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.

Pantano Commends New Hanover Commissioners for Resolution Supporting Arizona Immigration Law

(Click on headline for story)

It's good to see New Hanover county supporting Arizona, just as it's good to see a true conservative challenging "Blue Dog" Mike McIntyre in the fall. Pantano is a former Marine Corps infantry officer who has served in the Gulf War and the Iraq War.

A local joint looks to be closing soon and many are upset, but can this serve to teach a good lesson to people?

No one is quite sure just what exactly is to become of Whitey's here in Wilmington, but one way or another it looks to be facing some major changes sooner than later. As the link above points out, the owner Mr. Pravette acknowledges that one way or another they will be "redeveloping." This news has caused a lot of anger within the local community, and probably more than that, just plain sadness. But has everyone thought this through beyond their emotions?

A few minutes ago I was noodling around on facebook, and checked out the WECT News page, (the local NBC affiliate.) They had a summarized version of the story, and mentioned how there is a good chance that Walgreens will be taking that particular corner over. The posts on the thread were vastly negative about this. This is completely understandable. After all, the place has been around since 1956. I'm sure people have a ton of fond memories in the place, and I have no doubt that there are many people who really enjoyed the food.

Here's the deal though; I've been to Whitey's. The food was extremely mediocre. Watery eggs, cold food, a dirty floor, and week service pretty much sum up the place. I have nothing personal against the ownership, and I certainly recognize that my opinions are simply my opinions...except now the place is in financial trouble, and looks to have numbered days. So maybe my opinions AREN'T just my opinions. Apparently they are shared by lots of other people. Maybe this is the perfect example of capitalism in the works. Whitey's failed to provide a good product, and now it's in trouble. Walgreens has continued to grow, seems to be fairly clean every time I am in one, has relatively low prices, and never seems to be in shortage of customers. Should there be any surprise that Walgreens looks to be the leading contender as Whitey's replacement on the corner of Kerr and Market?

For the record, I support Mom and Pop type places. Yet I won't support one blindly if they fail to provide quality service and products. I was amazed to see the anger in many people's posts on that facebook thread. Everyone was talking bad about Walgreens, seemed to have the attitude that since Whitey's had been around since '56, and that it's not a corporation, it should be entitled to remain in business, and that it should be entitled to that street corner. No one seemed to think that Whitey's should have to face competition.

The sense of entitlement, an all too common phenomenon of late, seems to be rearing it's ugly head again. It's too bad Whitey's has seen better days, but maybe people can look to this as an example of the beauty of capitalism. Maybe Whitey's, back in 1956, served better food, had better service, and had cleaner floors. Maybe this can be a warning to people not to let complacency and senses of entitlement ruin their work ethic.

Hopefully this will keep people motivated not to serve watery eggs.

Just some quick thoughts on the topic of words

When sifting through the day's top headlines, I am reminded of a quote from the book "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand, which I am currently reading. One of the major characters, Francisco D'Anconia asks another key character, James Taggart, "When are you going to understand James, that words have meaning?" This conversation takes place while both of these characters are children, after Francisco has shown up James in something, (I want to say it was swimming if memory serves me correctly.) James is complaining that Francisco shouldn't act as if he is better than he is, simply because he is more successful. Without going any more into the novel, I will simply say that James goes on to become quite the progressive, and has a major part in bringing the country to it's knees.

Words have meaning. I can't help but think that this oversimplified statement is being forgotten on a regular basis. At what point did we as a people forget that words have meaning, start to be dismayed over consequences of actions, and abandon the concept of thinking things through logically before speaking? It certainly isn't that our culture lacks words; but we seem to be caught up in a never ending black hole of pseudo intellectualism and shallow, silly phrases. Just turn on the radio and you will hear Eminem singing about how he is "not afraid to take a stand." Go to your nearest college campus and you will see plenty of students with false senses of righteousness and superiority wearing "live strong" bracelets. What has eminem ever taken a stand on? As far as I can tell, nothing. Yet it is constantly being talked about as an inspirational song. Why do these students wear "live strong" bracelets? Do they mean it literally concerning their health? From their constant diet of institutionalized food and beer we know that's not true. Have they faced major adversity? Well, with the government paying for so many people's school now, and the vast majority of these kids not being Vets, we know that isn't true either.

I remember shortly before Obama won the nomination for the Democrat Party, Dennis Kucinich telling the media that the word "change" wasn't just a word, that it had meaning, and that too many people were getting caught up in it. He pointed out that the word itself had neither positive or negative implications. Needless to say, the media didn't take very kindly to him clearly referring to their favorite, Obama, but it would have done them some good to consider what the man was saying. Not being a Kucinich fan, I must at least tip my hat to the man for acknowledging that what we do and say has consequences. Now today, the first rig in the gulf has taken off for Egypt, starting the inevitable decline in jobs there. One can see first hand that words have meaning. Denouncing oil companies and prohibiting them from doing their work has had an effect. It is no longer something which environmentalists, progressives, and liberals can rally around and get the warm fuzzies over; it is something which has caused consequences which they must actually deal with.

And yet, more and more people forget that words have meaning, and that it would help their own cause to think things through rationally and logically before opening their mouths. Minutes ago I got off the phone with my good friend and fellow Marine, Gary Grant. As we are both students our conversation turned to our experiences at our respective colleges. We found that both places have a prevailing attitude of thinking that it's the cool thing to come from a poor family, a family with only one parent, a bad neighborhood, and most of all, a family that has no white collar workers in it. When did America stop thinking rationally so much, and begin to think that one is actually expected to be more proud of an unsuccessful background than one that is full of success and triumph? When did it become OK to disrespect a family with a doctor or a businessman as the head of the household, which includes a happy marriage and financial security, and yet expected to revere and to champion the household of financial irresponsibility, crime, dependence on welfare and lack of marriage? Even in the military, an organization which I love, I witnessed the tones and glances of a few people saying, "heh, you're from the suburbs" or "yeah, you had money didn't you?" My answer was always a proud, "YES!" Of course this surprised people who were raised to think that I would be ashamed of my parent's or anyone's success.

I would be willing to bet, that if I were to ask these students and these military men who had come from a more humble background than I, if they wished to be successful or unsuccessful they would choose successful every time. I very much doubt that their goal is to end up living in the projects or the ghetto, that they wish to enter a life of crime, or to end up on welfare. I am sure they would rather have money than being constantly strapped for cash. I am sure the college students hope to have decent jobs and to provide for their future children with the degrees they will attain from the university. I am sure the few guys I came across in the Marines who had the attitudes I just wrote about, will strive for promotion, and work hard in their field to provide for their families, or use the skills they've attained in the military for future jobs in the civilian sector to do so.

So why then, is it becoming common for so many people in America to say these absurd things, and to embrace this bumper sticker ideology and shallow liberal drivel? I think the answer is clear. They have forgotten that words have meaning.

The World Cup is finally over, but let's take a closer look at what it all means.

Well a few hours ago Spain won the World Cup. Congratulations on winning something boys. After all, you tend to stay away from wars, and the pursuing of terrorists. Ok, ok that was harsh. Congrats to Spain.

But now for a more serious and less smart alecy note. A few weeks ago Dear Old Dad posted on facebook, (something he announced a few months back that he was going to quit using and yet still has not) a question for his facebook friends to ponder. The question was whether it was a coincidence that the vast majority of the world would cite soccer as their favorite sport and that this favorite sport of theirs is mediocre. At first glance I just chuckled. As a non soccer fan I love taking digs at the sport and it's fans, but a moment later I stopped chuckling and fully realized that it was most definitely a serious question to think about.

An average soccer score seems to be 1-0, 0-0, 1-1, or maybe if it's a crazy day 2-1. Now I've heard all the arguments against citing these ridiculously low scores as evidence of soccer being a lame sport. Just a week or two ago I heard a Brit in the gym telling his American buddy who was complaining about these low scores that he was "such a f---ing yank who had no culture." Yet this passionate Brit had no idea just how wrong he was. The reason most Americans don't go nuts over the sport is BECAUSE we do have a distinct culture.

Americans, whether they are even conscious of it or not, do believe in exceptionalism. They believe that America's exceptionalism is due to the fact that the individual has a chance to be exceptional, to provide for his exceptional family, and to provide exceptional products. So how does a 0-0 score reflect any sort of exceptionalism? A 2-1 score is barely any better. That's not exceptional, that's squeaking by. The American Dream is to excel, not to get by, by the skin of your teeth.

But do these scores and the overall culture of the game reflect something even more sinister than simply a bunch of guys willing to settle for mediocrity? I sure believe so. As a huge part of the world still operates on socialists policies, wouldn't having low scores which are consistently extremely close be the perfect type of game for a socialist utopia? The more I think about it, I can't help but think that Dear Old Dad was really on to something. Yet we can't think of it as simply an "us and them" mentality; as America leans farther and farther left, more and more Americans denounce American exceptionalism.

As I pondered this issue the story of the Russian spies came out. I listened on the radio and watched on the tv numerous interviews of former CIA guys, cold war experts, espionage experts, and regular old pundits, and I couldn't help but get the feeling that nobody was really taking this very seriously. It was all done and over with so quickly that I couldn't help but feeling that the majority of Americans just wanted to wish it away, or that they simply genuinely didn't care. This to me is terrifying. As I pondered these events I realized that this was a giant circle, because inevitably my thoughts were that too many Americans and this current administration didn't have enough respect for our nation to really look into this very serious matter, due to a increasingly prevailing attitude that America is not exceptional, which led my thoughts to soon be jerked back to soccer, and the World Cup.

On Friday afternoon I cleaned the apartment and had sports radio playing. Colin Cowherd on ESPN radio was rambling on about his theory of why more Americans weren't bigger World Cup fans, and why those that are, really aren't soccer fans for the three years and eleven months in between. He claimed that America is a country of rules, of boundaries, of efficiency and of organization. He brought up the aspect of soccer when they add unknown amounts of time onto the clock as his example. He spoke it in a light hearted manner. He wasn't necessarily being snide, but he was poking fun at people that don't enjoy the game in a good natured way. However, what he truly did, was inadvertently pay America a compliment.

America has always been a land of absolutes. The slippery concept of no right and no wrong, no absolutes, and an anything goes attitude has done considerable harm to the rest of the liberal world. After all, wouldn't a policy of no absolutes have to, by it's very nature, give way to societies that rule by perverted and twisted "absolutes," such as the islamo-fascists?

We must stop this type of thinking from continuing to seep into our American culture. Without absolutes and only illusions, we can not have national borders, which exposes why liberals are so resistant to enforcing the laws we have concerning them. And, as everyone has probably heard argued before, isn't it impossible for a state to exist without borders?

So as I sit here and attempt to rap this meandering post up, I realize that this World Cup frenzy has led me to think about our national borders, the Russian spy crisis, our modern tendancy to reject American exceptionalism, (though I truly believe the majority of Americans do believe in it, even if they don't realize they do) and the marxist dream of everyone having equal amounts of things in small doses, much like a soccer score. I've heard many soccer fans defend their beloved sport by telling me that the average player runs about 8 miles in a game, and that this shows what a great athlete he is. I don't doubt that at all, but it certainly is not an effective defense of the game itself. A great industrialist or businessman in America suffering under an oppresive regime such as our current one won't make the country great if liberal progressives take away his freedom and individuality.

FIFA is an organization with many great athletes, however it's overall simply mediocre. America is a country with many great individuals. Let's not let it become a mediocre establishment as well.

Tough Month in Afghanistan

All I can say is that I sure as hell hope that General Petraeus can turn this thing around over in Afghanistan. As far as I can tell, there's no reason to suspect otherwise. The man turned Iraq into a victory, and seems to have better credentials than his predecessor. After all, as it turns out, General McChrystal was a left winger who wouldn't even allow Fox News to be played in the wire. No wonder we haven't been making enough headway over there; liberals never fight to win!

But I digress. According to the AP, 23 US Servicemembers have died so far this month. That's a tough month. That's a number that doesn't even include the numerous Packistanis who have been killed by taliban fighters, and international troops, including Brits and Germans, who have experienced numerous attacks on their convoys.

Yet something is wrong here. We continue to refuse to fight a total war. After conducting operations this month, in which eight taliban fighters were taken into custody, over one thousand "civilians" protested chanting "Death to America, long live Islam!" What am I missing here? As the left continues to bend over backward to prove that America is not anti-Islam, (a policy I haven't quite figured out yet) Islam continues to openly denounce the United States.

The taliban has many dedicated radicals who are willing to fight to the death. Yet the seemingly never ending amount of IEDS, and suicide bombs put in motercycles and cars prove that they are getting constant help. The only way they are able to continue fighting as they do, is that they are being consistently harbored, lied for, and protected.

In short, there are very few innocents over there.

Do I advocate the killing of women and children? Of course not. Do I advocate striving for victory in a fierce, drawn out war, even if it means more women and children dying? Of course. This country has made a mistake of too firmly claiming that we are not at war with Afghanistan, but only a small radical sect. Is this sect very small, and how "radical" is it compared to the rest of Islam? As for the second question, I do not know for sure. Yet it is obvious that the force which we are up against is not small at all. The majority may not be up in the hills with AKs, but that doesn't mean they aren't part of the war effort.

I do not for a moment suggest that it is an easy thing to do for a family in Afghanistan to put themselves on the line, and take a stand against these insurgents. I will suggest however, that they need to do the right thing.

I'm all for hearts and minds, but let's get real; many times what that means is two rounds in the heart and one round in the mind. A reluctant enemy is still an enemy.

Well, here goes

Hello everybody. This is the first time I've managed a blog so I'm looking forward to it.

As you may have guessed from the title, I love beer, baseball and discussing politics. I'm a very conservative guy who is currently deeply worried about this country and it's future. I am a Marine Corps Vet who served on two deployments to Iraq, and plan on keeping a close eye on the events in Iraq and Afghanistan in this blog.

But hey, I also look forward to discussing sports, good books, movies, and any other random stuff.

Hopefully after a few posts here, I'll start getting some regular followers.