Saturday, October 6, 2007
To knowingly write orders for these heroes that are one day shy of giving them veteran's education benefits is petty, and I would've hoped, below our government.
I would urge each of you to use the link on the right hand column to get in touch with your Representatives and Senators to let them know how you feel on this.
Thursday, October 4, 2007
"Hello, Hello," she called. "Can anyone hear me? Hello"
For quite a while there was no answer.
Losing hope, Snow White called again, "Hello. Is anyone down there?"
Just as she was about to give up all hope, there came a faint voice from deep in the mine. The voice said, "Vote for Hillary. Vote for Hillary."
Snow White, somewhat relieved screamed out, "Oh, thank God, Dopey is still alive."
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
This sounds good to me. A properly written tax code should be understandable by a 16 year old working his first job. It shouldn't require what has become almost an entire branch of government. For instance, it has over 100,000 employees and an operating budget of almost $10 billion annually.
I'm sure, realistically, that we will always have a department like the IRS, and while I don't really expect sports car-esque streamlining from my government departments, I don't think it should cost the government ten billion to collect taxes either.
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
To warn you, this group of moonbats, called VoteVets.org, like the Democrats and the MoveOn.org weenies that fund them, are also bereft of the ability to read a simple transcript. Apparently, they also don't listen to a program that they are feeling free to criticize.
Now, granted, unlike the maker of the video, I have not sustained a severe head wound. But it is clear that it has left his ability to read quite intact, as he is clearly reading off a prepared propaganda slide. So why hasn't he read the transcript of what Mr. Limbaugh really said?
Like the Democraps are, he's simply taking the opportunity, falsely based as it is, to lash out in an attempt to silence a person who has done great service not only to our entire country, but specifically to our men and women in uniform, and our veterans, of which I am one.
This vicious slander--and slander it is, as it is clearly false and defaming--reeks of revenge, and can only come back to haunt them.
Why is it that any time the Democrats or their liberal cronies are out of arguments and reason (things that they were never in great supply of anyhow) they resort to the ad hominem?
Michelle Malkin is also talking about this. Check it out.
What I'm concerned about is this: What is Congress trying to sneak past us while we are distracted by this Wagging of the Dog? More unwanted immigrations bills? The shipwreck known as the Law of the Sea Treaty? Keep your eyes peeled.
Monday, October 1, 2007
But what really caught my attention was the apparent hubbub caused by some dialog from a phone call with a listener. It appears that he was talking about those unscrupulous individuals so base as to falsely claim combat service. He referred to those people as "phony soldiers". The moonbats have taken this and run with it, claiming that he referred to any soldier that dissented politically to the war in Iraq.
Now, Senator Reid, a barking moonbat of the highest order, has been tying up valuable time in Congress trying to get a letter signed by Congress that condemns Mr. Limbaugh for his remarks.
First of all, doesn't Congress have anything more important to do? Seriously! Tying up valuable legislation time for this crap gets on my nerves. It is McCarthy-esque to say the least. What are we paying these dorks for? Perhaps Mark Twain was correct, when he stated, "Reader, suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself."
I urge you to go check it out for yourself at the link I listed above, decide for yourself, and write your Congressmen and tell them to quit wasting the time we are paying for.
I will caution you, however, not to get your hopes up that a single letter will change the ways of an institution like Congress. They might not understand what's wrong with wasting their time and taxpayer's money debating crap like this. It may be difficult to get them to stop listening to Senator Reid's ridiculous antics.
After all, Mark Twain also observed: "All Congresses and Parliaments have a kindly feeling for idiots, and a compassion for them, on account of personal experience and heredity."
Sunday, September 30, 2007
I applaud a book such as “A Dangerous Book for Boys.” Why is there a need for such a book? I grew up in a time that such a book would have been laughed at and ridiculed because it was nothing more than common knowledge. I had learned about choosing sides for games and that not everyone got picked; the angst of waiting to be picked, and the shame if you were not picked but traded for two others, just to make the teams even in numbers (two traded equaled one player). Everyone got to play, but not every player was equal. Beginning in fourth grade I would take various hunting shotguns and rifles to school for show-and-tell. We had a fifth grade teacher who would show us his hunting bows; a ninth grade teacher who helped me to restore a Civil War percussion cap rifle in the classroom before school started each morning and the weapon was kept in a closet in the classroom until the next morning. It took almost three months to restore the 50-caliber rifle. From second grade through ninth, Mr. Bender was never called Mr. Bender (at this time you did not have a separate teacher for each class even in a town of a population of 15,000 – four grade schools, one junior high school (grades 7-9) and a senior high (grades 10-12)). He was always called Coach. He taught us, girls and boys, about how to play red rover, ball tag, dodge ball, statue, basketball, football and many other games. These games were easily adapted to the neighborhood outdoor skating rink. He also taught the Vince Lombardi concept of “The difference between a successful person and others is not a lack of strength, not a lack of knowledge, but rather a lack of will.” He never played favorites, even with the jocks. I remember a rope-climbing contest (I never made it up the damn rope) in ninth grade gym class. There were two finalists for the competition. Al (the quarterback for the ninth grade football team and was later drafted for a short stint in the Canadian league) and Denny (a kid who came from a totally different background and was sort of considered the Fonz of the day: no interest in sports; complete with black leather jacket). Denny won the contest by over three seconds. Coach Bender’s response was “Denny won, Al. He had the will and the ability.”Though these examples may wax nostalgic about my experiences, there is still the question: What has happened to make such a difference in concept in our current culture? I think that a definitive answer can be found in The Changing Gender Composition of Psychology: “In 1970, women made up just over 20 percent of PhD recipients in psychology, according to the National Research Council. In 2005, the last year for which data are available, nearly 72 percent of new PhD and PsyDs entering psychology were women, according to APA's Center for Psychology Workforce Analysis and Research. And when you look even further down the line, graduate enrollment in psychology, including those pursuing master's-level degrees, reached nearly three-quarters female in 2005.” And, "Just by their sheer numbers, women are changing the field of psychology," says Carol Williams-Nickelson, PsyD, associate executive director of the American Psychological Association of Graduate Students.”
Billing itself as the perfect book for any boy aged eight through 80, it ended up being just the sort of book I want my son to read when he gets older. I would recommend it to the parents of any boys around that age. In today's world, it seems like more and more we are preventing boys from being boys. A brilliant essay about this phenomenon can be found here: http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/09/banning_boyhood.html
I remember growing up and playing Cowboys and Indians (feather, not dot), Cops and Robbers, Tag, Dodgeball, and Army Men. I remember learning to shoot at Boy Scout Camp, the time my Dad built a slingshot for me, and then a day or so later teaching me about the consequences of not using a weapon properly (I shot the slingshot at my sister--missed, but not by much) by tanning my backside and breaking the slingshot across his knee in front of me. I remember building forts in the woods and using the apples that fell from the tree that grew next to the house I grew up in to defend it--at the end of very atlatl like sticks.
I also wonder about the drawings we made in school: normally they were panoramas of destruction: usually showing the allied forces of WWII wreaking great destruction on an army of stick men carrying swastika flags. These were graphic drawings, involving explosions, fireballs, and little stick bodies flying through the air. Never were we sent to see counselors about it, never were we sent to the principle's office. The only time a teacher even intervened was one time when a kid showed the Nazi bastards winning--earning him a stern talking to about good and evil, not a suspension or terrorist response team.
My generation made it through to adulthood without an incident like Columbine. The only thing that I could see that was different, aside from the fact that the inheritors of Woodstock weren't running everything yet, and our country's Greatest Generation was still enforcing some kind of moral code on government an society at large, was that corporal punishment was still an accepted form of punishment for children. Even at school. I remember being told several times that if I got paddled at the principle's office, that when I got home I would get double. It was indeed a deterrent. I was not "beaten" or abused as a child. I was, however, punished in a more or less fair manner that more often than not met the severity of my transgression--using multiple methods from grounding and time-outs to spanking.
We also had video games. Most of the hand-held ones had red LED's that moved one space per key-press and the only sound effect was a beeping noise. I remember playing Pong, and the advent of the Atari. So, we also had video games.
We had music that was considered immoral and obscene, just like today (personally, I think that has been the way of history: each generation attempts to disturb the next with their music).
So, what was the difference? In my opinion, boys were allowed to be boys, and punished appropriately when it was needed.
Anyhow, I'm starting to ramble, so I'll leave you with the advice to check out the book, read the link and let me know what you think.