issues have been stripped away as the hyperbolic campaign chatter that they really are.  What are the ABBers left with?  The only things they ever had in the first place.  Partisanship and hatred over the 2000 election.  Now those are two important campaign issues.

Something Good May Come From This

Conservatives have long been associated with a desire for smaller government, except, and this is a big exception, in the area of personal privacy issues.  One of those personal privacy issues is the prohibition and criminalization of drug use and drug addiction.  Cultural conservatives have long been associated with the notion of locking up drug offenders and passage of mandatory sentences for drug offenders.

The War on Drugs is not conservative in terms of the power it places in the hands of governmental officials.  The War on Drugs has been responsible for governmental abuses and overreaching that makes the Patriot Act pale in comparison.  You think that having a librarian calling the FBI about what books you read is bad, imagine having your home seized and sold because the government found some marijuana in your bedroom.

Rush Limbaugh has been a huge defender of the War on Drugs and has been, historically, hard on drug users.  Cultural and religious conservatives have been the most vocal in giving him an "Amen" when he would rail on those issues.  It was almost like Rush and these moralists never even realized how UN-Conservative the War on Drugs was.

We need fewer laws, not more.  The criminal code, with few exceptions, should be reserved for offenses where someone has deprived another person of life, liberty or property.  Drug abuse does none of those things.  Yes, I know, some talk about the cost to society of drug addiction.  That still does not justify using the criminal code to increase governmental power as a nanny.  It certainly does not justify using the criminal code to steal the property of individuals.

Perhaps, Rush's current troubles will cause some of these conservatives to rethink their positions on the War on Drugs and the power that a victimless crime gives to an already too powerful government.

Getting Even The Enlightened Way

I will admit it.  I don't have a whole lot of compassion for Rush Limbaugh and his acknowledgment of a five year addiction to prescription painkillers.  He was too hard on drug addicts in statements made on his show, and purposely alienated Libertarians who would have agreed with him on other issues anytime they would bring up legalization of marijuana.  People who live in glass houses need to be careful what they toss.

That being said, the level of glee and frothing bloodlust from liberals regarding this issue is disgusting.  Liberals claim to have the market cornered on compassion.  No person is too bad to be unworthy of assistance and help.  Liberals claim to be more enlightened and open minded than conservatives.  That enlightenment doesn't extend to Rush, though.  We shouldn't be surprised.

Liberals' treatment of Rush actually shows us liberalism at its core.  Liberalism, their protestations to the contrary, is the politics of getting even.  Rich people must have cheated or oppressed someone to obtain their wealth.  Thus, we must get even with them.  White people have oppressed minorities for centuries, so we must get even with them.  Employers have oppressed employees, so we must get even with them.  Men have oppressed women, so we must get even with them.

Amazingly, though, with all this need for getting even that liberals have; this all changes when it comes to street crime and foreign policy.  Street criminals are always entitled to compassion.  Foreign enemies are entitled to that compassion as well. Liberals believe that street criminals and foreign enemies have been oppressed by the United States, so they are simply getting even, too.

Like I said, liberalism is all about getting even.

Why Do They Hate Us

Leftists have spent the better part of a year in agony because, in their opinion, the world hates the United States.  These handwringers can offer you reason after reason as to why, citing everything from colonialist and unilateral foreign policy, to corporate greed that intentionally keeps the rest of the world oppressed.  As with most things, leftists have this issue all wrong.

First, if we were horrible, then we would not have millions trying to get in the country.  At last count, there were over eight million illegal aliens in the United States.  Haitians risk life and limb to get to our shores.  Amazingly, there are even Cubans who still want to leave that socialist paradise and its wonderful schools and free healthcare in order to seek asylum here.  If we were as bad as the leftists say, then these same leftists would be risking their lives to get to Cuba and Mexico.  Basically, the leftists don't even believe their own garbage on this issue.

However, some in the world do hate us.  Of course, the left is convinced that this hate is due entirely to George W. Bush.  If that were the case, then the left would have to finally reject Noam Chomsky as a kook.  Chomsky has been telling the world for twenty five years that the United States deserves to be hated.  Chomsky and Michael Moore notwithstanding, there is a simple reason as to why we are hated.  We win.  We prosper.  We are free.

Think back to the 1970s.  The most hated team in the NFL was the Pittsburgh Steelers.  Why?  They won Super Bowl after Super Bowl.  Winners are hated.  Jealousy and envy are basic human emotions that the United Nations will never be able to remove from the planet.  Look at the leftists themselves.  They hate the wealthy.  They are convinced that the wealthy cheated to become wealthy.  Regardless of the truth, it makes leftists feel justified for their anger.  People around the world are no different.  They accuse the U.S. of horrible crimes, but the bottom line is that they want to justify their hatred.

Just as individuals cannot MAKE people like them, we cannot make the "world" like us.  We can join the leftists in self loathing and wrongheaded guilt, or we can thank God that we live in the greatest nation in the world.  It's your choice.

 

Wonderland Politics

At any moment, I expect to be approached by a giant rabbit informing me that he is late for an important date.  I have definitely gone "through the looking glass".  The California Recall and the Valerie Plame affair have revealed the political landscape to be a strange place indeed.

We have Democrats screaming that a womanizer and groper cannot be Governor of a state.  I could have sworn that these same Democrats had been saying since 1992, that questionable sexual behavior and old charges didn't matter and were simply distractions from the "real" issues of the day.  The Los Angeles Times is outraged because Arnold is only an "actor" but Martin Sheen's attributes were apparent to all.

We have Republicans proclaiming joy that a pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, pro-gun control, pro-cloning supporter of the principles of the Kyoto Treaty has been elected to be Governor of the largest state in the Union.  Oh yeah, and this guy had more Kennedys on the podium during his victory speech than Republicans.  This ride needs an off switch.

On top of it all, we have Congressional Democrats horrified that a possible covert agent of the CIA has been outed.  "National security and foreign policy have been compromised", they scream.  Of course, these same Democrats spent the better part of the last decade calling the CIA murderers and drug dealers and blaming secret operations for causing the drug problem in South Central Los Angeles.  Democrats, in the 1970s, even tried to get rid of the Agency, claiming that it was a greater threat to world peace and stability than the Soviet Union.  Republicans, on the other hand, apparently, regardless of whether a law was broken or not, have taken a cavalier attitude about the traditional secrecy of the Agency.

Yet, in spite of these total reversals of position.  America is still divided.  Politically, we have not been this divided since 1860.  "Gotcha!" and "Getcha!" rule the day.  Each side hates the other side without recognizing the positions that they must defend in order to do so.  "Off with their heads" is the only order of business.  I sure hope I wake up soon.

For Conservatives only

What is wrong with the Bush political team?  Have they all quit?  I realize that part of the problem was the new tone that Bush promised.  You don't fight Democrats he said, you try to work with them. I'm sorry, working with most liberal Democrats gives me the same feeling that the thought of Charles Manson pleading to simple assault would have given Vincent Bugliosi.  Justice isn't done, and a bath is needed.

I thought Karl Rove was a genius.  But three recent incidents have got me wondering.  First, when the admittedly left of center Joseph Wilson wrote the story in the New York Times that Saddam never purchased yellowcake uranium from Niger, the administration couldn't wait to be apologetic.  Never mind that Bush said that an attempt was made, not a purchase.  Never mind that Great Britain stood behind their intelligence.  Never mind that Wilson never did any investigation other than ask the government of Niger whether they sold any to Iraq.  The Bush team caved when they didn't have to cave.

The second pathetic episode regarded David Kay's report concerning weapons of mass destruction.  The news media was thrilled to report that no stockpiles of weapons had been found, but the administration did a lousy job of pointing out what had been found, like Scud fuel, attempts to get missile technology from North Korea, starter toxins for weapons, dual use labs; all banned .  The report actually confirmed a lot of intelligence, but the administration didn't seem to care to make their case.

Now comes the story of  Valerie Plame.  The Bush team is letting the news media and the Democrats define the terms.  The Intelligence Identities Protection Act is a very specific statute with a high burden of proof.  There are serious questions about whether Ms. Plame falls into that category and whether there was an intentional leak.  Yet, the Bush administration is going along with whatever the media says about this.

Has Bush decided that he doesn't want a second term?  Politics is the art of perception.  The Bush team used to be able to play politics like Stevie Ray Vaughn on guitar.  Not lately, though.

 

What Did You Expect?

Let me begin by advising my conservative friends, I'm going to make you mad with what I'm about to say.  It needs to be said, though.  So here goes.

The current outrage over Arnold's groping and the absolute glee over the possibility of Rush's drug abuse should be expected.  Yes, it is politically motivated.  Yes, it is a double standard compared to how Democrats are treated for the same offenses.  But it is to be expected.  Moralizers always get skewered worse by their sins than rogues do.

Look back to the 1992 presidential campaign.  Written in small letters, under "It's the economy stupid" on the Clinton campaign was the statement that personal character does not matter.  Everyone knew that Bill Clinton had Hugh Hefner tendencies.  It was part of his charm.  The Republicans should have realized this after the '92 election, but persisted in their attempts to bring him down, using primarily, issues of personal character to do it.  They should have spent more time washing the windows in their glass houses.  We lost two House Speakers because of it.

Bush's past with alcohol is treated worse than Teddy Kennedy's past with alcohol.  Why?  Republicans try to present themselves as more moral than Democrats.  Therefore ANY chink in the armor is going to be pounced upon like it were a fumbled football.  Arnold's 30 year old groping is more relevant than similar behavior by Clinton or Kennedy, simply because he is associated with the Republican party.  Republicans should not expect any sympathy from the Democrats now that the shoe is on the other foot.

Rush has spent entire hours on his radio show making fun of Libertarians, who would otherwise support his views, because of their desire for decriminalization of marijuana.  He shouldn't expect any sympathy if it comes to light that he has been abusing pain pills.  Never mind that the left treats drug abuse as a disease.  Republicans treat drug abuse as a moral problem and THAT is the standard THEY must live up to.

Is it fair?  Maybe, maybe not.  It is a fact, though.  Republicans shouldn't have expected anything else.

 

Politically correct v. right. PC favored by 10

Rush should have known better.  No matter how FACTUALLY ACCURATE his statement was, he should have known better.  Rush Limbaugh has gotten nailed to the wall for statements he made about the NFL brass and the news media.  Yes, that is who he was talking about.  His only comments directed toward Donovan McNabb, quarterback of the Philadelphia Eagles were that he was overrated.  That is a charge that has been made of quarterbacks, black and white, ever since the advent of the T formation.

Rush said that the media and the NFL muckety muck were proclaiming McNabb to be better than he is to show the world that the league has a successful black quarterback.  The reason behind this is two fold.  First, the NFL has recently suffered from extortion by Jesse Jackson, which resulted in the silly rule that any NFL team had to interview a black coach for any opening that team might have.  The team is under no obligation to hire the coach, it simply has to interview one.  Secondly, the NFL wants to show the world how advanced and enlightened it is by having a successful black quarterback.  It is very similar to what John Kerry did when he proclaimed that he had a black friend. 

Before you say that the NFL is past such ideas, since they have had Randall Cunningham and Doug Williams, let us look at the facts.  Cunningham suffered criticism throughout his career that he was an athlete playing quarterback.  No one ever claimed he was at the level of Dan Marino, Joe Montana or John Elway.  Doug Williams won a Super Bowl and had a spotty career otherwise.

So, the bottom line is, that Rush was RIGHT, as his fans are fond of saying.  However, he should have known better.  The politically correct thought police have taken over America.  There are some things that cannot be said in polite circles, even the polite circles of an NFL pregame show.  Rush may have been right, but he certainly was not politically correct.  In this modern enlightened world in which we live, we have a valuable object lesson as to which is more important.

Top Ten Ways To Tell If Your Wife's A Spy

10.  Instead of a tribal tattoo on her lower back, she has a tattoo of the CIA emblem.

 9.   You give her a new diamond ring for your anniversary, but she still chooses to wear her secret decoder ring.

 8.   At parties she introduces herself as "Smith, Jane Smith".

 7.   When you go on family vacations, she typically has to fight off teams of black clad ninjas everytime you leave the motel.

 6.   Her package of birth control pills doubles as a radio transmitter.

 5.   She refers to her boss by using a single letter rather than a name.

 4.   She keeps getting taped messages in the mail that self destruct after ten seconds.

 3.   She asks you to go to a small African nation to ask a government official about baking a yellow cake.

 2.   Her car has all kinds of cool gadgets.

 1.   She gets nervous everytime you mention Karl Rove's name.