Fight The Good Fight

Ack! Who hijacked my church???

2005-01-27T23:40:00.000-08:00

Today I finally got around to writing an e-mail to the author of this article from the official United Church of Christ site. (Yeah, I'm UCC. Wanna make something of it? ;o)) I've been meaning to write this all week, but tonight was the first night I could actually do it. I know, I'm pathetic. :o/ Still, this is a letter I felt I needed to write, and subsequently share with whomever hasn't given up on reading this blog that hardly ever posts. :o)

Hello there! I am a member of [church name and location removed to protect my congregation from being associated with me ;o)] (not far from St. Louis, MO). I am writing you in regard to the January 24th article you wrote for ucc.org, in which you took Dr. James Dobson to task over the recent Spongebob Squarepants controversy.

I'm afraid I must take issue with your characterization of Dr. Dobson's original statements. In your article, you state "...James C. Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, [accused] that the popular SpongeBob and other well-known cartoon characters are crossing 'a moral line' by stressing tolerance in a national We Are Family Foundation-sponsored video that will be distributed to U.S. schools on March 11, 2005." On the contrary, he wasn't "accusing" any of the fictional characters in the video of anything (it would be ridiculous to accuse a cartoon character of wrongdoing), nor was he taking issue with "stressing tolerance" per se.

Rather, as Dobson later clarified, "...while the video is harmless on its own, I believe the agenda behind it is sinister. My brief comments at the FRC gathering were intended to express concern not about SpongeBob or Big Bird or any of their other cartoon friends, but about the way in which those childhood symbols are apparently being hijacked to promote an agenda that involves teaching homosexual propaganda to children."

In other words, he wasn't taking issue with Spongebob, or with the video's message of tolerance, but instead he was taking issue with the cartoon characters and the benign message of tolerance being used to legitemize the We Are Family Foundation itself, and the other, less-benign messages it has promoted. As Dobson wrote, "I want to be clear: the We Are Family Foundation — the organization that sponsored the video featuring SpongeBob and the other characters was, until this flap occurred, making available a variety of explicitly pro-homosexual materials on its Web site. It has since endeavored to hide that fact (more on this later), but my concerns are as legitimate today as they were when I first expressed them in January."

I recognize that there is a tension between loving the sinner and hating his sin, and accepting a person and condoning his actions. Further, it is difficult to work out the balance between "accepting a person as they are" and "believers conforming to the image of Christ". I fully believe that it is important to love people unconditionally, and to accept all who seek Christ into our church unreservedly. Further, I would say that Doctor Dobson agrees with me: "Let me say it again for emphasis: Every individual is entitled to respect and human dignity, including those with whom we disagree strongly. The problem is not with acceptance or kindness, certainly. But kids should not be taught that homosexuality is just another "lifestyle," or that it is morally equivalent to heterosexuality. Scripture teaches that all overt sexual activity outside the bonds of marriage is sinful and harmful. Children should not be taught otherwise by their teachers, and certainly not if their parents are unaware of the instruction."

Homosexuality is not a worse sin than any others in the eyes of God, and certainly isn't an "unforgivable sin". That being said, we must not, in the name of tolerating the individual, pretend that sin isn't sin. After all, we don't say "you can be in Christ and continue unrepentently lying, or coveting, or stealing, or committing adultery". We aren't doing our Christian friends coming from a homosexual lifestyle any favors by pretending that calling homosexuality a sin is "a Leviticus thing". And we certainly aren't doing our Church any favors by jumping on the bandwagon of lambasting a fellow Christian who spoke out from concern for our nation's children, especially when in doing so we seem to be attempting to promote our own agenda (e.g. statements like "Meanwhile, the UCC's recently released 30-second paid television commercial - produced to underscore the denomination's belief that Jesus didn't turn anyone away - has been rejected by two major television networks for being 'too controversial.'"). That ends up just sounding like sour grapes and inter-denominational sniping, which undercuts our message of tolerance and diversity of ideas, doesn't it?

In closing, I would like to say that your article disappointed me. Not only did you seem to be jumping on the dogpile as a means of tooting our UCC horn, but I didn't believe it was up to professional standards. The article was high on innuendo, and low on fact-checking and point-supporting (Dr. Dobson's original statements and his rebuttals to the press have been readily available on the Web all week long). I don't say these things out of anger or mean-spiritedness, but rather in a spirit of constructive criticism. You seem to have a God-given talent for writing. My only wish is that you would hone that gift, and use it in the spirit of truth.

Thank you so much for your time!

p.s. I forgot to ask: in your article, you state that Dobson espouses "often-outrageous viewpoints". Could you please delineate some of his viewpoints that you find particularly outrageous? I'm curious to see which ones bothered you the most. After all, Jesus said a lot of things whch people in the 1st Century found (and for that matter, find today) "outrageous". Being "outrageous" does not immediately disqualify a statement from being true, is all I'm saying. :o)

p.p.s. All quotes from Dr. Dobson were taken from this site: http://www.family.org/docstudy/newsletters/a0035339.cfm"

Yikes, it has been awhile...

2004-12-21T20:31:00.000-08:00

...since I last posted. And sadly, I still don't have anything I really feel like blogging about. Still, I should blog something, so...

Happy Decemberween from Los Bros Chaps!!! :oD

More blogging to come as I feel like it.

Sorry Libs Gave Me This Idea

2004-11-11T21:31:00.000-08:00

Apparently, there are a bunch of Kerry supporters who feel the need to apologize to the rest of the world for their inability to "re-defeat Bush" in the recent election. (Hat tip to Jim Treacher, via IMAO.)

Which is fine, really. They need to get their collective hissy fits out of their systems, and this is a fairly harmless way to do so. Sure, it speaks volumes of the elitism, smugness, and self-importance of these people that they took it upon themselves to apologize to the World as a whole on behalf of us cretinous, Bible-thumping fools who just weren't smart enough to support John Kerry, but what the hey. If this is in any way cathartic to these folks, more power to 'em.

And besides, it inspired me to make an apology pic of my own. Enjoy, won't you?

Edit: the pic is big enough to throw my blog's format off. Blah. Okay, putting it up as a link now.

Click here to see!!!

Conservative, Not (Necessarily) Republican

2004-11-10T15:48:00.000-08:00

Jonah Goldberg has a good piece on NRO today that pretty well matches the way I look at things. In it, he identifies himself as a political Conservative first, and a supporter of Republicans only inasmuch as they support conservative policies and principles.

This is where I've been coming from for about 12 years now. Like Goldberg, I'd like to see Democratic candidates move toward the center and espouse more conservative positions than they currently do (such as on the issues of gun control, the sanctity of life, and national security, among others). I'm not saying that I expect all candidates to have the same cookie-cutter positions on these issues; after all, not everyone within the same political philosophy agrees 100% on what the correct position is.

However, it shouldn't be the case that these issues polarize the parties to the degree that they do. After all, there are a lot of people who identify themselves as Democrats who are pro-gun, pro-life, pro-defense types, but who are also pro-union. Shouldn't there be room within the "official" party structure for candidates who better reflect the positions of constituencies comprised of such people?

Mind you, I'm not pro-union, but my Dad is, and so are a lot of people in the area in which I live. And in 4 out of 5 cases, these people will vote for a Democrat every time, even if they are conservative on "social" issues, just because "Democrats are for the working man". Sure, you can argue that such people ought to be educated on the economic harm that a lot of modern labor unions do. Until they come to that conclusion themselves, though, shouldn't they be able to vote for a candidate of their preferred party without compromising their principles?

Yes, I realize that such a move on the part of Democrats would result in more Democrats being elected. This, in my opinion, is a good thing; not so much because I'm pro-Democrat as I am concerned about what happens to what will likely happen to the Republican party if they don't have viable competition: stagnation and an inevitable creep towards the Left.

I'd much rather see the continued championing of Conservative ideas in our government than I would see the Republicans set up a dynasty. Yes, Republicans espouse positions congruent with my own far more often than Democrats do. However, I'll vote for a Zell Miller long before I vote for a Lincoln Chaffee or an Olympia Snowe. Conservatism is much more important to me than Party.

Keyes Projected to Lose in Illinois

2004-11-02T17:53:00.000-08:00

According to story posted on citizenlink.org, Alan Keyes will probably lose to Barack Obama by a large margin. Unfortunately, Keyes came off as a carpetbagger who moved to Illinois solely for the purpose of running against Obama, and didn't have much time to establish himself as anything other than a Republican alternative to Obama. I don't know if he would have done better if he would have had the opportunity to establish what he stands for to the voters of Illinois, but it certainly couldn't have hurt his election bid.

Oh well, better luck next time, IL GOP.

UPDATE (12:16 AM, Wed. 11/3)
It's over, Obama has definitively won. Now it's time for the IL GOP to get serious and develop some candidates that have a chance of winning. :o/

Back From The (Blog) Dead

2004-11-02T15:22:00.000-08:00

Hello, everyone. Yes, I know I've been gone for something like a month. I am sincerely sorry for neglecting you all, but this past month has been quite busy, and I've been generally burned out on things political.

Nonetheless...

Please do the same. You still have time, and your vote defintely counts!!! I would recommend you vote for Bush, mind you, but by all means vote your conscience. :o)

Are We Living In A Climate Of Fear?

2004-10-07T20:46:00.000-07:00

Yes, another re-post of a Chaos Central entry. I hate to do this without putting up more original content here, but yeesh, it's been since last Monday since I posted anything. It's a wonder I have any readers at all!! :o(

Anyway, here it is. To all of my faithful readers, thank you for your patronage!!! I'm trying to get inspired to write more stuff for here. Please bear with me!!! :o)

Stanley Kurts wrote an interesting article that appears on National Review Online today. In it, he recounts how he posted a question on NRO's "The Corner" blog: is the phenomenon of vandalism and/or threat to homes and vehicles that display Bush/Cheney '04 stickers really all that common?

There is a climate of fear. Again and again, Corner readers say they've been scared off of posting bumper stickers by visions of having their cars keyed or their windows smashed. A typical comment: "Putting a Bush-Cheney sticker on my car would be like adding a bulls-eye that says, 'Please vandalize my truck.'" A reader from Arlington, Va., who lives just a few blocks from national Bush-Cheney headquarters, says he was not afraid to use bumper stickers in 1996 or 2000, but wouldn't do so this year. Bush lawn signs are feared, not only as an invitation to vandalism, but because they might permanently alienate neighbors. A man whose wife was handicapped and dependent on neighbors in case of emergency was wary of starting a neighborhood "war" with a sign. This was a common worry among Bush supporters, even in less dire circumstances."

Kurtz concludes that there is a certain degree of threat out there. And frankly, I don't doubt it's true, having seen firsthand the type of intimidation that labor unions can exert not only on members, but on the communities they work in. However, I haven't personally seen signs stolen/burnt/defaced, etc., and I haven't seen cars with Bush/Cheney stickers keyed or otherwise vandalized, either. Mind you, that may be more a function of my living in the midwest than anything else.

How about you, have you seen evidence of this phenomenon firsthand? I'm interested to get some perspective from other areas of the country.

More Evidence That California Is Insane

2004-09-27T20:34:00.000-07:00

Okay, this is a re-post of an editorial I posted today on Chaos Central. I figured I should put up some sort of update, given that the lovely and gracious La Shawn Barber has seen fit to not only link me, but to point out said link. Besides, this is a topic about which I definitely have strong feelings.

I followed a link on Michelle Malkin's site that details how Oakland city officials have caved in to demands by wrong-headed Latino activists who foolishly think that illegal immigrants have the right to live in this country.

"Oakland police officers have stopped setting up roadblocks to check whether drivers are under the influence because of a rash of complaints from the Latino community and City Council President Ignacio De La Fuente.

The checkpoints, which allow officers to demand licenses and proof of insurance, are an effective way to get drunken drivers off Oakland's streets, city leaders agree. But the checks also have ensnared dozens of illegal immigrants who are not licensed to drive yet otherwise obey the law."

Umm, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the fact that these are illegal immigrants indicate that these people don't "otherwise obey the law"??? Sure, they might not be overtly stealing, murdering, or committing other acts of mayhem, but their very presence in this country breaks the law.

"'These checkpoints make people's lives miserable, not make them safer,' said Jesus Rodriguez of Oakland Community Organizations, which filed most of the complaints about the checkpoints. 'I've watched while the police have towed away cars (full) of groceries, leaving children crying on the sidewalk.'"

Boo hoo, Mr. Rodriguez. You're breakin' my friggin' heart. It doesn't change the fact that the people involved were living in this country illegally.

"While officers have some discretion, the cars of unlicensed drivers are usually towed. To get their cars back, owners must pay $125, plus any storage fees. That is a significant burden to many illegal immigrants, Rodriguez said."

Again, boo friggin' hoo. What about the tremendous burden illegal immigrants put on our healthcare system? Not to mention the tremendous financial burden they put on the welfare system. And it totally ignores the point that I've made before, and will make again: they're illegal immigrants; they're not supposed to be in this country.

Call me hard-hearted, but I don't have any sympathy for illegal immigrants whatsoever. The acceptance of illegals in this country is an affront to everyone who went to the trouble to immigrate to America legally. They are not citizens of this country, and do not deserve to be treated as such. End of story.

The thing that scares me in all of this is that yahoos like Rodriguez can publicly demand "rights" for illegal immigrants, and no one calls them on the fact that he's talking about people who according to existing law should be immediately deported. Why does it scare me? If it can happen in California, it can happen here. And I fear it'll happen sooner, rather than later.

Resigned To My Fate

2004-09-23T21:07:00.000-07:00

Or maybe it's more like resigned to my laziness :o/

Yeah, anyway, it seems that I just can't bring myself to update more than twice a week anymore. I just don't have the energy to come up with a good entry when I get home lately. Still, I guess it beats updating once every two weeks.

Nothing of interest here really, except for Rush skewering Kerry over the Dem presidential hopeful(a hopeless hopeful, at that)'s crapping all over Prime Minister Iyad Allawi's performance as leader of the recently-liberated Iraq. Oh sure, Kerry meant it as a criticism of Bush, but as Rush points out you can't use the situation in Iraq as a means of bashing one of the involved parties without bashing all of the involved parties. Sheesh, it's like Kerry doesn't even want to win anymore.

Also of note: I've become a contributor to Chaos Faction. My good blog-buddy Chaos Overlord has revamped his site and opened it up for submissions. He's not only looking for political opinion, but also for movie and music reviews, technology news, and creative writing submissions! This is cool, cool stuff in the making, my friends. Check it out, and join the Faction! :o)

Memo To Kerry Supporters:

2004-09-17T20:41:00.000-07:00

Boneheaded stunts like this aren't going to convince many people to vote for your guy.

In case you somehow missed this story, some union thugs harrassed a man and his children who were showing support for President Bush at a John Kerry rally. One of the thugs grabbed the sign away from the little girl and ripped it to shreds, while the rest of the group jeered and tormented the already crying child. Some of these Kerry supporters are real nice folks, huh? :o/

It's the little details that speak volumes about the moment captured in the picture: the self-satisfied sneer on the smarmy jerk on the left (who still has pieces of the sign clutched in his hand), the look of terror and sadness on the face of the little girl, the look of barely-contained anger on the father's face, the look of not-really-restrained amusement on the faces of the other thugs, the way the doofus in the back is holding his Kerry/Edwards sign upside-down, and best of all in my book, the look on the face of the little girl's big brother (on the far right of the picture) which seems to say to the dude who stole his sister's sign, "If I were ten years older and two feet taller, you'd be eating the pieces of that sign, punkass!".

This is a powerful image. Pass it on to a friend who doesn't believe this kind of thing goes on, please.

(Props and what-whats to Steve H. for the heads-up.)

Rather Silly

2004-09-14T20:41:00.000-07:00

"They probably shot him up with something," James Carville declared.
"They got that poor man in the twilight of his career and just used him," the "Ragin' Cajun" insisted. "They said, 'Look, go up there and say this,' and they handed him a bunch of documents."

Yeah, I know Insano was talking about Zell Miller. But you know, it's oh so much funnier to imagine he was talking about CBS and/or the Democrats drugging this turkey:

Yeah, I know it's silly. But it's an update, isn't it? :o) Besides, I think he does look drugged in that picture.

Ten Days Later...

2004-09-10T23:11:00.000-07:00

Yeah, so much for "tomorrow". Or the next day. Or the next week, for that matter. What can I say, busyness, tiredness, and apathy have conspired to make me just a blog replier (when I manage to do that), rather than a full blogger.

But then this article caught my attention (props and what-whats to Sherry for the heads-up). It's an article by an organization called freemuslims.org that echoes what I've been saying for a long time in regard to Muslims in the War on Terror: Moderate Muslims need to own up to their complicity with regard to atrocities committed in the name of Islam (in the form of silence, which is seen, rightly or wrongly, by non-Muslims as tacit approval of those acts):

Will Muslims wake up before it is too late? Or will we continue blaming the Jews and an imaginary Jewish conspiracy? The blaming of all Muslim problems on Jews is a cancer that is destroying Muslim society from within and it must stop.

Muslims must look inward and put a stop to many of our religious leaders who spend most of their sermons teaching hatred, intolerance and violent jihad. We should not be afraid to admit that as Muslims we have a problem with violent extremism. We should not be afraid to admit that so many of our religious leaders belong behind bars and not behind a pulpit.

Only moderate Muslims can challenge and defeat extremist Muslims. We can no longer afford to be silent. If we remain silent to the extremism within our community then we should not expect anyone to listen to us when we complain of stereotyping and discrimination by non-Muslims; we should not be surprised when the world treats all of us as terrorists; we should not be surprised when we are profiled at airports.

It's certainly gratifying to read this. Does it represent the majoritarian view of mainstream Muslims? I pray it does. If not, we may well be facing the beginnings of an extremely bloody religious war, with non-Muslim nations banning Islam as a means of self-defense, and both sides striving to convert the other at gunpoint.

Otherwise level-headed people I know are talking about not only the possibility of such a war, but about how inevitable it seems. Historical perspective reminds me that nuclear war between America and the USSR seemed inevitable to some in the 80s, and that turned out all right, by the grace of God... but still, it's scary to contemplate, especially when I look at my nieces and nephews, and think ahead to the children that I hope someday to father with the woman I love.

Heavenly Father, I implore you to awake the moderate Muslims to the danger Islamofascists pose to everyone, including them, that they might stand up and fight against the terrorists. It's the third anniversary of 9/11, Father, and it looks from here like we're on the brink of terrible, bloody war on a global level, that won't end unless either all Muslims or all non-Muslims are wiped out. Please, Lord, I ask you to have mercy upon us mortals in spite of our folly, and for the murderous thugs who kill in the name of Islam to be dealt swift-yet-thorough justice. And yet, in all of this let not my will, but your will be done, Father. I pray these things in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, Amen.

Say a few prayers of your own, please.

I'm Baaaaaaaack!

2004-08-30T20:52:00.000-07:00

Yes, I've been on hiatus, and no, I didn't have the common decency to make a post to the effect that I was going to be. What did you expect? White men are supposed to be the seat of eVil in any given civilization, so I figured I should act the part. :o/

Seriously, things have been way busy (still!), and I haven't seen much I've felt like commenting on, at least nothing that other people hadn't already posted about better than I likely could.

Until today, that is. Hoo boy, there sure have been some doozies (and a few to cheer about, too)...

Exhibit One: The Smell of Moonbat Fear
"'I'm scared. I'm f***ing scared out of my pants right now, and if you're not, wake up.' The actress Rosie Perez was pouring out her heart Saturday night to a crowd of artists, performers, activists, and partygoers gathered at the Chelsea nightclub Crobar." (From Byron York's latest piece on NRO)
What is Rosie scared of? Who knows? Apparently, she never actually said. Maybe she's a-scared that if she listens to Bush speak much more she'll start pronouncing it "nukular". As for me, I'm scared that there are actually people who will base their decision on who to vote for in November based on the semicoherent ramblings of Perez and others of her profession (that is, celebrity).

Others, for example, like Chevy Chase. "'This guy Bush makes Barry Goldwater look like Pollyanna,' said comedian Chevy Chase. 'He's frightening. He's scaring the crap out of me.'" That's a helluva lot of fear, you know. Can someone tell me why anyone is listening to this feeb? He hasn't been funny for at least 10 years, and if we the viewing public were to be really honest with ourselves, we'd admit that it's really been more like 25. Here's an exchange of dialogue I'd love to hear, featuring Mr. Chase and the object of his fears:

Chevy Chase: Good evening, scary man. I'm Chevy Chase, and you're not.
President Bush: Hello there, has-been moonbat. I'm relevant, and you're not.

Exhibit Two: We're The Party Of Free Speech, Now Shutup!!

John Kerry's daughter Alexandra uses her index finger to shush people who expressed disapproval of her and her message at the MTV Music Awards on Sunday.

Donald Rumsfeld responds with a finger of his own. (The man speaks for us all!!! :oD)

Exhibit Three: Ronald Reagan Rocks!
Here's some lyrics from a fun little song to piss off the Leftists in your life (shoutout to Jay Nordlinger for the heads-up):

She had hair under her arms
And hair on both her legs
And her hate for you was never-ending
She was socially aware, yes
And I really couldn't care less
But her chest kept me pretending
She always said that she wished you were dead
And I nodded so she'd shut up and hop into bed
But that's the part that I'm sorry for now
Because I love you more than I loved her anyhow

Ronald Reagan
Please forgive me
Too dumb to see
What you were trying to give me

Ronald Reagan
You showed me this land's mine
They said you were living
In your own B-movie
But when the Wall fell
That's not what it looked like to me
Ronald Reagan
You showed me this land's fine

Check out the rest at ronaldreaganrocks.com, please. It's the right thing to do, and the rockin' way to do it! :o)

Okay, that's enough for tonight. More tomorrow, provided the news stays as fun as it was today. :o)

Mark Krikorian on Immigration

2004-08-18T18:56:00.000-07:00

Mark Krikorian wrote a good piece for NRO today. I'm honestly surprised that Michelle Malkin hadn't mentioned it. Oh well, she's been a busy blogger today. :o)

Anyway, Mr. Krikorian says that the new border patrol powers aren't all they're cracked up to be; that they're merely a political gesure. As he sums up:

The new border-patrol powers aren't a bad thing — they're just ridiculously overdue and inadequate, offered almost with apologies and only in response to political pressure. I'd have a lot more confidence in the federal government's commitment to protecting my children's lives if these measures had been put in place on September 12, 2001 — or, better yet, on September 10 — and if they were part of a comprehensive, unfettered effort to gain control over a chaotic immigration system. As it is, they are merely part of our Potemkin-village immigration system, designed to give the false impression that we're playing defense, as well as offense, in our struggle against militant Islam.

I have to say, this is one issue where I am sorely disappointed with Bush. Don't get me wrong, I'm not voting for the Metrosexual Duo or anything. It just frustrates me that he doesn't seem to see this as an important part of the War on Militant Islam (as he's now calling it). This is an issue that would garner him a lot of support not only in his base, but in the Latino community as well (particuarly our Cuban-descended citizens). I really don't know why he's so apathetic about our borders, but it's one area I'll have to agree to disagree with him on.

Muslims Against Islamofascism

2004-08-12T20:29:00.000-07:00

There is an interesting article by Mustafa Akyol on NRO today. In it, Mr. Akyol argues that Islamofascists who commit acts of terrorism in the name of Islam do so in violation of its precepts.

I will admit that I tend to view claims that Islam is a "religion of peace" (that is, that acts of violence and persecution toward infidels are inconsistent with Islamic doctrine and philosophy) with a rather jaundiced and cynical eye. Nonetheless, I can certainly sympathize with reasonable people who don't want their belief system associated with psychopathic nutjobs (such as, say, abortion clinic bombers). My problem is with people who claim that said nutjobs don't represent them, and yet do nothing to stop the wackos, or at least condemn them. Every Christian worth his salt rightly condemns the acts of clinic bombers as those of deranged lunatics; reasonable Muslims should do the same in regard to Islamofascist terrorist acts.

That's why I was heartened by Mr. Akyol's article. The last two paragraphs really hit the nail on the head:

In short, the kidnappings and murders we see today, like all other acts of terrorism committed against civilians, are un-Islamic cruelties. They stem from a kind of necrophilic nihilism, not from the essence of Islam.

The fact that the kidnappers and killers mention Islam and Allah virtually in their every sentence should not mislead us. The Koran speaks about a gang who planned to kill Prophet Salih by swearing an oath in the name of Allah (Koran, 27:49). This is an example that men can do evil in the name of God. The killings of Nick Berg, Kim Sun-il, and Paul Johnson have been just that. And every Muslim should denounce this evil.

Hear, hear. I've said it many times in the past, and I'll say it many times again in the future: if American Muslims (and Muslims the world over, for that matter) don't want non-Muslims to lump them into the same category as Islamofascist murderers, then they should be among the staunchest and most vocal opponents of Islamofascism. If Islam is truly a religion of peace that abhors the kidnapping and killing of non-combatants, then Muslims should be leading the charge to stop the jerkwads who are besmirching the good name of their religion. I'm happy to see that some Muslims (such as Mr. Akyol) have finally started to stand up for themselves.

Another quick non-update

2004-08-08T21:21:00.000-07:00

Just a note to all 3 of my readers (I'm grateful for you all, by the way! :o)) that the reason I haven't been updating so much lately is a good one. As I alluded to last Monday, I am in love. I'm in love with a beautiful, winsome, fantastic Christian lady who for some reason thinks I'm as wonderful as she is! Hey, I'm not one to question God when he blesses me, so I guess I'm just going to have to accept it. And, incidentally, reciprocate her love. ;o)

The best part? That would have to be that she and I are on the same page in regard to saving sex for marriage. I've mentioned before my views on chastity, and when I talked to her about it she felt the same. She and I have both made mistakes in the past, and we both want to do this God's way. It's not going to be easy: she drives me crazy, and the feeling's mutual. But we're determined to make it work.

She and I have been friends for years, and have always been there for each other in good times and bad times. Pretty much everyone who knows us has asked us why we haven't gotten together sooner, but circumstances always got in the way. The way she and I see it, God was getting us ready for one another. I know that even a year ago I wouldn't have been really ready for her, and she thinks that she might not have been ready for me a year ago either.

I'm telling you, I've never felt as close to anyone as I feel to this woman. Do each of us have baggage to sort out before we're ready to get married? No question about it. Is she going to be worth the wait? You better damn well believe it! I have all of the giddy, euphoric feelings of falling in love (which I've experienced numerous times), coupled with a peace and security and a feeling of total openness and connection that I've never experienced before (even in the early days with my ex-wife). She fills my thoughts at least sixty times an hour, and the sight of her radiant smile never fails to melt my heart. She's one amazing lady, and I'm SO blessed to know her. :o)

Well, I've bored you all with my mushy ramblings now. Tomorrow, back to making Kerry-Edwards metrosexual jokes, and making fun of liberals. Good times, good times. :oD

Kerry in STL: Exclusive Coverage

2004-08-05T20:28:00.000-07:00

I set out today to write the AWG Industries exclusive, in-depth report of everything interesting that happened at John Kerry's campaign stop here in St. Louis, at historic Union Station:

...and got distracted by a piece of lint on the floor near my desk.

Tune in tomorrow, as I set out to write about a more exciting topic: namely, a comparative survey of St. Louis Area libraries! ...or something. :o)

Why I Shouldn't Blog After Midnight

2004-08-04T22:31:00.000-07:00

Y'all remember how John McCain's campaign bus was called "The Straight Talk Express", right?

I got to wondering: will the Kedwards ticket be calling their campaign vehicle The Metrosexual Talk Express?

Don't hit!!! XD

More Ward Connerly!! (and some La Shawn Barber)

2004-08-03T21:35:00.000-07:00

This time courtesy of La Shawn Barber, who has joined the ranks of Blogs I Peruse Regularly (well, okay, I haven't done so yet, as this is the first day I've read her. But I plan to. ;o)). La Shawn sums up nicely why I admire Mr. Connerly:

"Connerly is a true civil rights crusader who’s committed to organizing similar campaigns in all 50 states. His mission began in Democratic-leaning California, where the people said NO to skin color preferences in state hiring and admissions. His next stop was Democratic-leaning Washington State, where the people said NO to skin color preferences in state hiring and admissions. Connerly is now the engine behind MCRI."

Somewhere, the whole "judging a man by the content of his character rather than the color of his skin" paradigm got turned on its ear, and it became a "racist" thing to want to judge people on the basis of their accomplishments, rather than on how much melanin their skin contains. Quite frankly, the whole affirmative action mindset boggles my mind. From what I can tell, a person's got to have a really warped and cynically-distorted way of looking at things to conclude that the only thing preventing your average white person from slapping your average black person in irons and selling him is an equally (if opposite) racist government program.

Yes, I'm a white man (hence the nome d' blog). I grew up in southern Illinois, near St. Louis. Far from turning out racist, however, I was raised to be colorblind in regard to "race" (I put that in quotes because the various ethnicities aren't distinct races, or species, of humans. We're all Homo Sapiens Sapiens, with varying degrees of pigmentation in the skin, and some other, minor congenital differences). I learned early on the fundamental truth that people are people, regardless of any superficial, external differences. I went to school with black kids (and kids of a great number of other ethnicities, including Philipino, Japanese, and Hispanic, to name a few). I've had dear friends (some closer to me than some of my family) of all socio-economic and political stripes, who happened to be black. I've dated black women. I'm not mentioning these things as a means of saying "Look at me! See how tolerant I am!!!" or some crap like that. I'm mentioning them to cite examples from my life about how monumentally unimportant the subject of "race" is to how I live my life.

Mind you, I realize that just by talking about "race", I'm giving the "race"-baiters more grist for the "accuse white folks of racism" mill. Frankly, I'm willing to live with that; if they're itching to accuse me of racism anyway, I might as well say my piece. And the crux of the biscuit (as Zappa once said) is this: if you're a decent person who tries to do right by others, I'll probably like you. If you're an asshole, I probably won't. Whether your skin color, your accent, your vernacular, your customs, and your clothes are similar to mine or not will have pretty much no impact whatsoever on how I look at you. I do my damndest to live Dr. King's dream of judging men (and women, yes) by the content of their character. And as such, I profoundly admire Ward Connerly. He is a passionate, articulate, courageous proponent of true equality among the "races", and he serves as an inspiration to all of us who don't look at the world as being populated with black people and white people and Asian people and Latino people etc. etc. etc., but as being populated with people.

I didn't write "just people", because there's no "just" about it. People are foolish and wonderful, terrible and beautiful, wicked and wise, and winsome. We are all imperfect reflections of our Creator, and possessed of all of the dignity and worth that that implies. To try to divide us up by superficial, congenital differences (and to homogenize all members of the resulting sub-groups) is to rob us all of some of that dignity.

([shameless plug] By the by, have I recommended that you check out La Shawn Barber's blog yet? Well, let me do it again. Speaking of wise, wonderful, and winsome, La Shawn is a lady well worth your time to read. Her prose is concise and passionate, and informed by solid, intelligent conservative thought. Please do yourself a favor and visit her site often! :o) [/shameless plug])

Quick Updateage

2004-08-02T20:29:00.000-07:00

Yeah, yeah, my updating is still scanty. What can I say, my personal life has taken a turn for the better. I'm sorry, but it looks like mo' lovin' fo' AWG means less bloggin' fo' y'all. Word up!

But that's not to say I don't like you. Far from it, I appreciate all of you who have stuck with me through the sparse postings of the last few weeks. As a reward to you good kids, might I direct your attention to

the latest piece by Ward Connerly on NRO. As always, Mr. Connerly talks a lot of sense, particularly in regard to how the NAACP is relegating itself to the ashheap of irrelevance.

Check it out, please. And check back tomorrow, when I'll attempt to have an actual, real post about things and stuff!

No Love Lost For Ron Reagan Jr. at NRO

2004-07-27T20:49:00.000-07:00

It seems that I am not alone in my contempt for Ron Reagan, the small, small man who shrinks even further in the shadow of his giant of a father. Ramesh Ponnuru posted a good article that points out the logical fallacies and self-contradiction in his speech before the DNC.

The estimable Mr. Ponnuru made no mention of it, but you might recall that Reagan the Lesser recently told Larry King that early-term embryos are merely "collections of cells in a petri dish. . .We're not talking about fetuses, human beings being killed." Not surprisingly, Mr. King was kind enough to overlook the pro-abortion Reagan's gaffe at referring to fetuses as "human beings". It's probably because he was too busy agreeing with Lil' Ron's next snarky jab that only uneducated, anti-intellectual yokels debate the truth of Macro-Evolution, and that coincidentally some of those Luddite bumpkins are working in the White House right now. I might almost be swayed by the guy who wore a tutu on Saturday Night Live's well-reasoned anti-theistic arguments, but quite frankly, I Don't Have Enough Faith To Be An Athiest.

Meanwhile, David Frum had this to say (while commenting on the various, interminable speeches at DemCon): "10:02 Ron Reagan’s appearance tonight just underscores one more resemblance between Ronald Reagan and Franklin Delano Roosevelt: They both had worthless children."

Ouch!! That was short, succinct, and mean-spirited. I love it! >:oD

New Blog Name, Same Bloggy Goodness

2004-07-27T20:30:00.000-07:00

That's right, I've decided to do a little revamping here at AWG Industries. So far, that involves renaming the blog. Not that big a deal, I know, but I figured it might not hurt for the sake of those people who didn't get that I had chosen my nome-de-blog ironically.

And yes, I took the title from the Triumph song of the same name. Call me a dork, but I've always considered this song to be something of a personal anthem for me. Plus, the guitar line rocks. ;o)

And now, the lyrics, because I can:

Triumph - Fight The Good Fight

From the album "Allied Forces"

The days grow shorter and the nights are getting long
Feels like we're running out of time
Every day it seems much harder tellin' right from wrong
You got to read between the lines

Don't get discouraged, don't be afraid, we can
Make it through another day
Make it worth the price we pay

The Good Book says it's better to give than to receive
I do my best to do my part
Nothin' in my pockets I got nothin' up my sleeve
I keep my magic in my heart

Keep up your spirit, keep up your faith, baby
I am counting on you
You know what you've got to do

Fight the good fight every moment
Every minute every day
Fight the good fight every moment
It's your only way

All your life you've been waiting for your chance
Where you'll fit into the plan
But you're the master of your own destiny
So give and take the best that you can

You think a little more money will buy your soul some rest
You'd better think of something else instead
You're so afraid of being honest with yourself
You'd better take a look inside your head

Nothing is easy, nothing good is free
But I can tell you where to start
Take a look inside your heart
There's an answer in your heart

Fight the good fight every moment
Every minute every day
Fight the good fight every moment
Make it worth the price we pay

Every moment of your lifetime
Every minute every day
Fight the good fight every moment
Make it worth the price we pay

Dag, yo.

2004-07-25T21:01:00.000-07:00

I haven't been in operation for more than a couple of weeks and I'm already making sporadic updates. I apologize to all of my readers (you know who you are :o)) for this. The last week in particular has been incredibly busy at work and in my private life, but it's been rewarding, too. In particular, I've been out with a really good female friend of mine that might just be becoming more than just a friend (both of us want to take things slow, because we've both come out of other relationships in the last couple of months).

Now while all of this is enthralling to me, I know that it's not so interesting to those of you who come here to read... err... I guess you come here to read my political commentary. I really don't know. :o) Anyway, I promise to make time to do much more regular updates regarding topics of national interest through this week, and hitherto. Yeah yeah, I know, if promises were grains of wheat, then no one would go hungry. Humor me, please.

In the meantime, please check out this article by the indespensible Victor Davis Hanson on terrorism vs civilization, and how that bears on the war in Iraq and political posturing related to it here in America. Please, you'll thank me for it.

A Winner Is Me!!1!

2004-07-18T20:43:00.000-07:00

That's right, I won a contest on Beth Grindstaff's site last night. Nothing too difficult, mind you, given that my musical tastes are ecclectic (and that I like to rock out from time to time :o)). I just had to know what the title of a Lita Ford song stood for. She made this nice little image to link for my reward (yeah, she got my moniker a little wrong. I'm not offended ;o)), which you can see above.

Anyway, please take the opportunity to check out Beth's site, please. She's all about supporting her Marine boyfriend, and the troops in general. Plus, she's conservative, a science fiction fan, cute, and a really nice gal to boot. :o)

Safire on Moonbat "Groupthink"

2004-07-15T21:26:00.000-07:00

Just a note that William Safire's recent piece on the conventional wisdom regarding WMDs is well worth reading (and well worth the free registration needed to look at it). I'm not going to go into detail on it (I am in need of sleep), but this is a good quote from it:

Think about that. Do today's groupthinkers believe that Osama bin Laden would sit down with Saddam in front of the world's cameras to sign a mutual assistance pact, establishing a formal relationship? Terrorists and rogue states don't work that way. Mass killers collaborate informally, without a photo op, even secretly.

Think about that, indeed. Props and what-whats to Mr. Safire for a well-written article.

Remember Who We're Up Against

2004-07-15T20:20:00.000-07:00

Here's a reminder in case you forgot.

See, according to the story linked above, apparently Palestinian summer camps are less about hiking, canoeing, and making pictures with macaroni, and more about learning to be Jew-hating terrorists:

The deranged organizers of the camp boast that dozens of kids are flocking to their outdoor classrooms — and more than half are under age 15.
Lessons for the tykes include instruction on how to assemble explosives and fire automatic rifles.

The eager kids also must complete an obstacle course that includes jumping through burning tires and crawling under barbed wire, as shots are fired above their heads.

But the entire course is designed to lead up to the grand finale: the mock staging of the deadly kidnapping of the "settler."

That is, the camp's "final exam", as it were, is to simulate the kidnapping and killing of an Israeli Jewish citizen. Nice, huh? Kind of puts the whole wall thing in a different light, doesn't it?

Some of the rabid youngsters said they couldn't get enough of the pretend killing. One pint-sized recruit named Mustafa, 10, said he hoped to one day soon destroy Israeli aircraft and tanks.

Why if it isn't the littlest murderer! Remind me to say "Awwww!" at lil' Mustafa when I'm done retching, won't you?

To sum up: never, ever, EVER forget that these are the sorts of people that we're fighting against in Iraq, and that the Jews are fighting against in Israel. Remember it the next time the moral equivalence crowd tries to sell you their bull.

No Real Update Tonight

2004-07-14T21:17:00.000-07:00

Nope, sorry. I just spent the last couple of hours typing up something to help out my buddy Chaos Overlord (of Chaos Faction). We gamer geeks gotta stick together, after all. :oD

Okay, I sleep now. More ranty goodness on the morrow.

Mfume Makes Me Queasy

2004-07-13T21:09:00.000-07:00

Much as I hate (did I say hate? I mean love) to rile the liberal racists out there who insist that abhorrent idiocy such as Ted Rall's is "hitting a nerve", I would be remiss if I didn't give a shout out to Expertise for the entry he posted on the head of the NAACP'S latest attempt to intimidate conservative blacks. Expertise is right on the money with this entry (as he pretty much always is, from what I've read :o)).

Funny how according to schmucks like Mfume, it's "angry white men" who are trying to keep black people down. I'm tempted to use the old saw about the pot and the kettle, but 1) I already used it a couple of entries down, and 2) some moonbats would accuse me of being an insensitive bigot for using it in this context. Yeah, that would be a pretty niggardly thing for them to do, but that hasn't stopped them before.

More Federal Marriage Ammendment

2004-07-12T20:36:00.000-07:00

NRO has another great piece on the FMA today by Senator John Cornyn. There's not a lot I can add to what the good Senator writes, so I won't try.

I will say, however, that an ammendment to the Constitution to protect marriage wouldn't be necessary if Congress would have actually done its job and removed the definition of marriage from the jurisdiction of the courts. Yes, they can do that, and the fact that they haven't is demonstrative of the political cowardice that plagues modern Representatives and Senators.

But anyway, I've said it before and I'll say it again before it's over: call your Senators and Representative and let them know how important the FMA is. Trust me, they will give credence to your call.

National Link IMAO Day!

2004-07-08T20:32:00.000-07:00

I'm about dead exhausted, so I'm not gonna sit here and compose a big-ass blog entry like I usually do. Instead, I'll link a classic post by FrankJ of IMAO, "We Should Target More Civilians-
An Editorial by Frank J.". Just doing my part for National Link IMAO Day (this Friday, July 9). This humble Right-Wing Ronin will now slip back into the night!

...but first, let me drop a link to an important piece Michelle Malkin posted today. Ted Rall has sunk to a new low, and the incomparable Mrs. Malkin shows how this is good for conservatism. I salute you too, Michelle! :oD

Catch that John-John Energy!!!

2004-07-07T20:33:00.000-07:00

Stop the presses! John Kerry has found the solution to our dependence on foreign oil:
"Today you are the first city in America to get a different kind of electricity called John Edwards," Kerry said.

I'll be frank with you (no, not this Frank.): that shit cracked my ass up. I'm serious, I nearly fell out laughing right off the sidewalk and into traffic. I'm sure Kerry meant it to be a joke, but it's far funnier than it intended to be, I'm telling you. His speechwriters should pitch a sitcom to the major networks; it'd be The Simpsons, Seinfeld, and Frasier rolled up into one delightful package.

But anyway, back to the electricity. There is so much electricity bouncing off of these two live wires that Edwards apparently forgot he vowed never to be Kerry's veep. Edwards went on to say "This campaign will be a celebration of American values," which is undoubtedly true, if by "American values" you mean "making a mint from the misfortune of others as a tort lawyer".

And this electricity seems to have cross-wired Lurch, too. He's started using Edwards' tried and true "two Americas, the haves and the have-nots" schpiel. Why he thinks this will help him and Edwards connect with what is called "the common man" is beyond me; both of them quite handily fall within the "haves" camp (most "have nots" don't have five houses, after all). He also was quoted as saying "We're ready to take back the White House," which further proves that the Edwards voltage has disconnected the cadaverous Taxachussetts liberal from any form of reality known to man.

Former president and potentially still-current philanderer Bill Clinton said of Edwards, "He will appeal culturally to some people who feel that they don't know John Kerry very well yet." One can only speculate as to whether the people who "don't know Kerry very well yet" that Clinton was referring to are Martians, Oompah Loompahs, or liberal midgets living inside Michael Moore's ass.

Dear Lord, I pray that the rest of this campaign will be even half this funny. You only know I could use a good laugh.

"While Frank Sinatra sings 'Stormy Weather'..."

2004-07-05T20:12:00.000-07:00

There is quite the atmospheric conflagration here in my neck of "flyover country". We're on tornado warning until 1 am or something like that, so I'm gonna keep this short and bittersweet.

Under most circumstances, I'd be willing to chalk up the storm raging outside, with its attendant high winds and rumbling, as a typical summer thunderstorm and leave it at that. However, Moxie has brought it to my attention that there may be an entirely different cause...

God willing we survive the night, I'll update y'all as to whether the wind smells like 30-year-old canned tamales.

Lack of Updateitude

2004-07-05T00:50:00.000-07:00

I once chided Moxie for "a lack of updateitude", and here I am with much the same affliction. What can I say, it's been a busy week, ending in a busy weekend, and hence the nigh-3 AM blogging. What the hell, it's not like I have to work tomorrow.

Okay, a little summing up of things and stuff, since I've been lax in my duties:

Federal Marriage Ammendment: A Call To Action
Since it's obvious that only hate-filled, homophobic, bigoted right-wing-crazies who make the three-way love child of Hitler, bin Laden, and John Wayne Gacy look downright respectable by comparison would object to gay marriage for any reason, I feel it's my duty to share a little hate. Yeah, you know I'm down with this struggle, considering the value I place on marriage (yes, especially since I'm divorced), and considering the detrimental effect gay marriage has had on heterosexual marriage in Scandanavia Come on, y'all, call your Senators. You know you want to.

Why You Gots Ta Be A Hater, Mr. Stuttaford?
Considering that on the balance, Andrew Stuttaford is a thoughtful, insightful commentator, his glib, condescending dismissal of religion is all the more irritating. Take for example the snarky little rant he worked into his review of and commentary on the re-release of The Life of Brian.

In it he bemoans the bygone days when religion was (according to Mr. Stuttaford) on the wane, and the world was apparently on the cusp of a New Secular Enlightenment, the manifold miracles of which could all be explained by Almighty Science. He then goes on to say
Times change. To take just a few wretched examples from the cornucopia of cant on offer on these fruited plains, the nation created by the revolution that was the Age of Reason's finest hour now finds itself lost in nonsense. It is wrapped up in the Rapture, preyed on by Gantrys, prayed at by Falwells, prayed for by Jacksons, dumbed down by creation scientists, and hectored by ranting First Amendment fundamentalists who react to a cross as if they were vampires.
Yes, Andrew. Because America's founders were all "Deists at worst, and enlightened, secular skeptics at best." Never mind what the men had themselves said.

He goes on to equate Christianity and Judaism with occultism and militant Islam. Thanks a whole lot, Mr. Stuttaford. I'm glad to know that you think that crooked televangelists and Scientologists (stupid and harmful as they are) are on precisely the same moral level as the terrorists who beheaded Nick Berg, Daniel Pearl, and Marshall Johnson. Nice sense of perspective you've got there.

"Oh yes, fanaticism can be secular too," Mr. Stuttaford writes in one paragraph. Well shit, thanks for telling us unwashed masses that. We might never have figured out that athiest regimes such as Stalin's, Pol Pot's, or Mao Tse-tung's have inflicted quite a toll in their time as well. For that matter, Castro has racked up quite the bodycount, too.

But never mind all that. If you've shown us anything, Mr. Stuttaford, it's that religious fanatacism includes not only murders "for the cause", but clinging to dogma to the point that it renders an individual capable only of painting those who dissent from said dogma in a negative light with the broadest brush possible.

Mister Kettle,
You sir, are most assuredly black.
Sincerely,
Mister Pot, Esq.

Saddam reaches out to Michael Moore

2004-07-01T21:29:00.000-07:00

Well, it looks like Saddam "Natural Born Killer" Hussein is using the occasion of his trial before the Iraqi Provisional Government to audition for Michael "Raging Bore" Moore's next film.

"'You know that this is all a theater by Bush, the criminal, to help him with his campaign,' the former Iraqi president said."

Read through this article and notice the feigned "objectivity" of the AP. Don't get me wrong, this article is more even-handed than a lot I've seen from these guys. Still, it rankles a bit that they can print a line like "Saddam Hussein scoffed at charges of war crimes and mass killings Thursday, making a defiant first public appearance since being hunted down seven months ago." and make absolutely no mention of the some 270 mass graves that have been discovered in Iraq since Saddam's regime crumbled.

But I guess that Saddam didn't know anything about those. Just like he didn't know anything about the slaughter of the Kurds, or his WMD projects, the horrifying torture and executions that took place in his prisons, or how his sons would kidnap, rape and kill Iraqi civilians for fun. Poor clueless schmuck. I guess that 100% of Iraqis voted to elect him president because of his likeability and good-natured charisma. It certainly didn't have anything to do with them fearing for their lives and the lives of their loved ones. Heavens, no.

Why Conservatives really love Liberal kooks

2004-06-29T21:01:00.000-07:00

I found what might be the perfect example of the writings of what scientists call Liberalis Coocoocaca, or what regular folk might call your garden-variety Liberal kook. Such a delicious pastische of lefty cliche, staggering incoherency, unreasoning rage in general, Bush hatred in particular, and really, really atrocious spelling and grammar. Check it, homeslice:

"Seeing all of you "non Liberals" are anti-abortion, i hope all your women are raped and get pregnent. That way you can enjoy taking care of someone elses baby. You people are fucking dumb. Its ok for "W" to send troops over to Iraq that are getting killed for his own wealth. Oil! Pointless war thats killing americans as well as Iraqies. You find it ok to kill 18 year olds but not babies yet developed. Stupid asses. SO get off you high horse assholes, your no better than anyone else!

Posted by Bush Hater at June 29, 2004 11:20 AM

Such a perniciously twisted little specimen. It's important that we preserve ones such as these, who refuse to repent of their errant ways, as an example of what happens when one listens to Air(head) America while eating lead paint chips. One more reason to build Moxie's Petting Zoo.

Stop! Hammer time!

2004-06-29T20:41:00.000-07:00

"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.'" -Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, at a fundraiser in San Francisco on Monday, 6-25-04

Ayep, the witch is showing her true colors. Survey says: Socialist. (Not that that's any real surprise...)

Ready thyself, my trusty Oversized Right Wing Hammer of Doom. It's about time a certain broad-beamed New York senator feels the might of Commiebasher!!

Hog On Ice on what women want

2004-06-28T17:44:00.000-07:00

Steve of Hog on Ice said some right-on things about women and premarital sex today.

And now, my own views on premarital sex (copied and pasted from the comment I made to Steve's post, and then expanded upon):

Premarital sex has screwed up every relationship I've been in, including my marriage. It's just shy of a month since I broke up with a wonderful, beautiful lady with whom I have a lot in common. The cause of our break-up? We started having sex. I swear, once we crossed the threshold of physical intimacy, the emotional barriers started building up. It's like we started to distrust each other in very subtle ways, and we drifted apart.

And this has happened in every romantic relationship I've been in. I may not always be the easiest student to get through to, but life experience has demonstrated a pattern to me, and that pattern suggests that having premarital sex is a wonderful way to kill relationships.

Call me crazy, but I'm going to try it the right way next time.

And by "right way" I mean God's way (you knew I couldn't finish this post without pissing off the athiests/agnostics). God told us not to have sex before marriage, and gee willikers! What do you know, it turns out to be the right way. It's almost like He made us, and knows what works and doesn't work when it comes to human relationships! Color me surprised.

As to why a Christian boy like me took so long to figure out that I should be doing it God's way, chalk it up to my thinking I knew better. You know, the usual problem with humanity.

Open letter to Ron Reagan

2004-06-26T22:36:00.000-07:00

Oh, Ron Reagan. What in the world are we going to do with you? Look, dude, I totally understood when your mother called for an government aid for research using embryonic stem cells. She was grieving (still is, I'll warrant), and she's likely as uninformed as most people are in regard to what embryonic stem cells can do. I mean, most people don't know that adult stem cells outperform embryonic stem cells in every way, unless you're specifically trying to form tumors in your patient.

I also realize that you're doing some grieving of your own. Your differences with your father are well-publicized, but hey, he's your father. I know you've got to still be grieving your loss. I'm sure that your grief has made you even more adamant in your position on use of embryonic stem cells.

That's fine, you're entitled to your opinion. If you want to believe that (in your words) "There's no down side to this. There's no real moral problem here. We're talking about cells in a Petri dish, not creatures with brains and spinal cords and fingers and toes" and blithely ignore where those cells came from, then more power to you. I may (and do) disagree with your viewpoint, and point out that of all diseases to have potential cures in stem cells, Alzheimer's is the least promising. Furthermore, I'll argue against the "human beings as commodities" mindset that seems to be informing your viewpoint. Through it all, I won't get angry with you about it.

The part that pisses me off, though, is when you start saying that your father would have been in favor of using embryonic stem cells. You told Judy Woodruff "My father is not here to speak for himself. I'm not going it speak for him. I can speak for my mother, who knew his mind pretty well. I showed my mother that article when it came out and I asked her what she thought about it. She thought that William Clark was absolutely wrong. She thought that her husband, my father, would be all behind embryonic stem cell research."

So essentially you're saing "I won't speak for my father, but I'll speak for my mother who in turn will speak for him". You claim your mother knew your father very well, and I am sure she did. She, however, isn't the only person to know your father, and his beliefs. William Clark (whose opinion you discount entirely too quickly), for instance, knew him pretty well. Your brother Michael knew him pretty well, too. Both of them were closer to him from a political and philosophical standpoint than either you or your mother were, and both of them believe that your father would have been against the use of embryonic stem cells.

Again, the part of this whole thing that smacks of assholery as far as I'm concerned is this politically-motivated pseudo-necromancy you're practicing here. You piously tell us that you won't speak for your father, and then you do it anyway, merrily using "your father's position on stem cells" as yet another stick to bash Bush with. Not that you're exactly a stranger to using your father's name to push your lefty political views, but sheesh! This comes off as particularly unsavory.

Thanks for your time.
The Angriest White Guy

p.s. FYI: I'm not particularly a fan of in vitro fertilization (at least in regard to the fertilization of more eggs than likely will be implanted for pregnancy), so don't bother trotting out that out as a means to call my consistency into question. That dog won't hunt, son.

Andrew McCarthy does it again

2004-06-25T22:57:00.000-07:00

Andrew McCarthy, who had a great piece on NRO about The New York Times manufacturing the torture memo scandal already has another piece up.

This latest article (titled "Times Games") details how the Times sat on documentary evidence of at least one Iraq/al-Qaeda tie. The document in question shows that the Iraqi Intelligence Service reached out to al-Qaeda in the mid-90s regarding the possibility of joint efforts against the House of Saud. Furthermore, the document makes it clear that it was Iraq that approached bin Laden, who eventually agreed reluctantly (he was afraid of being labeled an Iraqi operative).

Mr. McCarthy further writes:
Why does it matter who was enticing whom? On June 17, when, despite having this document, it was trashing the whole notion of an Iraq/Qaeda connection, the Times asserted without qualification that: The 9/11 Commission had found that any collaboration proposals had come from bin Laden's side; all such proposals had been declined by Saddam; and this scenario undermined the Bush administration's rationale for deposing the Iraqi regime. (The Times on June 17: "As for Iraq, the commission's staff said its investigation showed that the government of Mr. Hussein had rebuffed or ignored requests from Qaeda leaders for help in the 1990's, a conclusion that directly contradicts a series of public statements President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney made before and after last year's invasion of Iraq in justifying the war.")

He then goes on to show how the Times self-servingly and duplicitously parses phrases in order to save their own hash and to further sully the war effort in general and the President and his administration in particular. I wholeheartedly suggest that you read the full article, as it is chock full of examples of what utter weasels these people are. His penultimate paragraph:

The Times has been against the Iraq war from the start. Its relentless propaganda, in conjunction with its media allies, has taken a sizable toll. President Bush has taken a ratings hit, and a poll out this morning suggests that a slim majority of Americans now believes the war was a mistake. But that could turn around in a heartbeat. No one is more aware than the "newspaper of record" that if the American people become convinced Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden were in cahoots, the national perception of the necessity for this war will drastically change, and the president's reelection will be a virtual lock.

I salute you, Andrew McCarthy. You are well on your way to proving yourself utterly indispensable.

Okay, took me long enough.

2004-06-25T21:20:00.000-07:00

I just realized that the default setting for replies to blog posts is "members only" or some crap like that. D'oh!

Well, I've just changed it so that anyone can reply now, so if you're reading this, feel free to reply to this or any other entry I've made so far.

Go ahead, call me a dumbass. You know you want to. :oD

So... tired...

2004-06-24T20:56:00.000-07:00

Yeah, I've been staying up too damn late playing with my blog settings the last few nights. I've gotten less than 6 hours of sleep a night since Sunday and it's really starting to tell on me.

Anyway, I'm too tired to think of anything really witty to say about anything right now. ("But what's your excuse the rest of the time?", you say. "Shut it," I say back.) I'll just answer a hypothetical question that Rush asked on his site last week (and it's still up there, since he's on vacation this week): Will the Media complain that they've been covering Clinton too much when this week's through? And in my inimitable Zen-like fashion, I will answer this question with a series of questions:

Will the French suddenly tire of Jerry Lewis?
Can John Kerry win legions of voters to his cause by the force of his personality alone?
Will Michael Moore join the Bush re-election campaign?
Is there an elephant in the world, African or Asian, with smaller ankles than Hillary?

Meditate on this koan, my faithful students in the Tao of Rage. I need to sleep now. I have a big day of committing Right Wing atrocities ahead of me tomorrow. I think I'll start by blowing up the ocean.

Blind Dems' Bluff

2004-06-23T20:42:00.000-07:00

Michael Novak made a statement that struck a chord with me in an interesting article that appeared on NRO today.

At times like this, the donkey seems to be the only adequate symbol for certain extreme Democrats. So stubborn, so set in their ways, incapable of learning. They cannot see facts right in front of their face. Their ideology is so powerful they see only what they want to see.

I find this to be true of a significant portion of Democrats I encounter, whether they are Envirowackos, Militant Feminists, Union-Members-for-Life (by that I mean the duration of their union membership; many of the ones I know decry the abortion issue as a mere distraction from the "important" issues), and so on. (Mind you, it's true of people of all manner of ideological stripes, but many of the Dems I've encountered seem particularly resistant to readily apparent facts.) It can be frustrating to lay out a solid, logical argument rooted in facts, only to be discounted by the other person because they don't want to believe you. Meanwhile, a lot of these jokers claim a monopoly on "open mindedness" (and I'm reminded of of a line from a Steve Taylor song: "You're so open-minded that your brain leaked out").

I'd like to believe another statement he made in that article (and at least some of the time, I do):

In the normal course of events — if I may employ for political philosophy a metaphor taken from our literary habits — most Americans learn to read from left to right. Since the Left dominates the media, the schools, and the mainline churches, from left to right is the normal course of a maturing mind. Reality sooner or later trumps.

A neoconservative, for instance, is a leftist with two teenage daughters.

Hey, it seems to be working on Dennis Miller. That's a bit encouraging, at least.

Chaos Central Hitcount Pledge Drive!

2004-06-23T19:25:00.000-07:00

The Blogsphere's very own Chaos Overlord (of Chaos Central has pledged to pledge at least $50.00 to Spirit of America if his hit count goes over 10,000 by July 4th.

Spirit of America, if you don't already know, is an organization dedicated to helping Americans serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the Iraqi and Afghani peoples. It's a hell of a good cause, so please, take a moment and check out the Pledge post at Chaos Central!

And *ahem* while you're at it, you might consider making a donation of your own to Spirit of America.

Bill Clinton Legacy Rehab, take 592

2004-06-22T20:08:00.000-07:00

Rich Lowry had a good article on NRO about Clinton's one-hour book commercial-- I mean, interview on 60 Minutes this past Sunday. Even my dad (no VRWC member, he) came away with the conclusion that all of the Partisan Media's attention toward Clinton's book is designed to 1) sell copies of "My Li(f)e", and 2) prop up Der Schlickmeister's sagging legacy.

As such, I don't deem it necessary to harp on the point. As a finish, I'll pull out is a quote from Mr. Lowry's article:

Bill Clinton told 60 Minutes in his promotional appearance for his book, My Life, that he wears his impeachment as a "badge of honor." As far as honors go, it's a far cry from the Distinguished Service Cross or the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

Preach it, brother. It's much closer to a stained blue dress. XD

Things That Piss Me Off, #1287

2004-06-21T17:06:00.000-07:00

Okay, first off, let me establish that despite my chosen blog title, I'm really a pretty laid-back guy. I tend to let the aggravations of life roll off my back, and try to keep things positive.

However, some things really, really piss me off. Outrage me, to tell the truth. I read a blog entry by Michelle Malkin that did just that.

Essentially, the awesome Mrs. Malkin recounted a story from the Seattle Times about how a developmentally-disabled woman named Suzy Schlater had been raped and abused in a state-operated group home (for which Suzy's mother had helped raise $300,000).

This was the part (quoted from Mrs. Malkin's site) that outraged me:
In the months following the rape, Sclater looked back more
closely at incidents that at the time hadn't seemed to her to
indicate abuse. Now, she wonders about the cause of the nightmares
that awakened Suzy during the night, about bruises on her back that
mirrored the pattern of her shower gurney, about her hymen being broken.
Sclater's conclusion: "I think they'd been using her for years."

DSHS lawyers take a different view of the matter, suggesting that Suzy
could have gotten the bruises in a series of falls and inserted the semen
into herself....

What. The. HELL. "Insered the semen into herself?!? What kind of sick motherf^&*ers are they? First off: where did Suzy supposedly acquire the semen to insert into herself? Secondly: she has the developmental abilities of a friggin' toddler. WHY would she do such a thing?

Under most circumstances, I'd sentence these sick chankers on the legal profession to a dozen heavy whacks from the Giant Right Wing Hammer of Doom (aka Commiebasher). This, however, is too good for them. I think they deserve no less than 40 swift kicks to the groin, followed by the Abu Ghraib treatment. And by "Abu Ghraib" treatment, I mean Abu Ghraib when Saddam was running it. >_>