Officials are eyeing North Korea as the culprit as a Cyber Attack Against U.S. and South Korean Computer Systems Is Launched over The Holiday Weekend
John Barnhart of American Daily Review told me the other day that since Independence Day he, and a number of other people, had been having problems with Internet access. It may be a coincidence, but the government has been having the same problem.
The widespread cyber attack that overwhelmed South Korean and American government websites has been possibly traced back to North Korea. The attack, which appeared around Independence Day, targeted government and private sites, and revealed how ill equipped the U.S. Government truly is for this kind of attack.
In an age where the missile launches of North Korea, and Iran's push for nuclear weapons, grace the headlines of newspapers and news sites, Cyber Attacks are often overlooked. The danger is very real, and the U.S. Government has now received a reminder about how important it is to prepare for other such attacks in the future.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
US officials eye North Korea in cyber attack - Associated Press, LOLITA C. BALDOR
Thursday, July 09, 2009
Rove Interviewed Regarding Role In Firings of Federal Prosecutors
Investigators for the House Judiciary Committee are trying to get to the bottom of the firings of nine federal prosecutors in December of 2006 by President George W. Bush. The investigators interviewed Karl Rove regarding his role in the dismissal of those prosecutors.
One must understand that the federal prosecutors serve at the pleasure of the President of the United States, and it is legal for him to fire the prosecutors for any reason. In 2006, President Bush exercised that executive privilege.
Funny how, when Bill Clinton fired all of the federal prosecutors, except one, during his presidency, there was no concern, or even a peep from the Democrats, regarding Clinton's actions.
Obama's firing of Inspector Generals, which do not serve at the pleasure of the President, and were fired against the law (independent federal inspectors general are supposed to be granted special protection from political interference as per the Inspector General Reform Act of 2008, co-sponsored by Obama), has also garnered little concern, and a probe was launched only after the emerging outcry by critics.
Interesting how the Democrats are on a witch hunt regarding the previous administration, yet ignore the filth in their own house.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
by Douglas V. Gibbs
Rove Is Interviewed in Judiciary Panel Inquiry - The New York Times
Probe launched in suspicious firing of inspector general - World Net Daily, Drew Zahn
A President Can Fire Any Federal Attorney He or She Wants! Bill Clinton Fired All 93 When He Took Over - Rush Limbaugh
One must understand that the federal prosecutors serve at the pleasure of the President of the United States, and it is legal for him to fire the prosecutors for any reason. In 2006, President Bush exercised that executive privilege.
Funny how, when Bill Clinton fired all of the federal prosecutors, except one, during his presidency, there was no concern, or even a peep from the Democrats, regarding Clinton's actions.
Obama's firing of Inspector Generals, which do not serve at the pleasure of the President, and were fired against the law (independent federal inspectors general are supposed to be granted special protection from political interference as per the Inspector General Reform Act of 2008, co-sponsored by Obama), has also garnered little concern, and a probe was launched only after the emerging outcry by critics.
Interesting how the Democrats are on a witch hunt regarding the previous administration, yet ignore the filth in their own house.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
by Douglas V. Gibbs
Rove Is Interviewed in Judiciary Panel Inquiry - The New York Times
Probe launched in suspicious firing of inspector general - World Net Daily, Drew Zahn
A President Can Fire Any Federal Attorney He or She Wants! Bill Clinton Fired All 93 When He Took Over - Rush Limbaugh
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
7-8-9 and Life Is Good
Times are tough. I work many hours, and have health issues that make working a difficult task. However, I do what I need to do to take care of my family.
Despite the difficulties, however, I have been blessed in many ways, as well.
Today's date, July 7, 2009, is one of those unique dates in life where the numbers line up. In other words, today is 7-8-9.
Like the unique date, we have unique blessings that line up as well.
As an American I feel uniquely fortunate to have beaten all odds by being born in America in the first place. Liberty is mine from birth. I live in the most prosperous, and exceptional nation, ever to exist. I live in a nation where even the poorest of Americans are richer than over 90 percent of the rest of the world.
When I consider the odds of having that kind of fortune, it is staggering.
I have been blessed with a marriage that has spanned two and a half decades, two children who were born healthy, and have grown to become fine adults, two beautiful grandchildren, a refrigerator full of food, a home in a pleasant neighborhood, a job that puts food on the table, and extended family that cares for me. I enjoy doing my favorite thing in the world (writing) daily, have nice vehicles to transport me to wherever I wish to go, and entertainment on the Internet, radio, and television available to me at the push of a button. Despite a partial disability I move around on my own accord, and have a wife that tends to my pain when it appears to be bringing me down. Life is good.
Right about now the Liberal Left is surely getting very upset. How dare I say these things when there are so many in the world, and in this country, that are without such blessings.
Guilt is what drives the liberal mind.
The nice thing about America (or at least for the time being) is that those who live in this nation that don't have each and every blessing in their life, have the opportunity to pursue happiness, and make it happen for themselves as well. It is not up to government to provide these blessings, either. That is an individual personal responsibility - and those who wish to, have the freedom in this nation to pursue happiness to their heart's content.
Remember, such a freedom being at your fingertips is not a guarantee of success - but remember the old saying, "If at first you don't succeed, try, try again."
What a blessing it is that we live in a country where that kind of opportunity exists in the first place - God's hand remains over America.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Despite the difficulties, however, I have been blessed in many ways, as well.
Today's date, July 7, 2009, is one of those unique dates in life where the numbers line up. In other words, today is 7-8-9.
Like the unique date, we have unique blessings that line up as well.
As an American I feel uniquely fortunate to have beaten all odds by being born in America in the first place. Liberty is mine from birth. I live in the most prosperous, and exceptional nation, ever to exist. I live in a nation where even the poorest of Americans are richer than over 90 percent of the rest of the world.
When I consider the odds of having that kind of fortune, it is staggering.
I have been blessed with a marriage that has spanned two and a half decades, two children who were born healthy, and have grown to become fine adults, two beautiful grandchildren, a refrigerator full of food, a home in a pleasant neighborhood, a job that puts food on the table, and extended family that cares for me. I enjoy doing my favorite thing in the world (writing) daily, have nice vehicles to transport me to wherever I wish to go, and entertainment on the Internet, radio, and television available to me at the push of a button. Despite a partial disability I move around on my own accord, and have a wife that tends to my pain when it appears to be bringing me down. Life is good.
Right about now the Liberal Left is surely getting very upset. How dare I say these things when there are so many in the world, and in this country, that are without such blessings.
Guilt is what drives the liberal mind.
The nice thing about America (or at least for the time being) is that those who live in this nation that don't have each and every blessing in their life, have the opportunity to pursue happiness, and make it happen for themselves as well. It is not up to government to provide these blessings, either. That is an individual personal responsibility - and those who wish to, have the freedom in this nation to pursue happiness to their heart's content.
Remember, such a freedom being at your fingertips is not a guarantee of success - but remember the old saying, "If at first you don't succeed, try, try again."
What a blessing it is that we live in a country where that kind of opportunity exists in the first place - God's hand remains over America.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Hoyer: bills garner very few votes if lawmakers actually read bill before voting
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Maryland) said, "If every member pledged to not vote for it if they hadn’t read it in its entirety, I think we would have very few votes."
I don't know if he means that they are too lazy, so few would read the lengthy bills, whatever the bill may be, or that if they read it and the true nature of the bill would be exposed and as a result few would vote for the bill. But, Hoyer definitely let us in on a tidbit of truth: The members of Congress do not, and will not, read in their entirety anything they are voting for.
This means that the members of Congress are either voting party only, regardless of what the bill says, or they are relying entirely on the leadership to explain to them what these bills say, rather than investigating themselves. Perhaps both scenarios are true.
How can a representative of the people govern appropriately without knowing in full what they are voting for?
"But, Doug, the bills are so long, nobody could possibly go through them. . . "
Then the language is too complicated, and not concise enough. The founding fathers started a nation with the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution, and combined these documents don't even remotely approach a hundred pages, much less a thousand or two.
Besides, there is no excuse for this. The politicians criticized credit card companies and mortgage lenders for making lending contracts too long and complicated, yet they can't even follow their own advice. And what kind of imbecile agrees to something without reading all of the fine print? These bills, from the Climate Bill to the Health Care Bill, are filled with pork that has nothing to do with the bills, and provisions that hammer the American people in the case of taxation and loss of liberty.
Have I read the entire bills?
Of course not, they won't allow the public access to the bills - they are afraid we might actually read what they aren't willing to, and then may discover what the freedom killing government officials and are really up to - and it can't be good.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Democratic Leader Laughs at Idea That House Members Would Actually Read Health-Care Bill Before Voting On It - CNS News, Monica Gabriel and Marie Magleby
I don't know if he means that they are too lazy, so few would read the lengthy bills, whatever the bill may be, or that if they read it and the true nature of the bill would be exposed and as a result few would vote for the bill. But, Hoyer definitely let us in on a tidbit of truth: The members of Congress do not, and will not, read in their entirety anything they are voting for.
This means that the members of Congress are either voting party only, regardless of what the bill says, or they are relying entirely on the leadership to explain to them what these bills say, rather than investigating themselves. Perhaps both scenarios are true.
How can a representative of the people govern appropriately without knowing in full what they are voting for?
"But, Doug, the bills are so long, nobody could possibly go through them. . . "
Then the language is too complicated, and not concise enough. The founding fathers started a nation with the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution, and combined these documents don't even remotely approach a hundred pages, much less a thousand or two.
Besides, there is no excuse for this. The politicians criticized credit card companies and mortgage lenders for making lending contracts too long and complicated, yet they can't even follow their own advice. And what kind of imbecile agrees to something without reading all of the fine print? These bills, from the Climate Bill to the Health Care Bill, are filled with pork that has nothing to do with the bills, and provisions that hammer the American people in the case of taxation and loss of liberty.
Have I read the entire bills?
Of course not, they won't allow the public access to the bills - they are afraid we might actually read what they aren't willing to, and then may discover what the freedom killing government officials and are really up to - and it can't be good.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Democratic Leader Laughs at Idea That House Members Would Actually Read Health-Care Bill Before Voting On It - CNS News, Monica Gabriel and Marie Magleby
Thanking the Troops with Baseball
Thanking the troops in even the smallest ways is important, and I am especially happy when a thank you comes unexpectedly.
Tonight, at the beginning of the televised baseball game between the Angels of Anaheim and the Texas Rangers it was announced that tonight's game would be broadcast on the Armed Forces Network, and that members of the U.S. Military would be watching the game from 177 bases and ships around the world.
Rex Hudler, the Angels' sportscaster who is known for being animated, and always holding a baseball in his hand, had this to say in response to the announcement:
"Those are the real gamers. We may be playing for first place, but you are playing for keeps."
Hats off to you, Rex. I am sure a nod of appreciation waved around the world as you uttered those words.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
by Douglas V. Gibbs
Understanding Conservatism
Conservatism seems to be a term that the Left is trying to demonize.
No surprise. That is what they do. They attack with no mercy anything that makes them nervous about losing their power.
Democrats hate Conservatives because they fear Conservatives.
The party that has based its platform on Conservatism in the past has been the Republican Party. Problem is, the GOP has been infiltrated by the Left, and many of the politicians that call themselves Republicans are more liberal than the majority of Democrats.
As a result of the Leftists taking residency in the party, the Republicans have moved to the left in many of their policies. Moderates (the name used, because Liberal Republican doesn't sound very appealing) have taken control of the GOP, and the platform has become a middle of the road, fence straddling, light-weight version of the Democrat Party.
In short, the Republican Party needs to reestablish its conservative roots, and support for the U.S. Constitution.
At the foundation conservatism is the understanding that it is individuals that make this nation great, and that personal responsibility is an important part of being an American. Personal responsibility means not finding the easy way out, but doing what is right.
With that said, the GOP needs to remind us that they recognize that murder is unacceptable, even when it is labeled as a "choice." Tradition and standards are an important part of the foundation of this nation, and by not even being willing to abide by the law of the land, such as when it comes to illegal aliens, we are making ourselves a nation at risk.
The federal government is supposed to be limited in its powers, and the states need to be allowed to make their own decisions on state issues - without federal encroachment. Limited spending and lower taxes stimulate economies, not stimulus packages that redistribute the wealth, and put this nation into a greater national deficit. Unemployment rates drop when businesses are profitable, grow, and need more employees to keep up with their growth. Profit is generated by unrestrained capitalism. The consumers will regulate the market by not buying from unscrupulous sellers. Companies should produce products the public desires, not products the federal government demands they produce.
Our military should be untouched by political correctness, or the politicization of foreign policy. If American interests are at risk, the military should be enabled to go in, do the job, and leave - without ridiculous rules of engagement that give the enemy an edge over our men and women, nor rules that place our troops in Levinworth for doing their job. Captured combatants should be treated as such - combatants who had the desire to kill Americans. The U.S. Constitution does not apply to non-citizens, therefore Miranda Rights, the right to a lawyer, and the right to a trial do not exist for foreign combatants - especially those that do not wear a uniform, or represent a specific nation. These prisoners should remain out of the U.S. population, and that includes the prison population. Though they should be treated humanely, we should not bend over backwards to accomodate their every whim. If techniques like water boarding are required to retrieve information that will save American lives, the techniques should be used without restraint. Torture, in my opinion, is what Islamism has been doing to our men and women - pouring water into someone's nose under supervision so that their lives are never actually in danger is hardly torture.
Health Insurance is not a right. Health care has never been (or should not be) denied to people, except in rare instances such as repeat illegal alien abusers of the system, based on the ability to pay. Using health insurance for every sniffle, however, is irresponsible, and is part of the reason that insurance is so out of whack. The doctor's fear of being sued is the main reason our healthcare system is under stress. If politicians want to fix the healthcare system, the way to do it is not by nationalizing the industry. The way to attack the problem is through Tort Reform - which will disable the ability to sue for frivolous reasons.
Manmade Global Warming is a myth, and an excuse for the government to hit us with the largest tax increase in history in the guise of the Climate Bill. Cap and Trade with further undermine this struggling economy, and allow the federal government more control over our lives. Environmental standards should be based on common sense, not extreme liberal whims of the Environmental crazies out there that have decided humanity is a parasite on the planet Earth.
Education is a local issue, and the Department of Education should be eliminated. Bush's "No Child Left Behind" Act was a mistake, and the billions of dollars pumped into education, with only six percent of those funds going to the basics of education, is appalling. Private schools educate our children much better, on much smaller budgets. How about the state governments take some lessons from the private schools?
Government has no business being involved in marriage. The fact that government has a hand in heterosexual marriage in the first place is wrong - but then for government to dictate to Americans the definition of marriage is an overstepping of governmental authority. Marriage belongs to churches and individuals, not the government.
Owning a gun is a right, and the federal government, as per the 2nd Amendment, has no authority to place any restrictions on owning a gun or any kind. This is not to say the state can't. States have the local authority to require registration, or whatever else they deem fit regarding this issue.
The commerce clause is one of the most wrongly used clauses in the Constitution, and is not supposed to cover anything "crossing" state lines. The commerce clause was specifically written to settle disputes over interstate commerce, not as an option for the federal government to use to regulate state's rights.
And finally, conservatives understand that state's rights is what the issue of state sovereignty is all about. States are autonomous entities that are not to be controlled by the federal government. The federal government was designed to protect the union, hold the union together, and settle any squabbles between the states - beyond that, the federal government has a scant amount of responsibilities (Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution specifically outlines the duties of the federal government).
If that is far right extremism, then you need to reaquaint yourself with the political spectrum. Far right extremism is anarchy. Far left is totalitarianism (complete control of the populace by an overpowering government entity). Conservatism is about limiting the federal government, not eliminating it. Liberalism, however, has much more in common with totalitarianism than I care to admit.
No wonder the Communist Party of America likes the current Democratic Party Platform so much. Maybe the two parties will merge in the near future.
Seems reasonable.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
No surprise. That is what they do. They attack with no mercy anything that makes them nervous about losing their power.
Democrats hate Conservatives because they fear Conservatives.
The party that has based its platform on Conservatism in the past has been the Republican Party. Problem is, the GOP has been infiltrated by the Left, and many of the politicians that call themselves Republicans are more liberal than the majority of Democrats.
As a result of the Leftists taking residency in the party, the Republicans have moved to the left in many of their policies. Moderates (the name used, because Liberal Republican doesn't sound very appealing) have taken control of the GOP, and the platform has become a middle of the road, fence straddling, light-weight version of the Democrat Party.
In short, the Republican Party needs to reestablish its conservative roots, and support for the U.S. Constitution.
At the foundation conservatism is the understanding that it is individuals that make this nation great, and that personal responsibility is an important part of being an American. Personal responsibility means not finding the easy way out, but doing what is right.
With that said, the GOP needs to remind us that they recognize that murder is unacceptable, even when it is labeled as a "choice." Tradition and standards are an important part of the foundation of this nation, and by not even being willing to abide by the law of the land, such as when it comes to illegal aliens, we are making ourselves a nation at risk.
The federal government is supposed to be limited in its powers, and the states need to be allowed to make their own decisions on state issues - without federal encroachment. Limited spending and lower taxes stimulate economies, not stimulus packages that redistribute the wealth, and put this nation into a greater national deficit. Unemployment rates drop when businesses are profitable, grow, and need more employees to keep up with their growth. Profit is generated by unrestrained capitalism. The consumers will regulate the market by not buying from unscrupulous sellers. Companies should produce products the public desires, not products the federal government demands they produce.
Our military should be untouched by political correctness, or the politicization of foreign policy. If American interests are at risk, the military should be enabled to go in, do the job, and leave - without ridiculous rules of engagement that give the enemy an edge over our men and women, nor rules that place our troops in Levinworth for doing their job. Captured combatants should be treated as such - combatants who had the desire to kill Americans. The U.S. Constitution does not apply to non-citizens, therefore Miranda Rights, the right to a lawyer, and the right to a trial do not exist for foreign combatants - especially those that do not wear a uniform, or represent a specific nation. These prisoners should remain out of the U.S. population, and that includes the prison population. Though they should be treated humanely, we should not bend over backwards to accomodate their every whim. If techniques like water boarding are required to retrieve information that will save American lives, the techniques should be used without restraint. Torture, in my opinion, is what Islamism has been doing to our men and women - pouring water into someone's nose under supervision so that their lives are never actually in danger is hardly torture.
Health Insurance is not a right. Health care has never been (or should not be) denied to people, except in rare instances such as repeat illegal alien abusers of the system, based on the ability to pay. Using health insurance for every sniffle, however, is irresponsible, and is part of the reason that insurance is so out of whack. The doctor's fear of being sued is the main reason our healthcare system is under stress. If politicians want to fix the healthcare system, the way to do it is not by nationalizing the industry. The way to attack the problem is through Tort Reform - which will disable the ability to sue for frivolous reasons.
Manmade Global Warming is a myth, and an excuse for the government to hit us with the largest tax increase in history in the guise of the Climate Bill. Cap and Trade with further undermine this struggling economy, and allow the federal government more control over our lives. Environmental standards should be based on common sense, not extreme liberal whims of the Environmental crazies out there that have decided humanity is a parasite on the planet Earth.
Education is a local issue, and the Department of Education should be eliminated. Bush's "No Child Left Behind" Act was a mistake, and the billions of dollars pumped into education, with only six percent of those funds going to the basics of education, is appalling. Private schools educate our children much better, on much smaller budgets. How about the state governments take some lessons from the private schools?
Government has no business being involved in marriage. The fact that government has a hand in heterosexual marriage in the first place is wrong - but then for government to dictate to Americans the definition of marriage is an overstepping of governmental authority. Marriage belongs to churches and individuals, not the government.
Owning a gun is a right, and the federal government, as per the 2nd Amendment, has no authority to place any restrictions on owning a gun or any kind. This is not to say the state can't. States have the local authority to require registration, or whatever else they deem fit regarding this issue.
The commerce clause is one of the most wrongly used clauses in the Constitution, and is not supposed to cover anything "crossing" state lines. The commerce clause was specifically written to settle disputes over interstate commerce, not as an option for the federal government to use to regulate state's rights.
And finally, conservatives understand that state's rights is what the issue of state sovereignty is all about. States are autonomous entities that are not to be controlled by the federal government. The federal government was designed to protect the union, hold the union together, and settle any squabbles between the states - beyond that, the federal government has a scant amount of responsibilities (Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution specifically outlines the duties of the federal government).
If that is far right extremism, then you need to reaquaint yourself with the political spectrum. Far right extremism is anarchy. Far left is totalitarianism (complete control of the populace by an overpowering government entity). Conservatism is about limiting the federal government, not eliminating it. Liberalism, however, has much more in common with totalitarianism than I care to admit.
No wonder the Communist Party of America likes the current Democratic Party Platform so much. Maybe the two parties will merge in the near future.
Seems reasonable.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Conservatism and the Republican Party
The loss of the GOP in the 2008 Presidential Election, while simultaneously losing many seats, and control, in Congress as well, has the political minds of America trying to determine why such a thing would happen. Since November the pundits have been arguing over what will save the Republican Party from a death similar to that of the Whig Party's a hundred and fifty years ago. Amazingly, the great political scholars did not try to conjure up a story of a dying Democratic Party when the party of the jackass (err, uh, I mean, donkey) were losing, but for some reason this loss suffered by the Republicans have a lot of folks speculating that a death awaits the GOP on the horizon.
To the dismay of those that have been proclaiming that the reason for the Democratic victory in November was because the country is moving left, it turns out that not only is the nation mostly center-right, but that more people consider themselves as more conservative than before as opposed to people who say they are more liberal than they were before.
So much for the "nation moving left" theory.
Jay Bookman, a writer for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, has come up with an even more laughable theory than the one about the U.S. moving to the left. Jay says the GOP has moved so far to the right, it is even too conservative for the people who consider themselves conservative.
Funny thing is, the Conservatives are proclaiming the exact opposite. The RNC showed preference to the moderate candidates in the presidential race, making the candidates that had more conservative opinions "book-ends" during the debates. The GOP leadership is obviously moderate, as well. In fact, the Republican Party has been moving in a leftward direction ever since the end of Ronald Reagan's second term.
If a moderate Republican Party is what it takes to win, then why did a moderate candidate like McCain lose? In fact, in many polls, Republican voters stated they voted for McCain more because Sarah Palin was his running mate, not because of McCain's policies - and guess what? Palin was the more conservative of the two.
The fact is, regardless of what the less understanding "Jay Bookmans" of the world may say, the Republican Party lost not because the GOP has driven itself so far to the extreme right that it alienated non-extreme conservatives, but because the GOP has been moving to the left, and more closely resembles the Democrats of half a century ago, than it does a party the conservatives of America would like to vote for. The Republican Party's platform has become something washed down and unable to stand for anything in particular. If the GOP had a largely conservative platform, the enthusiasm of being a Republican would return to conservatives that are currently feeling like a people without a party.
It seems that the Republicans have forgotten that the conservative platform favors reducing the size and role of the government, supports less government control over the economic rights of individuals and corporations, and believes that too much spending, and too much taxation is harmful to an economy.
If that is too conservative as a whole to some folks, then perhaps they belong in the Democratic Party.
Besides, saying that the GOP has moved too far to the right is ridiculous. That would be anarchy.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
by Douglas V. Gibbs
Conservatives Are Single-Largest Ideological Group - Gallup
Special Report: Ideologically, Where Is the U.S. Moving? - Gallup
GOP too conservative for a conservative country - Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Jay Bookman
Obama's Dropping Approval Rating
In Ohio President Barack Obama's approval rating has dipped below 50%. Ohio is historically a trendsetter in presidential elections, and is often a preview of national approval ratings. With that in mind, it is not unreasonable to assume the entire national approval rating for Obama is not far behind the Ohio number in its plummet to skid into the gutter.
Not one to put too much importance on polls because I am firmly convinced that they tend to be manipulated, and usually in favor of the Left, I find it fascinating that when George W. Bush was President every single little dip in the polls were captured on the news networks as another valuable piece of evidence of how horrible of a President Bush was. Yet, any movement in the polls regarding Obama are ignored (unless they go up, of course), or are downplayed as a temporary dip on the rollercoaster ride of opinion polls. Sometimes, just for good measure, the Liberal Left will discount the poll daring to show a loss in adoration for Obama completely, accusing the writer of such a blasphemous article of "cherry-picking" the opinion polls.
I believe there is more at work here than meets the eye. The Democrat's economic decisions are not sitting well with most Americans, even those that voted for "The One." Poor economic news was not supposed to be the news of the day at this point of the Obama Presidency. He had proclaimed that by the summer things would be improving, but now we are looking at double-digit unemployment, and a spending spree by the Obama Adminsitration that makes Bush's hated spending habits look like a drop in the bucket.
The Democrats ran on "anything is better than Bush," and the public is realizing that the mantra was not necessarily true. There are worse things in the world, and they are far left, liberal crazies. Now that Washington D.C. is teeming with the Leftists, unless the economy miraculously rebounds, 2010 will be a gold rush for the Republicans.
As Ohio goes, so goes the nation - when it comes to opinions on the White House.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Ohio: Obama Under 50% Approval - Real Clear Politics, Tom Bevan
Tuesday, July 07, 2009
Military Flyover Refused Because of Christianity
For 42 years it has been a tradition during the "Treasure Valley God and Country Family Festival" in Idaho to be honored with a military flyover. This year, however, the opportunity to give tribute to the military in the form of a flyover has been denied. The FAA permit was approved, but when the request got to the Pentagon, the Pentagon denied the application because the event was "Christian in nature." For the 42 years prior, the request has never been denied.
While the organization putting on the "God and Country Family Festival" is definitely a Christian organization, the flyover is designed to specifically salute our military, and give the festival participants an opportunity to enjoy the spectacle of the flyover, while reflecting on their own personal feelings of patriotism.
The flyover is not "establishing" Christianity, or any other religion, as the state religion. Besides, the First Amendment guarantees all Americans freedom of religion, and specifically that Congress shall make no law "prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Yet, somehow political correctness has gotten into its crazy little mind that the part that says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" somehow means that the public display of religion, especially with the involvement with any governmental entity, somehow must be prohibited because that is akin to Congress establishing a religion.
No law is being made by Congress establishing a religion with an approval by the Pentagon to allow a flyover, of which is a long-time tradition, to take place over a festival in the state of Idaho.
I have never heard anything so absurd in my life. The Separation of Church and State argument is what is being used, obviously. That argument, as it is being applied by those seeking freedom "from" religion, is unconstitutional, and is a symptom of what is really going on.
The festival is open to anyone who wishes to participate. The festival is not forcing anyone to be Christian. And the flyover is not being accompanied with a Congressional attachment that all who see it must drop to their knees and become Christian.
Those that are not believers in Christianity are using back door arguments to minimize Christianity, and eventually remove it from a country whose founding was based on Christian principles. No matter how much some members of the U.S. Government deny it, this is a Christian nation - because Christianity shaped and molded this nation, and was the inspiration for the blessings of liberty America holds so dear.
Under the onslaught of dissatisfaction over the Pentagon's decision to deny the "Treasure Valley God and Country Family Festival" the opportunity of the flyover, it will be no surprise if the U.S. Government changes its position from denying the request because the event is "Christian in nature," to something more along the lines of "the current budget cannot support this request."
Pork spending by Congress, Obama's outings to hamburger joints, White House cocktail parties, and Michelle Obama's shopping events in Europe, however, will receive funding every time.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
God and Country organizers: Pentagon denied flyover - Idaho Press Tribune, July 2, 2009, Bryan Dooley
Pentagon wants to get "God" out of our "Country" - Treasure Valley God and Country Festival, Nampa, Idaho
Big Government Wrecking America
Barack Obama is Transforming America by destroying it. . ..jpg)
And from the ashes he hopes will rise an America controlled by Liberalism - Is it any surprise that the Communist Party of America agrees with all of Obama's policies?
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
.jpg)
And from the ashes he hopes will rise an America controlled by Liberalism - Is it any surprise that the Communist Party of America agrees with all of Obama's policies?
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
A Government-run Life
The Democrats have this strange opinion that the government is somehow more efficient than the private sector. The Leftist believes that the cost of doing business through the government is lower than the cost of doing business in the private sector. And, since they are so darn efficient, it is up to those wise government bureaucrats to teach, regulate, and control the private sector, if necessary.
This is false, and so morally wrong.
Every government-run program ends up costing more than originally intended, and fails in the "efficiency" originally intended. On top of that, the government has no "profit" incentive, meaning that they (in the end) really don't care how well of a job they do. The citizen that is dependent upon the government is at the mercy of the government-run program, and the government's goal becomes running it as cheaply as they can without care in the finer points that make the consumer happy - and while they try to run it cheaply, as proven time and time again (be it the massive failures of Medicare, Social Security, The Department of Education, etc.) the program becomes bogged down by waste, and poor practices, and eventually goes broke - becoming a blackhole of out of control spending because the politicians don't want to admit their bright idea was just another way to suck tax money out of the people.
What one needs to realize, is that in the end, the politicians really don't care if the program (any program) is sufficient, efficient, acceptable, or able to compete with the private sector. The ultimate goal of the government is control. The end result is a government-run life, without that pesky private sector, or capitalism, or individual liberty, getting in the way. This is how Marxists work, and this is the direction the Obama Administration is taking us.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
This is false, and so morally wrong.
Every government-run program ends up costing more than originally intended, and fails in the "efficiency" originally intended. On top of that, the government has no "profit" incentive, meaning that they (in the end) really don't care how well of a job they do. The citizen that is dependent upon the government is at the mercy of the government-run program, and the government's goal becomes running it as cheaply as they can without care in the finer points that make the consumer happy - and while they try to run it cheaply, as proven time and time again (be it the massive failures of Medicare, Social Security, The Department of Education, etc.) the program becomes bogged down by waste, and poor practices, and eventually goes broke - becoming a blackhole of out of control spending because the politicians don't want to admit their bright idea was just another way to suck tax money out of the people.
What one needs to realize, is that in the end, the politicians really don't care if the program (any program) is sufficient, efficient, acceptable, or able to compete with the private sector. The ultimate goal of the government is control. The end result is a government-run life, without that pesky private sector, or capitalism, or individual liberty, getting in the way. This is how Marxists work, and this is the direction the Obama Administration is taking us.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Sacramento Budget Gridlock Solutions
The Citizens for Responsible Budgets and Accountability sent me a mailer urging me to contact California Assemblymember Brian Nestande, and urging me to inform him of what the right budget decision is. The mailer proclaims in order to save California, the only choice is an either/or. Either, make oil companies pay their fair share - or - Cut another billion dollars from schools.
Typical liberal tactic. Either stick it to those greedy business owners, or stick it to our poor kids. Makes it an easy decision, doesn't it?
Problem is, Nestande is a Republican - not that it matters much, anymore. The politicians have all gone off the deep end, and have adopted liberal tactics that is destroying California's economy, and will cause the American economy to collapse.
Like most of the newer "moderate" Republicans, rather than use their common sense, Brian Nestande may have fallen for the typical political tripe being regurgitated by Sacramento, and the Democrats for years. The politicians are chasing mirages, rather than getting to the root of the problem. If Nestande joins these cockroaches of Sacramento in their quest to worsen an already broke California governmental budget, he'll be jumping on the bandwagon of a blame game against "profit," rather than recognizing the oily drudge of political rhetoric.
Business exists for profit. It is profit that drives businesses. That is the whole point of being in business. Without profit, business does not grow. Without profit, business does not offer employment, move goods and services, and will eventually go out of business (giving government another opportunity to extend a handout, and then dictate to the business what they can and can't do because the industry foolishly accepted the "with strings attached" government money). Without profit, the economy is doomed.
Yet, California hits businesses with taxes and fees (another word for taxes) while applying regulations that kills the ability to do business. As a result, businesses make less profit, which cause them to downsize, cease to do business, or leave the state - all of which takes revenue away from the State of California.
To get an economy moving, the key lies in business. Capitalism. The ability to make a buck. Business thrives when government creates a favorable environment for businesses. Increased taxes and regulations are driving businesses out of California. Increased spending on programs that are designed to regulate and control business compounds the problem.
In short, to return the economy to a prosperous, robust engine, government must encourage capitalism.
California is not suffering from a revenue problem. The population has been increasing in California rapidly, and the revenue has been going up each year. However, the spending by Sacramento has been rising faster than the revenue.
When it comes to education, the drop-out rate, and test scores, are a disaster. California spends over a hundred billion dollars on education, and only six percent of these programs have as their primary function the teaching of math, reading, or science. Private schools educate children on a much smaller budget, but garner better results. This is because it is not about how much money is spent, but "how" the money is spent.
The organization that sent me the mailer is suggesting taxing business over cutting back on wastful spending (specifically in education). This is what California has been doing all along. When will the politicians in Sacramento learn from their mistakes?
And if some non-profit organization is suggesting this madness, you can only imagine the insanity the Democrats are suggesting.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Typical liberal tactic. Either stick it to those greedy business owners, or stick it to our poor kids. Makes it an easy decision, doesn't it?
Problem is, Nestande is a Republican - not that it matters much, anymore. The politicians have all gone off the deep end, and have adopted liberal tactics that is destroying California's economy, and will cause the American economy to collapse.
Like most of the newer "moderate" Republicans, rather than use their common sense, Brian Nestande may have fallen for the typical political tripe being regurgitated by Sacramento, and the Democrats for years. The politicians are chasing mirages, rather than getting to the root of the problem. If Nestande joins these cockroaches of Sacramento in their quest to worsen an already broke California governmental budget, he'll be jumping on the bandwagon of a blame game against "profit," rather than recognizing the oily drudge of political rhetoric.
Business exists for profit. It is profit that drives businesses. That is the whole point of being in business. Without profit, business does not grow. Without profit, business does not offer employment, move goods and services, and will eventually go out of business (giving government another opportunity to extend a handout, and then dictate to the business what they can and can't do because the industry foolishly accepted the "with strings attached" government money). Without profit, the economy is doomed.
Yet, California hits businesses with taxes and fees (another word for taxes) while applying regulations that kills the ability to do business. As a result, businesses make less profit, which cause them to downsize, cease to do business, or leave the state - all of which takes revenue away from the State of California.
To get an economy moving, the key lies in business. Capitalism. The ability to make a buck. Business thrives when government creates a favorable environment for businesses. Increased taxes and regulations are driving businesses out of California. Increased spending on programs that are designed to regulate and control business compounds the problem.
In short, to return the economy to a prosperous, robust engine, government must encourage capitalism.
California is not suffering from a revenue problem. The population has been increasing in California rapidly, and the revenue has been going up each year. However, the spending by Sacramento has been rising faster than the revenue.
When it comes to education, the drop-out rate, and test scores, are a disaster. California spends over a hundred billion dollars on education, and only six percent of these programs have as their primary function the teaching of math, reading, or science. Private schools educate children on a much smaller budget, but garner better results. This is because it is not about how much money is spent, but "how" the money is spent.
The organization that sent me the mailer is suggesting taxing business over cutting back on wastful spending (specifically in education). This is what California has been doing all along. When will the politicians in Sacramento learn from their mistakes?
And if some non-profit organization is suggesting this madness, you can only imagine the insanity the Democrats are suggesting.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
American Priorities - Michael Jackson Death Takes The Stage
A friend of mine, an American that resides in Thailand, sent me an Email that gets you thinking.
Is this what our country is coming to???
Ed McMahon died this week. He was a great entertainer, but prior to his stage accomplishments he was a distinguished Marine Corps fighter pilot in WWII, earning six Air Medals and attaining the rank of Colonel. He was discharged in 1946 and was later promoted to the rank of Brigadier General in the California Air National Guard.
Farrah Fawcett died this week after a long career in Hollywood as an actress. After she was diagnosed with cancer, she became an activist for cancer treatment and devoted her last remaining years encouraging people to seek treatment. She documented her plight on film and used it to encourage others to stay positive and upbeat despite their diagnosis and suffering.
Michael Jackson died this week. He was perhaps one of the greatest singers of modern time. He will also be remembered for his eccentric lifestyle that included sleeping with a chimpanzee, living in a carnival-like atmosphere at Neverland, his fascination with Peter Pan, and his numerous masks and costumes. He also admitted to finding pleasure sleeping with young boys and paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families of these boys despite being acquitted by a court on one allegation of sexual molestation.
Question: Which of the above persons did the U.S. House of Representatives, under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi, declare a moment of silence for this week? (Hint - It wasn't the first two.)
Question: Which of the above person's family received a personal note of condolence from President Barrack Obama? (Hint - It wasn't the first two.)
SUMMARY: The answers to these questions reveal a lot about the current American culture..... think about it.
Additional Note: I turned on my television this morning, and everyone of the main networks and news channels are covering Michael Jackson's funeral. Though I understand that he was a pop icon, and it is a sad thing that a fellow human being died, a couple weeks of solid coverage is just too much.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Is this what our country is coming to???
Ed McMahon died this week. He was a great entertainer, but prior to his stage accomplishments he was a distinguished Marine Corps fighter pilot in WWII, earning six Air Medals and attaining the rank of Colonel. He was discharged in 1946 and was later promoted to the rank of Brigadier General in the California Air National Guard.
Farrah Fawcett died this week after a long career in Hollywood as an actress. After she was diagnosed with cancer, she became an activist for cancer treatment and devoted her last remaining years encouraging people to seek treatment. She documented her plight on film and used it to encourage others to stay positive and upbeat despite their diagnosis and suffering.
Michael Jackson died this week. He was perhaps one of the greatest singers of modern time. He will also be remembered for his eccentric lifestyle that included sleeping with a chimpanzee, living in a carnival-like atmosphere at Neverland, his fascination with Peter Pan, and his numerous masks and costumes. He also admitted to finding pleasure sleeping with young boys and paying out millions of dollars in settlements to the families of these boys despite being acquitted by a court on one allegation of sexual molestation.
Question: Which of the above persons did the U.S. House of Representatives, under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi, declare a moment of silence for this week? (Hint - It wasn't the first two.)
Question: Which of the above person's family received a personal note of condolence from President Barrack Obama? (Hint - It wasn't the first two.)
SUMMARY: The answers to these questions reveal a lot about the current American culture..... think about it.
Additional Note: I turned on my television this morning, and everyone of the main networks and news channels are covering Michael Jackson's funeral. Though I understand that he was a pop icon, and it is a sad thing that a fellow human being died, a couple weeks of solid coverage is just too much.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Obama Unable To Charm Russians
Russian leaders are not interested in nuclear disarmament that include them and their allies disarming. Russia is not interested in letting former Soviet republics join NATO. And Russia is not mesmerized by Obama's so-called charisma. Therefore, little was done during Obama's talks with Russian leaders.
Barack Obama wants to press a reset button that will suddenly have Russia and the United States be buddy-buddy. . . reset button? When have we ever been buddies with the Russians? Besides, just because Obama is trying to make America a spitting image of the now defunct Soviet Union, it doesn't mean Putin and Medvedev will suddenly coming running up, throw their arms around him, and call Barry "Comrade."
Barry Hussein Obama and Dimitri Medvedev did come to an agreement on the basic terms of a treaty that is designed to reduce the number of warheads and missiles to the lowest levels since the early years of the cold war. An enemy like Russia is always willing to make little deals if they believe it will give them the opportunity to position themselves, while also enabling the opposition to weaken willingly.
Russia sees this as an opportunity. As America follows the path to collapse, all they must do is wave, smile, agree on just about anything, and watch America crumble.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
U.S.-Russia Nuclear Agreement Is First Step in Broad Effort - The New York Times, CLIFFORD J. LEVY and PETER BAKER
Barack Obama wants to press a reset button that will suddenly have Russia and the United States be buddy-buddy. . . reset button? When have we ever been buddies with the Russians? Besides, just because Obama is trying to make America a spitting image of the now defunct Soviet Union, it doesn't mean Putin and Medvedev will suddenly coming running up, throw their arms around him, and call Barry "Comrade."
Barry Hussein Obama and Dimitri Medvedev did come to an agreement on the basic terms of a treaty that is designed to reduce the number of warheads and missiles to the lowest levels since the early years of the cold war. An enemy like Russia is always willing to make little deals if they believe it will give them the opportunity to position themselves, while also enabling the opposition to weaken willingly.
Russia sees this as an opportunity. As America follows the path to collapse, all they must do is wave, smile, agree on just about anything, and watch America crumble.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
U.S.-Russia Nuclear Agreement Is First Step in Broad Effort - The New York Times, CLIFFORD J. LEVY and PETER BAKER
Today California Assembly Bill 1506 to be heard
Assemblyman Joel Anderson's bill, AB 1506, will be heard. The bill allows the IOUs being issued by the State of California as a result of the State's budget problems may be used as payment or taxes and fees owed to the state.
AB 1506 will not only apply to businesses, but to individuals, cities, counties, hospitals, and other entities receiving an IOU from the State of California.
I am not sure if I like this bill or not, but I do believe that the IOU situation is something that could have been avoided if the state had reined in its spending, and cut taxes which would encourage economic growth.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Critical Vote Tuesday: Send Letters of Support for Anderson’s IOU Bill - FlashReport, Jon Fleischman
AB 1506 will not only apply to businesses, but to individuals, cities, counties, hospitals, and other entities receiving an IOU from the State of California.
I am not sure if I like this bill or not, but I do believe that the IOU situation is something that could have been avoided if the state had reined in its spending, and cut taxes which would encourage economic growth.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Critical Vote Tuesday: Send Letters of Support for Anderson’s IOU Bill - FlashReport, Jon Fleischman
Monday, July 06, 2009
Army to Sikh Officers: Shave Beard, Take off Turbans
Two members of the United States Army are fighting Army policy. The Sikh Religion holds uncut hair as an important article of faith, and the Army asked two officers of the Sikh Faith to shave their beards, cut their hair and remove their turbans.
Captain Kamaljeet Kalsi has said, of this order, "I don’t think it’s fair for anybody to ask me to choose between my religion and my country."
He should have thought about that before joining the Army.
The two Sikhs were recruited as part of the Army's Health Professions Scholarship Program. One is a doctor, the other a dentist. They claim they were assured that wearing the beard and turban would not be a problem. However, now that school is over, and active duty fast approaches, and the religious accomodations are no longer being offered.
When it comes to the U.S. Military, this has nothing to do with religious freedom. I remember when, while I was in the Navy, beards became disallowed. It came down to the fact that with a beard, servicemen were unable to get a proper seal with their Oxygen Breathing Apparatus (OBA) mask, which would, if the seal is proper, save the person's life in the case of a fire, or toxic gas weapon. In short, the religious requests by these two men interfere with the wearing of proper military equipment, which could pose a danger to their lives - which in turn, puts unites as a whole at risk.
The military, if such a concession was made for school, allowing these men to keep their beards, long hair, and turbans, was in the wrong. They should have been upfront, and ensured that these men understood that when it comes to the military, short hair, the wearing of the proper military issue headgear, and clean shaven faces (a mustache that does not extend beyond the edge of the mouth is usually allowed) is the required policy.
Diversity, or not - military history in the family, or not - it must be understood that military requirements are what they are for a reason. . . and in the end, the regulations are what they are for the protection of the servicemember, and for the best opportunity to accomplish a task for the mission.
When in the U.S. Military, military regs come first. For the protection of the servicemember, and the personnel in their unit, the Sikh religious requirements need to either go on the back burner, or these men need to say goodbye to their military careers. Allowing a particular group to "break" the rules, will open up a can of worms that would, in the long run, compromise the effectiveness of military operations.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Army tells Sikh officers to change appearance - Military Times, Tony Lombardo
Captain Kamaljeet Kalsi has said, of this order, "I don’t think it’s fair for anybody to ask me to choose between my religion and my country."
He should have thought about that before joining the Army.
The two Sikhs were recruited as part of the Army's Health Professions Scholarship Program. One is a doctor, the other a dentist. They claim they were assured that wearing the beard and turban would not be a problem. However, now that school is over, and active duty fast approaches, and the religious accomodations are no longer being offered.
When it comes to the U.S. Military, this has nothing to do with religious freedom. I remember when, while I was in the Navy, beards became disallowed. It came down to the fact that with a beard, servicemen were unable to get a proper seal with their Oxygen Breathing Apparatus (OBA) mask, which would, if the seal is proper, save the person's life in the case of a fire, or toxic gas weapon. In short, the religious requests by these two men interfere with the wearing of proper military equipment, which could pose a danger to their lives - which in turn, puts unites as a whole at risk.
The military, if such a concession was made for school, allowing these men to keep their beards, long hair, and turbans, was in the wrong. They should have been upfront, and ensured that these men understood that when it comes to the military, short hair, the wearing of the proper military issue headgear, and clean shaven faces (a mustache that does not extend beyond the edge of the mouth is usually allowed) is the required policy.
Diversity, or not - military history in the family, or not - it must be understood that military requirements are what they are for a reason. . . and in the end, the regulations are what they are for the protection of the servicemember, and for the best opportunity to accomplish a task for the mission.
When in the U.S. Military, military regs come first. For the protection of the servicemember, and the personnel in their unit, the Sikh religious requirements need to either go on the back burner, or these men need to say goodbye to their military careers. Allowing a particular group to "break" the rules, will open up a can of worms that would, in the long run, compromise the effectiveness of military operations.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Army tells Sikh officers to change appearance - Military Times, Tony Lombardo
Muslims Riot in Communist China
The death toll from the ethnic riots in the Muslim region of Xinjiang in China has reached 156. The rioting stems from a call for the region to become an independent homeland for the Muslim Uighurs. Chinese officials are stating that the separatist urgings, and calls for protest, are coming from outside of the country by Internet and telephone.
Groups being accused of organizing the violence are denying the charge, and say it is due to pent-up anger regarding government policies, and the dominance over the Muslims by the Han Chinese.
Rioting Muslim Uighurs trace the unrest back to another confrontation that occurred in southern China in late June where Han Chinese and Uighurs fought at a factory in Shaoguan. Two Muslim Uighurs died in that episode. The outbreak of violence resulted from an accusation by the Han Chinese that Muslims had raped a Han Chinese woman.
The Uighur's claim that up to 100 Muslims were killed in that clash.
The rioters have been primarily identified as Muslim men in their twenties, many unemployed.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Xinjiang riot toll hits 156 as unrest spreads - Yahoo! News, Reuters, Chris Buckley
Groups being accused of organizing the violence are denying the charge, and say it is due to pent-up anger regarding government policies, and the dominance over the Muslims by the Han Chinese.
Rioting Muslim Uighurs trace the unrest back to another confrontation that occurred in southern China in late June where Han Chinese and Uighurs fought at a factory in Shaoguan. Two Muslim Uighurs died in that episode. The outbreak of violence resulted from an accusation by the Han Chinese that Muslims had raped a Han Chinese woman.
The Uighur's claim that up to 100 Muslims were killed in that clash.
The rioters have been primarily identified as Muslim men in their twenties, many unemployed.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Xinjiang riot toll hits 156 as unrest spreads - Yahoo! News, Reuters, Chris Buckley
U.S. Constitution - America's Instruction Manual
On Saturday, during the Founding Truth radio program that I co-host, we read the text of the Declaration of Independence in celebration of Independence Day. I referred to the Declaration of Independence as America's Birth Certificate. In the chat room, a listener quipped, if the Delaration of Independence is America's Birth Certificate, then the U.S. Constitution is America's instruction manual. Problem is, there are people that erroneously believe the Constitution is to be interpreted, rather than applied.
The Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution are written in plain English. You don't need to be a lawyer to understand them. In fact, many of us understand those documents more than any lawyer - because we take the time to read them. They were written this way for a reason; because they were written for the people.
When one reads the two documents, an abundance of things become clear. The founders were men of God. They may, or may not, have been akin to what would be today's fundamental Christian. They may, or may not, have all been closely involved with their respectable churches. They did, however, with no doubt in my mind, believe that what they were accomplishing was inspired. The fingerprints of God are spread throughout these documents.
Freedom is based on the Judeo-Christian belief that God gave us the inalienable right of free will. Right, and wrong, exists, and without standards, we tend to do the wrong thing. But, we have the free will to make right, or wrong, decisions. It is our ability to reason that returns us, normally, to the right path, when our moral, God-given standards are applied.
Knowing that mankind is inherently power hungry, the founding fathers divided power in our government as much as they could. They realized that men with too much power takes away the freedoms of the populace. Power corrupts, and there needed to be safeguards against the lust for power by men.
The U.S. Constitution is the instruction manual they wrote to keep this land free, and to keep that kind of power under control. The federal government is limited by the U.S. Constitution. In Article 1, Section 8, the allowances for the federal government are given. In section 10, what the states cannot do are given. Anything else is automatically a state issue. The U.S. Constitution, and capitalism, has made this nation exceptional, and prosperous, for 233 years. If such a system is so successful, then why would anyone wish to change it?
The People. That is what America is for. Not an overpowering, controlling, socialist government.
Governments in all other countries have come and gone, and have changed more often than Houdini escaped from deadly safes and contraptions. America's government has weathered the times. We are nothing like the governments in Europe for a reason - and it is that difference that has made this nation unique, exceptional, and the greatest nation ever to grace God's green Earth.
The question is, are we as dedicated to liberty as the signers of that Declaration of Independence were? Are we willing to defend our freedom to the end. Are we willing to make that kind of pledge?
The final sentence of the Declaration of Independence reads: And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
Lives, fortunes, and sacred honor.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
The Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution are written in plain English. You don't need to be a lawyer to understand them. In fact, many of us understand those documents more than any lawyer - because we take the time to read them. They were written this way for a reason; because they were written for the people.
When one reads the two documents, an abundance of things become clear. The founders were men of God. They may, or may not, have been akin to what would be today's fundamental Christian. They may, or may not, have all been closely involved with their respectable churches. They did, however, with no doubt in my mind, believe that what they were accomplishing was inspired. The fingerprints of God are spread throughout these documents.
Freedom is based on the Judeo-Christian belief that God gave us the inalienable right of free will. Right, and wrong, exists, and without standards, we tend to do the wrong thing. But, we have the free will to make right, or wrong, decisions. It is our ability to reason that returns us, normally, to the right path, when our moral, God-given standards are applied.
Knowing that mankind is inherently power hungry, the founding fathers divided power in our government as much as they could. They realized that men with too much power takes away the freedoms of the populace. Power corrupts, and there needed to be safeguards against the lust for power by men.
The U.S. Constitution is the instruction manual they wrote to keep this land free, and to keep that kind of power under control. The federal government is limited by the U.S. Constitution. In Article 1, Section 8, the allowances for the federal government are given. In section 10, what the states cannot do are given. Anything else is automatically a state issue. The U.S. Constitution, and capitalism, has made this nation exceptional, and prosperous, for 233 years. If such a system is so successful, then why would anyone wish to change it?
The People. That is what America is for. Not an overpowering, controlling, socialist government.
Governments in all other countries have come and gone, and have changed more often than Houdini escaped from deadly safes and contraptions. America's government has weathered the times. We are nothing like the governments in Europe for a reason - and it is that difference that has made this nation unique, exceptional, and the greatest nation ever to grace God's green Earth.
The question is, are we as dedicated to liberty as the signers of that Declaration of Independence were? Are we willing to defend our freedom to the end. Are we willing to make that kind of pledge?
The final sentence of the Declaration of Independence reads: And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
Lives, fortunes, and sacred honor.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Independence Day Tea Parties Agree With Helen Thomas
A couple thousand Tea Party rallies in all fifty states once again sent the message to government that the American People are fed up with the out of control expansion of government, massive government spending, and the unconstitutional power grab of the private sector and citizen freedoms by the federal government.
The rallies are in the spirit of the 1773 Boston Tea Party, but these Tea Parties of today are not just about taxes. Saturday's replay of the Tax Day Tea Parties are about protecting our freedoms - freedoms that many believe are at risk of being lost under the onslaught of an expanding government being directed by the Obama Administration.
Cap and Trade, for example, will increase energy costs to unreasonably high rates, and require homes to meet new green standards that they just can't afford. The health care bill will result in rationed health care, and bureaucrats determining who receives care, and who doesn't.
In a statement by President Barack Obama at a town hall event, he suggested that one way to shave medical costs is to stop procedures on people who are about to die, or don't stand to gain from the extra care, as reported by the Los Angeles Times.
Even liberal media icon Helen Thomas is amazed at the Obama Administration's attempt at total control. When referring to Obama's attempt to control the media, she stated that not even Richard Nixon tried to control the press the way President Obama is trying to control the press.
One thing is for sure. If these rallies are to be a factor in eliminating the Marxist influence in our government, the rallies need to continue. Consistency is the key. More often, and more intense. Only a strong, united, front will stop the madness, and return this nation to the Constitutional Republic the founders intended it to be.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Tea partiers counterattack 'bad guys on bad mission' - World Net Daily, Joe Kovacs
Helen Thomas: Not Even Nixon Tried to Control the Media Like Obama - CNS News, Penny Starr and Fred Lucas
SENIORS REFUSE TO LIVE ON THEIR KNEES - Andrew C. Wallace
The rallies are in the spirit of the 1773 Boston Tea Party, but these Tea Parties of today are not just about taxes. Saturday's replay of the Tax Day Tea Parties are about protecting our freedoms - freedoms that many believe are at risk of being lost under the onslaught of an expanding government being directed by the Obama Administration.
Cap and Trade, for example, will increase energy costs to unreasonably high rates, and require homes to meet new green standards that they just can't afford. The health care bill will result in rationed health care, and bureaucrats determining who receives care, and who doesn't.
In a statement by President Barack Obama at a town hall event, he suggested that one way to shave medical costs is to stop procedures on people who are about to die, or don't stand to gain from the extra care, as reported by the Los Angeles Times.
Even liberal media icon Helen Thomas is amazed at the Obama Administration's attempt at total control. When referring to Obama's attempt to control the media, she stated that not even Richard Nixon tried to control the press the way President Obama is trying to control the press.
One thing is for sure. If these rallies are to be a factor in eliminating the Marxist influence in our government, the rallies need to continue. Consistency is the key. More often, and more intense. Only a strong, united, front will stop the madness, and return this nation to the Constitutional Republic the founders intended it to be.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Tea partiers counterattack 'bad guys on bad mission' - World Net Daily, Joe Kovacs
Helen Thomas: Not Even Nixon Tried to Control the Media Like Obama - CNS News, Penny Starr and Fred Lucas
SENIORS REFUSE TO LIVE ON THEIR KNEES - Andrew C. Wallace
Sunday, July 05, 2009
Lou Gehrig, The Pride Of The Yankees
July 4 was the 70th Anniversary of Lou Gehrig's Luckiest Man speech. After a cut short seventeen year, Hall of Fame worthy, career in baseball, Lou Gehrig fell ill with a disease that attacks nerve cells in the brain and the spinal cord. Many called it a tough break, but Lou Gehrig, always the class act, responded with a very different response than everyone expected. In his fairwell speech, he proclaimed himself the luckiest man on the face of this Earth.
The following is the text of that great farewell speech:
"Fans, for the past two weeks you have been reading about the bad break I got. Yet today I consider myself the luckiest man on the face of this earth. I have been in ballparks for seventeen years and have never received anything but kindness and encouragement from you fans.
"Look at these grand men. Which of you wouldn't consider it the highlight of his career just to associate with them for even one day? Sure, I'm lucky. Who wouldn't consider it an honor to have known Jacob Ruppert? Also, the builder of baseball's greatest empire, Ed Barrow? To have spent six years with that wonderful little fellow, Miller Huggins? Then to have spent the next nine years with that outstanding leader, that smart student of psychology, the best manager in baseball today, Joe McCarthy? Sure, I'm lucky.
"When the New York Giants, a team you would give your right arm to beat, and vice versa, sends you a gift - that's something. When everybody down to the groundskeepers and those boys in white coats remember you with trophies - that's something. When you have a wonderful mother-in-law who takes sides with you in squabbles with her own daughter - that's something. When you have a father and a mother who work all their lives so you can have an education and build your body - it's a blessing. When you have a wife who has been a tower of strength and shown more courage than you dreamed existed - that's the finest I know.
"So I close in saying that I may have had a tough break, but I have an awful lot to live for."
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
By Douglas V. Gibbs
MLB pays tribute to Gehrig - ESPN,
Debbie Lee: America Chooses Michael Jackson Over The Troops
In the aftermath of the eight hour Troopathon at the Reagan Library in Simi Valley, California, it turns out that the final funds raised for Care Packages for the troops was only about 50% of last year's efforts. This unfortunate result came after Move America Forward had secured a better location, had a much better set, and a heck of a lot more celebrities of high caliber to appear on the webcast. Unfortunately, instead of covering the event, the media was head-long into their ongoing coverage of the death of the King of Pop, Michael Jackson.
It is a pretty serious indictment to say that America chose Michael Jackson over our troops, but one wonders if it had not been for the death of Michael Jackson, and Farrah Fawcett, which dominated the "breaking news" section of the media, whether or not the amount of money contributed to support the troops would have been higher.
How is it that a strange individual, who no doubt had a lot of talent as a performer, could garner more attention in his death than those alive and fighting, and are willing to die for our freedoms on the battlefield?
I am indeed saddened that an individual, namely Michael Jackson, died. Any death is a sad event. But I don't believe his death deserves a week-long marathon of coverage by the media, and I don't think he deserves more appreciation than our troops who have pledged to protect this nation, and are willing to die for liberty, and remember, they made this pledge voluntarily, out of love for liberty, and this nation.
Debbie Lee is our guest tonight on Political Pistachio Radio to talk about the Troopathon, and her feelings about America's obsession with a dead entertainer that was an accused pedophile, and drug user, and a person that lived in a Neverland of unending insanity.
Join us Live at 7:00 pm Pacific Time, or catch the archive later, HERE.
Thank You, Aaron - A Soldier's Sacrifice on Independence Day
In the face of danger from a foreign foe, our servicemen and women put their lives on the line every day. Regardless of one's opinion of whether or not the military should, or should not, be in a particular region, these brave men and women are doing what they were trained to do - and are doing their duty with honor and pride.All of our fine warriors deserve words of "Thank you," and encouragement, from each of us. Each one of them are in my heart, and in my prayers. You, Sirs and Ma'ams, have my utmost appreciation. As a former military man, I understand. As an American, I am humbled by your service.
Aaron was one of two soldiers killed in Afghanistan on Independence Day by a suicide bomber. The picture above is the "tweet" from his heart-broken dad to let folks know the tragic news.
The New York Times is reporting that the attack was in the Paktika Province, near the Pakistan border.
The Masters Family has our prayers, and condolences.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Thank you, Aaron: A U.S. soldier’s sacrifice on Independence Day - Michelle Malkin
2 U.S. Soldiers Killed in Taliban Attack - The New York Times
Seeking Pleasure
Watching my youngest of two grandsons, this one being four and a half months old, is one of my favorite activities. He likes to, while laying on his back, grab his feet and then while holding them, rock over to his side. He then smiles, even laughing out loud, as his body settles on its side, as if it was the funniest thing ever to happen.
Little Cortez is starting to turn over, but he hasn't quite figured out how to get back on his back once he rolls over to his belly. He will then fuss until someone comes over and rolls him back on his back, only to roll over to his stomach again, only to fuss about his position once more.
When I feed him he will stop sucking on his bottle for a moment, sometimes, just to look at me, as if he is trying to drink in all of the lines that make up Grandpa's face. More often than not he will crack a smile, and I will smile back at him. Then he will resume feeding time.
My oldest grandson, Cortez's cousin Ezekiel, will be approaching two years of age in November. He visits a couple of times a week when my son's work schedule overlaps his wife's work schedule, and at the age he is now he has discovered that the best seat in the house in Grandpa's lap. When we aren't sitting in my recliner jibber jabbering about things that are interesting to him, we run through the house, constantly warned by my wife that we better be careful, or one of us is going to fall and bust open our heads.
We play, and run, and wrestle until Grandpa can't take much more, and is huffing and puffing for breath.
Ezekiel always has a sly smile when he visits, especially when he realizes that Grandpa is home. He knows that with me he can have all kinds of adventures in the house, at the park, and in the yard. We play with blocks, cars, balls, and Grandpa's old fashioned video games.
I drive a big rig during the week, and at one of the locations I drive by there is a billboard that reads, "You only live once, make sure it's enough."
Looking back on my life, sometimes I wonder.
Popular opinion dictates that life is about the pursuit of pleasure, and I suppose a kind of agree. I don't believe, however, that seeking pleasure ought to be about drinking, partying, and being merry until you puke. Sure, I have a beer a few times a year, and every once in a while have a Margarita with dinner, or a bourbon and coke with friends. But I don't need that alcohol to enjoy life. Nor do I need to party, or be excessive about any other form of pleasure available in the big, wide world. Those things just don't interest me. I find more pleasure in the simpler things in life, I suppose, and in my relationship with Christ.
The powerful urges of human nature disagrees with me. Evidence of the pursuit of baseless pleasures is all around, on television, the Internet, and in our every day journey through life. Another billboard I often see sums it all up. The advertisement is for a particular hard liquor, though I do not remember which one, and it is an image of two women looking at each other seductively, one with the necklace of the other resting in her mouth. The caption to the lower right of these two women, who are rather close to each other, reads, "Things are getting interesting."
Perhaps things are getting interesting. But why should I seek pleasure in things that in the end will be unfulfilling, and carry very serious dangers with them? Youth will pass away, but the consequences of alcoholism will remain long after the final party, should that kind of excessive drinking continue. Liver damage could make life in the future pretty miserable, too. Parties, and most of our friendships, end. The decisions made today, however, will continue to haunt us, tomorrow. Promiscuity may lead to life threatening disease. Drug use may lead to an empty wallet, and a visit to a room with bars, in addition to health problems associated with the drug use. Missed opportunities, because we were chasing after pleasure instead, will leave us with a skinny bank account in the future - more often than not at a time when we really wish we had made better decisions in preparation for our later years.
Actions have consequences. Personal freedom comes with responsibility to ourselves, and those around us. We can choose to put ourselves into situations that could bite us back, or not. We can choose to be a victim of our poor choices, or use those lessons to move forward, utilizing the wisdom we gain from the storms in our lives to improve our lives in the future.
I have been asked a number of times, considering my spotted history, if I regret the choices I made in my life. Regret is not a word I use. Maybe I don't regret my choices because in the end it all came out to the positive. I did have a lot of opportunities when I was younger, and I made choices that altered the path of my hopes and dreams. All of the preparation I spent for a career in law, or journalism, ended with a couple lousy decisions. Family financial assistance offered was rejected, and college opportunities were squandered. I could have made better decisions. I am a product of my choices, and my choices were not the best I could make.
Choices are non-refundable. There is no sense in dwelling on what could have been. But, I do realize that my choices essentially had me walk over a bed of hot coals, and I survived. And it seems, at least now, that the rough trip through life made me a better person. In the end, it seems, it all worked out for the best.
Little Cortez is starting to turn over, but he hasn't quite figured out how to get back on his back once he rolls over to his belly. He will then fuss until someone comes over and rolls him back on his back, only to roll over to his stomach again, only to fuss about his position once more.
When I feed him he will stop sucking on his bottle for a moment, sometimes, just to look at me, as if he is trying to drink in all of the lines that make up Grandpa's face. More often than not he will crack a smile, and I will smile back at him. Then he will resume feeding time.
My oldest grandson, Cortez's cousin Ezekiel, will be approaching two years of age in November. He visits a couple of times a week when my son's work schedule overlaps his wife's work schedule, and at the age he is now he has discovered that the best seat in the house in Grandpa's lap. When we aren't sitting in my recliner jibber jabbering about things that are interesting to him, we run through the house, constantly warned by my wife that we better be careful, or one of us is going to fall and bust open our heads.
We play, and run, and wrestle until Grandpa can't take much more, and is huffing and puffing for breath.
Ezekiel always has a sly smile when he visits, especially when he realizes that Grandpa is home. He knows that with me he can have all kinds of adventures in the house, at the park, and in the yard. We play with blocks, cars, balls, and Grandpa's old fashioned video games.
I drive a big rig during the week, and at one of the locations I drive by there is a billboard that reads, "You only live once, make sure it's enough."
Looking back on my life, sometimes I wonder.
Popular opinion dictates that life is about the pursuit of pleasure, and I suppose a kind of agree. I don't believe, however, that seeking pleasure ought to be about drinking, partying, and being merry until you puke. Sure, I have a beer a few times a year, and every once in a while have a Margarita with dinner, or a bourbon and coke with friends. But I don't need that alcohol to enjoy life. Nor do I need to party, or be excessive about any other form of pleasure available in the big, wide world. Those things just don't interest me. I find more pleasure in the simpler things in life, I suppose, and in my relationship with Christ.
The powerful urges of human nature disagrees with me. Evidence of the pursuit of baseless pleasures is all around, on television, the Internet, and in our every day journey through life. Another billboard I often see sums it all up. The advertisement is for a particular hard liquor, though I do not remember which one, and it is an image of two women looking at each other seductively, one with the necklace of the other resting in her mouth. The caption to the lower right of these two women, who are rather close to each other, reads, "Things are getting interesting."
Perhaps things are getting interesting. But why should I seek pleasure in things that in the end will be unfulfilling, and carry very serious dangers with them? Youth will pass away, but the consequences of alcoholism will remain long after the final party, should that kind of excessive drinking continue. Liver damage could make life in the future pretty miserable, too. Parties, and most of our friendships, end. The decisions made today, however, will continue to haunt us, tomorrow. Promiscuity may lead to life threatening disease. Drug use may lead to an empty wallet, and a visit to a room with bars, in addition to health problems associated with the drug use. Missed opportunities, because we were chasing after pleasure instead, will leave us with a skinny bank account in the future - more often than not at a time when we really wish we had made better decisions in preparation for our later years.
Actions have consequences. Personal freedom comes with responsibility to ourselves, and those around us. We can choose to put ourselves into situations that could bite us back, or not. We can choose to be a victim of our poor choices, or use those lessons to move forward, utilizing the wisdom we gain from the storms in our lives to improve our lives in the future.
I have been asked a number of times, considering my spotted history, if I regret the choices I made in my life. Regret is not a word I use. Maybe I don't regret my choices because in the end it all came out to the positive. I did have a lot of opportunities when I was younger, and I made choices that altered the path of my hopes and dreams. All of the preparation I spent for a career in law, or journalism, ended with a couple lousy decisions. Family financial assistance offered was rejected, and college opportunities were squandered. I could have made better decisions. I am a product of my choices, and my choices were not the best I could make.
Choices are non-refundable. There is no sense in dwelling on what could have been. But, I do realize that my choices essentially had me walk over a bed of hot coals, and I survived. And it seems, at least now, that the rough trip through life made me a better person. In the end, it seems, it all worked out for the best.
Now, despite my poor decisions, I have emerged on the other side with a life that fulfills. I draw pleasure from my grandson's smile. I draw pleasure from being his grandpa. Such a pleasure may not be the capstone to everyone's lives, but with me, it is enough for a lifetime.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Statue of Liberty Crown Reopens
July Fourth was the perfect day to reopen Lady Liberty's crown to visitors.
Limited tickets were available, but plenty of visitors had the chance to visit the crown.
The statue was closed to the public after the attack against America on September 11, 2001. The base, pedestal, and outdoor observation deck reopened in 2004.
When I visited Liberty island in 2002, I couldn't even get close enough to the base to touch it.
The crown has 25 windows, and the view of New York City is breath-taking. The tickets are pretty much sold out through the end of August.
The torch has been closed since it was damaged by a saboteur's bomb in 1916.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)