It is time to stop tap-dancing around the giant elephant in the room.  What good is being politically correct if you die as a result, and allow people who are even more politically incorrect than you to gain control over more of the planet?

We are fighting a war against Islamofascism.

We are not simply dealing with criminals, or the disenfranchised, or people with a “different” culture.  No – we are dealing with murderous, genocidal, intolerant Islamofascists.  They come in several varieties, but have in common the use of coercion, terrorism, and force to impose their power hierarchy and their brand of Islam on others.

Don't fool yourself.  They are not peaceful.  They are not friends.  They don’t simply need some “love” and “understanding” to be sent their way by us.  They are not okay. It is not okay to chalk them up to culture or freedom of religion. We have freedom of religion in the U.S. because we have a Judeo-Christian society that is tolerant of others, so long as they abide by the law and respect life, liberty, and property. We need not extend our principle of freedom of religion to foreigners who seek to dominate by force and genocide.  Nor can we allow Islamofascists to rise through the ranks of power and ownership here, even through democracy, to then impose forced “Islamic” practice on the whole society.  We should demand respect for our Constitution and our way of life. Anyone who would seek to destroy our Constitution does not deserve to freely operate under it.

Thanks to weak churches, temples, and synagogues, low native birth rates, immigration, and self-denying “tolerance”, Europe is falling to the Islamofascists, who are keeping their own ghettos until they gain enough power to completely dominate.

We "tolerate" them to our own destruction.  You don't tolerate cancer.  You cut it out.  You kill it, or it will kill you.  I know you some of you want to think that if only we give them enough money, technology, charity, and kindness, they will change, but it is time you woke up to the reality of evil and that some people do evil things and will do evil things even if they have their needs met.

You can't reason or negotiate with these people once they are too far gone into Islamofascism. They lie.  They make agreements they have no intention of keeping.  They blow themselves up.  They encourage their children to blow themselves up.  How do you reason with that?

I know some of you think Bush, Cheney, Rove, and anyone you didn’t support who wins elections, or anyone who makes more money than you is the enemy, but really they aren't – at least not as much of an enemy as the Islamofascists.

We all have reason to war against Islamofascists in every way – politically, militarily, religiously, socially, financially, electronically, etc.  It doesn’t matter if you identify as a Christian, Jew, Wiccan, Buddhist, Taoist, Hindu, Jain, Sikh, New Ager, Jehovah’s Witness, Mormon, Scientologist, Satanist, Hedonist, Secular Humanist, Freethinker, Atheist, Agnostic, (or any other religion-affiliate), artist, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Green, Communist, feminist, homosexual, populist, civil libertarian, labor activist, Zionist, multiculturalist, postmodernist, or relativist.  The Islamofascists want you to conform to their brand of Islamofascism or die.  Even most Muslims would need to conform to a new way of life or die.  Your religious practice, political practice, financial transactions, social interaction, creative endeavors, and just about every aspect of your life would be controlled by narrow-minded autocratic mullahs.

I’m not talking about killing people because they are a certain nationality, ethnicity, race, or religion.  I’m talking about warring against people who do certain things, like terrorist acts.  Islamofascism is their motivation – and if we can persuade them away from that motivation, perhaps they won’t be terrorists,

“But don’t people have the right to believe whatever they want?”

No, people don't have the “right” to believe whatever they want to believe – not when it turns into murderous action.  Not when 1) they want to kill us or enslave us; 2) they have the means to attack us; 3) they have a history of attacking us; 4) we have the means of defending ourselves.  They can choose to believe in Islamofascism, and we can choose to defend ourselves by disrupting their plans and organization, killing them if necessary.  I’m arguing that we should do precisely this if they choose to practice or seek to practice Islamofascist terrorism.

So, what do we do about these people?

First of all, recognize who your greater enemies are.  You may not like the religious right, but you may need to work with them and many others you don’t see eye to eye with to defeat this enemy.  And no, the religious right is not just like the Islamofascists terrorists.  Their proclamations and behaviors are not alike.  Pat Robertson and Jerry Fallwell may have said some goofy things over the years and you may not like their opposition to redefining marriage, but neither one has encouraged anyone to attack civilians and if they did, you wouldn’t see a bunch of Bible-thumpers jumping up and down in the streets in support of such statements.  The religious right does not practice or encourage civilian bombing, beheadings, or nuclear attack.

Support efforts to win their hearts and minds.  I think if you look at the situation honestly, you’ll find that today’s societies and subcultures that identify themselves as Christian are more tolerant and offer the opportunity to have a better life to more people than the Islamofascists.  Maybe you don’t want to promote Christianity.  Fine – but you’ll be better off if more people choose Christianity over Islamofascism, so perhaps you should support efforts to subvert Islamofascism, even if the efforts involve the promotion of Christianity.  Allow peace-promoting evangelists to fill the void.  If you’re an atheist and you have persuasive, convincing atheists who can give those flirting with Islamofascism enduring reasons to behave themselves and get along peacefully with their  neighbors, then fine.  So far, the atheists don't have a good track record of that, because if someone believes there is no god, then people think they "get away" with whatever they can get away with, and the only way of keeping them in check is the government bullet.

Don’t welcome Islamofascists and those who lean that way into your country.  If they want to live behind a veil and never be searched, and if they want to live in a country where everyone is forced to observe Islam, fine… they can stay in a country where that is already done.  The rest of us shouldn’t put up with that.  That’s why we have our countries and they have theirs.

And yes, support military action to disrupt the Islamofascist advance.

A word about Islam and Islamofascism.  I can tell you the theological differences between Christianity and Islam - no, they do not worship the same God - and some general Islamic practices, but I can't tell you what is the "real" Islam.  Clearly, the overwhelming majority of people in the world who identify themselves as Muslims are not violent.  If they were, the world would be a lot worse off than it is now.  Whether or not they are the Islam of Mohammed, I do not know.  Mohammed had a violent life, but whether or not what was inherent to his faith or a product of his times, I can't say.  What I can say is that either the “peaceful” Muslims don't buy into this violent form of Islam, or they are waiting for the opportune time to jump in and help it to world domination.  If they really don't buy into it, then they should be willing to join our efforts to defeat it, because they'll be targets, under it, too.

I’d rather gripe about how trashy primetime TV has become than have a mullah telling me what I can and can’t watch on TV.  I’d rather deal with atheists and communists on college faculties than have only universities that teach a narrow Islamofascist worldview.  I want to continue to live in a Constitutional, democratic, representative republic ruled by laws, not men, with checks and balances and inalienable rights, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, due process, capitalism, and Judeo-Christian values,  I hope you agree with me on most of those, and will support fighting Islamofascism.  If you are a Muslim citizen of the U.S. and you value the U.S. Constitution and are willing to live in tolerance of non-Muslims and respect our security needs, then I embrace you as a fellow American.  You are free to speak and write and live in a way so as to attract people to Islam, but please do not use government force, violence, or coercion to impose Islam on anyone else.

So, stop saying “If only Israel would…” or “If only Bush would…” or “If only we’d pull out of Iraq…” or “They have a right to be that way…”  No.  They are warring against us - you, me, and our loved ones – because we are not their kind of Islamofascist, and we need to fight back.

There’s a morning radio host in Los Angeles named Bill who makes money off of “selling babies” - meaning he is involved in reproductive technologies and surrogate parenting, condemning some of the children to motherless or fatherless homes by design.  It should come as no surprise, then, that he aggressively attacks (verbally) people who are against embryonic stem cell research, or at least Federal (meaning OUR) money paying for it.

This morning, he was screaming at a caller that the options for human beings frozen in the embryonic stage is "keeping them frozen, throwing them away, or experimenting with them, so we might as well experiment on them!"

Well, Bill, those aren’t the only options.  There is also the option of letting them be adopted.  Remember adoption?

Apparently he doesn’t.  You see, when the caller rightfully pointed out that we wouldn’t have these “extra” frozen embryos in the first place if these unnecessary reproductive technologies weren’t creating them.

To this, bill screamed “My children were made through in vitro fertilization.  Don’t I have a right to have children?”

Well, sure you do, Bill, if you and your partner can make them naturally - nobody can stop you.  But when you need the assistance of others, or Federal funding, the answer is no.

Now I realize that this is an emotional issue and that couples who long for children feel a deep pain when they have difficulty conceiving and giving birth to a child.  But there is no right to force someone else to help you have children.  If you couldn’t find anyone capable of performing in vitro fertilization who was willing to help you, would that mean you should be able to force them to help you?  Do mutes have the right to free speech?  Sure, but that doesn’t obligate someone else to make a medical device that allows them to speak.  Just because technology allows us to do something doesn’t mean we have the right to do something.  If the use of your technology will likely create children you don’t want to be responsible to carry and raise, you are essentially creating a situation where you are denying someone their inalienable right to life.  I think most people would still think that the right to life supersedes the “right” to have children, even if our laws do not reflect that.

So, let’s review.  Bill and others like him told the rest of us years ago “Hey, what could go wrong with these reproductive technologies?” and so they went ahead and created all of these “extra” human beings using these technologies, and now they have the audacity to turn around and say “Gee, we have all of these extra embryos.  Why not let people experiment on them?”

Well, Bill, THAT’S WHAT’S WRONG WITH THOSE REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGIES.  That's why some people were hesitant about these technologies in the first place!

I know that some people have an emotional desire to have children that are their “own” biologically either by having children made from their sperm or egg or both, or were carried inside of them.  I know there are women who want to have children well past their natural fertile window.   But should an emotional desire supersede a child’s life?  Despite what abortion pushers told us life would be like if they got their way, we still have children that are available for adoption, and maybe... just maybe... that is a better route than labs that manufacture “extra” human beings to be discarded or to be subjected to experiments.

Just some thoughts from a Roe v. Wade survivor - something with which Bill is far, far too old to identify with.

Governor Schwarzenegger has given his State of the State address.  The County of Los Angeles CAO, who is retiring after a relatively long and successful run, has given some parting comments where he warns that there are problems the County of Los Angeles is facing that the County can’t solve.

The Governor is calling for more bonds (= future taxes) for infrastructure, a panel to figure out what to do about California’s overcrowded prisons, and new fees (taxes) and government involvement so that everyone in California has health insurance.

The CAO warns that L.A.’s public health care system and jails are broken.

They both failed to address one of the major “root causes” of these problems.  Neither stood up and called out the seemingly endless stream of illegal aliens squatting in California and especially Los Angeles.  It is ignoring the neon pink elephant that is standing in the living room, relieving itself.

Yeah, the hospitals can’t turn away anyone (even if they wanted to, just imagine the ACLU’s reaction), and border control is a Federal issue, but Schwarzenegger is willing to make pacts with foreign governments (isn’t that a Federal issue?) and take on “global warming”, as if California can make a real difference in the world’s climate.  He’s willing to give health insurance to another country’s citizens!  Perhaps if Schwarzenegger and other state and local officials were willing to loudly and consistently point out the problems illegal aliens are causing – and the risk an open border is leaving us exposed to – the Federal government would be motivated to actually do something about it.

How many millions of illegal aliens were legalized by the 1986 amnesty?  That played a part in encouraging the 12-20 million more illegal aliens who’ve invaded since then, a good chunk of whom have found California to be a great place to settle down and pop out anchor babies.  Americans are leaving California, and yet it the infrastructure is still overwhelmed.  Hmmmmm... how can that be?  Why should we build new schools, prisons, hospitals, and roads to accommodate Mexico’s citizens?  Why are we asked perennially to take extra steps to conserve water and electricity?  Because the system is burdened by people who broke into our home.

So far, the Federal government’s “solution” is to simply declare the invaders legal.  Oh yeah, make them legal by a stroke of the pen... yeah, that’s going to solve the problem.  And with more government-forced wealth redistribution combined with the promise of eventual amnesty, who but the elite and connected are going to stay in that cauldron of corruption, Mexico?

Can you deny that these invaders are a burden on infrastructure or our schools, hospitals, or prisons?  How much of a problem would L.A.’s hospitals have if they weren’t treating illegal aliens?  Would our schools and prisons still be overcrowded if no illegal aliens were in them?  Would we still have as much traffic congestion as we do if no illegal aliens were driving on our roads?  Libertarians like to focus on the contributions of the illegal aliens, but we’re not living in a libertarian state - we're living in an increasingly socialist state.  We use public funds for transportation and roads, schools, health care, prisons, and so many other things.  I’m willing to pay a little more for car washes, gardeners, janitors, dishwashers, and groceries in exchange for  paying a lot less for schools, prisons, health care, and infrastructure... and maybe getting some radio stations back.

Some in the County of Los Angeles think that more bureaucracy will solve the problem.  They are calling for a County Executive (mayor) and/or expanding the 5-member County Board of Supervisors, and/or for breaking up the County of Los Angeles, which has over 10 million residents, into smaller counties.  The City of Los Angeles is exploring becoming its own county (like that bastion of... ahem... reasonable government, San Francisco).  None of that will help, especially not the City of L.A. becoming a County.  “Los Angeles” is a name that rightfully belongs to the County, but that would be the least of the complications.  The County seat is in the City, so "divorce" arrangements would have be made that would provide for new facilities.  Any new county would need a slew of new personnel and offices for “necessary” county functions.  There are cities that are landlocked by the City of L.A., so they would either need to be part of the new county created by the city, or would need to be their own county as well, or the City of L.A. would have to give up some territory so that these cities could connect to other non-City of L.A. areas.  It's a big mess.

All of this is an awful lot of time, money, and effort that can all be reduced with a real solution - controlling the border.

This headline in the Los Angeles Times is worthy of Jay Leno:


“Civil rights activists”.  You’d think Wal-Mart was lynching people.  Stories like this indicate that we truly have ensured civil rights for all in the U.S., because otherwise these activists wouldn’t have time to speak out about Wal-Mart.


Oh, man.  This is too funny.  Religious leaders?  Religious leaders have time for this?  They have time to whine about Wal-Mart when orthodox teachings are being perverted by heresy... when traditional religious practices are being abandoned or are lacking... when members of their congregations are fornicating, divorcing, having kids out of wedlock, killing their children in the womb, abusing themselves and the people they are supposed to look after, and stealing?

If you are a religious leader, your job is to look after your congregation, lead them in prayer and worship, call them to morality, teach them about God, lead charitable efforts, and stand up for justice.  And no, Wal-Mart compensating employees with what those employees have agreed to is not injustice.

Where does it say in the Bible that even if an employee agrees to work for certain compensation, the employer should listen to outsiders who aren’t a part of the transaction and give the employees more than the agreed-to compensation?  Where does it say in the Bible that Wal-Mart is supposed to take care of all an employee's needs and wants? Was this an extra commandment I missed?


“Hip Hop Caucus?”  Do they represent Peter Cottontail and other rabbits?


You don’t have to “settle for low-paying jobs without a future.” You can work elsewhere!  You can start your own business!  Slavery still exists in Muslim countries, but it has long been abolished in the U.S.A.  Nobody forces anyone to work at Wal-Mart.

If you don’t like Wal-Mart, don’t shop there.  Don’t work there.  Offer an alternative.  Or buy into Wal-Mart enough that you have enough power to change it.


Oh, but you see that’s not enough.  You have to do whatever “activists” tell you to do.


Did these people never take a basic economics course?  Market demands create jobs.

I love this buzzphrase “working families”.  You see, all of those lawyers, doctors, accountants, managers, business owners, and so forth that work six or seven days a week, 10-24 hours a day aren’t “working”.  All of those people who put up their own money to create a business and put their blood, sweat, and tears into it aren’t “working”.


Wait a second.  How are they supposed to offer more jobs if you won’t let them expand?

I can just see this being such a high priority for King: “Stop the lynchings.  Stop the segregation.  Let us vote.  Treat people according to content of their character, not according to the color of their skin.  Stop the violence.  Oh, and make Wal-Mart give city dwellers cushy high-paying benefited jobs simply because I said to.”  Um, yeah.


“Living wage”.  Another stupid buzzphrase.  How about “agreed-to wage”?

How about “living tax rates”?  How about “living crime level”?  Why should anyone else pay you more than you can negotiate?  If you don’t like what they’re offering, don’t... work... for... them.  I don’t know how much more simple I can make this.  You want higher pay?  Make yourself more valuable to employers!

If you want “good” jobs in your neighborhood, then help crack down on thuggery and laziness.  Employers do not want to operate in areas without quality potential employees or high crime.  Any area where people burn down business and loot or have a lot of graffiti should NOT expect employers to bring good jobs there.  Some of these areas should count their blessing that any legitimate business wants to move in.  I wouldn't want to build anywhere that experienced a riot within the last fifteen years.

Thank God for Wal-Mart.

Apparently, based on what they've said and done over the last fifteen years, Democrats of the Pelosi sort see the U.S. military as:

1. Only good for military actions like Bosnia under Democrat presidents and/or U.N. direction, not for dealing with international terrorist threats.
2. Passing out aid.
3. As John Kerry wants us to believe, a place for people who can't cut it in college.

Latching on to this third point, Democrats are starting to look at our military forces as a new government-dependent class they can manipulate.  The subtle and not-so-subtle messages are that if the military personnel vote Democrat, they won't have to go to war, but they will get government benefits the rest of their lives.

Fortunately for America, most people who've chosen to go into the military have done so at least partially out of a love and devotion to the U.S. and liberty, and they are willing to risk their lives to fight to protect our interests and to protect liberty.

The Good Old Days vs. Today

The good old days:
A familiar, responsible face who can take care of any shopping problems standing proudly behind the counter.

Today:
A teenager with no decision-making power or product knowledge you’ll never see again slouching behind the counter.


The good old days:
Family doctor making a home visit.

Today:
Sitting in the emergency room for hours while filling out paperwork.


The good old days:
Kids playing pick-up baseball, football, hockey, or basketball on the street.

Today:
Kids playing Grand Theft Auto sitting on their butts.


The good old days:
A wife asking sweetly “What are you going to want for dinner tonight, dear?”

Today:
A wife sneering, “I’m not your slave! You have two hands!  Make it yourself!”


The good old days:
Family together on a vacation trip.

Today:
Family only together for transfer of custody.


The good old days:
“Boys will be boys.”

Today:
 “That boy has ADHD and needs to be drugged.”


The good old days:
Adopting kids.

Today:
Making kids in a test tube, discarding the “extra” brothers and sisters like trash.


The good old days:
Your kid’s friend’s parents are divorced, making things a little awkward.

Today:
Your kid’s friend was conceived in a test tube from donated sperm and donated egg, implanted in a woman who was surrogating for two men who have since split up and “married” other men because one had a sex change operation.  Telling anyone this is awkward for you may result in hate crime charges.


The good old days:
Playing cards in the basement with the guys.

Today:
Running up a gambling debt online, alone.


The good old days:
Kids swimming, playing, and being carefree in the summer.

Today:
Kids taking SAT prep courses all summer.


The good old days:
Working summers to pay for college.

Today:
Working for years to pay off student loans.


The good old days:
Listening to owls in the night.

Today:
Listening to gunfire and sirens in the night.


The good old days:
Leisurely walks in the evening.

Today:
Running for your life during the day.


The good old days:
Police respond to rioters with clubs and tear gas.

Today:
Politicians respond to “civil unrest” by rewarding the participants.


The good old days:
Running from the cops meant more jail time and a good roughing-up.

Today:
Running from the cops gets you on TV and millions of dollars if they slap you.


The good old days:
Your coworkers play a prank on you, and you prank them back, or take it outside if there is a problem and settle it like men.

Today:
Your coworkers prank you, and you get counseling and sue.


The good old days:
Family hour on network TV.

Today:
Learning new put-downs and sex positions during the 8 p.m. hour on network TV.


The good old days:
"The Dating Game" or "Love Connection"

Today:
"Next" or "ElimiDate"


The good old days:
Listening to Elvis, the Beatles, or Little Richard while mom and pop are out.

Today:
Listening to Korn, Emenem, or R. Kelly while mom and her “date” are in her bedroom.


The good old days:
Marilyn Monroe holding her dress down while it is being lifted up by the wind.

Today:
Britney Spears leaving nothing to the imagination while climbing out of a car.


The good old days:
Mohammed Ali.

Today:
Mike Tyson.


The good old days:
Prayer in school.

Today:
Muslim prayer in school.


The good old days:
Christmas pageant at school.

Today:
 “Safe” and “alternative” sex seminar at school.


The good old days:
Your kids asking to borrow the car for the prom.

Today:
Your kids asking you to take out a loan to finance their lavish week-long prom-related extravaganza.


The good old days:
Your kid asking how to dance in preparation for the school dance.

Today:
Your kid is ticked off because the principal bans nudity and sex acts on the dance floor.


The good old days:
Girl scouts selling cookies door to door to raise money.

Today:
Scout-age girls gone wild stripping on web cams for free.


The good old days:
Your son in middle-school has a puppy-love crush on a teacher.

Today:
Your son’s married middle school teacher gets impregnated by him.


The good old days:
Your kid is going steady.

Today:
Your kid is going to the clinic to get tested.


The good old days:
Boys sneaking a look at breasts in Playboy magazine, hoping they don’t get caught.

Today:
Boys viewing XXX-and-worse video clips online without a chance of getting caught.


The good old days:
Your daughter in high school getting her first kiss.

Today:
Your daughter in middle school offering oral sex to several classmates.


The good old days:
Girls getting “in trouble” sent to live on the farm with Aunt Martha.

Today:
Girls dropping off their two children from different “fathers” in the high school nursery so they can attend class and sit next to a girl who had her child sucked down a sink.


The good old days:
Girls who have unmarried sex are bad.

Today:
Girls who wait until they are married are weird and need counseling.


The good old days:
Worrying about the boy your daughter has a crush on, even though he calls you “sir” or “ma’am” and seems respectful.

Today:
Trying to determine if the person who just opened the door and walked out of you daughter’s bedroom and nodded at you in passing is a boy or a girl.


The good old days:
Your teenaged daughter wanting her ears pierced.

Today:
Your teenaged daughter wanting her tongue pierced, then split.


The good old days:
College dorms segregated by sex.

Today:
College classes encouraging sex.


The good old days:
Women looking for the right man to marry.

Today:
Women hopping in to bed with an abusive, addicted, unemployed jailbird.


The good old days:
A man marrying a woman because he got her pregnant.

Today:
A man griping for life that a woman should have gotten an abortion and trying to duck child support orders.


The good old days:
Waiting until being married to have kids.

Today:
Your kids are in the wedding party.


The good old days:
Stag films at bachelor parties.

Today:
Sex with the male stripper at bachelorette parties.


The good old days:
Trying to avoid that busy intersection on the drive home.

Today:
Trying to find a new route home because the entire freeway is jammed bumper to bumper every day.


The good old days:
Being concerned that you won’t understand people when traveling abroad.

Today:
Being concerned that you’ll get kidnapped and beheaded.


The good old days:
Being commended for using your gun to ward off a burglar.

Today:
Being arrested and sued for injuries to the rapist/robber who broke into your home.


The good old days:
Reading about a murderer being fried in the electric chair.

Today:
Reading about how a judge agrees that lethal injection is too cruel for a serial child rapist/murderer.


The good old days:
The rabbi, priest, minister, or reverend warns you to observe moral law.

Today:
You can’t tell if she even professes to believe in God.


The good old days:
Politicians quoting frequently from the Good Book.

Today:
Politicians think First and Second Illusions are books in the Torah.


The good old days:
Conspiracy theorists considered nuts.

Today:
People who don’t believe in conspiracy theories considered naive.


The good old days:
A cheeseburger as a treat.

Today:
A deep-fried bacon pastrami triple cheeseburger at least once a week.


The good old days:
The Supreme Court citing the U.S. Constitution in decisions.

Today:
The Supreme Court citing a Luxembourg ambassador’s off-hand comment at a cocktail party in decisions.


The good old days:
Jurors convicting someone they believe is guilty.

Today:
Jurors acquitting someone they’re sure is guilty because they can make money selling their story after the trial.


The good old days:
Murderers being shunned by society.

Today:
Murderers getting paid under the table for book and TV deals to talk about how they committed their crimes and got away with it.


The good old days:
Worrying about catching cold when out and about.

Today:
Worrying about catching the bird flu, flesh-eating bacteria, or Ebola.


The good old days:
Your immigrant neighbors becoming proud citizens, upstanding, productive members of society, and doing everything they can to fit in.

Today:
Your illegal alien neighbors, born 1000 miles south of the border, telling you that "you” “stole” “their” land, removing the U.S. flag and replacing it with a foreign flag and demanding you conform to their culture and pay for their social services and higher education as they send U.S. dollars back to Mexico.

California Governor Schwarzenegger wants me and other taxpayers in California to pay for health insurance for "all" children who happen to be in California.

Since 90% of children here already have health insurance coverage, what he's really calling for is for the government to force me to pay for health insurance for any children from Mexico, the rest of Latin America, or from anywhere else in the world (but mostly Mexico, when you look at the numbers) whose parents are successful at invading our country.

Yes, they're clogging the emergency rooms anyway, but the answer is not to accommodate them.  The answer is to DISCOURAGE THEM from invading in the first place, not encourage them.

I'm tired of this.  I'm tired of being forced to look after people who invade my country while people are waiting patiently to legally immigrate.

You've been hanging around Uncle Teddy too much, Arnold.

Why should we force people, at gunpoint (which is what taxes mean), to pay to take care of people simply because they were successful at invading our country?  Why not the people who stayed in their countries, who also lack health insurance?

An editorial in today’s Los Angeles Advocate… uh, I mean Times subtitles “Schwarzenegger’s Gay Marriage Misstep"


Yeah. 1) Everyone already has “marriage rights”.  They can choose whether or not they want to exercise them.  Just because someone does not want to participate does not obligate the rest of us to reorder our society and issue marriage licenses to parties missing one of the basic components of a marriage (one of the sexes).  2) The people of California voted to keep the legal definition of marriage in line with the natural definition of marriage.  The Times might as well have written “If only the Governor would have ignored the will of Californians and thousands of years of recorded human history... 3) Schwarzenegger didn’t bring about the two sexes.  The Times could have also written “If only Mother Nature wasn’t so bigoted...”

Notice they don't say we could avoid a court fight if the activists would stop trying to force radical change on the rest  of society and accept that the majority of people are willing to "live and let live," but they are not willing to deny the reality that marriage is something requiring the participation of both sexes.

We could all avoid a lot of court fights if we just gave up and let the loudest, most bullying activists to roll all over us.  We could avoid a lot of court fights by not opening a business in the first place (no employment discrimination or personal injury lawsuits).  So what?  We didn't pick this court fight.  You did.  It is disingenuous to now turn around and say "Gee, isn't it too bad that there is a court fight about this?"

Marriage licenses are for marriages, not for other arrangements.  Pet licenses are for pets, not cars.  Business licenses are for businesses, not pets.  Drivers licenses are for drivers, not bus riders.  You can call a car a pet, but it doesn’t make it so.  You can call pet a business, but it doesn’t make it so.  You can call a bur rider a driver, but it doesn’t make him so.  You can call two people of the same sex married, but it doesn’t make it so.  A marriage is different from other arrangements precisely because it brings together both sexes.  Most people recognize this.


Do you really think the activists will stop even if they are granted counterfeit marriage licenses?  I highly doubt it.  I’m sure something like state-funded “infertility” work-arounds will be next, because bigoted ol’ Mother Nature won’t let them conceive children like most both-sex couples can.


Okay, so if it isn’t really that big of a deal, why are you putting so much effort into this?


Translation: The people don’t buy these arrangements as marriage.


Don’t forget  - President Bill Clinton (D) signed it into law.


Sloppy, interchanging “gay” and “same-sex” marriage.  They aren’t necessarily the same thing.  Both terms are oxymorons, however.  You can call a square “circular” all you want, and you may desensitize us to it, but it doesn’t make it real.


See, their relationships are already the same legally in California, yet that isn’t enough.  They want to force society to “approve” of their counterfeiting of marriage.


Yeah, I’m sure the people who wrote the Constitutions of California and the U.S. really thought about this one.  They were all for legally recognizing that two men two women wanted to “share lives”.  They also, of course, thought of such relationships as marriage, no question.


How is a judge not being an activist if they order new law written, when legislators are tasked with the writing of law and the judiciary is there to interpret/apply the law?


You see, anyone who understands what marriage is and isn't is "irrational."

If enough bottled water purveyors got together want wanted to label their product as milk, the state would be making a mistake to do so, because even though it is liquid, it is not the same thing as milk because it lacks some of the ingredients of milk.  The water sellers might be hurt, or upset, or offended, or feel like second class citizens, and even write preachy sitcom episodes about the matter, but that is their problem, not the state's.  The state, through counties, issues marriage licenses as a representative of the people.  If the people do not want to change the terms of issuing the licenses, the state authorities do not have the moral authority to subvert their will.  Marriage is much more basic to our society than drivers licenses.  That's why we care.

Wanted: Presidential Candidate

Required Qualifications:

1. Believes in a higher power - an omniscient, judging authority and future state of rewards and punishments for actions in this life.

2. Has integrity, ethics, morality, and discipline as demonstrated in both professional and personal life.  Owns up to and has worked to correct mistakes.

3. Is a proven leader, manager, and appointer as demonstrated from previous experience.

4. Takes national security seriously, including control of borders/ports, and willing to use intelligence, covert operations, and military force to kill our enemies, break their things, and disrupt their threats to the U.S.

5. Recognizes that Islamofascism is incompatible with and a threat to Western civilization and the American way of life.

6. Recognizes Israel as beneficial to American interests.

7. Accepts the Constitution as the highest law of the land, not foreign documents, courts, personalities, organizations, or opinion polls; believes that the Constitution limits government, including the judiciary.

8. Believes in the sanctity and worth of individual human life from conception until natural death.

9. Will not force states to issue counterfeit marriage licenses or the Federal government to recognize non-marriage arrangements as marriage.


Preferred Qualities:

10. Has executive and foreign policy experience.

11. Will promote and support tax reforms that will move us away from Federal income taxes towards a system primarily consisting of user fees and tariffs, supplemented, if necessary, by “sales taxes”.

12. Will work to eliminate or reduce Federal government involvement in education, health care, business, and any activity not clearly stated as a Federal responsibility in the Constitution, instead encouraging voluntary, private action, and State and local involvement only where and when appropriate.

13. Will support easing the immigration process for those who demonstrate a desire to legally immigrate, become naturalized, and become law-abiding, productive, integrated members of American society who are loyal to our Constitution and our way of life.  In the event of an actual and detrimental labor shortage, will allow businesses to import temporary labor.

14. Promotes voluntary, proven conservation as opposed to using government force to force businesses and individuals to comply with the demands of alarmist activists.

15. Is effective at communicating and defending these principles.

16. Will not fall into the siren call of MSM praise for “bipartisanship”, “listening”, “international cooperation”, and “change” - which are all codewords for supporting Leftist causes - to the detriment of these principles.


Notice I do not mention race, ethnicity, age, appearance, education level, sex, religion, marital status, or even political party.  That’s because as long as the person is described above, I don’t care about those other things.

Of the current supposed frontrunners, is there anyone who meets #1-9?  Who meets #10?

Much of my blogging consists of rants about how something or other about what’s going on in our world is all wrong and how much worse the situation is going to get unless people wise up or start making better decisions.

As we face the new year, I want to pause to focus on the positive. In no particular order, here are some things about which we can be happy:

There are more great places to get news, information, analysis, and entertainment than ever before, so we don’t have to rely on the Left-leaning elitist legacy MSM.

Ethiopia is kicking Islamofascist butt.

We haven’t had a major terrorist attack in the homeland since 9/11.

Saddam the Genocidal Terrorist Tyrant is still out of power and has been condemned to death by his own people.

Iraq does not have a government that is developing WMD or playing huffing, puffing, or bluffing games with the U.N.

The Taliban is still out of power in Afghanistan.

Our ally Israel still exists.

Conservative women are beautiful.  Michelle Malkin...Mary Katharine Ham... need I say more?  If I looked like MKH - and was female - I’d do video blogs, too.  My wife (the most beautiful woman in the world, as far as I can tell) tends to be the “protective” type, so I’ll move on now before she requests that I not watch video clips found here anymore.

Dr. Laura, who wrote the Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands (thank you), has a new book out – The Proper Care and Feeding of Marriage.

The SCOTUS has not ordered states to issue counterfeit marriage licenses.

Space exploration and development continues with prominent U.S. participation.

The economy has been doing well and unemployment has been low.

We didn’t have a bad hurricane season this year despite doom-and-gloom predictions.

The Amazon jungle still exists, despite assertions during my childhood that it would be long gone by now.

We still have landfill space, despite assertions during my childhood that we would run out of space long before now.

We haven’t been annihilated in a nuclear war with Soviets, despite assertions... well, you know where this is going.

The U.S. is still the greatest nation on God’s green Earth.

I’m a U.S. citizen living in the U.S., with all of the freedoms, opportunities, and standard of living that the statistically typical U.S. citizen enjoys.

Most of all, God is in control.  Jesus Christ has already defeated sin and death, and someday, He’s going to enforce that victory in the most complete sense, and all who follow Him will be better off as a result.  Justice and righteousness will win out in the long run. Atheists and anyone who prefers not to follow God can take heart, because once that happens, we annoying Bible-thumpers won’t be bothering you any more.

I'm sure you can think of many other reasons we should be happy.

Personally, we’re expecting our first child, we’re not struggling financially, we’re saving for the future, I have a new, better job, all three of us are fairly healthy, and we have wonderful friends and family nearby.

It’s almost time for the far-Left of the Democrat Party to take control of Congress.  Together with President Bush, who sometimes fails to stick closely enough to conservatism, they’re planning to ignore the requests of most U.S. citizens and do everything they can to reward people who have illegally invaded this country, misappropriated public funds, services, and facilities, and committed identity theft - while doing nothing to secure our borders.  Their plan is to not only leave our borders wide open as a route to smuggle in contraband, WMD, terrorists, terrorist plots, and diseases, but to leave it wide open for the flood of additional invaders who are almost sure to pour across when they hear how the gravy train and citizenship is going to flow to the criminals who came before them.

Lovely.

You know, we can argue about Iraq and the fight against terror all day, but the gaping exposure of our open borders leaves a nagging doubt in my mind about how serious Bush is about preventing terrorist attacks here at home.  Is there something we don’t know?  Are you using some technology and supercovert operations to magically track and capture the terrorist and their weapons before they come across the wide-open border?

And while the illegal labor pressures wages downward, we’re now looking at increases in the Federal minimum wage.  Why not let people work for whatever amount to which they’ll consent?  Why keep raising the minimum wage?  Why threaten to harm the low unemployment numbers?  Is this one of the ways you get Big Labor to keep its fat mouth shut about the invaders?  Then again, why would Big Labor care if a worker was a citizen or immigrant, or an invader, as long as they can force dues out of anyone who simply wants to work... what do they care about the person’s legal status?

I just want to take this moment to again thank all of you people who normally would have voted for Republican candidates for Congress, but sat home or voted for someone else in November to “teach the GOP a lesson.”  Thanks.  Yeah, life is going to be so much more how you wanted it, right?

Here behind the Blue Curtain in California, Governor Schwarzenegger is calling for universal health care coverage, including for the illegal invaders.  Yes, there is still an “R” after his name, but these days it is followed by “INO”.  So, Federal moves will bring even more illegal invaders to us, and now we’re going to give them all health care coverage.  Great.  More and more, it is looking like it is time to flee the state, like so many of my friends have.

Guaranteed jobs for life, large sums of money if you think someone has looked at you funny, Federally-forced wage rates, universal health care coverage for life, free or subsidized education through college…yeah, I’m sure this is all Constitutional and exactly for what the founders of this country were aiming.  Socialist States of America.

What ever happened to taking responsibility for yourself?  Whatever happened to coming to an agreement with someone to swap goods, services, and cash per the conditions you two established without anyone else’s interference?  Whatever happened to relying on family or private charitable arrangements when times were tough instead of relying on the government to take money from strangers by force to make up for your misfortune or bad decisions?

It’s bad enough that were going to forced state and national socialism.  It is even worse that we continue to invite invaders into that system.

I'm soundling like such a downer these days!  I do believe there is a lot to be positive about.  Maybe I should write a few posts about that stuff.

Scammer e-mail addresses from spam e-mails sent to the address listed on this blog.  My goal is for their inboxes to fill up with messages from each other:

rose.max073@terra.es

mrs.maxwell01@yahoo.ca

saeedahmed055@yahoo.co.uk

bnl_paymentdesk@yahoo.co.uk

southernalabamapainters@mchsi.com

brian.capon1@btinternet.com

bcaponnat@terra.es

jameschuka4@virgilio.it

jameschuks_010@yahoo.de

mr.qinohaozhuos07@yahoo.com.hk

textilemills101@globalum.com

mr.qinohaozhuos07@yahoo.com.hk

securessl@usbank.com

bless_2@canada.com

jak1111a@yahoo.co.uk for

jak5a@yahoo.co.uk

mahi92lida@yahoo.fr

anderson_a@mail.net.mk

seejohn_808@yahoo.fr

joantailor2005@yahoo.co.uk

cry4help@walla.com

jameschuka2@virgilio.it

james_chuck010@yahoo.de

zumahfedricks@jmail.co.za

zzumah61@hotmail.com

zumah@jmail.co.za

fiduciary_sirdavidrex@hotmail.co.uk

lotteroffice@uklotterywinners.co.uk

fiduciary_sirdavidrex@hotmail.co.uk

joantailor2005@yahoo.co.uk

cry4help@walla.com

claimsagent_mcdannycole@yahoo.co.uk

mrphilhod@myway.com

mr_philhod8@hotmail.com

info_agyeman@yahoo.com

b_agyeman03@walla.com

(Edited to correct sleep-deprivation-related errors.)

Why are they against democracy?  They are against it because it is "secular" in the sense that it requires some tolerance for more than one faith.  The terrorist leaders maintain that jihad and rule by a priestly class is the only legitimate way to govern.

How do the governed know that these terrorist religious leaders have been chosen by the Almighty to lead them as their government?  Simply because they have the ability to motivate people to blow themselves up?

What if... what if...they haven't really been selected by the Almighty to be your government?  What if they are lying or delusional?  How do you know?  Maybe you think that, but are afraid to speak those thoughts or act on those thoughts because they are the experts at killing?

This type of radical "Islam" can't co-exist in a democratic state.  The way to defeat it is to get more of the people to doubt it, and the support they need to fend off the terrorism meant to literally kill or beat them into virtual slavery.

Jihadists... it is time to come into the modern era.  You don't have to give up Islam.  You don't have to give up your holy book.  You just have to stick to governing the people who really want to be governed by you, not EVERYONE who surrounds you.  We call that a cult.  They are allowed to exist by the rest of society as long as they don't get murderous or destructive.  Stop sending your children to blow themselves up.  The Almighty made life precious and the world a beautiful place.  Enjoy it.  Have your cult.  But leave state-governing to people who aren't savages and can walk down the same street as someone with a diferent faith and not feel the urge to kill them.  Besides, if your brand of Islam really is favored by the Almighty, surely peaceful efforts to persuade nonbelievers will be favored by Him, right?

Remember how abortion was going to end poverty, child abuse, oppression of women, and make every born child a wanted and healthy child?  Remember how it was going to make it so women wouldn’t marry abusive and/or deadbeat men, or have to drop out of school, or go into debt, or get injured or die from an abortion?

Gosh, all of these decades later, we’re living in a utopia now, thanks to having the legal right to rip apart our babies in the womb.  Abortion took care of everything!

I bring this up now for two reasons.

First, this is the time of the year when billions of people around the world celebrate the birth of a baby who went on to make all of the difference in the world.  He’s so gracious, he’ll even wash away the sins of those who use their medical training to kill babies, if they’ll repent and follow Him.

Secondly, yesterday I saw my first baby in an ultrasound for the third time.  We’re still in the first trimester, but there he or she was, with a face, waving hands, kicking legs, and apparently having the hiccups.  I could see his or her heart beating, and hear it, too.  We saw the heartbeat during the first ultrasound, but we knew there was a living human being inside my wife the moment the pregnancy test came back positive. No matter how small, no matter what the person inside my wife looked like at the time, he or she was still a human being with a complete set of human DNA, inside my wife, but distinct from my wife.

If wombs had windows, abortion would definitely be extremely rare.

Does anyone with any knowledge of history really believe that the men who wrote and voted to adopt the Eight Amendment would agree that lethal injection is "cruel and unusual punishment"?

No.

Just think of how people were punished for their crimes in those days.

So this means that there are are judges who think the words of the Constitution don't really mean anything... except what they think they should mean based on their feelings and opinions.  The meaning of the Constitution should therefor change, year by year, based on the tastes of the day.  That is dangerous thinking that leaves us vulnerable to oppression.