What's reeling through my mind

Government Healthcare - the dark side

2011-07-28T10:16:00.000-07:00

In 1932, the Federal Public Health System colluded with the Tuskegee Institute to to perform a study on poor black males in Macon County, Alabama. In return the participants would receive free medical exams, meals, and burial insurance.

The free burial insurance would have tipped me off to a possibly bad ending, but despite that, the study attracted 600 male participants. After six months, the study would conclude - however, it continued for forty years. The intent was to infect 399 of the men with syphilis, and keep 201 free of the disease, then monitor the natural progression of the disease. None of the men were told the specifics of the study, except that they were to be treated for "bad blood."

In 2010, President Obama was able to get his Federal Healthcare plan passed, which will eventually place the personal healthcare of every American citizen into the hands of the Federal Government - the same folks that intentionally misled, and infected, citizens of this country with a disease in order to monitor it's progression to the end of it's life, or the life of it's host.

Now, doesn't ObamaCare make you feel all warm and fuzzy? Well, if not now, then maybe later, in some secret study.

Facts don't mean anything!

2009-06-22T10:03:00.000-07:00

U.S. President Barack Obama, two days before an historic visit to Saudi Arabia and Egypt, told a French television interviewer, “If you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we'd be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world."

However, statistics show that there are less than eight million Muslims in the U.S., representing barely 2.5 percent of the total population of 304 million. The Islamweb.com site claims there are 10 million Muslims in the U.S., larger than most other estimates but still representing only 3.3 percent of the population.

The U.S. ranks only 26th in the total number of Muslims in each country, according to the website.

President Obama used the number of Muslims in the U.S. as a basis for stating, “There's got to be a better dialogue and a better understanding between the two peoples.”

Israel National News

Change 2

2009-03-31T15:37:00.000-07:00

Change, Yes We Can! Was the mantra President Obama ran on.

Check this video out from the Daily Show with Jon Stewart.....

In Case You Haven't Voted Yet.......

2008-10-29T12:30:00.000-07:00

I don't need to rewrite all of this info. It's easier for you to follow the link:

Barack Obama on Marriage, and children

A Summary, from David Crowe:

"In addition to the above moral considerations, Barack Obama's lack of any credible executive experience, his associations with the unrepentant American terrorist and socialist Bill Ayers; anti Israel, pro Palestine Liberation Organization Columbia professor Rashid Khalidi; highly questionable relationship with convicted felon Tony Rezko; his unmistakable socialist views; his naïveté in foreign affairs/policy; his misguided economic agenda; his extreme liberal voting record in the U. S. Senate, and his lack of truthfulness and transparency about all these relationships-including his 20 year relationship with 'Reverend' Jeremiah Wright and Muslim leader Louis Farrakhan-disqualify him as a person the American people can trust for the highest office of the land.

Further, Barack Obama, if elected, will nominate - and the democrat majority in the Senate will approve - liberal judges to the U.S. Supreme Court who will in all likelihood continue the killing of the innocent, favor international law over the Constitution, and legislate a "militant secular-paganism" world view from the bench.

Electing Barack Obama President of the United States will be the greatest mistake in our history and is in fact the greatest threat in our lifetime to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, Israel, Christians and Jews around the world, the stability of the family, respect for human life, the economy, the war on radical Islam, our military strength and defense, foreign policy, the U.S. Constitution, and the safety of the nation, than any candidate for the Presidency in American history.

If Christians and Jews VOTE for Barack Obama-or remain silent by failing to VOTE at all-in the face of his preference and open rejection of Biblical morality and authority, we who claim the name of Christ as LORD, yet VOTE in opposition to His Word, will be held accountable by God and our fellow citizens.

As Mordecai said to Esther, "Do not imagine that you in the king's palace can escape any more than all the Jews. For if you remain silent at this time. . . you and your father's house will perish."

The trumpet has sounded, and the warning has gone forth. May you, and I pray, all American Christians and Jews, VOTE and VOTE wisely to the Glory of God. May His Name be exalted and honored once again in post Christian America."

CHANGE!!!

2008-10-28T14:57:00.000-07:00

Change. Change from what? From Bush? From Politics?

Don't let Sen. Obama fool you. He's a politician. He hasn't been a U. S. Senator long enough to know anything, let alone how to "Change" the country's corrupted political system. And he won his Senate seat by default, not by vote.

He hobnobbed with radicals and domestic terrorists, but now downplays those relationships, knowing they could affect his presidential dreams.

He is protected by the mainstream media, and when his activities or past are questioned, the race card is played, even though he had a white mother. I hate playing skin color games, it's just wrong. I have nothing against this man, I just do not agree with his politics, and am amazed at how he has essentially come from obscurity, and jumped into the Presidential race.

I'm astonished at how he has had these questionable associations, and yet everyone looks past them, as if they were schoolyard acquaintances, left behind at graduation. Are they? Or will they all come back into play once he's elected President?

So many tried to point out President Bush's ties to Yale's Skull and Bones Society, yet it went no where. Nobody seemed to care. Like now, with Obama and his questionable affiliations.

And then there's the folks that are making the claim that Barack Obama is the Anti-Christ. Really? You have to look at the descriptions of the anti-Christ given in the Bible, and then compare them to what is already known about Obama. I would have to say that the scriptures would describe a number of people around the world today.

One of those descriptions, Daniel 11:37, says "He will have no respect for the gods of his ancestors..." (The Message Bible). Well, Obama did attend a church, and speaks of Jesus, and God. If, as some say, he practices Islam, then he 'respects' the god of Islam. This would take him out of the running for anti-Christ, in my mind.

But we'll see what the future brings.

Audio montage: Barack Obama, and a clip from the classic movie: The Princess Bride

Rehashing the Political past

2008-10-09T09:52:00.000-07:00

Are we seeing a new political exchange today than what happened in the past? Maybe not. Check these out:

1952
In this TV ad by Democratic presidential candidate Adlai Stevenson, the question is asked who will be making decisions in the White House, Republican candidates Dwight D. Eisenhower or Bob Taft. Why make this ad? Some feared that Eisenhower didn't have the political experience to be president."

Present: "Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, who will announce Saturday that he's running for the Democratic presidential nomination, says the brevity of his political résumé is his "greatest strength." USA Today, Feb. 9, 2007

Present: "Presidential scholars say she (Sarah Palin) appears to be the least experienced, least credentialed person to join a major-party ticket in the modern era."

"In another TV ad, a narrator reminds the 'man on the street' that while Republicans may talk about fairness, it is the Democrats who have produced programs that benefit the working class. The ad focuses on the benefits of the Social Security program. The Social Security program was a New Deal legislations that was signed into law by another former Democrat, Franklin D. Roosevelt. Why run this ad? Frankin D. Roosevelt was still a hero to most Americans. This ad reminded the public that Adlai Stevenson was a Roosevelt Democrat."

Present: "Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) accused Republicans under President Bush of economic mismanagement and favoring the rich here on Monday as she outlined a Democratic campaign agenda of tax breaks and incentives designed to make the costs of health care, college and retirement more affordable for millions of Americans." Washington Post, 7/26/2007

Present: "Senator Barack Obama proposed a plan on Tuesday to provide at least $80 billion a year in tax cuts to middle-class workers, homeowners and retirees, saying if he was elected president he would “end the preferential treatment that’s built into our tax code.” NYT 9/28/2007

1964
Republican candidate Barry Goldwater, speaking in Spanish, urges Hispanics to join the reenergized Republican Party. Why run this ad? Being the Senator from Arizona, Goldwater understood the importance of the Hispanic vote.

Present: "After showing he can win white votes in Iowa and New Hampshire, and solidifying his standing with African-American voters, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama is setting out to prove Tuesday that he can win Latino votes and break Sen. Hillary Clinton’s long-standing alliance with Hispanics." Politico, 2/5/2008

Present: "Sen. John McCain said Monday the tenor of the immigration debate has hurt the way Hispanic voters view the Republican Party. Republican strategists have said McCain has to do well with Hispanic voters to win in November. When President Bush was re-elected in 2004, he received 44 percent of the Hispanic vote, but that was before the divisive political debate erupted over illegal immigration." CNNPolitics, 5/5/2008

1968
With quick-cutting video and horrific music this ad links, without using words, Democratic candidate Hubert Humphrey to the horrors of the Vietnam War and the violence in US streets. Humphrey stands smiling over the Democratic convention and then there is war dead. Why run this ad? There were problems inside and outside the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago. Anti-Vietnam War protesters clashed with police outside and there were disruptons inside.

Present: "Republican presidential candidate John McCain defended his belief that U.S. troops will need to stay in Iraq for decades Monday but said the unpopular war will soon end "for all intents and purposes." CNNPolitics, 2/26/2008.

Present: "Obama calls Iraq “the most important foreign-policy decision in a generation.” By the word “decision,” presumably, he means to refer at once to President Bush’s decision to invade Iraq, Congress’s decision to authorize that policy, and his own early decision to oppose any such action." Commentary Magazine, 4/2008

1976
Independents and Democrats are jumping on republican candidate Gerald Ford's bandwagon.

Present: "John McCain's 6 percentage-point bounce in voter support spanning the Republican National Convention is largely explained by political independents shifting to him in fairly big numbers, from 40% pre-convention to 52% post-convention in Gallup Poll Daily tracking. By contrast, Democrats' support for McCain rose 5 percentage points over the GOP convention period, from 9% to 14%, while Republicans' already-high support stayed about the same." Gallup, 9/9/2008

1984
"Reagan's policies are decidedly unfair to workers. Democratic candidate Walter Mondale's VP, Geraldine Ferraro, is featured in this ad. Ferraro was the first female on a presidential ticket. Why run this ad? Mondale wanted blue collar workers to return to the Democratic Party. Reagan had been able to gain support within this group in 1980."

The first female on a Presidential ticket? Maybe not...
"List of female United States presidential and vice-presidential candidates"

1988
"Jimmy has good grades but is worried about paying for college. Michael Dukakis has a plan to get Jimmy to college."

Present: "Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.) have recently presented their plans for improving the higher education system, covering issues like the price of college tuition and tax credits." The Triangle, 6/27/08

(Video of a man laughing) "This man cannot stop laughing. He is so happy that the George Bush adminstration keeps bailing him out despite his bad business decisions. Why run this ad? Dukakis wanted to present the Republican Party as the protectors of the wealthy."

Present: "Washington can act with breathtaking urgency when the right people want something done. In this case, the people are Wall Street's titans, who are scared witless at the prospect of their historic implosion. Congress quickly agreed to enact a gargantuan bailout, with more to come, to calm the anxieties and halt the deflation of Wall Street giants. Put aside partisan bickering, no time for hearings, no need to think through the deeper implications. We haven't seen "bipartisan cooperation" like this since Washington decided to invade Iraq." The Nation, 7/30/2008

"The vice president is just a heartbeat away from being the president. Even though the office is often not a position of power, it is if something happens to the president. Bush chose Dan Quayle, a young senator from Indiana and the Democrats pounced. Why run this ad? Many were alarmed that Bush chose Quayle as his vice presidential nominee."

Present: "If John McCain wins this woman will be one 72-year-old's heartbeat away from being President of the United States." Huffington Post, 9/26/2008

Celebrities, Huh! Who do they think they are?

2008-09-26T16:01:00.000-07:00

Go to Insightanalytical for this post. No need for me to repeat it here.....I can only say Ditto!

Louisiana's new Science Education Act, July 2008

2008-07-16T09:01:00.000-07:00

"Digest: Provides that proposed law shall be known as the "Louisiana Science Education Act."

Proposed law requires BESE, upon request of a local school board, to allow and assist teachers, principals, and other school administrators to create and foster an environment within public elementary and secondary schools that promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories being studied including evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning.

Provides that such assistance shall include support and guidance for teachers regarding effective ways to help students understand, analyze, critique, and objectively review such scientific theories being studied.

Provides that a teacher shall teach material presented in the standard textbook supplied by the school system and thereafter may use textbooks and other instructional materials to help students understand, analyze, critique, and review scientific theories in an objective manner, as permitted by the local school board.

Provides that proposed law shall not be construed to promote any religious doctrine, promote discrimination for or against a particular set of religious beliefs, or promote discrimination for or against religion or nonreligion.

Requires BESE and local school boards to promulgate rules and regulations necessary to implement this Act prior to the beginning of the 2008-2009 school year."
___________________________________________________________________

It is a shame that the government should have to pass an Act in order to require this kind of activity to be allowed. It's something that happens in laboratories, colleges, and businesses everyday.

When Einstein applied his Theory of Relativity to the structure of the universe, he found that it predicted either an expanding or contracting universe--something entirely incompatible with the prevailing notion of a static universe at the time. Later Einstein added a term called the "cosmological constant" to his equations so they would make his calculations consistent with a static universe.

He changed his Theory to fit the prevailing scientific thought of his day! A Scientist by the name of Edwin Hubble decided to "understand, analyze, critique, and objectively review" the structure of the universe, and found that it was not static! In 1929, Einstein admitted his mistake.

How many Edwin Hubbles are sitting in classrooms today, that will be encouraged by this Act to understand, analyze, critique, and objectively review, the knowledge they are being presented with in the classroom? Or how many will find a way to alter the information to fit what they are being taught based on the prevailing scientific beliefs?

Unfortunately, there are those who are threatened by this Act. They don't want schoolchildren thinking for themselves, questioning what they are being taught. They want to be able to shove whatever they want into the minds of our kids.

Who are these people?

-The American Association for the Advancement of Science. AAAS CEO Alan Leshner warned that the bill would "unleash an assault against scientific integrity, leaving students confused about science and unprepared to excel in a modern workforce."
-The ACLU says it will be keeping a close eye on a bill called the Louisiana Science Education Act should it become law.
-The Louisiana Coalition for Science
-Atheist Revolution

What if they were around in 1929 - would they be trying to silence Hubble, or perhaps prevent him from doing his research, or asking his questions? I'm sure there were many scientists who were quite comfortable believing in a static universe, and had their lives shaken by Hubble's results.

Give me the Edwin Hubbles in the classrooms, they're the ones that will make a difference in the world.

Lisa Garza, Food Network is NOT your friend.

2008-07-10T14:23:00.000-07:00

From Bob Tuschman's Food Network Blog: "Lisa ...... started out strong: the very cute “mom” side of her emerged and she was down to earth and twinkly. But when Rachael came on strong to move the segment along, Lisa just shut down. Rachael couldn't’t relate to the sophisticated food she created for her Girl Scout."

Huh? What Food Network showed on their site, and what Rachel Ray shows on her site, give completely different views of what happened. Lisa did great, and Rachel Ray seemed to be having a good time too!

After seeing this, and realizing how Food Network duped me into thinking Lisa screwed up, I'm about ready to blacklist their station from my remote. I wasn't rooting for Lisa, as she came across as stuck-up. But I'm beginning to change my mind. Maybe I've been voting for the wrong person! What a dilemma. Maybe I'll start voting for my least favorite, because Food Network doesn't deserve her.

Personally, I think Lisa should take this as an omen, and even if she does win a show on Food Network, she should get out of it, and look elsewhere. Follow in the footsteps of TFNS alum, Nathan Lyon.

Unfortunately, Food Network once again shows me that their attempt at a reality show fails, and I won't tune in next year. The fix is in, and it's even more obvious this year than in the past.

Be more authoritive, less authoritive, but more authoritive. What?

2008-07-06T21:50:00.000-07:00

Show Six. Rachel Ray and the Brownies Challenge. Bob Tuschman tells Kelsey she needs to take more authority, but when she does on the Rachel Ray show, he criticizes her.

What's it going to be, Bob? Is this a glimpse on how you run Food Network, too?

Week 1: "Do a show on taro root."
Week 2: "Why did you do a show on taro root? I ought to fire you!"

I wonder how many of your employees are taking Prozac or Valium?

Kelsy got Rachel involved in what was going on, instead of Rachel standing around talking the whole time. Oh, wait. Isn't Rachel Food Network's golden goose?

IMHO, Rachel Ray has been overexposed. I'm getting weary of seeing her, like, everywhere.

I Don't eat that kind of food.......

2008-06-21T16:55:00.000-07:00

On the June 15th episode of The Next Food Network Star, Season 3, Martha Stewart wasa special guest. The contestants had to come up with a product of their own, something to sell in a store. Ms. Stewart was the surprise judge.

Kelsey Nixon, a recent graduate of a culinary school, and full of spunk, came up with a sauce that the harried homemaker could pick up, and use to make a meal. Her example was Sloppy Joes.

Martha's comment to the judges was "I don't eat that kind of food....very often."

So, she comes across as snobby, uppity. I thought I'd look into her comments a little more. A quick search on Martha Stewart Living for sloppy joe recipes come up with 18. Yes, eighteen!

It's okay for her to peddle sloppy joe's in her magazine, to her subscribers and followers, but it's beneath her to partake?

Somethings smelly in Martha's kitchen. And it's nice that the Food Network had a convicted felon on their program as a judge. How ironic.

The Next Food Network Star

2008-05-26T09:23:00.000-07:00

Okay, so I missed Season 1. But I caught Season 2, and forced myself to watch Season 3, more as a test than anything else. And, I believe my experiment with Season 3 proved my theory about this particular reality show, and maybe all the others - which I try to avoid.

In Season 2, you had a group of talented people vying for their own show on Food Network. The end of this competition had Guy Fieri winning the coveted show, which is not to say he didn't deserve it, because he did. It's the way Food Network stacked the deck that disappointed me. This was one of my favorite stations, a departure from my usuals: Stargate, NCIS, and CSI.

Here's how I saw it - and I hope I can effectively put my thoughts down here. As Food Network whittled away at the contestants, it seemed obvious in each show who wasn't going to make the cut. No surprise there. The final three were Guy Fieri, Nathan Lyon, and Reggie Southerland. It was obvious to me that Guy was the best of the three, and that his real competition for the show was Nathan. Nathan was good, but he wasn't "Guy good." I suspect that Food Network knew this, and wanting Guy to win, they eliminated Nathan. This left Guy having to compete against Reggie, who was good in his own right, but when you pitted him against Guy, the choice was clear, Guy had it hands down.

So, the more I thought about this, the more I questioned how things occurred. I grew disappointed with Food Network as I started to see that something had been pulled on the viewers. Guy's real competition was eliminated, providing the viewers, who ultimately voted for the winning contestant, with a clear choice - Reggie had no chance against Guy.

To prove - or, hopefully, disprove - my theory, I watched Season 3. The final three were Amy Finley, Joshua "Jag" Garcia, and Rory Schepisi. Personally, I didn't see a real standout in these three as far as their cooking skills, they each seemed to have an area where they stood out. I wasn't until they did a radio show. They were prepped by Food Network "NOT" to say anything derogatory about Food Network, or the other contestants.

Egged on by the two radio hosts, Rory and "Jag" took the bait. Rory talked about some of the other contestants in a gossipy manner, and "Jag" complained that Food Network didn't have any ethnic food shows. Amy didn't fall for it, making her the clear winner of this test.

It was the radio show challenge which convinced me that Amy was clearly the winner. So I was shocked when the judges eliminated her. This left "Jag" and Rory, two contestants who showed little integrity in the Radio show competition. How could Food Network make such a choice? To me, the reflected on Food Network, and their integrity. They were condoning this behavior!

Next came the bombshell that "Jag" embellished his personal information. They made it a part of their show to have him come in and admit his wrongdoing, and withdraw from the competition. at first, I was both relieved that Food Network was finally showing some integrity in this competition. I was also disappointed that a fellow Marine would do this. I don't know if Food Network set this whole thing up for the publicity, or what, at this point, I can only suspect.

So, in an effort to make the competition seem on the up and up, they called back Amy Finley to compete against Rory. When the fans voted, Amy won. To me, this was justification, Amy should have won. It was also another sign that Food Network had again tried to stack the deck so their choice would be the clear winner, the viewers would only have one choice, Food Networks choice. It didn't work out that way because of "Jag's" mistake, and in the end, I believe, the viewers really did get to choose.

In science, experiments are continually repeated so the results are constantly verified. And it's in this vein that I'll again tune in to watch "The Next Food Network Star: Season 4". I hope that Food Network runs a non-interventional competition this season. Maybe they'll restore my faith in the network, because my viewership has declined as a result of my perception of their integrity. I don't consider Food Network as entertainment, but educational and informative. Without integrity, they might as well have Beavis and Butthead doing a cooking show.

So you think you're stuck with three losers for President?

2008-04-30T09:17:00.000-07:00

Think again.
Check out this list of who's thrown in their hat for the 2008 Presidential Elections!

And ask yourself, why hasn't the media covered any of them? Why only these three goobers; Obama, Clinton, and McCain?

Thoughts on Politics

2008-03-07T09:12:00.000-08:00

For Politicians:

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened. "

"If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. "

For the 2008 Presidential hopefuls:

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."

"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."

"There is no such thing as a good tax."

.......From the pen of Winston Churchill.

Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton

2008-02-21T16:52:00.000-08:00

Three things, mainly observations on what others are saying.

1. He's black.
2. She's a woman.
3. They're both running for President of the US.

Geraldine Ferraro recently commented; "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position, and if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept." She's wrong, of course.

In 2004, a black man ran for President. He is a conservative. Yet, Alan Keyes did not see the same type of hype that Barack Obama, a man with mixed ethnicity, is getting today. People claim Barack Obama is a black man, yet he is a man who's parents come from two different countries, and who also happened to have different skin colors. His father was a black man from Kenya. His mother, a white woman from the US. People are making him choose a side, as it were.

In 2000, another woman ran for the Presidency of the US. She also did not receive the notoriety that Hillary Clinton is getting today, as a woman candidate. She also is a conservative, and her name is Elizabeth Dole.

A common thread can be seen here. Both Alan Keyes and Elizabeth Dole have something in common with the 2008 presidential candidates; skin color and gender. Yet neither experienced the same support Barack and Hillary are seeing today. Can it be that their political attitude, conservatism, was against them? What if Barack or Hillary were conservatives, would they enjoy the same popularity that they do as liberals?

I doubt it. People like free things, and these two are promising lots of free stuff, like healthcare. But it doesn't really matter. With Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John McCain coming out as the front runners in this years race, I can only say that in my opinion, there are three liberals running for President. All want to raise taxes, and increase government control.

Alan Keyes has announced his bid for the Presidency in 2008, but little has been heard of this. And Ron Paul, another conservative, has little chance of winning. Neither of this backrunners are promising free stuff, but they are talking about making changes that would be beneficial to this country, and everyone in it.

God help us all.

Helping the Associated Press (AP)

2008-01-29T14:52:00.000-08:00

So, I came across the news story by the Associated Press, and found that it was uncommonly accurate in it's wording.

I realized that somehow this must have slipped past the editors, but that the reporter has by now been fired, once the error was discovered. So to help the AP out, I decided to rewrite the article in a manner that was more fitting to their politically correctness. I know this is how they really wanted the article to be broadcast.......

"BALTIMORE, Md. (AP) — Soon to be Ex-President Bush on Tuesday referred to his former conflicts with substance abuse as an "addiction," a blunt characterization of his dysfunctional adult days before self-realization helped him redefine himself.

"Addiction is difficult to overcome," Soon to be Ex-President Bush said in speaking at a charity based recovery center that aids victims of dysfunctional homes in re-training and other needs.

"As you might remember, I experienced substance abuse at one time in my life," Soon to be Ex-President Bush said. "I understand charity based recovery programs. I understand that sometimes you can find the inspiration from other sources to solve a dependence problem."

Increasingly, Soon to be Ex-President Bush has reflected in candid terms about his days of substance abuse. Last month, he told some young recovering substance abuse victims to stick with their resistance to harmful substances and cited his own experiences with substance abuse years ago. He said then that "substance abuse competes for your affection ... you fall in love with the harmful substance."

Soon to be Ex-President Bush, 61, decided to quit his substance abuse after an unrestrained night in 1986 celebrating his 40th birthday. He went on to once again attain election and re-election as Texas governor before illegally taking the White House.

The Soon to be Ex-President spoke Tuesday at a charity based recovery center, which helps victims of dysfunctional homelives get their lives in order and join society. The stop came as Soon to be Ex-President Bush sought to keep some attention on his charity based programs, one of the themes from his final State of the Union address on Monday night."

And, here's the article as it was sneaked past the AP editors.....

"BALTIMORE, Md. (AP) — President Bush on Tuesday referred to his former struggles with alcohol as an "addiction," a blunt characterization of his less disciplined adult days before a reliance on faith help him turn his life around.

"Addiction is hard to overcome," Bush said in speaking at a faith-based center that helps former prisoners get job training and other help.

"As you might remember, I drank too much at one time in my life," Bush said. "I understand faith-based programs. I understand that sometimes you can find the inspiration from a higher power to solve an addiction problem."

Increasingly, Bush has reflected in candid terms about his days of drinking. Last month, he told some young recovering addicts to stick with their fight against drugs and cited his own experiences with alcohol years ago. He said then that "addiction competes for your affection ... you fall in love with alcohol."

Bush, 61, decided to quit drinking alcohol after a boozy night in 1986 celebrating his 40th birthday. He went on to win election and re-election as Texas governor before bidding for the White House.

The president spoke Tuesday at the Jericho Program, which helps former prisoners get their lives in order and contribute to society. The stop came as Bush sought to keep some attention on his faith-based programs, one of the themes from his final State of the Union address on Monday night."

Now, I prefer the upfront, factually correct and truthful article, but I know that the editors at the AP believe it's their place in the media to make everything politically correct, and easy to understand for the mindless twits that believe everything they read, so I figured I'd help them out.

"Undocumented"

2008-01-16T13:14:00.000-08:00

Although in this day and age, a person can use any word in any way they want, and mean something completely different that the word they used, let's take a look at the meaning of a few of these types of words in use today:

Undocumented: "Not having the needed documents, as for permission to live or work in a foreign country."

Immigrant: "A person who leaves one country to settle permanently in another."

Resident: "One who resides in a particular place permanently or for an extended period"

Alien: "Owing political allegiance to another country or government; foreign"

Illegal: "Prohibited by law"

Reform: "To abolish abuse or malpractice in"

Now, let's look at a recent AP news article, on stricter drivers licenses in the state of Oregon, and some comments that were made by people in the article, along with some comments;

"Representatives ranging from farm worker advocates to the Oregon chapter of the Minutemen Civil Defense Corps were at the Oregon Capitol Friday to support or oppose stiffer rules for driver's licenses for undocumented residents."

-Now, this is the AP's words, "undocumented residents." Don't you think someone who's profession is writing would know the differences in words, and proper word usage? So, it's obvious that the AP is being politically correct, rather than factual here.

"The issue in Oregon is as contentious as immigration itself."

-When did immigration become contentious? Again, the AP is wordsmithing this article to provoke a specific emotion. Nobody is against LEGAL immigration, only ILLEGAL immigration. And everybody should be against this, because it's an ILLEGAL activity!

"Groups opposing illegal immigration say anything less than a proof-of-legal-presence standard invites terrorists and drug traffickers."

-Only groups? Shouldn't every citizen of this country oppose illegal immigration?

"In addition, Oregon continues to issue eight-year driver's licenses to people with six-month visas, and that's unconscionable," said Jim Ludwick, the president of Oregonians for Immigration Reform, which opposes illegal immigration. "Oregon is a mecca and a magnet for ID fraud and illegal immigration."

-Again, one of those groups that oppose illegal immigration.

"But Hispanic activists migrant worker supporters say such claims are a new low in anti-immigrant lobbying."

-No we're not talking about "anti-immigration" here, we're talking about anti-illegal immigration! Get it right, and stop trying to confuse people..

"The fact is, undocumented Latino workers pay $134 million to $187 million in income taxes annually," said Victoria Lewis, a member of the Oregon Coalition for Public Safety. "In Oregon, they put between $1.8 billion to $2.5 billion into the economy as consumers of products and services."

- If these workers are "undocumented," then how do they pay taxes? How does Ms. Lewis know the amount of taxes that are being paid by these folks, since they lack the legal paperwork to be here in the first place? This is a suspicious "fact" that she quotes. And if she is a member of the Oregon Coalition for Public Safety, shouldn't she be concerned about the safety of Oregonians, instead of non-Oregonians who who are here illegally?

Article Source: KATU News site

Gas, we all want it. But at what cost?

2007-12-29T11:45:00.000-08:00

There's many types of alternative fuels being proposed these days, but the U.S. government is primarily backing one - ethanol.

Ethanol is a "green" gas, a renewable resource. This makes it acceptable to many people. But is it safe? In a recent letter to President Bush regarding his ten-year plan to convert U.S. fuel supplies to a mixed fuel containing ethanol, the Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works stated:

"Currently, under federal law, the maximum level of ethanol permitted to be blended with gasoline for use in conventional gasoline-powered vehicles, equipment and engines is 10 percent – so-called E10. There is an interest in increasing ethanol blends to 15 percent (E15), 20 percent (E20), or even 30 percent through an expedited process at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) pursuant to a fuels waiver under Section 211(f)(4) of the Clean Air Act.... Currently, there is little available data on the emission, air quality, public health, or safety impacts of mid-level ethanol. On-road and non-road engines, vehicles, and equipment (other than flexible fuel motor vehicles) are not designed to be operated on ethanol blends higher than E10. The available evidence indicates that lawn mowers, chain saws, snowmobiles, recreational boats, motorcycles, and non-flex fuel motor vehicles will produce higher evaporative and engine exhaust emissions if ethanol blends higher than E10 are used.

Ethanol blends higher than E10 are more corrosive on certain metals and plastics used in many of these products and will cause many gasoline-powered engines to run hotter and at higher RPM levels. In turn, this will result in adverse impacts on starting, durability, operation, performance, and operator safety, due to the degradation of critical components and safety devices.

To ensure there will not be damage to air quality or to consumers or their gasoline-powered products, there must be a comprehensive and scientific analysis of the impacts of ethanol blends higher than E10 in all gasoline-powered on-road and non-road engines, equipment, and vehicles." [BI-PARTISAN LETTER URGES PRESIDENT TO CONSIDER HEALTH AND SAFETY ISSUES RESULTING FROM INCREASED USE OF ETHANOL]

This comes at a time when "global warming" is a big issue. Many folks are making decisions based on the many reports and public figures supporting this phenomena. But how much can we believe, and are humans at fault? Well, again let's look at other sources:

"U.S. Senate Report: Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007"

"Global Carbon Tax Urged at UN Climate Conference" - This is a good one. Remember the UN's "Food for Oil" scandal? Think we could trust them to manage a foolish tax like this?

"Over 100 Prominent Scientists Warn UN Against 'Futile' Climate Control Efforts"

"Skeptical Scientists Urge World To ‘Have the Courage to Do Nothing' At UN Conference"

Do you really think ethanol would fix it? Isn't it possible that Al Gore's hype about global warming is a lot like yelling 'FIRE' in a crowded theatre?

Think about it.........

Appreciate your freedoms

2007-11-27T08:15:00.000-08:00

If you live in the United States, like I do, then I sincerely hope you appreciate what you have here.

Compare your existence with this:

"A woman who was gang-raped over a year ago in the Saudi capital of Riyadh was sentenced to six months in jail and 200 lashes. Her crime: Being in the car of a man who was not a relative.

She had initially been sentenced to 90 lashes on charges of violating the rigid Saudi laws on segregation of the sexes. However, the number of lashes was more than doubled because of her "attempt to aggravate and influence the judiciary through the media," Arab News reported. Her lawyer's license to practice law was confiscated, and he has been summoned to a disciplinary hearing, after expressing public criticism of the original verdict.

The seven men convicted of raping the 19-year-old woman were not beheaded, but rather sentenced to between two and nine years in prison. Three of the convicts were also convicted of raping her male companion.

On Sunday, Saudi Arabian authorities carried out the kingdom's 136th beheading of the year, surpassing by far its combined totals for the two previous years. The latest victim was a man convicted of murdering another with an assault rifle.

Saudi Arabia often defends its practice of beheading by explaining that it follows an interpretation of the Quran by which the crimes of murder, drug trafficking, rape and armed robbery are punished by public execution with a sword. Those convicted of sodomy, apostasy and certain other offenses can also be beheaded in the kingdom.

Nearly 40 people were beheaded in Saudi Arabia in 2006, including four women, and between 83 and 90 the year before, including two women."

Notice two things here. First, the men that raped both the woman and her male friend were given a jail sentence of less than a year, to nine years - not beheading. Second, Saudi Arabia claims it bases it's beheadings on a religious principle, which includes rape in the 'approved' list.

So, why were these rapists given jail sentences and not beheaded? Isn't this a direct violation of the Quran, by their interpretation? Wouldn't this be an affront to their god, Allah? And if they are willing to break their religious code for this situation, doesn't this indicate they are willing to break it elsewhere, making them untrustworthy?

And why was this woman's sentence increased from 90 lashes to 200 lashes? Because she made her plight public?

Personally, I'm glad she did. This allows the world to really understand the injustices that occur in these Islamic countries. I can only offer sympathy and outrage at the punishment placed on her by the Saudi "legal" system. They screwed up, and they're embarrassed. They should be!

Sources:
BBC
Daily Mail
CBS News

2007-10-10T09:19:00.001-07:00

The cartoon comes from an Abbas newspaper, Al-Hayat al-Jadida, the largest Palestinian Authority (PA) daily newspaper controlled by PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.

In the background is the silhouette of a U.S. B-2 bomber. The Muslim's prayer is written on each missile (translated in the lower left corner).

This comes from the same folks that the U.S. is trying to help. This cartoon is only one example of the hatred towards the U.S. from a group we are trying to help. This hatred extends even into their schoolbooks.....

So why the hyphenated American?

2007-09-24T13:01:00.000-07:00

So, I've always wondered..."Why do people hyphenate their ethnicity?" I know that many folks hyphenate their last names, which is fine, except that it just makes their last names longer. I suppose one day centuries from now, the hyphen will get dropped, and their last names will become one word. But that's a topic for another time.

I'm thinking about ethnicity this time around. Now, I don't believe in this whole "race" thing, I believe that there is only one race, the human race, and that we are all a part of it. Within the human race, their are different ethnicities, which most people simplify by skin color. But it's not that simple. The Random House Unabridged Dictionary defines Ethnicity as "ethnic traits, background, allegiance, or association", which is supported by the anthropological definition "Ethnicity is thus a concept describing a particular way of drawing boundaries between groups ", so the amount of melanin in your skin is not the only factor you can use.

It has been shown by Genetic Anthropology that the human race came from one woman, Mitochondrial Eve. As a result, it can be expected that M. Eve carried the genetic diversity of melanin seen today. Because people migrated in groups where they had similar physical features, or ethnicity, to other parts of the African, Asian, and European continents, the separation of cultures resulted.

Why is it so important for people to identify themselves by a dual, or hyphenated, ethnicity? Do they feel they must provide an explanation to others, or is it something that comes from pride? There's not one thing wrong with being proud of you heritage, I just wonder about the reasoning for it.

I can't say that I see any advantage by going around claiming I'm a Belgian-Swedish-American, when I'm simply an American. For me, that's enough. But maybe for others, it's not.

At any rate, I've compiled a list of hyphenated ethnicities for the most prominent citizens of this country, the Presidents.

	Name	Term	Ethnicity
1	George Washington	1789 - 1797	British
2	John Adams	1797 - 1801	British
3	Thomas Jefferson	1801 - 1809	British
4	James Madison	1809 - 1817	Scottish
5	James Monroe	1817 - 1825	Scottish
6	John Quincy Adams	1825 - 1829	British
7	Andrew Jackson	1829 - 1837	Irish
8	Martin Van Buren	1837 - 1841	Dutch
9	William Henry Harrison	1841	Belgian
10	John Tyler	1841 - 1845	British
11	James Polk	1845 - 1849	Scottish
12	Zachary Taylor	1849 - 1850	British
13	Millard Fillmore	1850 - 1853	British
14	Franklin Pierce	1853 - 1857	Welsh
15	James Buchanan	1857 - 1861	Scottish
16	Abraham Lincoln	1861 - 1865	British
17	Andrew Johnson	1865 - 1869	British
18	Ulysses S. Grant	1869 - 1877	Scottish
19	Rutherford B. Hayes	1877 - 1881	Scottish
20	James Garfield	1881	British
21	Chester Arthur	1881 - 1885	Welsh
22	Grover Cleveland	1885 - 1889	British
23	Benjamin Harrison	1889 - 1893	British
24	Grover Cleveland	1893 - 1897	British
25	William McKinley	1897 - 1901	Scottish
26	Theodore Roosevelt	1901 - 1909	Dutch
27	William H. Taft	1909 - 1913	British
28	Woodrow Wilson	1913 - 1921	Scottish
29	Warren Harding	1921 - 1923	British
30	Calvin Coolidge	1923 - 1929	British
31	Herbert Hoover	1929 - 1933	British
32	Franklin D. Roosevelt	1933 - 1945	Dutch
33	Harry Truman	1945 - 1953	British
34	Dwight Eisenhower	1953 - 1961	German
35	John F. Kennedy	1961 - 1963	Irish
36	Lyndon Johnson	1963 - 1969	British
37	Richard M. Nixon	1969 - 1974	British
38	Gerald Ford	1974 - 1977	British
39	Jimmy Carter	1977 - 1981	British
40	Ronald Reagan	1981 - 1989	Irish
41	George H. W. Bush	1989 - 1993	British
42	William J. Clinton	1993 - 2001	British
43	George W. Bush	2001 - 2008	British

*Ethnicity determined by genealogy information or surname root.

25 British-American Presidents
8 Scottish-American Presidents
3 Dutch-American Presidents
1 Belgian-American President
1 German-American President
3 Irish-American Presidents
2 Welsh-American Presidents

Slow news day?

2007-07-16T21:36:00.000-07:00

The front page of the July 16th Oregonian carried the line "Soldiers still go over the hill even in an all-volunteer Army."

My immediate response was, "Must be a slow news day for this left of left newspaper....." I mean really, is this a surprise to anybody? Of course there's going to be deserters in an all volunteer military. Just like there's going to be folks who start a job one day with high hopes, and find out it's not what they envisioned, so they don't go back. Military life is not easy. The demands are great, and the rewards are almost non-existent.

In my last year at Camp Pendleton, 1979, I had attained the rank of Sergeant. As such, one of my duties was to stand watch at Battalion Headquarters. I didn't wander around with a rifle - I didn't have any weapons. I sat at a desk in the building. I had a log book, which I dutifully wrote in each hour, indicating all was quiet. The intent was to have a single point of contact during off-hours in case of emergency. I was.....the night watchman. In a combat situation, this would be a more serious position to be in, but we weren't at war.

Due to the extreme boredom of the post, aside from the occasional visit by the Officer-of-the-watch, I started taking a 13" black & white TV with me. Well, this had the effect that a porch light does to bugs, and soon I had a few extra people around me. Turns out, these extras were living upstairs in the building, even though this was an office. They were awaiting their paperwork for dishonorable discharges for desertion.

One guy didn't seem to think it was any big deal, he was just looking forward to getting on with his career outside. He decided to share his reason for deserting with me, and got very animated about telling me, too.

"Sergeant, let me tell you how it was. You know how little we earn, and I'm just a Private. But one night I was out at a bar, and this guy sits down next to me. We start talking, and I find out he drives a truck - a semi! He told me how much he made driving that truck. It was a fortune, at least $30,000 a year! He said he could hook me up, I could ride with him, learn to drive, get my license, and his company just might hire me!"

I said, "Yeah, too bad you broke your contract with the Marine Corps."

He didn't miss a beat, "This guy said we'd be on the road all the time, so they'd never miss me. I'd be better off anyway, with more money. So I met him a few days later, and off we went. I worked with him for six months, and made a butt-load of cash."

"So, how did you end up back here?" I asked. "Well," he said, "I got too confident, and the FBI was waiting for me at a truck stop. But it's no biggie, 'cause once I'm outta here, I'll be back on the road in my truck. I'm going to buy my own truck, that's where the money's at, running your own rig."

So, here's one guy out of several in the room, watching my little TV. The fact that he broke a contract, is getting a dishonorable discharge - and who knows what else, but is happy about his decision to run during peacetime tells me that he's not alone. He didn't leave because he'd had a bad experience in war, he left because he wanted more money. It was all about him. And I'm glad he left, because I wouldn't have wanted to be stuck with him in a foxhole.

He would have only been thinking of himself.

So where's the story in the Oregonian's front page headline? It had to be a slow news day for them. Or, they're just trying to keep their usual liberal non-stories in readers faces, like the mother who keeps putting the rice cereal to her baby's mouth. Only the mother knows what she's doing, the baby just accepts - until one day it grows wise.

Memorial Day 2007

2007-05-30T09:29:00.000-07:00

So I get this wonderful, feel good video about supporting the military, and at the end, it says "Each and every Soldier needs our support..."

Why did she limit this to those in the Army? Why do people insist on grouping every military person under the name "Soldier?"

Why?

So I'll go over it again:
Soldiers are personnel in the ARMY
Sailors are personnel in the NAVY
Airmen are personnel in the AIR FORCE
Marines are personnel in the MARINE CORPS

Miltary, Military personnel, Troops...these are acceptible terms for grouping all our Military personnel into one easily handled word. NOT "Soldiers," unless of course, you are referring to someone in the ARMY!

Thank you. my rant is done for the day.

Remember Me

Semper Fi

Military Wives Song

Traffic Safety and individuality

2007-04-25T14:32:00.000-07:00

So driving to work one day a mini-truck with a shell pulled out in front of us - safely, and headed off in the same direction as we were going. It took a few minutes for me to realize that the lights on the back of the truck had been modified. Each brake light had been replaced by a single row of red LED's, and relocated low on the back of the truck.

I figured I'd check this out, and see if this guy was pushing the limits of the law, not to mention traffic safety.

The Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 816.100 (5)) indicate that the lights must be "plainly visible and capable of being seen and distinguished from a distance of 500 feet to the rear of the vehicle in normal daylight." I doubt that these meet this statute.

I noticed that the owner was also using his brake modified brake lights as the turn signal. Okay, I'm old enough to remember when there were cars on the road that were made this way. But this truck is not anywhere near the age where it would have rolled off the factory floor like this.

The ORS (816.100) indicates that the turn signal should be a separate indicator from the brake light, and should be yellow or amber. It doesn't come right out and say that the brake light and turn signal can't be a combined unit, but it does discuss these indicators separately.

Why is this bouncing around in my head? Because it appears to me that this is a safety factor, and being that, it affects you, me, and the driver of the truck. If we don't see his brake lights or turn signal well enough, then we can't make the traffic decisions that we need to make to drive safely.

But hey, you decide.......

National Geographic Magazine

2007-03-22T15:01:00.000-07:00

In the February 2007 Edition of National Geographic Magazine, there's an article about the amazing sea worms around Hawaii - "Hawaii's Unearthly Worms."

The pictures, taken by Darlene A. Murawski, are stunning. The variety of shapes and colors that these marine worms come in keep you turning each page to see the next one. These aren't your typical backyard earthworms. It's an excellent photo essay on this type of sea life.

So, it's with disappointment when several pictures in, one comes to the picture of a Ptychodera flava, or Acorn Worm. The journalist, Jennifer S. Holland, points out that this worm has "gill slits like those of sharks" but then she feels compelled to end this statement with "—and embryonic humans."

Do embryonic humans have gill slits? Is this a remnant of evolution?

National Geographic has never shied away from any opportunity to support the theory of evolution, and only quietly retracted it's "facts" when proven wrong. So, once again they have attempted to claim evolutionary proof in this subtle picture caption, which I'm sure many folks would nod their head in agreement over, because after all, this is "National Geographic," and isn't this what we've been told throughout our years of biology in public school?

But is it true? DO embryonic humans have gill slits?

The answer, of course, is NO! Are there skin folds on the embryo that resembles gills one might see on non-human embryos? Yes. But they are not gills, future gills, or even remnants from some evolutionary past. They are merely the result of cartilage forming under the skin, which will become unique structures in the neck, such as the voice box.

The idea that human embryo's have gill slits was perpetrated in 1866 by Dr. Ernst Haeckel, an early convert to Darwinism. See Biogenetic Law. Haeckel not only falsified his illustrations of the human embryo to fit his claims, he also fabricated a life form which he called the Moneron, going so far as to give a scientific name, Protomyxa aurantiaca. Of this life form, he claims "The Protomyxa aurantiaca is distinguished from the other Monera by the beautiful and bright orange-red colour of its perfectly simple body, which consists merely of primæval slime, or protoplasm."

His falsification of evidence was eventually proven in 1874 by Wilhelm His, Sr, a famous comparative embryologist of the day and professor of anatomy at the University of Leipzig. On Janurary 9, 1909, Dr. Haeckel admitted his fraud in a letter to a scientific journal.

In today's world, any serious Embryologist would deny that human embryos have, or have ever had, gill slits. This is a lie perpetuated by folklore, and bad comments in widely respected publications like National Geographic.

Protomyxa aurantiaca: Ref. 5, Vol.2, p. 380, Ernst Haeckel, The History of Creation

And the Oscar goes to..........

2007-02-28T08:35:00.000-08:00

On February 25th, 2007, a grand awards ceremony took place, with much fanfare and hoopla, televised to homes across the globe.

Why were these people being rewarded? Because they made movies, which did nothing to improve life on earth, advance medical technology, or feed the hungry. They did not increase your paycheck, pay off your debts, heal your body, or put out a fire.

In other words, it was a ceremony to honor people that did nothing for anyone else. In contrast, two local policemen, who put their lives on the line every day for public safety, will receive awards from their department. There will be no television cameras, no fanfare, no designer clothes, and no fancy dinners afterwards. They will not be household names, and they will not be driven about in a limousine.

So, in my opinion, the Oscar belongs to..........Our Firemen, Policemen, and Military. When I go to sleep at night, I don't feel safe because Alan Arkin, or any of the other "winners" made a movie. I feel safe because there are real people out there, like Officers Meza and Wilson.

Burial of Christ and His family?

2007-02-27T09:38:00.000-08:00

There's plenty of good blogs about why James Cameron latest "documentary" is wrong. So I'll list some after a brief comment, and leave it at that.

In past blogs, I've talked about how people, or sheeple, are being led by the media. They have no personal filter to control the information that's being presented to them, especially by the media, and trust of the media is near total.

Jim Davila's Blog (Professor of Early Jewish Studies, St Mary's College)
Chris Heard's Blog (Associate Professor of Religion, at Pepperdine)
Todd Bolen's Blog (Associate Professor of Biblical Studies, in Israel)

Past blogs about media educating the masses:
Idiocracy - Not just a movie
History by television - The dumbing of America
An inconvenient truth...or theory?

Idiocracy - not just a movie....

2007-01-29T13:40:00.000-08:00

When I initially made the impulse grab which added "Idiocracy" to the handful of movies I was bringing home, I thought it was another silly, yet entertaining movie along the lines of "Mom and Dad Save the World."

I was right, and wrong. There seemed to be a lot of truth to this movie. The future society in this movie had become, well, ignoramuses. Everything they did was based on some form of self gratification - watching TV, monster truck competitions, and sex. The populous had forgotten how to care for themselves, the government was barely functioning, and what was left of industry existed by convincing people, through advertising, that their product was the best for them. and the population believed it.

One glowing example of this was for a sport drink, that claimed to be better than water, and even had "electrolytes." When Luke Wilson, the main character who has awoke in this future after several hundred years in a suspended sleep, asks one person what electrolytes are, the response is a statement taken from the company's commercial. Nobody knows what electrolytes are, but they've been told they're good, so they accept it.

The acceptance of the goodness of this sport drink is so widespread, that farms are failing because water has been replaced by it. "It has electrolytes!" In fact, water is ONLY used to flush the toilet.

A few blogs back, I talked about a conversation I overheard in a supermarket, where a young man was expounding on the history of banana importation into the United States, based solely on his revelation while watching a Three Stooges movie. I was reminded of the conversation while watching Idiocracy. It was then that I realized how much truth this movie really contained. I realized that Idiocracy was already creeping into our society, and had been for some time.

You see this in politics, and it's pundits. Who needs facts, if the statement being made will incite people to rally behind your cause? Take, for instance, an event around the Grand Canyon. Jeff Ruch, executive director of a group called PEER (Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility) has decided to make an issue over a book that is sold in the National Park Services bookstores, which is contrary to his beliefs. Many followed his crusade, including the publisher of Skeptic magazine, Michael Shermer.

Mr. Shermer dutifully picked up on Mr. Ruch's rant, and made a show of support on his website, making a point of Mr. Ruch's claim that the NPS was being gagged by the Bush government. Reaching even further, Garry Trudeau, the Doonesbury cartoonist, seize's this opportunity, and includes this information in his Jan. 13th cartoon strip.

The problem here is Mr. Ruch's is wrong. Once Michael Shermer started looking into PEER's claims in their original press release, he found that Mr. Ruch's had fabricated a few things. On Jan 17th, Mr. Shermer published an update to his Jan. 10th article. In "Fact Checking 101," he goes through the allegations made by PEER, and what he found the the truth to really be. He admits that he was fooled, and credits his followers for alerting him to the truth.

Gene Weingarten, in his Oct. 22nd, 2006 Washington Post Magazine story about Garry Trudeau, makes the observation "When he (Trudeau) reads a book, he edits in the margins, correcting errors of grammar, syntax or cloudy thinking." Will Mr. Trudeau follow in Mr. Shermer's footsteps, and make a correction for the "cloudy thinking" that he was fooled into following, and subsequently passed on to his readers? A quick internet search shows many have been deceived by PEER's allegations, but few have actually tried to find the truth.

Idiocracy. It's here, and it's real.

An Inconvenient Truth...or Theory?

2007-01-16T12:55:00.000-08:00

Okay, what's the difference between "truth," and "fact?"

Not a lot, actually. "Truth" is based on "fact." What is "fact" then? Well, "fact" is defined as something that exists, has existed, been observed, or occurred. It is NOT a theory, opinion, or assumption. A fact can be proven.

So, is global warming a fact? Yes, it is. It can be measured, it can be compared to historical meteorological documents, showing an increase in global temperatures. Is this a new event in earths history? Not according to Karen Bice, a Paleoclimatologist at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Observatory. From her research, she has found that the Atlantic Ocean may have once been a steamy 107 degrees (F), 25 degrees higher than it is today.

Of course, this was during the cretaceous period. According to popular scientific theory, this was the period of time that life on the earth flourished, and there was very little ice to be found, except in the North and South poles. But that steambath existence eventually ended, and the ice age arrived, ending almost 20,000 years ago (according to the USGS). Then everything froze.

So, if mankind wasn't around during the cretaceous period to wreak havoc on the earths environment, what caused the ocean to heat up? Well, I don't know of anyone that was there, so only research and speculation can provide some ideas.

“(Karen Bice's) study addresses how the ocean-climate system changed in the past, long before people had any impacts,” said paleoceanographer Mark Leckie of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

".....Long before people had any impacts." What does this tell us? It says that we are a very arrogant bunch, thinking that we can have such a destructive affect on the global environment. The earth has it's own cycles, and we're only here for the ride.

**Update:
On February 25th, 2007, Al Gore received an Oscar for his movie, "An Inconvenient Truth." This alone should set off alarms to most folks, showing them just how dull the media really is, by honoring a faux documentary. But then again, the celebrated mockumentarist Michael Moore was also given an Oscar in 2003 for his staged film.

Is anyone really surprised?

Mary Poppins - Trend Setter

2006-12-12T11:29:00.000-08:00

My daughter was watching MaryPoppins on TV last night, and I would pop in occasionally to catch a glimpse of what was happening. After all, I was seven when it came out, and I got the rare treat to go see it in the theatre.

But what caught my attention this time was Bert's (Dick Van Dyke) dance with the penguins. It was funny when I first saw it - how ridiculous he was when he stretched his pants down to mimic the penguins. Then it hit me, this was a trendsetting moment, in 1964! It took forty years to catch on, it was so far ahead of it's time, but the young folks embraced it.

Who would have thought Mary Poppins could have bridged the fashion gap as initiating the baggy pants style?

Hezbollah, using the public as a shield

2006-12-06T08:09:00.000-08:00

Watch these videos of captured Hezbollah terrorists discussing their tactics that included using civilian buildings to hide in, store munitions in, and using the civilian population as a shield.

Video 1
Video 2
Video 3

The media used images of destroyed family dwellings to indicate how terrible things were in the Israel-Hezbollah conflict in Lebanon, yet these terrorists admit that they used civilian housing to launch missiles from, in order to attract Israeli tanks, and the destruction of the home. One terrorist said that 90% of the civilian population in one city had sent keys to their homes to Hezbollah for their use! 90%!

This puts a different light on organizations like the UN Refugee Agency, aka UNHCR, which is asking for donations to rebuild these same "donated" homes. A BBC article contains a quote from a Lebanese citizen, which says "I feel very bad to see what Israel has done here - ever since 1948 they have done evil to civilians on our side." But now there's an admission from a Hezbollah member that Hezbollah used the citizens for their own twisted purposes, which made Israel look like the bad guy.

But, truth will prevail. Hezbollah is not the savior it wants the world to think it is.

Thirteen days since...

2006-11-20T10:25:00.000-08:00

Okay, it's been thirteen days since Democrats have won a major replacement race in the US government. What does this mean for US citizens?

So far, not much. There's some feather fluffing going on, such as calls to increase the income tax, and to bring back the draft. Some Democrats are seeing this as an opportunity to push through their long repressed desires, while others are taking a more cautious, patient, approach.

Looking outside the US will give us some idea of what the recent election means:

"Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Friday called U.S. President George W. Bush's defeat in congressional elections a victory for Iran."

Abu Hamza al-Muhajir, the leader of al-Qaida in Iraq, praised the American people for handing victory to the Democrats, saying: "They voted for something reasonable in the last elections."

It's obvious how terrorists feel about the election results, which I can only hope sends a clear message to the Democratic majority in congress, just as the election results hopefully sent a clear message to Republicans.

An Israeli commentator said this of the results: "Women in the US that voted for a Democrat might as well go out and buy a burka, because that's what the end result will become."

I hope not. But looking at past Democratic attitudes, it may be a true statement;

Which party has defined the war on terror as a “law enforcement” issue to be handled by U.S. courts and law enforcement?
Which party would work to outlaw NSA wiretapping, aggressive interrogations of terrorist detainees, and other intelligence tools vital to preventing a repeat of 9/11 or worse?
Which party would work full time to obstruct U.S. intelligence agencies, and the U.S. military in their efforts to win the war on terror?
Which party would withdraw (“cut and run”) from Iraq, thereby handing Jihadists a major victory, both strategically and psychologically as Clinton did in Somalia?
Which party has constantly compared the war in Iraq to Vietnam in an attempt to further weaken the resolve of the American people?
Which party has continued to devastate U.S. troop morale by declaring that America cannot win in Iraq, or by accusing American soldiers of terrorist acts against Iraqi civilians?
Which party has compared conditions at Guantanamo Bay to Nazi prison camps during World War II, and accused the Bush administration of violating the Geneva Convention?
Which party has persisted in their attempts to give captured terrorists and enemy combatants trials in our federal court system rather than under military tribunals?
Which party has blamed American foreign policy for 9/11 and the war on terror in general?
Which party has opposed the strategic missile defense system initiative?
Which party has historically opposed and cut military and intelligence spending?
Which party opposes military recruitment on college campuses?
Which party has a history of appeasement of our enemies rather than confrontation?
Which party has stated that we are creating terrorists and implied that if we withdraw (“cut and run”) from Iraq, the terrorists will leave us alone and not attack us anymore?

The answer to all these questions is Democrats. The same group which is now in power.

What do we have to look forward to in 2007? We shall see. Like him or not, we have NOT had a repeat of 9/11 under this President, or the Republican dominated congress. Will we be able to say the same under a Democratic congress, or after 2008?

The human condition

2006-11-17T10:25:00.000-08:00

As I was doing some housekeeping on my pc, I came a cross an old link, one I hadn't visited in a while. It's a shame, because this site is one of the best I've seen that really shows the human condition, culture, and society.

The site I'm talking about is FOUND.

FOUND is essentially a database of stuff. Stuff that's been discarded, lost, or forgotten, and once again found - but not by the original owner, or recipient. This rediscovered stuff - notes, letters, pictures, signs, etc. - are sent in by the finder, sometimes with a comment. The website allows viewers to leave their comments and observations.

You never know what you'll see next, and often the language is vulgar. At one time, this type of language wasn't socially, or publicly acceptable. Today it's tolerated, and in a lot of cases, accepted as proper expression.

Sometimes sad, sometimes funny, it makes a good study of who we are. FOUND is a look in the mirror of society.

The human condition.

"Infringed" VeggieTales on NBC

2006-09-13T09:00:00.000-07:00

Deleting swearing, sex and violence from films on DVD or VHS violates copyright laws, a U.S. judge has ruled. "Their (movie producers) objective ... is to stop the infringement because of its irreparable injury to the creative artistic expression in the copyrighted movies," the judge wrote. "There is a public interest in providing such protection."

"Creative, artistic, expression,.......a public interest in providing such protection."

But when this "creative artistic expression " involves God, it's okay to edit. Evidently there isn't "a public interest in providing such protection" in this case. Where's the producers ( Steven Spielberg, Robert Redford and Martin Scorsese, and thirteen others ) standing up against the editing of this content? Where's U.S. District Judge Richard Matsch, the judge who made this ruling?

"These films carry our name and reflect our reputations. So we have great passion about protecting our work ... against unauthorized editing" stated Michael Apted, the president of the Directors Guild of America. So if editing the objectionable content from a piece of work is "...irreparable injury to the creative artistic expression," then how could any producer "authorize" the editing of their work?

Easy. It's called money, something that's paid to the copyright owner for use of their product. Your probably thinking that YOU paid for the DVD you have at home, therefore YOU own it. That's wrong thinking. You paid for the material, labor, and right to have a copy of the movie at home to view. You don't have the right to alter it. In today's world where movie production can be done on the home computer, you could easily edit your personal version of a movie. But don't get caught. It's not really yours.

On September 9th, 2006, the CG show "VeggieTales" appeared for the first time on NBC Saturday morning cartoon programming. But this isn't the same VeggieTales you would find when you purchase the DVD or the VHS, no, this is a version that's been edited to meet the requirements of NBC. What are those requirements? Well, "God," "Jesus," and Bible verses must be removed. They aren't acceptable subjects for children to be exposed to, like, say, violence, sex, and swearing.

NBC could have placed a warning on the cartoon, like "PG-G", for "Parental Guidance required due to "God" content." But no, it's easier to require the removal of the "religious" content, to impose "irreparable injury to the creative artistic expression" of VeggieTales.

The one hope, as expressed by creator Phil Vischer, is that people will enjoy the NBC aired cartoon enough to go out and buy a local copy, the uncut copy, at Walmart, or any Bible store.

VeggieTales on NBC's Saturday cartoon lineup: It's Judge Matsch's "infringement" in reverse. Or is it religious intolerance? Maybe secular bias?

http://www.cbc.ca/story/arts/national/2006/07/09/film-scrubbing-ruling.html

http://www.philvischer.com/index.php/?p=18

http://townhall.com/Columnists/BrentBozellIII/2006/09/08/nbc_slices_and_dices_veggie_tales

Steve Centanni and Olaf Wiig are free; Gilad Shalit isn't

2006-08-31T15:51:00.000-07:00

Journalists Steve Centanni and Olaf Wiig have been freed from their Palestinian captors. They were taken captive while in Gaza, and remained captives for thirteen days.

What were they doing in Gaza? Reporting for Fox News! They weren't trying to blow themselves up in a marketplace, or plant a bomb.

Gilad Shalit wasn't doing any of that either. He was peacefully going about his duty as an IDF soldier, on Israeli soil, when Palestinian terrorists tunneled through Israeli soil, killed two IDF Soldiers, wounded one, and kidnapped Cpl. Shalit.

Now the release of the two Fox News reporters places the Palestinian Terrorist government with a positive public facade. But what about Cpl. Shalit?

Well, of course, the Cpl. Shalit situation is different. He is after all, a Jew. And the Palestinian leadership has started to implement their desire to eliminate Jews.

Of course, the UN is as effective as usual, with Annan sitting back and saying "stop that, don't do that, you're not a nice person" like the powerless wimp he is.

So what's the answer? Well, first, Israel needs a government with a spine, one that can commit itself to use it's military to do the job they are capable of. Then, turn that fine IDF loose. Forget what the world thinks, go get your kidnapped people.

Israel - God's promised land!

Hamdaniyah trial - a USMC fastrack CYA?

2006-08-30T12:08:00.000-07:00

Same action, different name.

I've experienced this form of reactionary response while an active duty Marine at Camp Pendleton (1978-1980).

While still proud of my service in the Corps, I remember the dark moment in my tour when the Corps unceremoniously accused me of drug abuse, sent me to drug counseling, and laughed when I employed my Request Mast right for this false accusation. The evidence was obviously against the Corps, and in my favor, but it was never allowed to progress.

I suspect this is the same thing that's going on with the Hamdaniyah/Marine issue. The Marine Corps is trying to save face, instead of standing behind these Marines, and the Corpsman, they are willingly going to sacrifice them for the "good of the Corps."

But, it appears this is going to backfire. At the moment, the Corps is reactivating reservists due to low enlistment. The lack of the Corps to show support for it's people can only hurt it. It's willingness to rush into public condemnation of it's personnel can only be demoralizing - it was for me. I was considering re-enlistment prior to the false accusation, but following the dissapointment of the Request Mass debacle, I decided this was not the Marine Corps I thought it was.

My Marine Corps pride was tarnished. In Boot Camp, you are taught that Marines take care of Marines, and if you are wrongly accused, you can find absolution through Request Mast. It sounds great, but it doesn't work.

If these Marines did what they are being accused of, then where is their commanding officer. Why isn't he being keel-hauled for failure to control his men? Obviously he failed his command.

So, it appears the Marine Corps is playing political games, instead of rallying behind it's personnel. And this is a sad statement.

The Marine Corps hymn has a line that says: " First to fight for right and freedom, And to keep our honor clean." Is this public event an attempt to keep their "honor clean," or to find scapegoats for public appeasement?

For me, it's a matter of trust.

Be careful what you post in your area - but only if God's involved.

2006-08-11T08:26:00.000-07:00

Okay, so I work for a large US company. This company has embraced an attitude of tolerance, inclusion, and acceptance. To a point.

This morning, I walked by a cubicle, which has an 8" x 11" poster prominently displayed promoting a men's "re-education" group, who's intent is to make men more accountable, and instill integrity. So, I looked up "The Mankind Project" to see what they were about.

As far as I can tell, they have very honorable intentions. This is a positive, acceptable organization.

Back in the late 1990's, I worked in a group of technicians, and our office space was setup in an open, "farm" type manner. All technicians shared office space regardless of gender - I make mention of this because it's key to this subject.

One day, a female technician taped up a full page newspaper article about the group "PromiseKeepers" because her husband had attended one of their meetings, and she saw a positive change in him, so she was all for it.

I've never been to one of their meetings, but I was aware of what they promoted. The article was near my desk, and I had no issue with it, I agreed with their premise that men need to be more accountable, and to have integrity. Sound familiar?

A problem arose from this article. I shared a desk with a young lady who worked the shift after me. For several days, I would come in and find the article taken down, and watch as the female tech on my shift taped it back up. Then one day the article was missing, and I was called to my managers desk.

It turned out that the woman I shared my desk with was a lesbian, and she took issue with the article - she found PromiseKeepers to be offensive to her, and her lifestyle. She was mad that the article kept getting put back up, and assumed I was responsible. She turned the article in to her manager with a complaint. This was passed on to my manager, since I was the suspected "offender."

My manager took a laminated, rolled item of her bookshelf, unrolled it, placed it in front of me and asked me if I recognized it. Well, it was the PromiseKeepers article, so of course I told her I did. She then explained about how someone was offended by it, and the whole story about it being taken down and put back up. I realized what was going on, and let her continue with her accusation, feeling very confident in my situation, since it was another woman that was posting it.

When she was done, I informed her that it wasn't my article, and that another person, a female, was responsible for it. After learning about this she realized the mistake, but instead of an apology for a false accusation that could have easily cost me my job, I was reprimanded for not stopping this "offense," since I was a senior tech in that area.

The female tech I shared my desk with was unapologetic, yet accepted a transfer to another state shortly after this.

The point here is that no one has complained about this "Mankind" poster. Why? It's because of the difference between the two. Both endeavor to bring men to an understanding and acceptance of their responsibilities to family, friends, and community. But PromiseKeepers adds one more level of accountability - to God. And that's the rub.

Kofi Annan - "apparently deliberate" kickbacks

2006-07-26T09:06:00.000-07:00

"U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, speaking in Rome on Tuesday, said that an Israeli attack was an "apparently deliberate targeting" of the UNIFIL post. The victims included observers from Austria, Canada, China and Finland."

This was, of course, a terrible thing to happen, but it was far from deliberate. The UN observers were in a combat area, and these things happen in combat areas. Israel issued an apology for this event - Israel has too much integrity to apologize for something they know they were right about.

Now, let's look at who made this comment.

July 26, 2006 "STOCKHOLM, Sweden - The Swedish government knew in 2000 that
Saddam Hussein's government demanded kickbacks from companies participating in the U.N. Oil-for-Food Program, officials and news reports said Tuesday.

Anders Kruse, head of the (Swedish) Foreign Ministry's legal division, said Sweden had forwarded the information to the U.N. committee in charge of sanctions and was told the extra fees were widely known."

This proves that the UN, and Koffi Annan, knew what was going on. So, here we have a corrupt leader, of a corrupt organization, accusing Israel of purposely targeting some of it's people, while trying to protect itself from continued attacks by terrorists.

Kofi Annan needs to look in a mirror, point his finger, and say "You are guilty of apparently deliberate targeting of Iraqi citizens, for greed."

History by television: The dumbing of America

2006-07-18T11:18:00.000-07:00

Yesterday, while standing in the checkout line of the grocery store, I overheard the conversation between the checker, and the young guy in front of me. The checker was commenting on how everyone that had passed through her stand had banana's.

She and the young man chuckled over the trend, and then the young man shared some information he had just learned. He told her about how he had watched the Three Stooges the previous night, and that in one scene they noticed some bananas, and were perplexed over this odd yellow fruit.

He went on to tell her that their interest was because nobody had really seen bananas before, they were new to the US.

At this point, I was intrigued that this young man confused farcical with factual. And I decided to look into this a little more, since I knew his statement was just a little, well, wrong.

In 1871, a railroad across Costa Rica was built by a Brooklynite named Minor Keith. He planted banana trees as he built his railroad, and imported bananas into the US. By 1898, Americans were consuming 16 million bunches a year.

The Three Stooges act started in the 1920's, nearly fifty years after bananas made their appearance in the US. So they would have been well aware of the banana.

It was a sad moment, to see that someone was deriving his history from a tv show, and one that was designed for silliness, at that. It was more disturbing that he felt so sure of his deduction that he shared it as fact publicly. If the checker has any sense, she'll question his info, and do the research. If not, she'll share it with others, who'll share it with others, and so on, until it becomes folklore.

And maybe one day we'll find it entered in Snopes.

Egypt promotes anti-Semitism and child martyrdom

2006-07-05T11:56:00.000-07:00

"Egyptian cleric Sheik Muhammad Sharaf Al-Din appeared on a children's program on Al-Nas television on June 21, 2006, and told a story from Islamic tradition in which a Jewish woman tried to poison Muhammad.

After telling the story, in which the prophet of Islam is miraculously spared, the sheikh took a call from a child viewer. "Ruqaya, what did you learn from today's show?" the sheikh, Muhammad Sharaf Al-Din, asked the child. "I learned that the Jews are the people of treachery and betrayal...."Sheikh Al-Din interrupted the caller, shouting, "Allah Akbar!" Turning to the children in the studio, he instructed:

Say Allah Akbar! What did Ruqiya say? The Jews are the people of treachery and betrayal. May Allah give you success. We want mothers who teach their sons Jihad, the love of Allah and His messenger, sacrifice for the sake of Islam, and love for the countries of the Muslims. Loving the country of the Muslims. May Allah bless you, Ruqaya. That is the most beautiful thing I have heard - that the Jews are the people of treachery, betrayal, and vileness." http://www.memritv.org/default.asp

"An earlier episode (June 15, 2006) of the program for children on the same television station promoted death in the course of Jihad against "infidels." The host of the program, Egyptian Sheikh Muhammad Nassar, of the Egyptian ministry of religious endowment, invited the children to "listen to a very beautiful story to learn about the courage of a child, and how, when a child is brought up in a good home, and receives proper education in faith, he loves martyrdom, which becomes like an instinct for him. He can never give it up.""

Egypt. One of the countries already boycotting Israel, seems to be joining extremist Muslims in their attacks against Israel. Egyptian President Mubarrak exudes a world view as a caring, honest person, yet allows this type of promotion to occur in his country. What kind of people would encourage their children to do what adults should be doing? What kind of people would send their children into battle?

Well, we saw the communists do it in Viet Nam. We saw Hitler forming ranks of young people in Germany. Now we see extremist Muslims doing it - not all Muslims, just those bent on world domination.

2006-06-29T16:13:00.000-07:00

"A Hamas spokesmen responded publicly with hysteria (about the Israeli action). "This is a revolution against human and democratic values," Hamas spokesman Mushir Al-Masri told Al-Jazeera. "This is an international crime and an open declaration of war against the Palestinian nation [sic]... The international community must speak out. Where are the Arab and Moslem countries? The arrrest of the ministers and legislators is not just a blow agains the Palestinian Authority, but against the sovereignty of the parliaments and governments of all the Arab, Moslem and free nations.""

Well, it's very obvious that Hamas is a victim. I mean, all they did was attack an Israeli tank crew of four, killing two, and seriously wounding another, then kidnapped an Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit. Oh, and there's that matter of the daily kassam missiles being sent into Israel from Gaza.

And then there's France. They've condemned the arrests of the Hamas leaders. Naturally. They're probably supplying the kassam missiles. Did I mention that Gilad Shalit is a french citizen?

They should feel grateful that Israel has shown the restraint that it has.

"No WMD's in Iraq!"

2006-06-28T11:49:00.000-07:00

I don't kow about you, but I get really tired of hearing talking heads exclaiming the there were "No WMD's in Iraq!"

This is a blatantly false statement, whether they know it or not. But what if they did know it? I suspect that this misinformation is more about establishing or retaining a following than providing the truth.

After all, it's always easier to accept and believe what you want to, regardless of the facts.

Read this FAX about the WMD's (you'll need Adobe reader).

"We will rule the nations"

2006-06-26T12:43:00.000-07:00

“We will rule the nations, by Allah’s will, the USA will be conquered, Israel will be conquered, Rome and Britain will be conquered…” pronounces a reclining Ghalban in the video, promising to “crush the Jews and expel them from our country Palestine.” He adds, “Just as the Jews ran from Gaza, the Americans will run from Iraq and Afghanistan…"

"The video was produced by the Al-Qassam Brigades terrorist group, the military wing of Hamas. In addition to the Hamas clip, a video from the Al-Qaeda international terrorist organization is posted on the PMW site, featuring pictures of dead and injured American soldiers with English-language captions, including “They Are Coming.”"

The U.S. Senate voted on Friday to block aid to the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority, even as the European Union announced it would provide more than $100 million in aid to PA Arabs.

Watch for senators to start back-pedaling on their votes for this blockage of support. They're a wishy-washy bunch. As for the EU....well, what would you expect?

"Frog in the pot" freedom

2006-06-19T13:19:00.000-07:00

We've all heard the parable about the frog that's placed in a pot of cold water, and then the water temperature is slowly raised, so that the frog doesn't notice - until it's too late, and then he's cooked.

So it is with our freedom. Our fore-fathers enjoyed freedoms that we know nothing about today. Our grandparents did too. And our parents. But with each generation, some freedom was lost, but since the new generation never had that freedom, they have no basis for comparison, and therefore no reason to complain.

Consider the income tax. The United States didn't collect an income tax until 1862, in order to finance the Civil War. The civil war came about mainly because each state was considered sovereign, while agreeing to be a part of a united group of states. This sovereignty was slowly being challenged in the slavery arena, over a period of years. The "northern" states were passing laws against slavery, which allowed for the freedom of escaped slaves in their territory, while the southern states contested the legality of this based on the constitution.

The slow process of passing laws which opposed the constitution was gradually accepted by the people, and those that didn't accept it, the southern states, were forced to accept it. The issue over slavery was a sign to the South Carolinians that if this could be taken from them, then eventually their sovereignty could be taken altogether (See "December 24, 1860 South Carolina "Causes of Secession" document").

I'm not advocating slavery, I'm only using this as an example. So how much freedom has been taken from us over the years by our ignorance? I can't say for sure, but you only have to look at what the government; local, county, state, and federal, have control over.

They can dictate how businesses will run, they control how and where your home is built - on your property. Try to add on to your home, and you'll find that the government has it's hands in that, too. You must have their permission. If you own land, and someone wants to put a mall on it, or a housing complex, all they have to do is work with the city, and the city government can condemn your property, then take it away from you. The city of Keizer, OR. did just that.

How much freedom will you see disappear by the time the next generation comes along?

Just like water heating up slowly......

At Odds: The Media, and Reality

2006-06-13T08:06:00.000-07:00

The Media:
Reuters, June 10th, 2006
"...five family members were among seven Palestinians who died when an explosion tore through the beach in northern Gaza on Friday as Israeli artillery shelled the coastal area used by militants to fire rockets into Israel. ....Armed militants, firing in the air, vowed revenge."We will kill 10 Jews for every one of the Ghalya family martyrs," one gunmen shouted through a loudspeaker."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(June 13, 2006) The Reality:
"Despite hasty condemnation of Israel, IDF finds that the Arab family decimated on a Gaza beach was not hit by IDF artillery. The only other option: A Hamas mine placed there against Israel.

According to the findings, shrapnel taken from two wounded Palestinians who were evacuated to Israeli hospitals showed that the explosives were not made in Israel, the officials said.
In addition, the last Israeli shell fired toward Palestinian rocket launchers who operate in the area was seven minutes before the blast and landed 250 metres away from the scene, the officials said.
Also, after the blast, Israeli military viewed Hamas militants collecting the shrapnel from the area, in an apparent effort to prevent authorities from revealing that the explosion was caused by explosives it had laid, the officials said."

A short comment on politicians.....

2006-06-01T09:22:00.000-07:00

I just wanted to make a short political statement......

Just as Massachusetts has Ted Kennedy, so New York has Hillary Clinton.

You can make your own decision on this paradigm.

PA - Our Friends?

2006-06-01T08:48:00.000-07:00

The picture to the left is from the Hamas Weekly, a publication from Gaza. It depicts a Palestinian boy urinating on the Statue of Liberty, specifically the book she's holding, which is titled "Democracy."

Of course, this isn't the only such cartoon they've carried. Check out http://www.pmw.org.il/ for others.

What's interesting here, is if this picture depicted a young American boy urinating on the quran, there would be world-wide protests.

So, you have to ask yourself, is this government trying to be our friend, or is the U. S. on it's list with Israel to be destroyed from existence? The U. S. must remain strong in it's resolve to fight terrorism.

The U. S. must remain a strong ally of Israel. Israel is a sovereign nation, and should not be dividing it's country up to terrorists, or subjugating itself to others. The U. S. should not condone this divvying up of Israel.

Israel has made three agreements to work with these people, the Oslo Agreement, an agreement in 1993 with Yasser Arafat, and the Gaza withdrawal. Every time Israel is the one that has had to make concessions. All the PA wants to do is continue to cause problems, like a spoiled child that keeps stamping it's foot until it gets what it wants. And they will continue to do this as long as they can get away with it, as long as they have sympathizers.

Or at least until Christ returns.......

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008442

Da Vinci Code - What, me worry?

2006-05-22T15:18:00.000-07:00

The Da Vinci code. This is causing quite a stir these days, and I'm not sure why.

I remember several years ago, stopping at the Borders bookstore at Oakway Center in Eugene, on my way home from church. As I wandered around, waiting for my daughter to pick out a book, I noticed a new book on display called "The da Vinci Code." I was intrigued, because there was also a stir caused by the Michael Drosnin book "The Bible Code." As I started to flip through it, I realized it wasn't what I thought, and that it was a fictional thriller. Even the advertisments around it claimed it as such. I set it back down, no longer interested.

Fast forward to today. This fictional book is now a movie, and causing a stir. But who seems to be stirred up? It appears to be Christians. I haven't met one person who's thrown this book in my face and proclaimed it as proof that my faith is unfounded. I do believe that the author of this book is seeing a new interest in his book, and that people are now accepting it as a fact.

But what's the deal? There's now a flurry of activity within the Christian community around this book, and movie. All kinds of material is now available to refute the "claims" of this book, and resubstantiate the Bible. I don't believe this is necessary, but I do believe that it's important to be informed.

According to the Word of God, there's a way to handle this. Not by arguing with them. Not by defending yourself. But by keeping quiet and continuing to do the good works God has called you to do. Look at Jesus' example when he was highly criticized by the religious establishment of His day. He never fought back. Instead, Acts 10:38 says He simply went about doing good.

Acts 10:38
"..how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power, who went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with Him."

This will aggravate the devil because his primary purpose is to make you ineffective for the kingdom of God. He wants you to get wrapped up in the criticism. He wants to distract you, to get your mind off the job God has given you. He really wants you to quit. Don't do it! Instead, follow the instructions in 2 Timothy 3:14 and "continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of." Silence the ignorant criticisms of men by continuing to do good and by continuing to live by faith. And when all their foolish words have faded away, you'll still be standing strong.

The Da Vinci Code is a distraction!

RU-486 - The Human Pesticide

2006-05-18T10:32:00.000-07:00

RU-486 - Leave an Advanced Directive

The dream pill. Have your fun, pop a pill, and all your worries can be flushed away! An idea as great as the hangover pill.

Or is it?

"Seven women have died during the past five years, including four in California, after taking the abortion pill RU-486. On May 11th, the FDA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the National Institutes of Health gathered in Atlanta, Georgia, partly to discuss the dangers of this pill, and whether women taking it are more susceptible to deadly infection.

Researchers believe that a bacterium, Clostridium sordellii, and not the RU-486 drug, directly caused these women's deaths. However, Dr. Ralph Miech, a pharmacology professor at Brown University, has another idea. He suggests that the abortion pill negatively affects the immune system. He believes that these women died after taking the RU-486 pill because their bodies could no longer keep the dangerous bacterium in check.

The women died from toxic shock caused by a Clostridium sordellii bacterium infection. C. sordellii exists in the vaginas of about one in every 1000 women without causing much harm.

Several doctors argued that the danger from the drug is relatively low, and that it only has a death risk of about 1 in 100,000." This seems like pretty bad odds for something thats completely voluntary, and avoidable. According to the 2000 census, there were 143.4 million women in the U. S. at that time. According to the above doctors, that would mean that 1,433 women that used RU-486 wiould die. And this appears to be acceptable to them, as they feel that this is a relatively low number. But who's going to decide who those women will be?

I think it would be a novel idea to require pharmacies to include a Personal Will & Advanced Directive Kit with each prescription of RU-486. This is a convenience pill, and not a pill required for a health problem. You should get informed about it, and any medication you take. Make an informed decision, not an emotional one.

For a personal story of this pill's use, go here:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?B2B35612D

Cruise control - Dateline NBC - MSNBC.com

2006-05-17T15:52:00.000-07:00

Cruise control - Dateline NBC - MSNBC.com
I watched this story, not because of TC, or his cult, but because I wanted to see how it would be handled. Okay, so Hoda Kotb asked some mildly pointed questions, maybe even irritating to the scientology crowd. What I was hoping for, and didn't happen, was for the story to look into some of the cults' activities. They seemed to focus on the "Celebrity" center. But what about the curious compound near Hemet, CA, which Gilman Springs Road, just SE of Highway 79, runs through? I used to travel this route, when servicing an account in Hemet. It was always a little unnerving, like some kind of retraining compound or prison. I would see uniformed para-militaristic individuals walking back and forth across the road, sometimes hearding bewildered looking people in plain jumpsuit-like outfits, back and forth. I've heard that they've built a tunnel under the road now, so it's probably not as noticeable.

You could see large, hanger-style buildings in the background, and what appeared to be dormitories. One would think that this was some kind of training, or retraining, center. My mind would go racing with thoughts of what might have been going on inside those fences. What were these folks being put through?

Years before, I had the "opportunity' to visit the scientology center in Riverside, CA. It wasn't a voluntary visit. My brother's girlfriend had been visited by some scientologists, who asked her if she would like to be more self-assured, more confident. They eventually convinced her to take a self-help class - for a fee. As a devout LDS, once she realized what had happened, she tried to get her money back. That's where I got involved.

I was home for the weekend from Camp Pendleton, and my brother told me what had happened. He said they were heading over to the Riverside center to get her money back. I said I'd tag along, as I didn't have any plans, and maybe we could hit In-n-Out on our way back home. No such luck.

We arrived at the center, and went in through the entrance, where we were greeted, and asked how we could be helped. When my brother explained the situation, and mentioned that his girlfriend wanted her money back, things immediately changed. We were ushered back into some other part of the building, and my brother and his girlfriend were taken into a room with a "counselor," who promptly locked the door. According to my brother, the counselor asked a lot of questions about why she changed her mind, and if my brother coerced her. then he had her hold some metal pipes, which were connected to a meter, and asked her more questions. He said that according to the machine's responses, she didn't really know what she wanted, and was being controlled by my brother. They came out after a bit, and the counselor left, telling us he'd be back. I peeked in the room, and saw the "machine." as an Electronics Tech, I recognized the "machine' as a simple lie detector. I'm talking Radio Shack here. I've posted a schematic of one here, in case you want to start your own scientology counseling center.

Anyway, this went on for some time, the counselor would come back, they would go into the room, lock the door, and continue with the questioning. I stood in the hallway. at one point, I heard the counselor yelling, and stepped closer to the door to listen. He was shouting obscenities! Good job, bud. He left again, and my brother and his grilfriend came out. She looked like she'd been crying. I told my brother I could hear the guy yelling, and that he should allow that to happen. So the next time he let the guy know that was not acceptable.

By this time I was getting pretty fired up. No body should talk to a woman that way, and why couldn't they just give her the money back? And.......In-n-Out was going to close soon.

Well, they wouldn't give her the money back until she had undergone the "counseling," because they knew that she really did want to take their classes.

So, to make a long story short, this whole thing took about two hours, and finally, we were ushered into an office with some guy that spoke very quietly, very controlled, and she was given her money back. Of course, he told us they would always welcome us back, should we change our mind. Yeah, right.

Of course, Tom Cruise is a real poster child for this group.

Corvallis City Council enacted a tax on cell phones

2006-05-17T14:31:00.000-07:00

Politicians and money. They're always trying to find ways to get more, and never looking for ways to reduce their expenses - or operate within the budget, like the citizens they burden.

The difference here is that they aren't just imposing a tax on the citizens of Corvallis, They're also taxing non-citizens.

Taxation without representation? For those that don't live in Corvallis, but work there and have cell phones, they will have the privilege of paying into this too.

The city says "Without the new revenue, the City Council would have to reduce other property tax-funded services, such as the library, police and fire departments and parks and recreation..." So if out-of-towners are going to pay taxes to support these services, does that mean they can all expect a library card? I would assume so. Just walk into the library after July 1st, show them your cell phone bill with the tax on it, and ask for your card. Why not!

The sad statement here is that the city passed a tax without letting the people vote on it, not that that would make it any more acceptable. I'm sure there are places they could cut, but are too ethically challenged to do so. Many of the folks in this city are employed by local companies and businesses that have frozen, or delayed pay raises for some time now. Everyone except the city bureaucracy.

Personally, I think it's time for a tea party in Corvallis. Corvallisites - your city council needs to be tarred & feathered, then run out of town. You voted them in to make intelligent, informed, and wise decisions.

They've failed you.

Miserably.

Immigration, the Mexico way

2006-05-12T11:20:00.000-07:00

Since May 1st, we should all be aware that there are a number of illegal immigrants living in the United States, and the majority are from Mexico.

They want the U. S. to reform our immigration law so they can be absorbed into our country without going through the present legal method.

So, what does Mexico's immigration law look like? In the April 24th issue of the Providence Journal, J. Michael Wallert provides this information;

"Mexico has a single, streamlined law, seeking to ensure that foreign visitors and immigrants are:

1. In the country legally.
2. Have the means to sustain themselves economically.
3. Not destined to be burdens on society.
4. Of economic and social benefit to society.
5. Of good character, with no criminal record.

The law also seeks to ensure that:
6. Immigration authorities have a record of each foreign visitor.
7. Foreign visitors do not violate their visa status.
8. Foreign visitors are banned from interfering in the country's internal politics.
9. Foreign visitors who enter under false pretenses are imprisoned or deported.
10. Foreign visitors violating terms of their entry are imprisoned or deported.
11. Anyone who aids in illegal immigration is imprisoned."

He goes on to show;

"Mexico's main immigration law welcomes only foreigners deemed useful to Mexican society:

12. Foreigners are admitted into Mexico "according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress." (Article 32)
13. Immigration officials must "ensure (that) immigrants will be useful elements for the country and that they have the necessary funds for their sustenance" and that of their dependents. (Article 34)
14. Foreigners may be barred from the country if their presence has upset "the equilibrium of the national demographics," if they are deemed detrimental to "economic or national interests," if they are not good citizens in their own country, if they have broken Mexican laws, or if "they are not found to be physically or mentally healthy." (Article 37)
15. The secretary of governance may "suspend or prohibit the admission of foreigners when he determines it to be in the national interest." (Article 38)

Mexican authorities keep track of every person in the country:

16. Federal, local and municipal police must cooperate with federal immigration authorities upon request: i.e., help in the arrest of illegal immigrants. (Article 73)
17. A National Population Registry tracks every "individual who comprises (sic) the population of the country," verifying each individual's identity. (Articles 85 and 86)
18. A national Catalogue of Foreigners tracks foreign tourists and immigrants (Article 87), assigning each a tracking number. (Article 91)

Foreigners with fake papers or who enter the country under false pretenses may be imprisoned:

19. Foreigners with fake immigration papers may be fined or imprisoned.
(Article 116)
20. Foreigners who sign government documents "with a signature that is false or different from that which he normally uses" are subject to fine and imprisonment. (Article 116)

Foreigners who fail to obey the rules will be fined, deported, and/or imprisoned as felons:

21. Foreigners who fail to obey a deportation order are to be punished. (Article 117)
22. Deported foreigners who try to re-enter Mexico without authorization can be imprisoned for up to 10 years. (Article 118)
23. Foreigners who violate terms of their visa may be sentenced for up to six years in prison. (Articles 119, 120, and 121)
24. Foreigners who misrepresent the terms of their visa (as by working without a permit) can also be imprisoned.

Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony. The General Law on Population says:

25. "A penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine of 300 to 5,000 pesos will be imposed on the foreigner who enters the country illegally." (Article 123)
26. Foreigners with immigration problems may be deported, rather than imprisoned. (Article 125)
27. Foreigners who "(make attempts) against national sovereignty or security" will be deported. (Article 126)

Mexicans who help illegal aliens enter the country are considered criminals:

28. A Mexican who marries a foreigner with the sole objective of helping the foreigner live in the country is subject to up to five years in prison. (Article 127)
29. Shipping and airline companies that bring undocumented foreigners into Mexico will be fined. (Article 132)

(J. Michael Waller is a professor of international communication at the Institute of World Politics in Washington.)"

Maybe the U. S. should adopt Mexico's Immigration law. But then, laws only keep the honest person honest. The dis-honest person just ignores them.

Walk out? What walk out?

2006-05-03T11:29:00.000-07:00

On May 1st, 2006, large numbers of illegal aliens and their supporters did not show up for work, and agreed not to buy anything in order to send a message to the people of the United States about their relevance here. I wonder if they also refused any social or medical services that day - probably not, as that would have sent the wrong positive message.

There was little affect, as far as I can tell. Life went on. I saw some news comments about it, but otherwise, it was just another day for Joe American.

One guy, who owned a company that was building a multifloor building, said he couldn't get much work done on Monday because a lot of his workers didn't show up. He was convinced that the lost time could be made up with overtime, putting him back on schedule. Hopefully, he won't have to pay for that overtime, since his employees were the ones that decided not to come to work. Or maybe he could fire them, and hire new employees in their place.

If you're still uncertain about the effect illegals have on our country, check out the information at About.com.

I can relate personally from this. Growing up in Southern California as the citrus industry in the area was starting it's decline, I remember a lot of illegals living in the area. Some would live under the canopy of the orange tree, while they were picking. When they left, they also left their mess - empty cans, bottles, boxes, clothing, and blankets. There is a flood control channel that runs along the back of what was one of my parents' orange groves (recently converted to condo's). Illegals would come across the channel at night, and pick oranges. The next day they would bag them up, and sell them at street corners. Now, you might say, "So what's a few oranges?" Unfortunately, it wasn't just a "few oranges," it was several trees worth. When you make just enough to pay the property taxes and upkeep costs for the groves from the citrus harvested, then every orange is valuable.

The other experience is medical care. I've experienced long wait times in Emergency rooms due to the extra load of illegals seeking "free" medical care. My brother is a doctor in a border town, and he's mentioned that his clinic experiences this problem, and the local hospital's Emergency room wait time is a typical 3 hours. They are inundated with non-citizens crossing the border for medical care. And the hospital is required to provide basic care for everyone, by the Federal government. This requirement should be changed to "anyone in the country legally."

This problem is bigger than the individual, because it affects the entire country. It affects our laws, and bending them is not the answer. These people should be trying to make a change in their home countries, and not attempting to force the U.S. to do their will.

If you want to be a part of this country, there is a legal way to do it. Period. No discussion needed.

Supporting Illegal aliens -- not!

2006-05-01T09:57:00.000-07:00

Illegal aliens, regardless of what country, are here, well, illegally. They are NOT "undocumented," they are ILLEGAL. Our prisons are not full of people that performed "undocumented" acts, they are full of people that performed illegal acts. And they are not "immigrants." They are aliens.

Illegal is illegal. It is not changed by using different terminology. Employers that have hired employees which are here illegally have broken the law, our law. And they should be prosecuted for that. Employers that allow employees time off to participate in today's activity should be ashamed of supporting this. I understand that people (legal citizens) have the right to be involved, and if they want to use personal time, or vacation time, fine. But if the company is providing them with specific paid time off to attend one of these events, then they are aiding in this activity, when they should be neutral.

Today's walkout by illegal aliens, and those that support their illegal activity, are showing their real lack of patriotism to our country, and it's laws. They are hurting themselves, and their employers. Hopefully, INS will use this event to round up those that are breaking our laws - and enforce our laws.

I have to wonder, if the illegal aliens think that this will have such a profound effect on the U.S., garnering support in their favor, then why aren't they doing this in their home countries, to bring about the changes necessary for reform and better the lives there, rather than here. Obviously, they aren't doing this to make the U.S. a better place, because they are breaking, not supporting, our laws.

Matthew 24:12, 2 Timothy 3:1-8, and 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7 talk of lawlessness in the end times. Today, we are seeing a portion of this. It is a sad day in U.S. history, when people take advantage of the freedoms fought for by our citizens, both on the battlefield, and the courtroom, freedoms that today are being abused by non-citizens who want to take advantage of the "American dream" by side-stepping the laws set forth by this great country.

Some say they have rights. Yes, in their own countries. But here in the U.S., they do not have rights, because those are for U. S. citizens. Our Bill of Rights does not provide for illegal aliens. They have their own country for that.

And what about churches? There are churches that are supporting this activity - promoting the breaking of the law. They should know better, and one day will answer for this.

Some of those companies supporting this dissidence are:

Tyson Foods (TSN)
-"An Equal Opportunity Employer, M/F/D/V "

Maybe Tyson should add an "I" to their EEO statement, to include "Illegal" status.
"An Equal and Illegal Opportunity Employer, M/F/D/V/I"

Swift & Co.
-"Swift & CompanyÂ® is an equal-opportunity employer committed to diversity in the workplace, ..."

It appears that Swift's "equal-opportunities" and "diversity" here in the U.S. apply to illegal aliens too. Where's the equality in that?

Cargill Inc.
-"If you want to fulfill your potential and are looking for a company that thrives on innovation, values diversity and rewards performance, consider a career with Cargill."

Again, Cargill is following with the mantra - diversity. The pattern set by this, and the previous company's is that diversity includes illegal aliens. I wonder what other laws they're breaking - in the production of foods and elsewhere.

ConAgra Foods Inc. (CAG)
-ConAgra claims "At ConAgra Foods, recruiting qualified, passionate people to join our team ..."

Does "qualified" include a legal status? Evidently not.

Pilgrim's Pride

Well, they make no claims. They just give the impression from the website that they are all- American. I guess they're also illegal-alien.

This is only a glimpse of the companies that are supporting this activity. It's a sad thing. Very sad.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew 24:12 And the love of the great body of people will grow cold because of the multiplied lawlessness and iniquity,
2 Timothy 3:1-7 But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: 2 For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, 4 traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, 5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away! 6 For of this sort are those who creep into households and make captives of gullible women loaded down with sins, led away by various lusts, 7 always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
2 Thessalonians 2:7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way.

We progress, right?

2006-04-26T09:27:00.000-07:00

Well, not really. Look at King Solomon.

Solomon saw injustice to the poor (Eccl 4:1-3), crooked politics (Eccl 5:8), incompetent leaders (Eccl 10:6-7), guilty people allowed to commit more crimes (Eccl 8:11), materialism (Eccl 5:10), and a desire for "the good old days (Eccl 7:10). And he ends with "Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity (Eccl 12:8)."

Have we progressed? Maybe in technology. But as a people, we are that same as we were in Solomon's day. Isn't it sad that after thousands of years, nothing has really changed?

Congress Nears Deal on Illegal Immigrants - Forbes.com

2006-04-06T11:05:00.000-07:00

"As outlined, the measure would ...... offer legalized status to the millions of men, women and children in the country unlawfully. "

So what message is Congress sending out? They're letting everyone know that "You will be rewarded for breaking the law." What will our kids think if they are arrested and put in jail for breaking the law, when Congress sends the message that it's not only okay, but you can also be rewarded for it! And the President supports this!!

Not all approve of this action. Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, and Sen. Johnny Isakson of Georgia, all criticize the measure.

It's time we take back our country from these "politicians" who are willfully ruining it. This hasn't been approved yet, so there time. If you think finding a job now is difficult, wait 'til this apostasy is passed. Email or phone your Senator, and tell him/her to vote against this measure!

Mrs. Clinton Says G.O.P.'s Immigration Plan Is at Odds With the Bible - New York Times

2006-03-29T11:22:00.000-08:00

"Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton invoked the Bible yesterday to criticize a stringent border security measure that, among other things, would make it a federal crime to offer aid to illegal immigrants. "

"It is hard to believe that a Republican leadership that is constantly talking about values and about faith would put forth such a mean-spirited piece of legislation," she said of the measure, "It is certainly not in keeping with my understanding of the Scripture because this bill would literally criminalize the Good Samaritan and probably even Jesus himself," she said. "We need to sound the alarm about what is being done in the Congress."

Hmmm. Her knowledge of the Bible doesn't seem too good. Or maybe it's her usage. She whips out the Bible at this time, but ignores it other times? That shows her conviction of the Bible. It's either all, or nothing, as we see in Rev 3:16. But what else can we see of her intimacy with the Bible?

"I am and always have been pro-choice, ..." (Source: New York Times, pg.A11 Jan 22, 2000)
"[Our] core beliefs and values can guide us in reaching our goal of keeping abortion safe, legal and rare into the next century." (Source: Remarks to NARAL, Washington DC Jan 22, 1999)

The Bible is clear on human life - it is sacred. And the Bible clearly identifies the developing child in the womb as a CHILD. So, the best verse to tie this together is Prov 6:16 - 17 "These six [things] doth the LORD hate: yea, seven [are] an abomination unto him: ...... hands that shed innocent blood,..." What is an unborn child guilty of? Nothing, so it's innocent.

So we see that Hillary's Bible knowledge is very selective, she only pulls it out when it meets her needs, but ignores it when it's a hindrance, as with abortion.

Let's look at her other claims:
"..would literally criminalize the Good Samaritan and probably even Jesus himself.."

What she's talking about is a part in the security measure that "would make it a federal crime to offer aid to illegal immigrants. "

First things first. The good Samaritan was legally in the country. The man he helped was legally in the country. Jesus was legally in the country, and so were the people he helped.

Next. It would be "a federal crime to help illegal immigrants." That statement in itself should be explanatory, but let's look at it anyway. An "Illegal Immigrant" is an immigrant, someone who belongs to one country, but has come to another country. Illegal means "not legal." So an Illegal Immigrant is someone that is in a country against it's established laws. So they are breaking the law, they are a criminal.

What is it called when someone helps a criminal? It's "Aiding and abetting a criminal," which is a felony/misdemeanor.

Aiding and abetting a criminal
1. A criminal offense had been committed;
-(Coming into the country ILLEGALLY)
2. The defendant knowingly associated with the person who committed the crime;
3. The defendant participated in the crime as something he or she wished to bring about;
4. The defendant intended by his or her actions to make the crime succeed.

So, the measure that has Sen. Clinton upset, and inappropriately using the Bible is only making it clear of what is already taking place. People are coming into this country illegally, and other folks, including Local, State and Federal governments, are aiding and abetting them.

Now, I'm not against providing the basic human necessity to these folks, but they should be returned immediately to their own country, and discouraged from coming back unless it is legal. And their country should bear the cost of this activity, not the the offended country.

Finally, a comment from Dick Morris.

"Morris says there was more to Hillary Clinton's bible-themed immigration critique on Wednesday than meets the eye.

Blasting a GOP bill that would make illegal immigration a felony, Mrs. Clinton complained:
"It is certainly not in keeping with my understanding of the Scriptures. This bill would literally criminalize the Good Samaritan and probably even Jesus himself."

Morris tells NewsMax: "The woman who said that she was 'adamantly against' illegal aliens now compares them to Jesus.""

Blasphemy?

Hamas; Offense, or Defense?

2006-03-20T14:18:00.000-08:00

Speaking at a gathering marking 40 days since the death of the head of the Palestinian National Council, (the leader of the Hamas) Khaled Mash’al emphasized the importance of the “Palestinian spirit” in winning the historic battle against Zionism.

In his speech, he said “The liberation [of Palestine] will come with the help of Allah, until it is attained by the last soldier, woman, and child, despite resistance by Israel and the United States… Jerusalem will become Arab and Muslim again, including all the places holy to Islam and Christianity.”

“We and the Zionists have been brought together by destiny. If they want a fight, we’ll be there; if they want a war we’re ready; if they want a conflict we’ll be there however long it takes."

“We have more determination that Israel…We’ll defeat it, with the help of Allah, and we’ll liberate the land.”

He is willing to scrifice every one of his people to fight Israel. But he also has his threats mixed up. He implies Israel is the aggressor, yet Israel has only responded to the aggression shown by the Palestinian terrorists. Not one Israeli has walked into a Palestinian market or restaurant and blown themselves up. Not one Israeli missle has been fired in offense, only defense.

And there's one more point he's missing. God has singled Israel out as his chosen people, and has a covenant with them. He will not allow them to be defeated. Hamas is not going against Israel, they are going against the God of Israel.

I believe we'll see this in our lifetime.

It's not the truth you see in a mirror, it's your personal conviction.

2006-03-15T14:46:00.000-08:00

"In a March 4, 2006 article in the PA sponsored newspaper, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Editor-in-Chief Hafez Barghuthi equates Western institutions with the Gestapo of HitlerÂs Third Reich."There is a new ideological Nazism which has started to dominate the West. It doesn't speak openly about its totalitarian Nazism, but carries it out in practice. I see in many minor and senior Western officials copies of Hitler. Many of the western institutions are as if they are managed by the Gestapo and the S.S. "While the Jews suppose they are safe from this Nazism which is directed towards the people of the third-world and Latinos, they are mistaken. It is not possible that the wolfish Nazi feelings will not eventually turn against them, because the neo-conservative idea is derived from the remnants of the Nazi idea. It is an Aryan supremacy doctrine with new terminology."According to Palestinian Media Watch (PMW), the frequent hatred expressed towards the United States by the PA has significant impact on public opinion amidst its constituents. A recent European poll found that 65 percent of PA Arabs "support Al-Qaeda actions in the USA and Europe." [Fafo - Norwegian-based NGO, in Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, December 23, 2005] PMW Director Itamar Marcus notes that the strong support of violent anti-American support comes in spite of hundreds of millions of dollars in annual US aid to the PA. Marcus asserts that the hatred was documented well before the US announced a freeze in funding, following JanuaryÂs sweeping victory by Hamas in the Palestinian Legislative Council."

(The FAFO website refers to Israel as "Occupied Palestinian Territory.")

In a recent action, S. Con. Res. 79 was approved by the Senate on February 1st and by the House on February 15th. This stops any US Aid to the Palestinian Authority as long as they have a position that calls for the destruction of Israel. The House vote was 418-1, and the Senate vote was unanimous. Hawaii's Representative Neil Abercrombie was the only "No" vote. I wonder why?

Anyway, like most of the folks that hate the US, they are always willing to take our money, and our aid, while trying to destroy us. It seems to me, that it's kind of like trying to blow up the Homeless Shelter that's giving you food and clothes.

An interesting side note, in 2003 the uber liberal Senator Dianne Feinstein of Kalifornia introduced a resolution that the US has a sovereign right to persue and prosecute any person that commits a crime IN the US, and then flees to Mexico. Wow, she must have had a conservative moment. I'm sure she went straight to church for absolution.

Getting back to my title. Have you ever known somebody that looked in the mirror, and saw something other than what was there? Like a woman that sees her reflection as overweight. It's not that they are, it's just that they have convinced themselves of it. And so, it is the same with Hamas, except they see a righteous reflection.

Go figure.

Hamas, today's Gestapo?

2006-03-08T08:43:00.000-08:00

In the Hamas website for children, one page contains an overhead shot of a corpse, draped in a Palestinian flag, being carried on a stretcher. The webpage continues on with a list of all the "martyrs" that have died as a result of "Zionist" (Israeli) attacks.

Odd that it never mentions that the attacks were in response to Qassam missiles that were fired into Israel, or the Israeli gas station owner who was shot to death by two Palestinians, or other unprovoked attacks.

On the UN day of Solidarity with Palestine, authorities displayed a "map of Palestine," with the Palestinian flag in the upper left corner. This is actually the map of Israel.

Hamas has claimed it will destroy Israel. Sounds like genocide. I believe Hitler attempted this, and look where it got him. Hamas is expending so much energy hating and attacking Israel, it's a shame that same energy isn't being used to better the lives of these people.

In Genesis 17:7-8, God deeds the land of Canaan (modern Israel) to Abraham, and his descendants. In approx. the 1200 - 1100 BC timeframe, Israel took possession of Canaan. This was long before the Palestinians.

The Palestinian Media Watch website contains many of the Hamas anti-Israeli statements. Check it out for more disturbing info on Hamas.

The U. S. needs to stand strong with Israel.

Why should immigrants learn English in the US?

2006-02-06T14:31:00.000-08:00

Maybe these examples of immigrants to the U. S. will shed some light on why it would be a good idea for an immigrant to America to learn English:

Charles Atlas, Italy, Bodybuilding
Mikhail Baryshnikov, Soviet Union, Dance
Irving Berlin, Russia, Music
Frank Capra, Italy, Film
Claudette Colbert, France, Film/Theater
Xavier Cugat, Spain/Cuba, Music
Karl Dane, Denmark, Film
Albert Einstein, Germany, Science
Gloria Estefan, Cuba, Music
Felix Frankfurter, Austria, Law
Andy Garcia, Cuba, Acting
Marcus Garvey, Jamaica, Politics
Kahlil Gibran, Lebanon, Literature
Arshile Gorky, Armenia, Art
Sol Hurok, Ukraine, Theater
Al Jolson, Lithuania, Show Business
Elia Kazan, Turkey, Film/Theater
Henry A. Kissinger, Germany, Advisor
John Kluge, Germany, Business
Alfred Levitt, Belarus, Art
Bela Lugosi, Hungary, Film/Theater
Zubin Mehta, India, Music
Hakeem Olajuwon, Nigeria, Sports
Hyman G. Rickover, Russia, Science
Edward G. Robinson, Romania, Film
Knute Rockne, Norway, Sports
Arthur Rubinstein, Poland, Music
Carlos Santana, Mexico, Music
Arnold Schwarzeneger, Austria, Bodybuilding/Acting
Igor Sikorsky, Russia, Aeronautics/Helicopter
Gene Simmons, Israel, Music
Lee Strasberg, Austria, Theater
Arthur Tracy, Russia, Music/Film
Rudolph Valentino, Italy, Film
Baron von Trapp & Family, Austria, Music
An Wang, China, Technology

Did you figure it out? Each one of the above immigrants had to learn enough English to be successful in the United States.

There's a story in the Bible about this issue with language. It's about a place called Babel, where many people were living. God wanted them to go abroad on the earth, but they weren't. He realized that they all spoke the same language, which gave them a great advantage, as they could communicate unencumbered. As a result, they started to build a great tower. So God said, "Look, they're one people and they have one language; this is only the beginning of what they will do, now whatever they can imagine will be possible for them."

Wow! God's saying, because everyone speaks the same language, they'll be able to do whatever they can imagine. So what happens next? God fiddles with everybody's speech, so that now there are groups of people speaking the same language, but each group's speech is different from the other. So they pack up and head out in different directions. They divided. The differences in speech resulted in division, not unity.

For the U. S. , I'd like to see more unity. Think of what we could accomplish!

Ref.: Genesis 11

HillaryCare

2006-01-24T09:29:00.000-08:00

Hillarycare (Socialized Medicine), it's baaaack.

PIHOM Hillary Clinton is again raising her ideals about putting our medical care under government control, so that 'everyone ' can have healthcare.

She claims; "There are now over 45 million uninsured Americans. There are over 13 million uninsured children . . . Premiums are rising at over twice the rate of inflation and the number of employers offering coverage is dropping." Okay, if this is true, then putting healthcare under the government would only degrade the qulity and availability of the service. What would be a better fix, rather than handing out 'free' healthcare, would be to improve the environment for businesses so more folks could be empolyed, and businesses would be more willing to provide a healthcare benefit.

Yet another in another comment she states; "This is a national crisis and a flat-out moral failing." Really? Well, the New Orleans disaster graphically displays the government's ability to respond to a crisis, and why is she imposing her morality on the rest of the nation?

She continues with "We need to make sure all Americans and their representatives know the truth about how our present health care policies are impacting you and your family." Good idea. And how about sharing the truth about how Hillarycare would impact you and your family? Just look at the Fraser Institute's report to the Canadian government on the state of their 'free' healthcare.

in 2004, Hillary Clinton said: "Many of you are well enough off that ... the [Bush] tax cuts may have helped you ... We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." And that pretty much sums up her healthcare plan, too.

"What matters in the liberal-socialist world-view is the structure of the state. Social justice comes, not from individual morality, but from centralized government control that forces equal distribution of income and property." This is where Mrs. Clinton wants to take us, where she, as 'the government,' can tells us, 'the people,' what is right, and what is wrong. This form of tyranny is exactly what our founding fathers wanted to escape.

Freedom doesn't come from the government controlling the people, it comes from the people controlling the government.

Suicide, Murder; It's all okay.....?

2006-01-18T15:40:00.000-08:00

The movie “Paradise Now” tells a tale of two Palestinians which are recruited to become suicide bombers. Hollywood named it this year’s best foreign language film at the Golden Globe Awards. Personally, I consider these folks to be Homicide bombers -- their purpose is to kill others folks.
The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on Tuesday that (Oregon) doctors could legally prescribe overdoses to patients who wanted to kill themselves.

These are sad commentaries of our world's condition today. Life is so cheap.

The problem is that in one case murder is commited out of hate. The second case has legalized murder by a doctor upon request, due to sickness. Both of these are related.

Death and sickness were never a part of the original creation. They were introduced into this world through the disobedience of Adam. Christ delivered us from these curses, yet people still want to claim the unnatural, rather than the natural.

Why? because they're still doing what Adam did, listening to Satan. John 10:10 tells us that Satan came to kill, steal, and destroy; Christ came that we might have life, and life so full that it can't be contained.

Praise God.

Socialized Medicine, or "Hillarycare, Take Two"

2006-01-13T11:31:00.000-08:00

Hillarycare, that "oh, so good" sounding promise of "free" healthcare for everyone, is again looming on the horizon. At least in Oregon, since the Federal government already instituted Medicare, in 1972, which is a socialized medicine for older folks.

Well, now our ex-governor, Dr. John Kitzhaber, is trying to re-work the "free" Oregon Health Plan imposed on the citizens of this state in the 1980's. now, he wants to re-work the plan. Why? Well, probably because he didn't do a good job designing it in the beginning. Or, maybe he wants to be governor again. Either way, Oregonians would lose.

His idea is that "all Oregonians would receive at least basic health care coverage under a sweeping reform plan.." and how would this dream get paid for? Well, naturally, he would use the state money already going to the OHP from taxes. But, he wants to go further, and create more dependency on his program by taxing what ".. the state currently forgoes because employers are allowed to deduct what they spend on employee health insurance. " This will effectively remove the incentive for employers to provide a healthcare benefit to their employees, and at the very least it would cause the cost of this employee benefit to increase beyond the point of affordability. Then you may not have a choice but to use the "new' OHP.

Canada's free healthcare system, according to a report from the Fraser Institute for the government, is nearing bankruptcy. By 2022, they expect the taxes required to support this system to be 50% of a working person's income. It will require 100% of income almost ten years later. Besides the cost, there's the wait time. Canada just released it's report on health care wait times, they say waiting up to 26 weeks for by-pass surgery is acceptable. How many heart patients will die while they're waiting?

The abuse of the OHP is rampant. It's free to those who qualify, and the qualification process is fraught with loopholes. One such case I'm personally aware of involves a young lady. She hired in to an office, and had a choice of taking the employer's health insurance, or OHP. Why did she qualify for OHP? Well, this person happened to belong to a particular ethnic group. That's it, that's all it took! She took the OHP because it was free.

How many illegal aliens are taking advantage of the OHP, but not reporting their wages, which would be taxed.

"Free" healthcare isn't really free. Somebody has to pay for it. And the cost to provide it will continue to increase, just as the system will continue to be abused. The Fraser Report recommends that the Canadian government start charging a copay for service, and allow citizens to purchase private insurance. By doing this it's assumed that the abuse of the system will be reduced to a managable level.

Kitzhaber likened his plan to the public school system. People have a choice to send their kids to public school, or to pay for private schools. Well, either way, a parent pays. In case you didn't notice, public schools are funded and controlled by the government. Kitzhaber wants our healthcare to be under the same control. What do we hear every year from our public school system? "We need more money." We'll hear that from the OHP too. How much money does it take to make something work properly? Well, when it comes to the government, there's never enough money.

Nothing in this world is free. Not even the air you breathe (ever heard of the EPA? They are a government -- aka taxpayer supported -- department).

For a related blog, see: Tuesday, November 15, 2005, "Socialized Medicine in the US, aka HillaryCare"

Unintelligent Design

2005-12-21T08:51:00.000-08:00

"Judge Jones agreed that Darwin's theory of evolution is imperfect. "However, the fact that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation of every point should not be used as a pretext to thrust an untestable hypothesis grounded in religion into the science classroom or to misrepresent well-established scientific propositions.""

Judge Jones is saying that one "untestable" hypothesis, Intelligent Design, is less provable than the theory of evolution? To date, evolution still hasn't been proven, and many of it's attempts have been exposed as hoaxes. Yet he'd rather thrust this "scientific" falsehood on our school kids! Why don't we also go back to teaching that the world is flat ---- oh yeah, we've proven that's not true.

"U.S. District Court Judge John Jones said the decision of the Dover School Board to introduce intelligent design into the classroom violated the constitutional protection of the separation of church and state."

Again, the judge has mis-spoke. Remember your history? The Pilgrims came to North America to escape religious persecution from the government run churches in Europe. They determined that the government would no longer control the church. There is absolutely nothing that says that the church cannot be involved in government, though. This is a misconception that's been passed down, and accepted by nearly everyone. And admittedly, it's a very convenient method of excluding moralty and conscience from everyday life.

Evolution is a powerful belief. Yes, I said belief. Or religion. Many people place their faith in the possibility that it's true. Without a deity to impose morality, people are free to do as they want. How far do you think AIDs would spread if promiscuity and homosexuality weren't socially acceptable today? Morality. It can stop a lot, yet few want it.

Faith (sometimes called 'religion'), is defined as "believing in something unseen." Or "Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence." Sounds like intelligent design, right? Well, geuss what, it also applies to evolution. Judge Jones has made the decision as to what faith will be taught in public schools -- one unproven and demeaning -- evolution.

The author Frank Peretti once said "Our kids sit in a class learning that they came goo for no apparent purpose, then when the bell rings, they head down the hall to a class on self-esteem."
Enough said.

The Big Bang theory. But what about....?

2005-12-07T11:18:00.000-08:00

The Big Bang. It all started there. Maybe.

Scientists have a desire to believe the Big Bang theory of how our universe, and ultimately us, came into being. But, as NASA says in it's Big Bang website,

"Although the Big Bang Theory is widely accepted, it probably will never be proved; consequentially, leaving a number of tough, unanswered questions."

According to a UC Berkeley website on the Big Bang,

" .... the presence of incredibly large amounts of energy, in the form of photons."

So, it all started from a large amount of energy, or photons. Okay, where did the photons come from? Well, that's a mystery in it's self. They preface the previous statement with the comment " It is hard to imagine the very beginning of the Universe. " Yep, I would agree. Especially when your explanation has to provide a way for evolution.

The truth is, the universe, and all that is in it, was created. From nothing, to a fully functioning earth in seven days.

Is that so much harder to believe, than saying "incredibly large amounts of energy came from somewhere, then for some reason started to change into other forms of energy, which then resulted in a large explosion, that ended up forming suns, and planets, and nebulae, and then a sun of the appropriate size formed, along with planets that orbited it, and one planet happened to be just the right distance from it, and happened to have all the right material on it to allow a goo to form, which eventually became people."

Nope. It makes more sense to me that someone planned this whole thing, than to believe it was all just luck.

Socialized Medicine in the US, aka HillaryCare

2005-11-15T12:24:00.000-08:00

"Scampering rats and stray cats and dogs sharing bed space with patients are not uncommon sights at India's overcrowded state-run hospitals that are used by millions of poor and middle-class people."

Think that this only happens in third world countries? Think again. In 1980, after leaving the military and starting college, I worked as a phlebotomist in a county hospital in So. California. Beginning at 5:00 AM, I would start on a floor of the hospital, then move on to other floors to help my co-workers, until all requests were completed.

It was not unusual, while drawing blood at bedside, to watch large, healthy cockroaches scurry across the floor. Occasionally, mouse droppings could be seen on ledges and corners.

So, it's not just in other countries. The county hospitals are where uninsured people go for medical care. They are supported by taxes. They are socialized medical care facilities.

Phil Angelides

2005-11-10T11:36:00.000-08:00

Phil Angelides wants to be the next Governator of Kalifornyah. So who is Phil Angelides?

Well, your first response, after visiting his website, is one of sadness. Sadness that this candidate feels his campaign can benefit from a mocking, slanderous cartoon called "Arnold's Neighborhood." I'm sure he can do just fine without it, but, it does show his character.

Let's look at who's helping him; sen. Barbara Boxer, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, and Assemblyman Fabian Nunez.

Sen. Barbara Boxer feels that we should provide welfare to immigrants, yet doesn't want to allow Churches to provide welfare services; Opposes drug enforcement; Supports socialized medicine. She's considered to be anti-business, and anti-family.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein is pretty much a clone of Ms. Boxer. She's considered to be anti-family, but has a mixed business voting record.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi, well, she's a clone of Sen. Feinstein.

Finally, Fabian Nunez. Well, this picture of the new flag sums Mr. Nunez up --

If these supporters of Mr. Angelides provide any indication of what California will be like when he's elected, then it'll be a sad day for all legal immigrants, past and present. What pride you have at becoming an American will be stripped by this gang of five.

Mr. Angelides should have done better at picking his supporters. So, what it really comes down to for Californians is this, vote for the lesser of two evils, whoever you beleive that to be.

CBS and the New York Times

2005-09-27T11:10:00.000-07:00

What does The New York Times and CBS have in common?
Purporting lies and inaccuracies in their reporting, without a shred of conscience. That's what!

The New York Times Lied.......Twice!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3018505.stm
http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001181535

CBS Lied
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4276489

What can we learn from the problems in New Orleans?

2005-09-07T13:15:00.000-07:00

So, what can we learn from the Katrina damage to New Orleans, and the response from the Government, at all levels?

It should be obvious. If you depend on the government to meet all your needs, they will let you down.

You can only depend on yourself. Less government in your life is a good thing.

Unfortunately, many people made a decision on their own to stay in the storms path, and now they're causing many folks to risk their lives to save them. So maybe government should be helping them, since they can't make informed decisions on their own.

The Blame Game, and other silly notions

2005-09-06T12:23:00.000-07:00

There’s a lot of accusations flying now about who’s at fault for the problems in New Orleans.

Lot’s of folks are jumping right to the top, blaming the President. Didn’t the levee’s need to be updated while Clinton was President? How about Carter?
I suspect it’s because they think Bush is at fault, or they hate him and this is just one more thing they can use to fire people up.

Here’s some proof. The following link is for the New Orleans Emergency action plan. It clearly states that the Mayor is responsible for issuing an evacuation, and the city government is responsible for providing transportation, shelter, and food for evacuees where needed.

http://www.cityofno.com/SystemModules/PrintPage.aspx?portal=46&tabid=26

Did they do their job?

“Nagin and local pols can't say they weren't told. In a watershed article published in Risk & Insurance in December of 2000 by Lori Widmer, Shea Penland, geologist and professor at the University of New Orleans, reveals himself to be a veritable Cassandra: "When we get the big hurricane and there are 10,000 people dead, the city government's been relocated to the north shore of Lake Ponchartrain, refugee camps have been set up and there are $10 billion plus in losses, what then?" he queries. Penland laments the Francophile city's laissez faire attitude, which in the end proved fatal: "These are things I've been preaching for a number of years. This town has never planned ahead. They've always reacted and not pro-acted." Notice what Penland does not do — blame the feds for a localized problem. Ultimately, there's no getting around the fact that New Orleans is responsible for itself.”
(Hurricane Katrina: The Blame Game; By Karen H. Pittman, MichNews.com , Sep 6, 2005)

Well, you read the Plan, and make your own decision.

As far as FEMA? They have to be requested by the state.
The military, those “horrible” folks from Abu Ghraib & Guantanamo lore? They’re restoring order, saving lives, rescuing people, and fixing levees. They are helping even those that complained about them.

New Orleans education

2005-09-02T09:42:00.000-07:00

It's amazing how we allow the media to lead us, like sheep. Even intelligent folks fall prey to their emotional prattle, without one honest, intelligent thought about what they are saying.

So, let's step back and take a look at how the media is reclassifying the people in New Orleans, and Mississippi (but mainly New Orleans). The media has labelled these folks as "refugees," when in truth, they are "victims." There's a difference, and the media knows it, but the term "refuge"' carries a more emotional meaning.

Go back to the previous hurricanes, or any tornado, and the media refers to these displaced people as victims, and rightly so. Not once did they call them "refugees."

A "refugee" is a person fleeing persecution due to religious, political, or war related reasons. None of these people fit that description. They do fit the description of Victim.

This is nothing new for the media, though. For years they've referred to people with bombs attached to themselves as "suicide" bombers. That's just crazy. These folks are homicide bombers. Their intent isn't to just kill themselves, their mission is to take out as many other people as they can -- that's homicide.

So think about what you're being told, and what it really means, before you repeat it.

New Orleans devastation.......

2005-08-31T11:40:00.000-07:00

Now that New Orleans has been destroyed, who can we expect to come to their aid?
What countries will help?
Will the Hollywood elites hold a fundraiser, or just criticize the U.S.?

Where's the folks that complained about our "slow" response to aid the tsunami victims? Obviously they aren't falling over themselves to come to OUR aid.

Hypocrites. Whiners.

Maybe we can expect something from the UN? I won't hold my breath.

http://www.usaid.gov/locations/asia_near_east/tsunami/ngolist.html

2005-08-22T11:24:00.000-07:00

Harvard Jumps Into Evolution Debate

"My expectation is that we will be able to reduce this to a very simple series of logical events that could have taken place with no divine intervention," said David R. Liu, a professor of chemistry and chemical biology at Harvard."
The Associated Press
Sunday, August 14, 2005; 9:33 PM

Wow, that's really open-minded. They're going into this million-dollar-a-year study with a bias from the start. That's science? I call it folly.

And when they find that life really did begin like the Bible said, will they admit it? I doubt it. They still won't be able to accept it.

Could the money be used elsewhere? Of course, there's plenty of people that need help. Evolution doesn't need help, though. It's already being taught in our government schools.

As the author Frank Peretti said: "Our kids sit in one classroom and are taught the 'Goo to you' theory, then walk down the hall to their self-esteem class."

Sad, very sad.

2005-08-09T16:56:00.000-07:00

August 6th, 1945. Hiroshima. Nagasaki. WWII, the Pacific

August 6th, 2005. The media was filled with remorse and politically correct attitudes over the dropping of two atomic bombs on Japan. Admittedly, this was a horrible thing.

But not one of them addressed the horrors that the allied soldiers, and civilians endured at their hands, or the millions of lives that were spared on both sides, because of the bombing.

You don't know what I'm talking about? Maybe you should read more. Read "Flags of our Fathers," where a Marine on Iwo Jima who disappeared during the fighting is found after the island is taken, inside a cave, dead. His teeth had been smashed out, his penis cut off, and stuck in his mouth. Or maybe "Horror in the East," which talks about the atrocities played out on the occupied Chinese, the Japanese cannibalism that was reported by Australian soldiers.

Yes, dropping the atom bomb was a horrible thing to do, but it was necessary to stop other heinous acts.

2005-07-26T10:50:00.000-07:00

Discover had a successful launch! This is a great day for NASA, and the people of the United States.

Although I think the space program has been a boon to our country and the world, not only from the scientific knowledge gained, but also from the technology that has become a part of our daily lives.

I disagree with NASA's underlying reason to go into space, though. There is no life out there, and they will never find any. The only thing they will do is reinforce the belief of intelligent design. So to spend billions of dollars looking for green men is folly. To do it to improve life on earth, is gain.

2005-07-20T13:45:00.000-07:00

The Supreme Court Nominee Judge John G. Roberts, seems to be a political candidate.

People need to understand, this isn't a political position -- it's a judicial position. The Supreme court doesn't make law, it interprets the constitution.

So let's stop turning this into politics-as-usual. Let's just get about the business of filling this position, and get on with other matters.

2005-06-28T13:52:00.000-07:00

There's been a lot of talk about Bush's exit strategy for Iraq.

Come on. If that was released, then the terrorists would just wait until we left. But really, shouldn't the question be asked: "What's Clinton's exit strategy for Kosovo?" Shouldn't that be first? After all, they didn't help produce terrorists that came to US soil, and killed thousands.

Our military was only sent there because they were commiting genocide.......oh, wait, wasn't Sadam doing that too?

Maybe if Clinton had of taken care of Sadam when he was president......

2005-01-26T13:58:00.000-08:00

So, am I the only one that's noticed all the publicized military complaints coming back from Iraq are being made by the Army? Not the Special Forces , I'm talking the regular army.

I can't believe it. This isn't the same Army that fought in WWI, WWII, or Korea. This is the NEW, IMPROVED, Army of ONE! I really wish they'd get rid of that slogan, and get back to turning out soldiers that don't think they are individuals, but part of a team, and realize that the success of the team depends on each person doing they're best, despite the odds.

Just my opinion.

2004-11-16T11:25:00.000-08:00

DAMN RIGHT I would have shot him! This isn't New York, or Chicago, or LA! This is a war, where the terrorists arm dead bodies with explosives. These are people that support homicide bombings.

What would you expect a Marine to do, walk up and see if this terrorist was going to explode?
"Kill or be killed," that's the motto you have to live with in this situation. Our military didn't go over there to be terrorist fodder. And shame on you for thinking other than that.

These people cut the heads off of THEIR prisoners while they are still alive, screaming in pain. And their prisoners aren't even armed!

2004-10-27T11:58:00.000-07:00

I know a few folks that voted for Jimmy Carter strictly because he claimed to be a Christian.

I've recently heard that many Catholics are starting to support John Kerry since he's started including his "Pride" of being a Catholic into his campaign.

People should support whoever they feel is the best person to run this country, but consider this: The terrorists that took over the US embassy in Tehran, released all hostages the day Ronald Reagan took office. Both Reagan and Carter were Christians.

What was the difference?

2004-09-03T10:27:00.000-07:00

There are four types of voters this election year;
1) Pro-Bush
2) Pro-Nader
3) Pro-Kerry
4) Anti-Bush

I can respect the first three types of voters, as they are voting for the candidate that they believe is the best person to run the United States.

The last type is nothing more than an angry group of people that hate President Bush, and would vote for anybody if it meant getting Bush out of office. And that's scary. Very scary.

2004-08-13T11:16:00.000-07:00

It's all very interesting. Last night, my family and I had the honor to open our home to one of our countries soldiers, a young man that graduated high school with our oldest daughter.

He is just back from Iraq, full of stories and experiences. Very little of what he shared sounded even vaguely familiar, because it bears little resemblance to what the media reports here in the US.

When I mentioned this to him, he told us that his platoon had a reporter and photographer embedded with them for a period of time. After several missions, He and his fellow soldiers were able to read the story written by the reporter. He said it was a topic of sarcasm among the platoon, because the report bore little resemblance to the actual events.

None of this is really surprising, but what's sad is that people will read the embellished reports, thinking this is the truth, then basing their opinions about the war on it. And that's just wrong.

Welcome home, Ben. And thank you........

2004-06-01T12:43:00.000-07:00

So every one is upset by the Abu Ghraib abuse! This situation is of course, wrong. The people involved need to be punished, from the officer in charge on down. For any person, military or not to claim they were just "following orders" in committing these atrocities is ridiculous. This is an attempt to justify bad behavior, and is typical of today's attitude of not taking responsibility for what they did.

It's also typical military. Just watch and see who does the time for the crime, and don't be surprised if it's all enlisted personnel. In 1977, while providing technical support for a combined Navy/Marine Corps exercise on the Philippine island of Mindanao, I saw this first hand.

Who planned and oversaw the exercise? An Officer.
Who decided not to bring rifles ashore? An Officer.
Who okayed the use of the pick-axe handle in place of rifles? An Officer.
Who should also have been blamed? An Officer. It didn't happen.

First off, I don't condone what happened at Abu Ghraib. With that said, let's put this in perspective.
-Saddam Hussein tortured, raped, and killed his own people.
-The Germans, during WWII, committed genocide, medical experimentation, and torture.
-The Japanese, during WWII, tortured, raped, performed medical experimentation, mutilated corpses, and practiced cannibalism.

Pretty wild stuff in comparison, yet you don't hear folks getting worked up over any of that.

I wonder why.........

2004-04-26T09:13:00.000-07:00

We got an unexpected funeral notice in the mail Saturday, for the father of some friends. We knew him, as he attended our church in Salem, and occasionally came down to Eugene to visit his son's church, where we occasionally visit.

He was a great man, and led a Godly life. He never met anyone he didn't like, and was always happy to see you. He had a problem with his lungs, which had gotten worse over the last few years. While in the hospital, before passing away, he told one of his son's that he was in a win-win situation. Either God would give him new lungs, or he would go home to Heaven.

So, as his son said at the memorial service, he has been promoted. Enjoy your new home, Roy.

It is always amazing to me to sit in a memorial service for someone such as this man, and experience the love of those who knew him. This wasn't one of those services where everyone was wailing, and inconsolable. It was instead, a celebration! It was a celebration of a man's life, and of the faith that he had. Yes, it was sad that he won't be among us any longer, but for those who believe in Heaven, there is hope that they will see him again.

The family, and friends, remembered him through anecdotes, and a slide show of his life. They read portions of diaries that he kept throughout his life, and notes he had scribbled in his Bible.

I left that service not filled with sadness, but gladness. Glad that this person's life had touched mine, that I had a chance to know him. Hopefully, I will be a better person because of it.

2004-04-16T09:51:00.000-07:00

As personal computers started to make their climb from hobbyists workbenches in the 70's, to retail stores in the 80's, the greek prefix "gig-a" has had it's pronounciation changed from "jig-a" to "gig-a".

I suppose this is a (computer) cultural thing. And since english is such a living language, always adapting, changing, and redefining, it probably makes sense.

But does that mean that english words derived from greek, such as "gigantic," should also follow suit? If so, then the pronunciation of "gigantic" would move from "jy-gantic" to "gig-antic".

I think I'll stick with the "j" sound.

2004-04-08T11:17:00.000-07:00

9/11 Hearings.......It's supposed to be a "Fact Finding" commission, but from what I've seen so far, they are more about making accusations and suppositions than actually finding the facts.

When it's all done and said, I can't imagine we'll know anymore than we already do. All that time and money being spent here is nothing more than placing the blame, finger pointing, between political parties.

2004-03-29T09:26:00.000-08:00

Watched a documentary on forest firefighters, and how some were trapped when the weather changed, losing their lives. I started thinking about a refuge chamber that could be dropped by a helicopter or sky crane onto any terrain (typically a hillside). The chamber would be cylindrical, allowing it to orient on any incline, and it would have an outrigger that would prevent it from rolling down the hillside. It would be insulated so that the internal temperature would remain livable despite the external temperature. There would be a hatch for the firefighters to enter through. It should allow enough room for a twelve person team, or six people sitting across from each other.

Other options that could be added would be gel cell type power, an oxygen rebreather, air filtering, low power lighting, cooling (peltier?), location beacon, first aid needs.