Uncle Uncle Uncle

Nothing Comic About It

2011-09-14T09:59:00.000-07:00

On August 30, the worldwide news media and Internet blogosphere exploded with breathless commentary about the publication of a coloring book describing the historicity of the 9/11 attacks. The pundits and spokespeople decried the comic book as disgusting, hateful, and disturbing. The publisher responded by explaining it was a tool for parents to teach their children about the underlying facts of that awful September morning.

Now why, I wondered, would a parent need a teaching tool for 9/11? Then it hit me—maybe because outside the home their children are hearing that a fact-based comic book is disgusting, hateful and disturbing, instead of being told that Muslim Jihadists are disgusting, hateful and disturbing.

I searched out the offensive comic book, assuming it would have pictures depicting, oh, I don’t know—Muslims dancing in the streets at the news the Towers had fallen. Maybe a picture of Daniel Pearl screaming in agony as members of Al-Qaeda sawed off his head while chanting “God is great!” And at least one picture of the president of Iran at the podium, proclaiming Israel should be “wipe off the map.” Sure, all these events are real. And really happened. And are parts of American history. But, but, but—talking about them isn’t sensitive, because it might “offend” the American Muslim community.

Here’s what I found inside that the hateful publication: An illustration of a news anchor reporting that Osama Bib Laden had been identified as the mastermind behind the attack; an illustration of someone crying from grief; George W. Bush addressing the nation; Osama Bin Laden cowering behind one of his wives as a Navy SEAL arranges for his expedited delivery to paradise; and finally, a picture of the Founding Fathers. Aside from the hateful pictures, the words—the dreadful words—that seem to have taken the coloring books over the edge into hate-speech is the description that the men who participated in the 9/11 slaughter were “freedom-hating, radical, Islamic Muslim extremists.”

And the problem is?

Okay, yes… the writing is childish. But the target market is parents wanting a way to explain mass murder to their—wait for it—children. Why does the writer use both of the words “Islamic” and “Muslim”? I don’t know—but I’ll bet you a $1,000 it has something to do with the fact that the average American child doesn’t understand that a “Muslim” is someone who practices a religion called “Islam.” That said, it’s probably best to use obvious, declarative terms when communicating with children. I mean, you’re probably not going to get a lot of Santa-mileage if you tell Johnny that Santa “exercises fiscal restrain when encountering morally ambiguous kids.”

The claims against the comic book also allege Islamophobia, which one would decipher to mean “a fear of Muslims.” Man, we love our phobias these days, don’t we? I don’t have Islamophobia, but here’s one I do have: Strapped-into-a-jet-going-600-miles-an-hour-with-a-suicidal-terrorist-in-the-pilot’s-seat-phobia. I hear we have lots of warriors in Iraq and Afghanistan who are bothered by a mild case of trying-to-keep-peace-and-help-build-a-functional-and-free-government-when-a-suicide-bomber-denotes-near-me-phobia. And, apparently, there are several thousand kids with growing-up-without-a-parent-beacause-of-9/11-phobia.

Our fear of “inspiring fear” within the American population is ponderous. Consider this: There are thousands of children who’ve actually lost a parent in the War on Terror who’ve never seen the video footage of the 9/11 attacks. Let me ask you: When was the last time you saw it? Unless you’ve tracked it down on the Internet, you haven’t seen it in 9 ½ years. Why? Because the media/government complex—even Fox News—decided that the footage was too “incendiary” for us to see anymore. It might result in a backlash against the American Muslim community. Aaaaand, poof! It was gone. Although the tenth anniversary of 9/11 will have passed by the time you read this, I’m betting in advance there won’t be a lot of telecasts showing the raw horror of the slaughter, followed by the sublime bravery of young men and women who joined the military to fight for freedom. I’m betting there will be lots of mourning, and remembrances, and video essays on the mistakes we’ve made, and exposes on the foolishness of invading Iraq. What I doubt we’ll see is anything as starkly truthful as the coloring book in question: Muslim extremists did this, so we did this.

Should we include the story of the collateral damage caused by our war on terrorism? Sure, why not. Self-flagellation has become an American pastime, and if feeling bad about America makes you feel good, have at it. Just remember: We didn’t draw first blood in this war.

In closing this missive, I think it fitting to end with a commentary about the illustration drawing the most outrage: The one of Osama Bin Laden getting shot. Why? Because I’ve been asked by dozens of friends, “Do you think killing Bin Laden has made America a safer place?”

I had to ponder that a while, and here’s the answer I believe is true: No, killing Bin Laden didn’t make America safer. But you know what it has done? It’s gotten terrorists and dictators and warlords all over the world sleeping with one eye open. Why? Because it showed that if you murder innocent civilians in our nation, we will track you down and shoot you dead. Even if it takes 10 years. Even if the sitting President is a left-leaning Democrat who opposes war. You can run, but you cannot hide.

That’s a fact so simple, even a child could grasp it. Maybe we should send copies of the comic to the terrorist leaders.

Don't tell me. Seriously. Don't...

2011-01-01T11:30:00.000-08:00

Well, it appears the unpleasant task of speaking up on the repeal of Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell has fallen to me.

Before I begin, however, let me say I have no negative feelings towards gays. What a king does inside his castle is of no concern to me. I should also point out that I am going to limit my opinion on the integration of openly gay men to the Marine Corps, as that’s the only branch where I served.

To start the discussion, let’s start at the top: The issue of repealing Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell is currently big news, because the paper-pushing Generals and Admirals at the Pentagon have released a “study” that says it wouldn’t affect readiness, morale, or good order and discipline. Well, let me give you a little education about Generals and Admirals, and members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: They have about as much in common with the frontline gunfighters as Barack Obama has with his brother… the one who lives in a box… in Kenya. For the men who do the front-line fighting and dying, the worries and concerns and political aspirations of the Pentagon Brass are irrelevant. As a result, that’s the category where I’ll file their study—under irrelevant.

Next, let’s discuss the issue of culture: When young men join the Marines, they do so because they are patriots, willing to fight and die for their country. They make a conscious decision to join the toughest branch of service. Why? It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure it out: They join the Marines because they want to prove themselves worthy of the legend of the Corps—and its reputation for taking civilians and turning them into tough men willing to fight on the front lines.

Kids who choose the Corps are either already tough, or they are like I was—decidedly not tough, and hoping to earn that adjective. In Boot Camp and Officer Candidate School the Corps takes boys and makes killers. Yes, Killers. Not well-rounded men, not renaissance men, not poet-warriors… killers. Every fresh graduate from Boot Camp or OCS is itching for a chance to prove himself in combat, and proving yourself means “showing courage under fire and killing lots of the enemy.” Personally killing them. Note, please, that I’m talking specifically about the culture among 17 to 29 year-old Marines, not among the “older and wiser” lot who’ve had some years to mature. I’m talking about the lads who are getting shot and maimed, yet refuse evacuation and bleed to death in order to keep fighting alongside their buddies. These are men who redefine “macho,” and their definition has nothing to do with wash-board abs.

So, gentle reader, do you think that maybe you could make an informed guess about the personality traits of these young men? What do you think they talk about in the barracks? What magazines do you think they read? How many do you think want to “discuss the issue” when they are insulted or threatened? What percentage do you think cuss, drink to excess, and pursue women with less than marital intentions? And what percentage do you think act sensitively when they see what they perceive to be an “oddity” in the man who is supposed to guard their flank?

Now, let’s discuss you, if you are one of those who Americans who think the Marines should be forcibly integrated with openly gay men. Who, exactly, do you think you are? If you’ve never served in a Marine Corps combat unit, what makes you think your opinion even matters? I can hear you already, whining, “If you substitute ‘black’ for ‘gay’ and ‘white’ for ‘straight,’ you’re offering the same argument used against racially integrating the military.” Not true: The Marine Corps is, whether you like it or not, an uber-macho gun culture. As a result, it takes a black Marine about a day to win the respect of a white Marine. That’s because performance is performance is performance. What you see is what you get—and the homogeny of the all-green brotherhood remains in tact.

Homosexuality, however, is a divisive issue, particularly among young men who grew up in a hard-scrabble environment, and not in the ivy-covered walls of private schools and country clubs. Should it be? That’s completely irrelevant. I’ve been there, and I’ve served with these men, and I can tell you that in their world the word “gay” is used as an uber-insult, not to describe “an alternative lifestyle.”

Now, let’s discuss where the rubber meets the road: In combat, and in company level tactics. The worst part of being a Marine Officer in combat is it is you who will pick the platoon or squad that does the hardest job. Translated, you will pick which men are probably going to die. Unlike in the movies, you don’t ask for volunteers to “rush that machine gun nest,” you order men to do it. Guess what? Most men don’t want to die! Yes, believe it or not, they want to kill the enemy, but they don’t want to die. So why do they do it? Because the Skipper said to, and the Skipper is the man with the plan. And then they rush the machine gun nest because it’s their turn, and they aren’t going to let down their buddies. But what happens if you cloud this life-and-death moment with doubt? If you add in an element of mistrust? Here’s how it happens:

The Company Commander is openly gay, and he has three Infantry Lieutenants under his command—two straight, and one gay. And now it’s time for him to send a platoon of fifty well-armed men to die… men who don’t want to die, even if it means being heroes. The Company Commander picks the Lieutenant he believes will do the best job and will arrive at the objective with least casualties. If he chooses the gay Lieutenant, then the potential problem is 49 enlisted men thinking, “He picked us because our Lieutenant is gay, and he wants to appear unbiased to the Battalion Commander. I ain’t dying for that.” If he chooses a straight Lieutenant, the potential problem is 49 enlisted Marines thinking, “He picked us because he doesn’t want that gay Lieutenant to get hurt. I ain’t dying for that.”

Will this scenario happen? It doesn’t matter—the potential of a disruption of the good order and discipline of the unit is there. Those young men deserve to serve in an environment where we have done everything humanly possible to eliminate distractions while increasing readiness, morale, and esprit de corps. And if integrating the Corps costs a single Marine’s life—ever—then those who voted to repeal Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell will have his blood on their hands.

If I thought people would read it, I could write another 1,000 words. Additional issues need to be discussed, like discrimination lawsuits, fraternization issues, promotion boards, unwritten quotas, hate/insensitive speech, security clearance, and the cost of retrofitting facilities on land and sea and air.

The bottom line is this: The young men who stand on that wall and provide you with the blanket of freedom under which you sleep don’t want gay men in the ranks. Why that is doesn’t matter. It’s just the truth. And I’m sorry if you can’t handle the truth.

Decisions must be made...

2010-08-18T09:24:00.000-07:00

Within the political arena, there is any number of incredibly complex issues. Some of them boggle the mind. I mean, really—how is America supposed to respond to North Korea sinking a South Korean ship? It’s North Korea, for crying out loud. Once you eliminate the only feasible answer (nuke them) as not-so feasible, it gets really messy really quick. The North Korean army subsists on a diet of water and pain, and you do not want to brawl those kinds of people when they live halfway across the world.

Health care is no easy fix, either. Health care is broken because the government, Medicare, Medicaid, and lots of really expensive (lifesaving) technology and research broke it—but what do we do with all those people whose very lives depend on subsidized American health care? People who’ve been told their entire lives to expect it? It’s not like we can get an LBJ-do-over. It’s here, and we can’t afford it. We can’t afford it more each day. That’s complex.

I for one think we should at least fix the things we can fix, until someone really smart figures out the complex stuff. Unfortunately, that really smart person is apparently not yet alive, but in the meantime we can just keep selling T-bills to the Chinese. I don’t know what they do with all that paper, but they sure seem to love it. Uh-oh. I just stumbled into another complex issue.

But, let’s say we were interested in solving some of the less complex issues. It would still take a razor sharp mind and keen understanding of the issues. In thinking this idea through, I decided to enlist the aid of my four-year-old nephews, Ben and Henry. We gathered for an afternoon think-tank, and spent dozens of minutes arriving at the solutions.

First, the very complex issue of “immigration reform.” Henry, what would you do if you were trying to keep Ben from coming into your room and playing with your toys? Did you say, “Close the door?”

The mile-deep oil spill. Ben, if there was a shiny quarter lying on the ground across an eight-lane highway, and one right there in your yard, which one would your Dad encourage you to pick up?

The current federal deficit of $13 trillion dollars. Henry, if you were to eat so many cookies you thought you might puke, what could you do stop the problem? What’s that? Stop eating cookies? Smart boy.

Job creation. Ben, if your Mom wants you to clean up your room, does she a) make you pay her for the privilege of doing so? b) encourage you to clean up by offering a popsicle when you’re done?

Air travel security. You’re parents tell you a red-haired boy has been seen breaking into neighborhood homes. Do you a) Alert your parents if you see a boy with red hair in the yard? b) Alert your parents every time a man, woman, or child so much as drives by the house?

Education. If you got to choose between a school with really great teachers and one with really awesome playgrounds, which would you choose? Really? Okay, well, I’m just going to have to be the adult here and decide for you.

The Bill of Rights. Okay, listen carefully: You both know the rules of Simon Says. The big questions is, “Do the rules apply to you, even if you don’t want them to?” That’s correct—they do, unless you want to quit and move somewhere with different rules. Good answer.

Bailouts and Stimulus Packages. Ben, if you whack Henry in the head with your Nerf bat and make him cry, what happens? What would you think if, instead of a timeout, your parents rewarded you with a cupcake and a trip to Chucky Cheese?

Lobbyists. Do you lads sometimes disagree about what your Mom should cook for dinner? Do you think the one who proposes the healthiest meal should get their way? Or the one who’s saved up the most money to give to Mom, even if the menu he wants is Cheez-Whiz and beer?

Iraq and Afghanistan. What’s the rule about cleaning up a mess you make, even if you were trying to do something nice like make your Mom a birthday card?

The thing I find most amazing about my think-tank exercise with my nephews is that apparently no one in Washington has access to such bright young fellows. George Bush failed—and Barack Obama is failing—to come within a thousand miles of these self-evident solutions. Worse yet, the House and then Senate are blind as well. How can this be?

I pressed Ben and Henry for their ideas on why this governmental degenerative disorder exists, and they recommended we put the entire lot of them in a corner and let them think about it. Brilliant.

I hereby propose the President and Congress be put in a corner for the next Congressional term: No free dinners, no free booze, no flirtatious interns, no “fact finding” junkets, no free golf, no free air travel, no public speaking endorphins, no congressional healthcare, no federal exemptions from federal regulations, no pension deposits, no special parking, and no TV interviews. For the next two years, they get to be working Americans like the rest of us. After two years, we’ll see what they’ve learned—and if enough problems are solved, we’ll allow them back to the trough.

I bet they balance the budget in six weeks.

Video Post

2010-08-12T09:29:00.000-07:00

As a political commentator, I'm always humbled when I encounter real genius. Here's a six minute video commentary on the mosque that's slated to be built by Ground Zero, offered by a cat named Pat Condell. He is a genius.

Cut & Paste: http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/06/pat-condell-on-ground-zero-mosque-is-it-possible-to-be-astonished-but-not-surprised.html

The Greene Party?

2010-07-19T08:09:00.000-07:00

I cannot stop laughing.

Alvin Greene, an unemployed young man who lives in Manning with his parents, is the Democratic candidate chosen to face Senator Jim DeMint for the United States Senate. Mr. Greene not only beat Vic Rawle, he crushed him.
Alvin Greene didn’t so much as print a bumper sticker or yard sign. He didn’t attend any Democratic events. He ran no television or radio. He ran against political veteran Vic Rawle, who worked hard to win, doing all of the things usually required—fundraising, speeches, printed literature, you name it.
And yet, Greene won with 59% of the vote. That’s a mandate level margin.

The Democrats and the laughably liberal media are going insane.

The Washington Post wrote the most condescending, racist piece of journalism published in 40 years, in which they quoted Greene literally—court-reporter style. Sure, they clean up the language of Congressmen they like, but not poor Alvin Greene. They make him out to be a complete moron. Is he? Perhaps, but he’s also the Democrat’s choice for the US Senate.

Jim Clyburn, as you probably know, is calling for an investigation of Greene’s candidacy. He believes Greene was put up by some shadowy figure for nefarious reasons. He and the Democratic leadership within the state are calling for Mr. Greene to step out of the race, stating that he’s not qualified.

Qualified? Qualified? What exactly are the qualifications needed to serve in Congress, a parliament of whores, thieves, nitwits, trust-fund babies, pathological liars, and boot lickers? I can think of no job in the entire nation that requires less qualifications. Not one. I was a cashier at a fast food restaurant a few years ago, and in that role at least I had to be honest. Amongst politicians it’s considered reasonable to argue over what the definition of “is” is.

Oh, and Mr. Clyburn? What exactly were Barack Obama’s qualifications to be President?

The national media is baffled about how this happened, but it’s actually quite simple. Native South Carolinians (and Jim Clyburn) already know the answer, but—shudder, it has to do with race, and apparently we’re no longer allowed to act as if race even exists. So here you go: Alvin Greene spells his last name with an “e” on the end. In South Carolina, that’s how African Americans spell the name Greene—with an “e.” Everyone knows it. And when African American voters entered the voting booth, they could tell from the names that a black man was running against a white man. So they voted for the black man. Period.

I’ve seen two video interviews with Alvin Greene thus far, and he strikes me as a perfectly likable guy. He’s definitely got the deer-in-the-headlights thing going on, but why shouldn’t he— a couple weeks ago he’d never spoken to a reporter in his life. Does he strike me as smart? No, but 99.9% of elected officials don’t strike me as smart, either. And unlike most members of Congress, Mr. Greene doesn’t strike me as a mean-spirited narcissist, either.

Consider this: When Sarah Palin arrived on the scene, average Republican voters got fired up and reengaged—here was a gal who is “one of us.” A married, Christian, blue-collar gal, more passionate than intellectual. She says what’s on her mind, and many of us fell in love with her. To some degree, the same thing occurred with Joe the Plumber. Who says Alvin Greene doesn’t (or won’t) appeal to Democrats in the same way?

Our “elected class” and our media, that’s who. Greene’s not good enough! He’s not polished! He’s nervous in interviews! He didn’t run around sucking up and selling favors in exchange for campaign contributions! He’s even got a pending “obscenity” charge against him.

Really? Like, uh, Bill Clinton had? But instead of “obscenity,” wasn’t it adultery? In the Oval Office? And don’t I recall every Democrat in America shouting that “one’s private life is private, and has no bearing on public service?”

Personally, I kind of doubt Alvin Greene came up with the $10,000 needed to file to run. I think someone gave him the dough. But at the end of the day, the voters spoke. No matter what smoking guns are uncovered by Jim Clyburn’s investigation, the fact remains that 100,000 South Carolina voters gave him the nod. There was no scandal there—the votes were legitimate. Yes, I think we had a bunch of black folks saying they’d rather have a black man than a white man, but the last time I checked that’s allowed in America.

There is something good that can come out of this: Democrats across the nation can once again get a crystal-clear look at their party, and see—again—how elitist their leaders are. How Jim Clyburn and Barack Obama are acceptable blacks, but Alvin Greene isn’t. How black voters are good, but only if they stay in line and do what’s expected.

My guess is that Alvin Greene’s life will be more-or-less destroyed by this. The political elites will crucify and embarrass him to the point that, even if they never uncover a conspiracy, he will drop out just to make it all stop. Yet another American citizen will be crushed by those who rule us.

I said at the beginning that I can’t stop laughing, but I’m not laughing at Alvin Greene. I’m not laughing at the voters who elected him. I’m laughing at the media and the politicians who are outraged that an African American was elected without their permission.

The Will to Win Wars

2010-03-09T06:30:00.000-08:00

Somewhere in the Berzerkistan Province of Iraq, an awards ceremony is taking place:

General: Well, Captain, what did you do?

Captain: I’m a fighter pilot, General. I dropped flaming gasoline on a group of men.

General: Hmm, they looked suspicious, eh?

Captain: Roger that, General.

General: Very good. You get, uh, these three ribbons, and… this medal.

General’s Aide: Next!

Sergeant: General, I engaged in house-to-house fighting, and when I ran out of ammo I commenced to bashin’ heads in with my shovel. By the time the battle was done, I was down to gouging out the eyes of the enemy using my MRE spoon.

General: Nicely done, Sergeant. You’re a killer, and a man for the enemy to fear. You get you get two ribbons, a badge, and this medal.

General’s Aide: Next!

General: Ah! A young lady! What did you do?

Private: Sir, I made a guy wear my underwear on his head. Oh, and one time I watched while another MP had a dog bark really loud at a prisoner. Want to see the pictures?

General: Are you kidding me? Absolutely! That is so freakin’—

General’s Aide: Pssst. There’s a reporter watching, Sir.

General: …so… so freakin’ bad! Bad Private. No ribbons. You go to jail.

General’s Aide: Next!

Lieutenant: General, my platoon was ambushed, and we wiped out the enemy.

General: Well done, Lieutenant. Four ribbons, and medal.

General’s Aide: Next!

Staff-Sergeant: General, my squad was ambushed, and we wiped out the enemy.

General: Well, that’s the sort of thing—

General’s Aide: Sir, there’s a reporter here from the New York Times, and he says he talked to one of the enemy and the enemy says that the Staff Sergeant wiped them out.

General: Yes, well, uh, isn’t that the point?

General’s Aide: The enemy says they didn’t deserve it.

General: And?

General’s Aide: And the reporter is from the N-e-w Y-o-r-k T-i-m-e-s.

General: As I was saying, Staff Sergeant, that’s the sort of thing that results in murder charges. You go to jail.

Staff-Sergeant: Murder? In a combat zone? In a fire fight?

General: Get a photographer over here. I’m ready to do my concerned and disappointed look.

Somewhere in Charleston, a former Marine boils:

Ladies and Gentlemen, it is time for a brief, educational break: War is what our military does, and as is the case with all war-making units, they hurt people, and break things. The hurting and the breaking continues until the other side is so broken and so hurt they’ll do anything to make it stop, even listen to American politicians tell them what to do. Sometimes achieving this is very hard, because listening to American politicians is an awful fate indeed: Clear thinking folks that the Japanese are, they resisted long and hard. Finally, we had to nuke a couple of civilian cities.

But, that’s the way it goes. The man in charge of the mission made the call, and the atom bombs flew. FYI, here is the total number of people who went to jail for nuking two civilian cities: Zero. Here’s the total number of guards who went to jail for teasing Japanese POWs: Zero.

But… times have changed. America today is a kinder, gentler America than back in the 1940’s. These days, the press has virtually unlimited access to our wars, and those brave war correspondents have kept us on that path of kindness and gentleness. Only once have we strayed from this new recipe: During Gulf I in 1990, the military put all the reporters in a room and spoke to them only during daily briefings. In unrelated news, Gulf I is also the only war we’ve actually won since WWII.

So, how did we reach this point? When did we as a nation begin accepting the second hand testimony of the enemy as a reason to charge our military men with murder? When did we sink so low as to make a public spectacle of a little girl named Lindy England?

It began the day John F. Kennedy took two for the team. In covering JFK’s funeral, the American media discovered that they could not only report the news, they could shape the way we feel about the news. I have painstakingly charted the media’s emotionalizing of stories, and found that when that chart intersected the chart tracking politicians who govern by poles, the result was, uh, America today.

The formula is now thus:

Politician- This Abu Ghraib thingee is problematic. The networks are screaming bloody murder. What do the polls say?

Handler- Well, the CNN poll says the American public is outraged. The MSNBC poll says the American public demands action. ABC, CBS, and NBC all report that America’s standing as the world’s moral compass has been shattered.

Politician- How about Fox? What do their polls say?

Handler- Their polls indicate the American people think it’s kinda cool, so they’re launching a bumper sticker slogan contest.

Politician- Well, how do I play it?

Handler- It’s a tough call, Big Guy. Those are our soldiers, and it’s their lives were discussing here. We need more facts.

Politician- Ha! Good one! You can always make me laugh when I’m down!

Handler- Just go with the polls, Boss. Demand an investigation, sound angry, and throw the military under the bus. The press loves that indignant routine.

Somewhere in Charleston, a former Marine asks some questions:

Should we, America, ever go to war again? Do we have the will to inflict the violence necessary to utterly break another people, like Sherman broke the South? Is there any cause so great that the press would agree not to publish information about secret missions before they happen? Is it possible in today’s world of live-feed news and Twitter to allow the commanders on the ground the do their jobs? Can we forgive our troops when they lose control and wreak havoc on bystanders? If the answers are what I think they are, should we become isolationists?

Food for thought--

Can America Defy the Laws of Math?

2010-03-08T13:39:00.000-08:00

If you are a thinking person, you’ve been feeling the stress of cognitive dissonance regarding America’s economy. Even with no training in economics, you know something is very, very wrong. Perhaps you can’t quite lay your finger on it, but you know there’s a bad moon rising, and something’s got to give.

Thus far, you’ve likely rationalized that gut feeling away, and you’ve accomplished this by listening to dozens of experts give dozens of conflicting opinions, and it all swirls together into one big lump of economic-theory nonsense. In the end, you assume “the best and the brightest” are working on the issue, and the problem will ultimately get solved.

It won’t.

The best and the brightest aren’t working on the problem—life-long politicians and bureaucrats are. The people in charge of getting us out of this meltdown are the same people who got us into it. There’s no brilliant guy in the background offering sage advice. In fact, no one in charge has any idea whatsoever what they are doing. No one. But the emperor isn’t the only one who has no clothes—his advisors are naked, too.

If you will take the time to research the decisions made by the President and Congress during the past two years, you will quickly come to the conclusion that America of 2010 is unrecognizable to the America of 2007. Can you even keep track of what’s been nationalized, subsidized, and socialized? Wall Street, Banking, Insurance, the Auto Industry, now Hedge Funds—what’s next? Airlines? Credit Card Companies? Newspapers? Pandora’s Box is open, and the folks in charge seem unwilling to close it, no matter the cost.

Ah, the cost. It’s another area where you’ve been experiencing cognitive dissonance, because you keep wondering how the taxpayer is going to pay down this debt. How can we pay off hundreds of billions of dollars? Well, we could if that was all it was… but there’s more. A lot more: As reported on Bloomberg, the Federal Reserve pledged to create, out of thin air, 7.4 Trillion dollars to bail out the economy. It is one of the biggest financial stories in the history of the world, and… well, did you even know about it? As an added nugget of intrigue, the Fed has stated they won’t reveal who gets that money, or what the Fed gets in return. That’s 7.4 Trillion of your dollars being spent in secret. True to their word, in 2009 the Fed recently placed the initial two trillion, and they aren’t saying where it went.

Question: How can a government in as much debt as ours come up with 7.4 Trillion dollars? Answer: They own the printing presses.

Yes, they will try to “borrow” (and thus “create”) the 7.4 Trillion by selling Treasury Bonds, but it appears that the world is, well, kinda tired of American dollars. They have enough, thanks—and they’re starting to wonder if those dollars are actually worth what they paid for them. Hell, if China owned anymore T-Bills, they would need to invade Taiwan—if for no other reason than a place to store all the paper.

Now, if common sense (and sanity) prevents the rest of the world from buying 7.4 Trillion dollars in T-Bills, plus the 1 Trillion-plus Congress has spent on bailouts, how do we explain where all this paper money is coming from?

Look! Over there! It’s Bigfoot!

That’s right, we can’t. When we run out ways to legitimately “create” money we will simply resort to printing money. And when we begin blatantly and publicly ignoring the very basic laws of economics, China and Japan and Europe and India are going to look at their mountain of T-Bills and say, “These have got to go.”

And then? Game over. The ensuing “run on the dollar” will cause it to collapse, and our consumer economy will fall into a depression. This is a mathematical certainty.

President Bush handled the economic crisis like a moron. President Obama has simply done more of the same, as his “big idea” is to spend a Trillion dollars hiring a few million folks to dig holes, and an equal number to fill them back in. If you’re following the math, that now brings us to 9.4 trillion dollars of “bailout” money. 9.4 Trillion dollars that didn’t exist on the planet earth even six months ago. And that doesn’t even include the budget deficits the White House has seen fit to propose.

Do I have a solution? You bet: What would happen to our economy if the government announced, “We are eliminating all income tax and capitol gains tax until we’ve reached the point of 9.4 trillion in lost tax revenue”? If you guessed the recession would soon be over, step up and collect your prize!

But why won’t they do this? It makes so much sense, right? Instead of taking money out of the economy and inefficiently funneling it back in, just leave it with the American people. We’d then have the money to get our credit cards and cars paid-off, buy a flat-screen, and maybe even have enough available salary to make those pesky mortgage payments. Right?

Wrong. Tax revenues equal money, and money equals power, and you’ll die of old age waiting for a politician to give up power. It is their drug. It is their sex. It is their god.

Prior to discovering Peter Schiff’s website (www.europac.net) and then beginning to research the economy myself, I assumed our leaders would work the situation out. This is America, after all. We’re the greatest nation on the earth. What I now believe is that the foxes are in charge of the henhouse, and foxes eat chickens. It is their nature. And they will continue to eat the chickens until the chickens are gone, even if it means they starve to death later.

So what should you do? First, do your own research. Decide for yourself what you think will happen. If you think nothing is going to happen, then you don’t need to do a thing. But if you think something bad might happen—something life-changing like hyperinflation—then it only stands to reason you should get prepared.

Is it urgent? I cannot say. But consider this: All of America went home for the weekend on a Friday, and Lehman Brothers was a AA-rated investment bank. When business began on Monday, Lehman no longer existed.

Humans are the only species that ignores gut instinct. What is your gut telling you?

Advice for College Freshmen

2010-02-18T03:54:00.000-08:00

This fall, both my nephew and my godson will be entering the freshman class of Clemson University. If their college experience is like most folks’, those four years will launch them out into the world at the very peak of their intelligence. I mean, was there ever a time in your life when you were smarter than your first year out of college? From literature to economics to politics to leadership, I was the 1985 human-version of Google.

But entering college? Well, that was a bit different. I was entering a new and mysterious world, and the only thing I knew for sure was that I didn’t know squat. And that’s not easy for any high school senior to admit.

So, I’m going to do these lads a favor, and offer them some sage advice—right here, right now. If you’ve got a youngster climbing out of the trenches and assaulting that collegiate machinegun nest, feel free to share it with them as well.

Will and Alton, here you go:

First, the seniors at college will look like grown men—wise and experienced veterans, capable of dispensing important insights on life. They aren’t. If you have a question more important than which Zippy Marts accept fake ID’s, call your Dad.

Speaking of fake ID’s, avoid bars. They are expensive, illegal for anyone under 21, and tend to attract guys who want to fight (and girls who want to be fought over). Push, shove, swing—there goes your scholarship. That’s a call to your Dad you don’t want to take.

In planning for Fall semester, sign up for later classes—it’s cold at 8am. In the Spring, sign up for early classes—when it warms up, you’ll want to be outside.

In high school, you attended classes and played sports from about 8am until 3 or 4pm. If you can force yourself to maintain that schedule, and view college as a “job” from 8am to 4pm, you’ll crush it. You’ll be amazed when other people flunk out.

Nothing, and I mean nothing, good happens after midnight. After 1am, the police start getting involved. After 2am, it’s the ER. Regardless of your classmates’ preferred schedules, have your fun earlier, and be counting sheep when the cops start pulling out the tazers and pepper spray. If you must stay out late, use this rule of thumb: When the clock strikes midnight, think about what you want to do, then do the opposite.

Speaking of cops, there will be times in the next four years when you will feel called to “reason” with them. Perhaps in your own defense, or for a friend who’s crossed the line. This is a mistake. Cops are not reasonable people after 6pm. Until you are 40, the only words you should ever say to a cop are, “Yes, Sir,” and “No, Sir,” and “I’m happy to comply, Officer.”

Along those same lines, college professors are fairly predictable, too. In all liberal arts classes, sit in the front row, nod a lot, ask questions, and—this is key—whenever you are answering a short answer or essay question, be a human parrot. When writing your answer, focus on the question, “What does the guy grading my test want to hear?” As an added benefit, this will be good training should you choose to pursue a career in corporate America.

I’d also encourage you to avoid taking advantage of the fact that most college profs don’t care if you come to class. The only reason for missing a class is if an ER physician is standing over you, holding paddles and yelling ”Clear!”

The most tireless, obsessed, mean-spirited humans on the planet are not radical terrorists—they are meter maids on college campuses. You have been warned.

Make sure your iPod has Andrea Bocelli’s Romanza on it. The chicks will think you are cool and mysterious. If you can stand it, have some jazz, too.

If Clemson has a foreign language requirement, remember that the vocabulary words you learn are considered fair game in later semesters. Don’t kill the brain cells containing those words.

At Auburn, where I went to college, riding a bicycle was considered “driving.” You might want to check on the local laws at Clemson. Just saying.

Sitting around with friends at the library, laughing, texting, or flirting with girls doesn’t qualify as studying. Sure, that may seem obvious—but you’re about to encounter thousands of people who can’t grasp that concept.

You will meet a lot of kids who do recreational drugs. I implore you, don’t go down that road. Make your own decisions regarding beer, but draw a line in the sand with drugs—and seek a reputation as someone who thinks drug users are geeks. You’d also be wise to avoid “trying dip”: I did not, and 25 years later I’m still a nicotine addict.

You will also meet a lot of kids who bet on football. To that, let me say this: Gambling is the surest way to lose everything. Think about it: If Tiger Woods tried to blow all his money on drugs, alcohol, and partying, he couldn’t—because he’d be dead before the money ran out. But gambling? He could lose it all in a week. He could lose it all, plus enough more to have a bookie break his legs. Think about it before you get a taste of the “easy money” that comes with a few innocent bets.

If you want to join a frat, don’t join one that hazes pledges. While the Marine Corps might haze recruits on their way to becoming Marines, it’s necessary. A frat is a beer drinking club—and hardly worthy of demanding some sort of trial by fire. Along those same lines, if you join the Marines, feel free to get a tattoo. Fraternity tattoos, however, are just sad.

You’re also going to encounter lots of kids from different economic backgrounds—there will be rich kids with their parent’s credit cards, and there will be kids who are working their way through school without a dime from their folks. Don’t be quick to judge either—you’ll meet good people in both categories. Just don’t try to run with the rich kids, because their parents’ credit cards aren’t yours. Along that same vein, don’t pressure your less fortunate friends to do stuff that costs money, unless you’re going to pick up the tab.

Remind yourself how blessed you are: Put an index card on your mirror that says, “Today, someone my age, who couldn’t afford college, may die serving America in Afghanistan or Iraq.”

At this point in your life, you have no idea what’s at stake—but it’s a lot. The choices you make in college will impact the rest of your life. You won’t believe how quickly the “real world” will pigeon-hole you into the career you choose, which will likely be based on your major. If you sleepwalk thru college, the world doesn’t mind… in fact, the world doesn’t even care. That’s because while the world needs engineers, businessmen, marketers, teachers, warriors, doctors, and nurses, it also needs ditch diggers. Lots and lots of ditch diggers.

This is your one four-year window to explore the buffet of professions. Talk to peers, adult professionals, professors, and ditch diggers to see what their lives are like, and find a passion to pursue. College won’t go by fast, but it will go by—and when you pop out on the other side, the world will only be your oyster if you know where oysters grow, have a boat to find them, have the tools to harvest them, and have the know-how to crack one open. Remember this: The world and technology have changed more during your 12 years in school than it changed in the previous 1,000 years. The job where you’ll spend your career might not even exist yet. No old dudes like me can help you with this—I come from a generation that could never figure out how to stop the 12:00 on the VCR from blinking. You and you alone need to survey the ice, and skate to where the puck is going to be.

Oh, and go to church. Believe it or not, God goes with you to college.

Considering torture

2010-02-18T03:41:00.000-08:00

It all seemed so impossible—the explosion, the gunfire, the shouts. It was an operation that defied logic. No one could explain it. Even his most experienced advisors were stunned into a dull, thick state of shock. The surviving Secret Service agents were talking, blaming, pointing fingers—covering their asses. The President put his face in his hands and tried to think.

Just two hours earlier the day was unfolding as a rare, stress-free delight. He and the First Lady and their two daughters had flown via Marine One to Richmond, where they were making a photo-op visit to an inner city school that was showing promise using a newly-developed curriculum. The children were scrubbed and beaming, assembled on the playground in the shape of a big letter O. The President laughed out loud when he saw it, and treasured the look on his daughter’s faces as they realized what they were seeing out the window.

The helicopter touched down gently. The President stepped to the door and waved, then turned his back as he helped his girls down the steps. It all felt so good that he feared his grin would come across as goofy, but he just didn’t care. This was the change he’d dreamed would come about during his time in the White House.

Following a brief welcome and introduction ceremony by the school’s principal, the first family made their way into the school building for a tour. Each of the girls was assigned and honor roll escort, and the excitement was palatable. The President thought to himself he’d never felt more like the President than at this fine moment.

Suddenly, time slowed down. The President could remember every detail so very clearly, but it seemed to be a bizarre dream—a moment out of a science fiction movie. An overwhelming force threw him sideways, but there was no violent explosion. He felt himself in the air, then felt a blow to his ribs, and the taste of metal in his mouth as his head struck the floor. Panic swept over him like a rogue wave, and his mind could conjure only minor thoughts—Where is my wife? Where are my girls?

In seconds, the room was flooded with men firing automatic weapons. Seconds later, the room was awash in blood, and the smell of gunpowder. A Secret Service agent knelt to shout orders into his ear, only to fall across his chest lifeless before the first command could be understood. The President rolled out from under the dead agent, and rose to a crouch—he scanned the madness, thinking the same simple thoughts. Where is my wife? Where are my girls?

And then, it was over. Men in suits lay across the room, dead and dying. It was impossible to distinguish between the bodies of his Secret Service detail and the attackers. It was a hell he’d never imagined, and for the first time he managed another thought: Why am I alive? What do I do now? And once again—Where is my wife? Where are my children?

A group of men he did not recognize, dressed in riot gear, exploded through the cafeteria doors. How much time had passed? Ten seconds? Two minutes? He willed his mind to work, but the horror of it all was so foreign to him. The men surrounded him, lifted him and carried him out of the door in a well-rehearsed sprint. Back aboard Marine One, The President fought back his feelings of panic, and shouted at the agent who appeared to be in charge, “Where are my kids? Where is my wife?”

The agent spoke briefly into his headset, then looked The President in the eye. “We’re not sure, Mr. President. The React Team is sweeping the grounds—if I had to bet, I’d say their detail has them secured in a side room, waiting for an all-clear signal.”

Once back at the White House, The President struggled to keep his cool. It was obvious that every federal agent within a hundred miles was focused on the situation, but the minutes felt like hours. At last, his security chief approached. “We’ve got to get back aboard Marine One, Mr. President. I’ll brief you in the air.”

Three minutes later, they were airborne. The President was surprised by the relatively few people onboard, but said nothing. His security chief hung up his cell phone, and spoke.

“We got one of them—four blocks from the school, when he was trying to switch cars. He had the first lady in his van; Mr. President, she’s dead. He was planning to leave her there to be found, with a note pinned to her jacket. The React Team has the suspect onboard a helo out of Quantico, and we’re going to rendezvous with them at a CIA facility. We should arrive about fifty minutes after them.”

“Tell me what the note said.”

“It said you have twenty-four hours to resign from office on national television. Or your daughters die.”

The security chief’s phone rang, and The President motioned he should take the call. The remaining time on the flight The President sat in silence.

Marine One landed next to a barn, on what appeared to be a horse farm.

“What is this place?” he asked as the team moved towards the barn doors.

“This place doesn’t exist, Sir.”

Again, The President felt as though he was viewing a wild, three-dimensional movie. They entered the barn, only to find it empty, save for a wall-to-wall concrete slab, and a single elevator. The elevator ride took less than half a minute, and opened into an underground bunker complex. A man dressed in black stood in front of them when the doors opened.

“Mr. President, follow me,” he said. “The rest of you may be seated in the conference room at the end of this hall.”

“I want my security chief with me,” The President announced.

“No, Sir,” the man replied. “You do not.”

The President began to raise his voice when his security chief interrupted.

“He’s right, Mr. President.”

The President followed the man in black down a brightly lit corridor. At the end of the hall, they entered a gray, concrete room—the room was empty except for a six-foot commercial grade tool storage cabinet. The President also noticed a drain in the center of the floor, and a number of eye bolts rising up from the smooth cement floor.

“Here’s the deal, Mr. President. It appears we are dealing with a very organized, extremely professional white supremacist group. This guy looks as cool, and as mean, as anyone I’ve ever encountered.”

“What’s he said?”

“Nothing. He asked for his lawyer.”

“I’m told the note said twenty-four hours. Twenty-four hours before my daughters are killed.”

“I’m aware that, Sir.”

“Well, we don’t have time to get him a lawyer—we need him to talk!”

“I would agree with that assessment, Sir.”

“Can you make him talk?”

“Using the tools inside that tool chest there, I could get Osama Bin Laden to convert to Christianity.”

“Do it,” The President said.

“Sorry, Mr. President. The Attorney General is investigating torture allegations. We have agents that are going to go to jail. I can’t help you.”

“These are my children,” hissed The President. “My children.”

“It’s always someone’s children, Sir.”

“I will grant you amnesty! This is an issue of national security!”

“Let me ask you, Mr. President: Don’t you think national security is always involved in these things? Or do you think we do it to people just for fun?”

The door opened behind them, and a man strapped into a dental chair was wheeled into the room. Without a word, the attendant used come-along straps to secure the chair to the eye bolts, then exited without making eye contact. The man in black checked the restraints, and applied another strip of duct tape on the prisoner’s mouth.

“The good news, Mr. President, is this ain’t rocket science. The key is to get him dislike the pain more than he loves his cause.”

“But he’ll say anything to stop the pain,” The President countered. “How will we know if it’s true?”

The man in black smiled sadly.

“It goes like this: You hurt him until he talks. You tell us what he said, and we go into rescue mode. But, there’s a catch—you keep hurting him until you hear from us that the girls are safe. It motivates him, see? Motivates him to talk early, and give us the fastest way to get the girls back. Just explain the rules to him.”

“I can’t do this,” The President said.

“You’re call. But I’d encourage you to take some time to think it over. If you decide you’d rather get him a lawyer, let me know. I’ll be out in the hall.”

The man in black closed the door behind him, and sat down to wait.

The Enemy is...Me?

2010-02-18T03:31:00.000-08:00

It turns out the new enemy of the people is, well, me. Homeland Security recently issued a nine-page report warning law enforcement agencies about right-wing extremists, and I couldn’t for the life of me figure out how to take myself out of the equation—the descriptions they used were so succinct and accurate, even my wife said, “Hey, Prioleau. You’re in the paper!”

I read the story, and in desperation, I interviewed the desperado that is me.

Me: Homeland Security is looking for you.

Me: Why do you say that?

Me: Because they just issued a report saying that right-wing extremist groups are on the rise, and pose a danger to the nation.

Me: Right-wing, extreme—what? Since when am I that?

Me: You’re a white, Southern, Republican, bitterly clinging to your guns and religion. Ergo, you are potential recruit for the KKK and you hate President Obama.

Me: I don’t hate him. I think he’s a socialist and a narcissist, but he doesn’t inspire hate.

Me: Sure thing, Adolph. Aren’t you a veteran?

Me: So?

Me: Homeland Security says disgruntled veterans are especially problematic—all that baby-killer training you got.

Me: I’ve never killed anyone.

Me: But you could. All those ninja skills, and what-not. Plus, you’re angry about the economy. Homeland says economic anger could cause you to lose it—

Me: Who isn’t angry about the economy?

Me: Stephen Colbert. John Stewart. They say lots of funny stuff about it.

Me: Okay. Yes, I’m mad about the bailouts and the spending.

Me: Barrack’s bailouts? Barrack’s spending?

Me: Bush’s, too.

Me: Hmm. So you hate Texans, too?

Me: How can you—

Me: Been buying ammo, haven’t you?

Me: Look—the price of ammo has gone up 100% in one year, and they’re looking at taxing it even more. So, yes. Of course, I’m buying ammo.

Me: Homeland said you would. You’re nothing but a hoarder. How do you feel about illegal immigration—

Me: Ponderous?

Me: Homeland Security has you pegged. You’re a states rights advocate too, aren’t you? Probably think state government trumps federal government.

Me: Dude—does the Tenth Amendment ring a bell? The Bill of Rights?

Me: It’s almost like Homeland Security interviewed you. Name one conservative thought you have that isn’t a cause for alarm.

Me: I think Sara Palin is hot.

Me: That’s going in your file, Misogynist.

You think I’m kidding here, right? You assume I’m exaggerating to make my point, and that the Office of Homeland Security didn’t really issue a report like that. You think I’m, well, a right-wing extremist.

Wake up, Comrade. Do the research, and you’ll find the report widely available, on Homeland letterhead, with on-the-record remarks from the Homeland Security spokesman stating essentially, “This is routine business. Nothing to see here, people—move along.”

Okay, so what difference does this make? So what? Who cares?

I’ll tell why: Because Barack Obama, Rohm Emmanuel, and the strategists of the left are very, very smart. Unlike conservatives, they are patient. The Left has been plotting this peaceful revolution since the Summer of Love, when Hillary was just an awkward co-ed and Bill wasn’t inhaling. They have slowly and patiently inserted themselves into the schools, the universities, the government, the non-profits, and the courts.

They have brilliantly employed the long-standing Radical’s Strategy, which is, “We don’t need to win you over. It’s your grandchildren we need to win.”

Oops. If you take the late Sixties and do the math, guess who now provides the swing vote that put Barack Obama in the White House? Yup—the grandchildren of the Sixties.

Here’s where we get to the rubber and the road: With the American people now genuinely supporting the socialist/federalist approach of the left, Barack and his administration are conducting some brilliantly evil experiments. For instance, not too long ago the PRESIDENT spoke out against an individual American when he told House Republicans, “you can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and expect to get things done.”

Really? Why? Is he an enemy of the people? Are his conservative principles dangerous to the Fatherland?

The President let it drop after that, but the idea was out there: If you expect to get things done with me, you need to stop thinking certain thoughts. You need to give up certain beliefs. You need to abandon this enemy of the people.

Now, just days before millions of angry Americans around the nation will attend April 15th Tea Party protests, Barack’s administration issues a report that states, in no uncertain terms, the kinds of people who will attend these Tea parties are likely enemies of the State. Like the attack on Limbaugh, this issue will soon be dropped.

But it’s out there, now.

The idea’s been floated, and the norming has begun. The PRESIDENT has declared that the peaceful ideas of some Americans and some American groups make them enemies of America. And now it is a-okay for the President to make such public declarations.

It doesn’t take long to norm an idea in America. It wasn’t long ago Congress invented “the hate crime,” a way to provide extra jail time for criminals who “think certain thoughts” during the commission of a crime… as if rape is worse if you do it out of “hate” and not “love.”

Hate crimes gave way to “hate speech,” which the Supreme Court has roundly rejected as a criminal offense, because the Constitution protects your right to be spew idiocy out of your pie hole. Universities, however, seized on the concept, and in the 80’s and 90’s many made “hate speech” an expulsion offense. In short, they’ve normed it as a crime in the eyes of our—anyone? Anyone? Yes, the students. And one of those college students of the 80’s is now—anyone? Yes, serving as President of the United States. And he’ll soon be appointing Supreme Court Justices to rule on the crime of “hate speech.”

Slowly, gently, one-drop-at-a-time, you too will be identified as an enemy of the state. They’ve already got my number, but what’s yours? Are you too rich? Use too much energy? Need too much medical attention? Do you have too many kids? Commute too far? Do you eat too many Cheetoes? Do you love Big Brother enough?

Everyday I thank God I don’t have children. If you do, you have only one of two choices: Get involved personally and financially, or allow your political apathy to be their curse.

America's Apathy... and Collapse

2010-02-17T19:14:00.000-08:00

While no one was looking, and as we the people were pursuing life, liberty, and happiness, our government was stolen. It is gone, and in our current state there is no getting it back.

Fact: Two of our nation’s financial cornerstones, Social Security and Medicare, are a fraud. They are bankrupt, and in their current form will ultimately break the financial back of our nation. There is no fixing them. Yet, in order to buy themselves votes, our elected leaders for the last 35 years speak of them as if they are wounded, and simply in need of “strengthening.” They are liars, lying to buy votes from the aging population.

Fact: For decades our elected officials have conspired to buy themselves votes by spending trillions of non-existent dollars. Regarding the last eight years, the Republicans are now saying, “we strayed from our principles,” as if principles are something you can “stray” from. The Democrats are blaming President Bush, as if the President is the CFO of a family business, devoid of oversight. Both are liars—they are in it together, swapping favors (and hundreds of billions of tax dollars) in order to buy themselves re-election.

Fact: Our elected officials have been bought off by special interest groups, left and right—from big oil to environmentalists to unions to trial lawyers to insurance to farm lobbyists. At this particular moment, the people causing the most “pain to the people” are the environmentalist, who for decades have paid off (via votes, contributions, and media muscle) our elected officials to bow to their many agendas—one of which is to not drill for oil. As they continue to press their agenda, long-time Senator John McCain pretends to be an oh-so-brave “maverick” by announcing it’s time to drill. Senator-- Did it not occur to you twenty years ago that being energy independent might be a good idea? Suddenly, you reverse your stance, and expect a hero’s welcome to reality?

Fact: Our elected officials are trampling on the constitution, daily. Hate speech is unconstitutional. Forced integration of all types is unconstitutional. Laws regulating the keeping and bearing of arms are unconstitutional. Much of the Patriot Act is unconstitutional. Creating de facto law from a judge’s bench is unconstitutional. And a very significant chunk of the federal government’s power is unconstitutional. But we the sheep-le have allowed our elected officials to erode the very document that makes America America.

Fact: John McCain was unqualified to be our President. Why? Because virtually every ill we now endure came about or worsened on his watch. He claims now “to have a plan,” but why has he failed to act on this “plan” during his twenty-plus years in the Senate? Why have tens of millions of illegal immigrants come across the border? Why is gas $4 a gallon? Why is the economy in the tank, despite vigorous (and needed) tax cuts? Why do we continue to kowtow to dictators, from Saudi Arabia to China? John McCain is, and has been, part of the problem.

Fact: Barack Obama is unqualified to be our President. Why? Because his voting record, his positions, and the people with whom he associates reveal him to be a socialist, with perhaps the worst judgment in the history of educated people. Quite frankly, I don’t care about his lack of experience—it is his utter distain for the culture and traditions of our nation that I believe disqualify him. He seeks to be America’s Commander in Chief, but will not wear the American flag on his lapel; he does not place his hand over his heart during the pledge of allegiance; the tail of his campaign jet boasts his logo (not the American flag); his self-described spiritual leader preached sermons stating “God damn America” and referring to America as the “U.S. of KKK,” after which Senator Obama stated he supported the minister—he rebuked him only after Rev. Wright stated words of the effect that “Barack supports my views. He’s just saying he doesn’t because he wants to get elected.” Are these the actions of a man who loves his country? Or a man who loves his country for what it might be after he radically re-organizes it?

Fact: We are so dependent on federal pork that we have resorted to honoring our politicians for stealing on our behalf. How? Well, we can’t actually write them a check—so how’s immortality? How many public buildings in this state were named after Fritz Hollings while he was in office? Strom Thurmond? And why? Because they “fought” for the money to build them? Hardly—they traded money (that didn’t exist) with other state’s Senators (for more money that didn’t exist), in order to build buildings that we the people never had the money to pay for… all the while further bankrupting the nation.

Fact: Our elected officials have created such enormous taxes, fees, and regulations that starting a small business is fast becoming a fool’s errand. In fact, most research indicates over half of small businesses fail within the first four years. Is this due to a lack of drive on the owner’s part? A failure of work ethic? Doubtful. We the governed have allowed our government to bury our dreams in a quagmire of taxes and bureaucracy.

Fact: John McCain stated in his 2000 Presidential race that he felt the “Confederate flag atop the State Capitol” issue should be decided by the people of South Carolina. After losing, he announced publicly, “I lied.” He then explained he did not believe South Carolina had the right to fly the flag, but he wanted to win the state. The insidiousness of this lie puts into question his every public belief.

Fact: An un-elected Al Gore is leading a global effort to reduce carbon emissions, with a goal of forcing Americans to pay a tax based on their supposed “carbon footprint.” Despite his role as Conserver in Chief, his home consumes more than 20 times the energy an average home does, and he travels around the world via private jet and motorcade. This level of blatant, public hypocrisy has not been witnessed since the leaders of the Soviet Union lived in total luxury while their “communist comrades” starved.

Fact: Our elected officials’ failure to approve drilling for American oil has resulted in the current $4 per gallon prices, yet both Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama have expressed a desire to seize some of the post-tax profits from those same oil companies. In 2006, oil company income taxes exceeded all of the income taxes paid by the bottom 75% of all taxpayers. The top 1% of income earners in America pay more in income taxes than the bottom 95%. These factors indicate a slippery-slope slide towards socialism and the nationalization of private enterprise. Never before in the history of the world have either of these practices worked successfully.

Fact: Our elected officials have made a conscious decision during the past 25 years to avoid stopping the flood of millions of illegal aliens into our nation. Why? Because the issue wasn’t on the voters minds, so they spent the money needed to fix the issue buying votes at the hog trough of pork barrel spending. They are to blame.

Fact: Almost every problem our nation faces can be linked directly to our national tendency to re-elect incumbent Senators and Congressmen/women. Once given a taste of the fun, power, junkets, freebies, and asskissery that comes with day-to-day life in Washington, incumbents will do anything to keep that job. They ignore the good of the nation, and focus on the pork and the press that will get them re-elected.

Fact: The Republicans blame the Democrats and the Democrats blame the Republicans, but they are all in it together. It is high-stakes professional wrestling, where they each put on a show, then get together for dinner afterwards to discuss the next evening’s choreography.

Fact: Our national politics are moving rapidly towards socialism. John McCain’s beliefs would be almost unrecognizable to the conservative reformer Ronald Reagan, and he is far to left of the Democratic demi-god, John F. Kennedy. Barack Obama has stated proudly, “When one American has a problem, all Americans have a problem.” In Bill Clinton’s inauguration speech, he stated, “We will move ahead together, or not at all.” Both of these sound bites stand in direct opposition to the nation our Founding Father’s created, where one was promised only the opportunity to pursue happiness.

Fact: Empires throughout history follow a predicable and set pattern: Rise, expansion, abundance, selfishness, complacency, apathy, then collapse. For my money, America took from 1776 to the 1950’s to reach its high water mark of abundance. Since then, the ‘60’s, 70’s, 80’s, 90’s, and 00’s are tracking along those down-slope stages like a freight train on tracks forged in the bowels of hell.

Solution: We as a nation must return to the Judeo-Christian ethics that shaped our nation, laws, and constitution-- and at least gently guided our nation for 175 years. We must return our government to the people, where our elected officials journey to Washington begrudgingly as public servants, not giddy McGods rushing back to the next cocktail party and gathering of thong-snapping interns. We must remove from the bench judges who make law, instead of ruling on law. We must slash the taxes and bureaucracy that cripple the entrepreneurial spirit that made us the world’s super power. Via constitutional amendment we must make it illegal for the federal government to spend money on any programs or powers not provided to them in the Constitution.

Achieving this is currently impossible, as our government is held hostage by the liars and thieves who have brought us into this mess. We need a man with George Washington’s character and Warren Buffett’s money to step forward and donate five billion dollars for the formation of a Constitutional Party, and begin the peaceful Voter’s Revolution-- starting with the election of a Constitutional Party candidate to the bully pulpit of President of the United States. The Constitutional party should them begin a nation-wide campaign to defeat every single incumbent, and replace them with citizens who have achieved in their lives—citizens willing to give up time to the nation that has made their success possible. The platform would need to be driven not by left or right ideology, but by integrity, common sense, fiscal responsibility, free market enterprise, care for those less fortunate, defense of our homeland and borders, Judeo-Christian ethics, and the proposition that all men are created equal.

We have faced a crisis of this size one time previously in our nation, when the turn of the century Robber Barons held America in a monopolistic stranglehold. (When bribery, kickbacks, and murder are used as currency, capitalism can be bad). Fortunately, and perhaps due to a “God Thing,” a political outsider named Teddy Roosevelt was President, and he broke the stranglehold that may have led to a communist revolution by the workers of this nation. No, he did not take the Robber Baron’s money-- but he took away their limitless power, and restored order to the nation.

The situations are similar: Today, our Robber Barons are the federal government and the lobbyists who buy their votes and loyalties like okra at a farmer’s market. Just like Vanderbilt, Gould, Morgan, and Rockefeller, they have us under their thumb, and crush any attempts we make to rise up against their rule. Teddy Roosevelt was President by accident—his party viewed him as trouble-maker who refused to “play the game,” and they sought to “bury him away” by making him William McKinley’s Vice-Presdent, figuring eight years of VP obscurity would end his career. An assassin’s bullet changed that, and America was saved.

Today, we need an altruist with the money to buy the people’s attention. No, not a war hero who has been part of the problem. No, not a two-year Senator with a socialist voting record and who refuses to pay respect to the flag so many hold so dear. We need a billionaire, who believes the future of this nation to be more important than the amount of cash in his portfolio.

As a candidate for President, we need an All-American Eagle Scout: Actor Tom Selleck, or Senator Jim DeMint, or former Senator Fred Thompson. Men who would be awed and humbled by the responsibility, not politicians who feel it’s “my turn” or “I’m the only guy smart enough to steer this nation.”

Do you agree? If so, send this editorial to your billionaire friends. Maybe, just maybe, there’s someone out there who cares.

Don't Ask Don't Tell

2010-02-11T14:19:00.000-08:00

From 1985 until 1989, I had the honor of serving in the United States Marine Corps. During those four years, I spent virtually every working hour with “my boys”— young enlisted troops ranging from age seventeen to thirty. We served together in garrison, and “in the field” for more days and nights than I care to recall, occasionally onboard Navy ships, and at one point in a little peacetime hell hole called Camp Schwab, Okinawa, Japan.

I knew my boys, and they knew me. I knew which ones needed the carrot, and which ones needed the switch. I knew which ones were mature, and which ones were still kids. I knew which ones would be stone killers in combat, and which ones would be shaky when the bugle sounded. I knew them better than their mothers, and we were a team.

It was, of course, my job to know them—not because they were fun to know, which they were, but because there might come a time when I would need to order some of them on an attack from which there would be no return. As a peacetime Marine, I didn’t have to think about this too much, thank God—but I can guarantee you there are hundreds of Platoon Commanders and Company Commanders who are dealing with this reality in Afghanistan and Iraq: Higher headquarters is ordering them to carry out extremely dangerous missions, which in turn tasks them with picking which men will go and possibly die.

Today, 20 years after I departed my beloved Corps, I read that Admiral Michael G. Mullen, chairmoron of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said it’s time to allow openly gay men to serve in the military. Colin Powell has said so, too. Why? I guess at some point these Generals had to decide whether they would remain warriors, or become political stooges. Clearly they made their decision, which probably explains their fourth star. I hope it was worth it.

So, since neither of these four-star politicos can explain why having openly gay men in my beloved Corps is a bad idea, that leaves it up to me. As I’m a Marine, I’ll opine only about the Marines—but I’m fairly confident that the men who do the actual gun-fighting in our sister services will agree with my logic.

Before I get started, let me address a situation that trips a lot of people up: Integrating the Marines racially is nothing like integrating the Marines with gays. Here’s why: The Marine Corps is, of course, an uber-macho gun culture. As a result, it takes a Dark-green Marine about one day to win the respect of a Light-green Marine. That’s because performance is performance is performance. What you see is exactly what you get. The honor-grad of my Basic Officers Course was a Dark-green Marine, and he was a total stud: Smart, a great leader, maxxed the physical fitness test, a superior marksman, top in the class at Land Navigation—He was the best of the best. And what we saw was what we got—he was one of us, lock, stock, and barrel. On the weekends, he was with us, drinking beer and chasing girls. Had he been waving good-bye to us on Friday evenings as he headed off to gay clubs, I doubt there would have been as much unquestioning admiration.

Is that right? Enlightened? Sensitive? Progressive? I guess not. But why would that surprise anyone—we all joined the freakin' Marine Corps, where our profession revolved around training to kill people and blow things up. I’m sorry that we fail to pass the “soft, warm, sensitive, and vulnerable” test that seems so important these days.

So, wherein lies the real-life problem with gays in the Corps? The issue is easiest to comprehend if you understand the impact gays would have on the good order and discipline of a fighting unit. Not the 22nd Software and Clerks Battalion, but an infantry unit.

The infantry operates mostly as a Marine Company, with a Captain serving as the Company Commander. Under him are four Platoons– three “line” Platoons, and a “weapons” Platoon. Each platoon is led by a Lieutenant. In combat, it is the Lieutenant and the enlisted troops in his platoon who take the hills, plant the flag, and do the dying. When a dangerous mission arises, it is the Company Commander who is burdened with making the decision about who does what.

Example: Hill 101 needs to be taken, and the enemy is a bunch of very bad dudes. In a situation like this, the Company Commander would probably have two platoons (plus the weapons platoon) lay down “a base of fire,” while the remaining platoon charged up Hill 101. The guys actually charging up the hill are likely to get dead.
Problem: No one is in a hurry to get dead—and allowing yourself to be ordered to your death is a tough thing to swallow.

Now, let’s take a look at the makeup of this new, gay-friendly Marine Company.
Company Commander– Openly gay
1st Platoon Commander– Straight
2nd Platoon Commander– Straight
3rd Platoon Commander– Openly Gay.
Weapons Platoon Commander– Straight

Now, it’s time to give the orders, and one platoon must be ordered to charge up the hill—and take heavy casualties. But with this “new” military, the Company Commander has a “new” problem. Does he pick the best leader for the job? Or does he now have to consider the ramifications of doing that?

If he picks the gay Lieutenant’s platoon, will the troops in that platoon think, “He’s picked us because our Lieutenant is gay, and he doesn’t want to appear gay-biased to the higher-ups. He’s sending us to die just to cover his own ass.” Might they refuse to attack?

If he picks one of the straight Lieutenant’s platoons, will those troops say, “To hell with that. He’s picked us because he’s likes that gay Lieutenant, and doesn’t want to get him killed.” Might they refuse to attack?

Do you understand how unacceptable this is in a combat environment? It is literally breathtaking that we as a nation would have the nerve to even consider putting our commanders in a situation like this—a situation that could cause “political doubt” to enter the minds of the troops. Or worse yet, into the minds of their Lieutenant leaders.

People who’ve never served in the military love to say, “That’s an issue of discipline. You have to do as you’re ordered.”

To these civilian arm-chair quarterbacks I say, “Bite me. You have no idea how a Lieutenant feels about his Marines. If I, for one second, thought my commanding officer had ulterior motives when ordering my Marines into battle, he’d need to shoot me in the head and pass the order himself.” I can say that as a fact.

And regarding the troops? Listen up, Mr. Community Organizer: Troops are not robots, and they are not morons. They are men willing to fight and die for their country—and because of that they deserve to serve in scenarios so completely above-board that questions of perception cannot arise. We should never put them in a situation where they have any reason to question the motives of those who lead them. Whether they should question their leader is irrelevant… it happens, especially if the mission looks to be a one-way mission. Again, they are men, not robots.

If you served in a combat arms unit and disagree about openly gay men serving in combat arms units, please post. If you counted skivvies or typed in the military, post away anyway. But if you’re civilian, with no experience whatsoever on the topic on which you want to speak— and were confused by the term "weapons platoon," please-- don't bother. You haven't earned the right to comment.

Video Links of Genius Level

2010-01-20T05:33:00.000-08:00

1) The guy who did this video should sweep the Academy Awards in every writing category.

Somebody needs to endow a Chair at one of the Ivy Leagues in his honor.

P.J. O'Rourke himself should offer his congratulations.

http://www.fark.com/cgi/vidplayer.pl?IDLink=4952771

2) Massachusetts elected a Republican, and Jon Stewart rips Keith Olbermann.

People, we have passed through the looking glass.

http://videos.mediaite.com/video/Jon-Stewarts-Special-Comment-Sl

Why the Left Hates Sarah Palin

2010-01-14T13:54:00.000-08:00

The 2007/2008 War for the White House. There are those that say it’s the worst race ever, and those that say it’s the tightest race ever, and those, like me, who say it’s pretty much politics as usual: My Guy, Yea! Your Guy, Boo!

There is, however, one new phenomenon in this year’s race that baffles me— And I can say with confidence it’s new phenomenon in American politics. I’m speaking of the left’s searing hatred of a vice-presidential pick, Governor Sarah Palin.

Where does this come from? What is it about her that inspires such white-knuckled rage?

I’m a conservative, and I think Barrack, Joe Biden, and runner-up Hillary have goofy political ideas, but I don’t hate them. I’m happy to admit, in fact, that they are all smart, ambitious, inspiring to their followers, and savvy. I also admit to finding them to be elitist, affected, racist, and narcissistic, but I don’t hate them… it takes a lot to inspire that emotion in me.

But Governor Palin? If you have access to the Internet, you already know what I’m talking about-- there is fury amongst tens of millions of Americans at the mere mention of her name.

According to these haters, she’s not just “dumb,” she’s “an embarrassment.” She’s not just “unqualified,” she’s “proof that John McCain is an idiot.” She’s not just a “deeply religious,” she’s a “close-minded, hateful bigot.”

You betcha, to coin a phrase. A bigot married to an Eskimo. Happens all the time.

So why the hate? Poor Dan Quayle was the butt of a billion jokes, but people didn’t hate him. What are the reasons Governor Palin inspires such an emotion? Let’s explore a few ideas that come to mind:

She’s beautiful. No two ways about it, she’s “America’s hottest governor from America’s coldest state.” Not only is she beautiful, but she’s just had a fifth kid and still retains a body that would bode well in a bikini. I think her beauty is most horrifying to the shrieking feminists on left, who are far more comfortable with female politicos that angrily eschew things like “looks” and “fitness”: Madelyn Albright, Janet Reno, and yes—Hillary. “Pretty girls” are the butt of these “smart” women’s jokes, because “pretty girls” have it all handed to them on a silver platter, right?

Now don’t get me wrong… there are plenty of beautiful women who hate Sarah Palin, but it’s for a different reason. They hate her for her stunning, meteoric success—that she rose to become Governor in a male-dominated state, while remaining married to her blue-collar husband, while raising five children, while being involved in church and athletics—and now she’s potentially one heart-beat away from being President! Beautiful women just don’t do that… because they don’t have to, of course. Maybe marriage, a career, and school board-- but not that level of success. For a beautiful woman to see another beautiful woman put in such hard work—ugh. It’s hateful to be reminded of one’s decision to take the bench early, I guess..

She’s married to a man’s man. For the last forty years, the hard left has sought to recreate American men and American women as American human beings, as if we are somehow differentiated only by reproductive organs. Men should cry more. Women shouldn’t cry at all. Men should be sensitive. Women should be tough. Men should get manicures. Women should compete harder in sports. The destination is a mushy, gushy middle, where everyone is equal, and equally unattractive to the opposite sex.

And you know what? There’s been a lot of success in this area. Grim-n-grumpy feminists wake up in the morning with the Pilsbury Doughboy next to them. (Boy, that’s a turn-on). The Pilsbury Doughboy looks in the mirror and sees—surprise, surprise—what he’s become: Effete and helpless. Then comes Todd Plain. He works the nightshift. In the oil industry. In Alaska. He races snow mobiles. He’s got a flat belly. And he’d kick your ass in a bar fight. He’s everything the Grim-n-grumpies strangled out of their husbands, and both parties in the bed know it. That’s cause for a lot of hate.

She’s apparently happy. The twenty-year marriage, five kids, started life without a trust fund, didn’t marry money, works sixty hours a week—just two of these horrifying afflictions would have the hysterics on the left on meds and in therapy. And yet, Sarah Palin is not only surviving… she’s thriving. She seems to be happy. She talks about her husband as “still my guy.” She looks like she’s having fun when she gives speeches. What’s not to hate?

She’s low-maintenance. Sarah Palin can stalk, shoot, and field-dress a moose. She lives above the Arctic Circle. She snowmobiles with “her guy.” She ran against her own party to become Governor in an uber-macho state and maintains 80%+ approval ratings. She and her husband pulled themselves up by their bootstraps. They work as a team. She is, quite literally, the polar-opposite of Hillary Clinton. She seems to offer evidence that you don’t have to be a “bitch” to make it. She seems to demonstrate that a sham marriage is not a pre-requisite to making it big. She is hardest, meanest dose of reality a Hillary supporter could ever be forced to see… and the result is hate.

She makes clear the inexperience of Senator Obama. Barrack Obama has less that 200 days service in the United States Senate. He has zero executive-level experience. None. In fact, at one point he pointed to “his campaign” as his executive experience, as if running for President makes you qualified to be President.

Personally, I have no problem with Obama’s lack of experience. Hell, I think I could be President, sipping on martinis and taking advice from my hand-picked advisors. But the problem with Sarah is this—A leftist cannot rub her face in the dirt of experience without stuffing Barrack’s in there too. She has executive experience as a mayor and a Governor, and he has none. Zero. And the fact that Obama supporters are put in a position where they have no choice but to sound stupid and hypocritical in discussing Obama’s superior qualifications… well, hatred is the only viable emotion.

She is one of us. This, I think, is the thing that inspires the deepest hatred. You see, Americans love their champions and leaders up on a pedestal—invincible and removed. We like our sports heroes to embarrass and crush the challengers. We like our movie stars nothing less than perfect. We like our politicians to members of mensa, or brilliant orators, or war heroes, or fabulously wealthy aristocrats who’ve never worked. Why? Because we love our “stars” not for the light they shine down on us, but how far away from us they are. Sarah Palin reminds us of how little most of us have achieved—that 99% of us are mere scrappers, vying for 10,000th place. She is the American success story of a woman who took what she was given, and multiplied it one-hundred fold.

And for that, I love Sarah Palin. And even if she fades into political obscurity in the next two months, I will always remember 2008 as the year I was, probably for the last time, inspired by an American politician.

Learning from History

2010-01-14T13:50:00.000-08:00

America has weathered a number of crises in the past 233 years, and rarely have we learned from those mistakes.

Our latest blunder in the making is our attempt to spend our way out of a deep and painful recession, despite the fact that FDR used the same strategy and failed miserably.

Why is this? Why have we failed so utterly to learn from our past? A child only touches a hot stove once, and – voila – lesson learned. Why aren’t we the people kindred souls with that child and those scorched fingers?

I think it’s because – in terms of evolution – we have it too easy. We, as a nation, have come so far, so fast, that our brains cannot adjust. We’re surrounded by decadent luxury, while most of the world is trying to figure out how they are going to avoid starving to death.

Gang, we the people are light-years ahead of the rest of the world. Our poorest people have clothing, food, and – 9 times out of 10 – shelter with a television. Our basic middle class lives like the elite of most nations, complete with car, cable, cell phone, fashionable clothing, vacations, and junk food. And our rich—well, let’s not even bother.

Is there anything wrong with this?

No! Our forefathers made it possible—It is our national damn-did-we-get-lucky birthright. It’s just that we, the human animal, aren’t ready for it. For two million years we’ve been very, very slowly refining our survival techniques, and suddenly in the past 100 years we’ve come to consider electricity to be necessary for survival.

Well, it’s not. It’s necessary for luxury, and sustaining the lifestyle “to which we’ve become accustomed,” but it ain’t necessary for survival. Ask the rest of the world.

The fact that we are where we are is the ultimate anomaly! It’s the miracle of miracles! The true testament to the brilliance that our Creator endowed us with! We should all be waking up – everyday – and staggering out into the sunlight and shouting, “Thank you, God, Buddha, Allah, Great Spirit, Great Pumpkin, for allowing me to be born in America!”

Do we? Nope, despite the fact that the saber-tooth tiger is dead; crops are grown in the grocery store; the cave has been replaced by a cozy little apartment; fire is created at the push of a button; the horse only needs re-shoeing every 40,000 miles; our clothing comes from hides that someone else acquired, tanned, and sewed for us; the weather is of no real consequence; and we’ve even gotten Madonna to move out of the country.

In short, all the really had work is done.

And because we don’t have to really take care of ourselves, we no longer take
responsibility for ourselves. Everything is “beyond our control,” it seems. Alcoholism, drug addiction, obesity, gambling, pedophilia—these things are all “diseases.” If in doubt, we sue the manufacturer. If we choose a life of crime, we blame our parents and society. And if we need an opinion, we look to the television to provide it.

Here, I believe, is the madness of it: We the people are acting more and more victimized, when in fact we are the least victimized people in the world. In America, it takes exactly one generation to go from a black citizen being arrested for riding in the front of the bus to a black citizen serving as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. It takes zero generations to go from being a computer nerd to the richest man on the planet.

Is this possible in any other nation? No. Why?

Because they didn’t have Thomas Jefferson and a team of the greatest thinkers in history create their nation from scratch. Their nations were created like, well, jello, where eventually over time things just sort of jelled into place. Then unjelled. Then jelled.

Socialism doesn’t work. Communism doesn’t work. Fascism doesn’t work. Anarchy doesn’t work. Feudalism doesn’t work. The world has been there, tried that…and only one system works really well.

Ours.

The one created in the 1770s, which we are trying so hard to screw up. There are many, of course, who like to blame our strange state of affairs on specific entities and specific people: Our elected officials, our judges, our lawyers, our media, our schools, our social programs, our bureaucrats, our special interest groups.

But, as P.J. O’Rourke explored so brilliantly in Parliament of Whores, aren’t “they” actually “us?”

Where do “we” end, and “they” begin? We elect them. We pay their salaries. We watch their news reports. We read their magazines. We use them to sue each other. We live our lives in accordance with their decisions and their opinions. So what do we do?

Perhaps we study and restudy history, and look for an answer there. It worked, after all, for our Founding Fathers, as they used the lessons of history to create our constitution. Learning from the mistakes of others is a great, painless way to solve most problems, and perhaps we could try using it.

Then again, perhaps America some sort of bizarre divine experiment, on a collision course with destiny, unable to alter our direction, incapable of learning from past examples, unable to remember that fire burns, and the saber-tooth tiger bites.

And if that’s the case, let’s just hope someone learns from us.

Thoughts on Racism

2010-01-13T14:11:00.000-08:00

On January 20, Barack Obama became America’s first black President.

It was a day for the history books, not just for America, but for the world. Blacks comprise a mere 12-13% of the population, and yet we the people elected a black man to lead our nation— the entire globe should take note of what human rights and equality can make possible.

At President Obama’s inauguration, civil rights leader Reverend Joseph Lowery prayed these words: “…in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get back, when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead, man, and when white will embrace what is right.”

People, I can’t take it anymore.

We just elected a black man as the PRESIDENT, and this black man prays for the day—future tense—when “white will embrace what’s right.”

Reverend Lowery, let me give you a little nugget of truth: Remember your work back during the Civil Rights movement?

How y’all took on the racist policies of the country through peaceful resistance?

This may come as a tremendous shock to you, but not only were you right—you prevailed.

Yes, change came slowly, and affirmative action was needed for many years, but ultimately the righteousness of your cause prevailed.

You succeeded.

Martin Luther King, Jr’s dream has been realized, and in 2008 men are judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.

Of this I am positive.

Why? BECAUSE WE JUST ELECTED A BLACK MAN AS PRESIDENT.

Your problem, Reverend Lowery, is that you don’t want a man judged by the content of his character. Or by how hard he works. Or by his intellect.

Why? Because you see men only by the color of their skin: They are either white, or not white. And for some reason, you believe that being black should be a meal ticket—a get-out-life excuse, where unemployment, out-of-wedlock births, crime, drug use, and laziness are accepted as an acceptable response to past injustices and current self-image.

Well, it ain’t.

And the folks I feel sorry for are the MILLIONS of middle and upper-class blacks who have to listen to you, year-after-year preaching your broken record message that “the Man is keeping us down.”

These folks have long since broken free of the shackles that bind YOU, and decided to succeed—in spite of the fact their great-great-great-great-great grandparents were slaves. Despite the fact that America was a largely racist nation up until the Civil Rights movement opened so many eyes. Despite the fact that some percentage of America still believes those racist views.

What else could they do? It was either succeed, or spend another generation in poverty.

Thankfully, these Americans decided it was time to move on—from you, and the insulting policies of the liberal elite, and the ghetto mentality espoused by the Rap music community.

Let me tell you the story of a black man in America, born at the dawn of the Civil Rights Movement.

He came from a broken home of mixed-race parents, who largely abandoned him. Despite this, he studied hard, and graduated from Columbia University and Harvard Law School, magna cum laude.

He worked a low-paying job as a community organizer, got married, had two children within the confines of that marriage, and got into politics.

Along the way he learned to orate like an educated man, eschewed the “coolness” associated with being “one of the homeboys,” and kept his eye on the future. Oh, AND NOW HE’S THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

It is clear, Reverend, that you believe all of us bigoted whites get up each morning and before leaving for work make out a list of People-to-Oppress Today.

But then how do you explain Obama slipping by? Was he so super-human that he simply overcame, through force of will, a nation of whites committed to his destruction?

Did he get to take his law exams in ebonics?

Maybe he has a low testosterone level, thus children with multiple women wasn’t necessary?

Or do you think it’s possible he put his best foot forward, every single day for 47 years?

And that he ignored the teasing about “talking like a white man?”

And that he resisted the advances of comely young admirers because he was committed in marriage?

Do you think it’s possible that even some of us white bigots “embraced what is right” and encouraged this promising young man to strive for great success?

Because of you and your supporters, Reverend Lowery—from Al Sharpton to Jim Clyburn, millions of young blacks will miss the entire point of President Obama’s election.

You will be so wrapped up in reaching for hand-outs, and trying to norm ghetto life, and discussing Barack’s blackness that you will cause these young people to miss the story of his excellence. Barack didn’t overcome racism—he overcame an unstable home life, and a ton of extremely hard college classes, and the poor pay of being a social worker, and the boredom of shaking hands to win votes.

He didn’t overcome white America… he overcame life.

I did not vote for barrack Obama. I cannot think of one thing we agree on.

I believe he is the most unqualified President since Ulysses S. Grant.

And I think a huge chunk of the people who voted for him couldn’t have told you the name of his running mate on a bet.

But I do admire him. And I hope he’s the greatest, most successful President in history, because he’s inherited a hell of a mess from President Bush, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid.

And while he may have stood on your very shoulders to even see his dream of becoming President, he’s there now. And he’s no longer standing on your shoulders. So don’t make him serve his term with you and your fellow racists on his back.

Predictions about Obama

2010-01-13T14:00:00.000-08:00

The following was written less than a month after the election of President Obama. He was inaugurated more than two months later. You be the judge. Was I right?

Well, it’s all over but the taxin’. The Chosen One has been chosen, and America is in for some big changes.

Although I fundamentally disagree with everything President-elect Obama stands for, I can take comfort in one primary reality— he never lied about who he is, or what he stands for.

He spoke eloquently for over a year about his dislike for our nation as it is, and the hope he held for the nation he could create. And he won. No one was tricked by his good-looks or his lip-biting, feel-your-pain delivery.

He explained what he stood for, and the majority of Americans stated, “Yup. I agree. That’s what I stand for, too.”

Let’s examine those issues, shall we?

Spreading the wealth around—He made it quite clear to Joe the Plumber that spreading the wealth around was a good thing, and something he planned to do. In a 2001 radio interview on Chicago public radio, he stated that one of the tragedies of the Civil Rights Movement (and of the Warren Court) was the failure to address the need for the redistribution of wealth.

When a reporter asked President-elect Obama if he regretted the “spreading the wealth around” comment, he stated flatly, “No.” Given that spreading the wealth is the bedrock of both communism and socialism, I gotta give President Obama credit—he says what he thinks.

Big Government— This is a governmental philosophy that both Obama and McCain shared-- no matter who won, we were going to get even bigger government-- just twelve years after Bill Clinton declared, “The era of big government is over.”

Obama clearly believes a bigger government can fix our national ills, despite the fact that the last eight years has seen stratospheric spending. The House and Senate from both parties got everything they wanted, and yet here we are.

When you are running against the record of George W. Bush, and holding his policies up as what not to do, shouldn’t your plan be different than his? How can the cure for out-of-control spending be more spending?

But, as always, Obama was very straight-forward on where he stood.

Rejecting Patriotic Symbols— There was, indeed, no doubt that Barrack Obama wanted nothing to do with Old Glory. He blatantly refused to wear an American flag lapel pen, and was never shy about speaking up about it.

He also removed the American flag from the tail of the plane and replaced it with the Obama logo.

Do such symbols matter? I’m sure that’s a personal decision—but at least President-Elect Obama made his feelings clear.

Racial Issues— President-elect Obama’s opinions on race were fearless. Absolutely fearless.

Barrack called the uber-racist Rev. Jeremiah Wright his “spiritual mentor,” and sat through twenty years of sermons in a church where the preacher proclaimed America to be the “US of KKK.” In the wake of Rev. Wright’s hateful, Anti-America sermons being exposed, Barrack gave a brilliantly crafted speech during which he sounded sad and reasonable and explained we need to understand the source of this racism, and work to heal it. (Please see redistribution of wealth above).

When President-elected Obama was forced to defend his comments from that speech concerning his grandmother, he then referred to her as “a typical white person,” who has a fear of black men “bred” into her.

Even the Huffington Post went ballistic on that remark, asking what the response would be if Hillary Clinton had referred to “a typical black person.” For those who need translation, let me say this— Racial relations have been healing for almost forty years-- Our new president intends to tear the scab off that wound, and start cutting deeper.

Like all of his beliefs, however, he laid it out for those with ears to hear.

Taxes— In a debate with Hillary Clinton moderated by Charlie Gibson, President-elect Obama made clear his views on taxes and class warfare. Mr. Gibson explained, “President Clinton cut capital gains taxes to 20%. President Bush cut them further to 15%. In both cases, revenues to the government via capitol gains taxes grew. How does this reality square with your plans to increase capital gains taxes”

The Chosen One responded, “Charlie, we said we would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.”

Ladies and Gentlemen, we just elected a man who stated publicly that seizing money from the rich is more important than additional tax dollars that might help the poor. And he was willing to admit to it.

Foreign Policy— President-elect Obama has stated from the get-go that he plans to sit down for “conditional” talks with Iran and North Korea.

I’m sure this makes folks like John Stewart feel all warm inside, but what do you think it will accomplish? News flash-- Kim Jong-il is insane. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is insane. Barrack may also want to meet with the guy at the Med U who thinks he’s Elvis, but that meeting isn’t going to make the guy any less insane. And as for the future of our support for Israel? The holiest place in the Christian world? You be the judge. But remember, President-elect Obama didn’t hide his thoughts from you.

Things fall apart-- As for this new America, it appears I am now the stranger in a strange land, bitterly clinging to my guns and my religion.

The American voters have stated that the values my parents worked so hard to instill in me are passé, and that personal achievement and personal responsibility are no longer desirable.

It seems my four years of service in the Legions was for naught-- for it was my job to defeat the expansion of communism, yet we are now rushing to embrace the “lite” version of that very ethos. The center could no longer hold us together, and things have fallen apart.

At least I can say this: There will be few surprises. President-elect Obama did not hide his agenda.

Thoughts on the Second Amendment

2010-01-12T13:56:00.000-08:00

In this ever-increasing age of big government, we the people are allowing our rights as Americans to be eroded by Big Brother in Washington. George Bush started this return of “Federalism,” and Barack Obama has taken the baton and is running like a seasoned athlete in peak form. Our Founding Fathers went to a great deal of inconvenience to ensure these rights were built into the Constitution, but somehow we’re allowing them to be whittled away. And most people don’t seem to care.

There is, however, one right you should care about above all—the Second Amendment, which states, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Some gun opponents like to argue the meaning of “a well regulated militia,” claiming this wording refers to the government’s right to “regulate” the militia, and thus the ownership of firearms. Arguing over the wording is their right, of course—but it’s a right they have only because individual Americans retained the right to possess arms, and over the next century these civilians came running when the call went out for the militia to assemble.

But let’s not get bogged down in the technical argument. It’s tedious, and ventures down way too many intellectual rabbit holes— Let’s allow the Supreme Court to decide (and re-re-re-re-decide) the technical argument. What I’d like to discuss briefly is why the Second Amendment is important to our nation, and is still relevant in 2009.

On June 7, 1776, Richard Henry Lee presented a three-part resolution to the Continental Congress stating that the Colonies should be free states. Everyone liked the idea, but the writing lacked gravitas, so they sent it to a committee-- and everyone knows what happens there. The chances are good that the document would still be in committee today, and we’d actually care the dysfunctionality of the Royal Family, but someone in the committee had the foresight to turn the re-write over to Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson wisely edited the original document with a match, and began over.

According to historian Alan Axelrod, Jefferson admired the work of English philosopher John Locke, and Locke had (years earlier) listed three “inalienable rights” in his writings: Life, Liberty, and Property. Jefferson agreed with Locke’s first two, and listed them accordingly. However, Jefferson clearly did not believe the third of Locke’s “inalienable rights” needed to be listed as an “inalienable right.” He believed them to be “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

We know that Jefferson got the idea of “inalienable rights” from Locke. We know he considered them at length. And we know he decided that, in America, listing property is an “inalienable right” was not necessary.

Why? Here’s my take on Jefferson’s thinking: Locke was an Englishman, and in England your personal property was not safe from the “Above the Law” King. If you owned the nicest horse in the kingdom, and the King decided he wanted it, he could send over a few knights to simply take the horse. Why? Because he’s the King, and you (the “subject”) had no way to defend yourself from his Royal Thugs. In Locke’s English mind, this was a violation of “natural law,” and the English people deserved to feel safe in their rightful ownership of property.

Jefferson, already formulating in his own mind what “the United States” would be, knew that there would be no such thing as a thieving, untouchable King, and the nation would be a nation of laws— a place where residents would be citizens, not subjects.

Laws would rule and guide, not the child of some genetically redundant warlord. This was a new-to-the-world concept—free men, self governance, and real rights for the individual—and the Declaration of Independence needed to explain the coming rebellion to the leaders of other nations.

Imagine the confusion:
Advisor: … so these Americans will govern, well, themselves.

King Vitamin: Yes, yes. But who shall rule?

Advisor: Well, my King—they will.

King: They? Who is they? Who will have my job in these States?

Advisor: No one, my Lord.

King: You can’t have a kingdom without a King.

Advisor: Right, my King. It won’t be a kingdom. It will be a Republic, where they elect men to speak on their behalf in a forum of discussion and compromise.

King: Madness! We manage as a kingdom because we know my every thought is ordained by God, and my decisions are above the law!

Advisor: Strangely enough, my King, my former boss said those very words, the night before you chopped off his head and ascended to the throne.

King: Don’t be contrary. God told me that he and my brother were no longer speaking. It was my duty to become king. Oh, well. I know King George—he’s hardly a gravity scientist, but he does have a decent army. It’s hard to resist the will of the King when he has guns, and you have only root vegetables to defend yourself.

Advisor: Actually, My King, almost every man in America owns his own gun.

King: Ha! King George will confiscate those guns prior to the rebellion!

Advisor: I don’t think you’re quite tracking along with this new concept, my Lord.

And in the end, that was that—the average Colonist was armed—and armed with the same weaponry as the King’s thugs. Our ability to even become a free state hinged completely on the fact that “the people” were armed, and were able to defend themselves against a tyrannical government. Now if our very independence was even possible because the populace was armed, why would Jefferson and the other Founding Fathers seek to then disarm the population?

At this point, many anti-gun readers are thinking one word: Relevance. They feel this right is antiquated, regardless of the Founders intent. The people simply no longer need guns.

To that, I respond with the name George W. Bush—the man those very same people believe to be the most evil man in modern history. Some called him a fascist, some say he orchestrated 9/11, some say he tried to turn America into a dictatorship, and some say he would have refused to leave office if he could have pulled it off.

Hey, let’s say that’s all true! That Dubya did want to initiate a governmental takeover, and rule for life. Then why didn’t he??!! Lenin did. Hitler did. Mussolini did. Castro did. Pol Pot did. Mao Tse-Tung did. Ho Chi Minh did. Kim Il-Sung did. Ferdinand Marcos did. Idi Amin did. Manuel Noriega did. Slobodan Milosevic did. If all these evil men did, why didn’t George W. Bush?

Because he couldn’t: The right of the people to keep and bear Arms still exists, and our government fears us. Might be a good idea to keep it that way.

Thoughts on Capitalism

2010-01-11T17:09:00.000-08:00

Before starting, let me clarify: I am, indeed, a capitalist. Capitalism inspires men to achieve great things, as they are rewarded for their efforts. I am a capitalist. A capitalist, I am.

I have, however, been thinking about the capitalism we are practicing in this country in 2006, and I think we have some problems. And I’m not sure we can fix them.

You see, I believe capitalism can only work long-term if it is held in check by a deeply-held moral code. Why? Because when morality begins to slip, so slip the weak towards the base human lust for money and power.

This concept isn’t new, of course. Back around the turn of the century, our nation was virtually held hostage by the greed of the Robber Barons like Gould, Vanderbilt, Carnegie, Rockefeller, and J.P. Morgan.

These guys were, in case you don’t know, thieves and liars of the highest order. It was a time when the nation was expanding westward, politicians and cops were on the take, and cheap immigrant labor was pouring into the country. The Robber Barons simply figured out the playing field, burned their morals at the alter of the almighty dollar, and went to work. As history now tells us, their system of kickbacks, bribes, extortion, and outright murder had them richer than Bill Gates will ever dream of being.

The Robber Barons reign of terror in the United States was so bad, it could have led to a revolt by the masses, and the nation may have collapsed into communism… the dictatorial Soviet Union kind.

Fortunately, one man with a moral code, President Teddy Roosevelt, came along and broke up the trusts and monopolies, and sent the Robber Barons to bed with a spanking and no caviar. The moral code of one man saved our nation.

Today, our corporations are operating in much the same way as the Robber Barons. Enron, Global Crossings, Tyco, the list is long. Too long. Employees look the other way, bigwigs cook the books, Wall Street rewards the process, and lawyers protect the whole lot of them.

Even in cases where no one is actively committing a felony, the corporations often act without morality… consider all the people in last five years that have seen their pensions go poof, while company executives received multi-million dollar bonuses for structuring the deal that made the pension go poof. Of course, it’s not just Wall Street that eggs on this behavior: It’s a well established fact that Wal-Mart doesn’t make most of their money selling to you… they make it by getting their suppliers to mortgage everything to meet their expansive orders, after which Wal-Mart “re-negotiates” the price down to where the supplier is working for no profit, and struggling to stay afloat.

Wal-Mart: Meet our price, or we’ll stop ordering.

Small Supplier: Stop ordering? I built a new plant specifically to fill your orders!

Wal-Mart: Really?

Small Supplier: You knew that… you helped me refine the manufacturing specs.

Wal-Mart: Oh, in that case, let us rephrase the demand: Meet our price, or die.

This is not capitalism. This is business anarchy.

Even many small businesses are infected by the attitude. Have you noticed how many small businesspeople are no longer satisfied if you, the other business, make any money whatsoever? It’s fine for them to score big with their idea or land development or service… but who are you, trying to make profits from your work? It seems that every deal these days must have a winner and a loser… win-win has become an unacceptable outcome.

Could all of this be because we, as a nation, aren’t going to church anymore?

Consider Europe, which is practically socialist now. Friend, the Europeans invented the modern capitalism we practice… they are the ones that exported it to the New World. So what happened? Perhaps they had a big meeting in Switzerland and declared, “Enough of this being rewarded for the fruits of our labors and ideas. Let’s all reinvent ourselves as second-world, McSocialist nations, where we stop being significant.”

Do you think? Me neither.

So what happened? Hard to say, but one thing’s for sure: Christianity has pretty much died off on “the Continent.” Could that be part of it? That with so few Christians around, the morality holding capitalism in check died out, too? And left to their own human devices, things got ugly? That little guys had the motivation beat out of them by the amoral big guys? And big guys got so lazy and arrogant that they quit even trying to hide their greed and corruption? And 1+1 equaled a decline into McSocialism?

Yes, I’m sure an economist would poke holes in all my ideas, and would claim the market always corrects itself, and the shareholder must get paid, and I’m just griping because I didn’t invent the Pet Rock.

But here’s a fact: We’re the most successful capitalist country in the world. And we’re arguably the longest, most established example of truly successful modern capitalism. But we’re only 225 years old.

Every empire in history has imploded.

Every single one. Most recently, the collection of nations we call Europe.

Why? Why does this happen every time?

I believe it’s because every empire reaches the point where its moral code falls apart, and the empire self-destructs.

But Alexander, and the Greeks, and the Romans, and the Moors, and all the other ancient empires at least had an excuse: They didn’t have God come down and give them the New Testament. They didn’t have God’s Holy Spirit available for counsel. They didn’t have Jesus Christ, and the ability to say, “What would Jesus do?”

I’ll bet you dollars to donuts that not one single person directly involved in any of corporate America’s recent scandals asked themselves, “What would Jesus do?”

Can you imagine all the pain that could have been avoided if they had? Imagine how much better we’d off we’d be if all of us would ask ourselves that question during our daily work: “Okay, this single mother of two has cancer, but the treatment will be expensive… and technically I can deny the claim because her employers failed to file their 2005 SRD forms by the deadline. Hmmm… improve the corporate profits, or pay to treat her cancer?

Gee… I wonder what Jesus would do?”

Of course, the amoral capitalist always has a comeback: “It’s business.” “Law of the Jungle.” “Kill or be killed.”

Please. As if it takes a Colt .45 Peacemaker and a steely nerve to lie on a spreadsheet, or screw an unsuspecting person in a business deal.

Here’s a newsflash for the “Law of the Jungle” types… if you think you’re a real gunslingin’ businessman, go do business with some L.A. street gangs. Get them to commit to a deal, then short them on their percentage. They’ll be real impressed when tell them who your law firm is.

It has been said that democracy can never survive as a permanent form of government, as eventually the people will come to understand that they can vote themselves benefits out of the public coffers. I’m beginning to think unregulated capitalism cannot survive as a permanent economic engine, as those without morals will eventually realize that those “bound” by morals are unprepared to deal with well-planned, methodical treachery.

What’s the alternative? I don’t have one.

Maybe Jesus does. What would Jesus do in this situation?

Ah, yes! He’d probably invite us all to one of His weekly business seminars… He holds them every week at His house.

Thoughts about Joe Biden, a Moron

2010-01-09T16:09:00.000-08:00

In the coming months, I will offer commentary on the new Era of Hope.

Prior to beginning this series, allow me a one-time blanket analysis, offered for the sake of avoiding the but-but-but-Bush response that every liberal feels obliged to offer whenever the New Order is criticized.

By putting these facts on the table, perhaps we can then consider the politics of 2009 and beyond.

So, let us begin: Every word that George W. Bush said or implied for eight straight years was a lie, except when he answered "yes" to the question, "Are you an evil, racist, homophobic, violent fascist intent on taking over the world?"

He invaded Iraq because he likes to kill children.

He personally and single-handedly caused our economic meltdown because it would make him and his friends richer.

He spent weeks at a time reveling in drunken blackouts, and turned all decision making authority over to Dick Cheney.

He cheated his way through Yale, and wears a bracelet that reads, "What would Hitler do?"

He personally oversaw the torture of every individual incarcerated at Gitmo. And for fun he would watch old videotape of the suffering caused by Katrina.

With that out of the way, let’s take a look at the Democrat party, and some of the change we can believe in.

Following President Obama’s speech to Congress, Joe Biden hit the road to defend his boss, and weigh in on the policies he outlined. On the CBS Early Show, the host informed Vice-President Biden that the show received a question from a viewer named Lisa Hendrickson who asked, “for clear details about how the stimulus package is really going to help small business."

Here is the first half of Vice President Biden’s response:

“I would recommend that woman call my office directly, and I will be able to guide her as to what pieces of this package would be directly helpful to her. For example, it may very well be that she's in a circumstance where she is not able, her customers aren't able to get to her, there's no transit capability, the bridge going across the creek to get to her business needs repair, may very well be that she's in a position where she is unable to access the -- her energy costs are so high by providing smart meters, by being able to bring down the cost of her workforce.”

Brilliant. And so very connected to the struggling small businessman. I remember just last week I was at a meeting with a client, and we were discussing the challenges he was facing.

Me: Your big seller is what?

Client: Hawg feed. And crystal meth, or course.

Me: Do you have a sense of why sales have dropped?

Client: Nope.

Me: Hmmm. No idea at all?

Client: Well, there’s one thing.

Me: Tell me—

Client: We was dynamite fishin’ last summer, and on accident we blew up the bridge ‘et runs over the crick to mah trailer. You kin still git there, but it takes a 4x4.

Me: Ah, the humanity! You’ve encountered the age-old accessibility issue!

Client: Any idears?

Me: None! It would take a miracle—or a miracle worker!

But the Veep’s keen insight into the trials and tribulations of small business went even deeper! His connection to their plight borders on spiritual— In fact, I used his ideas the very next day when meeting with a local car dealer client.

Me: Look, you’re sales are off by 78%—but that’s just a symptom—we need to get to the real problem. This spread sheet says your biggest payables are inventory; payroll; P&C insurance; advertising; health insurance; maintenance and cleaning; repo costs— but where’s your electric bill??!!

Client: It’s on the next page. Next to the line item for key chains and koozies.

Me: Yes! I see the problem, right here! Clearly what we need to do is cut your electric bill by 35 percent! What do you think of that?

Client: That would be great.

Me: What would you do with all that money?

Client: Hire a marketing consultant that isn’t an idiot.

Me: You’re a hater—I bet you don’t even care that Polar Bears are drowning.

After the Vice President of the United States suggested repairing “the bridge across the creek” might save America’s small businesses, one can’t help but ponder what the reporter would ask next.

You or I would have followed up with, “Mr. Vice President, are you just drunk, or as crazy as an Outhouse Mouse?”

But the show’s Hostess, stunned at being so close to one who personally knew The One, could ask nothing tougher than “By the way, do you know the website?”

Time for the Veep to redeem himself. He stammered, said he was embarrassed, then looked offstage to an aide and said, “You know the website number?”

The website… number.

Needless to say, I picked up my telephone and called that website immediately. After they answered, I did a search on the keywords “small business,” and a total of zero matches were found.

Madness! I assumed, of course, this to be the work of a graffiti hacker, who’d removed all the hopeful small business information from the website—so I decided to inform the VP. I must’ve whipped my horse a hundred times as I drove my buggy to the Post Office, where I posted an overnight e-mail to them, complete with tracking and insurance.

I haven’t heard back from the VP, but I’m certain I will—that’s the way this Administration rolls. They don’t just solve problems—they personally solve your specific problems.

At a Town Hall Meeting, Henrietta Hughes told the President she needed housing, but was on a two-year waiting list.

The One told her to speak with his staff after the meeting, and they’d square it away. (Everyone on the waiting list for housing, please take one step backwards.)

Now VP Biden is available to discuss infrastructure and energy policy with every small business owner who has a phone.

It occurs to me that all Bill Clinton ever did was feel your pain—under Barack and Joe, however, the White House will not only feel your pain, they’ll discuss it, analyze it, and massage it with money until it all goes away.

Is America becoming un-American?

2010-01-09T16:01:00.000-08:00

Sad news, my fellow Americans. The Republic has reached its tipping point, and well, it’s done tipped-- and there’s no way to put the spilled milk back in the bottle.

We are now a socialist country, complete with socialized banks and socialized medicine coming next. We’ve even nationalized some private industry.

How can this be? Those are tactics for Banana Republic dictators to prop up their failing nations, not national policy for the greatest nation in history—am I wrong?

Yes, I guess I am wrong. And I find the whole mess to be depressing, because it never should have been allowed to happen. Socialism is un-American. Period.

Hey, there’s nothing wrong with being a socialist if you live in a country that allows for socialism, but the United States does not.

The United States was, in fact, founded by some very independent, risk-taking, hard-working, leave-me-alone men. We know this because they left us some paperwork on the issues, primarily in the form of a Declaration of Independence and a Constitution of the United States.

In the event one of my readers is a socialist, and hasn’t really studied the timbers that were used to build our nation, here’s a little background:

On June 7, 1776, Richard Henry Lee presented a three-part resolution to the Continental Congress stating that the Colonies should be free states. Everyone liked the idea, but the writing lacked gravitas, so they sent it to a committee-- and everyone knows what happens there.

The chances are good that the document would still be in committee today, and we’d actually care whether Prince Harry is in rehab again, but someone in the committee had the foresight to turn the rewrite over to Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson wisely edited the original document with a match, and began over.

According to historian Alan Axelrod, Jefferson admired the work of English philosopher John Locke, and Locke had (years earlier) listed three “inalienable rights” in his writings: Life, Liberty, and Property.

Jefferson agreed with Locke’s first two, and listed them accordingly: Life and Liberty. However, Jefferson clearly did not believe “property” to be a true “inalienable right.” In reality, Jefferson believed them to be “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

Get out your mental highlighter, because this is important.

We know that Jefferson got the idea of “inalienable rights” from Locke. We know he considered them at length. And we know he decided that, in America, listing property as an “inalienable right” was not necessary.

Why?

Here’s my take: Locke was an Englishman, and in England your personal property was not safe from the “Above the Law” King. If you owned the nicest horse in the kingdom, and the King decided he wanted it, he could send someone over to just take the horse, and rape your maid. (Or rape your horse, and take the maid, if he preferred).

Why? Because he’s the King and the King is above the law-- even if it’s your property. In Locke’s English mind, this was a violation of “natural law,” and the English people deserved to feel safe in their ownership of property.

Jefferson, already formulating in his own mind what “the United States” would be, knew that there would be no such thing as a thieving, untouchable King, and that people might be truly free.

Because of this, Jefferson specifically deleted “property,” and replaced it with “the pursuit of happiness.” If owning a ton of stuff makes you happy, you were free to “pursue property.” If owning nothing and living a Grizzly Adams existence was what you desired, grizzle away.

According to Jefferson, your pursuit of the good life is what deserved protection.

Note, however, that he specifically wrote the “pursuit of happiness” and not just “happiness.” Why? Because failure and unhappiness are both potential outcomes of any pursuit. So here in this country, all the Founding Fathers wanted to offer was an equal shot at happiness—and in Colonial America, “happiness” was pretty easy to define-- you either achieved some form of happiness, or—Anyone? Anyone?

Correct! You starved to death. And that was that. You either succeeded in fending for yourself, or your failures were buffered because you were part of a supportive community or church, or… you died. Period. Three options.

Is this nice? Compassionate? Kind and gentle?

No, it is not. In fact, it’s too mean for even a cold-hearted conservative to stomach. So, over the centuries, we slowly (so very, very slowly) built a nation that offered a safety net for the sick, handicapped, oppressed, and even the lazy. We became a country where the government would support you if you were nothing more than lazy!

From 1981 to 1989, our nation was led by a President named Ronald Reagan. Despite a very conservative platform, Reagan was a fairly popular President—even his detractors respected his leadership, and he and Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill waged ideological skirmishes over the path of the nation—back and forth, give and take. It was a pair of strange bedfellows who made America a better and stronger nation. It was a time when it was fun and interesting to discuss politics with those who held different views.

I would say it was the high-water mark of the empire.

George H. W. Bush, Sr. followed Reagan, and it’s been downhill since then. At some point in the past 20 years, politics got uglier. Meaner. Disagreement gave way to hate.

And as politics found its way into the gutter, gutter dwellers found their calling-- and thus they have worked their way up in the ranks, as candidates and consultants and media pundits. Political Action Committees got into the business of king-making, an industry greased by billions of dollars in crooked fundraising and payola. It got bad, fast.

And during this century, the wheels have come off entirely.

Our government grew so out of control and corrupt that it enabled a charismatic young newcomer named Barrack Obama to arrive on the scene, and successfully pitched the message, “Let’s change everything. Let’s become a nation where we take from the rich and give to the poor. Let’s proclaim health care as right. Let’s dispense with the tough guy act, and try to understand and embrace with our enemies. Let’s stop acting so sovereign, and act more like members of the global community. And let’s grow the government to the point where we can deliver to every man, woman, and child the one thing that they deserve: Happiness.”

The masses elected that young newcomer, because they want that happiness.

And now they have hope—hope for a future that will offer not a level playing field, but a playing field designed to cater to the average instead of the exceptional. America will now be a nation that doesn’t reward achievement, but instead will spread the wealth around.

It’s all quite lovely.

Except that it’s un-American. I’ve got the paperwork to prove it.

Thoughts about our Military Men

2010-01-08T13:25:00.000-08:00

During the past seven years, a new phrase has worked its way into the lexicon of the left—I support the troops, but not the war.

I’ve listened to it for quite some time now and failed to address it, filing it under the category “too moronic to discuss.” With the election of Barack Obama, however, it is clear that well over half our nation has no understanding of the military whatsoever, so I thought I’d take a few minutes to bring them up to speed.

First and foremeost, a news flash for the support-the-troops-but-not-the-war gang: Every single serviceman currently serving in the military enlisted or reenlisted while the country was at war.

Since the military’s job is war, and war is designed to kill people and break things, it’s pretty much certain that every single serviceman took their oath knowing that violence was part of the package.

For the contrarians in the crowd, let me dumb that down a bit: How many soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines do you suppose joined up thinking, “I disagree with this illegal and immoral war, but—hey, sign me up anyway. I’m willing to risk life and limb for a per-hour paycheck of less than minimum wage.”

If your guess was zero, step forward and collect your prize.

Look, I’m quite sure there are servicemen who regret their decision to join, and now want us (and themselves) out of Iraq and Afghanistan, but that kind of military mind-changing has been happening since armies first clashed with rocks and saber-tooth tiger teeth. War is horrible, and wanting to be home is a sane response to an insane situation. Wanting to come home, however, should not be confused with the sense of purpose and duty these brave individuals felt when joining.

Now, if 100% of our troops joined while the nation was at war, what can we conclude that means?

Logically, it means that those young men and women thought it through, and decided the war was righteous. They decided the cause of fighting fundamental Islamic terrorism at its source (instead of here in America) was worth the risk.

They decided, “You don’t get to blow up the Twin Towers, then live in peace. This is America, and we will not abide such behavior. Someone’s got to pay, and I’m willing to be the one who collects that debt.”

Is this barbarous? For the John Mellencamps’s who view America as nothing more than a geographic location, it surely is. For the Keith Olbermann’s who believe America is the problem, not the solution, it surely is. And for the Michael Moore’s who believe America is an evil empire, it’s more than barbarous—it’s imperialistic murder.

But what is it to the troops?

It’s duty. Honor. Country.

You see, not-the-war gang, our nation still gives birth to these rare souls—men and women who don’t need input from the United Nations or The Huffington Post to determine right from wrong.

They don’t care about geo-political deal making; they don’t care about Sunni vs. Shia squabbles over who should have inherited Mohammad’s camels; they don’t care who’s getting what oil from where. They know America was attacked, and thousands of innocent men, women and children were murdered.

So somebody’s got to pay.

And if you ask our combat troops about collecting on that payment, 95% of them would say, “Afghanistan? Of course. Iraq? Sure, why not. Oh, no WMD’s were discovered? Gee, I’ll just have to soothe my aching conscience with the knowledge that Sadam Hussein, who murdered over 50,000 Kurds and ran rape/torture rooms for political opponents, is now dead and in hell. And maybe I can get through the day knowing that Islamic terrorists are still flooding into Iraq like lemmings to the sea, and by killing those animals here I know they won’t make it to my homeland.”

The men and women on the front lines of this war simply don’t care that Bill Maher thinks the war is bad.

They don’t care that decades ago, before they were born, America was in bed with Sadam.

And they certainly don’t care about the opinions of the pinot grigio and foie gras crowd.

When they joined the military, they cared about duty, honor, and country. Now that they’ve experienced the horrors of war, they probably care more about the man on their left and their right. But let there be no doubt they care about winning, and returning home with honor.

And you, Mister and Miss Not-the-War, sound like morons when you fail to comprehend this very basic foundation of an all-volunteer military.

A hypothetical situation for all the not-the-war supporters: You find yourself sitting next to an Iraq War veteran in a bar, and you hear him talking to the bartender about the media’s coverage of the war, and how demoralizing it was to hear the Democrats proclaiming the war to be lost, unjust, illegal, and pointless. You hear him speak of the losses his unit suffered, but also of the good he feels they achieved.

What do you do?

You want to speak up, but—oops, you are no longer oh-so-bravely poised behind your computer screen, able to comment anonymously. And you’re not surrounded by a crowd of fellow protestors, bolstered by mob bravery and the thrill of being anti-establishment.

It’s just you, and him.

So what do you do? Do you speak up, and tell him you supported him, but not the war?

Of course you don’t. He stands for something, and is willing to put pain, mutilation, and his life on the line to defend his beliefs. You stand for nothing but your own “feelings,” and are willing to put nothing on the line. Perhaps you will go home and post on your blog about what you “felt like saying,” but you won’t actually say anything.

Want to know why?

Because physical violence is scary. And a weak man is always afraid of a hard man.

The same holds true for nations. And we know these Islamic fundamentalists are, if nothing else, hard men, backed by hard governments.

And if you won’t even face down an American veteran with your beliefs, what makes you think you and your equally impotent political leaders can face down Muslim terrorists?

But, hey—feel free to keep that I-support-the-troops-but-not-the-war sticker on your car.

Maybe you can use the sticky side to stop some of the kids’ bleeding them when the war comes to an elementary school near you.

Thoughts on our Nation's Direction

2010-01-08T13:18:00.000-08:00

In an editorial for CNN, Governor Mark Sanford recently opined that the November election wasn’t a rejection of conservative ideals—it was a rejection of elected Republicans who refuse to govern according to conservative ideals.

Within the piece, the Governor added, “during our time in the wilderness, it's my hope that we go back to the basics of conservatism.”

That would be my hope as well—but our recent lurch towards socialism has gained some significant traction.

The past four years have been a perfect storm of frustration, spun up by corrupt business, narcissistic politicians, and a press corps that would be more at home in an advertising agency than in a news room.

The socialist branch of the Democrat Party seized (quite brilliantly) on this frustration, stuck the Republicans as the heavies, and began beckoning we-the-people towards their promise of pork in every trough— and turning off the pork spigot once it starts flowing is going to be tough for several reasons:

Men like Lindsey Graham:

Lindsey Graham is the symbolic face of the new Republican Party, a man far more committed to his own ideals than those of his constituents.

From the day he arrived in Washington he’s been a McCain Mini-Me— he sold out President Bush regarding the appointment of conservative judges so he and Mr. Maverick wouldn’t have to change the precious little rules of their Senator’s Club.

He’s fought for Mr. Maverick’s Amnesty Scheme, despite crushing opposition here in South Carolina. (He has pronounced that South Carolinians who disagree with him are “bigots.”)

American Spectator rated him “the worst Republican Senator.”

And with his Senate seat on the line, he voted absentee so he could be with Mr. Maverick on election night-- in Arizona! Dear Lord, are you kidding me? He didn’t even bother to stay here for his own election?

The arrogance of such an act is beyond mind-boggling, but such is the behavior of incumbent politicians. Let me give Mr. Graham his due—he’s certainly no Harry Reid, and he’s strong on defense, but since when does that earn you a Senate seat from one of the most conservative states in the Union?

He is, quite simply, betting that the press generated by his “reaching across the aisle” maneuvers will increase his “name recognition” enough to ensure his re-election, despite his failure to stand for the ideals of his constituents. Oh, and his gamble was right— Mini-Me just won six more years on the Gravy Train.

Class Envy:

As a middle class scrapper, I have one thing to say to the wealthy: Good for you. Barack Obama, however, has a slightly different message: Cough it up.

His message to you comes as a result of a brilliant mathematical gamble. You see, right now 33% of Americans pay zero income tax—and Barack did the math and said, “If I flat out promise to steal from the rich and give to the poor, I’ll lock up 33% of the voting public.”

So, he did.

Do you understand how brilliantly evil that is? And how blatant he was about pitting the poor against the rich? He looked ‘ol dreaming-of-a-better-life Joe the Plumber in the eye, and said, “You don’t like it? Tough. I think it’s better to spread the wealth around.” When asked by a reporter if he regretted making the statement, he laughed! Laughed, and said, “No.”

So, starting with 33% of the vote, all he had to find was another 18%.

When you add in his promises to senior citizens, environmental groups, global warming alarmists, and anti-war voters, then add in idealistic liberals, the white-guilters, the Bush-haters, and the UN-lovers, that 18% was no problem for a guy as well-spoken as Barack.

Now let me ask you: Even if we are in a depression where people are literally starving to death, do you think any of the people in the groups described above would be willing to say in 2012, “Barack was wrong. I was wrong. I’m going to vote for the conservative candidate that’s running.”

Not likely. It will take an all-out message and media war to re-explain to these folks the principles that conservatives (and the Founding Fathers) stand for.

America’s Youth:

I don’t know if you’ve been keeping up on the generation that will soon be running our nation, but trust me—the news ain’t good. In fact, American businesses are now retaining consultants to teach them how to deal with the “entitlement attitude” that’s so prevalent among our precious snowflakes.

Kids are going to white-collar first-job interviews and requesting additional vacation, flex-time, and work-at-home days. So why the consultants? Because companies are giving up on waiting for the traditional hard-charger to walk through the door—they’ve got to appease these kids, because all of them want the special treatment! And these are new college grads, expecting to be treated as executives!

America is a great country because legal immigrants came here and worked like dogs to realize the American dream; some got lucky, and realized it first-generation, while others simply passed along a better life to their children… but one thing unified our great American melting pot for 200 years: Hard work. Remove that from our national psyche, and we will quickly be replaced by nations willing to do the work we aren’t.

America’s Media:

The bias of the American media is well known: Fox and talk radio are conservative, and the rest range from mildly liberal to clearly Marxist. But the problem is this—News is no longer news; it’s show business.

Pundits and anchors pretend there is a journalistic chasm between them, but there isn’t-- at least not one the average American can understand. The 24–hour news networks have turned pundits and anchors alike into movie stars, and it’s impossible to tell anymore what one “heard on the news” and what one “heard a pundit say.”

The mix of news and opinion is so thick that it’s also impossible to tell anymore what’s not being said or reported. Consider a telling moment from a recent Charlie Rose Show on PBS—Rose, Newsweek’s columnist Evan Thomas and editor Jon Meachum, were viewing a re-run of Obama’s victory speech, and Thomas stated “There’s a slightly creepy cult of personality about all this.”

No one denounced the remark—in fact, the three discussed how elusive Obama is, and how little is really know about him.

What??!! Is this a new revelation? Or something you’ve believed for months? How come it’s never been discussed by Newsweek? Or reported as fact by Newsweek? Which of you represents news? Which of you represents commentary? And which of you kept these beliefs to yourself because you were afraid it would “hurt” Barack Obama in the election?
There is hope: Right here in South Carolina we’ve got a conservative heavyweights—Senator Jim DeMint. In terms of governing by conservative principles, he is above reproach.

But—and this is a big but—you rich folks are going to have to dig deep and give big, because the media is not going to tell the story of why conservativism matters. As a result, that story—a story of self-reliance and fiscal responsibility, and personal excellence-- will need to go around the media filter, and that costs a ton of money.

Fortunately, we still live in a free country, so the choice is yours: You can write checks to the men who represent achievement and capitalism, or you can wait for a socialist nation to take it from you.

Thoughts on President Obama's Decisions

2010-01-08T13:12:00.000-08:00

In 1967, psychologist Martin Seligman conducted a behavioral experiment involving dogs which offered up a startling discovery, the result of which gave rise to the concept of “learned helplessness.”

In a nutshell, Seligman discovered that if you shock a dog with electricity enough times—Zzzzzzzzzzzzzt!—the dog will cease to resist the punishment. It will simply accept the shock as part of its reality, and fail to take evasive action—even when evasive action is possible! I love dogs, but it’s a good thing we humans are different from them.

Can you imagine the fate of mankind if learned helplessness was part of our psyche? How would we move forward, striving to become a freer nation and a better people? Where would we be without the desire and ability to fight back?

Take for instance Timothy Geithner, who is undergoing confirmation hearings to be the Secretary of the Treasury, a position which will place him also at the head of the Secret Service and the IRS. In case you missed the news, he failed to pay $34,000 in self-employment taxes from 2001 to 2004, and after being caught by the IRS, he, uh, continued to fail to pay them. Clearly this is—Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt!

The Republicans should, of course, fight the idea of a tax cheat heading up the IRS, but Lindsey Graham stepped forward to defend him. Since when do Republican Senators side with partisan Demo—Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt!

I’m also amazed at the rubber stamp being offered to Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, given the list of questionable and international contributors to Bill Clinton’s library. How can you wave America’s big stick when you have direct financial ties to—Zzzzzzzzzzzzt!

I think it’s important also to understand the “Rule Changes” Nancy Pelosi has enacted in the House, which essentially prohibit the Republicans from even offering input on a proposed bill. This is a reversal of the Rule instituted by Newt Gingrich, which provided the Democrats with fair say, and flies in the face of the non-partisan politics preached by Oba—Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt!

America’s problems are hardly all due to Democrats. The Republican President led the charge to nationalize the banks, bail out the insurance companies, and rescue the Big Three, despite the fact that basic free market principles allow for both success and fail—Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt!

Speaking of opposing parties, can someone explain to me why Sarah Palin was cast as America’s most hated woman because of her “lack of experience, speaking style, and ambition,” yet just a few months later, you know, Caroline Kennedy is, you know, being considered for, you know, Hillary’s Senate Seat while the media fawns over her pedigree and volunteer work as—Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt!

I’m also still amazed at how quickly the American media attacked and demonized Joe the Plumber for asking Barack Obama a simple question. The question wasn’t even a hard one, and Barack was happy to answer it. It’s almost like the media feels they alone have access to the First Amendment, and when—Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt!

Speaking of the First Amendment, I’d like to voice my concerns about Leon Panetta being chosen to head up the CIA; other than his vocal pledge to ban torture, even during a ticking-clock scenario, why is he even being considered? Shouldn’t the head of the Central Intelligence Agency have at least a day of background in intelli—Zzzzzzzzzzzt!

As of today, two days before the inauguration, we still have Border Patrol Agents Ramos and Compean serving time in jail for shooting a convicted drug dealer, based on testimony by the same drug dealer they shot. We also have United States Marines on trial for “murders” committed on the battlefield, as attested to by Iraqi combatants. How can we ask men to defend our nation when—Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzt!

Riding into the tower of power with President Obama is, of course, the one-man brain trust known as Joe Biden. During the campaign season, Mr. Biden claimed the Obama administration would pursue prosecution of the Bush Administration for War Crimes, much to the delight of the left. Now, it’s possible my Dad taught me wrong, but the idea of a seated Senator calling the President a war criminal is—Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt!

So I’m taking a stand. I’m—Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt!

Reality check: These days I find myself getting immune to talk radio—even the shows hosted by the non-yelling, common sense commentators. I have been a long-time listener to talk radio—because I enjoy hearing the opinions of intelligent commentators and guests—but the reality of 2008 and early 2009 has ruined the experience.

Why? Because there’s so much blatant corruption and partisan hatred on the part of both parties, the commentators have no time to discuss anything else. As they run through their stacks of the latest mind-blowing news, I find myself saying, “Well of course that happened. What else can you expect? There’s not an ethical human being within 25 miles of that decision being made.”

Even worse, I sometimes find myself saying, “Whatever.”

My buddy the Reverend Peet Dickinson pointed out something to me that I never noticed prior, and the reality of his observation is striking: Jesus never offered commentary on what form of government He supported.

It seems like He would have supported a democracy or a republic built on human rights and self-evident truths, but He never weighed in on the issue—other than to point out that human leaders have no other authority than what God has given them.

But how can this be? How could the Lord not have an opinion about the form of government that rules over humans? How could He not be passionate and angry about those corrupting the system? How could these new developments not bother him?

Peet explained that, too: Humans are involved in government, so corruption and sin are inevitable. Jesus saw that end game 2,000 years ago.

Are we Ignoring the Constitution?

2010-01-08T12:57:00.000-08:00

I thought, until this month, I was fully jaded by news coming out of Washington, DC.

What could shock me? There’s nothing new coming out about the economy, other than the words of blithering bureaucrats who believe 2 +2 can equal 5, provided enough people feel confident that it does.

There’s nothing new about Barack Obama’s policies, because he’s doing exactly what he promised he’d do: Spread the wealth, increase the size of government, engage foreign dictators, and turn his back on Israel.

The Cap and Trade Tax passed the House. Unemployment continues to skyrocket. Mr. Geitner says the economy is improving— despite the fact that only a tiny fraction of the “it’s got to be passed before you even read the bill” stimulus money is in play. And the mainstream media continues to herald Obama, with Newsweek’s Evan Thomas recently stating Obama is “sort of God.”

There’s nothing new to see here, people—move along.

Then, I started getting shocked again.

First up, the Supreme Court nullified the law of the land. This might well be one of the most important legal moments in American history. Don’t know anything about it? Why would you? The media didn’t report on it, and unlike me you have a life—it’s necessary to listen to “hate-radio/TV” and read the “hate-news” sources on the internet to discover little nuggets like the Supreme Court nullifying contractual law, which is the very glue that holds our entire economy together.

The short-short explanation is this: When a company like GM wants to raise money, they do so by selling bonds. These bonds don’t pay that much interest, but that’s because there’s very little risk involved.

Why? Because if something went terribly wrong at the company—something even as bad as bankruptcy—the bond holders get repaid first. Period.

These bondholders specifically choose not to enjoy the potentially higher return of owning stock, because they don’t want the risk associated with it. Paying bondholders first has been a part of business since the development of the stock exchange, and is supported by the rock solid foundation called “contractual law.”

This agreement that bondholders are paid first has never been violated. Never. Not once.

When Barack’s administration put together the plan for the bankruptcy of GM, they said, “Hey, those GM bondholders never did anything for us. But the unions have, so let’s reward them! Let’s just screw the bondholders, and give a big chunk of the new GM to the unions.”

Completely illegal.

As illegal as cold-blooded, no-motive murder. But the Supreme Court would never allow it, right?

There’s an old saying that goes, “The Supreme Court sees the election returns, too.”

I never bought into it, because—well, their job is almost sacred. They are the last resort for justice, and the court of no appeal. Sure they may be politically partisan when they can get away with it, but something as air-tight as contractual law? I figured all nine justices laugh the proposal out of court.

Nope. The conservative-leaning Supreme Court of the United States has ruled in favor of Obama’s plan, and in doing so have set precedent that “a contract is legally binding, unless it fails to suit the whims of the government. Then, we’ll make it up as we go.”

We the people have lost the court of last resort as a legal compass.

The second shocker to get my attention was Obama’s firing of Inspector General Gerald Walpin, whose job it is to oversee AmeriCorps.

In case you didn’t know, an Inspector General (IG) is an independent position, appointed to serve as a watchdog over a specific area. Like the justices on the Supreme Court, an IG is chosen, then left alone to do their work. In an effort to protect the independence of IG’s from big-fat-meanie Presidents like George W. Bush, a Senator named Barack Obama co-sponsored a law stating the President had to provide Congress with 30 days notice if he was planning to remove an IG, along with the cause for removal.

But for President Obama? He’s above even the laws he co-sponsored— He simply announced he’d lost confidence in Walpin, then advised Walpin he could resign or be fired.

After Walpin resigned, then spoke out about it, the White House went Joe-the-Plumber on him, and told the national media that IG Walpin was senile, and had to be removed. Since Walpin’s firing, the Administration has also overseen the firing of Inspector Generals Judith Gwynne and Neil Barofsky—all while knowing full-well their actions were illegal.

We the people have a President so far above the law, he breaks the law in the light of day, for all to see. And Congress is either powerless to stop him, or complicit. How many laws can be publicly broken by the President before we cease being a nation of laws?

The last issue I’ll address is Obama’s Czars.

I’ve never given much thought to the Czars of the past, because there were only a couple, right? A “Drug Czar,” and I think there was an “Intel Czar,” but who cared? I always assumed it was just a title that indicated we had a guy who was “ultimately responsible,” and could focus entirely on that one niche without the usual pressure to play politics.

Now that Obama has appointed over 18 Czars, the issue has become one of interest.

And here’s the rub: The appointment of a Czar puts a new player in the chain-of-command—an unelected, uber-powerful bureaucrat, who takes his seat without the advice and consent of congress, devoid of public testimony and confirmation. A Czar answers only to the President.

Czar is actually a wonderfully descriptive word, because the Czar is, well, a Czar. He rules his area, answering to no one. Only the President can fire him. And the position is both un-American and unconstitutional.

Why is it a big deal?

Because we need Congress and the President breathing down each others necks. We need oversight and accountability. We need them “checking” and “balancing” each other, lest one become too powerful. Partisan politics is good—because as PJ O’Rourke opines, on a perfect day they cancel each other out and leave us alone.

Sadly, our elected officials stand for nothing and, seeing that President Obama still retains good polling numbers, they choose to do nothing about this proliferation of Czars, in order to avoid irritating The Chosen One.

And that sort of wraps it up: When it comes to a moral, legal compass, we’ve lost the Supreme Court, the Executive Branch, and the Legislative Branch.

At the time when this column was submitted, a number of juicy tidbits were available for discussion: North Korea, and their intention to “wipe America off the map.” Iran’s week of slaughtering their election protestors. Governor Mark Sanford’s infidelity. Sarah Palin’s resignation. Michael Jackson, and his judgment by a very different jury. And Warren Buffet’s declaration that the economy is in “shambles,” with no “green shoots” in site.

So why did I choose the issues above?

Because these issues are not politics or news as usual—they are the rock on which we built this nation. We are altering the very DNA of our Republic, and you can’t UN-mutate a change like this.

Worst of all, we are norming illegal, above-the-law behavior at a breakneck speed, and the average American doesn’t care. In fact, the average American doesn’t even vote. The average American couldn’t identify Nancy Pelosi with a gun to their head.

And those of us who do care about the law and the Constitution aren’t a large enough group to reverse the tide. The barn door is open, the plane has crashed into the mountain, and creek has passed the flood stage.

My advice? Get right with your family, your friends, your neighbors, and Jesus—those will be the only things you’ll recognize about America a few short years from now.