On this fifth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, I'd like to think America and, indeed, the world, is a safer place. I'd like to think that the country is still as united against terrorism and Islamic facism today as it was in the aftermath of that fateful day. I'd like to think that the bleeding hearts in this country have pulled their heads out of the sand and see clearly the threats posed by the jihadists and Iran, the terrorist state run by a maniacal dictator that reminds us of another madman that created such mayhem 70 years ago.
Yes, I'd like to think these things but I can't. Instead, I see an America divided along partisan lines. I see one party so blinded by hate of the man it could not beat in two elections that it has fomented an insurgency of its own, attacking the president wherever and whenever it can. Rather than heal, it seeks to divide. Rather than fight those who want only the destruction of us and Israel, it fights to regain its one-time hold on the seats of government, and security and fate of the world be damned. Rather than see the opportunity of accomplishment in Iraq and the Iranian threat to international peace and security, it sees only a way to attack President Bush, painting on him a small mustache and swastikas on his sleeves.
I also see a world blinded by resentment and jealousy toward the U.S., and it too hates President Bush, even going so far as to make a mockumentary entitled, "Death of a President."
Yes, I see all this, and I fear that we haven't learned anything yet. I fear it'll take another 9/11 or worse to wake up the leftists in this country. I fear the Harry Reids, Nancy Pelosis and Barbara Boxers of the world will gain control of this country's wheel and steer us toward an unprecedented disaster and a much more dangerous world for our children and grandchildren.
Actually, I just fear.
Monday, September 11, 2006
Monday, July 03, 2006
Another cross to bear ...
Like water eroding a hillside to the point where the house that sits atop the hill slides into the ravine below, the trickle of human secularism so prevalent in the political left is eroding the Christian foundation that was the underpinning of the birth of this great nation in the 18th and 19th centuries. Here is another example:
"In San Diego, the Mount Soledad cross was dedicated in 1954 as a memorial to Korean War veterans, and a private association maintains a veterans memorial on the land surrounding it.
Mayor Jerry Sanders has argued that the cross, sitting atop Mount Soledad in La Jolla, is an integral part of the memorial and deserves the same exemptions to government-maintained religious symbols as those granted to other war monuments.
In May, U.S. District Court Judge Gordon Thompson Jr., ordered the city to take down the 29-foot cross before Aug. 2 or pay daily fines of $5,000.
Thompson's ruling, which he described as "long overdue," found the cross to be an unconstitutional display of government preference of one religion over another."
Why is such a fuss made over Christian symbols? Could it be that they remind the secularists that there are absolute rights and wrongs and that they may indeed be sinners in need of a savior? If they can rid the country of Christian symbols, maybe the religious base will erode and the whole religion -- at least in this country -- will become of little consequence and then they all can live as they please, full of sin and free of guilt as there would be nothing left to prick their consciences.
May God forbid that that happens. It boggles my mind that so many feel threatened by Christianity. Heaven forbid that people should want to live peacefully side by side, loving each other and God openly, the way we originally were intended to.
It's time for the Christians to take a stand. Christians also have an inalienable right to life without persecution, liberty to express their faith publicly, and to pursue happiness through a Godly lifestyle.
"In San Diego, the Mount Soledad cross was dedicated in 1954 as a memorial to Korean War veterans, and a private association maintains a veterans memorial on the land surrounding it.
Mayor Jerry Sanders has argued that the cross, sitting atop Mount Soledad in La Jolla, is an integral part of the memorial and deserves the same exemptions to government-maintained religious symbols as those granted to other war monuments.
In May, U.S. District Court Judge Gordon Thompson Jr., ordered the city to take down the 29-foot cross before Aug. 2 or pay daily fines of $5,000.
Thompson's ruling, which he described as "long overdue," found the cross to be an unconstitutional display of government preference of one religion over another."
Why is such a fuss made over Christian symbols? Could it be that they remind the secularists that there are absolute rights and wrongs and that they may indeed be sinners in need of a savior? If they can rid the country of Christian symbols, maybe the religious base will erode and the whole religion -- at least in this country -- will become of little consequence and then they all can live as they please, full of sin and free of guilt as there would be nothing left to prick their consciences.
May God forbid that that happens. It boggles my mind that so many feel threatened by Christianity. Heaven forbid that people should want to live peacefully side by side, loving each other and God openly, the way we originally were intended to.
It's time for the Christians to take a stand. Christians also have an inalienable right to life without persecution, liberty to express their faith publicly, and to pursue happiness through a Godly lifestyle.
Sunday, April 30, 2006
The United States of ... Mexico?
It took more than 100 years, but Mexico is finally trying to reclaim part of the land taken by the U.S., and it is doing it without firing a shot -- well, at least so far. Mexico is doing it by taking advantage of our porous borders and flooding our country with illegal immigrants who are uninsured and hike up our insurance rates and medical costs by making American taxpayers pay for them when they get sick or into an accident.
They want all the benefits of American citizens but are shouldering none of the taxpayer burden, they want to be granted amnesty and be placed ahead of other immigrants who are working through the laws of the land to become legalized citizens, yet many refuse to even learn English.
Liberals beat the drums for them, insisting we offer them and/or their children bilingual education. This is just plain ridiculous. If they want to be in America, let them come here legally, learn our language and obey our laws. Otherwise, go back home.
But they continue to stream across the borders -- along with who knows how many terrorists -- while our distinguished Congress debates how to best secure our borders and absorb the millions who have already come into the U.S. Whatever compromise these idiots devise, you can be sure it won't solve the problem and will have the teeth of a 100-year-old woman without dentures.
Actually, there's an easy way to solve the problem and secure the borders. Let the Second American Revolution include not just the United States, but Mexico, too. Once we take over that country, they ALL become U.S. citizens and Mexico's southern borders would be a heck of a lot easier to protect than its northern ones.
A Voice in the Wilderness
They want all the benefits of American citizens but are shouldering none of the taxpayer burden, they want to be granted amnesty and be placed ahead of other immigrants who are working through the laws of the land to become legalized citizens, yet many refuse to even learn English.
Liberals beat the drums for them, insisting we offer them and/or their children bilingual education. This is just plain ridiculous. If they want to be in America, let them come here legally, learn our language and obey our laws. Otherwise, go back home.
But they continue to stream across the borders -- along with who knows how many terrorists -- while our distinguished Congress debates how to best secure our borders and absorb the millions who have already come into the U.S. Whatever compromise these idiots devise, you can be sure it won't solve the problem and will have the teeth of a 100-year-old woman without dentures.
Actually, there's an easy way to solve the problem and secure the borders. Let the Second American Revolution include not just the United States, but Mexico, too. Once we take over that country, they ALL become U.S. citizens and Mexico's southern borders would be a heck of a lot easier to protect than its northern ones.
A Voice in the Wilderness
Saturday, January 28, 2006
Be careful what you ask for ...
Well, I hope the bleeding-heart liberals are happy. Give the Palestinians a promise of their own homeland and free elections and -- surprise! -- they put the militant-extremist group Hamas in power, the same group that is sworn to nothing less than the extermination of the state of Israel. Ariel Sharon must have had a premonition this was going to happen and that's what gave him his stroke.
There are two possible solutions to this whole mess -- the Palestinians, Iran and Syria -- but neither is socially or politically acceptable. We could just tell Israel to take care of the situation militarily and turn our heads the other way. Then, if the Muslim countries get involved, we have Israel's back. Or, we could just tell the militant countries that any aggression will be met with a nuclear response. The bet here is that all it would take is the threat of nukes and they would back down. After all, we're the only country on earth that has used the nuclear option before and it has to be in their minds that we just might be crazy enough to do it again.
Either way, problem solved.
There are two possible solutions to this whole mess -- the Palestinians, Iran and Syria -- but neither is socially or politically acceptable. We could just tell Israel to take care of the situation militarily and turn our heads the other way. Then, if the Muslim countries get involved, we have Israel's back. Or, we could just tell the militant countries that any aggression will be met with a nuclear response. The bet here is that all it would take is the threat of nukes and they would back down. After all, we're the only country on earth that has used the nuclear option before and it has to be in their minds that we just might be crazy enough to do it again.
Either way, problem solved.
Thursday, December 22, 2005
Reduce the fat
The Senate yesterday approved a bill -- barely -- that would reduce the national debt $40 billion by making changes in Medicare and Medicaid, among other programs. While changes in these programs can work to reduce the deficit, why doesn't Congress first cut the salaries and pensions for its members and eliminate other waste that is rampant throughout the gigantic federal bureaucracy? Then, maybe cuts elsewhere will be more palatable to everyone.
Second American Revolution
Two hundred and twenty-nine years ago, our Founding Fathers, speaking for thirteen disgruntled colonies shackled by taxation without representation, penned these famous words in the Declaration of Independence:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Today, we Americans are governed by an out-of-touch Congress, which pays lip service to helping the poor, elderly, middle-class, minorities, disabled and disenfranchised but in actuality cares only about protecting the individual wealth and tenure of its members. Legislators, for the most part, legislate not to protect our freedoms but rather to further their own agendas -- i.e., do what is necessary to get re-elected so they can continue earning their fat salaries and pensions.
But something is wrong when legislators can funnel their wealth overseas and thereby avoid huge tax bills, then tell those who are getting social security or SSI disability that there is a limit they can make before they begin to lose their benefits. Would it really be wrong for a person on SSI to get $1,000 a month from the government and to earn another $1,500 a month on their own? That would amount to $30,000 a year -- and it really might not even be that much after Uncle Sam taxes the $18,000 earned income -- a figure that is far below the comparatively fat salaries earned by legislators. According to an article in the San Francisco Chronicle, "Lawmakers who left Congress last January are receiving pensions ranging from as little as $14,165 a year for six years' service to as much as $114,102 a year for more than 30 years' service." ... But no, the cap on how much a person can make before they begin losing their benefits is $620. So, unless that person can earn at least $2,600 a month (to match the $1,500+620+taxes), they would be better off not working at all and just live off the taxpayers. Who does that hurt? The rich? ... No, it hurts the middle class and the poor.
This is just one inequity heaped upon us by a government that restricts our freedoms more and more every year. It is time to speak out against this tyranny. It is time to voice our displeasures, no matter which side of the aisle we are on! It is time for another revolution!!! But a Second Revolution should be one waged not with the sword but with the tools furnished us by our Founding Fathers. We need to work within the system, to speak up, to dissent, to protest, to write emails and letters, run for office ourselves, to turn up the heat collectively on our representatives, to use the power of our votes to upset the status quo.
So rise up, speak up and TAKE ACTION!!!
A Voice in the Wilderness
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Today, we Americans are governed by an out-of-touch Congress, which pays lip service to helping the poor, elderly, middle-class, minorities, disabled and disenfranchised but in actuality cares only about protecting the individual wealth and tenure of its members. Legislators, for the most part, legislate not to protect our freedoms but rather to further their own agendas -- i.e., do what is necessary to get re-elected so they can continue earning their fat salaries and pensions.
But something is wrong when legislators can funnel their wealth overseas and thereby avoid huge tax bills, then tell those who are getting social security or SSI disability that there is a limit they can make before they begin to lose their benefits. Would it really be wrong for a person on SSI to get $1,000 a month from the government and to earn another $1,500 a month on their own? That would amount to $30,000 a year -- and it really might not even be that much after Uncle Sam taxes the $18,000 earned income -- a figure that is far below the comparatively fat salaries earned by legislators. According to an article in the San Francisco Chronicle, "Lawmakers who left Congress last January are receiving pensions ranging from as little as $14,165 a year for six years' service to as much as $114,102 a year for more than 30 years' service." ... But no, the cap on how much a person can make before they begin losing their benefits is $620. So, unless that person can earn at least $2,600 a month (to match the $1,500+620+taxes), they would be better off not working at all and just live off the taxpayers. Who does that hurt? The rich? ... No, it hurts the middle class and the poor.
This is just one inequity heaped upon us by a government that restricts our freedoms more and more every year. It is time to speak out against this tyranny. It is time to voice our displeasures, no matter which side of the aisle we are on! It is time for another revolution!!! But a Second Revolution should be one waged not with the sword but with the tools furnished us by our Founding Fathers. We need to work within the system, to speak up, to dissent, to protest, to write emails and letters, run for office ourselves, to turn up the heat collectively on our representatives, to use the power of our votes to upset the status quo.
So rise up, speak up and TAKE ACTION!!!
A Voice in the Wilderness
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)