In God's Hands

I truly believe that God calls men for certain times in history.  Yes, I know, that isn’t an enlightened way to think, but as a student of history I can think no other way.  Imagine how different the Revolutionary War and the early years of our Republic might have been without George Washington at the helm.  He was an inspiring figure so beloved that many wanted to declare him King after the defeat of the British.  Yet, he was humble enough and self effacing enough to ensure that this nation would not become a monarchy like Europe.

 

Abraham Lincoln was the perfect President to face the horrors of the Civil War.  Lincoln’s unique skills had not manifested themselves during his earlier life, and it is doubtful that he would have been a successful peacetime President.  Yet his resolve saved the and ended the scourge of slavery.  It is highly unlikely that any of his contemporaries could have accomplished those feats.

 

Franklin Roosevelt was the right man for the job of President during World War II, just as Churchill was the right man for the job of British Prime Minister during that dreadful war.  Ronald Reagan was the only man who could face down the Soviets and make them blink.

 

The point that I’m making is that throughout history, the cause of freedom has advanced.  The right people have been in place to lead that advance.  You may choose to believe that this is an accident, a mere random chance; but I don’t.  It is evidence of the Divine Hand of Providence watching over our nation.

 

With all my heart, I believe that George W. Bush is another one of those leaders who is chosen for a particular challenge.  That challenge, that enemy of freedom, is Islamofascism.  George W. Bush is a man guided by faith.  He isn’t a man who believes that being President is merely a goal in and of itself.  President Bush recognizes the moment in history we face.  He recognizes that the choices we make today will reach out into the future.

 

President Bush sees the enemy clearly.  Just as Lincoln saw that the Union MUST be preserved, even if places like Gettysburg, Shiloh and Antietam had to become blood soaked cemeteries, just as Ronald Reagan saw that the Soviet Union was the “Evil Empire” that must be confronted even as the world was calling for appeasement and disarmament; George W. Bush sees that this moment in time brings us to a clash of civilizations and ideologies that must be won.  George W. Bush has the faith and the fortitude to face this moment, even if it isn’t the popular thing to do.

 

I have already voted.  This week, I will drive my wife and my mother to the polls.  Then, we will have done all we cando to stand by this courageous man as he stands for our country and our way of life.  After we vote, the battle is in God’s hands.

 

This is a nation that has been blessed by God in unimaginable ways for the past two hundred and thirty years. In recent years, it hasn’t been cool to acknowledge that.  We have become dismissive of God’s blessings.  I sincerely hope that, as a nation, we haven’t rejected HIM to the point that HE allows us to fall.  For whether we like it or not, our nation’s future is in God’s hands.

 

 

I have seen the error of my ways

After years of fighting leftism and defending conservatism, I have suddenly been hit with a beam of light like Paul on the road to Damascus.  I was wrong.  Conservatism is not the path of knowledge and enlightenment.  The Progressives are the way to go.

First, in the area of defense, Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter have tried to explain it to us for the past two years, but we haven't understood.  If we disarm, then all the nations of the world will follow our example.  Don't worry about dictatorships that might appear to be unfriendly to us, they just are afraid of us and it makes them defensive.  So what if some nations decide to keep their weapons, we will have done the noble thing and set the proper tone for dialogue around the world.  After all, the survival of the United States is less important than the cause of peace and harmony throughout the world.

I have embraced the belief that "Bush lied".  I don't let the fact that every intelligence agency in the world believed the same things about Saddam Hussein bother me.  I don't let the fact that the Clinton Administration and every Democrat in Congress said the same things about Saddam bother me.  Once I accepted this everything else made sense.

At home, we should return to the pre-Reagan tax rates, where the top marginal rate was 70%.  Those rich people just stole their money anyway, or made it on the backs of slave labor.  They can get by with much less.  If we cannot move people out of poverty into the middle class, at least we can reduce the number of wealthy people and make a larger middle class that way.  So what if it creates less of an environment for investment.  This country should not create wealth if it cannot be distributed equally.

Now, the government should retool the budget to pay for all the social programs that the masses want.  We must reduce the risk in people's lives.  Many people are incapable of making the tough choices necessary to survive on limited resources, so the government should, in a benevolent manner, make things easier for them.  So what if that eliminates the incentives for achievement and thwarts ambition.  Achievement and ambition are just methods that white males use to rob from and enslave the masses.

Government should actively encourage alternative lifestyle choices.  Traditional morality is simply too confining and inspires guilt which can harm an individual's psyche.  So what if traditional morality forms the underpinnings of an orderly and cohesive society.  No one should have to feel guilty, unless they have more material possessions than their neighbor.

The environment should become our predominant concern.  We must first stop abusing animals.  We cannot eat meat, since that involves killing an animal who was not allowed to choose.  Of course that also means that we cannot use leather for belts, shoes and other items.  There is always plastic.  Oh wait, I cannot use plastic either.  Plastic is petroleum based and thus requires using nonrenewable fossil fuels and causes air pollution.  I am giving up my truck for a bicycle, even though I will have to leave two hours early to make the thirteen miles from the house to the office, and no public transportation is available.  I may give up my house too.  I do not know if it was made from old growth lumber or not.  You see, when it was built, I was less enlightened than I am now.  What about the electricity that heats my home?  Does it come from environmentally hazardous nuclear plants or from fossil fuel burning power plants?  Does it come from hydroelectric dams that have been built and destroyed the pristine habitat of fish and wildlife?  This is so hard.  I may have to give up electricity altogether. 

Oh well, anyway, except for environmental confusion, I FEEL so much better now that I have joined the path of enlightenment.  Now if I could just remember how to speak French life would be perfect.

Still The Same

You always won, everytime you placed a bet
You’re still damn good, no one’s gotten to you yet
Everytime they were sure they had you caught
You were quicker than they thought
You’d just turn your back and walk
You always said, the cards would never do you wrong
The trick you said was never piay the game too long
A gambler’s share, the only risk that you would take
The only loss you could forsake
The only bluff you couldn’t fake

And you’re still the same
I caught up with you yesterday
Moving game to game
No one standing in your way
Turning on the charm
Long enough to get you by
You’re still the same
You still aim high

Bob Seger described John Kerry perfectly over two decades ago. For you see, John Kerry the waffler extraordinaire, the flip-flopper in chief, has played the game of politics like an amoral gambler. He has made a career of changing positions to ensure that he appeals to all sides of every issue. There is one issue that has always caused Kerry to reveal his true colors, though. The only bluff John Kerry has never been able to fake is in the area of national defense. He can pretend to be a hawk all he wants, but the record is clear. John Kerry believes that appeasement of our enemies is the only way to go.

As chief Vietnam War protester, John Kerry made the statement, “We can’t fight communism all over the world.” As Lt. Governor of Massachusetts, Kerry urged Michael Dukakis to use civil defense funds to influence American foreign policy to take a less confrontational approach to the Soviet Union. As a new Senator, he favored a nuclear freeze rather than Reagan’s defense build up. He supported the Sandinistas even though it was clear they were Soviet puppets. After the first World Trade Center bombing he proposed gutting the intelligence budget.

That is all in the past. But in the past two weeks, John Kerry proved that he’s “Still The Same” when it comes to defense issues. First, in the second Presidential debate, John Kerry proposed a plan to give Iran nuclear material, in exchange for their PROMISE to use it peacefully. Nope, I’m not making this up. John Kerry wants to give one of the biggest sponsors of terrorism in the world, one of the nations that despises the United States, nuclear material. If that sounds familiar, it should. It’s essentially the same plan that Jimmy Carter came up with for North Korea during the Clinton Administration. The plan that North Korea is now violating. If that doesn’t disqualify John Kerry for President, then how about this.

In the first debate, John Kerry implied that it was hypocritical for the United States to be critical of North Korea’s nuclear ambitions when we are testing a bunker buster nuclear weapon. The King of the nuclear freeze lives. John Kerry equates us with Iran and North Korea. John Kerry attacks a program that is developing a weapon to be used against state sponsors of terror, with the implication that if we would stop developing weapons, then other nations would stop feeling threatened and we have fewer enemies. John Kerry the antiwar protester is still the same.

I’m not finished, though. In the New York Times Magazine, John Kerry made the following statement: “We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives but they're a nuisance. As a former law enforcement person I know we're never going to end prostitution; we're never going to end illegal gambling, but we're going to reduce it, organized crime, to a level where it isn't on the rise, it isn't threatening people's lives every day, and fundamentally it's something that you continue to fight, but it's not threatening the fabric of your life.”

Apparently, John Kerry thinks that before 9/11, terrorism was merely a nuisance. The first World Trade Center bombing was a nuisance. Somalia was a nuisance. Khobar Towers was a nuisance. The USS Cole was a nuisance. Those events were apparently the equivalent of “prostitution” and “illegal gambling”. The Massachusetts liberal who came to fame as an appeaser in 1971 is “Still The Same”.

The amoral gambler has one core belief that he cannot hide. When it comes to national defense, John Kerry is “Still The Same” as he has always been. Dangerous and clueless.

 

Beware of the Sheeple

Something happened, last week, to depress me about this election.  No, I’m not talking about W’s refusal to punch Kerry’s repeatedly unguarded chin.  I must say, the President’s lack of attack made me want to throw things at the television, but that was not nearly the worst news of the week.

 

The worst news was the news media trumpeting the hundreds of thousands of newly registered voters this election cycle.  It seems that several groups have been out and about using streamlined voter registration laws to get otherwise uninformed and misinformed people to register to vote.  “Isn’t that a good thing?”  “Shouldn’t we have more citizens participating in the process?”  Not really.

 

Voting is the most important DUTY that any citizen has.  The choices made affect all of us.  Therefore, the last things we need are more clueless people voting.  Think about it.  These groups are setting up tables at shopping malls and college campuses urging people who have no real interest in the political process to register to vote.  Many of these people would go through their entire lives without ever casting a vote if these interest groups didn’t shove the form in front of their faces.

 

These people tend to be the ones that don’t study issues, watch news programs or listen to entire political speeches in context.  They are the people who tend to be influenced by soundbytes, celebrities and who are prone to believe stupid statements like “ah feel your pain,” and “Bush lied people died.”  These people are really sheeple.

 

We have enough sheeple voting in this country.  The Democrats have survived as a national party, thanks to sheeple.  Democrat politicians, for over thirty years, have said that Republicans want to restore Jim Crow laws and burn down black churches.  The sheeple believe it.  Democrat politicians, for over thirty years, have said that Republicans are going to take away Granny’s Social Security check and make her eat cat food.  The sheeple believe it.  Democrat politicians, for over twenty years, have claimed that Republicans WANT poisoned water and air.  The sheeple believe it.

 

These sheeple are even taken to the polls by activists from the AFL-CIO and the NAACP.  They typically don’t show up in polls.  Therefore, it’s safe to add, at least, two percentage points to any percentage the Democrat candidate has.  In a close race, these newly registered sheeple are going to make the difference.

 

I truly fear that this is a constituency that can carry John Kerry over the top.  If the Democrats get enough sheeple to the polls, it’s going to be very difficult for the President to win.

 

 

So you want to speak Klingon?

Trying to discuss foreign policy with a Kerry supporter is like learning how to speak Klingon.  It's frustrating, time consuming and, in the end, serves no useful purpose.  I don't know why I keep trying.  I suppose it's my Missionary Baptist roots coming out, seeing a poor leftist in need of conversion.  I'd have better luck trying to convert a meth head atheist with one Buddhist parent and one Hindu parent to Christianity.

Leftists don't even see the same problems we see.  When I talk about a clash of civilizations you know I'm discussing the war against Islamofascism.  The only clash of civilizations that leftists see is the "widening gap between rich and poor throughout the world".  Islamofascism isn't a unified movement, they claim.  The Palestinian terrorists and Chechnyan terrorists are internal problems of Israel and Russia respectively, and we need to limit our activities to going after specific Al Qaeda operatives.  I'm serious.  That is what your typical leftist thinks about the "War on Terror".

Saddam Hussein's Iraq had only peripheral ties to terrorists, they insist.  The terror training base at Salman Pak had nothing to do with us they claim.  Saddam was content to build his palaces and let his people starve.  As at least ten Kerry supporters have told me, "He was contained."  His payments to Hamas and Hezbollah were not our problems.  His refusal to account for known stocks of chemical and biological weapons were no big deal.  We should have allowed "inspections to work," whatever that means.  Oh, and don't bother giving leftists and other Kerry supporters quotes from Kerry, Clinton et al from 1998 forward that were even more hawkish than anything Bush might have said.  "Bush lied to get us into war" will be the only response you get.

France and Germany only oppose us because they find Bush offensive, the leftists claim.  Never mind France's huge Muslim population.  Ignore the evidence of bribery in the Oil for Food program.  In fact, leftists and Kerry supporters claim that the Oil for Food scandal hasn't been proven yet.  Leftists deny that France and Germany have self interests that would cause them to oppose us no matter who might be President.  France and Germany should be given the benefit of a doubt, but the Bush administration is guilty until proven innocent.

Dissent is the most patriotic thing one can do, according to these people.  I dare you to point out to them that the insurgents in Iraq are emboldened by protests against US presence in Iraq.  Tell them that the insurgents are counting on doing something shocking enough to cause the protesters to turn public opinion against American involvement and cause a withdrawal.  Go ahead tell a leftist that.  They will simply say they love America and they are trying to save lives that are being taken because of OUR misguided leaders.

If you think you can change a leftist's mind on foreign policy, I have only one thing to say to you.  toH tlhIngan Hol DajatlhlaH 'e' DaneH'a'?[tlh]

Illegal? Excessive Force?

The American Left loves the United Nations.  The hopes, dreams and aspirations of leftists are tied up in the prestige and power of this organization.  Of course, it isn't hard to understand why.  The UN sees a world crisis and does either one of two things.  It either takes the wrong position right from the start or it takes the right position and then won't do a damn thing about it.

Of course, what should we expect?  Of  the over 180 member nations of the UN, most are Third World nations with little interest in freedom, representative government or self sufficiency.  The voting records of the General Assembly show most of these nations voting AGAINST the United States on a regular basis, all the while enjoying the fact that the United States is assessed 20% of the UN's budget.

Basically, if you look at the history of the United Nations General Assembly, the only nation attacked more regularly than the United States is Israel.  The UN opposes the US and Israel with virtually as much regularity as the American Left does.  Leftists are the natural allies of the United Nations.

This past week found Kofi Annan, UN Secretary General, in full anti-American voice.  He pronounced that the invasion of Iraq was "illegal".  Yes, you heard right, the same man who sees nothing wrong with the Saddam Hussein-UN-Oil For Food and Palaces and Al Qaeda conspiracy that was occurring for years; says that the removal of the dictator of Iraq, who violated 17 UN resolutions over a twelve year period was illegal.

The only thing that would be more laughable would be the announcement of a United Nations expeditionary force, led by France, to remove the United States and its coaltion partners from Iraq.  You might think I'm kidding, but I have no doubt that the UN would love to see Saddam Hussein restored to power, even more than Howard Dean and Al Gore would. 

Also, this week, in a speech before the General Assembly, Kofi For Food said that Israel had used "excessive force" in its response to Palestinian terror.  I must have missed the news report, but I don't remember hearing or reading that  Israel had nuked the West Bank out of existence.  Israel has fought Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, the Al Aqsa Martyr's Brigade and all the other Arab Islamist terror organizations with one hand tied behind its back for years.  It has made concession after concession.  It has tried its best to limit attacks to leaders of the terror groups.  Yet, still, a corrupt,  pompous ass like Kofi Annan calls their use of force "excessive".

In truth, the majority of the United Nations General Assembly would love to see Israel cease to exist.  By the same token, those same members would love to see the United States knocked down a peg or two, and that isn't even including the French, Germans and Chinese.

Yet, John Kerry says that if he were President, he would "reach out" to this bunch of thugs, dictators, Islamofascists, America haters and anti-Semites.  I guess we can be sure that John Kerry would avoid "illegal" actions to protect America's interests and would help to condemn Israel's "excessive" desire to survive in a sea of sharks.

Democrats gnash their teeth over "Cowboy" foreign policy.  I guess they prefer "Kofi" foreign policy.  We wouldn't want to be "illegal" or "excessive" you know. 

What if CBS were FoxNews?

Today I want to present you with a hypothetical scenario.  Let's suppose that a former member of Vietnam Veterans Against the War had contacted FoxNews Channel with documentary proof that John Kerry and the VVAW were working in coordination with the North Vietnamese government in 1971.  This proof consisted of correspondence, supposedly written to Kerry by the chief negotiator for North Vietnam and a copy of Kerry's written response.  FoxNews decides they want to use this documentation and produce a Special Report expose hosted by Brit Hume, proving that, not only was John Kerry against the Vietnam War, he was FOR the North Vietnamese.

After the network receives these documents, two things happen.  One, Roger Ailes immediately calls Karl Rove and says, "You may want to talk to this guy that used to run with Kerry.  He has stuff that will destroy him."  Secondly, these documents are examined by experts who tell FoxNews they are most likely inept forgeries.

Let's also suppose that Brit Hume insists on running with the story anyway.  The expose airs, and within hours experts are on rival networks calling the documents forgeries.  Hume, though, stands by his story, and finally after every expert in the nation weighs in that the documents are phony, he simply states that the allegations remain true even if the documents are not true.

The resulting outcry would end FoxNews and probably end George W. Bush's campaign, depending on how much coordination there was between Ailes and Rove on this story.  Yet, the scenario I described actually happened regarding President Bush's Guard service. The players were Dan Rather, CBS producer Mary Mapes, Joe Lockhart and Max Cleland of the Kerry campaign and Bill Burkett who hated George W. Bush before hating George W. Bush was cool.

The most we get from the mainstream media is cluck clucks about the damage to CBS' credibility.  No one even wants to look at connections to the John Kerry campaign.  The mainstream media wants to claim they don't have a bias.  So should we, the American people, simply accept that coordination between Kerry campaign officials and TV newsmagazine producers on a story designed to smear the President is merely the standard operating procedure of an unbiased media apparatus?  Yes, unless of course we're talking about FoxNews.