Thursday, November 30, 2006

Iran arming Iraqi Militia

Here's a huge surprise! According to a story I read on the ABC News Website, U.S. officials say that they have found "smoking-gun" evidence of Iranian support for terrorists in Iraq!

Well, if they needed to know that, all they had to do was ask anybody with common sense.

Wait, never mind, common sense is becoming hard to come by. Proof is in the pudding, folks. The Left now dominates Congress.

Now that we have proof that Iran is the main support for the powerful militia in Iraq (which seems to also be receiving training from Iranian-backed Hezbollah), the idea of cut and run by the left is rolling even faster. In fact, Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki of Iraq said Thursday that he believes the Iraqi Security forces will be ready by June 2007 to take full control of security in Iraq.

You know, this got me to thinking. The left keeps calling the situation in Iraq a civil war. Left wing, and even a few right leaning blogs are calling for the White House to admit that the situation in Iraq has deteriorated into a civil war.

By definition, this is not a civil war. Iraq is a nation attempting to get on its feet after a long bout with a ruthless dictator that has been recently removed, and troops from neighboring nations that have been hostile to Iraq in the past are assisting a criminal element with terroristic tendencies within the nation of Iraq in attacking the fledgling government, the American troops there to assist the government, and anybody supporting the democratic effort hoping to eventually make the Iraqi democratic experiment as impotent as the U.N.

Hardly a civil war.

That would be like calling the illegal immigrant invasion of the United States a civil war.

Bush has insisted that the United States stay until the job is complete. I agree with that, but with one added sentence. After the job is complete, there should continue to be an American presence in Baghdad, as there has been in Japan, Germany, etc.

And I also agree with Bush that "This business about a graceful exit just simply has no realism to it at all."

Graceful Exit. Sweet Abandonment. Caring Desertion. You can be nice about the words all you want. It is still a cut and run, and it is not good for the region, or for the United States.

What message would we be sending to our allies? That we can't be trusted?

I know what message we are sending to our enemies. That's why they arm the Iraqi militias, and pray out loud on airplanes.

Speaking of those six imams escorted off of a plane in Minneapolis after spooking the passengers with prayer to Allah, a commenter on my other political site, A Right Angle in a Left Turn World, said this about that situation:

"How ironic that they are getting the freedom of religion defense, when if the same thing happened, let's say Billy Graham got up on a flight and started praying out loud, he would be accused of imposing his religion on others!"

Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Religion, Politics, and six praying Muslim Imams

I originally posted this article yesterday on my Townhall Blog ( A Right Angle in a Left Turn World )

But the article came out so good, and I knew I'd get more feedback here at Political Pistachio, so here it is, in its entirety. Enjoy (or don't) - and I know my dear friend Mudkitty will have lots to say - and here's to hopin' she calls in to My Point Radio! I think her lefty point of view will spice up the show, and make for a real interesting segment. And hey, don't let her have all the fun - everyone else ought to call in too! I can't, I'll be on the road in my big rig, but I want to hear all of your voices when I listen to the archived show!

Now on with the post!

Talking Religion and Politics and the rights of six praying imams
Monday, November 27, 2006 10:08 PM

Tonight I was a guest on My Point Radio. Dave and Jenn, the hosts of the show, are Conservative Republicans, and first asked me to be on the show on November 13th. That particular show went off with a bang, and both my hits on my websites, and Dave's radio ratings went up. Tonight, they asked me to appear again on the show, and I was more than happy to oblige. The original motivation for the invite was my blog Political Pistachio, which has been growing in popularity of late. The first chapter of my latest manuscript, The Way of Deception, was the another bit of motivation.

Most people do not like talking about Religion and Politics, but tonight on My Point Radio, that is exactly what happened. It all began with a discussion about the six imams that were removed from a flight for praying in Minnesota.

Today, a demonstration was staged at Reagan Washington National Airport, demanding an apology from US Airways for barring the six Muslims from the flight bound for Phoenix in Minneapolis last week.

The tool used for this was a call for an end to racial profiling.

So why is this about Religion and Politics?

And as one famous criminal once said, "Why can't we all just get along?"

My friends, we are in the midst of a war. The war is larger than anyone realizes. The battleground extends beyond the battlefield where our troops are dying in the interest of protecting our freedoms. This is a Holy War, as the Islamic Radicals remind us, and I have to agree.

And the Islamic Radicals are using the ongoing war against Christianity waged by the liberal left to squeeze themselves in and get another shot at another 9/11 scenario.

Racial Profiling? Hardly. The actions against the praying imams was a matter of National Security. The imams are members of an violent terroristic ideology that we are currently at war with, and though they have a right to co-exist with Americans in this great nation, any action (I repeat, ANY ACTION) that may be deemed as a threat will not be tolerated, and if that action is murmering a prayer that sounds an awful lot like the prayers muttered by suicide bombers before they blow themselves up and kill Americans along with them, then it will not be allowed on our planes, or anyplace else it makes American citizens feel ill at ease.

And to bring into this situation Civil Rights questions regarding African Americans is wrong. This is not about race. This is about National Security. This is not about profiling, it is about National Security. The Religion of Peace, which has turned out to be a religion of violence, is waging a Holy War against the West. Christianity is not tolerated in their countries. Christians are hung by the throat for their faith in Muslim countries. Churches are destroyed in nations dominated by the Muslim faith. Yet here in the good ol' United States of America, if we feel threatened we are supposed to feel like we are in the wrong.


This is an issue of National Security.

Just because the liberal left is waging war on Christianity using the absurd idea of political correctness, it doesn't mean that we should drop our pants and allow this enemy to sneak in on us and kill more of our people by flying airplanes into buildings, or by any other means.

National Security, my friends. Protection of our very lives and freedoms is at stake.

We may not like to talk about religion and politics, but for the sake of our security, we better be taking action regarding religion and politics, or else the United States is finished as a nation.

Monday, November 27, 2006

Talking Religion and Politics and the rights of six praying imams

After the hot discussion tonight on My Point Radio, I have written a post relative to what was talked about at A Right Angle in a Left Turn World/My Townhall Blog. Check it out.

Sunday, November 26, 2006

How Godless and Immoral can you get?

Night Rider and Jim Stewart both sent me e-mails about similar subjects today. Got me thinking about Ann Coulter's accusations of the left being Godless. Are they truly that Godless? So Godless that they are becoming anti-God?

In light of Foley's Folly (which turned out to be computer chatting with Congressional pages over eighteen, homosexual sex talk with other men of legal age if you want to get technical - though he was still wrong in what he did in my book) the liberal left has once again shown that they can be hypocritical and more immoral.

Andrew Reed is the producer of the North Carolina League of Women Voters, responsible for the redesign and monthly editing of the newsletter. This particular newsletter is considered by many as the best local League of Women's Voters publication in North Carolina. The League is highly involved in American Politics, particularly the left-wing of politics. Andrew Reed is also a Democratic community leader highly involved with the party. Andrew Reed was just found to be duplicating and disseminating child pornography involving children as young as six years old engaging in sex acts with adults and other children. With his liberal friends in his corner, he only received ten months for his crime. HotAir Story. World Net Daily Story.

In Canada the liberals are worse than they are here in the states - maybe. In Canada the legal age of consent for sex is fourteen, rather than eighteen as it is here. However, anal intercourse is eighteen. The Liberal Party is calling for lowering the age of consent for such activity to fourteen years of age. By the way, Howard Dean will be a keynote speaker at their upcoming Liberal Convention in Montreal. Story at Canada Free Press.

An ongoing struggle over the words "In God We Trust" is in appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco. Known atheists and liberals support the cause they call "separation of church and state" which is actually not in the Constitution. Story.

Barack Obama is one of those charismatic anti-God liberals. He has a long history of defying the intended morality of scripture. He actively supports abortion being performed at any time during the nine months of pregnancy. He opposes parental notification when a minor is receiving an abortion. He supports partial birth abortion and post-birth abortion of infants with severe handicaps. He supports the homosexual activist lobby. He supports taking legal actions using "hate crimes" legislation against any clergy that preaches that homosexuality is wrong. He supports urging our youth to engage in sexual activity before marriage, just as long as a condom is used for protection.

Rick Warren, author of A Purpose Driven Life, and pastor of Saddleback Church in California, made an error in judgment and asked Obama to speak at his church (because they agreed on the issue that the rampage of AIDS through Africa is a bad thing). Obama will no doubt use the footage from this when he runs for the office of President of the United States in 2008 to gain Christian votes. Evil is a liar and a counterfeiter. Obama is the embodiment of such. Story by Kevin McCullough at TownHall.

Godless and immoral - but how quick the left is to jump on the right if they even sneeze wrong.

Saturday, November 25, 2006

Suicide Grandmas and the continued undermining of America

In the Gaza Strip a Palestinian grandmother blew herself up in a suicide attack claimed by Hamas. The woman was a mother of nine and a grandmother of 41. At the age of 57 (another report claimed that she was 64) she is on record as the oldest suicide bomber.

I'm curious what good the 72 female virgins in heaven will be for her.

According to one news report I read, she is one of thousands of veiled volunteers hitting the streets as the Islamic militant group Hamas increasingly mobilizes its network of female "activists".

That's right, the mainstream media calls her an activist. I suppose they are called such because women have started to demand a bigger role in Hamas, which leads the Palestinian government. I suppose this would be the only way a woman can gain any rights in this ideology - how proud they must be to have the right to blow their guts apart while taking out infidels in the process.

In the meantime, Cindy Sheehan is in the news again. She paid a visit to Chavez in Venezuela calling George W. Bush a terrorist responsible for killing tens of thousands of innocent people. Sheehan also called for the impeachment of Bush for war crimes.

How about we call for the arrest of Cindy Sheehan for treason!

And speaking of treasonous undermining, have you heard about Jimmy Carter's book, "Palestine: Peace not Apartheid"?

The book's bias against Israel is wrong. Even a liberal reporter, Alan Dershowitz, had a problem with the book and its many errors and omissions that undermines American and Israel operations, as well as failing to recognize the Islam ideology for what it is. Read the review HERE.

Carter's undermining of American efforts in the Middle East, and his repeated liberal attacks against the government, is treasonous.

Between him and Cindy Sheehan, and Pelosi, and Kennedy, and Murtha, and Kerry, and . . .

Friday, November 24, 2006

The dangers of raising the minimum wage

Okay, get this, the average annual income of a person on minimum wage is: $45,000 per year.


But soon to be Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi argues that people can't live on the minimum wage. The current minimum wage forces people to live in poverty, to go hungry, and to exist with horrid living standards.

The current federal minimum wage is $5.15 per hour. Working normal hours, that would yield about $206 per week, or $10,712 per year. Federal agencies define poverty as annual earnings of $9,827 or less for a single person. The mathematics of the above reveals that even with minimum full-time hours the federal minimum wage keeps a single worker out of poverty.

And on top of that, more than half of the minimum-wage earners out there work in restaurants and bars, receiving tips, and making more than enough to make living life possible. In fact, these fine people bring in over $45,000 per year on average.

And by raising the minimum wage we damage our economy. Smaller businesses forced to pay higher minimum wages will face the possibility of going out of business, or lay off employees, or do as the larger businesses will do and raise prices to cover for the increased cost of labor. Listen carefully: raising the minimum wage, then, will cause a combination of killing businesses (creating a higher unemployment rate), the lay-off of workers (resulting in a higher unemployment rate), and raised production costs which will in turn raise the prices of items, thus further weakening the strength of the U.S. Dollar (hence, causing inflation).

Oh, by the way, Nancy Pelosi has said that her first order of business is going to be increasing the minimum wage.

Just more proof of the idiocy of the left, if you ask me.

Wednesday, November 22, 2006

Being Thankful

I am blessed. I have a devoted wife that I have been married to for twenty-two years, two children that are healthy and independent. And I live in a nation where we celebrate Thanksgiving, a faith-grounded holiday in which Americans thank God with public expressions.

But what else do I have to be thankful for?

I am thankful to my Lord for I live in a nation where I have many freedoms. I have the freedom to write what I believe on my blogs. I have opportunities that arise, and the option to choose as I please. I am thankful that I have a family that I love, and who loves me. I am thankful for my faith, and that I have the allowance to worship as I choose. I am thankful to the farmers that labor to provide food that I may purchase, and for the meals from this food that I am able to provide for me and my family. I am thankful for the job that I have, and my home, and my automobiles. I am thankful for my life in America.

And there are so many in the world that do not have what we have. In Egypt a fifteen year old girl was kidnapped by Muslims trying to force her to deny Christ and accept Islam. The kidnappers drugged her and threatened to rape her if she refused Islam. She managed to escape while her abductors were taking a break from a Ramadan fast.

In Muslim countries people are jailed for supporting Israel or Christianity, and condemning Muslim violence. Examples include an editor of a magazine in Bangladesh facing a trial for doing just these things in his magazine. He has been imprisoned, harassed, beaten, and condemned. He faces the possibility of execution. Read the full story on Michelle Malkin's site here.

In Egypt bloggers are being detained by the government for criticizing Islam and exposing the apathy of Cairo police to sexual harassment of women. One of those detained was beaten in prison over several weeks. Read that story here.

In Sudan editors were beheaded insulting Islam, questioning Muslim history, and questioning the roots of Mohammed. Story is here.

China is the world's leading jailer of journalists and internet critics. One individual was jailed for five months because he reported corruption among local officials in his province. Read the article here.

In Lebanon outspoken writers pay with their lives. Read about it here.

Russian journalists also routinely wind up dead. Read about it here, here, and here.

In Denmark cartoonists who dare caricature Mohammed and challenge creeping sharia are still in hiding and fearing for their lives. Read here.

In Italy judges bow to jihadists. Read about it here.

I am thankful I live in America, the land of the free, despite the fact that there exists elements in this nation determined to undermine our freedom, leak top-secret information to our enemies, insult our leaders, broadcast enemy propaganda, and turn a blind eye to the victims of the jihad.

Oh, and one more thing, I am thankful to the American soldier for placing his/her life on the line for our freedom, liberty, and safety.

God Bless America.

note: thanks to Jim Stewart,, for the links to the articles and the idea for this post.

Tuesday, November 21, 2006

And we thought Gore was bad!

Apparently when leftist Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador lost the presidential election in Mexico back in July, he was so confident that he was supposed to win the election that he never conceded defeat. In fact, after claiming fraud and dirty campaign tactics by Felipe Calderon, the candidate that achieved a narrow victory, Obrador has decided to swear himself in as Mexico's "legitimate" president. His parallel government will be based in Mexico City, relying on donations to carry out its plans of overthrowing Calderon's presidency by using protests and demonstrations.

During his speech on Monday he vowed to draw up a new constitution to oppose the building of U.S. fences, and to limit the power of big corporation. He claims he is assuming the leadership of millions of poor Mexicans.

Supporters carried signs lashing out against not only Calderon, but a variety of foes they say had lined up to marginalize Lopez Obrador: the Roman Catholic Church, the mainstream media and even rival leftists such as Zapatista rebel leader Subcomandante Marcos.

Some members of Obrador's political party, however, have expressed disagreement with his strategy of using congress as an arena for protests rather than negotiations. Residents have tired of Obrador's brand of political activism, claiming that it affects the country's image, putting out a very bad image. In fact, the political unrest has greatly affected tourism, one of Mexico's main sources of income, which is down 4.3 percent.

The Mexican Media has described Obrador's ceremony as a circus act and a farce.

But the conditions in Mexico makes the country fertile ground for this kind of leadership, because many of the poor see this type of leadership as a solution.

The president-elect, Calderon, is a conservative that is business friendly, and is expected to move quickly to win over the poor sector of Mexico, borrowing ideas from Obrador such as pensions for the elderly and special utility rates for the poor.

And we thought that the controversy over chads in Florida was outrageous.

Monday, November 20, 2006

Roles in Iraq

United States officials stated that there have been positive statements from the Iranian government regarding their wish to play a positive role in Iraq. A similar assessment of Syria has been offered.

The Associated Press made a bold observation when they stated in a recent story regarding this that those statements haven't been backed up by actions. The problem is not what they say, the problem is what they do.

You think?

Well, at least the American Press has finally figured out how to recognize the obvious.

But don't hold your breath.

Tom Casey, Deputy Spokesman at the State Department, said, "What we would like to see the Syrians do is take actions to, among other things, prevent foreign fighters from coming across the border to Iraq."

I agree. I would also like to see the United States take action to, among other things, prevent illegal invaders from coming across the border to California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas.

During the weekend summit hosted by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran the leaders of Iran, Syria and Iraq discussed how to curb the runaway violence supported by Iran and Syria. But the resolution from these nations, I guarantee, has nothing to do with quelling the insurgency that they support, arm, and finance.

A friend of mine, Jim Stewart (author of The Ghosts of Vietnam), says that the words from Ahmadinejad's mouth to the Iraqi leader were probably something like, "Kick out the Americans, or we will destroy your new democratic government."

Jim's probably right, but I submit that the words were probably more like, "We are going to detroy your new democratic government anyway, so you might as well help us kick out the Satanic American soldiers. It'll be easy, now that the foolish Democrats have gained control of the American Congress."

Here's where I think Bush is succumbing to the idiot left. As this weekend summit in Iran is taking place, the U.S. is actually considering recommendations that could include a broader role in the region by Syria and Iran.

That's like asking Michael Moore to be speaker at the Republican Convention.

Another recommendation was to shift U.S. military focus away from combat and toward training the Iraqi forces.

Isn't that what we are doing? But the military focus must remain in place so that our troops aren't getting picked off one by one as they attempt to assist in the training of the Iraqi forces. Increasing troop level so that we may have enough people over there to train and protect may be necessary for this to transpire.

And while all of this is going on a discussion regarding how many troops to keep in Iraq ensued.

What a surprise. Here's what I can't figure out. The left has accused the Bush Administration of going into Iraq without enough force support, yet want to dwindle the numbers. The idea of cut and run has been discussed again and again, but isn't it a contradiction to what they originally said a year or two ago?

If anything, however, as I stated a couple paragraphs ago, especially if the focus is going to be training the Iraqis, the U.S. troop levels need to be boosted. Use existing numbers to protect the Iraqis, and increase numbers to assist in the training of the Iraqi forces.

Another key, I believe, is to get Iraqi troops that are ready out to fight in the areas where they are needed. I believe that if we dwindle the American forces currently in the region we will face two problems. One, our presence will be required longer; and two, it will embolden the enemy and place the democracy in Iraq in danger as well as snowball the situation against Israel.

One thing I am happy with is that General Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has asked a group of military members, mostly made up of Colonels who have recently served in the Gulf region, to look at what is going right or wrong in the war and to discuss options for progress. This is where the decisions need to be based upon. The Bush Administration ought to pay careful attention to what these military people say. They are the ones involved directly in the conflict. They are the people that will recognize what is realistic in the sense of goals, and what absolutely won't work in the region.

The primary key, as I see it, is to get the Iraqi security forces to be able to operate in an independent manner, on their own. If we don't ensure this, once we leave, if we leave, they will be overrun by Iranian and Syrian backed insurgents, and Iraq will become a larger problem, rather than the properous ally we would like to see them become.

Sunday, November 19, 2006

Rants and Raves of a trucker

When I am not doing side jobs, or writing in my book and blogs, I labor in the construction industry. And the machine I operate must be transported from jobsite to jobsite, and I do that too.

I have been driving big rigs for over six years, now, and to be honest, there are a lot of stupid people out there on the road.

My dad has been complaining about all of the idiots on the road ever since I can remember, but when you get behind the wheel of an 18-wheeler, they come out from the wood work.

This post is in hopes that some of those people are visiting my blog, and now it is time to learn something. And truckers, if I miss something, feel free to chime in on the comments.

*** If you are going to get in front of me, at least go the same speed (or faster) than me.

*** Onramps are long for a reason. Speed up to the flow of traffic, and if a big rig can't get out of your way, speed up or slow down (whichever is safer) and then merge with the traffic. Don't come on the freeway going twenty miles per hour under the limit, squeeze between the rig and the guard rail, flip the trucker off, and then speed away afterward. Especially if an uphill is coming. If the rig loses momentum, it may be a long time before the driver can get the rig up to a decent speed again.

*** The lane next to the slow lane is a passing lane for rigs. So, go faster than the rigs in the slow lane if you are going to be in that lane. Otherwise, move over to the slow lane.

*** When a rig is carrying a load uphill it will slow the truck down considerably. Anticipate that, take proper action, and don't get all freaky if you get stuck behind a slow rig. By not anticipating the slowing of the rig, nobody is to blame but yourself.

*** When a street shows weight limits, it is not because the heaviness of the rig will damage the road. Weight runs akin to size, etc. They just know that if a road is windy, or something, a truck over a certain weight may not be able to navigate it.

*** Rigs make wide turns if pulling a trailer. Please, oh please, don't get caught between a rig and the corner. A little patience may help.

*** When a big rig gets a new brake job (especially when on the trailer brakes) they tend to stink a little for a little while. Just because you can smell the rigs brakes, it does not necessarily mean that the driver has been abusing his brakes - though it could be a possibility.

*** To protect the brakes, a trucker is required to take downhills in lower gears. Don't be impatient. Wait, or go around. Please keep that finger in your fist.

*** A blown tire is like a shotgun blast, so don't spend too much time alongside a big rig if you don't have to be - especially on the highway.

Hope you enjoyed my rant and rave. If you want to read a political post by me, I posted one today regarding the Party of Reagan at My Point Right. Enjoy.

Saturday, November 18, 2006

Israel's technology for the war on terror

I made a comment not too long ago on My Point Radio that Israel takes American technology, and adds to it, making it more advanced than anything we have, and they don't even tell us how they did it.

Nanotechnology emerged from the imagination of the writers of the Star Trek series of shows, and the United States has been working on perfecting the technology for some time. Israel is now using nanotechnology to try to create a miniature robot able to chase, photograph, and kill its targets.

The "bionic hornet" is something that would be able to pursue the enemy in ways that troops and current technology cannot. The robotic device will be able to navigate into missile launchers, for example.

Being developed to combat militants, and discover suicide bombers with miniature sensors, the tool will become immensely useful in situations such as the recent war in southern Lebanon. In fact, the war in Lebanon is what proved the Israelis need smaller weaponry. It is costly to send a $100 million plane against a suicidal terrorist.

The war in Lebanon lasted 34 days before the U.N. brokered a ceasefire in mid-August. Deaths from the war included more than 1,200 Labanese and 157 Israelis. With this kind of nanotechnology, the death toll would drop, and the victory reached by the Israelis would be more swift and decisive.

Prototypes for the new weapons are expected within three years.

Friday, November 17, 2006

Self-destruction of the liberal left

The far left spent a lot of time gloating over winning control over the House and Senate. One of the methods they used to accomplish the feat was with moderate Democrats. Now, it seems, Pelosi is unable to control them, or lead them.

Already she has scarred her leadership, or lack thereof, by proposing John Murtha to be the Majority Leader. Why is this suicidal for her? Murtha has proven he has no ethics. Then, one of the methods she used to try to gain approval for him was to directly urge Democratic freshmen who are dependent on her for key committee decisions to vote for Murtha. Her allies rejected John Murtha by a vote of 140 to 86, and then elected Steny Hoyer, a longtime Pelosi rival.

By trying to assert her leadership on her colleagues, Nancy Pelosi got slapped in the face, and her fellow Democrats rejected her move. B.S. games may have worked on the voters, but her peers are not biting. This was a humiliating defeat for Pelosi in her first effort to assert control over her party, and it is going to get worse. She forgot that control was gained by moderates and Blue Dog Democrats, and with her claiming to be a member of the far-left, she is in for strident opposition - especially now that they've been emboldened by Hoyer's appointment.

The next two years, if the left never quits with the inward fighting, should be quite entertaining, to say the least.

Thursday, November 16, 2006

What "Cut-and-Run" really means to the world!

Liberals constitute about a third of the electorate, and a lot of them don't even vote. The swing voters, and misguided Republicans, are the reason for the Democrat Coup of Congress on November 7th.

Now, as a result, the judicial system will begin that long march to the left because the Senate will not be accepting any conservative judges chosen by Bush any time soon. Be ready for tax increases, and an elevated unemployment rate as the minimum wage is increased. The welfare system is going to take most of that extra tax money, and land in the pockets of illegals. Dependence of foreign oil will increase as no domestic drilling will be allowed, domestic oil will be taxed higher, and the search for alternative fuels will fail due to liberal corruption. With the borders falling, and amnesty on the horizon, prepare for the beginning of the end for America's sovereignty as a North American Union is ready to emerge, modeled after the European Union. And be ready for our national security to be compromised. Nobody desires America to be more vulnerable to terrorist attack, but the consequences of the recent election is simply that a terrorist attack on America is now more likely. The left-wing congress will see to it that terrorist surveillance programs are history. Aggressive interrogation of terrorists will cease. They will being dwindling the number of troops in Iraq, making that country's future look bleak.

Let's take a look at what our departure from Iraq will create.

IranÂ’s ascension will be emboldened by our cut and run from the region. Our allies in the war on terror will doubt our resolve. The nations with troops in Iraq will be forced to cut a deal with the terrorists as a matter of survival. The level of danger pointed at Israel will be increased. North Korea will be emboldened as well.

Now that the left has gained control, they will spend the next two years consolidating their gains, placing obstacles to any challenging forces and complete their goal of fooling the American electorate completely for the next elections.

The world is in danger if we cut and run, and the fall of America as a major global player could be at risk. We may not see this immediately, but the world our children will reside in will be a place very different than where we live now, with a lot less in the way of freedoms.

"Fight the Good Fight" at Navytown USA has a related story regarding Brigitte Gabriel and the question regarding "Why they hate us." Click HERE

Wednesday, November 15, 2006

So-called Tolerant Secular Militants wish to ban religion

When I sat down tonight to write about something, a number of things whipped through my mind. I've been up since 3:30 AM, and I just got home a little while ago (it's after 8 pm for me now). I showered, read my e-mail, and jaunted through my favorite news websites.

Everyone seems to be writing about Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his promise to annihilate Israel, and how now plutonium has been found in an Iranian Waste Facility. Israel is in big trouble, and the new liberal Congress wants to cut and run. If we abandon our ally in that region, Israel is in real trouble. In fact, if we cut and run, Israel will be extinct.

Iran has proven that they cannot be trusted, and they could care less what the United Nothing says. They simply desire to accomplish the same thing that the terrorists want (probably because they are one and the same in most cases), destroy Israel, destroy America, and spread the Muslim Religion around the globe. Iran is developing nuclear weapons, have tested missiles that can reach Israel, and the left wants to cut and run.

An article by Ann Coulter on Human Events Online also caught my attention. Her article begins by indicating that 476 documents made a big thing about the "maginificent" achievement of Nancy Pelosi becoming the First Woman speaker of the house. Read the article HERE. Who cares if that b*#@&. . . uh, person named Pelosi is in such a position? Rather than be proud, we all should be shaking in our boots.

Then I came across an article the scared the heebie jeebies out of me.
When I was on My Point Radio with Dave and Jenn a caller that goes by the handle of Night Rider asked me if I believe that we are in the end times as detailed by the Bible. I do. But what I believe, or what anybody believes, regardless of what it is, is in danger in ways beyond imagination.

The secular world accuses the Christian right of being narrow-minded and intolerant. On Sunday, November 12th, Elton John told an interviewer that he wants to see an effort to suppress institutionalized faith. Specifically, he wants to ban religion completely. ". . . organized religion doesn't seem to work. It turns people into hateful lemmings and it's not really compassionate."

In a free society such as ours, he is entitled to his opinion just as is anybody else. But there is a real danger here, and not just to Christians. This kind of thinking will eventually take away other rights. When you single out a group like this you threaten to eliminate all groups.

I understand the reasoning, however wrong it is. Elton John's argument is that religion turns hate toward gays. It may seem that way to him, but that is simply not true.

I disagree with that lifestyle, but I have never claimed to hate the people. Religion does not promote hatred and spite against gays as he claims. We are following Biblical beliefs that dictate to us that such behavior is wrong, and Christians feel that a Christian institution such as marriage should not be dirtied by it. However, Christianity, though we feel homosexuality is a sin, isn't out there lynch mobbing gays, or trying to make it illegal to live that way. To take away their rights of choice would endanger our own right of choice when it comes to worship.

Besides, this really isn't about religion at all, as Elton John accuses. It is about God. Banning religion is about banning God.

Christians don't rally to ban atheism. Catholics don't protest against agnostics. Protestants aren't out there demanding that any icon that is Godless be removed from their view on hilltops. So why is it that the ones that claim to be tolerant and broad-minded demand the removal of crosses from public places, desire the ban of Christianity, etc. If there is to be seperation of church and state, then shouldn't the religion of atheism be removed from our governmental offices as well? How about removing the religion of Darwinism from our schools?

Why is it that my daughter's teacher can have a picture of Buddah on his wall, but not a cross or an image of Jesus Christ?

Who's the intolerant ones here? Who are the ones spreading hate and spite?

So as you place your hand on a Bible and swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, remember that the Ten Commandments is being removed from the courthouse, and remember that there are those out there who wish to replace that Bible with Marxist literature, and who wish to take away your ablity to attend a church, pray in public or at home, or to say God's name unless it is being used in a profane way.

Yes, Night Rider, we are definitely approaching the end.

If we abandon God, America is in real trouble.

At the rate we are going "In God We Trust" will soon be a thing of the past, if those enlightened, tolerant, broad-minded Marxists have their way.

Tuesday, November 14, 2006

Hell on Earth

Thanks to Gunz and Bushwack!

Great video, guys.

God Bless America - God help us as we enter this new age of having a liberal Congress as the world ignites.

The insanity that engulfs us

Last night on My Point Radio, Dave the host brought up an interesting point that sums up Islam, and their reaction to the liberal takeover of the United States Congress.

In a nutshell, the election has emboldened our enemy.

Iranian President Mahoud Ahmadinejad declared that Israel was destined to meet with her disappearance and destruction at a council meeting with Iranian ministers. To quote: "The western powers created the Zionist regime in order to expand their control of the area. This regime (Israel) massacres Palestinians everyday, but since this regime is against nature, we will soon witness its disappearance and destruction."

And as that is happening, the man that put a halt to terrorist attacks in America by taking the war to the enemy, George W. Bush, is now going to be investigated by Henry Waxman for possible wrong doing.

Wrong doing? What wrong doing? This is the Democratic response to impending danger by a nation toying with the idea of having nukes?

Waxman first accuses Bush of having a poor response to Hurricane Katrina.

The Federal Government, by law, cannot come into a situation like that until asked to do so by the local government. The Governor, under Bush's recommendation that she do so, refused to declare a state of emergency, hence allowing Federal intervention, until it was too late. I hardly see that as Bush's fault. The fault lies on the shoulders of the Democrat Mayor of New Orleans, and on the shoulders of the Democrat Governor of Louisiana. Also amazing is how the left excludes the leadership by Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi in efforts exhibited in rebuilding his state.

Also listed by Waxman is Iraq.

If someone set fire to your lawn, killed your children, threatened to kill you, and the police refused to (or couldn't) do anything about it, would you sit at home and do nothing? Would you blame the fact that your kids walked by those people's house, or defended themselves against those people's kids as the reason for your plight? Or would you go take care of business, defend yourself, and defend your neighbors? Okay, your course of actions may not transpire exactly as you expect them to, but would doing nothing be a better course of action? We are in a war against terror, and we must do anything and everything we can to properly and successfully wage this war. Sometimes things may not happen exactly as planned, but the alternative of allowing our enemy to run right over us is not an option.

And Waxman lists Environmental Protection issues as well.

Bush's approach to protecting the environment includes the fact that the White House supported an energy plan that included drilling for oil in the Alaska wilderness and rewriting the Clean Air Act, actions that I believe will restore a balance between economic growth and environmental protection.

So as the Democrats attempt to dismantle Bush's administration by attacking the Republican leadership, they don't take notice of Islam's bold moves as a result of the leftist takeover of Congress.

Who are the Democrats for? Themselves? Or the nation's security and well-being?

Al Qaeda now claims to have 12,000 fighters in Iraq (source: Fox News), and the Dems want us to cut and run?

And as all of this is happening, Wal-Mart is under fire because they have decided to use the Merry Christmas greeting over the generic Happy Holidays greeting.

What an insane world this is becoming, and thanks to the voters that claim they were just trying to send Bush a message, our very ability to defend our nation is being undermined.

Thanks, voters. Thanks for nothing. Get it right in 2008, would ya, if America still exists by then.

Sunday, November 12, 2006

I salute all of my fellow veterans. Happy Veterans Day to you.

This article is a day late. Veterans Day is a busy day for me every year. I am a peacetime veteran, and I have many friends (and relatives) that are veterans of foreign wars. I salute every last one of you. Well done. Thank you for serving our great nation.

At the church I attend, Harvest Christian Fellowship in Riverside, California, one of the assistant pastors is a retired Army Chaplain. Tom Russell, Major U.S. Army Retired, asked that the veterans stand as he prepared to pray for our veterans and serving military this morning. He did this by military service, and I rose from my seat when the United States Navy was called. After the veterans of all five services were standing, he then asked for those with friends or family in Afghanistan and Iraq to stand with us. It was at this time my eyes filled with tears. Perhaps, as Bushwack would say, there was something in the air that made my eyes water.

Then the choir, after a wonderful prayer by Pastor Russell, broke into God Bless America. Okay, that was it, the waterworks turned on full blast as images of our troops and veterans flashed across the screens.

After a day of Veterans Day parades and so forth, my buckets were full, and the liquid needed to be poured out.

I'm going to tell you all something right now that I mean very seriously. We owe our freedom to these men and women. I don't care if you dislike Bush, dislike the Republican Party, or are steadfast in your opposition to the war in Iraq, it is because of those that served that you are able to even have the opinion you have without the threat of death or torture. For all you liberals out there, do you really think you would get away with half the crap you say and do if you lived anywhere else?

Freedom isn't free, and for those who have not served, you need to at least support our troops.

As for those that have fought for our freedom, Thank You. I know that freedom has a whole different taste to you, and we appreciate your service.

I leave you with the video below. It is a commercial, and one of my favorites. A Vietnam Veteran, Jim Stewart, reminded me of this one minute ad in an e-mail recently. He is the author of "The Ghosts of Vietnam", winner of the Military Writers Society of America's Distinguished Honor Award for 2005. You can visit his website for more details about him and how to purchase his book at

God Bless America.

Friday, November 10, 2006

The impact of abortion on our moral values in politics and society

How is it that we have lost our way? Folks my age and a tad older can remember getting up in the morning, riding our bike down the street collecting pop bottles, turning them in at the store, and using the money to buy baseball cards, or candy, or whatever our hearts desired at that moment for fifteen cents.

Now, parents are too frightened to allow their child to ride their bikes farther than a block or so.

Whatever happened to the good ol' days?

I'll tell you what happened. Violence walks our streets because life means nothing to people anymore. God has been removed from our lives, and the value of life has been cheapened.

Yes, I am a Christian, and many of my readers know this, but this is not a Christian post. This article is about more than God. It is about the root of the problem that has created liberals, and political correctness, and the degeneration of our moral values.

A huge part of the beginning of our downfall was Roe vs. Wade.


I can hear the comments coming already. "How dare you challenge a woman's right to choose."

I know that abortion, and morality, and God are touchy subjects. But they need to be discussed. If we are to save America from the liberal attack, these issues must be discussed. I understand that there are a number of conservatives that could care less about God. That's fine. You are entitled to your opinion, and to your own belief. I will not threaten your right to believe in yours, please don't threaten me to believe in mine.

According to the CDC, a total of 857,475 legally induced abortions were reported for 2000 in the United States alone. In 2002, the number was 854,122. This is not even counting illegal abortions, or improperly reported numbers. The United States alone allows nearly a million abortions per year. Worldwide, that number climbs to 46 million.

Why all this talk about abortion? Well, think about it. Whether your belief that the aborted human material is an unborn child, or simply a disposable fetus, the fact is, that embryo is on its way to becoming an innocent, loving, breathing child. By legalizing the death of our unborn children, we have cheapened the value of human life.

During the late nineties, Susan Smith, of South Carolina drowned her two young sons. A woman from Macon, Georgia smothered her daughter, dumped her body and fabricated an abduction story. We regularly read about newborns abandoned in toilets and dumpsters. More recently man allegedly slammed his infant son's head against pavement and a woman allegedly cut her 11-year-old son's throat.

Why would these people do this? Even in the wild animals protect their young from harm. Have we convinced parents to let go of their parental instincts by cheapening the value of human life with practices such as abortion?

The Roe v. Wade decision on January 22, 1973 authorized unrestricted first-trimester abortions in all states. "A Woman's Choice" became the euphemism for choosing economic or social convenience over the life of an unborn child. The rare medical dilemma reasons for an abortion in order to protect the mother's life is now an insignificant percentage of all abortions performed.

Abortion diminishes the value of human life. I believe that this act, in turn, diminishes our moral values, and increases the frequency of anti-social behaviors of all kinds. Since Roe v. Wade, we've seen increasing numbers of remorseless killings, an increase in the gang banger culture and "thug" attitude, and we have seen wider exceptance for suicidal thinking. At first this new attitude in society was shocking, but now, after being immersed by it for over thirty years, we have become numbed to these reports of senseless violence and random evil.

Violence against anybody is horrible as it is. But violence against our children affects us on a deeper level because most of us have a built-in instinct to protect our innocent little ones.

In politics, the left claims that we must increase taxes so that we may accomplish this or that "for the children."

Yet, these same politicians support abortion, and some even support "Partial birth abortion", which is killing an infant half way through the birth canal. Anybody can see that there is no medical or health-of-the-mother justification for this procedure. Defending partial birth abortion for any reason is irrational, and goes to show how far we have gone in the willingness to kill our children, and throw away life.

Terrorist attacks such as 9/11, and natural disasters like Katrina are dramatized by the mainstream media in order to evoke intense emotions and to urge the common citizen to criticize our government, and to demand increased security, safety or preventive measures.

But 46 million abortions worldwide per year is not enough to vault us into immediate action?

God weeps each time an unborn child is sacrificed in the name of choice. Our rights stop where the next person's rights begin. I believe that unborn children should have the right to choose life.

Thursday, November 09, 2006

Anti-American sentiment and negativity getting you down?

With the recent liberal takeover of Congress, and the mainstream medias negativity and bashing of the right, before we get too down, we ought to spend the time recalling England's Prime Minister Tony Blair's words during a recent interview. When asked by one of his Parliament members why he believes so much in America, he said:

"A simple way to take measure of a country is to look at how many want in, and how many want out."

A friend of mine recently offered me this statement through the e-mail: Only two forces have ever offered to die for you. Jesus Christ, and the American soldier. One died for your soul. The other for your freedom.

Wednesday, November 08, 2006

The aftermath of Election Day

I enjoyed tonight's installment of My Point Radio with Dave and Jenn, and I also participated in the discussion for about fifteen minutes. It is at times like that when you learn a little about yourself. Perhaps I am being a little hard on myself, but I think that I write much better than I speak.

Okay, enough of that. Thank you Jenn and Dave for having me, and I look forward to the next opportunity to be on the show. If my illness carries over, maybe I'll get the opportunity to speak with one of my favorite bloggers, Gunny John from Okinawa, who is a guest on your show on November 10th. I love his blog, and he is a regular visitor to the Pistachio.

Anyhow, I was thinking about Jenn's question, what did I think about the overall picture of the election. I said a few things about politics being cyclictic, and I stand by that, but now with my blog I would like to go into details of what I really think. Jonathan from CrushLiberalism has a good point when he wrote that some of the damage was mainstream media inflicted - but I only partially agree that an overwhelming amount was self-inflicted.

But let's go with that idea of self-inflicted damage. How did the Republicans shoot themselves in the foot that resulted in the GOP losing the House, and quite probably the Senate?

I believe the answer is that the Right's fault in this catastrophe lies in their inaction. That's right, the Republicans (and I am guilty of this as well) so believed that the American People would not fall for the lies of liberalism, that they arrogantly failed to go on the offensive. The mainstream media capitalized on the Right's inaction by creating an anti-Republican mood. The fine people of this nation did not vote the Democrats into power. They voted the Republicans out of power. The average voter dislikes the liberal left as much as the next person, but the media had everyone in such a frenzy about the war and many of the moral issues on the ballot, that people voted for the left simply because they truly thought (after being hammered by the MSM) that it was time for a change because the GOP can no longer be trusted. It must be true. CNN and MSNBC said so!

This situation is just like when Clinton originally got elected. He was the media's golden boy. The MSM loved him so much, and he had such a great smile (or so they say), and the people believed it - hook, line, and sinker. It didn't matter that the Reagan era was one of the most prosperous times in American history (after a liberal by the name of Jimmy Carter threw us into a massive recession, and allowed Iranian terrorists to hold over 50 Americans hostage in Tehran - how quickly the voters forget), and that he was credited with ending the Cold War. The news people loved this dude from Arkansas, and his feminist wife, so he must be A-okay.

We know that the left fights dirty. From the very beginning, even before 9/11, Nancy Pelosi admits that the Democratic Party's strategy was to reject everything Bush put on the table, and to commit an all out attack against him. That's how the left works. Their interests have nothing to do with the best interests of the nation. It's all about power. It's all about the Democratic Party. The Republican Party, and all of us Republicans (okay, maybe not all) underestimated what the DNC was capable of. Now, as a result of this, Bush's tax and entitlement reform proposals, and the extension of his tax cuts will be dead on arrival. His every move will be scrutinized and challenged. His ability to establish a functional relationship with the Democratic Congress is doomed. Suddenly, the veto is a very important weapon.

According to the press, the issue of the war in Iraq played prominently in several of the Democrat's gains in the House. In fact, it was probably a factor in every race across the country, dragging down the Republican hopes of maintaining control, making many of the races close when they should never have been competitive in the first place. Why? Okay, we all agree that war is hell, but it is ludicrous to imagine anybody believing that if we just leave terrorism alone it will simply go away. But that is really what they think!

This is why Rumsfeld stepped down. Maybe it was a good thing, but it is idiotic to say that he mismanaged the war effort. If he was guilty of anything, it is the fact that he sometimes did not fully consider the advice of the generals over there, and his inability to at least consider alternative courses of action. Most of all, his fault, and Bush's too, lies in the fact that they have not made the people understand that this is a war, and we should be over there fighting to win it, not just keep the peace.

People are tired of the effort over there, and the media has pounded into them everything wrong with it. It's gotten to the point that nobody has noticed (or been shown by any of the media giants) anything going right over there. They, the MSM, are quick to politicize the car bomb in Baghdad, but fail to relay any information about the progress being made in all of the provinces. The voters don't think about these things, and when it comes to politics, they don't like the hee-hawing around.

It's a war on terror, dammit! All of it. Iraq, Afghanistan, the difficulties with Iran, and Israel's dealings with Hezbollah and Hamas. It is a war on terror, and we must be all in and fight it. If we are not one hundred percent in for the win, and if we are all more worried about exit strategies rather than how we can reach our goals, then we have no business being there. If we cut and run, we deserve to be hit by terrorists again. Perhaps then the left will realize how important it is to protect America and her interests.

Another strategy that the left used, which actually impressed me a little, was recruiting candidates who were willing to run as conservative Democrats. You know these guys. Pro-life, pro-gun types like Harold Ford, Joe Donnelly, Brad Ellsworth, Heath Shuler, etc. etc. etc. I guarantee you these guys won't be so conservative once they take office (minus Ford, I think he actually lost).

But here is the biggest disappointment of all (and this subject was touched on while I was on the radio show with Jenn and Dave), Prop. 85 in California and Measure 43 in Oregon. These issues would have required the notification of parents when their minor girls seek abortions. And I guarantee you the people voting it down probably don't have kids because nobody in their right mind with a daughter would want her to be allowed to get an abortion without the parents being notified. My 16 year old daughter can't even get an aspirin at school without my permission, for God's sake, but she can get an abortion? How insane is that?

On My Point Radio, Dave made a comment that by reading my blog he believed that my daughter and I have a good avenue of communication, so it probably won't be a problem. I appreciate his comment, and he's right, I have a good enough handle on my daughter in the sense of our relationship that she is honest with me and I with her. But can you really trust a teenager? Do you remember when you were young?

And for those people that voted down Prop. 85 and Measure 43, think about this: When you do eventually have children, would you like your child to be able to terminate the life of an unborn child without your knowledge? Even if you support abortion, you would think that these people would want to know so that they could at least be there for that child, or help them choose a safer clinic (not that I think any abortion clinic is safe).

Finally, now that Nancy Pelosi is going to be the Speaker of the House, do we really know her? Do we really want her San Francisco values taking control? She is one of the most liberal members of the House. She voted against cutting taxes by $70 million, against renewing the Patriot Act, against reducing the death tax, against drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and against making it a crime to desecrate the U.S. flag. She supports gay marriage, and backed legislation allowing overseas military facilities to provide abortions for women in the military and military dependents. The would-be speaker also backed a measure calling for a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, supported a bill requiring a 72-hour background check for persons buying weapons at gun shows — and opposed a bill strengthening the enforcement of immigration laws. Though she claims to be pro-union, her $25 million Northern California vineyard is a non-union shop. She states that her stance on the environment is an ethic, but one of her largest investments is a private partnership called Lions Gate Limited, which operates the CordeValle Golf Club and Resort in San Martin, California. To get a permit to build the facility, the partners promised to build a "public course" providing considerable access to non-members, and to abide by several environmental requirements to ensure that there would be minimal ecological damage. But after the facility opened, the county's Planning Commission found that the golf course was in fact private — and the club had "ignored" many of its permit requirements concerning the environment! The fact is, the liberal left preaches in moral platitudes. You can have freedom of speech as long as it agrees with them (just ask Columbia University).

They have high standards for everyone, but when it comes to applying those same standards to themselves, liberals are quite the hypocrites.

So what is my overall feelings regarding November 7th, 2006? Democrats support surrender in Iraq, higher taxes, hate Bush, want to take your guns away from you (I'll have mine loaded and pointed when that day comes - and that day has come in New Orleans, but we'll save that one for another article), support same sex marriage and rights, support abortion, does not believe you should be allowed to know what your children are doing unless they need an aspirin at school, believes that if they raise taxes on cigarettes high enough it'll force people to quit smoking (like the government should be able to determine what people are allowed to do in that instance - and this is coming from an ex-smoker), and believes that morality is only a matter of opinion. With them in control of the Congress, we are in deep doo doo. But, it could be worse. Could you imagine a world with Hillary Clinton as President, and Nancy Pelosi as her running mate?

Excuse me, I have to run to the bathroom and. . .

Dems take the House, Senate possibly too, and Rumsfeld steps down.

What a day of news. Dave and Jenn will be discussing this and more on My Point Radio tonight, and I plan to chime in. 4 pm Pacific Time. Take a listen here.

Tuesday, November 07, 2006

Did you vote? I hope so.

I voted, and it was interesting because I was in and out of there quickly because I knew my issues, and how I was going to vote. The people voting when I arrived were still there when I left.


Flipping through the channels, I uncharacteristically stopped at CNN, and they were forcasting Democratic winners with 0% of the precints reporting - basing their decision on exit polls. And how often are exit polls correct? I'll wait until tomorrow before I cheer or cry, depending on the results.

Oh, and by the way, Scott sent me another postcard from Europe. Thing is, he bought this one early in the trip, and just now sent it to me from Italy. He claims that he was too busy to get it off sooner. Man, I wish I had that problem. Wow, traipsing around Europe on a multi-month vacation must be really stressful!

God Bless, and listen to My Point Radio tomorrow! I plan to call in!

P.S. That first picture is my house, and my neighbor's. Interesting thing is, we are the only two on the street with flags waving! Personally, I have four "Stars and Stripes." One in the front of my house. One in my office. One at my house in Brookings, Oregon. And one folded laying beside my United States Constitutionally protected guns.

Monday, November 06, 2006

Saddam is sentenced to death, says the radio, on the eve of election day

I got on the road this morning at four in the morning. It was a little early for me. Usually I am on the road somewhere between four-thirty and five a.m. I work in the construction industry, which is a surprise to some people because of a few of my medical ailments that seem to haunt me. Nonetheless, as I drove my work truck to my big rig with the two members of my crew with me, the news story comes on the radio stating that Saddam Hussein was convicted and given the death penalty for his crimes. One of the guys says, "Serves the bastard right." The other says, "Killing him won't solve anything, other than that it is okay to kill. Violence begets violence."


After talking further with this individual, I am happy to say that he doesn't vote.

Newt Gingrich said it best, I think, with these points. First, Saddam's conviction shows that the Iraqi people are far better off today under the rule of law than under the rule of a dictator that killed at least 300,000 Iraqis. Second, America was right to replace this evil dictatorship and to give the Iraqi people the chance to be a free and self-governing nation. Third, Saddam's conviction should send a message to every other dictator on the planet. The message says to these men that if you kill, torture, or destroy your own people, one day, given the chance, your people may destroy you. Fourth, and finally, the verdict reminds all of us about the current fecklessness of the United Nations. After completely failing to protect the Iraqi people from Saddam's terror, when Saddam was convicted for his crimes all the United Nations could talk about was saving Saddam from the death penalty. This reminds us that the United Nations today is a clearly broken institution focused on the preservation of the status quo, even when it is a status quo that tortures, mutilates and destroys human beings.

I asked my co-worker, "If someone came into your home and mercilessly murdered your mother and father and brothers and sisters in front of you, would you support the death penalty then?"

Vote on November 7th! According to Robert Novak the Democrats are set to win 19 House seats and two Senate seats. Vote, my fellow Republicans! Let's not allow the liberal left to do the horrible things that they are promising!

Sunday, November 05, 2006

MSM says: "We're losing in Iraq, but all is not lost."

Above is a paraphrase of a headline on the over of a popular main stream media news magazine. We are not losing in Iraq, I don't think. In fact, I was reading in another article by Phillip Carter and Owen West that it would take over 73 years for U.S. forces to incur the level of combat deaths suffered in the Vietnam war. Beneath those words is a sentence about getting out of Iraq. At first I thought it was a reference to the idea of "cut and run", but surprisingly, that was not the case.

After a comparison to the Korean war, and a statement that at the time two thirds of the American public disapproved of the war (I'd like to see the reference on that), the writer of the article "Rethinking Iraq: The Way Forward" by Fareed Zakaria of Newsweek proceeded to outline a strategy for exiting Iraq for the most part (but not completely) while saving the nation from a civil war, thus not causing a bloodbath. His words essentially states that we should "redefine [the] mission, reduce and redeploy forces and fashion a less intrusive involvement with Iraq." I think that a reduction if forces may be disastrous, but increasing the number could be as well.

The writer states that the spiraling death toll is alarming (spiraling death toll? Compared to other campaigns, hardly - again, it would take over 73 years for U.S. forces to incur the level of combat deaths suffered in the Vietnam war ), but the unemployment rate is devastating. I guess it would be. War on one's soil can cause economic and employment strife. Our war, according to this writer, is not promoting peace, normalcy, and jobs. Much of this is blamed by the writer on a lack of security. An issue currently being tackled.

The violence increases when the American forces scale back in an area. No kidding? The violence, according to Fareed Zakaria, is being suppressed, but not resolved. That's what happens when evil people don't like the growth of democracy, and they do whatever they can to stop it.

The sectarian violence is being categorized as a low-grade civil war (well, then, I suppose the gang wars in our big cities could be categorized as low-grade civil wars too) between Sunni and Shia communities. The violence involves ethnic cleansing, and other communal attacks, displacing 365,000 people and resulting in the deaths of 2,600 Iraqis during September in Baghdad alone. A lot less than the deaths caused by unchecked terrorist groups, and by a tyrannical dictator by the name of Saddam Hussein.

American assisted Iraqi security is being created with lopsided effects, states the journalist. The article then enters a "Bush's failure" mode as well as indicating that the Iraqi security force is not only inadequate, but at fault for slaughtering members of Sunnis since, as stated in the article, the Iraqi police and army is largely Kurdish and Shia. That may be true - however, again, they are a lot less as compared to what it could have been without us there.

Democratic party line is then quoted, and Democratic Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island is labeled as "one of the most intelligent voices on foreign affairs in the U.S. Senate." Senator Reed's trip to Iraq, and a story regarding how progress is limited in the region and how Iraq is sliding back into instability, is then recounted. The paragraph completes with a sentence stating that American strategy is falling prey to the political realities in Iraq. I am sure that the political realities were underestimated by the current administration. War can be like that. I suppose it is sort of like picking the lesser of two evils. Enter Iraq, hope for democratic growth, and an elimination of the use and production of weapons of mass destruction, or allow Saddam to continue to do as he pleased, murdering his own people, cohorting with the terrorist element, and racing with Iran to see who gets the nuclear bomb first. Hmmm, which is better? Hmmm. Still thinking?

Bush is accused of misunderstanding the potential of this war. Bush is said to have believed that they could make Iraq a "united, secular, harmonious, freedom-loving" society. He further says that unseating Saddam Hussein has resulted in a catastrophe, introducing Shia-majority rule to Iraq. The contradiction is funny, here, because later the unseating of Saddam is listed as an achievement. And you know, I doubt they thought that Iraq would become this magical, united, harmonious democratic society. Democracy is tough to grow. But at least they have been given the opportunity to head in that direction, and at least Saddam is no longer their to continue his tyranny.

The Sunnis, now, because of the Shia domination of the nation, are angry, causing them to be radical and feudal. The writer does then indicate that the Sunnis fail to recognize that without the American forces to protect them, they would be massacred by the Shiites. Religious radicals are difficult to gauge. The goal is to allow them to share the power, and if that has not been achieved yet, then perhaps that is one of the reasons we still remain.

regardless, continues the writer, Iraq is getting ready for the day the U.S. departs. There is already a power struggle ensuing. A civil war is sure to erupt, according to this article, once the Americans are gone. I don't use any crystal balls, and I am sure that tensions are high, but that is why we haven't gone yet. We may continue our presence indefinitely, someday. But I am sure that eventually our presence will be minimal, but we can't push that too early, or we could very well have a problem in the region erupt - - but remember, the radical left in this nation thinks we should cut and run.

Then the question is posed: with such a dire situation, how can the United States leave and all hell not break lose? Good point.

We can't leave. Not anytime soon, anyway. He states that the Iraqi Parliament should publicly ask the American troops to stay pipe dream for now, and the U.S. should communicate with Iraq's neighbors regarding the need for security and stability in Iraq talking doesn't work too well in this region. Then again, neither does the United Nothings. . . oops, I mean United Nations. He then recommends that by 2007 American units should stop being basic security and become a rapid-reaction force to secure certain core interests. Isn't that kind of what our forces are already doing? This would reduce the number of troops in Iraq while helping the Iraqis take more responsibility for their own security. As our troop levels drop, violence will increase, and hopefully (hopefully - cross your fingers, and hope to. . . well, you know what I mean) the Shia government will fight the insurgency in its own way. The increased Sunni rebellion will force the leaders to come to a political deal. That's a big if that this stage.

The current goals in Iraq ought to be to prevent al Qaeda style jihadist groups to use parts of Iraq as a base for global terrorism, ensure that the Kurdish region retain autonomy, and contain massive sectarian violence. I agree.

Here's where it gets interesting. The writer says that fewer forces will not result in attacks on America. Terrorism could have easily been inflicted on the U.S. in the last three years. They aren't interested in us. They haven't forgotten us. It would just make no sense to attack us. Of course it makes no sense to attack us. We are in their face. They could have, but they haven't because we have taken the war to them. The left keeps trying to use American standards to describe terrorists. They don't think like us. They think very unlike us. Talking doesn't work, negotiations are baseless. They kill. It's like the scorpion when he stung the turtle, and the turtle said, "Hey, you said you wouldn't sting me," and the scorpion says, "but that's what I do."

Instead, the writer recommends we battle al Qaeda (aren't we? Why does the left think that because we have forces in Iraq we have forgotten all about al Qaeda, bin laden, and Afghanistan?), secure Kurdistan, prevent a bloodbath by pairing U.S. advisors with Iraqi Army and police forces, draw down troops and increase the number of advisors. The writer admits that this plan may not work. If that's the case, we'll have to figure out how to handle the increased violence and chaos. (and of course the Republican party would then be blamed for the increase in violence, but if it works, the Democrats would get the credit somehow) But if it does work, a new nation might emerge. After all, civil strife tends not to go on forever. not forever, though it has for 6,000 years, so far. . .just ask Israel.

Surprisingly, the article lists some achievements of our presence in Iraq, listing Saddam's capture as one of them (using the statistic that during his tyrannical rule he killed 500,000 of his own people), Kurdistan is turning into a promising society, and the political positioning in Iraq in a democratic fashion is not seen anywhere else in the Middle East region. (I guess Israel doesn't count) The suggestion, then, is like Korea, we can't pull out completely, but give up our illusions of democracy in Iraq, scale back, and hope time will work everything out.
But we can't leave now, or scale down just yet. The generals in the field will know when that type of action is appropriate. Patience, people, patience.

Like I told my daughter, I will never be upset when she defends herself or comes to the aid of her friends. That goes for the U.S. government as well.

Friday, November 03, 2006

Iran fires missiles as the liberal attitude once again makes itself known in the public school system

I suppose you all know about Iran test-firing missiles, including ones that could reach Israel. A display of power such as this, coupled with their aspirations for a nuclear program makes me more nervous that North Korea's situation. Iran would be glad to share such technology with their Muslim allies in an attempt to eliminate Israel.

We need to deal with this now, with force. But, we won't, just like we didn't with North Korea, because everybody's too worried about making someone mad.

Meanwhile, in Gaza, the Palestinians used women as a human shield against Israeli troops.

And the Palestinians are accusing Israel of attempting genocide against the Palestinian people.

Fox News tonight gave a report about how the terrorists are urging everyone to vote Democrat - - calling a Democratic victory the beginning of the downfall of America.

And when these situations were brought up at work, one of my co-workers said, "Why even concern yourself with that stuff. There's nothing you can do about it. Just live your life." Another acquaintance told me, "These things are happening because we are in the region. Our violence against those people is creating the violence over there. Besides, we don't belong in Iraq anyways. Think about it. There was no Iraqis on those planes during 9/11." I'm surprised this person didn't start spouting out that Bush and Rumsfeld brought down the towers with well placed explosives.

My answer to that "no Iraqis on the planes on 9/11" is, "so I suppose you think we shouldn't have fought Germany in WWII because there were no Germans in the planes during Pearl Harbor, either."

Honestly, after these idiots made these statement, my first question to myself was, "Where in the hell do these people get these ludicrous ideas?"

As stated in a post not too long ago, one needs not look farther than our own public school system.

See if you recognize the connection here.

My daughter came to the aid of a friend that came under attack by another classmate. Knowing that her friend is not very good at defending herself, my daughter and another girl separated the girls fighting, and were then promptly apprehended by security and sent to the office. Originally my daughter was going to be suspended, but when my wife showed up and confronted the principal, her suspension was cancelled. The victim and the girl that assisted my daughter was still suspended. The aggressor WAS NOT SUSPENDED.

Also, when my daughter asked why they were in trouble for essentially stopping a fight, the response was, "School rules are that you either walk away, or if unable to, be beat up. If you respond to the attack, you will be suspended."


Get attacked, do nothing, and everybody is okay, because fighting (violence) will not be tolerated. However, you will not be suspended if your parent is proactive, or if your are the aggressor and somehow sweet talk yourself out of it.

I am pissed.

But doesn't this sound just like Politically Correct B.S. and liberalism?

They say, "Violence begets violence." "Don't fight the terrorists, you might make them mad! Just talk to them and allow yourself to be beaten to a pulp, and maybe they'll go away."

Holy Sh**! Are people really that stupid?

I told my daughter that fighting for the sake of fighting will not be tolerated. And if it is possible to walk away, or resolve the conflict without fighting, that is the best resolution. However, "If you find yourself in a situation where the aggressor cannot be negotiated with, defend yourself. Kick their a$$. Allowing bullies to continue to bully enables them to do it to others and to continue to do it to you. Defend yourself."

Hmmm. Maybe the leftists were those kids in school that somehow avoided bullies and so they never learned that there are evil/mean people out there, and the only way to deal with them is to take the battle to them.

Thursday, November 02, 2006

Snowball Express

Outside of politics for a moment, for a good cause!

About the Snowball Express

Please help the children have a great time at Snowball Express and help fund scholarships and assistance programs for the families.

"For the children of our fallen warriors… Reaching out now and far into the future." - Michael Kerr
Those who protect us deserve our thanks, our support and our help. Those in the Armed Forces who have laid down their lives in service to our way of life deserve our gratitude and our commitment to helping the family members they left behind.

The Snowball Express will provide a holiday experience for every child who has lost a parent while serving in our military forces during the Afghanistan and Iraq conflict since 9/11. We will be bringing the children and surviving parent or guardian from throughout the nation to Orange County in mid-December, 2006 for a holiday party and a trip to Disneyland.

More importantly, it's so we don't forget those who secure our way of life.

There are many ways to help. From donations to long-term involvement by providing continuing support for the families.

Send a check to:

M. Scott Kerr Foundation
EIN #20-5627830
(Tax exempt status applied for)
Orange Coast Snowball Express
28241 Crown Valley Parkway, #401
Laguna Niguel, CA 92677

9-11 Truck

Trucker who has painted his cab and trailer with the names of all those who lost their lives on 9/11. The trucker's name is John Holmgren from Shafer, Minn. The trucker has been "pulled over" numerous times just so the troopers can get their picture taken with the truck.

(scroll down to see the pictures)

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

Kerry is an idiot

Above is a message to John Kerry from some troops in Iraq.
Below is a link to an open letter to Kerry from a Naval Officer friend of mine.