Archive for December, 2007

The Children Will Stray

Friday, December 28th, 2007

   Since public schools in the United States are primarily funded through taxation , it should be inarguable that it is fair to declare them as institutions of the Government. On top of taxpayer-funded sources, Government sets guidelines to be followed for receipt of those funds. Fail to satisfy Government standards, fail to receive funds and hence, Government schools.

     Congress routinely engages in the practice that schoolchildren (and school teachers) do as Summer approaches; haul ass on the last day. The only difference is this; Congress must conclude its business before recess. Not so for teachers.
    
     Imagine if teachers and administrators had a set agenda to complete before Summer began in earnest. Then imagine that those educators pushed through however many failing students as needed in order to disembark on that treasured months-long vacation. Would there not be howls of outrage? I have money that bets “yes”. So why is Congress not held to the same standard?
 
     The answer is simple. They are Lords over serfs, and we allow it despite the power of the electorate, which we wield. We actually enable our masters. What a sad state of affairs.
    
     Congress passed the Omnibus Spending Budget which has languished since September, but did so less than a day (for the House) and less than two days (for the Senate) after the full text of the bill was released. As Nicola Moore from FrontPage Magazine notes:


1. No one read the bill.

“The text of the omnibus was 3,417 pages–three times the length of the Bible and nearly the same length as the second edition of Webster’s Dictionary. The House passed the bill less than 22 hours after the text was first made available, while the Senate had 46 hours and 8 minutes for its analysis. For Members of Congress to have read this bill, they would have had to read the bill at a rate of 2½ pages per minute for Representatives and 1¼ pages per minute for Senators, without stopping to sleep or eat. No one could have read this bill before voting on it.”


     Moore also points out that part of the bill, which was rife with pork that the Administration warned against, contained some particularly irritating items, one of which was the Charles Rangel (D-Bronx) “Monument To Me“, at a cost of $1.95 million.
    
     How Congress spends OUR money should be of concern to all of us, but just as they cannot be bothered to read the fine print, what with play time looming just within reach, we the people are more culpable in wasting our own money by allowing this sort of juvenile behavior. Think of it as having children on the payroll; we want to trust them but we must be ever vigilant that they remain on the straight and narrow. Should they stray from that path, we have no one to blame but ourselves.
-Woody

Dems Can’t Catch A Break

Wednesday, December 26th, 2007

    There they were, rolling along with the full support of groups like Code Pink (with the possible exception of Hillary), and the Iraq War was the thing to swing the White House back to democrats’ control in 2008. It was the hot-button issue that would make for many a great stump speech. Then something terrible happened…

     The Surge proved to be a success and just as if Bush rocked back over the garden hose, the flow of negativity from that region ceased. True to form, the better things got in Iraq, the worse they got for Democratic candidates, and it’s beginning to show:
 


“We haven’t heard as much bad news out of Iraq lately,” said Kevin Carson of Exeter, N.H. “Maybe it’s the economy that’s scaring people now.”

    
     Not to fear, there is always the old standard, “It’s the economy, stupid”. So now we’re going to witness the rest of the Democratic field shift into John Edwards’ “two Americas” gear. Yeah, that’s the ticket.
    
     Oops, wait just one cotton-pickin’ minute…that may not work so well, either. According to Larry Kudlow, Goldilocks is going to ruin that parade, as well.

“Against all odds, and despite the usual drumbeat of criticism, President Bush had a very good year.

 

The troop surge in Iraq is succeeding. America remains safe from terrorist attacks. And the Goldilocks economy is outperforming all expectations.”

 


 

    Aside from Hillary’s claim that if she’s elected, “oil prices will instantly drop“, there seems to be less and less they can do to succeed in their quest for the White House. Perhaps they can fall back on the ridiculous claim that Republican presidents read children’s books upside-down while chaos rains down around them.
    
     Yeah, that might do it.
-Woody

Hillary Clinton: Are You Experienced?

Wednesday, December 26th, 2007

  

     No, there is no “Purple Haze” on this one… 

     As the campaign season has slogged along, we have been given reasons from the Clinton camp to vote for Hillary. Yes, she’s the Junior Senator from New York (still a sore spot with many New Yorkers),  but we’re told that she brings eight years of hard core international experience through osmosis. That is, we’re expected to believe that by her mere presence as First Lady (another debatable topic), Bill’s dealings with the international community rubbed off on her.

  
     To be fair, we on the right have been squabbling for quite some time over whether she was actually a “co-President” while her husband served in the Oval Office. While none of us, to my knowledge, has speculated as to whether she held Monica down for Bill, we have certainly been guilty in giving her too much credit, it would appear, on policy issues. Was she really all that involved? It would seem, no.
    
     Despite the fact that she and, more pertinently, Bill, will not allow her records regarding her involvement as first lady to be released until 2009, the International Herald Tribune issued this report today debunking the notion that she has gained any foreign policy experience whatsoever from her years as “first cookie baker”.
    
     This excerpt speaks volumes:


“Her role mostly involved what diplomats call ’soft power’ – converting Cold War foes into friends, supporting nonprofit work and good-will endeavors, and pressing her agenda on women’s rights, human trafficking, and the expanded use of microcredit, tiny loans to help individuals in poor countries start small businesses.”


     “Pressing her agenda on women’s rights” seems just a tad disingenuous given her relative silence on the treatment of women in Islamic countries, but the larger issue is the question of her overall qualifications as a potential Commander In Chief. I can’t get past an Ahmedinejad declaration of “Death To Israel” being met with an offer by a President Hillary Clinton to engage in a “good will endeavor”.

     Another telling excerpt reveals that Hillary was more outside than in:



 

 

Asked about her role in Somalia and Haiti, Christopher said in an interview, “She wasn’t at any of the meetings in the Oval Office or cabinet room, and didn’t take any formal role that I saw.” Christopher is supporting Clinton for president.

 


  

     One thing the voters must keep in mind as November draws near and we decide on the new leader of the free world…it’s not a game, it’s not a popularity contest, and it’s certainly not about electing someone of whom we think the world will approve.

     We will elect OUR president. The rest of the world will simply have to learn to deal with it.

-Woody

Freedom’s Slow Bleed

Monday, December 17th, 2007

   Sometimes I gaze at my dog when he’s sleeping and wonder what he thinks of his life. At times, I envy him. He looks so content sleeping in my warm house with not a care in the world. I take good care of him, and he wants for nothing, and nothing is really expected of him. As I leave for work in the morning is the time I envy him most. I glance back at him and wish I could trade places with him, if just for a day. What a life; eat, play and sleep.

     So I have to wonder, with the life he has, where he gets fed and loved, why is he constantly looking for a way either over or under the fence in the back yard? Does he hate me, or resent me? No, that can’t be it. Anyone who has ever owned a dog knows the look of adoration in a dog’s eyes. So it can only be one thing that he craves.
    
     Freedom.
  
     He wants to be able to come and go as he pleases. That means that while he loves me, and while he has every intention to return, he nevertheless longs to explore what’s on the other side of the fence. He wants to be free.
    
     Freedom is something I used to believe was ingrained in the human spirit, something which we craved above all else; something that we’ve historically been willing to die for. So why is it that so many are so willing to give it up? Is it because it is not being wrenched from our grasp, but being bled from us like grains of fine sand through one’s fingers? Is it really possible that so many cannot see it happening? Apparently, it is, and it’s tragic.
    
     What is almost as tragic is the fierce reaction from those who refuse to see. Some reading this will think that the whole article is about an isolated incident, and will scoff loudly. What they fail to do is to step away from the small, individual line far enough to see the entire drawing. Think about your neighbor moving his fence one inch per year closer to your house. One inch per year, and 12 years later, without your even noticing, and he has a foot of your property as his own.
    
     Governments both federal and local in this country are slowly eroding our basic freedoms “for the good of society”. They are doing this by instituting punative taxes on that which they deem detrimental. Corporations are beginning to demand that employees behave in a specified way or face termination. We are being shaped, molded and herded. They are attempting to make us all conform to a standardized template.
    
     I understand that some of the reasons may be well intended. I also understand that there are those who wish to have a larger entity looking over them, taking care of them, making sure they are eating properly and exercising regularly. I am not one of them.
    
     All I want to do is get over that damned fence and be free.
-Woody
    

We’re From The Government…

Sunday, December 9th, 2007
     Somewhere along the line a quote has been attributed to Ronald Reagan, though I cannot find anything to verify the quote. It may be urban legend, but it is thus:
“We’re here from the government, and we’re here to help”.
    
     Legend has it that Reagan said the words with tongue firmly planted in cheek and was designed as the words a citizen would most loathe to hear. I would agree.
    
     Our government has become ever increasingly dishonest and, even worse, polarized to the point that that very untrustworthiness is being used with seeming impunity against their political counterparts. It has become crystal clear that the good of the country is no longer of primary concern, only the retention of power, at any cost. A perfect case in point…
    
     The Washington Post has a story today about the practice of waterboarding as an interrogation technique, but more pertinently, the faux outrage by prominent Democrats at the “revelation” that the method is used. It is reminiscent of the claims from the very officials sitting on various intelligence committees in the Senate that they were lied to regarding weapons of mass destruction.
    
     It turns out that in September, 2002 four members of Congress met for a briefing on the practice as laid out by the CIA. They were given a virtual tour of detention facilities and the interrogation methods described in detail. No one objected and in fact, some asked if they were “tough enough”.
    
     Now, for political gain and political gain only, the story of the CIA destroying interrogation tapes is front page news. Congress is vowing to investigate the incident in an attempt to embarrass the current administration, and bemoaning the fact that the evidence has been destroyed and that they’ll never know what these interrogations entailed, when all they have to do is ask the current Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi.
    
     She was one of the members of Congress present at the CIA briefing in 2002. She’s also one of the administration’s most boisterous critics. She wants us to believe that she’s “here to help”.
    
     If only Ronnie were here to help…
-Woody

Fluorescent vs. incandescent? Environmentalists can’t decide.

Sunday, December 2nd, 2007

WASHINGTON – Al Gore says switching from incandescent light bulbs to compact fluorescents can help save the planet from global warming.

California, Canada and the European Union are so persuaded he’s right, the three governments are in the process of banning the sale of incandescent light bulbs, following the trailblazing paths of Fidel Castro

read more | digg story

Michael Savage fights back, sues CAIR

Sunday, December 2nd, 2007

Trend-setting radio talk show host Michael Savage has filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against the Council on Islamic-American Relations, and has accused the organization of being a “political vehicle of international terrorism” that seeks to do “material harm to those voices who speak against the violent agenda of CAIR’s clients.”

read more | digg story

More Dem Double-Speak

Sunday, December 2nd, 2007

    Whenever President Bush reiterates the threat of terror it is met with derision from the left, including high profile politicians. They accuse him of “fear mongering” to garner support for the Republican party. If any of you have had the (pleasure?) recently to engage libs on these boards regarding this matter, they unanimously dismiss the notion that we are at risk of further attacks from jihadists.

    
     So now that the Bush administration is proposing cuts in funding anti-terror grants, who is out front protesting the loudest? Why, none other than Schmuck Schumer and Hellary Klingon.

In a letter to President Bush Saturday, Hillary Rodham Clinton said that in light of the terrorist threats facing the nation, “it is unimaginable to hear that you would cut funding for our nation’s law enforcement, firefighters, and other first responders by more than half.”   



    
     So when President Bush wants to reduce money to New York, Senator Klingon wails that we will be subject to attack by terrorists. Ah, but what about when the subject is a new AG? She sings a much different tune:

“We are at war,” he added, “and we cannot win this war by wishing it away or pretending it does not exist.”

Mr. Bush’s remarks appeared to do little to soften criticism by Democrats of his policies or his attorney general nominee. The front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, Senator Clinton, said Americans are “tired” of Mr. Bush’s rhetoric, and she assailed him for comparing the threat from current enemies such as Osama bin Laden to the specter of Nazism and Soviet communism.


 

     Sorry folks, you can’t have it both ways. 

-Woody

 

A Step In The Right Direction

Sunday, December 2nd, 2007

     Finally, some good news regarding Fred Thompson. Some say that the idea of the primaries is to claw your way to the top of the party heap. The method involves tearing fellow party members to shreds and selling yourself as the better candidate.

    
     Personally, I want to know why a particular candidate is better than the best of the opposition party. And telling me who you would most likely emulate from the past goes a long way in making that decision. Case in point:

LAGUNA WOODS, Calif. (AP) – Republican presidential candidate Fred Thompson said Saturday that election of a Democrat to the White House in 2008 would open the way for a welfare state where bigger government, higher taxes and defense cutbacks sap the country’s economic and military strength. “Our country is at a crossroads,” Thompson told several hundred people at a rally at a community clubhouse.  

“We know that the most liberal element of the Democratic Party has taken control of the Democratic Party, and if they win this next election we’re going to go down the road of a welfare state,” he said.

After warning of a government that gets “bigger and bigger,” he said “I don’t think the American people are going to turn the keys to this country over to the most left-wing part of a left-wing party next year.”

“We’ve got to make sure that doesn’t happen,” he said.

Thompson’s speech came on a day when most of his time was devoted to a string of fundraisers.

He never mentioned his Republican rivals in his remarks, but in a GOP race where some candidates have been criticized for shifting positions on conservative touchstone issues, Thompson asserted he is squarely in the Reagan tradition. “Principles don’t change, circumstances change,” he said.



 

 

     At least he’s saying the right things, at least in my mind. To be honest, I really don’t care if a President will take a strong stand on embryonic stem cell research while the country burns to the ground around him, and terrorist sleepers begin lopping off heads in shopping malls.

     And defining the opposition in no uncertain terms will definitely help. The red-staters already know that the Dims are controlled by the far left, but it helps to have a candidate reiterate that fact. It’s why talk radio has become so popular; people have long held beliefs that are now being “validated” by talk personalities.  

-Woody