It just warms the heart....

On Wednesday hundreds of pro-troop supporters turned out for a giant pro-troop rally in Berkeley, CA (of all places!) This was in response to harassment the U.S. Marine Recruiting Center has been experiencing with protests and vandalism. The Code Pinkers were outnumbered. Sweet.

Check out the pics!

MAF Blogger Danny: SEE RALLY PICTURES & VIDEO - HERE!!!
Debbi's Dribble Blog: More Pictures - HERE
Michelle Malkin's Blog: Red, White & Blue in Berkeley - HERE
Pipeline News: Move America Forward Counter Demonstration Crushes Code Pink In Berkeley - HERE
Contra Costa Times: Flag-waving demonstrators far outnumbered a group of peace advocates
Daily Californian: Protestors Clash Over Military Recruitment
Wake Up America Blog: Making Them "Pink" With Frustration
MAF Daily File: Catherine Moy Gives a First Hand Report - HERE
Winter's Soldier Blog: Melanie Morgan, MAF Rout Code Pinkos in Berkeley!

via Blogs For Bush

Whoa....

Check out this Iowa poll:

1. If the 2008 Republican presidential caucus were held today between Sam Brownback, Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, Duncan Hunter, John McCain, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Tom Tancredo, and Fred Thompson, for whom would you vote? (Republicans Only; Names Rotated)

Mitt Romney 27%, Rudy Giuliani 13%, Mike Huckabee 12%, Fred Thompson 10%, John McCain 5%, Sam Brownback 4%, Ron Paul 4%, Tom Tancredo 2%, Duncan Hunter 1%, Undecided 22%

Promoting Israel?

NRO's Mike Potemra says that "Anti-Iraq War blogger Mark Shea is trying to drive a wedge between U.S. evangelicals and Israel, by posting a video on his website that he hopes will shock us into realizing that Israel is just another “secular nation-state.” Potemra argues that even evangelicals such as himself see the humor in this video.

Now, I know you guys will enjoy the video, and I too can enjoy a bit of tongue in cheek humor, bikini clad babes and all, but it does go a bit too far for me in the end. I don't like the "Holy Mother of God" bit, but everything else is fine. Like Potemra says, Israel is both a secular national state and a nation of descendants of God’s Chosen People.

I was MAD about MAD magazine.

When I was young, my mom use to leave the hall bathroom light on at night (mainly because I was scared of the dark) and I would sneak in there in the middle of the night and sit in the dirty clothes basket (hey, it was comfortable) and read MAD magazine for hours.

This brought back those memories. Don't even get me started on Spy vs Spy. I would kill for this Box Set. Someone tell Santa.

I never understood the social commentary (at least not until I was older) but I just loved it. When I was in college, my Mom gave away my 1200 comic books and Mad magazines. Which I am pretty sure is a felony, but I chose not to press charges.

INTRODUCING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.....................

High Ideals In High Heels.

Describes her perfectly.

She's my daughter and she has her own blog now. She has two posts up. Go give her a warm welcome.

The World Just Keeps Getting More Surreal.

Sweetness & Light has this from National Public Radio: (Yes, even NPR can be appalled at something like this!)

-----

No, these two don’t have the latest hit on the Billboard charts.

They are Carwin Jones and Bryant Purvis of the so-called “Jena 6.” The two walked the red carpet of the 2007 BET Hip-Hop Awards, held this weekend in Atlanta.

According to those in attendance, they spoke briefly about the case before presenting the Hip-Hop Video of the Year Award.

Though their cohort Mychal Bell is back behind bars, that didn’t stop the two from hamming it up for the cameras (even holding up the number six with their fingers).

What does it say about the culture’s celebrity obsession that these two would be feted as stars? Do you think their participation in the award show undermines the gravity of the situation in Jena, La.?

------

You know who should be presenting instead of these boys? Bill Cosby and Alvin F. Poussaint of Harvard Medical School. They recently wrote a book called "Come on People: On the Path from Victims to Victors," which argues that many of the problems within the black community are self-inflicted, the result of a counterproductive culture of violence and victimhood. And they blame just the thing that BET is celebrating: The violence and ignorance that symbolizes the "gangsta" lifestyle.

Find all the common sense goodness of Cosby and Poussant here.
BET should be ashamed. What BET should do if they cared about the future of young blacks, is buy up as many of Cosby and Poussaint's books as possible and give away free to their audience.

Also, check out this appearance of Cosby on Oprah.

FISA. What the Democratic leaders don't get.

Once again the Democrat leadership seem determined to undermine our ability to track terrorists. House Democrats were forced to pull their proposed legislation to change the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) because of lack of support among moderate Democrats. These same moderate Democrats joined Republicans two months ago to pass a temporary FISA fix so our intelligence could monitor the overseas communications of terrorists without a warrant. Proving that there are Democrats who understand this war on terror.

Powerline makes this important point to understand:

As the Washington Times notes, it "would require a court order to gather communications when a foreign terrorist tries to contact someone in the United States" even though "from 1978 when FISA was first enacted until this year, no such requirement existed."

So we have done fine since 1978 with FISA the way it was implemented, but now, when we need intelligence on terrorists more than ever before, Democrat leaders want to change it to make it more difficult to wiretap terrorists.

Powerline also has this:

Brian Walsh and Todd Gaziano of the Heritage Foundation extend the critique of the Democrats' attempt to impose "a Byzantine and unprecedentedly burdensome intelligence regime on those charged with protecting Americans from international terrorists." Among other things, they ask:

Why Congress would depart from the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission by making it more difficult and cumbersome to gather intelligence on Islamic terrorists;

Whether there was any actual harm (rather than psychic harm that supposedly results from potential surveillance) to any American citizens as a result of five years of intelligence gathering on foreign terrorists since 9/11 and, if so, what that supposed harm was;

Why Congress believes it has the constitutional authority, with or without a court's assistance, to micromanage decisions about which potential foreign enemies to gather information on, when that power is constitutionally vested in the commander in chief;

Why no previous President--Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, or Bill Clinton--has ever conceded that FISA or any other regulatory regime crafted by Congress is the sole means by which a President may collect intelligence for national security purposes; andWhy Americans should entrust to Congress and congressional staff members a database containing information on every American whose name is mentioned as part of a national security investigation.

Good News For Romney.

Evangelicals seem to be warming up to him.

Propaganda by our enemy....

Oh wait. Not by our enemy. By The New York Times helping our enemy.

The propaganda seems to be working in some corners.

I may be sick.

via lgf

John McCain Still Rocks.

I've read quite a bit on John McCain. I have a folder in my favorites that has at least a two dozen or more articles on him. But I haven't read this:

In captivity, covert 'church'

Being taken captive matured him fast, he has said, and over time, he discovered that having faith gave him a common bond with his fellow prisoners.

Orson Swindle, an ex-POW who spent the last 20 months of his captivity at McCain's side, recalls how important "church" was when he and the others were being held individually in separate rooms. Every Sunday, after the midday meal was finished, the dishes were washed, and the guards had departed, the senior officer in the area would signal that it was time to pray together, by coughing in a way that signaled the letter "c" for church – one cough and then three coughs.

"It was time for a solid stream of thought among those of us there," says Mr. Swindle, now a policy adviser in Washington. "We all silently said the Pledge of Allegiance, we repeated the 23rd Psalm and the Lord's Prayer, and anything else you'd want to [say] in there that would get us some help – but not out loud. If we were heard talking, they would come in and start torturing us."

Toward the end of the war, when the North Vietnamese lightened up a bit and put the POWs together in a room, the prisoners organized Sunday church services. McCain was the room chaplain, "not because the senior ranking officer thought I was imbued with any particular extra brand of religion, but because I knew all of the words of the Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed," the senator says.

McCain conducted services and gave sermons, of sorts. "It was a topic, a talk," he says. "We had a choir that was marvelous…. The guy who directed it happened to have been previously the director of the Air Force Academy choir."

McCain will always remember the first Christmas they were allowed to have a service together. They had never been able to have a Bible before, but shortly before this particular Christmas, the Vietnamese handed McCain a King James Bible, a piece of paper, and a pencil. He jotted down bits of the nativity story from Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

"On Christmas Eve, the first time we had been together – some guys had been there as long as seven years – we had our service," he says. "We got to the point where we talked about the birth of Christ, and then sang 'Silent Night,' and I still remember looking at the faces of those guys – skinny, worn out – but most of them, a lot of them, had tears down their faces. And they weren't sorrow, they were happiness that for the first time in so many years we were able to worship together."

For McCain, there were other moments of grace in prison. While in solitary confinement, he would be left for the night with his arms tied back in a painful position. One night, a guard walked in and loosened the ropes, then came back five hours later and tightened up the ropes again, without saying a word. Two months later, on Christmas Day, McCain was allowed to stand outside for 10 minutes in a courtyard, and that same guard came up to him. The guard stood beside him for a minute, then drew a cross in the dirt with his sandal and stood there for a minute, looking at McCain silently. A few minutes later he rubbed it out and walked away.

"My friends, I will never forget that man," McCain recounts during a town-hall meeting with voters, his voice choked with emotion. "I will never forget that moment. And I will never forget the fact that no matter where you are, no matter how difficult things are, there's always going to be someone of your faith and your belief and your devotion to your fellow man who will pick you up and help you out and bring you through."

In McCain, you won't find a Bible thumper. That isn't him. I think he looks at life and faith through the eyes of a survivor. Most of us wouldn't understand that. I won't speak for him, but when someone survives something so horrific, they usually feel a need to make a difference. They are still here, there must be a reason. McCain seems to feel that in a big way. He doesn't preach. He just does what he feels is right.

What I have tried to make people understand about McCain is that what he has been through, his sacrifice for his country, his public service, and his leadership makes him UNIQUELY qualified to be President. His experience is such that all of us should be able to forgive him for when he has let us down politically.

Because a hero deserves this.

And is there any doubt at all that he is a hero?

Sex, Drinking, and Common Sense.

Jim Geraghty reports on this Huffington Post where they just can't believe Huckabee compares "safe sex" to domestic violence:

Huckabee:

"If we really are serious about stopping a problem, whether it's drunk drinking...we don't say "Don't drive 'as drunk'?" ...This is an illogical thing that we apply to that one area that we don't apply to any other area. And I'm open-minded to all the arguments, if someone can convince me a little reckless behavior is OK. Maybe that's the message. But it would seem to me that if we're consistent in saying reckless behavior is undesirable we should ask people to move their behavior to the standard and not move the standard to the behavior...We don't say that a little domestic violence is OK, just cut it down a little, just don't hit quite as hard. We say it's wrong."

There is absolutely nothing wrong with what he is saying and everything right about it. Look, promiscuous sex leads to AIDS, HIV and about 50 other sexually transmitted diseases. To pretend that using condoms prevents these things is foolish at best. Nothing is 100%. Even against pregnancy. So, when you look at consequences of a behavior, like domestic violence or drunk driving OR spreading STD's, we all agree these are wrong and should be stopped as much as we are able to do so. We should encourage actions that prevent these consequences, right? Huckabee is right on the money.

Most people like to drink, right? But if you drink and drive you put others at risk. Grave risk. These are behaviors that we draw the line at. We say "NO" to drinking and driving. Why can't we do the same to promiscuous sex? Both are personal decisions one makes and both put others at risk. Grave risk. Yet we make laws against drunk driving, while we throw condoms at promiscuous sex. It's like throwing coffee at drunk drivers or a Yanni CD at a wife abuser.

MADD did a tremendous job at making the public aware of the dangers of drunk driving. When I was young, everyone drove while drinking. No one thought twice about it. We need a MADD organization against promiscuous sex. We need to teach our children how dangerous this is.

In practical terms, we cannot impose laws on unsafe sexual activity, but we can sure as heck not promote it with condoms, which encourage this behavior instead of stopping it. The behavior is WRONG. That is the message we need to be sending.

She may not be a Nobel Peace Prize winner....

Al Gore received the award she should have, but in my book, she is a saint.

Six Degrees of Funny.

In case you haven't heard, Lynne Cheney revealed on CNN this morning that in researching her new book, she found that Dick Cheney and Barack Obama were eighth cousins.

Which prompted the hilarious picture above from skippy the bush kangaroo, that I stole from Outside The Beltway.

To put this in perspective, a commenter said that 8th cousin means your 5th Great Grandparents shared common grandparents.

Still, this fascinating to me. I just love ancestry. I have a great aunt who typed up pages and pages of stories of my family history. But upon closer inspection, I found a few time lines out of wack. So, now I'm not sure of the legitimacy of it all. But I did have a great great grandmother that was full bloodied Cherokee Indian. I have talked about this before and my leftie/crazy friend/commenter dave bones from across the pond, now calls me "squaw," which makes me laugh, but then again, since it means "the totality of being female," I kind of like it.

Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton, Bush???

Yesterday my son pointed out to me that if Hillary won the next Presidential election, he would probably be married with children and have always had either a Bush or a Clinton as President in his lifetime. Isn't that just strange?

Well, I jokingly said "And if she is re-elected and then after that Jeb Bush runs and wins, you will be 36 yrs old and still be able to say that."

So imagine my surprise when I read over at Outside The Beltway, that James Carville predicted yesterday that Jeb Bush will be the G.O.P's nominee for 2008. Like OTB, I find that almost impossible, but it still leaves my scenario in place for the future.

Not a good thing imo. In fact it bothered me quite a bit to think of it. We don't need dynasties. We need leaders.

Carbon Offsets.

First let's define what a carbon offset is. According to carbonfund.org: "Carbon offsets are the process of reducing a ton of carbon dioxide emissions in another location for the emissions you cause in your home, office, commute, travel, or other activities that use energy and cause emissions."

Tree planting is the most common, renewable energy, energy conservation and methane capture offsets have now become increasingly popular.

When you are purchase carbon offsets, you are essentially paying someone else to mitigate carbon emissions somewhere else.

Tony Blankley, while making fun of Al Gore, gives this analogy:

Let's suppose that Al Gore goes to an Italian restaurant and eats a loaf of garlic bread, a plate of lasagna, a bowl of spaghetti and meatballs, an extra-large pizza with seven toppings, a couple bottles of Chianti and a large assortment of pastries. As a result, he puts on 10 pounds. But he is deeply concerned that mankind is getting too fat. So he pays 10 peasants in Asia $10 each to eat nothing for a week. Although they are already thin, by starving themselves for a week, they each lose a pound. As a result, after a week, mankind is weight neutral. Al Gore weighs 10 pounds more, 10 Asians weigh 10 pounds less -- and Al Gore is given another Nobel Peace Prize for his leadership in keeping mankind's waistline in check.

Of course, this example is not quite fair to Gore because that imagined humanitarianism actually costs him cash money. In the real carbon offset business, he looks forward to being paid for directing other carbon consumers to invest in carbon neutral projects. Although when Gore personally is using carbon, as when he flies in a carbon-belching Gulfstream, one of his companies would pay some other fella not to fly or plant a tree or do something to offset Gore's carbon belching.

It is too easy to make fun of this. But try and google the news on carbon offsets and you will find almost no negative reporting from the MSM. Yet I did find this in looking around:

In 2007, the Financial Times conducted an investigation of the voluntary (unregulated) carbon offsets industry. Among the findings they reported were:

Widespread instances of people and organizations buying worthless credits that do not yield any reductions in carbon emissions.

Industrial companies profiting from doing very little – or from gaining carbon credits on the basis of efficiency gains from which they have already benefited substantially.

Brokers providing services of questionable or no value.

A shortage of verification, making it difficult for buyers to assess the true value of carbon credits.

Companies and individuals being charged over the odds for the private purchase of European Union carbon permits that have plummeted in value because they do not result in emissions cuts. via Wikipedia

So here is a whole movement and industry that claims we can buy "offsets" to lessen our carbon footprint and there seems to be no real evidence it does so. And the mainstream media seems to have no interest in this whatsoever. Go figure

Funny? Or just stupid?

If you watched TV News this morning, Stephen Colbert is running for President. Does this remind you of anyone?

Apparently Colbert will actually be on the ballot in the state of South Carolina only. My guess he will generate more votes than Paulsen ever dreamed of.

via media blog

"Unintended Consequences"

Very good.

via Instapundit

Ann Coulter's Site Get's Hacked.

You can read it here. The above is a screenshot of her page. Other than the "P.S. I'm a dude" comment, it isn't nearly as nasty as I expected. (The comments at the link make up for it though.) Can I just add here that particular insult to Ann is just so ridiculous. You can be angry with Ann for many things, but to pretend she isn't a beautiful woman just makes you look foolish. She just is.

When a man can't even get drunk on his own lawnmower....

It takes a few moments to get funny. Stick with it.

Poll says most Americans agree with Bush on SCHIP.

USA Today:

• 52% agree with Bush that most benefits should go to children in families earning less than 200% of the federal poverty level — about $41,000 for a family of four. Only 40% say benefits should go to families earning up to $62,000, as the bill written by Democrats and some Republicans would allow.

• 55% are very or somewhat concerned that the program would create an incentive for families to drop private insurance. Bush and Republican opponents have called that a step toward government-run health care.

In fairness, the poll also shows that the public trusts Democrats more to run health care (ACK!!), but at least they are understanding the fundamental problem with expanding SCHIP, and it's not because we are against insuring poor children.

New Ad For Mitt. On Taxes.

Tax talk may not be glamourous, but keeping more of our money instead of letting the government waste it, is music to my ears.

This Story Has It All.

Love, heartbreak, twists and turns, and deceit. And the Internet affection connection. You'll love it. Read it.

via Conservative Grapevine

Will Any Scandal Stick With Hillary?

The Hill:

Republicans are focusing on an allegation in a recent book by two Pulitzer Prize-winning reporters, which suggests Clinton listened to a secretly recorded conversation between political opponents.

In their book about Clinton’s rise to power, Her Way, Don Van Natta Jr., an investigative reporter at The New York Times, and Jeff Gerth, who spent 30 years as an investigative reporter at the paper, wrote: “Hillary’s defense activities ranged from the inspirational to the microscopic to the down and dirty. She received memos about the status of various press inquiries; she vetted senior campaign aides; and she listened to a secretly recorded audiotape of a phone conversation of Clinton critics plotting their next attack.

“The tape contained discussions of another woman who might surface with allegations about an affair with Bill,” Gerth and Van Natta wrote in reference to Clinton’s husband, former President Bill Clinton. “Bill’s supporters monitored frequencies used by cell phones, and the tape was made during one of those monitoring sessions.”

I have no doubt that this is true. But it isn't Republicans who should be using this now. It should be OBAMA.

Good grief.

"The War: According To Those Actually Here."

Update: Michael Yon on CNN. via HotAir.



E-mail from Michael Yon:

Greetings:

Iraq is on the mend, al Qaeda is on the run, and the civil war has abated to a point where the term "civil war" no longer applies.

Accurate war coverage is increasingly important. Even prominent seemingly well-informed persons can get it wrong, such as retired Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez who previously commanded the war in Iraq. His recent public statements –selectively excerpted and then widely dispersed by the hot winds of media – made it clear that this former senior commander is far out of touch with the current situation.

But there are commanders with a finger on the pulse.

When earlier this year I wrote about the 1-4 CAV transforming an abandoned seminary in a Baghdad neighborhood that had been decimated by civil war, the "surge" had not even begun; but already pundits, politicians and editors had declared it a failure. Though I'd spent only a few days with LTC Crider and his 1-4 CAV soldiers at the new COP Amanche, I ended the dispatch on a note of hope based on observation. I recently received an email from LTC Crider with an update on that Baghdad neighborhood. Please read "Achievements of the Human Heart" and see for yourself.

I was in al Basra province when I saw news reports claiming that Basra city had descended into chaos in the wake of an announcement about the draw down of British Soldiers. I emailed the facts about Basra to several bloggers who hold the media accountable, and the resulting effort got the attention of Tom Foreman who anchors CNN's "This Week at War." We were able to make a CNN interview, and the result is a segment that accurately reflects a complex and changing situation. Bravo to CNN for setting the record straight, and to the tireless bloggers who are making a substantial difference in the way news about the war is delivered.

There are major developments to share with readers in upcoming dispatches. If things go at-least-mostly according to plan (which is all we can hope for in war), and if I can rely on the help of readers who share my frustration with the lack of accurate reporting, we can significantly widen the stream of news flowing from Iraq so more people can obtain a truer picture. This will require the will and generosity of readers. But more on that, soon.

Michael
Basra, Iraq

"The Conversation Continues..."

Only Hillary talks and doesn't listen.

Also, this isn't the most interesting video of Hillary out there. This is.

This Is How We Fail Our Soldiers.

By bureaucracy and stupidity.

In early May, seven soldiers were on lookout near a patrol area in a dangerous part of Iraq. Four heavily armed al-Qaeda attacked them.

Four of the soldiers were killed on the spot and three others were taken hostage.
A search to rescue the men was quickly launched. But it soon ground to a halt as lawyers - obeying strict U.S. laws about surveillance - cobbled together the legal grounds for wiretapping the suspected kidnappers.

More:

For an excruciating nine hours and 38 minutes, searchers in Iraq waited as U.S. lawyers discussed legal issues and hammered out the “probable cause” necessary for the attorney general to grant such “emergency” permission.
Finally, approval was granted and, at 7:38 that night, surveillance began.

Too late.

Read the rest and weep.

via LST

Sieze The Moment.

Victor Davis Hanson:

Any visitor to Iraq can see that the American military cannot be defeated there, but is also puzzled over exactly how we could win — victory being defined as fostering a stable Iraqi constitutional state analogous to, say, Turkey.
But war is never static. Over the last 90 days, there has been newfound optimism, as Iraqis are at last stepping forward to help Americans secure their country.

There is reduced voilence everywhere. Why?

Officers offered a number of theories. The surge of American troops, and Gen. David Petraeus' risky tactics of going after the terrorists within their enclaves, have put al-Qaida on the run. Likewise, in the past four years, the U.S. military has killed thousands of these terrorists and depleted their ranks.

More:

Iraqis of all tribes and sects are also growing tired of the nihilistic violence that is squandering the opportunity for something better than Saddam's rule. The astronomical spike in oil prices has resulted in windfall profits of billions of dollars for the Iraqi government — and with it the realization that Iraq could someday become a wealthy, advanced state.
Iraqis told me that their widely held fear that Americans are going to leave soon has galvanized Sunnis to finally step up to secure their country or face even worse chaos in our absence.
The result is that ordinary Iraqis are increasingly willing to participate in local government and civil defense. Such popular engagement from the bottom up offers more hope than the old 2003 idea that a democratically elected government could simply mandate reform top-down from enclaves in the Green Zone.

The time is now. We are at a turning point.

Lost in all this confusion over Iraq is the fact that about 160,000 gifted American soldiers are trying to help rebuild an entire civilization socially, politically and economically — and defeat killers in their midst who will murder far beyond Iraq if not stopped.

It's time to pray.

h/t to BigDog

I'm wondering...

...Can popular culture sink any lower?

Have We Defeated Al-Qaeda In Iraq?

Many in the military believe so. This is subscription from the WaPo so I will copy generously:

The U.S. military believes it has dealt devastating and perhaps irreversible blows to al-Qaeda in Iraq in recent months, leading some generals to advocate a declaration of victory over the group, which the Bush administration has long described as the most lethal U.S. adversary in Iraq.

But some officials say making a declaration of victory fuel criticism that the Iraqi conflict has become a civil war only and they worry about declaring victory to an adversary that has shown resilience before.

There is widespread agreement that AQI has suffered major blows over the past three months. Among the indicators cited is a sharp drop in suicide bombings, the group's signature attack, from more than 60 in January to around 30 a month since July. Captures and interrogations of AQI leaders over the summer had what a senior military intelligence official called a "cascade effect," leading to other killings and captures. The flow of foreign fighters through Syria into Iraq has also diminished, although officials are unsure of the reason and are concerned that the broader al-Qaeda network may be diverting new recruits to Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Read that paragraph again. It is NOTHING but good news. And it gets better:

The deployment of more U.S. and Iraqi forces into AQI strongholds in Anbar province and the Baghdad area, as well as the recruitment of Sunni tribal fighters to combat AQI operatives in those locations, has helped to deprive the militants of a secure base of operations, U.S. military officials said. "They are less and less coordinated, more and more fragmented," Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the second-ranking U.S. commander in Iraq, said recently. Describing frayed support structures and supply lines, Odierno estimated that the group's capabilities have been "degraded" by 60 to 70 percent since the beginning of the year.

While it would be nice to make a declaration of victory, what purpose does that serve? To win the war of words here in America? The left plays that game. We shouldn't. This isn't a Bruce Willis movie where everything is neatly decided in the end. This is real war. Let's just let our boys do the job they need to do and let's not worry about PR here.

Look at what we have accomplished, even with the media's constant barrage of bad news from Iraq and never reporting the good. The left has convinced many Americans that we can't win. But we on the right know better. Forget PR, and let's just win.

The title of this piece is "Al-Qaeda in Iraq reported Crippled." Wasn't this our goal? This is who flew our planes into our buildings. To use a well worn quote, we fought them there so we wouldn't have to fight them here.

And we have.

A Link Parade.

Just a bunch of good stuff.

You have to wonder if the MSM even tries anymore. Read about Newsweek displaying six pictures on one page (regarding Rudy's right hand men) and five of the six captions are wrong

"The Lonely War." For all the debate and talk about the war in America, it really isn't understood. We especially don't understand how our military is making it all work, despite the negativity and dreary war soundbites in America.

Wasting our tax dollars with earmarks and through our military. It will make you just want to scream.

Americans would rather know what Britney did today than about the men who fight our battles. It's too bad, because this is history in the making. At this critical time in the war, maybe we can look away from tabloid TV and see the world changing events as they happen.

Good news from Iraq and there is a boatload. (via Ace)

And finally, I'll leave you with laughter. Stephen Colbert managed to snag Maureen Dowd's New York Time's column for the day and it is funny.

Have fun!

h/t to BigDog for some of the links!

Global Warming. Another Voice.

"ONE of the world's foremost meteorologists has called the theory that helped Al Gore share the Nobel Peace Prize "ridiculous" and the product of "people who don't understand how the atmosphere works".

Dr William Gray, a pioneer in the science of seasonal hurricane forecasts, told a packed lecture hall at the University of North Carolina that humans were not responsible for the warming of the earth."

Read the whole thing.

via Drudge

Say a prayer today...

...for the Muir family. Chris Muir's sister has passed away.

My Rebound Man.

Everyone here knows I love McCain. McCain is my hero. I forgive him for all his mistakes. But a girl always has to be looking for what could be her rebound man.

Mitt's my rebound man. Here is what I like about him:

He has been married to the same woman for 38 years and has five perfectly wonderful sons. This may not mean a lot to some of you, but it means something to me.

He's smart. He has business and law degrees from Harvard Business School and Harvard Law School. To say he was successful in life is putting it mildly. He's worth $250 million. Wow. He knows business and that's important. Too many leaders spend their whole lives in politics (see the Clintons) and never understand how regulation and taxes affect businesses.

Here is a story you might not know about Romney. In the summer 1996 a 14-year-old daughter of a Bain partner (his business) went missing in New York City. Mitt shut down Bain for a week (imagine!!!) while Romney and dozens of other employees flew to New York to walk the streets in search of the girl. They set up a command center in a hotel. They didn't find her, but she turned up a week later, safe in New Jersey.

Now that is impressive. Very impressive. It tells me what things matter to him and how much they mean.

Everyone knows about his success with being CEO of the 2002 Olympic Winter Games and that he was governor of Massachusetts. When he became Governor in 2003 he faced a projected $3 billion deficit. By 2006 the State had a $700 million surplus. Impressive again.

Many question his dedication to the social issues since he showed support for abortion rights and gay marriage in the past. He changed his views on both issues. Is it sincere? I can't tell you for sure. But I do know that in 2004, while researching embryonic cell research, he sought information from pro-life scientists to learn more about the issue. He says he had a change of heart, just like so many of us on the pro-life side (myself included) and I believe him. He says he against same sex marriage and I believe him there too.

In case you aren't up on all his views, here is a quick overview.

He's for the death penalty. He is for school choice. He calls for securing our borders. He opposes torture in prisoner interrogations. He advocates elimination the capital gains tax on everyone earning less than $200,000 and eliminating the inheritance tax. He opposes all tax increases. He wants to increase military spending and increase the military. He supports the war.

Is he as perfect as he looks? No. I don't agree with everything, just as I don't with McCain or anyone else running. But he's right on all the important things.

As far as him being a Morman? This is the way I look at it. Christ said you will know a tree by it's fruit. Mitt has led a good life. He seems to love his wife and has wonderful sons. There doesn't seem to be a hint of scandal around him. There won't be any skeletons falling from his closet.

The only concern I have is that he is a rookie at running for President. We all know how powerful this HillaryMachine is. I'm not sure a rookie can fight against it and win.

But this is a man who has won at many levels in his life. Not the least of which is just being a good man. Maybe goodness against a political manipulation machine can win.

We shall see.

Who Did They Think They Were Messing With???

Rush always has the last laugh (and with a good dose of charity thrown in).

Listen to a voice of a Muslim that loves America.

From The Middle East Media Research Institute via Mudville.

"Khudayr Taher, a liberal Iraqi author now living in the U.S., is a regular commentator for the liberal Arab e-journal Elaph. In a series of articles published September 21-25, 2007, he described his transformation from an ardent Shi'ite sectarian in his native Karbala to a liberal devotee of Enlightenment values. Earlier, on September 11, he published "An Apology to America for the Crimes of the Arabs and Muslims," in which he called the U.S. "the prophet of liberty."

"… As an Arab Muslim, I feel shame and disgrace at this crime [9/11] that befell the United States of America, which is considered the best country on the face of the planet in the service it has done to human civilization. It is America that gave humanity [many] inventions: the telephone, the airplane, cinema and television, electric light, the Internet, and thousands of other inventions and scientific and intellectual discoveries…
"And America is the prophet of liberty that has liberated millions of humans from subjugation and slavery. It brought down Nazism, Communism, and the Taliban and Saddam regimes.
"It is certain that the ignorant, the rabble, and the terrorists do not understand … that Allah has blessed the land of America and has graced it with all its resources - mines, oil, agriculture, land, and aquatic fauna… America is an earthly paradise… by the grace of Allah's blessings.
"The foolish and the criminal never manage to see the sunlight and the hidden good that shines out… One needs a clear conscience and a mind free of criminal mob slogans before one can see America's good, shining face…
"Any noble Arab Muslim should be ashamed and should apologize to the American people for this crime [i.e. 9/11]. America deserves great love and recognition for its goodness and grace towards humanity." [4]

Wow.

The More Interesting Story.

At least to me.

You have probably heard by now the National Inquirer story about John Edwards having an affair. I haven't posted on it because without proof, it's just too mean. The story isn't what I am interested in. I'm interested in the source. This just smacks of the Clinton machine. No one on the right cares about John Edwards. He isn't going to get the nomination. But the Clintons see him as siphoning off way too many votes in the primaries and Obama looking better because of it.

I'm figuring they haven't found anything juicy on Obama yet.

That's the real story here.

Update: Edwards and the woman are denying everything. But back to what I think the real story is. Remember how I just posted how Hillary will do everything by polls? It just so happens that this poll shows that a third of U.S. women say their vote is influenced by the happiness of the candidate's marriage. Among Democrats, 52% saw Edwards as having the happiest marriage, where only 29% show Hillary as having a happy marriage.

Hmmm.......

Political Art or A Bad Photoshop?

This a political art piece by Arthur Szyk, who did most of his work in the 1940's. You can read about him here.

This is called "The Four Horsemen" (l to r) Hitler, Mussolini, a Japanese Ultranationalist and a Bolshevik are potrayed as the four horsemen of the apocalypse.

This is political art. This is not. (scroll down just a bit)

The Guardian reports: "Mr Sokolov described the photo as political provocation and said he was pulling it, together with 16 other works, from a show at Paris's Maison Rouge exhibition hall. The exhibits were all displayed in Russia this year at Moscow's state-owned Tretyakov gallery. The minister also banned another work by the same irreverent group, Blue Noses, that shows Vladimir Putin, George Bush and Osama bin Laden cavorting on a double bed in their underpants."

I'm not posting the photos of the art mentioned above because they just disgust me (they are safe for work though), You can click on the link to see them. But when did political art that is displayed in exhibition become something that looks like a Democratic Underground photoshop???? I mean if you are going to make a statement against Pres. Bush, fine. But could some talent be involved here?

"Clinton Reverses, Says She Would Negotiate with Iran's Leaders"

CANTERBURY, N.H. — Hillary Rodham Clinton called Barack Obama naive when he said he'd meet with the leaders of Iran without precondition.
But her comments Thursday on the issue prompted him to question whether she's changed her mind.
During a Democratic presidential debate in July, Obama said he would be willing to meet without precondition in the first year of his presidency with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea.
Standing with him on stage, Clinton said she would first send envoys to test the waters and called Obama's position irresponsible and naive.
But asked about it Thursday by a voter, the New York senator said twice that she, too, would negotiate with Iran "with no conditions.
"I would engage in negotiations with Iran, with no conditions, because we don't really understand how Iran works. We think we do, from the outside, but I think that is misleading," she said at an apple orchard.

Why would she change her mind? One word. Polls.

We know through Dick Morris that Bill Clinton used polls almost daily in his Presidency. Nothing mattered more to Clinton than being liked, so he would do what the polls told him that the people wanted. Morris said that Bill and Hillary did absolutely nothing, without first weighing how it would effect public opinion. It's how we finally got welfare reform.

Now, Hillary doesn't care about being liked. She will do as she wishes if she becomes President, but to get the nomination and get elected, she must be liked. So I believe she is following in her husband's footsteps in this regard.

*I just had to use the pic stolen from Grouchy Old Cripple. He always has the best pics.

Update: Even Al Gore is afraid of the Hillary Machine:

WASHINGTON (CNN) — A source involved in Gore's past political runs told CNN that he definitely has the ambition to use the peace prize as a springboard to run for president.
But he will not run, because he won't take on the political machine assembled by Sen. Hillary Clinton, said the source.

When Did Listing Facts Become A Smear?

Think Progress has this "shocking" headline:

EXCLUSIVE: E-mail Reveals That McConnell Staffer Propagated Smear Campaign Against Graeme Frost

How did the McConnell staffer do this? By this e-mail:

"Seen the latest blogswarm? Apparently, there’s more to the story on the kid (Graeme Frost) that did the Dems’ radio response on SCHIP. Bloggers have done a little digging and turned up that the Dad owns his own business (and the building it’s in), seems to have some commercial rental income and Graeme and a sister go to a private school that, according to its website, costs about $20k a year ‹for each kid‹ despite the news profiles reporting a family income of only $45k for the Frosts. Could the Dems really have done that bad of a job vetting this family?"

Can someone explain to me how this is a "smear??" Let's see. He points out that bloggers found that the Dad owns his own business and building and that the kids go to private school. He then expresses disbelief that the Democrats would put this child out there as an example of why we need an expansion of the SCHIP program without finding out that they might not be that needy.

I just had to laugh at the notion that this is somehow a "smear." Listing facts about a person, who the Democrats put out there as a response to the President, is a "baseless smear?"

Good grief.

Gore Awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

I think we have all gotten used to this award being handed out to prominent liberals:

"The Norwegian Nobel Committee characterized Gore as "the single individual who has done most" to convince world governments and leaders that climate change is real, is caused by human activity, and poses a grave threat."

That is true. He has done that. You may have noticed that I don't blog on the global warming debate. I don't blog on it because there are too many confusing voices and I don't trust any of them either way.

But the shame of this award is that although Gore has done more in a PR sense to convince people about global warming, he has also been the biggest hypocrite on this issue as well. He encourages us all to take measures to conserve energy while he lives an elite lifestyle of private jets, multiple houses, and many cars.

I don't have to agree with someone to respect them. Just show me that you truly believe in what you believe and live your life reflecting those values, and I can respect you. Gore could have earned some respect from me by living a life that served as an example of conserving energy. If he had flown commercial or downscaled his home (especially since only two people live there). If he had always implented energy saving devices before he was asked to do "An Inconvient Truth." All those things would have convinced me of at least his dedication to saving the environment.

Finally, many have discovered serious errors in Gore's movies and they never seem to be addressed in the media.

This is interesting...

And probably more important than any of us realize:

"World's future hinges on peace between faiths, Islamic scholars tell Pope"

In a letter addressed directly to Pope Benedict XVI and other Christian leaders including the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, 138 prominent Muslim scholars said that finding common ground between the world's biggest two religions was not "simply a matter for polite ecumenical dialogue".

The letter, which is entitled A Common Word between Us and You, says: "Muslims and Christians together make up well over half of the world's population. Without peace and justice between these two religious communities, there can be no meaningful peace in the world. The future of the world depends on peace between Muslims and Christians."

The 29-page document argues that the basis for this understanding can be found in the common principles of the religions: "Love of the one God, and love of the neighbour".
Supporting their argument with quotations from both the Bible and the Qur'an, the signatories say that Mohammed was told the same truths that had already been revealed to previous Christian and Jewish prophets, including Jesus.

But the scholars also stress that there is more at stake than "polite ecumenical dialogue" between religious leaders.

"With the terrible weaponry of the modern world; with Muslims and Christians intertwined everywhere as never before, no side can unilaterally win a conflict between more than half of the world's inhabitants. Thus our common future is at stake. The very survival of the world itself is perhaps at stake," the letter says.


Read the whole thing.

By The Way.....

I am blogging over at NewsBusters now. I'll let you know when I post.

Democrat afraid of Redneck Cooties.

It is too funny.

Rep. Bennie Thompson, Mississippi Democrat and committee chairman, responds to concerns by Rep. Robin Hayes of Concord, North Carolina, that committee staffers should be immunized against certain diseases before attending NASCAR races.
...
"I have been to numerous NASCAR races, and the folks who attend these events certainly do not pose any health hazard to congressional staffers or anyone else," Mr. Hayes said.
A committee staffer says that the Republican staffers have declined the shots but that two Democrat staffers were immunized before attending the race at Talladega last weekend.

They have GOT to be kidding. I can't imagine anyone being that ignorant.

via Ace

If Only We Could Clone Him.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

You have got to read how this Sheriff makes it all work. Read the whole thing. You will want to cheer at the end.

Republicans. Listen.

Tony Blankley:

"In my column last week, I argued for electoral pragmatism by my fellow conservatives (e.g. better a Giuliani Republican than Hillary). About two-thirds of my self-identified conservative Christian e-mail respondents strongly disagreed."

I've been trying to drive this home with my conservative friends. Most religious conservatives will simply not vote for Rudy. Period. It may anger you, but it's reality. Can someone call Iowa and New Hampshire and tell them this?

That response reminded me of a very shrewd observation several years ago by Robert William Fogel that: "Coalitions spawned by religious movements are more ideological than partisan." The current Republican-conservative coalition that started forming under Richard Nixon and reached its zenith under Ronald Reagan would never have become a national governing coalition without the powerful impetus of the expanding religious movement in America. Without the conservative social-religious faction of the coalition, the remaining fiscal conservatives, free marketers, hawks and country-club Republicans would routinely come up short of a national majority.

Blankely argues, as most of you do, that we are only shooting ourselves in the foot if Rudy is our nominee and we stay home on election day. He makes this point:

"Those of us who have stayed in the fray have had to constantly wrestle with our consciences as to whether we are making a reasonable compromise — or whether we are becoming power mad political hacks.

No doubt there is a danger of becoming precisely the sort of swamp creatures we came to Washington to rid the nation of when we said we wanted to drain the Washington swamp. But perfect purity of principle in application is not a functioning governing process — it is a posture. And whether one is a Washington professional or a citizen voter, anyone who considers himself a person of good conscience, must have the courage to judge whether the net effect of his political decision advances one's moral objectives or not"

But where is the line drawn? I don't think it is "perfect purity" to demand that our candidate at the very least value human life as it's being born. I don't think it is "perfect purity" to desire our candidate agree with us on immigration, gun rights, campaign finance reform, and gay marriage. Letting one or possibly even two of these issues go is one thing. But the host of them adds up to a nominee that might as well be a Democrat. That isn't purity, that's promiscuity.

Blankley ends with this:

"But in the practicality of democratic elections we cannot make such a similar commitment to every one of our governing ideals. Elections are very specific and limited choices between different outcomes. The decision not to vote, or vote for a third-party candidate with no hope of winning, is itself a moral choice for the outcome such a vote will effectuate. People of conscience will have to decide whether feeling pure by voting "none of the above" is the highest ethical act or not."

This is a good argument. Very good. The problem is that millions and millions of Christians will never read it. The problem is millions will not agree.

I'm growing tired of this. We need to stop trying to convince people to vote for Rudy before Rudy is even our nominee. The simple and right answer to me is to NOT NOMINATE RUDY.

If we do, then we can have this argument. Not that it will make much difference.

Democrats. Listen.

Camille Paglia at Salon:

I find it hard to believe that my fellow Democrats want to backtrack and relive every tedious scandal from the Clinton era. But that’s what we’ll get if Hillary is the nominee — a long, sulfurous night of the walking dead, with chattering skeletons tumbling out of every closet. I’ve been discouraged by the clumsy missteps of the Edwards campaign, but I’m still hopeful about Barack Obama, who had the guts and good sense to publicly oppose the Iraq war from the start and whose ascent promises a clean, invigorating break from the sordid past.

via TJ Green

If you can't beat them on the merits.....

.....then plant racists hateful flyers and sign the other sides' name.

The ongoing determination to slander the right.

Good Grief.

The Plain Dealers blog has this:

"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi today defended the Architect of the Capitol's refusal to permit use of the word "God" on official certificates enclosed with flags flown over the U.S. Capitol.
Dayton-area GOP Rep. Michael Turner and more than 100 of his Republican colleagues sent a letter to Pelosi last week after an Eagle Scout in his district asked that a flag flown over the U.S. Capitol be sent to his grandfather with a certificate inscribed with the message: "In honor of my grandfather Marcel Larochelle, and his dedication and love of God, country, and family."

The boy and his father contacted Turner's office after noticing the word "God" was left off the certificate included with the flag. Outraged upon learning that the acting Architect of the Capitol, Stephen T. Ayers, won't allow religious expressions on flag certificates, Turner sent a protest letter to Pelosi.

"The Architect's policy prohibiting "God" from appearing on certificates for flags flown over the U.S. Capitol puts at risk our religious freedoms and heritage,"

Pelosi, of course, takes the usual anti-God stance. She had to take a break from praying for George W. Bush to make this statement:

"It's not about being anti-religion," Pelosi said, noting that each day in the Capitol starts with a prayer. "It is just about what the architect thought was appropriate for him to proclaim in a certificate."

Rush to Censor.

I haven't listened to Rush in years. I'm not in the car in the afternoon anymore, so I just haven't caught him. But after the Democrats launched their smear campaign on him, I started listening again. I had forgotten how clear and concise and funny he is.

Brent Bozell has an excellent article over at Townhall how Rush has been vindicated and he makes excellent points, which I will get to in a moment. But I think it's important to stop and think for a minute about what happened.

The Democratic congress went after a private citizen. I know they think if they can censor Rush then they might have a better chance in '08. And Rush isn't the only one they want to shut up.

Imagine for a moment if Republicans had tried to get Air America off the air when it began? Of course, we never would call for that. We aren't afraid of the opposite view. It's ironic, isn't it? That the same people who scream about wiretapping to catch terrorists seem to have no problem with the Democratic arm of the government going after a private citizen.

The Democrats could not have chosen a more ridiculous charge. As Brent points out, Rush has been an unrelenting supporter of the Military:

"A day doesn't go by when he isn't praising our military on his radio program. He's visited the troops on the battlefield in Afghanistan and brought comfort to our wounded at the Walter Reed Army hospital. He's raised and donated millions to military charities. It is no wonder that he is the single most popular personality on the Armed Forces Radio Network."

There is no doubt what this is about. Media Matters, MoveOn and other leftwing organizations are trying to shut Rush up. They don't want to debate the issues on the merits. They want to censor the opposite view.

That is what the smear on Bill O'Reilly was about as well. As Brent rightly points out:

This is no accident, and no coincidence. Yesterday, it was MoveOn. Today, it's Media Matters. This is the far left at its repugnant worst, perfectly content to destroy a man's reputation through dishonest attacks if it will further its agenda. Josef Stalin would be proud of this movement.

More:

But this won't stop the left. Tomorrow it will be Sean Hannity, or Mark Levin, or maybe Laura Ingraham. This group plays for keeps.

Brent is right about that:

"Rep. Henry Waxman has asked his investigative staff to begin compiling reports on Limbaugh, and fellow radio hosts Sean Hannity and Mark Levin based on transcripts from their shows, and to call in Federal Communications Commission chairman Kevin Martin to discuss the so-called "Fairness Doctrine."

Scary stuff. Scary.

This should be a concern for all of us.

Republican Debate with Fred.

I watched some of this. I really only wanted to see how Fred would do and I think he did pretty good. He was more charming and funny than I expected. I had read so much from others at NRO and Townhall that he was a lackluster speaker. I'm glad that turned out not to be the case.

HotAir has more here and here.

David Brody from CBN has a good overview of the debate as well.

The News or The Truth?

Hard to tell which is which.

Newsday has the following article, which was supplemented by wire reports:

"British pullout in Iraq leaves Basra in chaos"

Yet today I get an e-mail from Michael Yon:

Greetings,

A new dispatch is published: Under Distant Stars.

I've just spent 10 days on the Iran-Iraq border with an excellent British "Battle Group" called 4 Rifles. We truly were living under the desert stars.

I am currently in Basra. There are reports that Basra is in chaos.

These reports are false. Basra is mostly peaceful; the British have not lost a soldier in combat for more than a month, and Iraqi-on-Iraqi violence has plummeted in the last six weeks or so.
The British have NOT pulled out of Iraq or Basra yet, but from what I can see, their force reduction decisions are militarily and politically sound, and are supported by top American commanders in Baghdad. The news reports I am seeing about Basra are incomplete at best, and largely inaccurate.

(Reminds me of Mosul during 2005.)

V/r,

Michael

I can't tell you how disturbing it is to me to think that news from the war is not accurate. Is there really an effort by some in the media to portray everything in a negative light? I wonder.

I love Lynne Cheney.

If ever there should be a role model for women, Lynne Cheney is it. She is accomplished, smart, and strong.

I love her values and her opinions. It is ironic that she is married to the man the left thinks of as the devil, but as usual, the real story paints a very different picture. When their daughter came out as gay I'm sure the left assumed that the Cheney's would turn their backs on her, but of course that didn't happen. They showed unconditional love, which we are called to do in our faith.

As I discussed in my previous post regarding Christian's call to help others, not through the government, but through our own personal finances or time, the Cheney's come through there as well:

"Lynne Cheney has made about $2 million by writing books, giving half to charity. In addition, she and her husband have given nearly $7 million to George Washington Hospital, the University of Wyoming, and a scholarship program for students in the District."

Also:

"Mr. and Mrs. Cheney gave 78% of their 2005 income to charity. The couple donated $6.9 million, including the proceeds from stock options and book royalties that Mrs. Cheney routinely gives away. Their giving went to three nonprofit causes in health, higher education and services for inner-city youth."

I remember reading that a 1997 federal tax return showed Vice President Al Gore and wife Tipper reported giving $353 to charity that year. I don't question that Gore cares about the poor, but it seems he'd rather taxpayers actually foot the bill. I suppose if one depends on the government to help others, you don't feel much of a need to do so yourself. Which is one of the problems with it.

Just for comparison's sake, sort of like I did with the Bush girls and Chelsea, let's compare the percentage of the Gore's giving after the 1997 debacle. In 1999 they gave away 5.1% of their income.

78%-Cheny to 5.1%-Gore

Interesting, is it not? Some people practice what they preach and other's just preach.

What Would Jesus Do?

I've been getting some liberal commenters blasting me for not supporting the SCHIP, because that is what Jesus would have done, right?

Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s” (Matthew 22:21)

Should we pay our taxes? Yes. But that is where the line is drawn of Christ ever mentioning the government in relation to his ministry. And it was to make sure we knew the difference between what was God's and what was Caesar's. Never did Christ ask us to come together as a government and help the poor. He called us as Christians to help the poor. Each of us. Individually. It's interesting to note that in the New Testament Christ refers to how employers should treat their employees, how people should treat those who are in debt to them. He told parables about employees being generous and how they had a right to do with their money as they wished.

Christ never called on his followers to band with the government to help the poor. And he could have easily done so. It is wrong to bring Christ's teachings into politics unless it concerns moral issues. When moral issues are being forced upon us by the government then it is right to respond with Christ's message. Whether it be abortion, gay marriage, the death penalty, persecution, or civil rights for minorities. It is right to stand up for what we believe Christ would want us too. And we don't have to always agree with what that is, but it should stand on moral grounds.

Although it is fine to confront political issues with our religious belief, this is not demanded of us in our faith. That is our own decision. Many good and holy people live lives of giving and never enter the political process and that is fine. We answer the call we are given.

Now, that having been said, I do believe in a safety net for the poor by the government, but not because of my Christian beliefs, but because it seems to be the easiest way to provide that care for those who cannot take care of themselves. But we are so beyond a "safety net' right now. We have give a way programs that take away our hard earned money in billions and billions of dollars of fraud every year. That is wrong.

We are over taxed, over regulated, and over governed. Too much government is wrong for a free people.

So my liberal friends can stop lecturing me on what Christ would want. I have spent my entire life trying to make sure I am doing exactly that. It doesn't mean I haven't failed many many times, but nothing matters more to me. But you will never convince me that Christ was political in any way. He was about one thing and one thing only...our salvation. That's it. Period.

Sparkle on "Shut Up and Sing."

I thought you guys might be interested to watch the beginning clip of the Dixie Chick's "Shut Up and Sing" DVD where my blog is discussed. Other than the first thing he reads about me saying it's too bad and even this angry song is good, none of the rest is me. It's commenters on this blog and my Houston Chronicle blog. In fact, I'm not sure about the last line one of the Chicks reads, because I don't allow the "F" word, so that may be from somewhere else. Just wanted to make that clear.

SCHIP, the real story.

Pres. Bush is a heartless S.O.B.. right? Who doesn't want healthcare for children? Well, it's like this.....

I just have to expand on this. It's just mind boggling. Think about it. The Democrats thought they were being really crafty by having a 12 yr old boy named Graeme Frost read the rebuttal to President Bush's radio address about the SCHIP program. It really needs to be understood here that President Bush is for expanding this program and adding 4 million more children to the rolls, but the Democrats will not be happy until we are under socialized care and we all know that.

But I digress.

What is funny about this, is that this wasn't Republicans going and looking for a perfect example of how this expanded program doesn't help poor children. They are covered. It helps middle income America. People who can afford their own healthcare insurance. No, Republicans didn't have to go looking. Graeme Frost was the Democrats own little poster boy for the program. Only problem? His family lives in a half a million dollar home. He and his sister attend a private school that cost $20,000 a year. His father owns the half a million dollar commercial property that he works out of. And on top of all that, the insurance premiums this blog snoop found for the area were affordable. This family made choices and one of them was to take advantage of the system.

I don't blame them. But this is the problem with the ever expanding programs the Democrats want to force on us. We all say "Ok, we will help cover the poor children with health insurance." But that is never enough. The more give away programs the Democrats can push through, the more they look like the "caring" ones and the more votes they buy with the handouts.

Their poster boy for the expansion of the SCHIP becomes our poster boy against it.

You just can't make this stuff up.

Update: I went over to Michelle's since jandrew thinks it's so awful to expose the TRUTH and I find what I suspected. It may be that the grandparents foot the expensive private school bills. How about this? Let the grandparents pay for healthcare insurance and let the kids go to public school, instead OF LETTING THE TAXPAYERS FOOT THE BILL FOR THEIR INSURANCE.

It's time to get perspective here.

When I think about my Dad growing up without shoes in the summer. Bargaining with chickens to get goods and YET he became a lawyer, a legislator, and a circuit clerk. Why? Because he learned to depend on HIMSELF and not the government.