Sorry I kept you on hold for so long...

...and you probably think this is addressed to you, the reader.

 

Well, you'd be right...sort of.  Yes, I have kept you on hold.  For that I do genuinely apologize.  A lot has happened over the past several weeks, and rather than write about it while it's still so fresh, I wanted to take time to process it...especially the dream I put on hold...my dream of becoming a journalist.  That dream's fruition is on the distant horizon now that I've been admitted to UNL's college of journalism.  I start classes in just under a month.  That is the apology referred to in my title...I apologize to the essence of that dream for having had it on hold for so very long. 

 

I always knew the dream was there, but it seemed so fantastical, so drenched in a special kind of magic that it didn't seem possible I could make it come true.  Even as a boy, when other kids pretended to be cops, football players, or movie stars, my fantasy character of choice?  An investigative reporter.

 

So, now, the work begins.  It is going to take time.  Some would argue that it's awfully late in my life to pursue this.  I disagree.  For me, there's no better time.  I know what I want (truly know what I want) for the very first time in my life, and I am going after it.  This is no dream that rides on another's coat tails, this is a dream that belongs soley to me.  It is the dream I should have followed all along but denied even existed because (quite honestly) I was afraid to try and fail.  I'm talking about all of this (or maybe you'd call it rambling) because I am anxious, nervous, excited, and yes even a bit scared.  The University of Nebraska Lincoln is no small potato, and I hope I can live up to what being a "husker" means.  I pray for God's guidance at each and every step.

 

 

Hmmm, Freudian Liberalism,.

Okay, the subject/title is a joke of my own creation.  I came up with it because I was doing some googling to find descriptions of Freud's concept of the Id, the ego, and the super-ego.  In the process, I came across the article below.  I hope the copyright information below is sufficient.  I don't want to be in violation of such laws, and I want the author to get full credit...especially since I really like his approach here.

 

Okay, when I went to look for information about Freud's concept of the Id, the Ego, and the super-ego, this isn't what I expected to find, but it is a very fascinating read:

 

Leftists: Servants of The Id
Written by
Gabriel Garnica
Saturday, October 14, 2006

 

          I have always been fascinated by psychology despite its tendency to justify and rationalize liberal behavior and beliefs.  As a psychology major
in college, two particular notions caught my intellectual interest.  The first was Freud’s conception of the Id, Ego, and Super-ego as the triangle of
personality.  The second was Leon Festinger’s Theory of Cognitive Dissonance which sought to explain how rationalization becomes reality.

 

Simplified Messages

 

          Freud’s personality triangle simply stated that our personality is composed of three parts, the Id, the Ego, and the Super-ego.  The Id represents
our base instincts, impulses, and bare emotions.  It is the core of aggression and houses the pleasure principle.

 

The Ego is the center of rational, logical reality.  It is the mediator between the physical and the spiritual.  The Super-ego, on the other hand, is the
center of conscience, spirituality and moral codes.

 

            As one of my professors put it, the Id is about what I want to do, the Ego is about what I can do and the Super-ego is about what I should do.

 

            Festinger’s Theory of Cognitive Dissonance holds that people seek balance and order in their physical, emotional, and mental states and will
do whatever it takes to maintain and regain that order.  Thus if I steal and feel guilty about it, I will seek to rationalize or justify that theft in
order to relieve my mental and emotional stress and regain a state of calm in those areas.  Simply put, people will do whatever it takes to make what they
do appear acceptable, even if that means twisting reality to fit perception.

 

Leftists As Servants of The Id

 

          Anyone wishing to see leftist mentality need only look to Columbia University, where less than two weeks ago protesting punks charged the stage
to stop Minutemen founder Jim Gilchrist’s speech, unfurled inflammatory banners and then gleefully jumped of the stage once they knew the entire event
had been cancelled shouting “Si se pudo, Si se pudo” which means “yes, we could.”

 

            Leftists are not about intelligent discourse or debate.  They have nothing to do with calm dialogue or reasoned discussion.  Theirs is not the
world of logic, common sense, or intellectual exchange.  Rather, as shown by this mob of animals, leftists are all about emotion, instinct, aggression,
violence, and impulse.  They derive pleasure from inflicting displeasure, satisfaction from creating dissatisfaction and purpose from instilling disorder.

 

            Those seeking a reason for why leftists act this way need only realize that their smoke is merely concealing the fact that their points, issues,
causes and methods have been repeatedly proven asinine, imbecilic and overblown.  Their crusades have been repeatedly shown to be smokescreens for a darker,
more complex inner agenda.

 

At the end of the day, leftists are all about bells and whistles concealing smoke and mirrors.

 

            Given the empty, shallow, and hollow nature of their issues, causes, methods, and beliefs, liberals are forced to make scenes to both gain attention
and distract others from just how thin their rationales are.  Taken in this light, one realizes that leftists are like the guy who starts a fire in the
barn to conceal the fact that barn was not well kept.

 

Having already sold themselves to the Id, liberals quickly become servants to its promises of prompt, undeserved satisfaction.  Once addicted the Id’s short-term
pleasure principle, leftists cannot free themselves to think about the long-term impact of their actions and beliefs.  In the Columbia episode, the protesting
punks were surprised to discover that many people frowned upon their arrogant display of disrespect.  They had ignored the real, long-term implications
and perceptions of their deed while bowing to its short-term message.  The protesting illegal immigrants who stomped on the American flag were the epitome
of impulsive behavior devoid of intellect.

 

This impulsive, arrogant and stubborn emotionality on the part of leftists, this bare reflection of genuine leftist thinking, is too much for the average
American to take, not to mention a horrible election tactic.  Thus we see that liberals spend half their time disrespecting this country and the other
half seeking ways to conceal that disrespect.

 

Slaves of Cognitive Dissonance

 

            If leftists are servants of the Id, they are also prone to become slaves of cognitive dissonance.  Once you project to the world a particular
instinctual, impulsive and emotional state, you better do something to paint that approach and perception as normal, rational and acceptable.  In comes
cognitive dissonance theory telling us that people will distort their perception of reality to carve a reality consistent with their agenda and beliefs.

 

            Thus we see mindless protests defending illegal immigration rationalized into protests defending all immigrants, a public education establishment
trying to justify its obvious liberal bias under the guise of tolerance, respect and social compassion.

 

            Nowhere is this more visible than in the abortion issue.  First, liberals and feminists tell us that the only thing that matters is what women
want and that it is their body involved and nobody should violate that.  Confronted with evidence harmful to their claims, pro-aborts then speak of the
unborn as if they were removable waste and certainly not human.  Realizing the possible public outcry against speaking of the unborn in this way, leftists
have taken to euphemisms and flowery words to conceal the blood on their hands.

 

            The past decades of Democratic dissolution from a party of noble causes to its present state as a rag-tag bunch of interests and agendas perfectly
illustrates how Democrats progressively or, should we say, digressively, boil in the soup of their own moral absurdity waiting for the next pack of fools
ready to buy the empty platitudes and promises they sell.

 

Holders of The Ego and Soldiers of The Super-ego

 

            If liberals have title rights to the Id, then where do conservatives reside?  It turns out that political conservatives call the Ego their home
and the Religious Right hangs its hat in the Super-ego.  Unlike leftists, conservatives enjoy and respect debate, discourse and the intelligent exchange
of ideas.  They get their points across by calm discussion and interaction, not by jumping stages like crazed zombies seeking new victims.

 

            The Super-ego is home to the Religious Right, which favors its conscience and moral codes.  Regardless of religious affiliation, conservatives
enjoy a society where faith, spirituality and tradition are highly valued and respected.

 

Conclusion

 

            The student ambush of speakers at Columbia University should not shock or even surprise anyone versed in where such leftists come from, namely
the Id, with its focus on emotion, impulse and aggressive.  Intelligent debate, dialogue and discussion, the cornerstones of a good education, are not
even in the vocabulary of leftist thugs like those who rushed that stage.

 

            The fact that the protesting aggressors could even dare to justify the nature of their actions combined with their imbecilic perceptions of
what transpired that day in that place is a classic serving of cognitive dissonance.  Faced with the possibility that you acted like an animal, you turn
around and express shock at such claims.  Accused of inciting misbehavior and embarrassing displays of arrogant, ignorant aggression., you turn around
and claim that your invading group was victimized by a much smaller band.

 

            Nowhere is this classic two-way skill of liberals more on display than with regard to the Clintons.  It is an accepted fact that Hillary and
especially Bill Clinton act on impulse and emotion via her mouth and his zipper.  Once they have done so, these two often proceed to twist reality, history
and public discussion to suit their agenda.  This is the reason that Bill and Hill can, with a straight face, proclaim his administration a great one and
its accomplishments, good or bad, as being all positive, watershed moments for mankind.  Despite the reality of a failed Clinton North Korea agreement,
for example, the Clintons pretend that the agreement was great and blame everything on Bush now.

 

            Once we accept that leftists live in the Id and spend their waking hours rationalizing away their foibles and failures, there is very little
that they can come up with which will surprise us.  The greatest irony may well be that precisely these leftist imbeciles who proclaim the loudest about
choice and personal morality are the ones most enslaved by the chains of the Id and the eternal battle to rationalize their mess with their image.

 

            At the end of the day, one might say that leftists are all about being below the belt, with their impulses coming from the front and the justifications
for those impulses coming from the back.

 

About the Writer: Gabriel Garnica, Esq., is an educator, licensed attorney, and resident of Long Island, New York. As a conservative Latino college professor
working in New York City, Mr. Garnica feels that his picture is found in the dictionary under the term "exception." He can be contacted at
gbgmyarticles@yahoo.com.

 

Copyright © 2006
ChronWatch.
All rights reserved.
Questions?
images/email_icon
Contact us today
!

 

 

Blind leading the blind?

Okay, I'm stepping aside from politics (for once).  I want to talk about a young man who was on Oprah Winfrey's show.  Ben Underwood was on her show to demonstrate a form of orientation and mobility for blind people known as "echo location."

 

The problem I have with this form of navigation is that, if used without a white cane, it has a potential to be dangerous.  Mr. Underwood expressed a dislike of using a white cane that I cannot fathom.

 

I realize that, for some people,  it's a source of wounded pride to admit to being blind.  For most blind people, the white cane is a sort of badge saying "I am a person who happens to be blind."  For others, however, such as Mr. Underwood, carrying the cane might as well be a stigma against him...a not-so-scarlet letter, if you will.  After all, to a lot of people Mr. Underwood's age, carrying a white cane isn't very cool.  It certainly doesn't get you into the "in" crowd.

 

As I may have stated before, or at least in my profile, I belong to the National Federation of the Blind, and subsequently, to the Nebraska affiliate of the NFB student division.  This has exposed me, obviously, to young people (I'm a sort of young 41) who see carrying a cane as both necessary and important.  To them traveling safely, confidently, and independently is more important than finding the "in" crowd.  Not that they don't have a desire to be a part of that crowd, but they won't compromise using their white cane to get there.  To them, their white cane is literally a part of them.  To them, the white cane is an indespensible tool of independence.

 

I am not knocking echo location.  It is a valuable tool for any blind person who wants to move about a city independently.  That said, however, I do not think that echo location ought to be the sole means by which someone gets around.  In conjunction with a white cane and other skills, a person can move fluidly around any city or town they wish...assuming they have proper training in the use of a white cane.  Without a cane, there are things a person may miss such as stairwells, manholes, and other potential hazards that could cause injuries of varying severity. Personally?  I'd rather have a cane in hand and find these things than rely solely on sound cues and miss something that could be, literally, right under my nose.

 

I hope that, some day, Mr. Underwood discovers a desire to use a cane as well as echo location.  Until then, in all bluntness, I fear for his safety.

 

 

 

 

Let Freedom Ring!

Today is a very significant day for me on a number of levels.  Any election day is significant because of the impact that I (as an individual voter) can have.  Today, however, was even more significant because for the first time since losing my usable vision, I voted totally free of any major assistance to mark my ballot!  Thanks to the work of the National Federation of the Blind (www.nfb.org) I (and other blind voters) had access to voting independently thanks to an electronic voting machine that allowed us to mark our ballots for ourselves.  It was a feeling of freedom unlike any I can describe.

 

When I say this, I mean no ill will towards anyone who has helped me or another blind person vote.  It's just that, for us as human beings, there is nothing like taking that definitive action of marking the ballots for ourselves, and we may not even realize just how deep that feeling runs until we've done it...until we've used these voting machines and done the actual deed.

 

As the song used for the theme for Sean Hannity's show says, "Today is independence day!"

 

 

 

Alan Wheeler
awheeler@neb.rr.com or alan_wheeler@neb.rr.com
redwheel1 on skype
http://alan-wheeler.blogspot.com/
“Tell the people the truth and the country will be free”
  --Abraham Lincoln

Ironic.

Did some research on the church in Kansas.  Ironically, the pastor (though he ought to be stripped of that title) fixates on the verse that says "Your sin shall find you out."

 

Here's a major expose of the man and his family.  God has moved me from anger to shock and compassion...and a need to pray for the Fred Phelps's of the world and their victims.

 

 

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/michael_haggerty/expose3.htm

 

 

Alan Wheeler
awheeler@neb.rr.com or alan_wheeler@neb.rr.com
redwheel1 on skype
http://alan-wheeler.blogspot.com/
“Tell the people the truth and the country will be free”
  --Abraham Lincoln

 

Sick sick sick!

Don't let the title fool you, I am not going to rail about the Foley scandal. 

 

I am not going to talk about the creepy gunman in Pennsylvania who shot a bunch of girls...not directly anyway.

 

I just heard on Hannity & Colmes this interview with a woman from this church that has protested at the funerals of American soldiers in Iraq, and wanted to (but gave up the idea) protest at the funeral of those very girls killed in Pennsylvania.  Why?  Because they (meaning these girls) brought this shooting on themselves by not being obedient to God!

 

You'll be relieved to know (I hope) that I don't share this view.  I don't believe in an angry God who sits on His throne waiting to drop the hammer on the disobedient. I don't believe in a God that appears to show no mercy, no compassion, and no grace.

 

This woman appears to believe in a vengeful, angry God who would smite the disobedient.  Sadly, for someone who claims to believe in Jesus, she strikes me as someone who is very much like the very people Christ took on in His day for their legalistic and simultaneously corrupt way of approaching believing in God...the Pharisees.

 

Yet, the belief system she (and her "church" believes in leaves out God's life-changing, awesome, inexplicable grace in that He sent His son, Jesus, to die for all of us, whether we deserved it or not.  He knew we could never earn redemption, so He gave us His son as the ultimate sacrifice.  If we fall, God forgives us...he doesn't smite us for being weak and sinful by nature.  No father in his right mind, upon seeing their child fall and become injured is going to say, "How dare you allow this to happen!  Now I have to punish you!"

 

Rather, the opposite happens.  The father takes the child up, tenderly, in his arms and makes sure they get the care and healing they need. 

 

I once heard a story, and I hope it isn't copyrighted because I am about to paraphrase it.  If so, my apologies to Greg Laury. 

 

There once was a well-known judge.  He was known for handing down the toughest sentences to the criminals in his courtroom.  He would routinely give the maximum sentence at any trial he sat in on.

 

Then, one day, the judge's son is in court before his father for some of the vilest, most horrific heinous crimes imaginable.

 

As the judge prepares to render his sentence, the courtroom is silent as everyone breathlessly awaits the sentence he will hand down on his own son.  "Will he be as tough?" they wonder.

 

Then the judge looks at his son and calmly but firmly says, "It is obvious to this court that you are guilty of the crimes you have been charged with.  So, I have no choice but to give you the maximum sentence...to apply the maximum penalty."

 

It is at this moment, however that the judge's look turns tender as he stands, walks down from his bench, and around to his son.  Facing his son, the judge continues, "However, you are my son, and I do love you.  Because I do love you so much, I will serve your sentence in your place.  I will take all the penalties and punishments upon myself."

 

That is a picture of God's love for us.  Since Jesus is God (being part of the Trinity), it can be said that God suffered the penalty for us that we should have paid.

 

Hopefully, the people in this pharisaical, legalistic church will wake up and comprehend God's endless mercy and grace.  All I can do is pray for people who have such anger burning in their hearts that all they can imagine is an angry God.

 

Lord, forgive us, we *STILL* don't know what we're doing.  Amen!   

 

 

Alan Wheeler
awheeler@neb.rr.com or alan_wheeler@neb.rr.com
redwheel1 on skype
http://alan-wheeler.blogspot.com/
“Tell the people the truth and the country will be free”
  --Abraham Lincoln

 

A very "liberal" idea for President Bush.

I know some of you are going to think I've lost my mind, especially considering how hard I've been on you liberals of late.  
As I watched President's address to the nation last evening, I had an idea that I believe would help Mr. President's sagging credibility, and could help
to unite the country, and the irony is the idea came from a liberal...a president of the US, but a liberal nonetheless.  Here's my idea: 
Any of you old enough will remember FDR's old fireside chats. 
For those of you too young to remember, or those old enough to want to warp back in time, here's an explanation of what the fireside chats were:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fireside_Chats  
The thing I find interesting, and this is where I get back to riding hard the liberals of today (yes, you
www.moveon.org 
 types, I'm talking to you).  While FDR was a liberal, he wasn't afraid to take on Hitler and the Nazis and our other enemies in WWII.  You liberals of
today could learn something from FDR.  I think that it's the current democratic party's shift so far left that now FDR may be too far right for them that
caused me to leave the democrats.   
For some history on FDR:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_Delano_Roosevelt  
Why do I think these "fireside chats" would help Bush?  Because, as with FDR, he could rally the country behind him and help them understand better the
war we find ourselves in.  He could talk plainly and calmly to the nation about the things he is doing.  Now I believe this would have to be different
from his weekly saturday address (the ones presidents have done for I don't know how long now) in the tone and message (at least to a degree).  The fireside
chat was just that...a "chat" with the nation.  It would be done as if Bush were talking one on one with each and every American. 
I know that FDR had some advantages that Bush doesn't have (as in radio being the only medium, and as the article linked to above points out, people could
hear the address from a neighbor's open window), but Bush has several things FDR never had...IPod's, Cable TV, the Internet, cell phones, etc.  I really
think in this technological age a genuine "fireside chat" in the FDR tradition could gover over well today.  That, however, is just my opinion

Ah, dem arrogant types...and their most arrogant leader...


...Hmmm, so Howard Dean knows so much more about how things are in Afghanistan than anyone else that, on
Fox News Sunday he has the balls to claim that Secretary Of State Rice is *WRONG* about how things are going there?! I didn't know, Mr. Dean, that you knew more about her job than she does.

I think, Mr. Dean, the truth is you have the same grasp on the subtleties of the war on terror that a 1 year old has on the laws of physics! So, to hide your lack of knowledge and ineptitude, you act like a blowhard and open your mouth when you ought to, in reality, take a cue from the 80's band the Go Go's and say "my lips are sealed."

Just be quiet and let Bush, and Secretary Rice and all the others do their job.

Frankly? Your attitude on FNS was a disgrace.

The 9/11 Problem

Okay, don’t let the title wrankle your nose…don’t bombard me with nasty notes and comments saying that I’m trying to stir trouble. This is not a forum in which I am going to politicize 9/11 in any way, shape, or form.

What I do want to do is try to explain an understanding I reached the other night. It’s an understanding of why some people (you know who you are, liberal democrats) don’t understand the connections between 9/11, the war in Iraq, and the war on terror. It’s also an understanding that not only liberal democrats have this problem, but so do conservative republicans (at least some of them) and any person, for that matter, in their right (correct) mind.

The problem as I see it is this: no one wants to begin to think that we could have ever been attacked on our own soil. All the suicide bombers, car bombs, etc. happened on “that” side of the world (meaning the Middle East) and certainly couldn’t ever (and wouldn’t ever) happen on our own shores, or so we all thought before 9/11.

So, 9/11 happens; the towers fall, the Pentagon is severely damaged, and we lose civilians in flight 93 in a field in Pennsylvania. It is so appalling so heinous that we can’t wrap our brains around it. Yet, in light of the worst, most violent event on American soil, we still cannot fathom it. “How did this happen?” we ask God, ourselves, and others. “Who is so vile, despicable, so thoroughly and completely evil that they would want to do this?” We know, intellectually, that it is the Islamic terrorists, the neo-fascists who are out to destroy our way of life, and yet, what we don’t know is just why, just what it is that makes them so evil that they would want to do this.

Part of the problem is we don’t want to know. Our culture, which ironically can watch horrific images in movies they simply call “scary”, don’t want to see the horrific realities of the world…a world torn apart by people evil to the core, people bent on our destruction, and the annihilation of Israel.

I admit that even I, nearly five years later, have trouble believing what happened that horrible day in September. It took me a long time, too long frankly, to understand that the people who did this, right on up to Osama bin Laden himself, aren’t going to give up, back down, and change their minds about the objective of obliterating America and the American way of life. It took me nearly five years to comprehend that these people need to be stopped. Not with diplomacy, not with negotiations and sanctions, but strong, bold, courageous military might. No, it isn’t a pleasant thought, especially to someone (such as myself) who fancied himself a hippie born way too late, to think that war is so drastically necessary, but it is drastically necessary.

We need to, as a nation, wake up and realize that:
*We have enemies on our own soil as well as middle eastern soil. Enemies whose sole objective is our collective death. These people would gladly strap a bomb to themselves just as their brothers in the cause in the middle east do, and they live in states like California, Washington state, and not places like Iraq, Afghanistan, or Pakistan. They are on OUR soil.
*They will never give up, back down, be negotiated with or whatever. We must step up to the plate and be ready to fight, even if it means going on the offensive. *Remember, to them, our deaths at their hands means glory in heaven for them. Fools have died for much less.
*Because they won’t stop, we can never lull ourselves into thinking that another 9/11 type of attack is not in the works, because it is. The foiled London terrorist plot is proof of that.
*While very valid analogies have been made to Lenin and Hitler, we face a foe much worse in ways. It isn’t just Jews they want to utterly destroy, but we “infidel” Americans as well.

As I write this, my heart breaks. In so many ways, 9/11 was the loss of American innocence, and for me, it was the slow shattering of my rose colored glasses. As long as the Islamic Fascists, the Al Qaeda’s and Bin Laden’s of the world, the Ahmadinejad’s who want nothing more than to destroy us completely, to wipe us out of existence are allowed to walk freely, we will never be safe…ever.

What are the clinton people/liberals afraid of?

When you were a kid, did you ever do something wrong, you knew you'd be in trouble, and you did whatever you could/whatever it took to get rid of any evidence (no matter how weak and tenuous) against you?

Well, it would seem that President Clinton, some of his administration, and his liberal cronies are trying (yet again) to cover something up. What? Of all things...a TV miniseries.

http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/cl-wk-channel7sep07,0,6155461.story?coll=cl-tv-features

Why? Who knows? What is Clinton, Berger, et al so afraid of? Is Clinton's legacy as president so shaky, vulnerable, and at risk with this film that they have to block it? Or is it that he screwed up that badly in not going after Osama and he knows it, is ashamed of it, and doesn't want to be humiliated on the world stage?

The other big question is this: is ABC going to actually bow to their pressure and change the film so the truth is inaccurately portrayed to an even lesser degree?

http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/g/9367b3cd-be2a-40a3-b927-1854a0115108

Rush Limbaugh validly points out that President Bush (the current) doesn't raise this kind of stink with negative portrayals of him in the media. He doesn't deem it worth his time.

Clinton, by contrast, is so worried about his image (with or without the cigar and the intern in the cocktail dress) that he is moving to block this miniseries....a *TV SHOW* from airing! I think it speaks volumes about the stark differences between the two men in terms of the level of integrity.

If Clinton really thought he was a good president, and wouldn't be in trouble (somehow) over what this film depicts, he wouldn't be trying to bury it. What he is doing has the same effect as what I tried to do as a kid to hide the fact that I didn't clean my room...I just shoved everything either under the bed or into my closet. Maybe Rush is right, maybe Sandy Berger ought to go steal it for Clinton, and maybe Clinton could take a cue from me and find a bed to hide it under, or a closet to hide it in.

Okay, I am really really steamed! I know it's been a while since I posted, and I apologize for coming back in full rant, but this is unbelievable!

http://rawstory.com/news/2006/Iran_s_Ahmadinejad_to_attend_UN_ass_09022006.html

Why are we even allowing Ahmadinejad on to our soil?? Isn't enough that
we let
Ex-Iranian president Mohammad Khatami speak in Illinois? What are we thinking?

We never invited Hitler or Moussolini to speak at the UN, so why the former and present Iranian presidents? Have we as a nation truly lost our collective mind?

Farmers don't encourage visits by foxes into the hen house...the crips don't invite the bloods to their "hood" to sit and talk...bankers don't take known armed robbers to lunch. Isn't that exactly what the UN/US is doing with Ahmadinejad and Khatami?

I suppose it will take our country being run roughshod by our enemies before we wake up and go "Oh, yeah, these guys? In our country? Ah, er, uh, not a good idea!"

Come on! Don't let it take another 9/11 before you wake up and realize that having the enemy in your back yard is not the better part of wisdom! Wake up and smell the coffee! These people don't want debate...these people don't want negotiations...these people want our annihilation, and the complete destruction of Israel. Can we please keep the Khatamis and Ahmadinejads of the world off of our shores? Please?

Let me clarify something for you liberal readers out there.

When I talk about positively supporting the president, I am not saying I support every single thing he does to the letter.

That said, however, I do believe that the war on terror is one thing that we Americans (liberal or conservative, democrat or republican) ought to get firmly behind him on. Why?

Because we need to show the radical, islamic fascists that we, as a country are united against them, and that we won't back down.

I won't rehash my comments about how we cannot negotiate with these terrorists. I brought this up because of a comment I received that implied I am blindly following Bush without seeing the wrong or bad side of him.

I get the impression that a lot of liberals (notice I didn't say "all liberals") try to paint us conservatives with broad strokes and want to think we're blind little sheep, just following our leaders into some kind of oblivion.

This is ironic coming from the same faction that back stabs anyone who doesn't buy off on every jot and tittle of their rhetoric...need I say Joe Lieberman? He supports Bush on the war on terror and the liberals all of a sudden treat him like he has the plague. Just some food for thought. Granted, I get the impression that the poster of the comment was from Europe, and may not understand the Joe Lieberman comment, but I think if he's reading enough American papers, he will.

We interrupt my political rants...
...to bring you some news about me, personally. LOL!

Part of the purpose of this blog is keeping my typing and writing skills up to snuff. In case I haven't said it, or if you just now started reading this blog, I've had aspirations, off and on throughout my life, to be a writer, and now (as mentioned in previous entries) I am pursuing something exciting...a bachelors degree to become a journalist. Yeah, some of you think that I'm crazy for doing this at my age, but why not now? That's my thought.

So, starting in the spring, Lord willing, I'll be starting at UNL and winding up at their college of journalism. As time goes on I'll update y'all, and believe me, when I'm actually in the thick of it, I'll most likely have quite a bit to say.

If you want to check out the place I'll be attending school (specifically my journalism courses) here's a link.

http://journalism.unl.edu/

Open Letter to the ACLU

Dear ACLU:

Give it up! The president signed a bill protecting the cross in San Diego. Leave it be. I know you folks in the ACLU can’t stand us Christians, and we really get under your liberal skins, but please, leave that cross alone. Go find some other liberal, whiny cause to fight.

I apologize, I know I don’t sound very Christian, but I get so tired of the ACLU and its agenda against people merely wanting to publicly express their faith. The thing that gets me is that they’re like rabid pit bulls who won’t let go of your pant leg. It’s as if they don’t know how to not be sore losers or something.

Take, for example, this quote from an article at www.signonsandiego.com:
“The issue is still the same,” said David Blair-Loy, legal director for the ACLU in San Diego. “We believe it is equally unconstitutional under state law,
or federal law, for the government to subsidize, promote or endorse the Latin cross.”

Hello? We were formed as a Christian nation…and our founders came here so their faith could be expressed without fear of oppression. So, now, over 200 years later we have people within our borders trying to do the same thing, more or less, that the royals did over two centuries ago…keep people from freely expressing their faith.

No, the feds aren’t trying to fly in the face of Judaism or any other religion. They aren’t trying to force all US citizens to believe in Jesus Christ. That isn’t the point. The point is honoring our heritage as a nation, our *Christian* heritage.

I often jokingly say that the first two letters in ACLU stand for “anti Christian”, but as time goes on, I am convinced that, philosophically speaking, it is true.

One Step Closer...

...Oh, and before I forget, I am getting the ball rolling towards my going to school. Got set up with the students with disabilities services office, and so, to them, I am now a student. Next step? Applying after the 1st of the month, and in the meantime getting my informational interviews done for the Nebraska Commission for the Blind and Visually Impaired's rehab counselor I work with.

So, gradually, the ball is starting to roll...hang on, the ride will get wild!

Okay, so you know I'm switching sides/changing parties when I can listen to the Rush Limbaugh show and besides not throwing things at the radio, I actually agree with the man on most, if not all, of the things he says.

Well, I tuned in today, only to have a substitute, and a fascinating one at that. Columnist/writer Mark Steyn was filling in and he made some good points about immigration and Iraq/Iran.

Rather than post a column here, I'll post his site's address and let you discover your own favorites:
http://www.marksteyn.com/index.cfm

Observations after today's press conference.

Hmmm, not sure how President Bush is holding up. By that I mean stamina, etc...not politically speaking.

I got the feeling that this is not how he expected his presidency to run...he didn't expect this much upheaval in the world...and trying to manage his presidency with the weight of it all seems to be taking its toll...or is it just me?

He's doing his utmost, I will give him that, but is it enough? Is he being wary enough towards Iran and N. Korea? Is he doing enough for Israel in addition to and in comparison with what he is doing for Lebanon?

Don't be fooled, I'm not pretending to have answers, just throwing out here the questions that are on my mind. Just publicly ruminating on President Bush and how he, personally, emotionally, and spiritually is holding up under all the stuff going on in the world. All I know is this: I feel called to pray for him more than I ever have before. I think he needs all of our prayers right now.

Well, on to some less political stuff. I bowled for the first time in nearly 20 years on Saturday night, and while I "cheated" and used the bumpers that keep the ball in the lane (not 100% effective for me as I overshot them a few times and my ball had to be retrieved from that walkway bowling alley staff use), I did shoot three fairly good games with a 105, 120, and 84 respectively.

Oh, and one other personal note. I've decided I am going back to school for a bachelor's in Journalism. Long time coming, I think.

Good grief! I don't know whether to roar with rage or cry and cry! A federal judge tells the NSA to stop their anti-terrorist wiretap activities?

What other strategic tactics will the ACLU try to deprive our government of? What other tools in the war on terrorism will the US be deprived of? How long will it be before something so cataclismic that it makes 9/11 look small by comparison happens because of all this left-wing, liberal, cut and run nonsense.

If I sound angry...I am. If I sound upset...I am. The ACLU ought to be sued for misrepresentation...they strip away more liberties than they protect. It sickens me.

I just can't comprehend what it is that people don't understand about the war on terror and why they feel the need to undermine it at every turn. It just steams me up!

Let me put it this way, if we could have the technology we have today, and could use it to stop, for example, Hitler from exterminating millions of Jewws, would you really oppose this? I wouldn't.

Well, we have the technology, and what's scary is that we have an enemy that on so many levels is *WORSE* than Hitler, and yet we want to appease this enemy. We want to stop the Bush administration from knowing what our enemies are up to...who they are talking to, what they are saying and (thanks to the N.Y. Times) where there money is coming from and going to. It's simply unbelievable. I know, I've said all of this before, but I am *MAD* as hell that there are people who would rather risk having our enemies attempt to wipe us off the map as opposed to keeping said enemies in check. Well, we'll see how those people opposed to Bush, his administration, and the work they've tried to do feel when they lose family, friends and other loved ones in an attack that is 9/11 magnified 10 (or possibly 100) times. Maybe then it won't be so important to be able to carry hair gel on an airplane...maybe it will finally be acceptable to monitor communications traffic from outside the US and watch for potential terrorist activity...maybe the government will be allowed to keep its methods of tracking terrorists confidential. It's sad it may well take such an attack to wake people up, but it looks like that is the likely wake up call a lot of people will need.

Let him who has ears hear.

Are you still having trouble believing that God opposes Hezbollah and anyone else who would come against Israel?

Well, let's think about the situation with Israel, Lebanon, and Hezbollah as it stands now. If Hezbollah's leader thinks he can speak against Israel...if he thinks he can threaten Israel and survive...he is kidding himself and any and all of his supporters.

God has made it clear that those in that part of the world will regret coming against Israel. It's in the Old Testament, see for your self:

Joel 3:4 “Yes, and what are you to me, Tyre, and Sidon, And all the regions of Philistia? Will you repay me? And if you repay me, I will swiftly and speedily return your repayment on your own head.

Is it possible the global community (along with the UN) interrupted such a "repayment"? Just some food for thought.

Even if we have, if Hezbollah tries to obliterate Israel, they will live to regret it. Again, reread the passage from Joel:

Joel 3:4 “Yes, and what are you to me, Tyre, and Sidon, And all the regions of Philistia? Will you repay me? And if you repay me, I will swiftly and speedily return your repayment on your own head.

If we think God will remain patient with Hezbollah and its supporters, we are more blind...much more blind...than I originally thought.

Ignorance and stupidity in the news.

I shouldn't read stuff like this before coffee...it just doesn't pay.

What are they teaching in schools nowadays? How did we get to a point where people know the three stooges better than the three branches of government, and can recognize Harry Potter (and who he is) faster than they do British PM Tony Blair. It's just sad, really sad.

Then, in the same news section (a report by Brit Hume at the fox news web site) Cynthia McKinney tries to blame her election loss on electronic voting machines. Open letter to Cynthia McKinney. If electronic voting machines go away, so does independent voting ability for the blind and visually impaired. You lost, so just get over it, and stop trying to (inadvertently, I admit) rid the blind of access to something as important as the tools to vote independently. As things stood for many, many years, the blind had to ask people to read the ballots and/or punch the holes in the ballots, thus robbing the blind voter of precious privacy. Oh, and BTW Miss (or Mrs.) McKinney? Sad to say, even if I had access to a voting machine, and I were in Georgia, you wouldn't have gotten my vote...especially not after such a paranoid-sounding comment about voting machines.



Oh, and one last mini-rant to the people protesting against Israel over the weekend. How dare you insult the people of Israel by comparing them to the very regime that wanted them exterminated in the 30's and 40's. What an insult! It amazes me because black people would scream about being compared to the KKK, and certain groups of women would pitch a fit if you said they behaved too much like men (I know, weak example...but you get the point), so why should Jews have to put up with being compared to the people who tortured them, drove them from their homes, and killed them by the millions?
This just shows me what the anti-war/anti-Bush/liberal democrat/Hezbollah supporting crowd doesn't understand, and probably never will. Israel is God's chosen people. He is going to protect them from any and all harm, and those who oppose Israel (militarily or otherwise) ought to be very, very careful.

Okay, enough ranting. I'd better stop before the word "liberal" makes me want to spit nails, you know?

I'm scared, and I'm willing to admit it!

First we get this interview with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and now come to find out that he recently stated that he would answer the world about the whole nuclear disarmorment issue on August 22nd, some Muslim holy day, and a day on which the radical muslim world would be primed for a catastrophic action against Israel.

Hmmm, and we're supposed to believe what Ahmadinejad tells Mike Wallace about the time for weapons being passed, etc? Why am I not buying it? Why do I fear what could happen to America, Israel or both on the 22nd? My gut feeling is that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not to be trusted...at all.

Actually, to put a lighthearted spin on it, it's kind of like the joking impression of Hitler my mom's father used to do. He had a moustache similar to Hitler's and would brush his hair to the side, and in a mock German accent say, "I want peace...piece of Italy, piece of spain..." You get the idea.

Anyway, I think that all of Ahmadinejad's talk is just that...talk. If he lives up to his word, good...but I'm skeptical for the moment. Until then, on the 22nd, watch the skies...or at least the news.

Thoughts on the president of the US.

I first want to say that I respectfully disagree with President Bush. This cease fire/UN resolution is not a victory against Hezbollah. How? It seems to me that now they can re-group, re-arm, and make it even harder for Israel to combat them next time around, and trust me, there will be a next time.

Now, that said, I don't envy Mr. Bush because his job is one that no one human being should have to face. He sounded so tired yesterday. I really did (and still do) feel bad for him. The world is, almost literally, on his shoulders, and not because I think he's trying to control the world, either.

I say that because right now, in the world, things are a foreign policy nightmare. By that I mean I wouldn't want to be the one trying to decide how to handle the war on terror, the situation in Iraq, Iran, Israel, and how to handle the "president" of North Korea, among other things. That, and having domestic issues to deal with to boot? No offense to him, but better him than me. I would crack under the pressure, I'm sure.

Oh, boy, while I didn't see Mike Wallace's interview with the Iranian president, I did read the transcript thanks to Joel Rosenberg's blog. It's pathetic. Wallace not only played softball, but let the pres of Iran (to a degree) control the interview. Simply pathetic. This wasn't real journalism...it was what gruel is to oatmeal...thin with no real substance. If this is what CBS News has become, I'm taking my eye off the big eye and going elsewhere, thank you. Joel Rosenberg is a smarter man, and more experienced than I am, so I leave it to him to outline the things Mr. Wallace ought to have asked. Personally? If I were Mike Wallace, I would have pinned the man down like a bug on a cork board. That's just me, though. Here's what Joel had to say.

http://joelrosenberg.blogspot.com/2006/08/what-wallace-should-have-asked.html#comments

All right, I'm writing this in part to keep me awake. Had a big brunch, and now I'm fighting sleepiness.

I also want to write this down here before I forget to.

I believe I said something in a previous entry about understanding our enemy so we don't get blindsided. I think, after reflecting on it, that this also has spiritual implications. If we don't understand evil (the devil), we'll be blindsided by it/him. If we don't know how to stand up for our values, we'll fall...every time.

One of my favorite adages is "those who stand for nothing will fall for anything.", and it's true.
I think that is a huge part of why our society (in this country) is in the shape it is in (emotionally and spiritually speaking, that is) because we don't understand how the devil is plotting against us, and what this will cost us in the long run. Just a random thought for this Lord's day. :)

Okay, I couldn't get it to work, but that's typical of trying to do things with a screen reading software...not everything likes to cooperate. But, web accessibility isn't the point of this post, that's for another one.

I wanted to share this because I read the transcript and I think it's worth thinking about. It is a video clip of Joel Rosenberg.

http://www.terrorfreeoil.org/videos/JR081106.php

Well now, so we have a cease fire in Israel/Lebanon. What will this accomplish? This isn't skepticism, but a rhetorical question. I mean, Lebanon has asserted it's right, verbally, to fight, and well...as for Israel...they've stepped up the troops, etc. to do as much as they can before the cease fire begins. I understand their reasoning, but do they understand how it makes them look in the public eye?

Just my thoughts for tonight. I'm tired, and I've had a busy day. So, TTFN, as Tigger would say.

You know, as I sit here and think about the war on terror, I begin to realize something I miss about this country. Growing up, it seemed, the country was more in solidarity than it is now. Granted, I was a kid and didn't know about Vietnam, nor would I have understood it.

The solidarity I really miss, in the end, is that which the USA showed during the second World War. You hear it in the old time radio shows, and even the older TV shows that allowed for it, and even the newsreels of the time. In the old radio shows, for example, you would hear things like "buy bonds" or messages asking to conserve certain goods, and things of that nature. Why did we (as a country) do this, knowing the war was across the ocean? Because we understood our enemy, and we weren't willing to let our freedom be snatched away by the likes of Hitler and Moussolini.

I know it's a very different eara, and we live in a different country (and even world), but I sorely wish that our country could show solidarity in the war on terror (the war in Iraq, supporting Israel, the war in Afghanistan). We need to support our country and its leaders in their efforts to keep us free.

No, we don't have war bonds, and no, this isn't World War II. The problem is, it's worse than WWII, and yet we have the Democrats trying to use recent events as a political chess piece, hoping to find ways to sour the country on the current administration, and its efforts against the terrorists who would love nothing more than to invade our country long enough to blow it off the map. We can't turn a blind eye to this situation. We can never assume the fascists will go away. We can't treat them with kid gloves, either. America needs to sleep with one eye open, as far as I'm concerned.

I'm not asking people to agree with every single thing the Bush Administration does, but only to realize that we have mortal enemies that Mr. Bush and his allies, colleagues, and administration are trying desperately to combat. It doesn't help their morale to see sagging support in the polls. It's kind of like a sports team who doesn't see enough fan support. If their school/city doesn't support them, they see less value in playing the game.

I know, I know, this may be a somewhat naive political analogy, and I freely admit that. I'm no political analyst. I'm just an "average Joe" living in America's heartland. Still, when I think about all the satirizing, finger-pointing, and all the various ways this administration gets mocked and ridiculed innstead of supported and defended, it saddens me.

Please, let's get behind our country before we find ourselves behind the eight ball.

Well, the story did not totally disappear. I'm watching Hannity and Combs, and they've mentioned it, but no one was detained. It makes sense now. Hmmm, am I contributing to the "Drive By Media"?

Fascinating...

I got a breaking news alert (earlier in the day) from Fox News, and since it came in while I was out and not at my computer, when I went to check out the story, it was nowhere to be found at the Fox News site. Even the Drudge Report had a link to it, but the link took me to a story that while it is related to the thwarted terror plot, it had nothing to do with the breaking news item I received which stated there were 40 people arrested in Italy who were also related to the midair terror plot.

I'm no conspiracy theorist, so I'm not accusing Fox of anything, but I wonder if it was some kind of blunder?

Hmmm...

Here's something to think about. One thing I haven't mentioned here, or in my profile, yet (because it isn't a major thing for me) is that I am totally blind. I was thinking about the whole issue of the extra measures taken after both 9/11 and the plot that was thwarted yesterday in Brittain.

After 9/11 when I traveled by air, the security people have taken my long white cane from me. To me, this is a invaluable tool. It is, for me, an extension of my hand...and I use my hands now (a lot) since my eyes no longer work. At first, I wasn't so sure I liked this. I am an independent person who believes in the ability of blind people to function independently in society. Please, don't misunderstand. When I say this, I don't mean I won't accept help...I am just selective about the kind of help since I can do most things for myself.

Anyway, I digress. As I thought about the new security measures, and the thwarted plot, I realized how glad I am they actually inspect my cane. Why? Because, while I wouldn't fit a terrorist profile, what if some sick-minded individual who does fit such a profile decided to pretend to be blind in order to gain passage to an aircraft with explosives undetected because they hid them in a blind person's white cane? I have nothing to hide, so I have nothing to fear in letting them inspect my cane, and nothing to gain by resisting such an inspection. Let them wand me (and my cane), let them frisk me, take my cane and x-ray it (or even me). I don't care. As long as I can fly safely, I think the inconvenience is worth it.

Alan

Before I go any further, I need to admit something up front. I am changing in a way that surprises me, and some people around me. In fact, it is so sudden, and so surprising, I hesitate to tell people (such as family members) for fear that they won't understand. It's time, however, I come out of the political closet. I used to think I was rather liberal...in fact, I was rather liberal. In recent days, weeks, months, and years, however, that has changed. I am becoming something I used to fear & dread becoming...a conservative-leaning person.

There was a time, and it really doesn't seem all that long ago, that I would have listened to shows like Sean Hannity's and thought he was a nut job. Thing is? I don't now. I actually agree with him. I'm still not partial to Rush Limbaugh (because I think he stoops to too much name calling), but Sean has a level head which I truly appreciate.

I joined this community after reading the blog of the author Joel Rosenberg. Again, as with Sean Hannity, there was a time I would have ruled out reading books of the kind Mr. Rosenberg writes simply because his world view didn't match mine.

I have, however, gone through a dramatic shifting of my point of view. I can only credit the Lord God almighty, and His son, Jesus Christ because if it had been left up to my will, I would have never changed. Do I consider myself part of the "far right"? Probably not, but definitely more right than I used to see myself. I mean, hey, we're talking the guy who once received e-mail from www.democrats.com but gave up when the ideals espoused seemed to be too far afield of what I personally believed. So, if there are any other "closet conservatives" out there, let me know. I think I may need to out myself and my GOP tendencies once and for all. Whew! Did I just say "GOP"? :)

I don't believe it! Did you hear Mike Wallace on Sean Hannity's show? The president of Iran pulled a snow job on Mike Wallace, and Mr. Wallace apparently bought it! I was (basically) as shocked as poor Sean was. I just couldn't believe my ears. I think Mr. Wallace knew he was in the hot seat, too, because he could barely get out answers to questions when given the room by Sean to do so.

By Mr. Wallace's own admission, the president of Iran is "savvy", so what makes Mike think that he (the Iranian president) isn't savvy enough to sucker him? I'm sure a man in the position of the Iranian presidency has the equivalent of PR people who help him spin things...especially to the American media.

All I could do was shake my head.

Speaking of head shaking, depending on what I discern after praying about it, I may post an entry in the near future that will have some people who read this shaking their own heads, but we'll see.