Motivation

A less glamorous video this time. A glimpse of the nitty gritty. This is the last video I'll be posting on the blog today, but I think I'm going to put some Marine Corps quotes up in a little bit.



By the way, I found this video on youtube. I don't know these guys personally, wasn't with them, or anything like that. I just thought it was a good video to post.

2010 USMC Birthday Message from the Commandant and SgtMaj

"I would say that the cold was a blessing to me because I was wounded in so many different places I would've bled to death had it not been for the cold coagulating the blood." I'm pretty sure that's the definition of a hardcore warrior.

Happy 235th Birthday Marines

On 10 November 1775 the Continental Congress passed a resolution to form two battalions of Marines who would fight on both land and sea. The Marine Corps is huge on tradition, something that the Army, Navy, and Air Force don't even come close on. Celebrating 235 years is a huge deal.

Read about it at marines.com.

There's going to be some more motivating stuff on here through the course of the day, so stay tuned!

The Bush Interview flopped...is it any wonder?

Well Drudge Report just posted a link to mediabistro.com which is reporting that the Bush interview flopped.

Let's correct something here. The Bush interview didn't flop. The Lauer interview flopped. NBC flopped. Negativity flopped. Fake journalism flopped.

TVnewser at mediabistro.com, which you can click the link to up in the first paragraph, is saying that the interview came in fourth place last night in it's time slot behind the other networks. I'm not surprised. I tuned in for a good portion of it to find that it was exactly what I expected: Matt Lauer weakly attempting to steer the conversation into a negative and simplistic interview. As Lauer only asked about things he obviously perceived to be mistakes and gaffs of Bush's Presidency, he failed to portray anything in a positive light, save perhaps the brief mention of Bush's father reaching out and touching his arm in a touching moment after he gave an address at the Cathedral in Washington in the days following September 11th.


President Bush gave straight-forward and unapolagetic answers about his Presidency. As one friend on facebook put it, "He showed so much integrity, pride, and heart in the interview. Now that was a President."

I always chuckle when I hear about NBC's trouble. When you live by the liberal sword you die by the liberal sword. I'm no dogmatic Bush supporter. The man spent too much money, bailed out the banks at the end of his Presidency, and failed to defend his decisions and his Presidency, (although I certainly respect his reasoning. He felt it was above the institution of the Presidency to answer such idiotic and harmful statements such as Harry Reid's claim that the Iraq War was lost.) Yet he was a leader and defended America. Even if one wanted to make the argument that he didn't defend America, I don't entertain anyone's suggestion that the former President doesn't love America and isn't a Patriot.

So as I chuckle at NBC flopping after clearly expecting great success, there is part of me that's disappointed. It's too bad more people didn't tune in and watch President Bush come in and beat Matt Lauer at his own game.

No doubt I'll be called a racist...but I'm not a Democrat so I'm used to it

The second line in the song from this video is "All the wars that were won or lost somehow don't seem to matter very much anymore."



In this video the Anglican bishop says "We've emphasized multiculturalism to the point of losing our own roots."



Now that everyone thinks I'm racist, or that I hate anyone who isn't white, I'll explain where I stand. This nation is a nation of immigrants - (beat you to it liberals...don't you realize I know all your go-to lines?)

You can rely on the left in this country to use something such as immigration to destroy one's own country. Look at England. It's sad really, to consider what they once were and what they are now. When immigrants come to a country they must accept that they will take on that country's identity. It shouldn't be the other way around. Of course ethnic groups will remember their roots, but when an immigrant moves to England or America, they must strive to become English or American.

We should learn a lesson from what's happened in Europe. We are but an extension and a much improved version of it. While the left continues to ignore the peoples' cry down in the border states, refuses to do anything about illegal aliens, and encourages groups like La Raza to talk about how one day they will steal the power from the white man and run this country, our nation loses it's identity.

We must enforce legal immigration, and we must control and limit it. I am not calling for a closing of our borders. I am calling for a controlled and regulated inflow whether it be Europeans, Hispanics, or people from the Muslim world.

Of course, once a citizen a person has the right to free speech and to take to the street holding a heinous sign saying something like "Behead those who insult Islam." Logic tells me that we should be pretty careful about who we grant citizenship then huh? Call it profiling, call it what you will. There is one group who has a fixation with beheading people, cursing The Queen, and threatening "real" holocausts. Try to figure out who I'm talking about.

Let's make sure that all the wars that have been won or lost do matter.

I'm back...after being battered and beaten with the anti-mind epidemic which currently exists, I knew I had to get back on here before my head blew up

Well it's literally been about 2 months since I've posted on the good old site. School got absolutely insane and I ended up dropping this right when I was actually starting to get some serious hits.

What's important, is that I'm back. Right?

So here I am, back to posting. Of course I'm pleased with the election results, but I have a warning for the GOP and for the American who is currently feeling hopeful; No victory has been won yet.

I suppose politically speaking that the above comment is inaccurate. Yet the battle which must be fought and must be won is for logic and reason to be reestablished here in America. The thing I revere more than anything in life is truth. I believe in absolutes. I believe that every single shade of gray that exists, with enough digging, thinking, and researching, can be classified as black or white. I do not believe in apologies to those who do not want to respect truth and are offended when they hear it.

When I started this blog 3 months ago I was just starting out here at University of North Carolina at Wilmington. The contempt shown for America on a consistent basis, or statements like "99.9% of the world's problems can be attributed to England!" run rampant. Students wear US Army Alpha blouses as style statements, and third world countries are consistently spoken of as the ones that have systems which "make more sense" and have things "figured out better than we do." Other than the belief in God, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and former President Bush, nothing is actually classified as right or wrong. (Yes, the above things are classified as wrong...)

Today one of my professor's told a story in which she spoke with a parent of one of her former high school students. Without going into details, the professor was basically saying how she handled the situation poorly. She pointed out things logically to which the parent responded with superficial bumper sticker type statements. Yet the professor told this to us, saying how she had goofed up and how the parent had handled herself so well.

I raised my hand. I asked her why she was telling the story with an apologetic tone when she used reason and only received platitudes in response. The professor wasn't exactly sure how to respond, but told me that she was lucky the parent didn't hit her or something like that. So basically, in the years since her story took place, the professor has succumbed to political correctness.

There is a disease in this country which does have a cure. In Ayn Rand's novel Atlas Shrugged a progressive makes a comment about how "the age of the mind is past. This is the age of the heart." This revolting philosophy is ruining us as a civilization. Certainly I believe in "having a heart," yet it isn't for free. It's for those who have earned it. Yet this anti-mind disease is taking over. It is making us sick. Students and professors alike are refusing to use logic. Reason is frowned upon while inability is looked at as an asset. Successful marriages that provide a good home life for children are mocked, while single parent and dysfunctional homes are praised and romanticized.

There is a cure for the anti-mind disease. The cure is patriotism. With love of country, which most liberals and progressives lack, comes the desire to improve it. To improve one must think. To think, people will rely on their minds and discard the constant use of the heart.

Kelly for Congress

Once again I wish I lived in multiple places and could vote multiple times this November. Unfortunately I'm not a Democrat, dead, or live in Chicago so I'm going to have to stick with my one vote.

Either way, check out Jesse Kelly who's running out in Arizona's eighth district. He's another Combat vet who was a mortarman in 1st BN, 7th Marines and who served in OIF. He's for a secure border, cutting the spending, against the socialist healthcare agenda, and prolife. Check him out at votejessekelly.com.

Why allowing a mosque to be built at Ground Zero has nothing to do with freedom of religion

"This is a nation of tolerance!"

"Separation of church and state!"

"1st Amendment rights!"

Common arguments of liberals, muslims and psuedo-intellectuals who so adamantly believe in this abomination being built on the site of NYC's hallowed ground, Ground Zero. This consistent lightweight thinking which we see from the left is no surprise, but it is frustrating. As someone who attempts to always have at least some idea of what I'm talking about before I speak or write, I wonder how many of these people have actually read the Constitution. For that matter, I wonder how many of them have actually read the 1st Amendment.

AMENDMENT 1
RELIGION, SPEECH, ASSEMBLY, AND PETITION
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievance.

The first thing that the liberal drone usually blurts out is that we have separation of church and state in this country. While this is semi-correct, most of them are shocked to find that this terminology is nowhere to be found in the Constitution. What the first amendment does is guarantee the American two things (in the case of religion.) It gives one freedom of religion, and freedom from religion. In other words, we have the freedom to choose our religion, and there will not be specific religion you are legally required to follow.

The irrefutable fact is that this amendment, including the freedom-of and freedom- from clauses, has no language guaranteeing anything about location or building rights. There is no language in that amendment that would be violated if this religious group was told that they must build their mosque somewhere else nearby. The fact of the matter is that for some reason, America has entered an age where it does not desire to be seen as strong. Progressives and liberals have meekly suggested that to allow the mosque to be built would be "ballsy" as one liberal friend put it, and would show the world that we don't let things get to us. Excuse me, but 9/11 did get to me.

To believe that the muslim world, or any part of the world would for that matter, would interpret a mosque being built at Ground Zero as anything but submission is a fundamental misunderstanding of the world in which we live. Well, maybe Europe will think it looks strong but I prefer not to put things on the Europe-scale. People understand strength. People don't interpret weakness as strength, or understand the language of psuedo intellectuals as anything but mumbo-jumbo.

Yesterday, our President finally decided to weigh in on the "local" issue. It was a bit late for him considering he has always thrown in his, well, for the sake of easy language we'll say two cents, about local issues involving police officers, or issues such as whether or not College Football will develop a playoff system. The President knows the language of the Constitution. He knows everything I've written right here. This just demonstrates the evils of looking at a written document as a "living breathing document," as progressives disrespectfully view our Constitution.

Not only does this issue have huge importance as far as the weak message we will be sending to the world, our current Presidential administration is slapping the American people in the face, (a current CNN pole shows that a staggering 68% of Americans disapprove of this project) but it's bring out the worst in slimy politicians like Congressman Anthony Weiner (NY.) According to Politico, other than a letter written to Mayor Bloomberg which has been kept fairly quiet, Wiener has said little about the issue, even though most know he is all for it. Why? There are many whispers that he is running for Mayor in the near future.

It's sad that with such transparent corruption that our leaders are still able to get away with this. The manipulation of the Constitution, political seediness, and pandering to a force which has vowed to whipe out the United States makes me wonder why more Americans don't speak out....

Wait, according to CNN, (this isn't me citing Fox News mind you) 68% are saying something. It looks like our government just doesn't care.

Due to my love of capitalism and conservative values, I'm seriously considering abandoning the Chicago Cubs

1908. 102 years ago. Years before any of my grandparents were born. Nine years before the United States entered WWI. A good twenty-five to thirty years before the average American household had electricity. The last year in which my beloved Chicago Cubs won the World Series.

I have never lived in the city of Chicago. Pops grew up there and Mom lived there for a bit, but I never did.

I was born in Grand Rapids, MI. I could be a Tigers fan. They were the American League Champions in 2006 although they did end up losing the World Series to the Cardinals.

My family moved to Cincinnati when I was about a year old. The Reds had great teams at the time. They swept the A's in the 1990 World Series. This year they are in the hunt to win the NL Central.

My family then moved to Rochester, NY. This was the early 90's when the Toronto Blue Jays won back to back World Series. Many non-NYC New Yorkers loved the Jays, especially where we lived, relatively close to the Canadian border. Those that didn't rooted for the Yankees, a team that has enjoyed success that no other team has even come close to since the Jays power years ended and before that as well. I could be a Yankees fan.

My family moved back to Ohio, this time to Dayton, in 1998. This was a year after the Indians had been in the World Series, although unfortunately losing. I also had another chance to root for the Reds in Cincinnati who were only about an hour away.

Last summer I visited family in Denver where we went to see the Rockies who were in the midst of a ten game winning streak and who went on to the playoffs. I could have jumped on that bandwagon easily enough.

I visited a buddy in Boston last summer as well, where the Red Sox play. I could have used that as my reason to join the "Red Sox Nation," right?

I went with my family to Chicago for a long weekend one time, and went to a White Sox game because the Cubs were out of town. The White Sox won the World Series in 2005 and look to be headed to the postseason this year as well. No reason not to root for the White Sox.

I don't like Whoppers, I like Big Macs. That's why I'll pick McDonalds over Burger King every time. If a pair of Reeboks are uncomfortable I'll go to the store and pick out a brand new pair of Nikes. I like seeing my favorite team win, so why am I a Cubs fan? Patient, loyal readers...I am thinking about jumping ship.

Rooting for the Cubs is like waiting around on the government to do something right. The government continues to run inept, expensive, and lackadaisical agencies such as the DMV or post office, takes their sweet time when working on roads or bridges, is full of men and women in office who don't pay their taxes, ruins military operations when they don't allow the men in uniform to run things, and all the while never hesitates to demand money from you while coming up with catchy slogans like "hope and change."

Sounds a lot like the Cubs to me. Year after year they get me excited in the winter and the spring, only to me disappoint by late summer and the fall. They have on average, the most expensive tickets in baseball, talk about things like "tradition" and "legacy" and come up with catchy slogans, like "it's a way of life."

Just like I'm voting against the Democrat here in November, I'm thinking about abandoning my allegiance to the Chicago Cubs. After all, why should I settle for a mediocre product?

Semi intelligent ramblings about stuff going on right now

Here's my take on a few things going on right now that people are talking about.

Crazy flight attendant guy: Hilarious, yet ridiculous. I get it. People are rude on airplanes, this guy was tired of it and flipped out. I give the guy props for thinking it through. He obviously knew he was headed to the slammer because he made a point to grab two beers. That's certainly the funniest part of the story. I'm not sold on the argument that he's a hero however. The guy had a bitch fit. How is that heroic? All these flight attendants are coming out of the woodwork saying that they empathize with him and talking about what torture it is to be a flight attendant. Don't get me wrong, I mean no disrespect to the profession, but if it's such a terrible job go get a new one. You chose the career, you're getting payed for it, now deal with it. If someone is rude, kick them off the plane, don't steal beer and cuss out the passengers. The verdict? Crazy flight attendant is a tool.

J LO not getting the job of being the new judge on American Idol: My first reaction was to think this was a good thing. I figure if your music sucks, you have no business judging other people's music. Not only that, but the judges sit behind that table, so people won't even be able to see that 757 sized ass which some might have considered the one good reason to have her around. However, my final conclusion is that most of the people on that show who win have on hit and fade away, the only entertaining judge was that British guy who's now gone, and the show is on the decline. It's probably to J LO's advantage to not be getting on that sinking ship.

Rush Limbaugh making headlines simply by starting a facebook account: I like Rush, but even if you don't I think anyone should give a guy props who is so unapologetic about being as rich as he is, who has his own private jet, marries a beautiful blond woman half his age and constantly talks about how great he is. It helps that he constantly calls out that joke in the White House too. Final verdict? Cool guy.

Robert Gibbs getting mad at liberals: I'm not sure how anyone could disagree with what he said. He made a statement saying that anyone who thinks that there are similarities between Obama and Bush should be drug tested. How could a Bush fan or an Obama fan disagree with that? It does point out however, that there is a hardcore left in this country that is way to the left of our current administration. Conclusion: comical yet scary.

Putin helping out in fighting the fires in Russia: I just have one question. Did he do it on a horse without a shirt on? I hope so. If he did it that way I'll call him cool. If not, I call him a tool.

Popaditch for Congress

GySgt Nick Popaditch is running for Congress out in CA-51. By all accounts he's a true badass who's fought in Iraq both in Desert Storm and in the War on Terror. Some may recognize him as the "Cigar Marine" who had his picture taken smoking a cigar right after Saddam's statue was knocked down. In Fallujah in 2005 he lost an eye from a grenade in combat. His glass eye has the Marine Eagle, Globe and Anchor on it. A guy like him is definitely needed, especially since the liberal Bob Filner currently sits in that seat.



Check out Popaditch at www.popaditchforcongress.com.

You can also read about him at the dailycaller.com.

Trips to Spain, rants about Bush, and unpaid taxes. Where does the average American fit in with all this?

As I follow the intersecting stories of Michelle's vacation, Obama's speech given yesterday in an attempt to drum up the seemingly lackluster current support for the Democrat party, and the hot water which Maxine Waters and Charles Rangel find themselves in, I see that there is clearly something which they all have in common.



This morning, Fox News dug from out of the archives, footage of Maxine Waters back in 1995 railing against double standards, saying "What's fair for the goose, is fair for the gander!" She of course, was speaking about Newt Gingrich. Now she is playing the race card and saying that she has done nothing wrong. Charles Rangel who is yet another tax cheat continues to maintain his innocence as well.

Yesterday the President made yet another speech about how our current national troubles are due to the incompetence of President Bush. He defended this strategy saying that he's simply bringing it up still so that we don't forget and continues to point out that the GOP has yet to bring up any ideas of their own. (This reminds me of my post yesterday in which I wrote about liberals believing that saying something makes it true. If you don't agree with the actions Republicans have proposed that's fine, but to say they haven't suggested anything is ludicrous.)

Michelle took an extravagant vacation to Spain which has certainly raised eyebrows, despite a habit of attempting to look like the average American woman. I'd say she just burst that image.

But so far I haven't banged out anything here on the keyboard that everyone hasn't already heard. After all, the argument of whether it is or isn't relevant to constantly bring up Bush has lasted for months. The anger over US Congressmen and women not paying their taxes is just. Everybody has heard the whole "if I didn't pay my taxes I'd be sitting in the slammer right now!" bit. Finally, the Marie Antoinette comparisons to Michelle Obama have been all over the blogosphere, and quite frankly, may have been slightly blown out of proportion.



What really concerns me here isn't necessarily just the actions themselves. It's not as if I'm terribly surprised that there are Congressmen who aren't paying their taxes. People generally trust politicians about as far as they can spit, both Democrat and Republican. Michelle's vacation itself doesn't really bother me all that much either. Money-wise it's a drop in the hat. And let's face it, first ladies aren't your average American women,they are more of a unique type of American royalty. Barack Obama shoving the Bush talk down our throats no longer gets me riled up either; the man consistently proves to be a stubborn ideologue.

What we can really learn from all this however is the prevailing attitude of the left. Mrs. Obama's vacation didn't do much by itself to harm the country, yet it sent a bad message. The White House isn't stupid enough to not understand that the trip was going to rub people the wrong way. It's clear that they simply no longer care what the average American feels, or how much they insult them. The White House isn't stupid enough to not realize that to bring up Bush everyday is irresponsible, foolish and immature. It's clear they just feel themselves above having to take responsibility. The members of Congress aren't stupid enough not to know that they would eventually be caught in their crimes and that these crimes would enrage the American people. It's clear they just feel themselves above being accountable to the law.

The term "out of touch" has been thrown around a lot lately, by myself included. Yet these things seem beyond "out of touch." These actions expose a prevailing attitude of elitism and disdain for the common man.

Which brings up another thing to ponder; why would a party which fights for "social justice" show disdain for the common man?

The liberals have always targeted conservative Christians, but do they themselves have a God complex?

A couple of weeks ago while flipping through the channels on TV I stopped on Countdown with Keith Olbermann to hear what the old blowhard had to say. After hearing him and some guest of his talking about how evil Glenn Beck is for a few moments I decided to change the channel. (I asked MSNBC today on their facebook page why they feel the need to constantly report on Fox News or any of it's pundits, and that if I wanted to see what they were up to I would simply put Fox News on...so far no touchy liberal has responded.)

But then last night before I went to sleep I turned on BookTV on CSPAN and recognized the man reading an excerpt from his book. Within seconds I could tell that this book was all about Glenn Beck and what an evil, rich, Christian, racist opportunist he is. Not being at all interested in his liberal jargon, and not particularly being a huge Beck fan either, (nothing personal, just have never really gotten into either of his shows) I almost changed the channel again. Then right before I did, I realized I recognized this dude from somewhere.

He was the "some guest" on Olbermann's show about a month ago prattling on about how evil Glenn Beck was. For some reason I got sucked in, and watched this yokel read some more of his book, and then conduct a Q&A session for another 10 or 15 minutes. As I said, I'm no huge Beck fan, yet it struck me that this guy took a year of his life and wrote 500 pages about how much he dislikes Beck.

Early this afternoon, I don't know, perhaps out of slight boredom, I found that original interview between this guy and Olbermann on an extremely liberal blog, laprogressive.com. The guy's name is Alexander Zaitchik, and it seems that he's making his money(all the while accusing Beck of being money hungry) writing about Beck. The interview was ho-hum; the usual liberal prattle about racism and bashing of Fox News which has a nightly viewership of about 300% of MSNBC's. What caught my attention however was their explanation of Beck and Fox's "extremism." They claimed that since Beck's show is "hemorrhaging" money and ratings that they feel the need to take such "drastic" measures.

I went to check the ratings at tvbythenumbers.com. Sure enough, Beck has roughly about 400% the viewers that Chris Matthews does over at MSNBC at the same hour. In total, it was close to 2 million viewers. Now, not being one of those 2 million viewers, I don't care too much about all this other than the fact that, I suppose I would rather people be watching a conservative pundit than a progressive one. However, I am one of those people that does not like being lied to. Just because you say something, it does not mean that it is true! Telling me that 2+2 is 5 does not make the answer 5. In the words of Ayn Rand, (certainly not someone I see eye to eye with and a vehement atheist) "A is A."

And that's just it. In a world where we are constantly being told by liberals and progressives that there are no absolutes, we are also living in a world where a socialist President tells us that the economy is getting better because of a stimulus bill that he signed, which is simply not true. We are lied to by progressives about the nature of the planet and the non-existent global warming. We are assured that we owe them our money because it is theirs to decide what to do with it.

In a day and age where Christians are attacked constantly, (at least here in America) or even those who aren't Christians but simply profess to believe in a God that isn't Allah, it seems that it is no coincidence that progressives look at themselves as the one and only creator and master. As someone who doesn't really go to church all that much I can say one thing: I have no desire to bow down to or worship a liberal progressive either.

When the Boy Scouts boo you, it may be time to go

Found this on Drudge. Found it hilarious and thought I'd share.

Evil Walmart strikes again...

It's late August and it's hurricane season. While the liberals continue to do everything they can to take people's money, run shows like "American Greed" on left wing networks such as CNBC, and consistently do everything they can to generate a general dislike for all things capitalism, Walmart has announced that they will be hosting a Hurricane Preparedness and Awareness event here in Eastern Carolina.

It's funny how the American people are bombarded with stories about politicians not paying their taxes, city managers pocketing near million dollar a year salaries, and first ladies taking $350,000 vacations, yet are told to believe that successful corporations, (one of the few fortune 500 companies to be providing jobs to the American people in the last year and a half) are simply greedy and the enemy.

I commend Walmart for providing jobs, and for helping out the local community during this time of year when hurricanes can do some major damage. While the local Wilmington City Council, the New Hanover County Commission, the Brunswick County Commission, and the Southport City Council, worry about things like whether a business can put a bench outside their doors on the sidewalk, or whether farmers should be allowed to sell their vegetables on the side of the road, (yeah, THOSE ideas will really help out the average citizen around here) Walmart uses non tax dollars to do something good.

And what d'ya' know? They aren't the government. Oh, and they aren't unionized either.

Progressives continue to stay silent over human rights issues taking place in islamic countries

Today, Jihadwatch.org reported on a story about a man named Hector Aleem, a Christian, in Packistan. Feel free to click on the link to read about him. You can read about his plight easily enough by googling his name, checking out the "free Hector Aleem" facebook page. To sum up the story, police stormed his home, savagely beat him and his family, and have thrown him in prison for being blasphemous to Allah, where he and his family still sit today.

This story makes me causes me to continue to wonder just how our President goes to islamic countries and tells them how much they contribute to the world. I guess that's technically a true statement. 90% of the world's human rights violations come from these islamic countries after all. So why do we continue to pander to these countries? Why do we continue to allow ourselves to be fooled that islam is religion of peace?

Here in the United States, many became obsessed with overturning proposistion 8, and to stop "violating human rights." (Even though I stilldon't understand how anyone is being treated unequally if no one can marry someone of the same sex and anyone can marry someone of the opposite sex.) Yet no one is demanding that the United States call the islamic regimes of the world who torture and imprison those who practice their religion of choice, oppressive and tyrannical regimes.

Our current liberal administration, stocked full with marxists and progressives seems to have a never ending interest in limiting an American's freedom, and a never ending pattern of doing nothing about countries abroad that limit it's citizens freedoms.

Is Henry a liberal?

This is Henry the Navigator. All he does is hang out, wait to be fed, eat food that he hasn't payed for, and have all his medical bills payed for by my girlfriend and I. I have a growing concern that he is turning into a liberal. Just look at that face. You can see that he has a growing sense of entitlement.

Charles Lollar for Congress

Here's another US Marine who is running for Congress up in MD-5! I first discovered him back in April when CBN did a story on him on The 700 club. It's about time we get some more Vets in office. Some other blacks have accused Major Lollar of being a racist. His usual response is, "How can I be a racist? My wife is black." I obviously can't vote for him, but I sure hope he fairs well in November.

Check him out at www.lollarforcongress.com!

Pantano For Congress

This blog officially supports Ilario Pantano for NC-7! This man is a Marine, a warrior, a patriot, a conservative, and a man that we need in Washington.

Read all about him at his website:
Pantanoforcongress.netboots.nethttp://baseballpoliticsandfreedom.blogspot.com/

I can handle a crackhead stealing my bike...I'm having trouble handling the liberals stealing my country though

On Monday afternoon I enjoyed the relatively cool day, (it was in the 80's and not the high 90's) and rode around the neighborhood on my bike. I came back to my apartment, hopped off my bike, and left it unlocked right in front of my door. Now if it's daytime I don't worry about my bike sitting there. I can it see while sitting on the couch. I'll keep it there so if I want to use it again I don't have to mess with taking it out of my apartment again. Once it gets dark I bring it inside so it doesn't get stolen. Yet on Monday I forgot all about it. I sat on the couch watching the tube, got tired, and went to bed. When I came downstairs yesterday morning the bike was gone.

The thief didn't have to break in, didn't have to attack me or use any type of violence or destruction whatsoever. I was more angry with myself than I was with the thief. After all, everybody knows that bikes are one of those things which people love to steal. Everybody knows that in a perfect world people wouldn't steal, but that we live in this world. Everybody knows what thieves do, they steal. It was my responsibility to keep my bike secure. Obviously I failed to do so, and now I'm without a bike.

Yesterday the council in NYC voted to allow a mosque to be built on the sacred ground of ground zero. This is troubling, for I understand what the intentions of these muslims are. Muammar al-Gadaffi, a Muslim from Libya has been quoted as saying There are signs that Allah will grant victory to Islam in Europe without swords, without guns, without conquest. We don't need terrorists. We don't need homicide bombers. The fifty plus million muslims (in Europe) will turn it into a Muslim continent within a few decades." Are we the next target? I am not advocating that we ban them from migrating here. I do believe we must be vigilant though. Clearly, this is a victory for Islam, and a defeat to the United States. We have allowed a group which has vowed to take over the world, to build a monument to themselves on a site which claimed almost 3,000 American lives.

So, just as I was more disgusted with myself for leaving my bike out to be taken than I was with whatever dirtbag junkie who stole it, I am more disgusted with America for putting up a white flag than I am with a known enemy.

I am not as involved with the Church as I used to be, and my relationship with God probably leaves something to be desired. However, I can't help but feel that our country needs to be prayed for. I can't imagine what the families of the 9/11 victims are feeling, but I do know how I felt yesterday. I felt righteous anger, and extreme sorrow. I hope this country stays great, yet I can not help but feel that there are dark clouds on the horizon. We have sworn enemies around the world which we refuse to do anything about and simply try to appease. We allow hard working individualists to be victimized while we reward those who are weak. We fight a war in Afghanistan in which we tell the enemy when we are leaving, making us a bad ally to those fighting with us over there. We have borders which are barely existent, which are necessary by very definition for a state to exist. Now, we allow the liberals and progressives to raise a white flag on our very own soil.

This will get your blood boiling...

Retraction Statement

It pains me to say this about anything in life but...I was wrong about something. I had this following quote posted here, and it was brought to my attention that it wasn't actually Thomas Jefferson who said this. He found the quote from somewhere else and included it in one of his essays.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes...Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."

What makes this even more painful is that I was notified by a true left wing hippie while debating with people on MSNBC's facebook page. But hey, the guy pointed it out, after calling my blog a propaganda page, and after looking into I found he was right.

This doesn't change the fact that I consider the statement to be true.

FRED THOMSPON!!

Rachel Maddow said that if a Republican cause wants coverage, to bring up Fred Thompson. Well, here it is!

Progressives in America; The Guilty Party of Eugenics, Racism and Psuedoscience

When Americans think of the terms “genocide, forced sterilization, or even master-race” most understandably think of Nazi Germany, and the bone chilling images we’ve all seen of the millions of bodies being bulldozed into mass graves upon the arrival of the allies in 1945. Americans think of Hitler lashing out against the Jews, and successfully turning a nation, (with exceptions of course,) against a religion and ethnic group. After Nazi Germany, the next most common thing Americans most likely think of are the purges in the early 50’s in the Soviet Union. Many may think about the tribal warfare that tragically still goes on in Africa today. Unfortunately, the vast majority of this country overlooks one major detail. Despite America’s exceptionalism, there has been a band of people who have done everything but defend freedom. For the past hundred years or so, progressives have focused on a very real and threatening practice called eugenics. Through bigotry, racism, and a general dislike for the concepts of religion and God, progressives have sought to control people right here in America through this practice. Although the practice has taken on numerous names such as genetic engineering, ecoscience, or just plain science, it is still alive and well today, just as dangerous as ever, and must be stopped.

Eugenics is the attempt by man to influence the evolution of man. This can be attempted by numerous different ways. Genetic enhancement is the most common method in modern times. Other methods that have been used throughout history are the forced sterilization of people, (often times people who are “mentally unfit,”) selective breeding, and abortion. Although abortion itself is not a form of eugenics, when used to target selective ethnic groups or races in order to eliminate them as a society, it most certainly is. In the worst case scenarios, there are government sponsored programs overseeing all these things mentioned.

The most common method used here in the United States in the early part of the twentieth century was forced sterilization. In his book War Against the Weak; America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race, Edwin Black informs us of the nation’s largest center for forced sterilization, (or sterilization mill as they were often called,) and how it was located in Lynchburg, Virginia. Native Americans, Blacks, recent immigrants, Jews, and young poverty-stricken white boys and girls were brought in, sterilized and sent on their way. What makes this even more immoral is the fact that many of these people, especially the younger ones, were misled or not told at all about what the procedure they were going through was actually doing to them. Many were simply told that it was “for their health” (Black, pg 6)

There were those involved in the practice of eugenics who undoubtedly were misguided and surely had good intentions. Kate Bolton, a retired county welfare director stated when interviewed by Black, “If you’ve seen as much suffering and depravity as I have, you can only hope and pray no one else goes through something like that. We had to stop it at the root”(5). Although these words attempt to justify the actions taken, and show that some peoples’ hearts were in the right place, there is much evidence showing that many people who were perfectly capable of providing for themselves and future children were also rounded up and sterilized. In another interview from Black’s book, one man explains that he simply can not understand why the government deemed him incapable of taking care of children. He noted that he had held the same job for over a decade, had never missed a day, never been late, and was one the workplace’s most dependable workers. The only explanation is that he lived in a day and age where in Virginia, much of the “polite society” looked down upon people that lived in the hills as “hillbillies” or “white trash.” Clearly a bigoted view not unlike the Nazis contempt for the Jews.

Another thing progressive eugenicists were able to take advantage of in the twentieth century in order to advance their agenda was the economy. From about 1890 to the post World War I era, progressives were very involved in economics, and the reform of industry. In many ways they did things that helped many people and could be considered social advancements. For instance, they regulated child labor and eventually banned it, they set a minimum wage to making sure women and children weren’t working all day for a few pennies, and they regulated safety and working conditions in order to protect peoples’ lives and health. Yet just as it did in the foothills of Virginia, eugenics reared it’s ugly head by the hand of the progressives.

African Americans, Native Americans, Catholics and Jews were time and again banned from working in factories and getting jobs. As more and more white, Protestant workers began fearing for their jobs, the more the suppression of equality came to business and the more economists began looking to the ideas of eugenics in order to make a more thriving economy for non-minorities.

Thomas Leanard documents in his journal Journal of Economic Prospectives, how Irving Fisher, the President of the Eugenics Research Association and an economist, stated his fears when he addressed the association, saying that immigrants were “defectives, delinquents, and dependants” (209). Fisher and many of his economists colleagues believed that white, protestant workers were more apt to working in agrarian society, and that the only way for them to compete with Jews, Asians, Native Americans, African Americans, Slavs, or Catholic immigrants would be the eugenics route. To regulate the selective breeding of these workers, to force sterilization upon them, and to attempt, (although never successfully) to make laws about who could have children was the eugenicists solution to an economic problem.

Ultimately, the easiest way to defeat non protestant whites, and to defend against them from taking jobs in an ever urbanizing and industrializing environment, was to limit the non white protestant population. This was no easy goal to attain. Business owners liked employing Jews, slavs and other ethnic minorities because they would work for relatively low wages. You couldn’t just remove them from the cities; that would cause an uproar. Limiting their birth was the most logical conclusion.

Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood who is often times heralded as a hero in modern society wrote a “Baby Code,” (found in the online database Life Education and Research Network.) In her Baby Code, Sanger included eight articles. To paraphrase these articles, Sanger proposed that marriage licenses do not give couples the right to reproduce, that men and women do not have the inherent right to have children, that permits given by the government must be required to have a child, (each permit only authorizing one child,) and finally, that those who are feebleminded, prone to being criminals, and those with disease don’t have the right to have children. Although Sanger’s “Baby Code” includes no terminology regarding race or ethnicity, it was written about urban environments where the problem was minorities having children. Furthermore, only a few years later she participated in a outrageously racist project called the Negro Project.

While involved in the Negro Project, during a moment of complete candor, Sanger wrote a letter referencing the project’s push for African American abortions through an organization soon to operate under the banner “Planned Parenthood” to a Dr. Clarence Gamble. She wrote, “We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” This quote clearly shows, how tragically, America not only has racism as part of it’s past, but an ugly attempt at eugenics driven genocide to oppress that race.

Yet today many American people are convinced that eugenics is only an ugly stain on our history which is fortunately only part of our past and that has no place in our present or future. However, the progressive movement to decide and control who and what types of people are born and allowed to be a part of society has only disguised itself and taken on a new tactic; genetic engineering. Once one looks into just what exactly “genetic engineering” really is, it is not hard to tell that there is little if any difference between it and the eugenicists strategies. What was once called “selective breeding” by the progressives is now called Preimplantation genetic diagnosis, prenatal testing, or genetic testing, (a procedure done on the adults.) New fancy names are used to hide what they really are; slightly more advanced methods used to defend against the “feebleminded” or “unfit” becoming a part of our society, by deciding which fetuses should be allowed to continue life.

In fact, the goal of germline genetic engineering, (a branch of genetic engineering) is absolutely no different than the goal of eugenics when put into words. Just as eugenics has the ultimate goal of man controlling the evolution of man, germline genetic engineering gives man the ability to control his evolution or to “control his destiny.” This is done by controlling the genes in the sperm and the ova cells. Although the intentions may sound good, one must wonder, what are these scientists really trying to achieve? One of the two discoverers of DNA, Dr. James Watson has publicly approved of germline genetic engineering, but this same man has publicy expressed his contempt for “ugly” women, and unintelligent people. He’s gone on to say things paralleling Margaret Sanger’s quotes when speaking to the Times of London. In 2007 Dr. Watson bluntly stated that “there are many people of color who are very talented,” but went on to say that he is “inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa.” Fortunately the rest of the legit scientific community quickly denounced his words in the October 2007 issue of Scientific America. The sad truth of the matter is that Dr. Watson is not the exception in the community of progressive scientists, eugenicists and genetic engineers; he is the rule. The community has been attempting to mask their general distaste for people different than them, (whether it be of color, ethnicity, culture, intelligence, or simply their personal looks,) as science for the better part of the last century.

In fact, we need look no farther than the current “science czar,” (officially called the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy,) of the current presidential administration to find another pseudo-scientist attempting to use science to hide his ill feelings toward “undesirables.” In the 1977 book which John Holdren, the “science czar” co-authored, Ecoscience: Population, Rescources, Environment, he proposes many disturbing wishes for this country. He proposes forced abortions with no regard to the mother’s wishes. He proposes sterilizing the population at large by putting drugs into drinking water and food. Finally he proposes forcing “people who contribute to social deterioration,” (783) or undesirables, to have abortions or to be sterilized. How does Mr. Holdren propose that we enforce these proposals? In his own words he calls for an “International Planetary Regime,” which would be an “armed international organization” (782). Clearly, this same strategy of having and armed organization was shared by the ultimate eugenicists, Adolph Hitler. Obviously, although the progressive eugenicists have changed there language, they haven’t changed their goals.

If we take a moment to study the philosophy of progressives, we will find that really and truly, they do little to hide their contempt for mankind. As most are atheists, and in turn existentialists, (and in more recent years have taken on the title “humanists”) they have no regard for human life, and see no problem with manipulating it whether by forced abortion, or in a lab somewhere. In his book God And Reason; A Historical Approach to Philosophical Theology, ED L Miller exposes the true meaning of Jean-Paul Satre’s words, a leading existentialist, who wrote in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century summed up his existentialist beliefs in a few words. “Subjectivity must be the starting point”(151). Satre also gravitates to the idea that life is nothing but a series of absurdities, which is only another way of stating that to the existentialists, humanists, and of course the progressives, life is simply meaningless. Many thinkers who have ideals based on some sort of moral compass, (ie; members of numerous different religions or agnostics) believe in a “big box” (152). This box has reference points based upon which provide a rational view of the world.

Progressives have been for a little more than the last century, operating with no regard or belief in this box and with no tolerance for those who do. With no sense of morality, progressives here in the United States have roamed the foothills of Virginia looking for “feebleminded” to sterilize. They have attempted to force abortions in urban industrial centers with the sole goal of eliminating the African American population. Their ideology has spread oversees to the Third Reich where Hitler, (who had been closely following the Eugenics movement here in the United States) avidly ran with the idea, and proceeded to kill eleven million “undesirables.” Margaret Sanger’s of the “Baby Code” has spread to communist China which strict laws about how many children a couple may have. The progressive-eugenics movement has changed it’s name in recent years and taken on the titles of genetic engineering or ecoscience. Yet whether one-hundred years ago in sterilization mills, half a century ago in concentration camps, or today in labs or the office of the “science czar,” progressives have sought and continue to control population, families, and individuals’ freedom here in the United States and all over the world. American exceptionalism is a very real thing. We have given millions the opportunity to live free lives. We have spread democracy to other nations, toppled tyrannies and made advancements in science and medicine unprecedented by any other country. We as a nation have unbelievable influence upon the rest of the world. Therefore we must prevent the progressives from taking over our country and spreading their ideas to the rest of the world before their pseudoscience kills more people, and violates the rights of people of all colors, ethnicities, socio-economic statuses, beliefs, and cultures.


Works Cited

Black, Edwin. War Against the Weak; America’s Campaign to Create A Master Race.
New York City: Four Walls Eight Windows, 2003. Print.

Leanard, Thomas C. “Retrospectives; Eugenics and Economics in the Progressive Era.” Journal of Economic Perspectives. 19.4 (2005): 207-24. Print.

Miller, ED L. God and Reason. New York City: MacMillan, 1972. Print.

Nugent, Helen. “Black people ‘less intelligent’ scientists claims.” Times Online. The Times of London, 17 October. 2007. Web. 25, November. 2009.

Abrams, Joseph. “Obama’s Science Czar Considered Forced Abortions, Sterilization as Population Growth Solution.” Foxnews.com. Fox News, 21 July, 2009. Web.
28 November. 2009.

“Racist and Eugenicists Statements by Margaret Sanger, the Founder of Planned Parenthood.” The Black Informant. The American Life League. Web. 28 November. 2009.

Sanger, Margaret. “The American Baby Code.” Life Education and Research Network. Heritage House, 1976. Web. 26, November. 2009. http://www.abortionfacts.com/learn/sanger_and_planned_parenthood.asp

“Genetic Technology and Eugenics.” Med India, Networking for Health. Health Watch, 4 April. 2007. Web. 28 November. 2009.

Stein, Lisa. “World Renowned Geneticists Draws Fire for Claims that Africans are Intellectually Inferior.” Scientific American. American Scientific Publishers, 17 October. 2007. Web. 28 November, 2009.

Ehlrlrich, Paul R. Anne H. Ehlrlich. John P. Holdren. Ecoscience, Population, Resources, Environment. San Francisco: W.H. Freemen and Company, 1977.
http://www.questia.com/. Web. 27 November. 2009.

Lies about abortion that even "pro-life" people fall for

1. "Pro-Choice" is an accurate title for the pro-abortion camp.
-Next time you stumble across an abortion clinic, ask one of those dead babies freshly killed, if he had a choice in the matter.

2. Abortion is acceptable if it is because the woman was raped.
-Rape is undoubtedly a tragic thing to have happen. Unfortunately sometimes mother's decide to punish the wrong party. The one who committed this heinous act, the rapist, is the only one who should pay for what he did. The baby has done no wrong.

3. Abortion is acceptable if it is due to in incest.
-Although births as a consequence of incest do have a higher risk for congenital birth defects, there is absolutely no guarantee of this happening. If it does happen, while sad, the justification for an abortion is still non existent. Last time I checked, hospitals did not execute those with health problems. "Sir, you have cancer, we are now bringing you to the electric chair to fry you." Therefore, although in no way am I defending incestuous relationships, I am defending their
offspring.

4. Abortion is acceptable if the mother's life is in danger.
-A sad fact of life is that sometimes tragedy occurs. Lets let these tragic occurrences, (such as a mother passing away while delivering a baby,) happen naturally instead of deliberately, (as in the instance of abortion.) The mother chose engage in sex. The infant did not.

5. Those who lobby in favor of abortion have innocent motives in defending the rights of the woman.
-Since the Roe v. Wade case, somewhere between 45 and 50 million babies have been murdered. That is almost as many total dead after WWII. If these abortions never had occurred our nation would be approximately 1/6 bigger than it currently is. It is no secret that liberals have been proponents of population control, such as John Chaldren, Obama's science czar who wants to regulate the children population. Chaldren has written, "The law regulates other highly personal matters. For example, no one may lawfully have more than one spouse at a time. Why should the law not be able to prevent a person from having more than two children?” Clearly, those who claim to fight for the right of a woman's body, have ulterior motives.

Great quotes to shut french people up

I got this from a forwarder email and thought it was pretty cool.

At a time when politicians tend to apologize for our country's prior actions, here's a refresher on how some of our former patriots handled negative comments about our country.

These are good.

JFK'S Secretary of State, Dean Rusk, was in France in the early 60's when DeGaule decided to pull out of NATO. DeGaule said he wanted all US military out of France as soon as possible.



Rusk responded "does that include those who are buried here?"

DeGuale did not respond.

You could have heard a pin drop.

When in England , at a fairly large conference, Colin Powell was asked by the
Archbishop of Canterbury if our plans for Iraq were just an example of empire building by George Bush.

He answered by saying, 'Over the years, the United States has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return.'

You could have heard a pin drop

There was a conference in France where a number of international engineers were taking part, including French and American. During a break, one of the French engineers came back into the room saying 'Have you heard the latest dumb stunt Bush has done? He has sent an aircraft carrier to Indonesia to help the tsunami victims. What does he intended to do, bomb them?'

A Boeing engineer stood up and replied quietly: 'Our carriers have three hospitals on board that can treat several hundred people; they are nuclear powered and can supply emergency electrical power to shore facilities; they have three cafeterias with the capacity to feed 3,000 people three meals a day, they can produce several thousand gallons of fresh water from sea water each day, and they carry half a dozen helicopters for use in transporting victims and injured to and from their flight deck. We have eleven such ships; how many does France have?'

You could have heard a pin drop.

A U.S. Navy Admiral was attending a naval conference that included Admirals from the U.S. , English, Canadian, Australian and French Navies. At a cocktail reception, he found himself standing with a large group of Officers that included personnel from most of those countries. Everyone was chatting away in English as they sipped their drinks but a French admiral suddenly complained that, whereas Europeans learn many
languages, Americans learn only English. He then asked, 'Why is it that we always have to speak English in these conferences rather than speaking French?'

Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied, 'Maybe it's because the Brit's, Canadians, Aussie's and Americans arranged it so you wouldn't have to speak German.'

You could have heard a pin drop.

AND THIS STORY FITS RIGHT IN WITH THE ABOVE...

Robert Whiting , an elderly gentleman of 83, arrived in Paris by plane. At French Customs, he took a few minutes to locate his passport in hiscarry on.

"You have been to France before, monsieur?" the customs officer asked sarcastically.

Mr. Whiting admitted that he had been to France previously.

"Then you should know enough to have your passport ready."

The American said, 'The last time I was here, I didn't have to show
it."

"Impossible. Americans always have to show your passports on arrival in France!"

The American senior gave the Frenchman a long hard look. Then he quietly explained, ''Well, when I came ashore at Omaha Beach on D-Day in 1944 to help liberate this country, I couldn't find a single Frenchmen to show a passport to."

You could have heard a pin drop.

Embracing logic could save this country

When I was about eight years old I read a book for the first time which changed the way I've looked at things forever. Since then I've reread this book multiple times, (including in my adult years) and seen the relatively recently made movie version of it. The book is called "The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe" and is written by CS Lewis.

Oh, and for the record, the movie they made a few years ago is nowhere even close to as good as the animated version that came out in the 80's.

Back to the topic at hand though; How did this novel, written for pre-adolescents, change the way I think?

I'm sure about 75% of people are at least vaguely familiar with the general story one way or another. Early on in the story, a young girl named Lucy stumbles upon another world in which animals and trees speak, magic is abundant, and things such as gnomes, fairies, witches, giants, dwarfs and trolls exist. She does this by way of a magical wardrobe she finds in a forgotten room of her Uncle's mansion. Although she spends the better part of an afternoon in this place, (Narnia) she finds to her dismay, that when she returns to our world, only a few seconds have passed. She attempts, in vain, to explain the bizarre events to her two brothers and one sister. Unsurprisingly they think she's making it up. After a while, as she continues to insist that her story is real, they begin to genuinely worry about her state of mind. They decide to ask the wise old professor, who is also their great uncle, for advice.

Here's where Mr. CS Lewis put something into such painfully simple logic that it amazes me to this day that more don't use this thought process...yet it's so simple, and so logical, that this line of thinking still blows me away from time to time when I really sit and think about it. The professor puffs on his pipe and mulls over the scenario that the children have presented him with. Finally he asks them if Lucy has a history of lying. The kids tell him that no, she's always been an honest person. After a few more minutes go by, he asks them if she has ever shown signs of being mad. Once again the kids tell him that no, her mind has always seemed quite sane. The professor points out that since she apparently has no history of dishonesty or mental instability, that the most probable answer is that Lucy is telling the truth. He then wonders aloud why they don't teach logic in school these days.

And there it is. Over the last couple of years I've really taken those words more to heart than ever before. When trying to figure out a problem, situation, or scenario, I try to apply logic on the subject, and to figure out what the absolute best explanation is for whatever is going on.

So today when I saw that the district judge pretty much struck down Arizona's immigration law, (she struck down the 3 main points which all but made up the bill in total) I used the old tried and true method which CS Lewis taught me to assess the situation. After all, after reading the bill, it is clear that Arizona's law which was supposed to go into effect at midnight tonight, is only reiterating the federal law which already exists. It is common knowledge that it is simply illegal to be in America without going through the legal process, that Mexico would never even consider giving an illegal American immigrant the rights the illegal Hispanic population is demanding here in the states, and that racial profiling is specifically prohibited in the bill. So why is this a partisan issue? Why would any judge strike this down?

I decided I would try to apply logic to the situation. I decided to look for the most probable and absolute explanation for this:

1) Are the liberals and progressives who are such avid opponents of this bill plain stupid? - I don't think so. Sure there are dumb libs, but there are dumb conservatives too. Besides, with some exceptions of course, people don't rise to prominent positions without having at least SOME smarts.

2) Am I the one who is wrong? - No. I'm never wrong about anything. No but seriously, after already reading the bill, thinking it over logically, and personally knowing people who have immigrated to the United States legally who support this bill, I do not consider my opinion the problem here.

3) Are the liberals and the progressives who are fighting this law simply liars, who are actively trying to make this country weaker? - Possibly, to an extent. I do think that by their very nature, liberals do not believe in American exceptionalism, or absolutes. Without absolutes, it is impossible to believe in limits, (explaining their thirst for power, and total lack of self control when it comes to spending) or boundaries, (which explains their total lack of respect for this countries borders.) While I do believe there are MANY leftists who ARE liars, and who believe that the ends always justify the means, I don't believe this accounts for all of them.

4) Do the liberals and progressives who fight this law refuse to use logic and reason, and lack any sense of patriotism or American exceptionalism? - Yes. In the words of James Taggert, a progressive character of Ayn Rand's in her novel Atlas Shrugged "You can't use logic at a time like this! This is a crisis!" The libs keep refusing to use logic, which is why it should be no surprise that they are also completely unpatriotic. This country was born promoting ideals of logic and of reason! This country is a nation of absolutes, of right and wrong! Libs have no love for this country. They don't recognize borders or absolutes. They are the anti-logic.

Today, barely a day goes by where I don't use the example Mr. CS Lewis displayed in his book for me, to decipher a day's events. With a very basic understanding of logic, I can easily spot a lack of logic. I hope this nation embraces logic and reason, for I truly believe it is what makes us human. America still fundamentally stands for logic, which makes it the greatest nation on earth. We seem to be heading down a dark road, and I think that now more than ever, we must remember to think.

Letting the liberals think for you has disastrous results.

Cubs could have their first winning month of the season...

Well the Cubs just took 2 of 3 from the Cards, beat the Astros last night, and gave Silva his first victory in a while. Ryan Theriot even hit his first homerun of the SEASON last night. The bad news is that they are still 8 games under 500.

Tonight Ted Lilly will be throwing for the Cubs. Lots of rumors currently going around that Ted's getting traded, and that this could be his last time on the mound as a Cub. He's a good pitcher, and I think most Cub fans will be sorry to see him go, if in fact it does happen.

As the title of this post says, the Cubs have a 12-10 record in the month of July. It would be a beautiful thing if they could close out the month with a 16-10 record, and storm into August as a hot ballclub.

I'm not getting my hopes up though. Go Cubs.

click below to see what the Marines from LAR have been up to on the 24th MEU

www.mnfwest.usmc.mil

Cubs could sweep a quality team with a win tonight...but that just means they'll probably drop 2 of 3 to the Astros - a mediocre team

The Cubs could go out there at Wrigley tonight, take a 3rd straight game from the Cards, get Chicago excited, let people think that they're putting together a mid to late season run in honor of Lou's last season, and give people an overall feeling of hope tonight, as they play the last game of a three game series against St. Louis.

The problem with this team is, although they very well may do it, as a Cub fan I know there's a great chance that they'll hop on the plane, head down to Texas, and proceed to drop 2 of 3, or even get swept, by the the very below average Houston Astros.

Of course, that doesn't mean I don't plan on watching the game. Hey, it's even on ESPN so I can listen to Jon Miller and Joe Morgan provide background noise.

Go Cubs.

Look out for evil genies

Look out for those evil genies. If you don't, a female one might possess you. If that happens your father may chain you up in the basement for years on end, keep you malnourished, and let you rot in your own filth...if your father practices Islam that is. Otherwise you'll probably be taken to a doctor, and, who knows, the doctor might actually diagnose you with something other than being possessed by an evil genie.

I feel bad for the young man chained up in his basement by his father, but this should goes to show how backwards the religion of islam is keeping the muslim world. I can't even imagine what the liberal media would do, not to mention the airheads in Hollywood, if a story came out about some crazy Pentecostals or backwoods snake-handlers doing something like this. I'm sure the rants about Christianity or extreme "right wingers" would run a muck.

So why is it that progressives and liberals will do almost anything to defend a set of beliefs and nations that condone barbaric behavior such as this? Why do movies constantly come out which subtly, and often times not so subtly, mock Christianity? Why is their a steady stream of movies that come out, which defend those who would see us perish? Why am I called a redneck if I go to church, or even simply practice Christian values, yet a man straight out of the fifteenth century is ignored by the left?

For the most part, those who practice Judeo Christian principles love this country. Those who practice Islam, secular humanism, new age jargon, or any other watery mystic drivel, only wish to see our country fail. Why wish to see our country succeed when your ultimate goal is to see a world without borders or boundaries? The more I study progressives, the more I see that they have one goal, and that every action they take is an end to those means. The hardcore left is not ignorant of what Islam stands for. Sure, there are some ignorant college kids, or general wishy washy buffoons like Alan Colmes who think that the world should be hunky dory and that peace and love is the true goal of a liberal. But anyone with some common sense can see through that. The goal of a progressive is to control others, demolish the United States, and to promote their agenda throughout the world; ending up in one-world ideology.

So this story really got me thinking; liberals will ignore heartbreaking stories of a young 29 year old man who has been clearly abused for almost his entire life if it serves their purpose. Liberals will jump on any type of scandal, no matter how small, if it involves the church. They don't believe in either set of beliefs, but the ends justify the means. In general, Christians believe in freedom. They believe in the United States. The world of Islam does not. Yes, I believe there are good Muslims, and I am well aware that to someone reading this I sound as if I am a fanatic. But as I've posted before, I truly believe that the religion of Islam calls for the destruction of all non believers and non believing nations. Muslims who deny that have either rejected that point, are unaware of it, or are lying.

And so I come back to my point, that every action a progressive takes, is truly an action toward the same overall goal. Look at the screaming the libs have done over the new Arizona law, (a law most of them have not even taken the time to have read.) What does a border have to do with the consistent attack on Christianity? Both things, if the libs and progressives have it their way, will harm this country. Now, the libs want to tax the American people more, another thing that will harm the average American.

Progressives wish to see the destruction of the United States, and to control the people. There is only one type of power they despise, and that is the power of our country. Other than that, they want it all.

Well, except for going nuclear.

When JoBi calls Republicans "out of step," does he really mean to tell the American people that WE are out of step?

(Click on title for the story at McClatchydc.com)

Yesterday JoBi made a high dollar speech here in North Carolina, right over at UNC Chapel Hill, or, as my girlfriend's father likes to call it; Berkley East. The essence of his speech was to reassure his Democrat followers that the Dems have everything under control, that November is nothing to worry about for the left, and that Republicans are "out of step." What were his words really saying though? Was their purpose to make the Dems at his rally feel better? Was their purpose to make a statement against all the elected Republicans in the House or the Senate? While I'm sure their are pieces of truth in both of these first two options, I am convinced his words had a much darker and menacing undertone to the people of the United States..."Remember your place...don't get out of line..."

With pretty much all polls predicting that the Republicans will make some significant gains in November, it's hard to tell what's been going on in JoBi's head of late. He has been claiming that the Dems are in absolutely no trouble in the fall. Of course Joe making questionable statements is hardly a new phenomenon. Make no mistake, I am leery of getting overconfident about November, and feel it would be a huge mistake for the GOP and conservative base to underestimate the left, (as I pointed out in my previous post.) Yet to say that the Dems are going to win huge...Now Joe, that just sounds silly. On top of that, when the every poll shows that the vast majority of the American people disapprove of the job the current administration is doing, including the spending, the handling of the oil spill, the war in Afghanistan, it's hard to think that the term "out of step" would be used for any party BUT the Democrats.

JoBi said yesterday at Chapel Hill, "They want us to throw on the brakes, but what they really want us to do is throw us in reverse. As the President said, they drove the car in the bridge."

Now wait a second Joe. This is a Republic. We elect men and women to represent us in Washington. Granted, currently the Democrats hold the majority. Yet, maybe instead of turning a blind eye to the possibility of a major left-wing loss in November, you could take note of what we are saying. Biden's quote about the car gives the American citizen a glimpes into the mind of a liberal. He's not speaking about elected GOP officials. He's talking about anyone who disagrees with him, even if those who do outnumber him. He's directly telling us; "WE KNOW BETTER THAN YOU. REMEMBER YOUR PLACE. DO AS WE SAY."

The current administration has always been socialists as far as I'm concerned. Yet know they are truly starting to throw in some elements of fascism. Not only that, but they don't even seem to be competent at it. They seem to be in the constant state of being frighteningly out of touch. Or are they out of touch at all? Do they simply not care what we, the American people, have to say?

Ignoring facts and claiming ludicrous things, having the media in the tank for your agenda, and blatantly telling the citizens of a country to behave, or that they are "out of step" have all the qualities of a dictatorship or a despot. Always remember, words have meaning - and JoBi's latest words have given this American a very clear understanding of his meaning.

Interesting article by Charles Krauthammer this morning

I know, I know. How original right? Some other guy writes a great article, and for my newest blog post I talk about it. (You can click on the title to read his article by the way.) However, at the risk of sounding like that guy, who jumps up and down when an intelligent person says something yelling, "Yeah, that's what I have been saying!" - well, what he wrote this morning is something I have been somewhat worried about.

Mr. Krauthammer issued a warning in his piece this morning. He told Republicans, in so many words, not to count their chickens before they hatched. "Don't underestimate Barack Obama" Charles tells us. He went on to cite all the things that Obama has managed to do while in the White House - which is plenty of things. Destructive as these things are, I don't think anyone can really doubt that he has managed to get a lot of things done. Charles issued the warning, and to back it up, mostly concentrated on the administration's end on things. It got me really thinking though, about how overconfident many conservatives may be getting.

When I was 9 years old, I was on a little league team that didn't win a single game all year. Going 0-14 isn't just no fun, it's also embarrassing. To lose game after game, all season long, without a single spark or moment of victory is in short, miserable. A crazy thing happened the next season though. We won our first game, and we won it by a fairly large amount. It felt really good to go out their and experience the feeling of victory. It's amazing how this victory somehow blotted out the memory of our previous 14 consecutive losses. Just a few games later however, we faced the same team again. We lost. I was confused. We had beat them before right? Doesn't that mean we should have beat them again? I didn't think about the fact that they outpitched, out hit, and out-ran us on the base-paths. I simply focused on the fact that we had beat them once before, that they didn't seem like a particularly good team at the time, and now, somehow, we had lost to them.

"We beat them last time" I remember saying indignantly.

"So?" Pops said. He continued on, "C, they aren't a bad team."

That's about as much as my memory serves me right now. Other than the fact that we lost, and that conversation with Dear ole' Dad, I don't remember the ins and outs of the game. But for the purpose of this post, I suspect we were a little arrogant over our previous win. Maybe, instead of focusing on our own game, we focused on our desire to see the opposing team lose.

Republicans need to focus on their own game, not just seeing Democrats in November, and hopefully our current president in 2012, lose. The current polls show conservatives and Republicans leading in many races across the United States. Scott Brown won recently up in Massachusetts. Republicans have won some governor races in some unlikely states such as NJ. The President's approval rating is down. All these things are great, but I fear Republicans and conservatives are getting a bit too caught up in it. Every time I turn on "Hannity," (which isn't too often, I'm not a huge fan) I hear him telling us, as if it's already happened; "November is going to be huge! We're taking back the House and the Senate!" Every time I turn on the news, the Republican pundit is focusing on how the left is going to face humbling results in November.

Let's not get too caught up in that frenzy. Obviously the liberals aren't too stupid, or they wouldn't have won as big as they did in the first place. Obviously Republicans aren't political geniuses or they wouldn't have lost as bad as they did in the first place.

Many Republicans and conservatives are angry, and very rightfully so. Yet let's not let our emotions cloud our judgment. Let's not let our hatred for progressive and liberal ideology, our continuing loss of freedom and individuality, and increasing power of the government get in the way of what WE stand for. Our representatives NEED to understand; they can't just focus on making the other guys lose, they need to focus on our game as well. Freedom, individuality, American exceptionalism, and limited government are much wiser things to get excited over, than poll numbers.

"Islam: What The West Needs to Know"....a chilling documentary

I just finished watching the documentary "Islam: What the West Needs To Know." It was refreshing to watch something on this topic that wasn't politically correct and full of defensive American Muslims whining about how they get checked at airports.

The film isn't full of video footage or sound bites, music, or flashy effects, (though there is some limited video footage.) It's interview driven, with numerous interesting experts from the world of academia. You certainly have to be in the mood to learn something, not to watch "The Simpsons" or one of the "Bourne Identity" movies for the fifteenth time this week on TNT. I'm sure the average liberal or progressive will see the title of this and simply refuse to watch it on principle, assuming that it's a KKK production or something, then go on to badmouth it. The fact of the matter is, that two of the experts interviewed are Arabs and former Muslims, one of which is a former member of the PLO.

Now, as I sit here and type, I wish I had taken notes as I watched. (Anyone about to watch it for academic purposes would definitely want to do so - LOTS of information thrown out there.) It would be impossible for me to mention every point the film touches upon, yet that would take away the point of you watching it anyway. The thesis however, is basically this: Islam is a religion of peace, BUT ONLY by it's own definition. Islam is more than a religion; it is a way to govern people. Islam condones violence, and excuses lying if it is for the greater good of Islam. More than anything else stressed in the film, the West simply doesn't understand Islam and cannot speak out against it's goals, a fact most Muslims exploit by being extremely aware of our nation's great fear of being called racist.

The documentary opened up by showing Presidents Bush and Clinton, and Prime Minister Blair, all falling over themselves about how Islam is a peaceful religion. It struck me how weak we must look as we constantly pander to these people. Robert Spencer, who runs jihadwatch.org explained, that Islam is a religion of peace only in the sense that BY WAR AND CONVERSION peace may be achieved. Walid Shoebat, the former PLO member explained how Muslims are commanded to lie if it is protecting Islam. So how many Muslims lie on a daily basis about the intent of their religion?

The film shows plenty of verses from the Koran to back all these things up. They also explain that the Koran is not chronological. It is set up from biggest book to smallest book. That being said, some of the smaller books at the end which do mention peaceful things, are actually changed into more violent verses. These verses just appear earlier in the Koran, and to your average westerner, they figure the "older" verses in the beginning, are changed by the "newer" verses at the end of the book.

Make no mistake, I by no means think all Muslims are bad or violent. I believe many of them have rejected it or, like many "Christians" who haven't taken communion in ages or are unaware of much of the Bible, simply don't understand their religion. I also don't pretend to be an expert because I've watched an hour and a half long documentary. Much more research would be necessary in order for me to proclaim that. Still, I can't help but think that this film had some excellent points which the mainstream media is terrified to look deeper into. It really makes me think that the liberals and progressive are much more afraid of Islam than us "right wing, islamophobics" are. After all, who's the bigger wuss on the playground, the bully's sidekick, or the kid who calls him out for being a cowardly bully?

The film closed out with Walid Shoebat summarizing what the West doesn't understand.

"What the west needs to understand about Islam, is that Islam has the potential, of replacing the dangers that we just, kind of, did away with, nazism and communism. Like nazism and like communism, Islamism - the end justifies the means. There is no respect for national borders, and the whole ideology is to promote their way of thinking, to promote their way of life, throughout the entire world. That's what's being taught in the middle east. That's what's coming out of Saudia Arabia and all throughout the Muslim world. They will conquer, and will continue to conquer, until it triumphs, until everybody in the world says there's no God but allah and Muhammad is his prophet."

I will say this. This film makes me want to learn more about Islam, perhaps even pick up a Koran and read it, and do everything possible to NOT let the American muslims erect a mosque on the sacred ground of Ground Zero.