I've been thinking a lot about the post Chuck wrote in which he called for us all to support the Office of the Presidency as a position, regardless of our thoughts about the person that fills the seat, less we become the moonbats that we so disdain.
I have to agree - personal slurs and attacks on character make us the moonbats.
Don't get me wrong ... I disagree with the majority of Obama's proposed policies, I find his speeches empty, the sound of him talking makes my skin crawl, and I will do whatever I can as a voter to stand in his way ... but he will soon be my President and I will not reduce myself to the level of the Dixie Chicks.
I am however a tad bit angry that the moonbats would pull the "one country, one team" crap out of their asses now that their man won. Am I to support your President the way you supported mine? No, because I have more respect for the institutions upon which our nation is built.
I will respect the Office, even if I can't respect the man, but I will so do with a saddness in my heart for every moonbat that could not manage the same and then made a mockery of our country when they thoughtlessly exercised their right to vote that better men gave to them and ensure that they keep.
Sincerely,
Ashamed of my countrymen
How is it that they very same people that tell you they don't watch the news are the same people that want to tell you what's wrong with the world?
I tried my best to be non-confrontational with this woman, but I deserve a medal for doing it ... this woman was fiercely persistant in her absolute ignorance.
She told me all about how oil companies should be doing business and conducting themselves in a more environmentally manner, but has no idea where U.S. oil is imported from and drives an SUV (because it was cheap).
She stood firmly against Bush and the war in Iraq, using her father's negative experience returning home from Vietnam as her reasoning, but has not sought out a single positive story or made an effort to help a service member returning home.
She advocated coalition action in the world, and then asked what the U.N. was all about.
She railed on the corruption and incompetance of politicians, but couldn't name a single one that represented her.
She informed me on everything she felt was wrong with schools today, but didn't know what school system she lived in.
I tell you what lady, if ignorance is bliss ... you just took a fall from paradise.
Finally ... someone has some sense ... Supreme Court Issues a Stay for Cross on San Diego City Property
It sure as hell isn't the idiot trying to get the cross taken down though. I mean seriously ... the cross is part of a war memorial ... are you really going to pull the whole separation of church and state thing? Cuz other than that argument, you've got nothin, Buddy.
You don't like the cross? Don't look at it.
And how long are you going to push this battle? The city has been having political and financial trouble for how long now? If you cared about your city, you'd help them sort it all out. Instead, you're using it to your advantage to try to get your pet project through. Guess that means you don't get to complain about anyone else doing that again, now do you?
I say again ... if you don't like the cross ... Don't look at it.
Thank you, Supreme Court, for having some sense.
A Spanish-version of the U.S. National Anthem? No.
No. NO. NO!
Speak spanish in your house, to your kids, with your friends, with your community, at your church, in your restaurant...
But get your language off my anthem!
I finally figured out what really bothers me so much about this whole Hilton/Fran O'Brien's thing. Sure, it irks me that Hilton Corp is coming off like lefty wingnuts that don't support the troops/war, but in the end ... that is their right by everything our nation stands for.
What bothers me the most is that they have made the private support of a group of people into something political. Whether they be wounded military or a wounded farmer, the people that are eating at Fran's on Friday nights are still people at their core. They are having a dinner out as a step toward a normal life again. Does that really need to be brought into the public political debate?
Instead, shouldn't we be encouraging members of society to follow in the footsteps of Fran O'Brien's, to take care of each other? Shouldn't those legitimately in need be able to turn to their community for support, regardless of what label they fall under? Doesn't that make everyone better off (without creating a new tax burden)?
But my point is, if Fran's were the place that abused children went for dinner once a week, would they be closing? What if it were battered women? Or mentally handicapped? If it were left as simple, private, donated community service of any other kind, would the lease debacle still be happening?
Answer for yourself, but my money's riding on "NO!"
Apparently Blackfive is running out of his own content these days since he's stealing mine from September of last year ... (Just kidding, Mr. five, sir)
But go check out the video to he has up ... The song ROCKS!
Check out TheRightBrothers.com for ways to download and order their CDs and other merchandise.
I'm a little slow (ok, a lot slow) at posting about it (I blame the browser that ate this post the first time I wrote it), but guess what I didn't watch last night ... that's right ... L&O:SVU. Thanks to Blackfive and his loyal readers, I am now more informed about how Richard Belzer really feels about our troops. And quite frankly, I'm just not listening.
I really enjoy the fact that in our country you have the right to think or say whatever your heart desires. What doesn't seem to cross the minds of those who want to be heard is, there's no line in the Constitution or Bill of Rights or the Declaration of Independence or any other founding document that says anyone has to actually give a crap about what you want to think or say. It just says that I don't have the right to keep you from thinking or saying whatever it is you'd like me to pay attention to ... so I won't.
I won't make any move to tell Richard Belzer to STFU or impede his rights. What I will do though ... ? I'll add him to my list. He can join people like Johnny Depp and the Dixie Chicks, both of whom have been banned from my house. That's right ... BANNED! I don't care how talented you are as an actor, musician, or circus monkey celebrity - it doesn't make you a genius ...
So, Richard Belzer (and L&O:SVU as his employer), find yourself comfy on the LIST OF THE BANNED because your ignorant gum flapping has landed you a spot that I don't think you'll be leaving anytime soon. But by all means, keep talking ... that will just leave more time and money in my day to spend on people who are going to stick to what I'm paying attention to them for - entertainment.
I just read that Calabasas, CA has become the first city to ban smoking in a public place ... period. Honestly, I couldn't be more disgusted in their decision or embarrassed to say Californians made it. I went to high school just down the road from this city and my family is still there, so from my repeated experiences there, I can't say I'm surprised. I understand that indoor smoking is harmful and annoying so I get the premise behind those bans - even if I think they are too draconian. But seriously, this time they are taking the whole smoking ban idea just a little too far.
But the California legislature ruled second hand smoke to be a toxic air pollutant and a public nuisance, so that makes it ok...right?
Um... no!
Because you see, secondhand smoke is not nearly the same as diesel exhaust, arsenic, or benzene, all compounds found within the same category secondhand smoke has now been placed. Lobbying groups are citing studies linking secondhand smoke exposure to breast cancer, but what about the studies that show more than 35-40% of women that develop lung cancer have never touched a cigarette? Is one person smoking outdoors so potent that it should really be considered poisonous? Even a group of people smoking together outside, is it really that terrible?
No, it's not. However, the lawmakers of this city are so rude and arrogant that they must be controlling of others' behavior instead of asking people to be responsible for their own.
What ever happened to the ability to get up and move away from the smoke? Or letting businesses decide for themselves whether they will allow smoking on their outdoor patios? Are we really the kind of society that feels the need to isolate and ostracize people, simply because they smoke?
Last I checked really drunk people were a public nuisance too - but we still let establishments decide for themselves whether they will apply for a liquor license, don't we?
What is our country coming to when we feel the need to legislate every bit of individual behavior? I miss when Americans had a pair and could simply act like adults instead of running to Daddy Lawmaker every time someone else got a little annoying.
(more guest blogging)
I was having lunch with my close, personal friend Madonna yesterday at a Taco Bell in Tampa before we had to rush off to the Cirque du Soleil show when she said, "Man, those metal cone bras took their toll over the years. My back hurts all the time now."
It made me think.
Often we see the outside of things and think that tells us what is going on inside, but we never really know what those outside signs mean, and whether they are a mask for some inner pain. When not in BDUs we see soldiers with their upper left chest a display of colorful ribbons. For the most part we civilians look at that and assume quantity is quality. The patterns and hues are a mystery to most of us and we hope to decipher but end up being as confused as someone trying to determine if the snake that just bit is a coral or king. Some are indicators of attendance. Others are indicators of true excellence and valor. But they are all indicative of a story, sometimes good, sometimes bad. And keep in mind some of our fighting men and women choose to only wear a few if any of those medals they've earned.
As we were reminded in our most recent national election, not all medals are necessarily awarded for the same reason, either, and there were periods of medal inflation. But be comfortable in this bit of knowledge: almost every single person who put on a uniform and swore an oath did so knowing he or she would be giving up a part of their lives for a greater good. They aren't perfect beings, but I will wager any day that you will find more worthwhile people in their midst than in just about any other mix. Have you been to Walmart today to shop?
Sometimes the ribbon is not the only thing they came away with. Sometimes it's a piece of shrapnel or a limp that will be with them long after the uniform is folded and put away. It's worth taking the time to get to know someone like that. Learn from him, if you can.
That Maddy, she really makes me reflective sometimes.
So Pakistan is offering a wall to be built along the border with Afghanistan because the administration is "fed up with accusations it allows Taliban fighters to cross into Afghanistan." The wall was formally proposed to Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice in a meeting Monday as a method for keeping terrorists and drug dealers from crossing into Pakistan at will. (Read the full story here).
Well, you know, that is all well and good President Musharraf but half-ass is still half-ass. Pakistan is going to be more a part of the terrorism problem than a solution so long as there are militant madrasas within its borders. Stomp your feet, stick out your lower lip, whine and cry, dance around it all you like, thems the facts. And they ain't goin away... no matter how many fences you build.
So parents keep bitching about military recruiters 'harassing' their children. I would like to smack each and every one of these people...with a dead fish...right across the face...some of them more than once.
I know several Marine Corps recruiters and have had some experience with how they are taught to do their job. There are bad apples that might not be doing their job correctly but these parents are making a bad name for recruiters and the military everywhere.
These kids are 18 (or damn near) and society trusts them to be adults at that point. Granted, at 18 we all still have a lot of growing up to do...but if you trust them to vote, why don't you trust them to uphold that value? It was won militarily here, why is it so wrong that the military be used to bring that value to another country?
High school juniors and seniors should be adult enough to be able to say, "No thank you" and walk away if they really aren't interested. Sure, sometimes there is the hard sell but no one is grabbing you by the arm and dragging you to MEPS against your will. Maybe it's just annoying to get the phone calls when you really aren't interested? There is a way to keep your information off their records - try using it instead of working your flappy little head like a South Park character.
Are these teenagers not allowed to decide for themselves what future adventures they'd like to embark on? Feel they don't have all the facts? Talk to them about why they are interested in the military! Or is your discomfort about their decision worth more than their autonomy and your support?
It is a recruiter’s job to conduct himself in the most professional way possible while talking to your children. On an educational campus, at the mall, in their office, or any other place a recruiter might be found...do you really think that this person is going to risk their career over getting your kid to enlist? I don't think so. You might think your kid is that special but I've got news for you...he/she isn't worth someone's job, let alone a military career & retirement...
And if your kid is so frightened of the big bad recruiter at the age of 17 or 18 that they can't walk the other way, you should worry...not about the recruiter but about how sheltered you've raised your kid to be. Oh, and don't let them go shopping by themselves either...you know how pushy those sales people can be...your children might get swindled and learn a hard lesson about making their own decisions...GASP!
In the news this morning it was announced that USMC General Pace was selected to be the next Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. All I could think to myself was, "It's about damn time."
Now I don't know a thing about General Pace other than he has been Vice Chairman of the JCS so I have no clue if he was the best man for the job. Being Vice Chair you would think would prepare him for the job but again, I don't know a thing about his record or the decisions he has made. I'm just happy to see a Marine finally hold that position (assuming he is confirmed by the Senate).
The Marines may be the smallest service but they have done a lot of good for our country. I'm happy to see that the competence and reliability of the Corps is finally being recognized.
Most of my friends and family have asked me what I think about the whole China/Japan situation right now. Some have asked why I have not blogged on it. The answer is: I DON'T CARE! I know, I know...I should care...and I do...to a point. There are bloggers all over the place talking about what's going on over there so why should I jump in? Well they say I should because Japan happens to be an area I have studied rather extensively (many of my poli sci courses had to do with Japan in some way - focusing primarily on the late 1890s forward...I also minored in Japanese studies...and I lived there for a while). I'm pretty familiar with the national security policy of Japan and the trends so here goes my take on the situation....
The Short Version:
Violent protest should never be the answer.
Japan should not have a permanent seat on the UN Security Council
The Longer Version:
Japan has many valid reasons for its pursuit of a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. They have become a major player in the international community, an integral piece of the international economy, and the largest/most stable economic force in Asia (for now). Most of their additional reasons are:
1. They are strong/active proponents of many UN sponsored treaties
2. They believe strongly in peacekeeping missions & offer personnel
3. They are significant economic contributors to the UN
4. "The council of today should reflect today's international system'
These are justifiable reasons but I take issue with this last one in particular. The council of today should reflect today's international system but it should also include members with legitimacy on all security matters. Japan's inability to face its demons and insistence on the issue of textbooks strips it of its legitimacy on international security. For Japan to have a permanent seat on the UN Security Council would further trivialize UN resolutions and bring greater scrutiny to the value of the organization as a whole. In a time when the credibility of the only successful supranational organization is in question, Japan should not seek to jeopardize it further.
Many countries have skeletons in their closet but most discuss them and attempt to repent. Japan has not even admitted to their existence. It would be irresponsible for the international community to allow a hypocritical nation such as Japan to sit in judgment of others.
The time draws near, but the time is not now. Sorry Japan.
19 APRIL 2005: OKLAHOMA CITY, 10 YEARS LATER
The Alfred P Murrah Federal Building is no longer standing. Half because of a terrorist act. Half because it was "the right thing to do" to destroy the rest of it.
The primary suspect, Timothy McVeigh, is no longer alive. He was executed on 11 JUNE 2001 for his participation in the attack.
The whole thing just doesn't sit right with me. I'm not a conspiracy theorist but I've seen the seismographs - they don't match the idea of a single truck bomb. I don't know enough to even fathom a stab at the truth so I won't tell you it was all a big government plot. But for Timothy McVeigh, it was an execution that came much more swiftly than for others with the same sentence. I can't accuse my government of perpetrating an attack on its own people but I do believe something shady went on after the fact. For evidence to be 'lost' and McVeigh executed so quickly - when there are still so many unanswered questions - something just doesn't add up. And I don't feel good about it. At a minimum I would have liked to see them keep McVeigh alive a few more years, just to see what else could be learned.
Maybe the real story was that there were so many loose ends and unknowns that it couldn't be solved - after all, we don't live in an episode of CSI - and admitting that was considered unacceptable.
I don't know what the real story is all I know is we haven't gotten it.
More importantly though - my heart is with the families and friends today as they remember their loss. May peace find your souls and comfort in your heart.
What crisis, you ask? Their dammed political identity crisis. According to this information on Polipundit it is real. And I tell you, I love California, but this voting for liberal democrats has got. .to...stop! You know those liberal democrats that you feel so good about yourself voting for? They actually make decisions that affect the rest of the country. Not cool. And why are you voting for them anyway? The voting record for CA issues doesn't seem to show you're all that liberal.
The only reasonable conclusion I can reach (in my semi-conscious state as I am quite groggy) is that Californians suffer from a political identity crisis and are like that guy in Memento who can't form new memories. They have glorified the image of the democrat so they feel good about voting them into national office. But, they can't form new memories so then one of two things happens: (1) They forget the voted for the Democrat and vote based on the CA issue at hand, or (2) They forget the less than helpful outcome of putting the national level Democrat into office, and vote based on the CA issue at hand.
In any event, we should help them...after all, this is a medical condition that isn't their fault.