The really good news is this, however; Sarah Palin brings much more to the plate than merely being McCain’s “beard”. She has much more to offer than simply neutralizing Biden. She’s smart, she’s tough, she’s self-made and she’s more of a man than most inside the Beltway, in a strictly colloquial sense, of course. And most important of all, she’s already more qualified on her own to be President than the Democrat’s nominee. Which is why there is such delicious irony in the attacks already emanating from Camp Obama.
That camp is, with straight faces, already saying that McCain’s pick is a bad one because Palin has only been the Governor of Alaska for two years. That’s two more years of executive experience than the combined Democrat ticket. Further, before being Governor, Palin was the Mayor of Wasilla, AK and was later elected as President of the Alaska Council of Mayors. It seems she knows a thing or two about being in charge. So for the Obama Camp to complain that McCain essentially put an inexperienced person a heartbeat away from the Presidency is more than feeble, it’s pathetic.
McCain has the edge over them all in foreign policy experience, and he’s the candidate for President, which would make the ticket properly top-heavy. The Democrat ticket more closely resembles Hillary Clinton’s figure, and the top man on that ticket is young enough to stick around for a full two terms. Maybe he’ll learn a bit on the job, but that would depend on how quick our enemies are to curtail his education.
Sarah Palin would be ready to take the reins if, God forbid, something were to happen to President McCain. The fact that she already has executive experience thus lends more balance to the Republican ticket than the bowling pin that is the Democrats’. And, as someone I know who is personally familiar with Ms. Palin said, she will tie Biden up in knots at the debates and stand him on his head in the corner. (Kudos, AK).
This campaign season just decked the halls and I am ready to party.
-Woody
]]>The previous century for America saw an unprecedented influx to a particular country. To be simple, this was the place to be. One would expect nothing short of chaos in such a situation, but that did not happen. What did happen was that all of these new arrivals cared for nothing more than to embrace America’s culture and to blend in as quickly as possible. Our culture was enthusiastically adopted, our language was studied and self-enforced, and our laws were embraced and obeyed. Of particular note: at that time, there was no DHS, as there was no need for it. People came here for a better life and they actually wanted to become Americans.
So what has happened since? Why do we have such tumultuousness? The answer is not simple. The
recent revocation of the Labor Day Holiday at a Tyson Foods plant in Shelbyville, TN in favor of the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Fitr is cause for concern. It is a clear case of the invited guests suddenly rearranging the furniture in the home of their gracious hosts. Long before we became too timid to risk insulting our guests, there was a time when we would have made it clear who owned the home, and who set the rules therein. It has been a tried and true practice of civilized peoples to draw a line in the sand, indicating phantom fences before we envisioned their actual construction. It has served well as a civilian law-enforcement technique. It was a mark one crossed at their own peril, and it was a cognitive act either way the decision went. Now, however, it seems that the line has been drawn in the sand at the shoreline of America, and no one has been minding the tide, which has washed away that line without cognizance of any sort.It may ultimately fall to me and me alone, but someone needs to get down to the beach and maintain the line. If not, we may find ourselves homeless in the world.
-Woody
]]>I know I watch more TV during Hurricane Season because of the uncertainty. My TV is happier, too. When it’s out of season, I spend more time on my computer and I get silly error messages all the time:
“Bob, what can you tell us from the scene?”
“Well Ernie, the winds have picked up to 800 miles per hour and the seas are battering the shore. Experts are telling me that Global Warming is to blame.”
Ah, a villain! This was going to be one of the best Specials yet. As he continued his tortured report, he told of the conflicts between scientists who have been debating the problem eloquently for a few years.
Scientist 1: “Global Warming will increase the number of hurricanes.”
Scientist 2: “Global Warming will decrease the number of hurricanes.”
Scientist 1: “Increase!”
Scientist 2: “DECREASE!”
While this was going on, I reluctantly broke away from my lonely TV for the computer. I wanted to see if I could find out for myself what the real deal was. I began scouring the internet for documented proof one way or the other, when another error message popped up on my screen:
The great divide in politics and overall civility in America, fueled by the incendiary properties of instant communications, i.e., the Internet, would have many conclude that our society is on the brink of collapse. It is an argument that, to be certain, is difficult to refute. Click on any given message board and witness the viciousness with which people tear one another apart, and you’ll see what I mean. Yes, I have engaged in this practice personally. So what does it all mean? Are we ready to flee as the walls collapse behind us? I think not, and here’s why…
For one thing, the attacks of September 11th, 2001 were a shining example of what our people are made of when we are pushed to our limits. Despite our in-fighting and constant accusations of racism against one another, we pulled together that day and saw nothing but a fellow human in need and helped that person without reservation. There were no ulterior motives and no preferences, we just helped one another. I have also seen words of encouragement and consolation in difficult times shared between sworn enemies on those same message boards. Humanity, at least in western culture, is alive and well.
What of the Middle East and our Muslim counterparts, then? We’re all well aware of their worst moments, but what about their best moments? To be fair, we have not been treated to too many of those. We have not seen massive, press-covered rallies by “moderate” Muslims denouncing the violence perpetrated in their names. We have been deprived of anything remotely resembling a sound condemnation of the tactics employed by those who share the religion. Are these moderates too intimidated to exercise their authority over the crazies to speak out publicly? My theory says no. Be prepared…
I had sincere reservations over publicizing these thoughts, but I ultimately decided that they were better for society if exposed to the light of day. Let me know if you agree.
I have always been perplexed at the absence of suicide bombings in places like New York City and other large cities. Logistically, such attacks are virtually impossible to stop. Why then have they not happened? We know that jihadists would love to inflict such terror on our populace and yet, they have as yet to even attempt it. Certainly any member of a group that would gleefully kill themselves in the hopes of taking out as many Americans as possible would not be deterred by law-enforcement. What would be the fear if the perpetrator was dead after the act?
Family. See, these cells come here and must develop relationships in order to blend in with society, and even a bomber leaves people behind. Couple that with the fact that many moderate Muslims living in America like their new home (even if they view the new place as a hot bed of decadence), and what we have is a recipe for deterrence. But again, what could deter a bomber from…bombing?
Here is my theory in a nutshell: One thing about Americans that is widely presumed (and to a lesser degree, KNOWN first-hand) is that we are wild and crazy. Sure, we exercised incredible restraint after 9/11, but does anyone doubt the reaction of your garden variety country boy if we had delis and pizzerias across the country being subjected to daily bombings and carnage? There would be signs posted everywhere declaring open season on Daffy al-Duck.
So I maintain that our moderate Muslim population, while not being as outspoken as I’d prefer regarding terrorist attacks, has been instrumental in thwarting the insane notions of anyone who may have been harboring thoughts of granduer by jihad. Have they been doing so for selfish reasons? I suppose, but don’t we all perform in the same manner? Nevertheless, I’m not concerned with motive in this regard, just results. Perhaps as the frightened among the moderates get more acclimated to the American way, they will begin to dilute the pool to a point that they actually learn to love America. I know I do.
-Woody
]]>For one thing, the attacks of September 11th, 2001 were a shining example of what our people are made of when we are pushed to our limits. Despite our in-fighting and constant accusations of racism against one another, we pulled together that day and saw nothing but a fellow human in need and helped that person without reservation. There were no ulterior motives and no preferences, we just helped one another. I have also seen words of encouragement and consolation in difficult times shared between sworn enemies on those same message boards. Humanity, at least in western culture, is alive and well.
What of the Middle East and our Muslim counterparts, then? We’re all well aware of their worst moments, but what about their best moments? To be fair, we have not been treated to too many of those. We have not seen massive, press-covered rallies by “moderate” Muslims denouncing the violence perpetrated in their names. We have been deprived of anything remotely resembling a sound condemnation of the tactics employed by those who share the religion. Are these moderates too intimidated to exercise their authority over the crazies to speak out publicly? My theory says no. Be prepared…
I had sincere reservations over publicizing these thoughts, but I ultimately decided that they were better for society if exposed to the light of day. Let me know if you agree.
I have always been perplexed at the absence of suicide bombings in places like New York City and other large cities. Logistically, such attacks are virtually impossible to stop. Why then have they not happened? We know that jihadists would love to inflict such terror on our populace and yet, they have as yet to even attempt it. Certainly any member of a group that would gleefully kill themselves in the hopes of taking out as many Americans as possible would not be deterred by law-enforcement. What would be the fear if the perpetrator was dead after the act?
Family. See, these cells come here and must develop relationships in order to blend in with society, and even a bomber leaves people behind. Couple that with the fact that many moderate Muslims living in America like their new home (even if they view the new place as a hot bed of decadence), and what we have is a recipe for deterrence. But again, what could deter a bomber from…bombing?
Here is my theory in a nutshell: One thing about Americans that is widely presumed (and to a lesser degree, KNOWN first-hand) is that we are wild and crazy. Sure, we exercised incredible restraint after 9/11, but does anyone doubt the reaction of your garden variety country boy if we had delis and pizzerias across the country being subjected to daily bombings and carnage? There would be signs posted everywhere declaring open season on Daffy al-Duck.
So I maintain that our moderate Muslim population, while not being as outspoken as I’d prefer regarding terrorist attacks, has been instrumental in thwarting the insane notions of anyone who may have been harboring thoughts of granduer by jihad. Have they been doing so for selfish reasons? I suppose, but don’t we all perform in the same manner? Nevertheless, I’m not concerned with motive in this regard, just results. Perhaps as the frightened among the moderates get more acclimated to the American way, they will begin to dilute the pool to a point that they actually learn to love America. I know I do.
-Woody
When the
Arab Oil Embargo hit, Congress’ knee-jerk reaction was to release oil from our reserves to lower the rapidly increasing cost per barrel. Today, certain members of congress are making the same pleas, even while they deny that the spiraling costs have anything to do with supply. The question is, then; how will increasing supply ease the cost if supply and demand has no bearing, as they claim? And why won’t harvesting our own oil do the same, if we can flood the market with crude? Moving on, we also have members of the left claiming that in order to save ourselves from Global Warming, we have to implement radical and painful changes in the way we live, as well as to our economy. When they are confronted with conflicting evidence, they claim that virually everything is because of Global Warming. Cooling, warming, more rain, less rain, fewer storms, more storms, etc. The position is, how shall I say, very convenient.So now, with his European tryst with the worldwide media mercifully over, we have a man who wants to be president of the United States making statements that clash directly with previous statements and positions he has made and held. His certitude a year ago that the surge had no chance for success notwithstanding, it’s his reason for believing so is what’s pertinent. He said, unequivocally, that sending in 20 to 30 thousand more troops would only increase the level of violence in Iraq and that the only option was for us to leave, and leave quickly. He was dead wrong.
Now, back from the love affair abroad, he tells the people that things are looking pretty good in Iraq but that
Afghanistan needs help. How does he propose that we make that situation better? You guessed it; more troops! Color me confused. And confounded…-Woody
]]>Through most of the 20th century immigrants to America eagerly leapt into the pot and willfully allowed themselves to become part of the mix, revelling in their new-found home and enthusiastically embracing its culture. Then something changed near the end of the century; new additions began to cling to the side of the pot in an attempt to retain some of their original composition by not submerging themselves fully into what I call the stew. This corresponds to the emergence of hyphenated nationality labels. “Whatyouwill-Americans”, e.g.
The stew began to change with these new ingredients being added, even more so than it should have. The flavor was always in flux, true, but the basic composition of the stew was always about a mixture of components. I am at a loss in explaining this change.
Yes, the flavor changes with the ingredients of a stew, but the stew remains relatively unchanged in appearance. This is because everyone cooks down to a common broth. There is change, but the change is so gradual as to be nearly imperceptible. That is, so long as one of the ingredients doesn’t thrash about, wailing, as it loses its core identity at the boiling point. One must agree that such an occurrence would be most noticeable to the cook.
Up until the latter part of the 20th century there were no reluctant ingredients being poured into the pot. Sure, they still hit the plate as either orange carrots or white potatoes, but they all shared the plate without quarrel. It was a stew from the “pot”, and all were equally consumed without prejudice (3-year-old-racist-picky-eaters notwithstanding). Now we have the ingredients demanding special privileges and prominence on the plate.
To really throw a wrench into the mix, pomegranate has insisted on not only being added to the stew (something which, to my knowledge at least, is unprecedented), but has demanded even further that it be highlighted on the menu. Outrage, I say.
I think the cook needs to turn up the heat and use the ladle to clear the sides of the pot, stirring frequently. We need a common identity once again in order to survive.
-Woody
]]>That being said, today we saw that even Kennedy is not stupid enough to rankle the feathers of mainstream America. He ruled with the majority in upholding the 2nd amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees the right of citizens to keep and bear arms. Many liberal entities have argued at length as to the meaning of the amendment and its intent, based on the wording:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.
Those words have been argued ad nauseam for longer than I can say. The anti-gun lobby has historically focused on the first four words while true patriots have focused on the first five after the second comma: the right of the people. Today, for the first time, the Supreme Court of the United States settled the argument. Now the lawsuits are beginning to roll; the case before the court was centered on the Washington D.C. ban on owning a handgun…by anyone. Other cities across the nation are going to be sued en masse in short order, and mayors are already firing opening salvos as to their own interpretations of today’s decision. The words “reasonable restrictions” will be part of the average person’s lexicon by this time tomorrow, and the debate will rage on, despite what has been made clear; the people have a right to keep and bear arms.
The NRA is out front on this, of course:
Gun Lobby Quickly Sues To Overturn Chicago Ban
Look for a plethora of similar suits to follow, as the mainstream of America enjoys a rare victory over the insane encroachments they have endured for the last 50 years. It may just be possible that the mentality of the ’60’s people has worn off, and the move to Europeanize America has been thwarted. I am filled with a renewed hope today.
-Woody
]]>
There have been a few of these stories of late, in the news, that fit to a tee the definition of insanity. Most recently we had the story of the
Ohio first-grader, suspended for keeping the plastic knife the cafeteria distributed to him in the first place. This case is a bit of an anomaly since it is laced with a modicum of sanity, in that the parents are threatening to counter-sue the district for distributing dangerous weapons to children if they don’t rescind the suspension. Kudos to them. Then there is the New Jersey second-grader suspended for drawing a stick figure of someone shooting his friend with a water pistol. Zero tolerance was once again violated in this case, and the kid is in the news. Great. Right about now, some liberal-minded person is reading this and thinking that these suspensions are a good thing since we can’t have the children growing up in a “violent culture”. That’s all well and good, but I would remind such a reader that our species is, by nature, a violent one, but we have done a remarkable job at suppressing that urge in large measure, save for a handful who never got the memo. Or is it a handful?For most of the civilized world, that question could be answered in the affirmative. For a very large segment of the psuedo-civilized, it would be a no.
So why do the very same people who clamor to remove weapons or the mere mention of them from our society turn a blind eye to a real threat? And why, oh why can’t they see the clear and present danger in schools located in Alexandria and Fairfax, VA?
There was a story a while back about the teachings in a school called the Islamic Saudi Academy. It was alleged that the school was teaching hate, which it denied, of course. So The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, asked for textbooks to examine, a request that was denied. The commission was able to acquire 17 textbooks nonetheless, through other channels. What they found was disturbing.
The Associated Press
reports that “Textbooks at a private Islamic school in northern Virginia teach students that it is permissible for Muslims to kill adulterers and converts from Islam, according to a federal investigation released Wednesday.” And an even more troubling excerpt:
The commission said it obtained 17 of the academy’s textbooks through a variety of channels, including from members of Congress. The texts did appear to contain numerous revisions, including pages that were removed or passages that were whited out, but numerous troubling passages remained, according to the panel:
_ The authors of a 12th-grade text on Koranic interpretation state that apostates (those who convert from Islam), adulterers and people who murder Muslims can be permissibly killed._ The authors of a 12th-grade text on monotheism write that “(m)ajor polytheism makes blood and wealth permissible,” meaning that a Muslim can take with impunity the life and property of someone believed guilty of polytheism. According to the panel, the strict Saudi interpretation of polytheism includes Shiite and Sufi Muslims as well as Christians, Jews, Hindus, and Buddhists.
_ A social studies text offers the view that Jews were responsible for the split between Sunni and Shiite Muslims: “The cause of the discord: The Jews conspired against Islam and its people. A sly, wicked person who sinfully and deceitfully professed Islam infiltrated (the Muslims).”
One must wonder what was “removed or whited out” if those three examples were left in the text books. Nevertheless, this story will probably get minimal attention in the media, and the minimal coverage will be limited to publications that liberals denounce and therefore will not believe that there is a threat at all.
But they will continue to persecute 7 year-old school kids who draw innocuous pictures, and feel that they have served justice while ignoring a virtual curriculum of hate and depravity.
Insanity.
-Woody
]]>A barrel of oil today surpassed the mark of $138/bbl. It rose by nearly ten percent, in one day. Gas prices in the next week, if this is a sustainable record, will top $5 per gallon, without question. And yet, we have been led to believe by our elected Congresspersons that this war was a war for oil. Despite the fact that we kicked the virtual shit out of the vaunted Iraqi Republican Guard in record time and are still waging an ongoing battle with a ragtag contingient of well-armed, so-called insurgents (funded and trained by a sovereign neighbor), we have not reaped the spoils of war. Those spoils would ostensibly equate to cheaper oil for the victorious conquerors.
So one must ask this of their “public servants”, as well as the willing dupes who echo the tripe emanating from the lips of those servants: If this was an evil act perpetrated on the Middle East by a crazed oil man and his cohorts for nothing more than oil…why are we being subjected to the whims of those people who control that oil to this day?
With the resources America has beneath its own soil, it would stand to reason that the “oil barons” could have exploited their own land without shedding a drop of blood, save for the occassional dropping of an irate and charging female moose or caribou, however unfortunate and even more pertinent, rare, that scenario may have been. The reason this has not happened is not because those “oil barons” didn’t think of it. It’s because our own elected officials care more for their coveted positions than they do for the people.
The people have been clamoring for cheaper fuel since before anyone can remember. Bureaucrats have used that demand as a leveraging tool for equally as long. Are the lies a new tactic? Probably not, but the acceptance of them as validation for a political stance is relatively new, since people seem more willing in these times to slit their own throats to promote a belief contrary to their own best interests so long as it is fed to them by a lying government.
The Iraq war was not about oil. The ideological war is, and it may well be our undoing. God bless America.
-Woody
]]>Many will be angry with me from this point forward, but I truly believe that the cost is worth my conscience and so will not lose too much sleep over the anger of others. Sorry. The suffering of my fellow Americans is at the hands of their very own government, and I find that fact unconscionable. How our elected officials can sleep at night with the knowledge of what their lies have inflicted upon its citizenry is something I will wrestle with until the pain finally ceases.
A barrel of oil today surpassed the mark of $138/bbl. It rose by nearly ten percent, in one day. Gas prices in the next week, if this is a sustainable record, will top $5 per gallon, without question. And yet, we have been led to believe by our elected Congresspersons that this war was a war for oil. Despite the fact that we kicked the virtual shit out of the vaunted Iraqi Republican Guard in record time and are still waging an ongoing battle with a ragtag contingient of well-armed, so-called insurgents (funded and trained by a sovereign neighbor), we have not reaped the spoils of war. Those spoils would ostensibly equate to cheaper oil for the victorious conquerors.
So one must ask this of their “public servants”, as well as the willing dupes who echo the tripe emanating from the lips of those servants: If this was an evil act perpetrated on the Middle East by a crazed oil man and his cohorts for nothing more than oil…why are we being subjected to the whims of those people who control that oil to this day?
With the resources America has beneath its own soil, it would stand to reason that the “oil barons” could have exploited their own land without shedding a drop of blood, save for the occassional dropping of an irate and charging female moose or caribou, however unfortunate and even more pertinent, rare, that scenario may have been. The reason this has not happened is not because those “oil barons” didn’t think of it. It’s because our own elected officials care more for their coveted positions than they do for the people.
The people have been clamoring for cheaper fuel since before anyone can remember. Bureaucrats have used that demand as a leveraging tool for equally as long. Are the lies a new tactic? Probably not, but the acceptance of them as validation for a political stance is relatively new, since people seem more willing in these times to slit their own throats to promote a belief contrary to their own best interests so long as it is fed to them by a lying government.
The Iraq war was not about oil. The ideological war is, and it may well be our undoing. God bless America.
-Woody
]]>