Oils Well That Ends Well

With gas nearing the four dollar a gallon mark, here in the hinterlands of Illinois, a small cul-du-sac off the main drag in the bitter heartland of this great nation, kinda thought it time to get a few thoughts together regarding same, so here goes.

But first, a joke:

There was an old man sitting on his porch listening to his radio while watching the rain fall. Over the radio came a loud warning siren and the announcer said ... "Evacuate the area! A Flood is coming!" Right after the warning the water started coming over the porch and into the house.

The old man moved to the second floor looking out the window, when a rescue boat came and the people on board said,"You can't stay here the flood is here!" Please come with us."

The old man replied, "No, God will save me." So the boat left. A little while later the water was up to the second floor, so the man climbed up onto the roof. This time a helicopter flew over head and through a loud speaker said "You are going to drown if you stay here! Please come with us!"

The old man again replied,"God will save me." So they flew off to get others stranded.

An hour later the water was up over the roof and sweeps the man into the flooding water, where he drowns and goes to heaven. When he awakens, he is extremely mad and disappointed. When he sees God he asks him, "Why didn't you save me?"

God replied, "You arrogant man! I sent you a warning, then a boat, then a helicopter!! Yet you willingly refused my help so obviously offered, then have the gall to say I ignored your pleas."

There are ever increasing demands placed on our countries need for all types of energy. The nations industries need for (natural) resources to produce products for other companies and the general public. And an ever increasing desire to become truly independent of foreign sources.

The increase in power to meet the needs of families as they find more ways to improve their lifestyle with bigger televisions/entertainment systems/computers. More labor saving devices, larger refrigerators, deep freezers for the bulk buying from Costco, Sam's Club, or even buying meat/poultry in bulk from the local butcher (thus getting it at a cheaper per pound rate). Lawn and garden equipment to keep the homestead looking sharp. Then there is the cost of keeping the family wheels on the road.

Keeping our industrial engine running (with power) and, as noted above, resources to produce the products we need and want. Cheap enough energy (read fuel) to transport produce, products, and people from points "A" to points "B".

There has been a mad and not very well thought out rush to turn to bio-fuels as, if not "the answer", an answer to at least part of this concern. Sadly, it is now being realized this is at the very least a short sighted foolish "solution". The physical demands, land requirements, resulting drastic changes in commodity prices, threaten to not only weaken an already shaky economy, but will end up causing more instability in parts of the world which can ill afford it, due to people already lacking for the minimal basics in foodstuffs seeing the trickle offered now to come to a complete stop.

Add to this, the dirty little secret that bio-fuel is in the end no more friendly to the environment, due to energy(s) used in the manufacture of same, as well as the waste produced, and in the loss of efficiency in mpg (meaning more will be needed to meet the same miles driven by good ol regular gas), as to make it a loss all the way 'round.

But what are we to do cry the people?

Returning to the "joke" at the beginning of this post. We have been given the answer (at least for the next 100-500 years). That we have through our arrogance refused to take advantage of it, means we only have ourselves to blame for where we are now.

Yes, the progressives/liberals/tree huggers actions, along with the media doing their thing to muddy the waters (and sell papers and air time at the best prices possible), are instrumental in why we are where we are. But we of the more conservative/adult/responsible side of the street are at fault as well.

Folks, we are enablers! When we should have told the kids to shut up and leave the management of our energy needs to the adults. Instead, we gave in to their cries of "nuclear power is evil" (cause it might go "melty" or "boom"). So we gave up on that by regulating it to the point of near extinction.

Then there was the move to remove the poisons exiting the exhausts of the hundreds of thousands of happy motorists in this country. First is was lead. Then, lead by the eco-wienies out in la la land ... err California, a new environment friendly fad came to the fore. Cafe blends. Yes, now we had to have different blends of petrol for not only different times of the year (winter and summer) but for different areas of the country as well. The fly in this ointment was at the same time as these demands were being placed in effect, there were fewer and fewer refineries to produce same. Thus, the cost for production went up as demand began to exceed production. (And of course the evil oil companies were prevented from economically building new refineries, that would not be environmentally friendly .... or should that be in a more politically incorrect (but far more honest light) manner, stated as "Yes, we sure do need more refineries, preferably built close to the raw material (oil), but not in my back yard!!"

Last but not least there was the push to prevent new drilling for oil. Wither it was on land, or off shore, it was deemed verboten. Every reason in the environmental bible was given, from harming plant and animal life, to raping Mother Gia. And we, gave in.

We, like the fictional pastor above, have asked for help. To be delivered from our energy dependent bonds.
And our prayers have been answered in more way then one.

People, the water is up to our necks. We have been tossed a life preserver. Let us take hold and use what has been given to the best of our abilities. Lest we face our own final judgment, as our civilization crumbles upon the dust heap of history. And when, in some future time and place the truth is unearthed, that we in fact had the means to continue on, but willfully chose to ignore what was given. Said "Thanks , but no thanks." Then we will be judged, much like the fictional old man as being arrogant willful fools, most deserving of our fate.

Heartland Hates Hollywood Humor

Having read "Variety", any number of times in my youth, I couldn't pass up the chance to title this post in something akin to what may appear on that rag in the not too distant future.

Hollywood in it's seemingly self destructive and or narcissistic mind set, continues to focus on the 9/11, post 9/11 mindset. None of their efforts in presenting the War on Terror or the struggle in Iraq have paid off at the box office. The public, for the most part, has stayed away in droves. So now the are trying a different tact. We can't win 'em over with "serious" "heart wrench(ed)ing" drama ... so let's attack their funny bone!!

Guess it was bound to happen sooner or later. Sadly, it appears to be sooner.

Yeppers, it worked so well with WWII. Who can forget (those who are still alive to remember) the crazy madcap antics of those "Concentration Camp Cutups ™ " , the Waffen SS. Or that oriental laff riot, Tojo. I seem to recall even with a better then 20 year gap between the end of WWII and the airing of "Hogan's Heroes", there was still quite a flap over it. Granted, that particular show placed the American (and allied) POW's in the positive/controlling characters virtually all the time. And did make the German Officers/Nazi party types and German solders in general, to be nothing more then buffoons, morons, and pompous blowhearts. Which I am sure made any number of vets wonder why then did it take us so long to WIN the damn thing?

And yes, there were a number of "funny" or "humorous" movies, based on the war. "The Wackiest Ship in the Army" (both the movie, staring Jack Lemmon, and the short lived TV show) was based on an actual ship/events. And there were many others, usually portraying the trials and tribulations of either becoming indoctrinated to military life (boot camp/basic training) or finding ways to work with-in/around the system, in order to "get the girl", beat the enemy, meet the challenge given by the chain of command or circumstances.

But that was Hollywood of 40 some years ago. At least they had enough presents of mind to make the good guys just that, the good guys. Not so, with the current crop of military mirth/Gitmo guffaws/global terroristic tomfoolery, and international political/big business gone wild. Oh, and did I forget to include zombie troops and strippers? (Nothing says "We support the guys and gals in the military" more then a film with "re-animated" ranks risking limb to continue the fight for freedom!)

Perhaps this is just Hollywood's way of redefining a term which is probably not considered PC these days. "T&A", no longer stands for that particular segment of films. Now it can be used as an umbrella for almost all the content coming out these days. Now "T&A" stands for "Trite & Asinine"

I'm off to go and watch an old classic, starring Lee Marvin, called "The Dirty Dozen". Thank god for dvds!

With the obligatory tip of the "Squid lid ™ " to Jeffrey Ressner at "Politico" for his enlightening article on same.

Truth in Advertizing ...

... is a good thing to have. And is in (very) short supply regardless of which political side of the fence you are on. But in an effort to help a terrorist loving, race baiting, piss-poor excuse for a human being ... err "fellow Illinoisan who wants to do good on a massive scale, by implementing change" ™ , I have developed a straight forward no holds barred campaign button.

Yes, that is a mushroom cloud. And yes, I am willing to bet if Obama-lama-dingdong gets the Presidential nod, there will be one or more of those in our future. Though not the change I think he has in mind, it will be major change indeed.

H/T to both the amazing SondraK and the always engaging commentary and photo work provided by "Rodger, the Real King of France" for their posting about and pointing me to this bit of logo fun.

Campain Button or Reset Button ... the choice won't be yours for long

A few years back, Robert H. Bork penned a bit of non-fiction, "Slouching Towards Gomorrah". One of the most interesting thrusts of his book, as bought up in a review by Diane West at Public Interest, in it's entirety here, reads as follows:

In a concise, illuminating critique, Bork explains how the Founding Fathers, in their pretensions to near-infallibility, overlooked the fallibility of human nature. That is, while granting the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to all men, the Founders took for granted their own inherited moral capital - i.e., the Judeo-Christian tradition and classical thought - and made no provision for its perpetuation.

Indeed, we some twelve years after the books release, continue to bear witness to this. Look at the hoops those who are avowed statists/progressives/marxists, go through in order to get (the collective) us to become more accommodating of diversity for diversity's sake, tolerant accepting of all "faiths", the dumbing down/indoctrination of our future generations in the schools/colleges, and finally, (because of the above marginalizing of religions) the bowing to the State as the one supreme entity.

However, it doesn't end here, with the hubris of so called leaders from either side of the political spectrum demanding "We The People" humbly bow down before them, excepting their view of what's best for us. No, both sides (though perhaps arriving at it from different directions) have a much larger vision of what needs to be done. They, quite simply, are planning and perusing nothing less then the "globalization of humankind".

It is not some conspiracy lurking in the dark shadows of some one two kings shy of a full deck. Nor the wishful thinking of an Illuminati fearing anti-mason nutjob. Noted author Jerome R Corsi's May 19, 2006 column for Human Events gives a brief but enlightening synopsis of what has already happened, and what, most likely is to come.

This is nothing really new, President Bush's lack of success with his (supposed) immigration reform and securing of the borders, give credence to Corsi's work. And now there is this. Yes, the GOP candidate for president, Senator McCain, looks to be wanting to change the paint job on the 'ol "Straight Talk Express" to "The North American Union Express."

McCain proposed a new organization, the League of Democracies, to "harness the vast influence of more than 100 democratic nations around the world to advance our values and defend our shared interests."

"Our great power does not mean we can do whatever we want whenever we want, nor should we assume we have all the wisdom and knowledge necessary to succeed," the presumptive Republican nominee told the Los Angeles World Affairs Council. "We need to listen - we need to listen - to the views and respect the collective will of our democratic allies."
Source: Foon Rhee - The Boston Globe March 27, 2008

Why stop at the new borders of the Unión Norteamericana ... err ... I mean, North American Union? When we can, according to John McCain, (Are we going for the "third time is a charm" thing here?) form yet another League of Nations... ahhh ... United Nations ... damn ... "League of Democracies" ... yeah, that's the ticket!! After all we are the little kids on the block age-wise. All those Euro-pee-ans are soooo much more sophisticated and cultured then we is and all. It might be best if we just get rid of that pesky constitution once and for all. Lets get on board this one world thing. We can still have our own "nation" (note those were finger quotes around nation). But on the oft chance we happen to elect a leader that gets a bit too uppity, why the "real leaders" will be able to slap em down.

And make no mistake, tho they may be fools, these are not idiots. It will be done using the tried and true tools the libs (and their masters, the communists) have used for years . Incramentalism. First comes the various "U's" (European. Asian. North American), eventually to be followed by one big (not so) happy Union, Federation, Republic ... whatever is decided on at the time.

You believe in the constitution as written? Forgettaboutit! It will have been gutted (if not out rightly removed in toto). You believe in God? Not a problem, just don't expect any of the moral framework we hold to be based on what has been observed of the human condition over the past couple thousand years to be of worth... and as long as YOU don't force your moral guidelines on us, then you can keep your religion ... but we will be watching.

Guns????? You MUST be kidding!!!

Education??? The best and brightest will get a shot ... the rest of you ... eat your alloted caloric intake, drink your happy juice, and be quick about it! Your shift starts in 15 minutes.

America? "I remember gramps talking about that ONCE ... just before he went to "the home".

As for the here and now. We don't have the options the founding fathers (and a generation or so afterward) had. There is no place else to head off to ... to start over. We have only two choices.

Drink the kool-ade, while mentally and physically masturbating our freedoms away, and of course enjoy the ride.

Or

Hit the reset button.

I am ready for the button. What say you??

An Obamanation

If I were to gamble and suggest who might, in 50 to 100 years from now, be recognized as our generations answer to Kipling (at least as far as verse goes), my choice would be the prolific Russ Vaughn. He never fails to satisfy ... need proof? Happy to provide same. Here is his latest, enjoy!

VP or Not VP, That is the question

I made mention of who would be a good vice presidential running mate for Senator McCain here. However, that man about town, McGehee, feels (and rightly so) we delegates of the GOMLP (that's Get Off My Lawn Party for all you late comers out there *grin*.) should post our preferences at our respective sites, in order to get the conversations going, juices flowing (Ok, in light of former NY Governor Spitzer's "flowing juices" concerns, perhaps that's not such a good thing.), and on the off chance someone is actually reading this bit o' fluff on the interweb, see if we can arrive at some respectable choices for VP.

Some have suggested Alaska's Governor, Sarah Palin, would make a great choice and potential future presidential candidate as well. I would come back to the "continental 48", and offer either Duncan Hunter, or former Lt Governor of Maryland, Michael S. Steele, as fine high caliber running mates. Both would represent the more conservative (and increasingly muffled) voice of the Republican party. But more to the point, speak to the views and viewpoints of the majority of Americans (despite what the lame brain ... err main stream media would have you believe) in this country, particularly those in the heartland and the south.

So, what do y'all think?

The President Speaks

President McCain, now into his third month as “Leader of the free world”, gave the following speech as his first televised broadcast (on all major channels) to the nation last night:

... ”Given the current situation of the world today, and the treats posed by those, from both within and without, who seek to extinguish the light of democracy, I have placed the following demands, to be acted on in due haste, on my administration, both houses of Congress, and if need be - the Supreme Court.

1.Effective immediately, funds will be found to take whatever means necessary in securing our borders. This is to include the building of fortified walls and or fences and the use of surveillance equipments such as may be needed in areas where walls or fences would be impracticable. Major increases of manning levels within the border patrol shall be in effect immediately. Until such time as these numbers are reached, funds will be made available to state and local agencies (State Police/County Sheriff/National Guard) to augment their forces to meet our needs. This is to include the use of (deputized)local citizens as needed. A nation is only such if her borders are recognized and respected as the beginning and end of her peoples national identity. And all who seek to cross same, in an illegal manner, for what ever the reason or purpose, violate our customs and rule of law.

2.As the last holder of this office stated, “You are either with us or against us.” regarding our continuing fight with those who seek to end our way of life, our cherished history and customs, I say to any and all through out the world, be you a group or organization who directly acts or an agency of a state acting in the shadows ... you will be eradicated. And let all followers of “the religion of submission”,in other words Islam know,that from now on, any actions in the following of their philosophy which are contrary to the laws, security, and national interests of this country will be met with such force as is necessary to contain or eliminate this as a threat to our nation.

3.I am a man. As such, I have made mistakes in my past. I am also man enough to admit when I have done so. To this end, I am requesting congress set about repealing what has commonly been referred to as “The McCain–Feingold Act ”. It has proved to not be effective in curtailing or eliminating corruption in the political process. Indeed, upon reflection, it has lessened the intent and spirit of the First Amendment. I publicly apologize for having taken part in bringing about this legislation, and hope my active voice in bringing about its demise will serve as a proper penance.

4.To voice objections to a current majorities legislative agenda in the house, senate, or administration, or suggest alternative ways of reaching what is perceived as a common goal, has been a historical cornerstone in our Republic. However, there is a vast difference between the above, and what has been said and done by a handful of individuals in our body politic. To this end, I have begun criminal investigations into the actions of a number of our elected officials, along with some who have held public office in the past. To criticize your government and her policies is one thing, to actively promote the actions of her enemies or agencies is quite another, and if found wanting, these individuals will be prosecuted to the fullest extent possible.

Finally tonight, I have been called a “Maverick”, RINO, crackpot ... the list goes ever on, and rest assured these are the only ones I can mention in a public venue. (waits for audience laughter to die down) I have been playing my cards close to my chest, simply because I felt the only sure way to this position was so to speak, to hide my light under a bushel .

Let it be known and fully understood, that I AM the President of the United States Of America, and much like the oath I took as an officer in the greatest Navy in the world, ”To protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, against all enemies foreign and domestic.” ... is and always will be my top priority, and the greatest honor and privilege any man could ask for.

God Bless you all, and God Bless America.”

I almost fell out of my chair. It was stunning to hear such passion. To see the fire in his eyes. Was he a Churchillian Phoenix rising from the ashes of the Republican party? Was he showing the country and the world the “real John McCain”,the man his son's believed in and admired so?

I went to grab the morning paper, to see what the spin of the (now clearly disenchanted) print media would be, and then turn on the radio to hear what Limbaugh, Levin, or even Hannity might be saying.

But I guess I'll never know ... cause right about then was when I woke up.

Will We Have A McCain Mutiny?

Well it seems we have a Republican finalist in place. Arizona Senator, John McCain, locked the nomination by virtue of his walking away with Texas, Ohio, RI, and VT, in yesterdays primaries. As I have written in the past, the man gives me much cause for concern. His willingness to bend our first amendment rights in order to meet his needs/wants/desires, is by itself, reason enough to wonder about his political character. That he would, and has, side with leaders of the progressive movement in this country (otherwise known as the Democratic Party) if for no other apparent reason then to snub his own parties goals or agendas, comes across not as one who is a "maverick", but rather a petulant child who needs to be the center of attention ... and when not getting their way ... proceeds to curl up in a ball and turn blue.

Then there are the two things he has in common with the current holder of the office of Commander-in-Chief. The first, both seek to have our borders open to all able to walk across same. "Illegal Immigrant" is in not in either one's lexicon. That is going to cost us, and not just in dollars and cents. But in real human blood, sweat, and tears.

The second one, is their stance on the War on Terror. (This is kinda amazing to me, in that you would think a secure, non-porous border would be one of the top items on ones list of things to do, in order to effectively fight this foe, at least regarding being able to monitor the coming and goings of those who are of a questionable nature.) Both President Bush, and ostensively, Senator McCain, at the very least are aware of the potential price we pay if we chose to ignore the threat posed by "radical Islam". That neither seem to want to (or are able to) acknowledge Islam in and of itself IS the threat, and the more vocal/radical elements are nothing more then folks moving at a faster pace then the rest of the Muslim crowd, is perhaps a subject for another day. Still, they seem to have at least a basic grasp of the concept. We can't bargain with those who seek to kill us, and are less then honorable in their (history of) bargaining.

This last point is (if there is any politically speaking) McCain's saving grace.

But his successful run to the Oval Office will not be won on this alone. Both Democratic contenders are by all accounts going to give him quite a race, regardless who wins their party's nomination. He will have to do at least a couple of things (barring any major turns in the war). First, he needs to legitimately mend the fences he all but ran through the wood chipper, with conservatives. One way to start the mending would be to bring on board a strong conservative running mate for VP. Duncan Hunter would be my choice. He is a young, strong conservative from a state whose last major political voice (Pelosi, The Governator, and Boxer don't count) was none other then Ronald Regan. It might also be enough to swing that state in his column come the general election. (But my prognostication has been so poor, even I wonder about that ... still...) Then there is former Lt Governor of Maryland, Michael S. Steele, yet another strong conservative voice.

McCain has a long way to go to not only unify the GOP, but in winning the general election. Time will tell if he is honest enough with the conservative Republicans (and conservatives in general), to get them to turn out in large enough numbers come November.

I wonder if he will be honest enough with himself to be the kind of man his son sees him as.

“I think he is less [of a] maverick and more principled. He’s not going to pander and he’s not going to give in because it’s politically intelligent or just because it’s popular to go that way. Granted he is an elected official, and he is the voice of the people, but when it comes down to what he believes is best for the country, he does what he feels is right,” Midshipman Jack McCain, February 13, 2008

I have to admire both his sons. Both are in the millitary, by choice. Based on what I have read, they sound like solid centered individuals, who love their dad and are proud of him. It came across in the linked interview, and it did change my opinion of McCain just a bit. If those closest to him are as positive about him with out being *gushingly so*, then perhaps there is more to the man then what we have seen. And maybe this is what McCain needs to share with the rest of the country. Perhaps it is time to drop the "Maverick" and become instead, the principled senior statesman ready and willing to lead this country. If that means you have to secure the borders to defend against all enemies foreign and domestic, then so be it. If that means you have to repeal the BCRA (because our candidate is man enough to admit mistakes) because the Constitution, specifically the "Bill of Rights", is not to be trifled with. This would go a long way towards mending fences and establishing credibility with conservatives.

We shall see.

The Four Jokers of the Apocalypse

If it wasn't so serious a concern, the whole election process this time around could be viewed as nothing more then the political version of "Highlander"; "There Can Be Only One!" . Lord knows it is certainly shaping up to be a battle royal, if it ends up being between Ms Clinton and Mr. McCain. On the other hand if the (very) junior Senator from Illinois, Barack Obama, gets his party's nod, then all bets are off. Other then a major slip up of truly monumental proportions, there is no way in hell McCain beats Obama.

I am not in any way shape or form, a supporter of said junior Senator, but he has more personality and ability to galvanize his political base in his little finger, then McCain has in his entire (quite sizable) ego. Obama, shows signs of being able to pull in at least some of the middle of the road folks out there, and some of the RINO's (Big slice of irony there, McCain backers.), both groups which McCain dearly needs to win the White House. Add to this the fact that traditionally the majority of Democrats will line up behind whomever is their standard bearer, once chosen, regardless how bloody the battle was to get the nomination. This is NOT the case with the GOP this time 'round.

The world is as dangerous as it ever was. Whither through design, mismanagement, or perhaps plain hubris, the current administration has no been able to address all the demands placed upon it by the War on Terror.

At the same time, the erosion of personal freedom(s) continues here at home. The Constitution has taken quite the beating while Mr. Bush was in office. The First, Fifth, and possibly Second Amendments being assaulted. Our national borders, one of the very things considered as one of the standards to which denotes some bit of land as "being a nation", are criss-crossed with near impunity by anyone who desires to enter. We have more "undocumented aliens" here, then in the entire "director's cut" of "Close Encounters of the Third Kind". (At least the ones in the movie were just passing through.)

Of course there are also those on the other side of the aisle who seek to undo what little good the current administration has done. They also seek to send us closer to, if not directly down the same path which the EU is going down now. (along with Great Briton. may she rest in peace)

Senator McCain will NOT (The one possible exception being the War on Terror, and we only have his personal word on that ... and his past record shows how little he honors his word ... that he will continue the fight.) seek to change any of the above. Indeed, he will continue the big government spending and programs just like Bush and a large chunk of the GOP Senate and Congress. His track record shows, despite what he now says to the contrary, that he will fall in line with the liberal side of things more often then not. The man is only nominally a Republican, and only in his befuddled mind's eye does he wear the mantle of *Conservative". Need we say anything about his staunch support of the Constitution? (If you have to ask, go back to sleep, you really didn't want your First Amendment rights any more did you?)

At Least 12" of Global Warming Outside ...

... and more forecast for the rest of the day. And after spending better then 15 hours at the polls yesterday (election judging) ... Well, Misha talks about Super Tuesday Hangovers here, with voting and monitoring the ongoing results via television and radio. Try spending all that time at the polls ... people, it ain't pretty. The high point of the day was seeing a number of young people coming out and voting for the first time. They were excited and really wanted to be a part of things. I only wish there had been more of them.

We had about 40-50% turnout. And were busy for the majority of the day, despite the beginnings of a major storm starting to dump snow by around noon.

Off to go and start to shovel out the drive. Going to try and use the snowblower...but don't know if it will be up to the task, it's better then a foot deep now.

Wonder if we can get a pizza delivered for dinner tonight?

The Maverick from Arizona

Senator John McCain. First, let me get this out of the way, Senator McCain was a POW, and served Honorably in the United States Navy. His service to his country is not now nor has ever been in question by me. And I flat refuse to go there. . The man is as dangerous to this country as any Democrat, and as disingenuous towards the Constitution as Mike Huckabee would be...

Taken from "State of the Union and Primary Pleasantries"

I have posted about McCain and his less then stellar actions in the past. And on my opinion(s) of the man. Being he is in the running (and currently tied for the lead in the Florida Primary) for the Republican nod for President, perhaps a look at a couple or three posts from the past would be in order. This man is not to be trusted! His only saving grace, and it is questionable as to whither or not he will stay the course, is his supposed stand on the War on Terror.

With all the war of words about the Swift Boat Vets for Truth and their ad depicting Kerry in a less than favorable light (Truth hurts don't it Kerry). Aside from the whining and pseudo legal garbage put out by the DNC (and others for the Kerry Konvoy), one voice spoke out, which judging by his past actions isn't too surprising at first look. Yes, I am talking about Arizona's own Senator John McCain.

There has been talk over the years about his checkered political past (Keating Five ring a bell?), including the election ads cure-all (that didn't)which bitch-slaps ignores that pesky first amendment, the CFR. But, his statements concerning the ad placed by the Swifties, is not really about his being a "maverick", or even being an independent thinker.....it goes deeper.

As most folks know Senator McCain was a POW during Viet Nam. There have been other sites and other comments, over the years, suggesting he got the majority of his wounds by not following procedure upon ejecting from his aircraft over the middle of Hanoi. I would humbly suggest until you have done the same, you might want to pipe down about that....ejecting from an aircraft even in optimal conditions is not failsafe....and though I have concerns about the Senator, that isn't one of them.

He landed in the middle of " the Western Lake" and was removed from it by one Vietnamese. Thus started his 5 1/2 year stint as a prisoner of war.
And, on his fourth day of captivity and believing he was going to die, McCain chose instead to deal with his captors. I said, "O.K., I'll give you military information if you will take me to the hospital."**. Even this almost failed to work, until the Vietnamese realized he was the son of a senior Naval Officer. Now, only those who have been in that part of hell experienced by POW's of Viet Nam, would have any honest insight to what McCain was exposed to....the rest of us can imagine...based on what we have read or heard from other POW's. Is he a turncoat to his fellows based on his own admissions in so far as he claims to have freely violated the Code of Conduct all service members are bound to? I don't want to address that concern...indeed it is not as important as another question I do have.

Was Senator McCain broken so hard that he can never exorcise the demons his actions past and present would indicate he still faces? If he were just a small town mayor, or a little bureaucrat in a dimly lit office, that may not be much of a concern...certainly others have matters of self worth and conscience they must face constantly...But how many are US Senators....and past (and possible future) contenders for the highest office in the land?

Fact: McCain actively sought to dismiss and marginalize attempts of finding out whether there were American POWs/MIAs still alive in Viet Nam and possibly neighboring countries

Fact: After keeping his distance from Massachusetts Senator John Kerry for a number of years, obstinately due to Kerry's well documented anti-war stance, He has been alleged to have "Made his peace" with Kerry while on a trip to Kuwait.

Fact: The very enemy which caused him physical and mental damage, became the beneficiary of his actions in bringing about more open trade as one of a number of US Senators seeking to help open relations with Viet Nam.

Fact: When fellow vets attempt to present their side of the ongoing saga that is the Kerry attempt to rewrite (Kerry's) history of the Viet Nam war, he summarily dismisses them and calls upon the Bush administration to do the same.

The bottom line is there is more to Senator McCain then meets the eye. Based on what has appeared in print (US News and World Report, Congressional Record[s], McCain's own statements, "The Nightingale", etc) he is a man who seeks to put Viet Nam well behind him....even if the costs are far greater than just the personal well being and mental health of one Senator John McCain.

It is one thing to allow Kerry to dodge and weave as he puts on his "Visions of Viet Nam Heroics Pornshow ™" and attack those without credentials or affidavit's to back up their accusations. But the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are NOT in that group Senator McCain. They have the poof, they have been there, been wounded, and seen their comrades in arms die there.

You have talked about courage. You have talked about falling short of what you would consider to be honorable conduct. You have the chance here to do what would be considered to be the honorable thing, in really listening to what the Swift Boat vets have to say. And, in doing all of what is in your power to ensure the current Commander in Chief is returned to office for another four years. We are at war Senator, and though he is not perfect, President Bush has the clarity of vision to recognize the evil we are fighting for what it is. Perhaps, in finding the courage within yourself to drop the blinders and see the truth, you will be able to eliminate some of the demons who dine on your soul daily.

"John McCain, Haunted by Demons?" August 12th, 2004 - Snugg Harbor

This was followed by this(which referred to the blockquote above):

I received more than a few comments about this post when it appeared a number of months ago. The major piece of legislation co-authored by the good Senator has been in the news and making major waves throughout the blogsphere over the past few weeks. Perhaps it is as good a time as any to take a walk down memory lane...The main point of my post still stands. Senator McCain in all good conscience needs to step down from his senate seat and retire. I have the greatest respect for the senators Naval service, and for his time spent as a POW. But, I posit his time in hell, has at the very least affected his powers of reasoning. It's not his fault, and it may not be fair (as things in life often are) but his actions as a Senator, and the legislation he has backed or sponsored, as well as his actions as a member of the Senate fact finding committee on the issue of POWs/MIAs are questionable at best.

"Revisiting Senator McCain"- March 3rd, 2005 Snugg Harbor

And finally, there is this:

I have been following, with interest, not only the hub-bub about the BCRA and the FEC as it relates specifically to blogging and bloggers at large, but about the exploits of it's more notable author, Senator John McCain.

Ed Morrissey at Captain's Quarters has been on this item and the Senator like a good hunting dog...ferreting out bits and pieces of the truth along with giving us larger swatches about one of the main players in this madness.

But I am noticing something else here.

Yes there was the Keating Five scandal, and though he came out of it with little more than a slap on the hand (and a hope that the voting public has short memories), McCain did admit he was wrong. This major incident was spun over the years as his main personal reason for the BCRA. That, there exists a possibility legislators could become corrupted by the large amounts of money out their in corporate coffers and PAC land. The average voter across the nation (assuming McCain's ambition for power and the presidency are as strong as they ever were) could, if spun right, believe McCain has learned his lesson.

But wait you say, what about information currently being brought to light about his ties with Cablevision and their contributions to the Reform Institute. In fact looking at the cronyism prevalent at the Reform Institute, and McCain's ties to same, if this is the actions of an active "reformer", one might wonder when wolves became just another subspecies of chicken.

Okay, lets not look at the above. After all it's been many years since Keating...and one can't fault a fella from back sliding. Oops, it seems Mark R. Levin, dug up a bit more about McCain getting monies from outside sources at different times from 1989 through 2002.

So, what is the big deal here? To me it is simple, and Mr. Levin brings it to light in this fashion:

"Of course, I don't believe the mere receipt of campaign contributions is corrupting. In fact, it's evidence of representative government at work. The public has every right to try to influence the direction of their government. But McCain believes this activity to be corrupt, yet he took the money anyway."

And that appears to be McCain in a nutshell....the man is a hypocrite.

This brings me back to McCain's recent statements about the FEC and the BCRA not effecting, or having any effect on, individual bloggers. Judging on how the man is able to apparently talk reform out of one side of his mouth while feathering his campaign coffers or providing "capital" shelter for his cronies. You have got to wonder not only about John McCain's ability to prevent the erosion of YOUR first amendment rights, but his willingness to do so as well.

March 10th, 2005 -Snugg Harbor

Is this the man you want to see as Commander-in-Chief ? He is nothing more then a liberal in GOP clothing on every issue other then (perhaps) the War on Terror. At least with Obama, you know what you are getting. Senator Obama is upfront about what he is and what he stands for. (Though I can't see myself voting for him either. Not even close to my political stance.) But with McCain ... only John and God know what is going on in that muddled mind of his. If he gets the nomination, be afraid, be very afraid.

** original link no longer exists...updated with a more current item from Newsmax.com archives-Harbor Master

The State of the Union and Primary Pleasantries

Tonight President Bush gives his last "State of the Union Address", as he heads towards his last eleven months in the Oval Office. It will be interesting to see what his framework for his twilight tour will be. One expects it will contain much verbiage regarding the current fiscal crisis, and what the "Feds" are ramping up to do about it. It would not be a surprise at all to find more information put forward on past success with the War On Terror, as well as what the President hopes to accomplish towards the (ongoing) reconstruction of Iraq, and its version of democracy. Then there is Iran, and it's treat of becoming the regional nuclear power. All in all I suspect it will be more of a farewell address than a major litany of potential administration accomplishments.

And though there has been much President Bush has done which has caused my fists to clench and vision to turn red, in the end, regarding the singular most important event of our time, he has for the most part stayed the course. For that, I thank you Mr. President. Now begins his final chapter.
-------------------------
Which brings us to the real point of this post. (What? Your posts have points??!!!) The season of silliness, otherwise known as "The Primaries" ™ , is well upon us. The Democrats have seen fit to narrow down their "offerings" to three (No, not Larry, Moe, and Curly, but close!) In no particular order we have Hillary Diane Rodham-Clinton, who along with her husband, Bill, represent the Machiavelli branch of the party.

Then there is John Edwards, the "Hair today gone tomorrow candidate". Although early on many thought he would have a chance to grab the nomination away from Mz Clinton, or at worst be in second place, his lackluster showings, especially in what was considered to be "his turf", South Carolina, may have sealed his fate as a future vice president to who ever gets the Democratic nod. It could also be argued, his lack of tractions might be due to Hillary and Obama sucking up almost all the oxygen from the Democrat side of the process.

Last, but not least, is Barack Obama, junior Senator from Illinois. Young, charismatic, who more or less has been "officially" anointed as the second coming of JFK, by no less then Caroline Kennedy and Uncle Teddy. (One could be tempted to note, the Clinton camp might be more then willing to advance the Kennedy analogy with Sen Obama, to the same horrific conclusion as the original, but that would be crass and unfeeling. The Clintons are far, far above that kind of reproach...as spotless as Teddy Kennedy's ....err driving record.) It will be a very interesting season over on the Democratic side of things.

But they are not alone.

Get Offa My Lawn

Tired of your political party ignoring you fella?
You say it's like being told by the girl you're most fond of ... "I love you ... like you were my brother!"
What's that you're saying? That the candidates of either party could barely qualify for hall monitor? Let alone leader of the most powerful country in the free world???
That the other "also ran parties" offer either pie-in-the-sky platitudes, or are only thinly connected to reality?

WELL CHEER UP BUNKY!!!

Now there is an alternative!
Yes, the "Get Offa My Lawn" Party is just the "ticket". Get thee over to McGee's home on the web for more info...including how to become a deligate.

Are You Ready To Make A Choice?

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. Second Amendment-United States Constitution

We all have choices to make. Some are simple, daily, repetitive ... what to wear to work, what's for dinner tonight, is there anything worth watching on the boob tube.

At other times we face decisions of a bit more complex nature. Is this really the right car for me and my family. Who "is" the best person for the job. Should I stand (and maybe "die"), metaphorically, on this hill, or concede to the wishes of my wife.

Then there are the occasional really tough choices. Like; Should I risk losing the best friend I ever had by telling them what they really need to hear, or just agree with them and keep their friendship (assuming they are in some sort of self destructive state/situation).

Then there are the real life or death kinds of choices. And not just in a physical sense. The ones that can spiritually wound or even kill (or lead to the death of your soul)

We all make choices.

I, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

The Oath of enlistment/re-enlistment of the Armed Forces

Some of us feel that this oath, once taken, is taken for life. That our sacred oath demands we are duty bound to the oath even after enlistments and office holdings have expired. That one is honor bound to it ... for life. That there are ideals and beliefs which once realized, are worth the total investment of self. Even to the point of "that last full measure of devotion".

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.” Oath of Office

Some of us don't. They take political gambles with your first amendment rights, and lose. They allow for the further encroachment of our property rights. Seek to obliterate our borders, sovrenty, and national security. And now, an out and out attack on the linchpin of the Constitution, the Second Amendment..

And Some of us plan on supporting the Constitution as it was originally intended, especially if elected to higher office.

In one respect, the cave dweller over in Afghanistan has it correct. We are comfortable here in the west, especially in America. We have been blessed with a prosperity and abundance of riches, and standard of living, no other nation on earth as realized. And (the collective) we have come to expect our government to take appropriate action when needed. That the government will take care of what ever needs to be taken care of. It can mass an army large enough to meet our defense. It can through sanctions, diplomatic meetings, behind the scenes arm twisting, bend the rest of the world to our ends (or come up with a mutually agreeable compromise). But what this has done, over the course of the past 60-70 years, is to accelerate, in a negative way, a shift in personal responsibility.

It's easier to let someone else do it. To defend you. To pay a larger burden of the expense of running the government which is providing you with welfare (tax the rich make em bleed...I don't have enough...they have too much). To let the police take care of all vestiges of crime. (We don't NEED guns....that's what the cops are for anyhow.)

No it isn't! With perhaps one exception. It is quite possible that in the process of defending you ...your son/daughter/husband/wife will pay for your comfort. This would be perhaps the only legitimate extension to the federal government. But as to the others. Living off the dole, due to the (successful) efforts of others? Granting the police more and more power to battle crime when the moral code(s) used to define just what constitutes *a crime* become more and more nebulous, to the point where even ones thoughts are suspect? All the while, you are asked (cajoled, scared, lied to) to give up (some, and only for a short time if possible) personal freedoms to achieve these ends.

I guess it is at least partially due to human nature things are as they are. But ask yourself this ... at what price freedom?

At what point do I ... must I ... make a choice to let things continue in the direction they are going. At which personal line in the sand, after many such lines have been drawn, and crossed, do I say "that's it, that's enough. You have gone too far into what is MINE by divine right (or natural law if you prefer). I don't know what the answer is for you. Never the less, the time is fast approaching when a choice (or choices) will have to be made.

Are you ready? Will you be ready? To Make A Choice? Or will you let others make it for you?

Update changed the link to "the Second Amendment" above and moved other link to end of post. -Harbor Master.
Update2Seems someone in Congress also gets it. Head on over and add your two cents... A choice in the right direction

Don't Smoke em' If You (Still) Got em'

"We lay it down as a fundamental, that laws, to be just, must give a reciprocation of right; that, without this, they are mere arbitrary rules of conduct, founded in force, and not in conscience."

-- Thomas Jefferson (Notes on the state of Virginia, 1782)

Hi, My name is Guy, and I am a smoker. I have been dancing with darling nicotine since 1971. Should I stop? Perhaps. For a fact it would allow my lungs to operate in a (much) more efficient fashion. It would allow for a sharp drop in my over all chances of succumbing to either lung cancer and or a heart attack in what ever alloted time is left me on this earth. My clothes (and I) would generally smell a whole lot better. The actions taken by my state (and 23 others ... if one believes the propaganda) would not directly effect me as I would no longer feel the need for a smoke while having an adult beverage at a bar or after a meal (or cup of coffee) dining out.

Everything stated in the above paragraph is true ... except for the last sentence.

The actions taken by the Peoples Republic of Illinois does effect you wheither or not you smoke or have never seen tobacco in its processed state in your life.

Some religions in their doctrine condemn/forbid/strongly admonish the use of intoxicants (of which, tobacco is one). That is their belief/choice. If I belong to any one of those, I have the choice to either follow said doctrine or not, and suffer the consequences for doing so.

For reasons of safety, smoking is prohibited in certain businesses/areas. If you deal with oxygen, for example, it is not a bright idea to be smoking in the general area. In the military you do not smoke while on watch (that lit butt makes a great target).

Courtesy/civility/rules of decorum dictate, if one has any social etiquette/manners at all, that you refrain from smoking during a number of social gatherings/occasions. As a rule, one does not smoke in church (at the very least during services/mass). At formal gatherings of civic/fraternal organizations you will not be allowed to puff. It is polite to ask (or it was, when you could still smoke in restaurants) the patrons next to you, if they mind if you smoke. It was not required, but was the civil thing to do.

In short, the almighty state has decided for you, what is not only in your best interest, and by implication, that it knows better then you do what is best/socially acceptable/morally-ethically correct. That you do not have a choice as an individual to manage your affairs be they physical/social/mental/moral/business related/leisure related.

No, smoking in and of itself, may not be the best thing one can do. But it IS a legal substance (for adults). The state is hypocritical enough to realize this and tax the substance accordingly ... to make a tidy profit off the sale of same.

I am more concerned about the precedence set here. (And a strong argument could be made this was already started with the helmet/seatbelt laws of years past.) We all are, as fully functioning adults allowed to make choices. Some may not be the best (no seatbelt for example) but the bottom line is we as citizens of a supposed free society are supposed to be able to make these choices... and then live with whatever consequences are the result of these actions. This is not, nor has it ever been, the responsibility of the state to make these choices for us. Or why even establish a legal majority (the age of 18 or 21 depending on location) if the state seeks to be the final abater in all matters.

For the sake of this post we will stick to smoking. If I am an owner of a bar and I decide to restrict smoking on my premises, then I should be able to do so and financially live or die with that choice. My patrons will dictate as to wither or not it was a smart business move. Conversely, if I elect to allow smoking the same should apply. If enough people are going to frequent my establishment to drink and smoke, then I will make money. If not, then perhaps I need to back up and regroup... re-think my business plan ... and go from there. But (assuming it isn't illegal) it is not any of the states business to tell me how to run my business. And this goes for all laws which dictate (short of those dealing with safety issues ... fire codes/food prep/storage and the like) same.

The more we allow for the state to intrude into our personal affairs, in the long run, the less freedom we will have. The less freedom of choice. The less we will be able to be adults. We will become wards of the state. Bowing to their will.

The first of this year the bar was lowered, yet again, regarding personal freedom. Another of your choices as to how you desired to live (enjoy?) your life was taken from you. It may have been for all the best intentions. But the next time the state cares to intrude (and rest assured there WILL be a "next time") it has become that much easier for the state to do so.

Need an example:
"I am sorry Mrs. Smith, I would love to sell you the super size fries with your order, but your body fat card says you don't qualify for them." No, the state would never go after over weight people ... would they????

Thompson: At Long Last A Conservative Statesman!!

It seems Republican presidential hopeful, Fred Thompson, has begun to get his campaign into higher gear. Perhaps it was part of a plan to wait out the other guys, to see who would be putting their collective feet into their mouths first. Or to see how the (formerly) loyal opposition was going to shake out as we near the first hurdle of the primary season.

And I haven't posted much on the political season so far precisely because of that. It's still early. But like the Thompson campaign, I feel now is the time to toss my two cents out there. So here goes.

Giuliani: Strong on defense, charismatic (to a point), based on his handling of NYC during 9/11 there seems to be some leadership ability, certainly the ability to handle things in a crisis mode. But his domestic policy is going to be nothing short of RINO-isque. If you want to see more of what has been happening under the current administration, only more to the left, then he is your man ... But not mine. Though I see him as being Thompson's biggest obstacle in getting the GOP nod.

McCain: Also strong on defense. But his disregard of the Constitution (McCain-Feingold), past ethics concerns (alleged ties with the mob in Az/the Savings-in-Loan scandal), and his image (to some of us) as sometimes coming across as flaky, Is gonna knock him out.

Romney: His liberal style track record while Governor of Massachusetts is going to be the albatross around his neck. And though he is trying to sell himself as being a centrist ... Assuming he got the nod from the GOP, the Dems will have a field day with him (the same holds true for Rudy/Mike/John/Ron).

Huckabee: Yet another Liberal/Moderate in Republican clothing. If you want another George Bush ... only more strident in his religious convictions (as in using it as a club against any and all nay sayers regardless of the topic), and as easily a flip-flopper as ol' Billy Clinton, then go for Mike. And he STILL hasn't a clue about foreign policy. Weak at home and abroad is NOT what we need right now.

Ron Paul: It had to happen sooner or later. The GOP finally got a conservative version of Kucinich! And this fella gets all the granola votes too (that's fruits, flakes, and nuts). He might have had at least an honest listening had his folks IMMEDIATELY gotten rid of the anti-semitic and white supremacists. Sadly, they still flock to Paul like moths to a flame. This one will burn out not soon enough.

Saving the best for last.

Fred Thompson: Strong on defense. Strong on a return to the original Republican platform of smaller (Federal) government, lower taxes, etc. Pro Israel/Life/Military. Doesn't really want the job (not lusting for power) but will not shirk his civic duty when called upon to do so. Think Winston Churchill, with a Tennessee accent. (Yes, I think he could rise to THAT level of statesmanship.)

You need to hear what Fred has to say? Then you need go no further then to the video goodness here.

I will cover the Democratic side of the house in another post. After seeing the video from Thompson, my hopes are rising in that we may, as Constitutional loving Americans, finally get the leadership we need. Go Fred Go!!!!

The Scary GOP

December 15, 2007 7:43 PM

ABC News' Raelyn Johnson reports: Elizabeth Edwards, wife of Democratic hopeful John Edwards, lamented with Iowa caucus goers about her fear of the Republican Party. Elizabeth Edwards, wife of Democratic hopeful John Edwards, lamented with Iowa caucus goers about her fear of the Republican Party. "Republicans should scare us in a lot of ways," Edwards said as she was introducing her husband at a town hall in Dubuque, Iowa.

Sheesh ... You, or your husband, (or any of the other wanna-be potential presidents) may annoy me. Ya'll may even make me want to toss the nearest blunt object at hand towards the tv. Sadly, if it were not for the fact that so many in this country actually buy into what ya'll are saying, a bright future as comedians would be awaiting you all. But scare me, not even on your best day. So how is it that a number of the current crop of GOP presidential hopefuls, cause you to break out in a cold sweat? Did one of them hide her husbands curling iron? Or did another tell Elizabeth she doesn't look 10 pounds heavier on television ... she looks 25 pounds heavier???

Speaking about Republican candidate Mike Huckabee, who recently surged ahead in Iowa polls, Elizabeth noted, "He seems like a nice charming guy," before saying that Huckabee, "doesn’t believe in evolution and has some nutty views about what it is we should do about ending violence in our inner city — we should make sure all of our young people are armed. Republicans scare me."

One hopes her husband isn't as muddled in his thought process as she is. Looking for "Mike Huckabee kids with guns" on Google came up with a goose-egg. The best one can find on Huclabee's stance on guns and the second amendment is here. Regarding his feelings for (or against) evolution, he answers quite nicely here Decided not to even bother with the "ending violence in our inner-city" (Her inner-city?? She owns it?? And if so, why isn't she and her hubby taking care of the problem ... if it's their inner city and all.) As for the blockquote in toto: It may be a wild guess on my part but I bet if I found a complete audio file of the above, there might be a very good chance things about Huckabee where taken out of context.

She went on to warn about the larger party, saying, "Karl Rove may not be working in the White House anymore but you can pretty much be sure he’s going back in the presidential race... I believe he’s going to be back and he’s going be doing that same kind of Rovian politics that we’ve seen before — the kind of attacks that we saw against Sen. McCain in South Carolina we can expect to see against our nominee, 'swift boating,' all of that kind of stuff again."

Wow, the Dems sure have a fixation of ol' Karl Rove. She seems more afraid of him then Ebanezer Scrooge was of Jacob Marly and his chains. Perhaps if they came up with honest to god solutions to the problems and concerns this country (and to a greater or lesser extent, the world) is facing, the Mr. Rove wouldn't be a concern. Oh, but that's right, all the Dems perport to be interested in are "feelings" and not realistic, concrete solutions. Get over Rove...that is sooooo 2004. (And for that matter, get over Bush as well.)

John Edwards has been spending the last week campaigning in Iowa. Elizabeth joined him recently and has been making her presence felt by speaking at various moments throughout town hall meetings. Actor and supporter Kevin Bacon joined Edwards on Saturday, surprising audiences with a performance from the Bacon Brothers Band, but it’s becoming increasingly clear that this bus tour is being headlined by Elizabeth.

And yet another democrat contender is found to be not only using his wife as a major mouthpiece for his campaign ... in his (Edwards) case he is not hiding behind her skirt, he is hiding underneath it.

Pleading her husband’s case, she told caucus goers that Edwards could survive the Republican attack machine: "We have to have a candidate who stands up, can take the punches and give it back to them."

Boy am I confused. First Mrs. Edwards says her hubby can "survive the Republican attack machine", then in the next breath she states "We have to have a candidate who stands up, can take the punches and give it back to them.". So which is it Mrs. Edwards? You either support your husband with your fist sentence, or you are still looking for a candidate as evidenced by your second sentence.

Ah well, guess when you are constantly living in fear of the "Scary GOP" ™ , you can't be expected to separate fact from fiction. Especially when you have the friendly folks from the media being enablers of your phobia and all.

Now you want to hear something really scary? If I happened to hear of an accounting of Mr Edwards monthly hair care expenses ....now that would be scary!

Write of the Living Fred

It would appear the Thompson staff, or perhaps the man himself, are as quick with a pen as ever. I was less then happy with some of the early on campaign shuffling and what appeared as a less then active schedule of appearances by the good Senator. Happily, this seems to be changing. A strong showing at the last political gab fest (One hates to call them debates, regardless of what the media says, they are anything but.). And now even more spunkiness on his web site. Come on Fred, we need you now more then ever.

But what of the other rivals for the GOP *crown*? Well, Huckabee is a fool in conservative clothing. Ron Paul is the libertarian version of Ross Perot. Mitt Romney is a Massachusetts version of Bush (at best), while Giuliani is the same for NY. McCain should retire now while he can still save face.

The only other people who have any merit, Tancredo and Hunter, sadly have little or no traction. Perhaps either would or should look in to becoming Thompson's running mate? Both are young enough and would then make strong contenders for the oval office after Thompson vacates same. (Hey, ya gotta be optimistic.)

A floating turd ...

no matter how many times you flush, always tries to re-surface. You know this to be true. They refuse to exit the crapper... going quietly into the night.

So it would seem to be the case with that traitor err ... decorated Navy zero ... John "EFFEN" Karry(did you know he was in Viet Nam???). Just when you think this turd has finally left the commode, up to the surface he comes.

I have not a single word of kindness or support for this piece of human excrement. He violates what is good and decent about being a Naval Officer. No, I wasn't one, but had the honor and privilege to have served with and under quite a number of dedicated, professional, personally accountable men and woman. Officers who took their oath of duty quite literally to heart. Kerry, isn't worthy of licking their boots, and his actions past and present besmirch them all.

My blood pressure is heading north just typoing this. So to provide a brief refresher you could look at my post on Aug 5th 2004 regarding Kerry (I would link it, but the archives seem to be a bit hinky... though going back to Aug on the monthly Archives seems to work ... at Snugg Harbor ... not at CIA), or more importantly head over to The Patriot Post and read their take on the junior scumbag Senator from Teddy "the floater" Kennedy's personal playground. His recent antics, have caused him to float to the surface of the political cesspool. Can we finally get it right and flush him out to the backwaters of inequity once and for all?

Conservative Compassion

Compassionate Conservative. Two words some might consider to be an oxymoron. A catch phrase produced by a GOP pundit designed to shed a "kinder gentler light" on (at that time) an aspiring presidential hopeful. As most of us know, the media picked up on it, and it has been used time and again. But what does it really say ... about the media (and the liberal/progressives et all) ... and more importantly, about those of us who espouse a more conservative view of the world.

Mark Levin, the no holds barred conservative voice (and author extraordinaire), brought this up yesterday (or last night if you listen to him via WLS). And he makes a very interesting point. By creating a subset of conservatives as being exclusively Compassionate, isn't that implying Conservatives (and by default, conservatism at large) are either incapable of being compassionate, or those who embrace the conservative philosophy are rendered less compassionate (or devoid/stripped of this trait altogether) then all other mortals who wonder the planet?

He is right on the money. By marginalizing conservatives it perpetuates the myth we are all heartless. That we would, if given the chance, eat our young ... or our pets (for those out there without children). Or perhaps, we would bring back the rack, tar & feathers, public stocks, and or mass conformity to a Judaeo-Christian ethos with the blessing (literally) of the State. Maybe it is feared that woman, once married, would be shackled to the kitchen, the laundry, and the kids ... with no hope of developing a life outside (or along with) same. And all the other myths purposefully perpetrated at every chance by those on the left and their media lap dogs.

The real truth is ... conservatives do have a heart by the very nature of what they believe in, they have to! (And no, I am not necessarily talking about the Republican party here ... though there are conservatives who belong to it. With each passing election cycle it becomes less and less conservative in its make up and membership ... can anyone say RHINO ???) Conservatives believe in the individual and are in full support of their (God given) rights and freedoms as innumerated by the Constitution. They believe in small government, which means less intrusion in both your personal and professional (business) lives. They believe in taking responsibility for ones actions, being held accountable for same (for good or ill). If allowing for ones fellow man to be as unhindered in their opportunities to become what ever they want or to realize their dreams (whatever they may be) unfettered and unrestricted as much as possible isn't an applicable definition for compassion (toward their fellow man) then I don't know what is.

So perhaps we should send a word to the powers that be. We are not "Compassionate Conservatives". This beast doesn't exist. We of the conservative stripe, are first and foremost human beings. Who by our very nature are, when the need arises, compassionate, passionate, rational, logical, illogical, temperate, intemperate, forgiving, unforgiving, loving, boorish, honest, the full gamut of traits and emotions inherent in all human beings. To say we, as a group, are incapable of compassion is as disingenuous as saying there is no such thing as a liberal who believes in the Islamic threat to our way of life as being a clear and present danger. (They may be few in number, but they do exist. Sen Lieberman as a case in point.)

Cross posted at the CIA cause M. Jack, and the gang, need a break now and again.

Tired Of The Progressives? It's Our Fault! .

Was watching a video clip from yesterdays "Youtube Debate" over at the Rott. My first thought was Senator Biden is yet another of the kool-aid drinking, "the State knows what's best for you", I'm gonna make this MY err ... a perfect world even if I have to ram it down your throat and or (have someone ELSE) take out the whole lot of you, in order to do so, asshats. And that he is. And he is a danger (as are most all other liberal/statist/progressives ... but that is a story for the not to distant future) to most, if not all, of our Constitutional guarantees.

But upon a bit of reflection. Mr Biden (he ain't my Senator ... not that the ones I have are any better ... and trust me they are not!) is not the only one at fault here. Because a large part of the blame for what we have to put up with in Congress, the Senate, the White House (and by extension, the Supreme Court) is our fault!

When did this country or more correctly, the majority of it's population, forget or chose to ignore, our responsibilities?

We complain about the erosion of our rights and liberties. Yet we not only continue to elect people who spend an ever greater part of their time in elected office stripping them away. We bemoan the fact with each passing day it seems there is a new attack on our "rights", yet at the same time we collectively sit in the comfort of our homes, mentally (if nothing else) saying; "Ok, you just crossed the line, and this really torques me off!!" (Or language a tad more salty then that.) But within a day or two (Letters written to the non-listening elitist cadre otherwise known as the Senate/Congress, or phone calls to same being used if we REALLY get riled.) do nothing more then make yet another line in the sand a bit further out then the last. And I don't single myself out for any exemplary treatment, I am as guilty as the rest.

Why?

1. We are too comfortable. We have it pretty damn good (and the left knows it). My generation (the baby boomers) and the one immediately following, have had the highest standard of living of any group of peoples on this earth. This leads to the second point

2. We don't want to really rock the boat. We (despite the left and the media remarks to the contrary) are all social creatures and we want to co-exist with our fellows as much as possible. And life, despite the occasional spikes, is good. (Or so we are constantly reminded by the media ... look how bad the rest of the world is ... see how much America wastes compared to them?)

3. We are getting older. Yeah, I know that 50 is the "new 35-40", would someone tell that to my knees and other joints, they seem to be still on the old time table. Fact is, we might have the wisdom/maturity/experience level which can, to some degree, compensate for the seemingly endless energy and drive of youth. But knowing all that we amassed/built up/saved up for would most likely be gone if we elected to "push the reset button", is a very sobering thought. We need to remember the founders of this country gave their all to secure the liberties we see eroding before our eyes. Can we, as those who inherited these birthrights do no less?

4. We are Nice Guys - When we should be Adults (part 1)
When times are good in this country, we are more then willing to try and figure out if there is a way to share the wealth with those less fortunate. Especially if we have been in difficult straits ourselves. Again, human nature plays a part. We are a charitable people. And so, over the course of the 60's, 70's and some of the 80's we collectively allowed for vast sums of monies to be used in what was known as "the war on poverty" or "The Great Society". It was an honorable thing to strive for and based on good intentions (yeah, I know where that road goes). But we were nice guys ... when we realized the war on poverty turned into nothing more then the creation of a welfare state/class (Whom the progressives use as yet another group of victims needing to be "protected" ... for their own good of course.), we should have stepped in and put a stop to it then and there. We didn't. Not until the 90's was any substantive changes put in place to stop the monies going out.

5. We are Nice Guys - When we should be Adults (part 2)
The liberal mantra, often said before, is that we only do things because we are "meanspirited", "evil", or just our and out corrupt. When in reality our actions are based not on personal gain, or because our strings are being pulled by some mysterious cabal/military-industrial complex, or religious zealotry, or for you lefty bigots out there- "those evil Zionist joooooows". Rather we do them because they must be done. This is true on a personal level. In the raising of families. It is true on the local level, in the desire to live in a healthy vibrant community. And is also true at the National level. Wither it is fighting a war, cutting wasteful spending, lowering taxes, or trying to get government out of the home and business. (Sadly, that is what the Republican party used to stand for. It seems to have morphed into something altogether different over the past 8 years. But that is a story for a later date.) As reasoning, thinking, adults knowing this to be true, we do our best to act accordingly, in any given situation, no matter how hard it may be to do so.

Yet, as a political entity (the GOP), or as a philosophical point of view (conservatism/moralistic/some neo-libertarian), we often refuse to face our adversaries directly and call them on points of contention. We accept diversity for diversity's sake. Forsaking the ideal of accepting an individual as just that... an individual who should be held accountable for their actions (for good or ill) and not based on their gender/race/color/creed. We have allowed for the beginning (or at least the ground work) of the balkanization of America. With the liberals bringing about the constant formation of new classes/types of victims, and the acceptance of allowing every class/race/ethnicity their own hyphen before "American". "American" should be all you ever need to say when someone asks "Where you from?" period. And English should be the first language spoken (at least in the school or when conducting business with the public at large) when spoken to. Yes there are, and perhaps will always be, "Little Italy's, "Greektowns", Chinatowns, ect. And one should not be surprised to hear the native language of those who live there being spoken. Or their culture being proudly on display. This is all part of assimilation in to the melting pot which is America. But at the end of the day English first, Spanish, German, Chinese, Polish or which ever your flavor is, second. But we let this go to the wayside. Out of a misplaced sense of "fairness" perhaps, but that "being a nice guy" attitude seems to be the driving force behind it.

6. We are shrinking in numbers. Those who hold our countries original ideals and form of governance (the Constitution, rule of law, a country composed of Americans - not hyphenated sub groups of various origins), due to the tactics of progressives and their harlots in the main stream media, though still formidable, are shrinking in size. And yes, there will be those in the next generation who will carry the torch, but unless they can out procreate and then instill with in their progeny their same beliefs, they will be an even smaller percentage. As brought up at Personal Effects we may soon be nothing more then the remnants spoken about. "Jobs" don't come along all that often. Making the task of keeping the spark alive, until such time as humanity is ready to light the torch of liberty and freedom once again, all that much harder.

The Feeding Frenzy Begins on the Left??

Read this, from AP, and see whatcha think.

Clinton, Edwards talk of limiting debate

Associated Press - July 13, 2007 2:23 AM ET

DETROIT (AP) - Democrats John Edwards and Hillary Rodham Clinton consider themselves among the top presidential candidates.

They were caught by Fox News microphones discussing their desire to limit future joint appearances to exclude some lower rivals after a forum in Detroit Thursday.

Edwards says, "We should try to have a more serious and a smaller group."

Clinton agrees, saying, "We've got to cut the number" and "they're not serious." She also says that she thought their campaigns had already tried to limit the debates and say, "We've gotta get back to it."

Others taking part in the forum sponsored by the NAACP were Senators Barack Obama, Chris Dodd and Joe Biden, Congressman Dennis Kucinich, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson and former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel.

One Republican, Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo, also participated.

On the face of it is it really a big deal? After all politics traditionally has been largely as series of maneuvers in smoke filled rooms behind closed doors. Why should this little bit of conversation be any different. That two of the supposed Deomocrap front runners feel the need to actively try and exclude some of their playmates from the playground shouldn't come as a surprise. After all the whole progressive/statist experience is about control and knowing what is best for people, shouldn't that apply to their (internal) politics as well?

So if the Hildabeast and the Breckgirl feel they are the two (or at least, two of) top runners for their party's shot at the oval office (and a better pairing hardly comes to mind for that side). Why shouldn't they want to get rid of the political wanna-bes, those pesky bits of regional