Saturday, December 17, 2005

Some Thoughts on the "War on Christmas"

Figures that my first post in a while is a link to another blog (I know it's mine, but what the heck)
I put this on My Lewisian Pipe Blog because it is of a largly ecclesiastical nature.

Sunday, December 11, 2005

Sore Blogging

I am still a bit sore after this event that benefitted Toys for Tots. We managed to raise a nice truckload of toys (never underestimate the power of a $50 discount on the entry fee is every body on your team donates a toy.)
Unfortunately I came down with something at some point yesterday and was sick at work last night and had to call out today. Will post again when I am feeling more lucid. please resist the temptation of adding "guess we won't be hearing from you again"

Wednesday, December 07, 2005

New Look

Web Design Graphic Art Miva Merchant Web Design is the source for the new appearance for the House of Opinions. It reminds me of Furman University's rugby jerseys. Just bear with me as I get my blogroll back up. I also apologize for losing all previous comments.
UPDATE:Apparently I didn't lose the previous comments and trackbacks

Sunday, November 20, 2005

It Seems You no longer need to Lurk at the Airport

They aren't even waiting and taking the effort to meet them at the airport to spit on them. During and after Viet Nam the anti-war people at least put some effort into goint to airports to spit on returning soldiers. First we see them whooping it up when the 2000th soldier died (sorry guys the pics and rhetoric speak for themselves). Now, thanks to the marvels of modern technology you can do it from the comfort of whatever room you keep your computer. As I was reading Cao's Blog I found a link to this post on A Female Soldier. These words lept out at me making me sick to thinks to the depths some in the anit-war crowd strive for.

I wish to express my congratulations to the hackers, vandals, and anti-war visitors who successfully blocked my ability to post any further tributes to the soldiers. I am sure you find victory in preventing myself and others from having a place to read and pay our respects to the Fallen Female Soldiers, and my brother’s in arms, the brave soldiers of the 101st Airborne Division. I can only imagine your satisfaction in justifying the disgrace of men and women who died for this country. You may not feel it was justified, but they gave their lives believing in what they were doing. Apparently freedom of speech is merely a phrase to you, not something you believe, in unless it applies to you.

Please read the rest at the link above.

I scrolled down and found the comments referred to. The biggest culprit is some ...I know that "troll" is the phrase being used in reference to this person thus far, but I think it is too weak...oh well, we'll stick with "troll" til I think of something better. As I was saying, the biggest culprit was some troll calling him/her/itself "Amanda" (which I think is even more of an efront as I once had a girlfriend in collefe named Amanda). Here is some of what this blogging tubgirl was spewing:

"Do you not feel guilty that you are helping in the killing of innocent Iraqis - what did they do to deserve what has happened to them?
You can always choose not to go.
As for prayers and sympathy to your family - forget it!
And when you get back and realise all the death and destruction (which you helped to cause) is a complete waste - dont say you have not been warned" [btw, that is the entire comment, can't cry, "out of context"]

Just to show that ol' Mandy isn't drive-by troll this was posted later"

"If you think you are doing an important job for your country, just look at how much you or your family will get compensated for your death or injury.

Now tell me the President thinks what you are doing is important.

Our country needs idiots like you so we can over-run other countries and take their natural resources [emphasis added]"

Then another clown calling itself "Christians for Cheap Oil" chimed in as well.
These two cretins (as well as the population of Kos and DU) have every right to oppose the war...but it certainly belies their claim that they support the soldiers and oppose the mission. They just couldn't wait for them to arrive at the airport to start spitting on them.

UPDATE: Others have picked up on this and it looks like an all out blogburst brewing.
I will be posting those I discover to be participating.
Cao's Blog
In the Right Place
Small Town Vetran
Pirates' Cove
Random Numbers
Freedom Folks

UPDATE II: Just a random thought, if these folks' IP's could be traced to their employers' computers? I think they might be interested to see what their employees are up to.

Wednesday, November 16, 2005

If It is a Lie for One...'s a lie for the first one to say it!

Sorry, but you can't call it a lie for one and not the other. I think both men believed the intel that was before them and acted in that they believed to be the appropriate manner.

Thank you, Michelle Malkin

Saturday, November 12, 2005

Thank You, Beth

Comic book fan that I am I followed the link to this site that I found in My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy and spent more time than I intended looking at all that stuff and reading the hilarious commentary that accompanied. Now I am wayyyyy behind schedule.

Friday, November 11, 2005

Thank You

I am the son of a veteran (USMC). He had served before I was born so I don't know the sacrifices that many military families make except as an observer. These brave men and women put themselves between the enemies and their families, friends and countless people who they will never meet. Whether they come back or not, we owe them a great deal as they are reminders that the freedoms we enjoy are not free. There is a price, and our veterans put themselves on the line to defend them.
Thank you, vets.

C'mon down to South Park and Meet Some Friends of Mine

Between Samantha Burns and My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy I just had to try this:

Try your hand at it at Planearium

Thursday, November 03, 2005

BIg Surprise Here

Jimmy Carter, author of the please-don't-hurt-us foreign policy that worked oh so well in the seventies, is on the Bush-lied bandwagon again. This is the same guy who thinks the Revolutionary War was unnecessary but the [American] colonists were a bunch of hot-heads who forced the issue. Mr. Carter, you've got your Nobel Prize, now please go drift off into the obscurity you so richly deserve and stop with the, "Hey, I'm over here" routine, it is old. Very old.

Thursday, October 27, 2005

Hail Scarlet and the Grey!

My alma mater, Newberry College, the smallest school in the NCAA that plays football, has respectfully told the NCAA to "stick it". Our athletic teams nickname is the "Indians" and as many of you know the NCAA is now selectively enforcing a new rule that bars such names from postseason play or hosting post season play. Like Florida State, Illinois and Utah we appealed. Unlike FSU, IU and UU our appeal was rejected. Let's face it, they are bigger and bring in more money to the NCAA.
NC president, Mitchell Zais has responded both forcefully and respectfully with a request to revisit the appeal. Here are a few excerpts from the response:

...Pay a visit to Newberry. You’ll not find a student dressed in headdress and Indian garb, dancing and gyrating as if possessed. It has been 20 years since any athletic team had a mascot. You won’t find silly cartoons or demeaning caricatures on hats, uniforms, or playing surfaces. Our primary and secondary logos are a spear and arrowhead. The spear is nearly identical to the one used by Florida State University, an institution no longer on your blacklist....

...Furthermore, by ignoring Newberry College’s self-study on this issue and including us on the list of offending schools, the NCAA has declared us incapable of making a fair and ethical decision...

...What’s next? A proscription against the Notre Dame Fighting Irish as demeaning to persons of Irish descent? Condemnation of all schools with Crusader nicknames as insulting to Christians or Muslims? Censure of the blue hose-wearing Highlanders of South Carolina’s Presbyterian College as offensive to people of Scottish ancestry? ...

...Already the animal rights groups are lobbying for our nearest neighbor, the University of South Carolina, to remove the “Fighting Gamecock” as its mascot. South Carolina’s legislature recently enhanced the penalties for participating in cockfighting. It’s legal only in Louisiana and New Mexico, two of the fifty states. This mascot pays tribute to unlawful behavior, ostensibly sanctioned by the NCAA. If the NCAA continues along these lines, it won’t be long before special interest activists voice sufficient outrage against the use of any particular mammal, bird, reptile, insect, tree, or weather disturbance to shift that object to the banned mascot list....

Granted, in the grand scheme of things, college mascots are somewhat trivial. It is, however, the proverbial camel getting it's nose in the tent and Dr. Zais' prophecies are probably a lot closer to coming true than many want to acknowledge.

Sunday, October 23, 2005

Okay, Okay, I'll Read the Silly Thing

I have thus far resisted reading The Da Vinci Code. Before the chortling gnostics in the crowd start with "What's the matter, scared of being challenged in your faith?", I have resisted it because it has been done before. Anybody remember Holy Blood, Holy Grail? It appears to be another attempt to lay claim that gnosticism is the real Christianity. Now if I am going to discuss this and contribute to the discussion on LaShawn Barber's Corner I am going to have to read the darn thing.

Went as Far as I could Down that Road.

When the President put Harriet Miers' name up for consideration for the SCOTUS I had to admit a bit of surprise, but it was his appointment to make. I tried to give him and her the benefit of the doubt on the matter. I even castigated fellow conservatives for some of their near vitriolic reaction to the nomination.. As time has passed I now find myself unable to support the monination any longer. Her sketchy answers to members of the judiciary committee, the idea she may stop making courtesy calls on the Hill so she can cram for her hearings. I am no longer comfortable at all with the nomination. At first I was concerned with the appearance of cronyism, as this drags on I feel that there is more than just an appearance.
Mr. President, cut your losses and withdraw the nomination.

Friday, October 14, 2005

Perhaps Mr. Kerry would Care to Explain This.

As you may recall, when the Senate was looking into the possibility that there were still American servicemen in Viet Nam it was John Kerry who did everything he could to put a stop to it. He assured us that there were no more. If that is true, then why are the remains of eleven Marines just now getting here?
HT: Michelle Malkin

Wednesday, October 12, 2005

Amen, Brother Shayne

Being a United Methodist I was more than a little distressed to learn from Wesley Blog that one of our pastors has been named national chaplain for Planned Parenthood. PP is nothing more than a eugenics organization that was founded by Margret Sanger who was in persuit of a racist program of curtailing the number of births to African americans and other groups she deemed "unworthy of life". In addition, their desire to impede the prosecution of pedophiles and statutory rapists (which has led me to parody their name with "Pedophiles' Pal") makes this relationship between a UM pastor wholly inappropriate. I am beginning to think the UM "committment" to the sanctity of life is of the wink-nudge variety.
Cross posted at My Lewisian Pipe Blog

Friday, October 07, 2005

Prez Apparently Asleep at the Switch Again

While I voted for President Bush twice, I am becoming gladder and gladder there is a 22nd Amendment. Those who know me no I do not like the term limit that was written into the Constitution after FDR. This account from Debbie Schlussel proves once and for all that W is no Reagan. Reagan saw the threat posed by Daniel Ortega and risked his presidency to get him out of office in Nicaragua.
Bush, on the other hand is risking his legacy ignoring our boarders and making appointments that are questionable at best (namely Meyers and Miers). I am afraid Schlussel is right, he is looking more and more like Jimmy Carter. Ignoring real threats, going to the mat for people who don't deserve it and leaving himself open to the accusation of cronyism.
W, I want to support you, but you are making it hard these days.

Tuesday, October 04, 2005

You'd Think He had Nominated Michael Moore

I have been reading with some amusement, and no little bemusement, the reaction to President Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers to be Associate Justice on the USSC replacing Sandra Day O'Connor. And I am not talking about the reaction from the left. I am tired of the let's-jump-ship-if-we-don't-get-what-we-want mentality among some of my fellow Republicans and/or conservatives. It reminds me of the mentality of the country club Republicans that had a snit a few years back and supported Democrat "Jackpot Jim" Hodges; an incompetent boob if ever there was one.
I have just one question for the whiners: who do you think is your best chance to give you something even close to what you want in a USSC justice? Second, what are you basing your gripes on? It seems to me some of you are letting your imaginations run wild. If the confirmation hearings turn up something objectionable I will react accordingly, but until then let's see what shakes out of the tree and oput away the tar and feathers until we see if they are needed.
Also Read:
My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy

Monday, September 26, 2005

Rally, Sons of Notre Dame

Rally sons of Notre Dame,
Sing her glory, and sound her fame
Raise her Gold and Blue,
And cheer with voices true,
Rah! Rah! For Notre Dame.

We will fight in every game
Strong of heart and true to her name.
We will ne'er forget her
And we'll cheer her ever,
Loyal to Notre Dame.

Cheer, cheer for Old Notre Dame
Wake up the echoes cheering her name,
Send the volley cheer on high,
Shake down the thunder from the sky,
What though the odds be great or small
Old Notre Dame will win over all,
While her loyal sons are marching
Onward to Victory.

You may be asking what is a die-hard fan of the University of South Carolina Gamecocks doing publishing the lyrics of the Notre Dame Victory March. First of all, I have always like Notre Dame. The gold dome, "Touchdown Jesus", Knure Rockne and the "Gipper", it is a program of story and legend. Michelle Malkin links to this story thats greatly contributes to the mythos
WARNING:reading this will result in choking back the tears, or letting them flow depending on what kind of Sensitive New Age Guy you are.

Sunday, September 25, 2005

This Check Should be Returned as Well

You remember Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal ? Funny little man who, after giving Mayor Giuliani a check for $10 million for relief after the 9/11 attack, turned around blamed US policy for the attacks? Well, he has now purchased 5.46% of the Fox Corproation. It will be interesting to see how this will effect the only news network that has not been a cheering section for the terrorists now that is part-owned by a terrorist sympathizer. I only wish the poeple at Fox had the same sense of integrity that Mayor Giuliani had. I think Atlas Shruggs says it best, "oy".

Saturday, September 24, 2005

Take This Guy to the Pub

Argghhh! The Home Of Two Of Jonah's Military Guys.. relays this from the Irish Times' Newton Emerson:

As the full horror of Hurricane Katrina sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if this is the end of George Bush's presidency. The answer is almost certainly yes, provided that every copy of the US Constitution was destroyed in the storm. Otherwise President Bush will remain in office until noon on January 20th, 2009, as required by the 20th Amendment, after which he is barred from seeking a third term anyway under the 22nd Amendment.
As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if the entire political agenda of George Bush's second term will not still be damaged in some terribly satisfying way. The answer is almost certainly yes, provided that the entire political agenda of George Bush's second term consists of repealing the 22nd Amendment. Otherwise, with a clear Republican majority in both Houses of Congress, he can carry on doing pretty much whatever he likes.

As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if the Republican Party itself will now suffer a setback at the congressional mid-term elections next November. The answer is almost certainly yes, provided that people outside the disaster zone punish their local representatives for events elsewhere a year previously, both beyond their control and outside their remit, while people inside the disaster zone reward their local representatives for an ongoing calamity they were supposed to prevent. Otherwise, the Democratic Party will suffer a setback at the next congressional election.

As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if an official inquiry will shift the blame for poor planning and inadequate flood defences on to the White House. The answer is almost certainly yes, provided nobody admits that emergency planning is largely the responsibility of city and state agencies, and nobody notices that the main levee which broke was the only levee recently modernised with federal funds. Otherwise, an official inquiry will pin most of the blame on the notoriously corrupt and incompetent local governments of New Orleans and Louisiana.

As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if George Bush contributed to the death toll by sending so many national guard units to Iraq. The answer is almost certainly yes, provided nobody recalls that those same columnists have spent the past two years blaming George Bush for another death toll by not sending enough national guard units to Iraq. Otherwise, people might wonder why they have never previously read a single article advocating large-scale military redeployment during the Caribbean hurricane season.

As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking how a civilised city can descend into anarchy. The answer is that only a civilised city can descend into anarchy. As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if George Bush should be held responsible for the terrible poverty in the southern states revealed by the flooding. The answer is almost certainly yes, provided nobody holds Bill Clinton responsible for making Mississippi the poorest state in the union throughout his entire term as president, or for making Arkansas the second-poorest state in the union throughout his entire term as governor. Otherwise, people might suspect that it is a bit more complicated than that.

As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if George Bush should not be concerned by accusations of racism against the federal government. The answer is almost certainly yes, provided nobody remembers that Jesse Jackson once called New York "Hymietown" and everybody thinks Condoleezza Rice went shopping for shoes when the hurricane struck because she cannot stand black people. Otherwise sensible Americans of all races will be more concerned by trite, cynical and dangerous political opportunism.

As the full horror of that sinks in, this columnist is simply glad that everybody cares.

Get than man a pint of stout.

HT:Cassandra at Villainous Company

If it Quacks Like a Duck

In the early part of the Twentieth Century, the Ottoman Turks killed 1.5 million Armenians in what is regarded by some as the first genocide of that century. Some disagree. A twice cancelled conference to discuss the matter is drawing fire of guess who. Sorry, folks, but in the words of dirk Gently, "If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck you at least have to consider that you have a small aquatic bird of the family anatidae on your hands.

Thursday, September 22, 2005

Apologies to the Goose Creek Symphony

I will get to my headline momentarily but first (trust me it will get tied together...even if the segue sucks):
As many of you know, Michelle Malkin and Brian Maloney have been chronicling the woes of Air America and bring us more in the links I just provided. This is the funniest chapter yet in the pathetic saga of the Little Network that Couldn't.
Ahhh...tin-cup broadcasting is in the air. Not the usual PBS fund raisers, but a commercial for-profit radio network we know and loath, Air America. That is right, that champion pilferer of service organizations for underpriviliged children and Alzheimers patients now wants to reach into your pockets. Okay they want you to reach in yourself and give them $50 for three bumper stickers. Well, at least now the left has its own version of the PTL Club to invite the derision of of its critics. Instead of Jim and Tammy we will have Al and Randi. Actually, for $50 I would want nothing less than an autographed copy of Al Franken's partnership agreement that he never signed (So he says despite the copy that was uncovered a few weeks back).
When I was about 13 or 14 a group calling themselves The Goose Creek Symphony had its first and only hit. A little ditty called, "Oh Lord, Won't You Buy Me a Mercedes-Benz". It is the plaintiff cry of a nere-do-well asking favors of God with a sense of entitlement:

Oh Lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes- Benz
My friends all drive Porches
I must make ammends
I worked hard all my lifetime
No help from my friends
Oh Lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes- Benz

Oh Lord, won't you buy me a color TV
Dialing for Dollars
is trying to find me
I wait for delivery
each day until three
Oh Lord, won't you buy me a color TV

Oh Lord, won't you buy me a night on the town
I'm counting on you, Lord
Please don't let me down
Show me you love me
and buy the next round
Oh Lord, won't you buy me a night on the town

You get the picture. Now let's play with the lyrics a bit (and you will soon see the reason for the apology).

Oh [fill in whatever deity], won't you buy me a ton of air mins
My friends all have real jobs
I must make ammends
I can't beat Rush Limbaugh
Using string and two tins
Oh [fill in whatever deity], won't you buy me a ton of air mins

Oh [fill in whatever deity], won't you buy me an hour of Al Franken
We're doing so badly
I drink til I'm stankin'
He denies he's a partner
but honesty he's lackin
Oh [fill in whatever deity], won't you buy me an hour of Al Franken

Oh [fill in whatever deity], won't you buy me a ticket to Brazil
No more Boys and girls Clubs
will let my fingers in the till
you know what I'll need
when they find out it's just a big shill
Oh [fill in whatever deity], won't you buy me a ticket to Brazil

Wednesday, September 21, 2005

I'm This Many Years Old

As of yesterday the House of Opinions and two things militated against my saying anything. 1)I was (and still am to a somewhat lesser degree) down with bronchitis; and 2) (and most important) my wife had a birthday herself. It has been an interesting year and I look forward to more.

Sunday, September 18, 2005

Required Reading

I was directed to Not a Desperate Housewife while reading My Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. The post linked above is one of a series where Stacy deals with the loss of her nephew who died because of a drunk driver. You will be both moved and outraged by what you read. Cody's story and the aftermath of the senseless deaths of eight young people whose futures were taken from them and how the culprit was all but honored by their alma mater after being given a slap on the wrist by the judge.
This cannot be allowed to continue, in either Wyoming or any other state.
I could write more but won't. I will let Stacy's work speak for itself.

Sunday, September 11, 2005

Four years

Four years ago today I got up and called into work sick. I was not playing hooky I was having what seemed to be flu. I did not realize that that in just a couple of hours I would be a great deal sicker. At first I thought it was a drunken pilot until the second plane hit. Then the Pentagon was reported next. Then came the word of a fourth plane that went down in Pennsylvania which we later learned was hijacked but the passengers fought back.
As the usual suspects began claiming credit, and the video reached us of some Muslims dancing in celebration it became obvious that there are some with whom peaceful co-existance is impossible. Like it or not it is them or us. I would rather the fighting be over there than on our own soil if fight we must. We are past the point where we have the luxury of treating terrorists attacks as a crime for which the perpetrators have executed themselves. This is not the time to lose our resolve and cut and run as Mrs. Sheehan et al would have us do.
Is there a better way? If there was I would certainly advocate it. There seems to be no negotiating with a group that hates the US, Christians and any other non-Muslim. So long as those who maintain this homicidal practice of taking out the infidels with no condemnation by their fellow travellers (and in some cases their applause), fighting is our only option.
Please do not cite the 9/11 commission. As far as I am concerned that was a dog and pony show with one of its members (Jamie Gorelik) responsible for the failure of Mohamed Atta not being identified to the FBI even before Bush was elected. Apparently the previous administration was more concerned with possible political fallout.

Friday, September 09, 2005

Please Tell Me This is just a Bad Joke, II

As you remember, Flight 93 is the one where the passengers fought back and the brave Islamofacists plowed the plane into the ground. Well, that appears to be the view of the architect who has designed the front runner for the Flight 93 memorial in Pennsylvania. As Michelle Malkin reports somebody thinks that this:

is appropriate. I am with Bryan Preston of JunkyardBlog and I am paraphrasing, this is only as appropriate as a holocost memorial in the shape of a swastika. You can call it "Crescent of Embrace" or whatever window dressing you care to call it but it is still an insult to the passengers who fought back. This is the symbol of the murderers of those passengers. I am seriously hoping that this is just cluelessness or inadverdant insensitivity. Unfortunately I am afraid that this is nothing more or less than mutliculturalists running amok to generate good PR for the Islamofacists responsible for the atrocity that occured on September 11, 2001. I can only hope that this is design is eventually rejected.

Sunday, September 04, 2005

Please Tell me this is just a Bad Joke

The Irish Trojan is reporting the incredible comments made by the head of FEMA. If he truly meant what he said, Mike Brown should be sumarily dismissed from his position for gross incompetence. Yes the mayor of New Orleans and governor of Louisiana screwed up royaly in not using available resuorces to evacuate the city before Katrina made landfall. Every $@#! public official, elected or appointed, should have know that those leveys were at best suspect in a storm as strong as Katrina and that some if not all of them would fail.
Now, if any of those who were left in NO were there because they did not want to evacuate, then yes, they made their bed. However, that was not the case universally. Many did not own their own transportation. School buses and public transportation could, and should have been used to aid the evacuation. Instead they were left parked in neat rows and now either need major repairs and/or replacement. The looting should have been dealt with immediately with looters being shot on sight.
That being said, Mike brown is in no way absolved for his grossly inadequate actions in response to this. He let a horrific situation degenerate even further in a very short time. Inadequate food and water distribution. Little or no waste management allowing a potential disaster for a catastrophic disease outbreak. The honorable thing for Mr. Brown to do would be to tender his resignation immediately. But as with most bureaucrats, Republican or Democrat, the honorable thing is never a consideration.

HT:Michelle Malkin

Saturday, September 03, 2005

The Blame Game

There is a lot of blame being levied for events in New Orleans. "It is all Bush's fault!" Some have gone so far as to accuse the President of sending in the National Guard to shoot black people. Actually that order was to shoot looters and came from the governor of Louisiana (about three days late in my opinion). Yes it is all Bush's fault for urging the evacuation of New Orleans days before Katrina made landfall (the urging was ignored by both the governor and the mayor of NO). It was Bush's fault for declaring the area a disaster BEFORE the storm hit in order to allow relief to start immediately. Of course it was Bush's fault that the mayor of New Orleans allowed this to happen:

That is right, every one of those buses could have been used to get people out of town and kept inland where they would not have been flooded out like they are now. They are all parked in neat rows like they were during the storm, and they will stay that way because every one of them needs to have major repairs on them or replaced.
It is also Bush's fault that the NO police department did nothing to prevent (at best) and according to some reports actually participated in the looting themselves.
Sorry Mr. mayor...that does not wash...pun intended

Thursday, September 01, 2005

Instapundit Persona non Gratis

I know I had never gotten around to linking to Instapundit, and the only mention of Glen Reynolds is my Alliance pseudo-quote where is does not really say I must be destroyed. therefore, since Cao made known that Glen thinks the ACLU is such a wonderful organization I am urging my readers...both of delink from Instapundit, if you are linked to them.
I have never had any use for the ACLU and have yet to see what useful purpose they serve. When you read Cao's post you will also see that Glen's attitude leaves something to be desired as well. No wonder we of the Alliance refer to him as "Evil glen"

Tuesday, August 30, 2005

Apology for Light Blogging

A week or more between posts is not acceptable and I will try to do better. Thank you

If Abbas will not Do anything, Re-Open the Settlement

Israle forcibly removed people from the Gaza settlement. One of Israel's former PMs resigned on protest. Looks like he was right. This past Sunday there was another suicide bombing. Palestinian President Abbas condemned the act, rhetoricaly. President Bush is at last telling Abbas it is time for him to stand up to the terrorists among his people. Anybody care to start a pool as to how long before Israel gets blamed for this too, or accused of undermining the "roadmap" if she retaliates? Let's face it, in the eyes of many, particularly the US news medis, Palestinian terrorists are the darlings. Even Senator Hillary Clinton can publicly embrace Yasser Arafat's now-widow (he was alive at the time) and not get called on it.
Israel is right to be paranoid, some will not be happy until every Israeli is pushed into the sea, and every non-Israeli Jew soon follows. Many do not want to admit that we are witnessing a global holocost, but do you really think that the Islamo-facists will stop with the destruction of Israel?
More later.

Monday, August 29, 2005

Fred Phelps Strikes Again

Fred Phelps is often trotted by the left out as the poster boy for their caricature of an evangelical Christian. He may believe he is. Things like this say otherwise. Disrupting a soldier's funeral...and for what? So he can extend his Warhohlian fifteen minutes? Mr. Phelps, if you insist on misrepresenting Christ, at least do not claime to speak for all Christians. You are not even close.

Wednesday, August 17, 2005

Ever Wonder Where They come up with This Stuff?

Conspiracy theories are a dime a dozen (like the late, great "Classy" Freddy Blassie, "I'm lookin' for the guy who's supplyin' the dimes"). Of late they have become so off the wall so as to make one wonder if person who came up with it has more than two adjacent brain cells functioning. I think I have found the source.:
The George W. Bush Conspiracy Generator. That's right you too can get in on the fun of finding new things to blame on the pres.

HT: Dizzy Girl

Wednesday, August 10, 2005

NARAL Ad Shown to be False

NARAL has released an attack ad against Supreme Court nominee John Roberts that claims (by ham-fisted implication) that he wrote a brief supporting abortion clinic bombers. According to the good folks at the ad is false and misleading. FactCheck goes into what the brief actually said and pointed out that the ad uses an incident that occured SEVEN YEARS after the brief was files in a totally different matter.

In words and images, the ad conveys the idea that Roberts took a legal position excusing bombing of abortion clinics, which is false. To the contrary, during the Reagan administration when he was Associate Counsel to the President, Roberts drafted a memo saying abortion-clinic bombers "should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law." In the 1986 memo, Roberts called abortion bombers "criminals" and "misguided individuals," indicating that they would get no special treatment regarding requests for presidential pardons. Reagan in fact gave no pardons to abortion-clinic bombers.

The 1986 draft is on file at the Reagan library. The White House furnished a copy to

The ad does not even mention what the argument of the brief in question. According to FactCheck, "What Roberts argued was that a federal anti-discrimination law couldn't be used against abortion blockaders because they weren't discriminating against women – they were blockading men, too."

Let's face it, this ad is nothing but a guilt bu association piece, which is probably why CNN has accepted the ad for airing.

Sunday, August 07, 2005

I Do not Want to give them Traffic, but...

The Dawn Patrol: Planned Parenthood Fantasizes About Blowing Up 'Anti-Choicers' tells of the homicidal "superhero" concocted by Pedophiles' Pal Planned Parenthood Goldengate. Then again it is also an example of your tax dollars at work. Dawn's title of the blog entry pretty much sums up the hypocricy of the piece which looks like it started out as a flip book done by a third grader (apologies to third graders out there, I know many of you are more talented than the hack who made this cartoon).
Brief synopsis: After drowning an abstinance-only teacher (who looks suspiciously like Snidely Whiplash) our "hero" wipes out "anti-choice" demonstrators by encasing them in exploding condoms. She flies to DC (taking a route that is suggestive of an IUD coil) where she lectures a senator about nobody being above the law (rather ammusing from an organization that protects statutory rapists seemingly as a matter of policy). After that she goes to Africa to show the progress of Margret Sanger's Negro Project over there. Of course she doesn't mention that part of PP's history given that the hero is Black.
Of course it ends with the usual hollow rhetoric about accepting people regardless of "race, creed...religion [isn't this redundant?]...". This is hollow given the homicidal treatment received by those with opposing views.

Thursday, August 04, 2005

In Support of the Right to Vote (Fraudulently)

In a rather perverse episode of "Where Were You When..." I have to say I was actually in Atlanta getting ready to head home when Cynthia Tucker went off the deep end. In Easy to identify hypocrisy of Georgia Republicans' voter ID law
, Ms. Tucker revives the old, "what about non-drivers" objection to requiring voters supply a photo ID at the time they go to exercise the franchise. In this piece, Tucker tells us of the plight of 93-year old Mamie Fields, a nursing home resident who only had to show her social security card in the last election.

But Gov. Sonny Perdue and the GOP-dominated Legislature have gotten tough on people like Fields, who is 93, so she won't be able to get away with that again. Claiming they were on the lookout for fraudulent voters, GOP legislators pushed through a stringent voter ID law that would force Georgians to show a state-sponsored photo ID. But Mamie Fields doesn't have one. She hasn't driven in many years, she said.

Is that the only objection? That is rather easily fixed. You see many states, INCLUDING GEORGIA issue a photo ID to non drivers. If Ms. Tucker had done even a minor ammount of homework she would have known that. That would, of course, have made her column less melodramatic, but she would at least not looked like she was supporting the right to vote fraudulently. Let's face it, anybody who would say say something like, "I wish I could vote lots of times. I want to throw all those rascals in Washington out" on the record needs to be viewed. Ms. tucker apparently neglected to find out that "vote early and vote often" does not refer to the same least not legally.

Monday, August 01, 2005

Yeah, I'm know I'm Late to this Party, but...

Dead[beat] Air America can't seem to Catch a Break (Couldn't Happen to a Nicer Bunch) was the original title to this, but that won't fit in the trackback ping box.
Despite the silence of the New York Times, the Air America scandal continues to grow legs. At one time I would have said that it was to their credit that they were still on the air despite their abysmal ratings. It seems it was to someone else's involuntary credit that they are still on the air. Namely a now struggling Boys and Girls Club in the Bronx.
Michelle Malkin: AIR DEADBEAT: THE SAGA CONTINUES continues Michelle's coverage of the scandal. It would probably be fun to listen to the self-proclaimed knights-in-shining-armor-fighting-against-the-evils-of-capitalist-America try to explain their way out of it, but from all reports they seem to have a "scandal? What scandal?" attitude about it all. I guess that makes Al Franken one of those lying liars who tell lies he so abhors. BoreAmerica has even created a news ticker to cover the scandal.
As Cigar Dave would say, "Life is good."

Sunday, July 31, 2005

How Many times do I have to Say this, "Jimmy, Go Away!"

Sister Toldjah - Told Jah so! � How do we know our Gitmo policy is right? gives the answer, because Jimmy Carter thinks it isn't. then again, he thought the Ayatollah Khomeni was a good bet to be the leader of iran and refused to recognize any government not headed by the man. I can think of 52 people who can tell you what a wonderful idea that was.
Mr. carter, how have one Nobel Prize for America bashing, are we trying for number two?

Friday, July 29, 2005


No, this is not a reference to the syndicated column by fellow South Carolinian. But it is about what has happened to Michael. According to Michael GrahamMichelle Malkin: CRITICIZING ISLAM ON THE AIRWAVES, Michael has been suspended indefinately due to pressure from those happy-go-lucky moderate Muslims at CAIR. You know, the terrorist supporters who claim they are not despite all evidence to the contrary.
Of Michael should have had an idea of what a coach goes through when a general manager or athletics director says that the coach has "my full confidence" when the folks at WMAL originally said they were standing behind him. I can imagine the sinking feeling he felt as he watched them wimp out in the face of CAIR's bullying. But Michael is in good company, CAIR has done the same with Paul Harvey and Dr. Laura.
OKay, you people out there in media land, when are you going to drop the pretense that the Islamofacists are going to play nice if we do. After Michael's suspension CAIR immediately pushed for his firing. YOU CANNOT APPEASE BULLIES! Ask Neville Chamberlain. We are at war. A war on terror. When is out 5th column press going to wake up to that fact? The folks at WMAL are still asleep at the switch on this point. They are not losing their voice; they are abdicating it, giving it up. How long before we hear them whining about being censored? They were not censored, they simply CAIR'ed too much.

Also Covering:
Dr. Sanity
LaShawn Barber
Two Babes and a Brain

Evidence of Lack of Substance.

Ever notice that when an opponent runs out of substantial argument they resort to personal insults?Cheri Pierson Yecke has. Thanks to MIchelle Malkin

Sunday, July 24, 2005

Lt. Gov's Disgraceful Behavior Mars Marine's Funeral

Just so we are clear, let me say up front I like the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania second only to my home state of South Carolina. That being said I have to aske the good people of Pennsyvania, "Would you please consider recalling this person?" According to Lt. Gov. Crashed Marine's Funeral, Kin Say which appears in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Catherine Baker Knoll made herself a very unwelcomed (and uninvited ) guest at the funeral of Staff Sgt. Joseph Goodrich, 32 who died in action in Iraq. Seems the LG thought it was a good idea to approach the grieving family, DURING COMMUNION, and reassure them that, "'I want you to know our government is against this war". This after approaching a member of the family asking who she was.
What does Catherine Baker Knoll have to say in answer to this? We do not know, it seems she "travelling at this time". Translation:She is hiding. Ms. Lt. Gov, you have some 'splainin' to do and apologies to make. You, the governor and every other elected person in Pennsylvania are entitled to whatever opinion of the war you choose. This action, however, is more than a little inappropriate and, in a perfect world, should bring an abrupt end to your political career.

HT: Michelle Malkin

Tuesday, July 12, 2005

You just Knew this was Coming

The Washington state branch of NARAL is having aScrew Abstinence Party. Sure why not, if it feels good do it, and if there is an "accident" we'll take care of it from the proceeds from this little soiree. It is late now. More later
take care

Thursday, July 07, 2005

My Long Hour (or so) this Morning

I awoke this morning and began my normal routine. I got up, booted the comp, then went out and got a local newspaper while the diskscan was running. When I got back I read the editorials, sports and local news. As I was reading the comics online my youngest son came in and turned on the morning news. That is when I saw it. London.
My oldest son is working an internship at Cambridge. Not very far from London and it was not inconceivable he could be there. Unfortunately there was no way to get a phone call into England. Well, I would have to keep trying, wouldn't I. I sent him an email asking him to respond, let us know he was okay. Was I being irrational? Maybe, maybe not. When you're on the other side of the Atlantic the distance between London and Cambridge seems negligible first thing in the morning before the first cup of coffee.
I thought about calling in to work. But what would that accomplish? If I go in I would at least have something to keep me occupied. I showered and got dressed and we were heading out the door and our youngest came hollaring for us to come back. He had gotten an email from his brother. He was alright! A weight was lifted.
Now this is where I'm supposed to have this big revelation that the war is wrong and calling for us to cut and run so this does not happen again. Sorry, that is not going to happen. I think we must continue so that the cowards who perpetrated this attack in London will not become emboldened thinking that we will recoil everytime they set off a bomb somewhere.
True, my son's close call might not really be all that close, but from this side of the Pond it was close enough. I pray for those families who didn't, and won't get that reassuring email or phone call after the attack. Some will learn the bad news from an official coming to visit them, some may have to live with knowing no more than that a loved one is missing presumed dead. Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families

Wednesday, July 06, 2005

Quote of the Day

Goes to "The Usual Suspects" by Michael Graham:
" Normal people hate courts for that most elemental of reasons: they tend to be filled with lawyers. It is human nature to recoil in the presence of snakes, cannibals and attorneys at law, and not necessarily in that order."

Just a Bunch of Law-abiding, Freedom-loving "Hacktivists"...NOT!

So what does your basic fun-loving leftwing geek do when s/he has too much time on their hands? Apparently they hack, steal the credit card numbers from their database and plan to charge hundreds in contributions, do mischief with PW's email addressbook then go out and have a beer then return home to their inflatable girlfriends. There are some, like the folks at Great Scat seem to think this was some harmless prank. Sorry, this goes beyond changing your blog's name. This is identity theft, pure and simple, and a felony, the last time I looked. And by the way, "moonbat" is as much a term of endearment than "wingnut" is.
Actually, it might have been interesting had they done the bogus charges. You see, when there is fraudulent use of a credit card, and this would have been fraud, the recipient of the ill-gotten gain gets to eat the loss. In this case it means returning the "donation". This could really prove costly if the money had been committed for use. In the long run, these morons would have harmed their pet "charities" more than help them. Maybe they are as stupid as some of them look.
Thank you, Michelle Malkin

Where do You Run now, Rudolph?

Ever since he was first identified as a suspect in the Olympic bombing as well as a number of abortion clinic bombings and two murders that resulted from same, Eric Rudolph has been the poster boy for every pro abortion and/or anti Christian group. He is supposedly the proof that religion creates evil people intent on killing.
Errrr...i hate to break it to you, okay I don't hate to, but Rudolph is not a Christian. He is more a disciple of Friedrich "God id dead" Nietzsche than he is of Jesus of Nazareth according to - Special report: Eric Rudolph writes home.. The simple fact is that Eric Rudolph never enjoyed the wide-spread support of any responsible Christian group or church. Yes, there were a few misguided sould who thought him a hero, none of whom can be reasonably be called Christian under any definition of orthodoxy. I find it ironic that Rudolph was motivated by Nietzsche. Ironic in that Nietzsche was also the motivating force behind Margret Sanger. Then again, both show little regard for human life, their protestations to the contrary not withstanding.
The irony was not lost on Dawn Eden either.

Monday, July 04, 2005

Sit Down, John!

I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is called a disgrace, that two are called a law firm and that three or more become a congress. And, by God I have had this congress! For ten years King George and his parliament have gulled, cullied and diddled these colonies with their illegal taxes: stamp acts, Townshend acts, sugar acts, tea acts. And when we have dared to stand up like men he has restrained our trade, siezed our ships, blockaded our ports, burned our homes and spilled our blood!
Ans yet this congress has yet to grant any of my proposals on independence even the courtesy of an open debate. Good God! What in the hell are you waiting for?

-John Adams
I had posted this earlier and it seems to have disappeared, along with a comment from my friend, Hans Bricks. I hate when posts get eaten, I hadn't even opened the dashboard let alone edit. Oh well.
Happy 4th of July!

What Started it All

In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. —Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The signers of the Declaration represented the new states as follows:

New Hampshire
Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island
Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York
William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey
Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina
William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina
Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton

For additional information about the Declaration of Independence, see these sites:

National Archives and Records Administration: Declaration of Independence
Library of Congress: About the Declaration of Independence

Friday, July 01, 2005

Welcome Michelle Malkin Readers

It was great when I checked my trackbacks (it says zero but there are actually two) on my Brian Williams post. What was really neat was discovering a link in the update part of the post I had referred to. Thanks, Michelle.

Now aren't You Glad Certain People weren't There

The Usual Suspects by Michael Graham also engages in some speculative history. Here it is in its entirety (until the column is archived):
George W.�s Quagmire

PHILADELPHIA, the American Colonies; July 4, 1776 � Leaders of the self-described �American patriots� movement gathered in this Pennsylvania city today to sign an official declaration of their political intentions, despite widespread criticism of a failing war policy and complaints that their military action was launched under false pretenses.

�Here it is, July of 1776, and George W. and his lackeys are just now getting around to declaring what this war is supposedly all about?� complained Loyalist playwright Michael LeMoore. �Washington and his neo-congressionalists rushed us into war at Lexington and Concord, before anyone had �declared� a single word about independence. Face it: George lied, and people died.�

Moore was referring to what patriots call �The shot heard �round the world,� when colonial forces fired on British soldiers in violation of accepted international rules of military engagement.

Supporters of George Washington and the so-called �war for independence� dispute claims from the anti-war movement that their actions are unlawful, and they point to their formal Declaration of Independence as proof.

�We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights,� the declaration reads in part, �that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.� The document was reportedly written by Thomas Jefferson, a white, Southern slave owner and one of the architects of the patriot movement.

Critics quickly noted the hypocrisy of Jefferson�s reference to �unalienable rights� of liberty and the author�s own record of slave ownership.

�If they really believed in spreading �freedom,� they would free their own slaves instead of killing the British and shelling innocent civilian Loyalist women and children in Boston and New York,� said Howard Deanne, head of the Loyalist National Committee. �And what of the recently uncovered Commonwealth Avenue memos, which would seem to indicate that those closest to Washington were planning for war after the Boston Tea Party back in �73? I�m telling you, the colonists of America have been misled into war!�

Though most colonists agree that King George III is a tyrant, polls consistently show that a minority of colonists support open military action against the British. Many pundits also question whether removing the monarchy will make any fundamental difference in the lives of Americans.

Gen. Washington came to Philadelphia to report to members of the Continental Congress, and anonymous sources report he came under heavy fire over the actions of his army and the costs of the war.

�We lost 140 Americans at Bunker Hill, more than 600 killed or captured in our disastrous attacks on Canada, and there�s no end in sight,� said one congressional staffer who asked not to be identified. �People are asking, �When is this war going to end? What is our exit strategy?� This is George W�s war, no doubt about it.�

Indeed, as support for the war among the American colonists wanes, some Quaker anti-war activists are using the other �Q� word in colonial politics: quagmire. Some even suggest that the entire war was manufactured by Gen. Washington to settle a personal score with the British over perceived insults he endured during the French and Indian War.

�Washington was just looking for an excuse to go to war,� said prominent activist Rosalind O�Donnell. �Everyone knows little Georgie would be broke if not for his connections to major land speculators pushing out beyond Kentucky. This is just a land grab! No war for Ohio! No war for Ohio!�

Patriot leaders gathered in Philadelphia, however, were determined to ignore the mounting criticism and celebrate their unanimous adoption of the Declaration of Independence.

�I firmly believe that in the future, this day � July 4, 1776 � will be viewed as a great moment for America and for freedom around the world,� John Adams of Massachusetts told a hand-picked audience of patriot supporters. But neither he nor any of the other speakers said anything new about the costs or justifications of this divisive war policy, returning instead as they often do to the broad themes of freedom and democracy.

The declaration concludes by stating: �We, therefore � declare that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.�

�That�s the kind of simplistic jingoism one expects to read in Fox�s daily broadsheet, not in serious political discourse,� said Noah Chommsey, head of the political science department at King�s College. �But the idea that the American colonists have come up with some superior form of self-government that is inherently more just than, say, monarchy or theocracy, is the height of arrogance.�

Meanwhile, the war effort continues. Loyalists among the American colonists continue to support the British military, particularly in the South, and hopes are fading that a major European power will come to the aid of the Americans. Military analysts suggest that the American �War for Independence� could last another seven years and result in the death of up to 1 percent of the entire American population.

�Is a free, democratic America really worth such a price?� demanded playwright LeMoore. �I certainly don�t think so. The world shouldn�t look to America for leadership. They should look instead to courageous nations truly endowed with greatness. Like France.�

Brian Williams: Valedictorian of the Jimmy Carter School of History

Michelle Malkin shows the naked stupidity of the NBC "news" anchor in, "BRIAN WILLIAMS SAID WHAT?". It seems that Williams thinks that that fought for our independence were terrorists, or at least the moral equivilent of same. Now, to be fair to Carter, he only said the revolution was unnecessary but caused by the colonists' hubris. Williams does this in the context of the possible identification of the new Iranian president as one of the hostage-takers from back in 1979, oddly enough under Jimmy Carter's watch. Mr. Williams, when you can show an instance where women and children were targeted by suicide bombers, or civilians beheaded by American troops, then I might lend credence to argument. However, as it stands I will continue not watching your "news" program until they can find somebody competent to replace you.

Wednesday, June 29, 2005

My Lewisian Pipe Blog

My Lewisian Pipe Blog is the replacement of A View from Lanternwaste. Same type of content...when I get around to it (lol).

Wednesday, June 22, 2005

I was Afraid of This

When I first heard the rape story from Ed Klein's book about Hillary, I groaned. Aside from the fact that what she may or may not allowed Bill to get away with in the marriage bed is between them (where it should stay), all this is going to do is raise the, what I call, "martyr factor" for Hillary. Give her an excuse to play the victim card.
I don't seem to be alone in that estimation.Michelle Malkin: HILLARY ON THE SHELF has an excellant rundown of conservative reaction to the book. My favorite line is from John Podhoretz:
This is one of the most sordid volumes I've ever waded through. Thirty pages into it, I wanted to take a shower. Sixty pages into it, I wanted to be decontaminated. And 200 pages into it, I wanted someone to drive stakes through my eyes so I wouldn't have to suffer through another word.
Though Klein suggests in his subtitle that he has written a study of a power-hungry politician — "What She Knew, When She Knew It, And How Far She'll Go to Become President" — he's produced something quite different. An unduly celebratory biography is called a "hagiography." Klein's book is a "hate-eography."

This book is so over the top I have to wonder if maybe Klein is working for Hillary to make her more sympathetic. And believe me, I have even less a desire to see a distaff President Clinton than I did to see the first one.

No Apology Necessary

Douglas Woods, an Australian engineer who was being held hostage in Iraq by insurgents was rescued after being held for nearly seven weeks. What is interesting is what he said in a public statement related in an AP story:
"Frankly, I'd like to apologize to both President Bush and Prime Minister [John] Howard for the things I said under duress," said Mr. Wood, with his American wife, Yvonne Given, and his brothers, Vernon and Malcolm, and their wives by his side.
"I actually believe that I am proof positive that the current policy of training the Iraqi army ... works because it was Iraqis that got me out," he said.

I especially loved the last part of that quote, "I actually believe that I am proof positive that the current policy of training the Iraqi army ... works because it was Iraqis that got me out,". This man obviously gets it. Of course, not everybody is happy about this. Australia's top Mullah is having a hissy because this operation may have endangered Iraqi hostages still being held. And American Muslims wonder why they are viewed with suspicion and contempt.
I also noticed that the treatment Mr. Wood was such he did not want to discuss because it was too traumatic. Wonder if Dick Durbin will denounce the insurgents conduct with the same zeal he misrepresented conditions at Gitmo.
Mr. Wood, you owe nobody an apology. You were under duress. It is very unusual that hostage statements made during captivity can be construed as anything else. Any resonable person would realize that .

Sunday, June 19, 2005

See-Dubya Sees it Right

The Dawn Patrol has a link toPatterico’s Pontifications � See-Dubya: Fundamentally Flawed which is an excellant treatise on what "Christian Fundamentalism" is compared to the MSM's lack of understanding of what it is. I think he hits the nail on the head when he says, ... media types and leftists generally tend to use “fundamentalist” when they really mean “person who probably listens to albums by rhinestone-wearing gospel quartets” or “politically conservative” or as a shorthand signal for “we think these guys are wackos”.
The fact is, most reporters cannot distinguish a fundamentalist from anything other than a liberal. The biggest distinction they have a problem with is the distinction between "fundamentalist" and "evangelical" (yes there is a difference). The best short answer for "what is the difference?" came from the late Dr. Ralph Lewis, my academic advisor in seminary who said, "The biggest difference is that as an evangelical I can share my faith with you without being insulting" (cf: See-Dubya's reference to 'Jack-Chick-fantasy' in the linked artical. Anybody familiar with Chick's work knows he would insult anybody who didn't fit his idea as to what is 'Christian'). Many evangelicals are not Biblical literalists and they are found across all liturgical traditions. There are also evangelical protestants as well as evangelical Catholics. Note that evangelical is used to qualify the religious affiliation. A fundamentalist is a fundamentalist. In the fundamentalist mind there is no other valid form of Christianity.

Wednesday, June 15, 2005

Safe, Legal and (Medium) Rare

WorldNetDaily carries this story Abortionist Accused of Eating Fetuses. I know that Pedophiles' Pal Planned Parenthood is going to cry "fowl" and I know that this "doctor" is no more representative of the abortion industry than Eric Rudolph is of the pro-life movement. Like it or not, however, this is the end result of the whole utilitarian view of human life. Be it abortion or euthanasia when you view human life as a source for "spare parts" and/or research material it is not too much of a leap before we find ourselves living a bad remake of Soylent Green

At Long Last

Do not forget that the Terri Schiavo autopsy results are due out today. Hopefully some light will be shed as to what caused the condition her "loving husband rescued her from" in such a "humanitarian" fashion.

I Wish Tom would just Cruise on Outta here

Quite frankly I am sick of the whole Tom-Katie thing. One of the side effects of over-exposure is that sometimes things get exposed that should be. Like when one party seems to have an almost maniacal obsession with the other.
Thanks to Michelle Malkin I came across Now I find Tom Cruise's romance of someone half his age disturbing. Especially his insistance that Warner Brothers pay a Scientology rep to be with her (feeling a bit insecure, Tom?). Katie, however, is a big girl. If she thinks that someone with Tom's track record is a good bet for a life together, well she probably needs to have her head examined, but it is her choice. At least I hope it is her choice.
Normally I do not care too much about the wife-swapping game called celebrity romance. But there is something disturbing about this. Almost as disturbing as a 47 year-old man wanting to share his bed with little boys.

Monday, June 13, 2005

Queen of what? Pull the Other One

REmember the "Queen of Nice" who used to be so sweet (to those who agreed with her) and even had Elmo visit from Sesame Street to her talk show? Well, those days are gone for Rosie O'Donnell (if they ever truely existed). Reading Michelle Malkin: ROSIE O'DONNELL: PSYCHO MOM was painful. It is painful to read about a self-absorbed celeb who has forbidden her lesbien lover from breast-feeding their baby. Why? Because she was jealous. She admitted it...proudly. According to this, O'Donnell said, "I'm like, 'You've had your limit, honey, no more!'"
Rosie, this is not about you. This is about the baby. Rosie, this is a child, not a puppy or a play toy that exists for your pleasure or self-fullfillment. It is a child that has needs that supercede whatever you think your needs are.
This is also about why you should not be a parent and it has nothing to do with your orientation. Rather, it has everything to do with your being a selfish immature brat! Kelli carried and gave birth to the child, she is the one to breast-feed. You could have been the one to carry and give birth and breast-feed and develope that bond you are so jealous of. I obviously did not breast-feed my sons, my wife did, I sure as heck did not come running in saying, "You've had your limit, honey, no more!" because I was afraid there would be a bond between Ellen and the boys that I couldn't share. Guess what Rosie, the bond between Kelli and Vivienne is different because she carried and gave birth and if you cannot accept that then you have no business having children.

Wednesday, June 08, 2005

Welcome to Freedom's Zone

I have been honored with a spot on the blogroll of Freedom's Zone. The new aggregator on the sphere. What really attracted me to this international blog is this passage from its statement of purpose:
We oppose tyranny of all forms and intend to use our combined talents to fight for the persecuted and the oppressed through our keyboards. Our objective is to defend and extend Western civilization and culture, with all it's existing freedoms, for all people of all faiths, from both sides of the political spectrum. We all share the belief that regardless of whatever differences we may have from our individual religious and political world views, we have more in common with one another, than we have differences.

I look forward to this association where it may lead.

If You Can't Stand the Heat...

Based on the account in Professor Who Belittled Believers Drops Bid To Head Up a Department - June 8, 2005 - The New York Sun it seems that Brooklyn College associate professor of sociology, Timothy Shortell cannot stand the heat, so he is getting out of the kitchen. After his election as department head, some of his writings were brought to light.
The ones that caused the heat to be turned up were comments like these:
On a personal level, religiosity is merely annoying - like bad taste... This immaturity represents a significant social problem, however, because religious adherents fail to recognize their limitations. So, in the name of their faith, these moral retards are running around pointing fingers and doing real harm to others. One only has to read the newspaper to see the results of their handiwork. They discriminate, exclude, and belittle. They make a virtue of closed-mindedness and virulent ignorance. They are an ugly, violent lot

His supporters claim that comments like that are taken out of context. Will somebody please show me a "context" where such phrases like "moral retards" can be construed as anything short of bias against people of faith. That does not wash any better then his claim that his academic freedom was some how abridged. Mr. Shortell, academic freedom is not a garantee that your opinions will be embraced without reaction. Such inflamatory comments are quite sufficient to raise questions about your possiple bias regarding students and faculty members who might be people of faith.
I am also not impressed with the defense that there have been no complaints of bias against him. Does that nobody has complained, or that the faculty has sided with Shortell and rejected the complaint. The "union rep" never made that clear and until he does I will question the veracity of the statement. Along with the Sun and Robert Kaiser of the American Association of University Professors I question if academic freedom is even an issue with regards to what is an administrative post. What he chooses to present in his lectures is one thing. The question, however, remains; can he leave his very public bias in the classroom and not have it taint his administrative duties? Judging from his whining, no.

HT: Michelle Malkin

What Does This Make Kerry?

If President Bush is a Moron, as his critics characterize him then their hero, John Kerry must a bigger one...if only slightly so. According to, Kerry's cumulative average was 76 compared to Bush's 77. Obviously neither did anything to write home about, but Bush didn't try to tell his father that "D" stood for "distinction". I do hope Kerry's father wasn't foolish to fall for that. If explanations like that were commonplace for Kerry, that might explain the latest nonesense with his form SF180. It also signifies a character flaw that makes me even more glad he is not president.
HT: Little Green Footballs and Museum of Leftwing Lunacy

In Case You are Wondering

You may well be asking why I still have the Kerry counter in the side bar. Mainly because signing the form then releasing only the same stuff that you released during the campaigne does not count. Either let it all be available or not at all. What he has released thus far makes him no more credible than that copy of Downing Street memo he has been waving around on Capitol Hill

Tuesday, June 07, 2005

Waiting for another Kerry 180

I know he said he would sign it. Cao’s Blog � Kerry 180 posits that Mr. Kerry seems to have found another way to divert attention from the fact that it has been more than 100 days since his promise to do so. Namely the previously mentioned Downing Street Memo, which the 9/11 commission has already pretty much poo-pooed. Like Cao and a number of others I fully expect him to announce that he has signed it, but has not yet turned it in to the appropriate office.
Kerry's 180-180 continues

UPDATE This what happens when you blog when you first get up in the morning.
Apparently I did not pick up on something. Apparently Kerry really did sign it...requesting a copy for himself which he then edited and released himself (gee, that was mighty thoughty of him). Of course what was released was nothing more than he released for the campaign. The Boston Globe seems to be impressed. Me? Well, I'm with Raven who says:
I want details about all the little combat situations Kerry was involved in. I want to know if he really got shot by the enemy or whether he did it to himself in order to get the medals….

The file does not provide new documents about various combat actions. It contains mostly a repetition of Kerry’s citations for the Silver Star, Bronze Star, and three Purple Hearts. For example, it does not include the combat ‘’after action reports” that detail what happened in some of the firefights in which Kerry participated.

Mr. Kerry, come clean!

Saturday, June 04, 2005

Kerry: Impeach Bush; Me:You Need More than This

I was reading Cao’s Blog � Kerry: Impeach Bush and for a second I thought somebody had found something substantial. It turns out that the "Downing Street Memo" is not a British government document somebody obtained. It is a 5th column newspaper making unsubstantiated allegations. Unfortunately those do have a nasty habit of gaining traction as Cao rightly points out in her suggestion to Google, "Impeach Bush"

He Deserved Better and the Pentagon Was not Worthy of Him

I have been following the ordeal of Lt. Pantano since I learned of the gross injustice perpetrated on him. Yeah, I know, he was aquitted. The situation never should have come to trial All that they had on him was the word a sargent who looks in the mirror every morning and says to his reflection, "I should have been a lieutenant". Today I learn fromRaven at And Rightly So! that Lt. Pantano has resigned his commission. I cannot say that I blame him. The real shame is that while the USMC loses a man of the caliber of Lt. Pantano, it keeps the likes of the sargent (who I refuse to name).
Semper Fidelis, Lt. Pantano.

Wednesday, June 01, 2005

Monkey Wrench Thrown into PP's No Child Molester Left Behind Program

According to the New York Times an Indiana judge has required that state's chapter of Planned Parenthood to cough up the records of a number of patients under the age of 14. It seems that Margret Sanger's organization thinks it okay-fine to withhold information concerning statutory rape. In Indiana sex with a minor 14 or younger is considered rape...consentual or not.

Nationally, Planned Parenthood officials and other supporters have likened the situation in Indiana and a similar request for medical records in Kansas to fishing expeditions and say they fear that it is part of a strategy to intimidate providers of reproductive health services.

What hogwash. The fact is that PP is more concerned with loss of revenue so much so that they are willing young women on the alter of molesters. I think that "PP" should stand for "Pedophiles' Pal" I hope their demagoguery of the situation fails and those behind the decision to obstruct justice are charged as accomplices.

HT: Michelle Malkin

You Will Not Find Me on Their Blogroll, but...

The Cotillion is definately worth going to check out. It was started by Beth, Jeanette and Jody. The Cotillion is comprised of conservative female (this is what keeps me off their bloggers and is definately worth a visit and/or inclusion on your blogroll.

Monday, May 30, 2005

People Try to Read too Much into too Many Things

Some folks have too much time on their hands. There is no basis for the Georger Bush-Annikin Skyewalker analogies floationg around, but float they do like the biggest chunks in the septic tank. So far I like the comments of both Michael Graham and both The Cassandra Page weigh in. Here is Michael's in its entirety:

Osama bin Laden, Jedi Master

As an unapologetic Star Wars geek, I have a message for my fellow conservatives who refuse to see Episode III: Revenge of the Sith because they’re bothered by George Lucas’ politics:

If you think his politics are offensive, wait until you see his writing and directing.

The only reason Episode III is getting good reviews is because it’s being compared to Lucas’ horrific work in episodes one and two. I’ve seen porn movies with more realistic dialogue than you’ll find in Mr. Lucas’ films, and which generally made more sense.

So if you’re looking for a reason to skip Revenge of the Sith, there are plenty of them — Hayden Christensen’s acting is a great one — but don’t make the mistake of taking the “politics” of the movie seriously. It’s not worth it.

Yes, there are liberals out there who see reflections of the Bush administration’s foreign policy in the Star Wars saga. At the art house grand opening I attended, the left-leaning audience murmured approvingly when Natalie Portman’s character intoned, “This is how liberty dies: with thundering applause.” And yes, I’ve seen the ad urging that we save the Republic from the Revenge of the Frist.

But it’s all nonsense. The politics of Star Wars simply don’t fit the politics of the War on Terror, unless you’re really, really stupid.

And speaking of George Lucas …

When asked directly about the “Darth W” comparisons, Mr. Lucas was honest enough to point out that he wrote the original nine-part Star Wars saga during the Vietnam era. “When I wrote it [Sith], Iraq didn’t exist,” Lucas said.

But then he went on to connect the dots himself, warning that “throughout history, leaders have used threats from outside as a means of wresting greater control over their country, dimming democracy … I hope that situation never arises in our country. Maybe the film will awaken people to this danger.”

Mr. Lucas added: “The parallels between what we did in Vietnam and what we’re doing in Iraq now are unbelievable.”

They’re not just unbelievable, George. They’re total fantasy.

To make the Iraq equals Vietnam mathematics work (note that Lucas, like liberals everywhere, always leaves out Afghanistan), you have to believe that we’ve lost the war in Iraq; that the elections never happened and the Sunnis haven’t decided to join the political process; and that Iraq will be less free in the future than it was under Saddam Hussein.

Does anyone believe that, even in Hollywood?

Then there’s the idea that the Evil Empire of Emperor Palpatine represents the Evil America of George W. Bush. To make this parallel work, you have to believe that somebody inside the American government is, a la Darth Sidious, secretly conducting a fictitious war against his own country as an excuse to expand the government’s power.

This only makes sense if you believe that 9/11 was government-invented fiction, that there is no terrorist threat and never has been. Is anyone irrational enough to believe that?

OK, OK. Other than Michael Moore, does anyone believe it?

Sure, Anakin echoes the Bush doctrine when he tells Obi-Wan, “If you’re not with me, you’re my enemy,” but in the case of al Qaeda, there really IS an enemy. If you don’t believe me (or George W), ask the thousands of people injured in the first World Trade Center bombing or the subsequent bombings of our embassies, war ships and barracks before Sept. 11, 2001.

I suppose it’s possible to believe that all these attacks were orchestrated by the CIA or the Mossad. Hey, if you can believe Ewan McGregor is going to age into Alec Guinness before Luke Skywalker turns 20, it’s possible to believe just about anything.

And by the way, if the Bush haters are right and W is Darth, doesn’t that make al Qaeda the Jedi? And so Luke Skywalker is … Osama bin Laden?

This is the revealing point of the whole Star Wars/Bush wars worldview: To be a George Lucas liberal means believing that all violence is equal. A hundred thousand imperial storm troopers take over the Republic and end democracy; a hundred thousand American soldiers topple a dictator and bring democracy — whatever. To the enlightened Hollywood Left, it’s all the same.

The fact that America’s military actions in Iraq brought an end to the violent, brutal, terror-fostering regime of Saddam Hussein is irrelevant. America is powerful. America uses force. America is the Evil Empire. Period.

Murder, slaughter, self-defense, democratic revolution — really, once the bullets start to fly (or the blasters start firing, if you prefer), what’s the difference, right? Darth is W is Hitler is Churchill is FDR. The only difference among Iraq or Normandy Beach or Cornwallis’ surrender at Yorktown is the color of the uniforms.

That is, if you believe the politics of Episode III. If you cheered when Obi-Wan assured us that, “Only the Sith think in absolutes.”

I prefer the politics of the original Star Wars, when idealistic young friends risked death to do the right thing, and the murderous Darth Vader was merely “a master of evil.”

In that world, as in the real one, there are some actions that are absolutely good and absolutely evil, and you don’t need George Lucas to tell the difference. Even if he could.

Thursday, May 26, 2005

Dear Kos, The Word is, "Context"

The fine people at the Daily Kos (I refuse to link to them) are extatic. The FBI supposedly supports Newsweek's account of events at Guantanamo. If you look at what they are citing you find they they apparently slept through the class about context.Michelle Malkin: GUANTANAMO BAY: THE REST OF THE STORY points out that what Kos et al are claiming as vendication for Newsweek are nothing more than what the detainees were claiming.
This brings up a point about context. Pne of the things that my exegesis professor, the late Dr. Robert Lyon used to pound into our thick heads was three letters, C.I.E.: Context Is Everything. You can't just lift out the words that suit you and divorce them from the context in which they were said/written. If I say something like, "If you were to say to me, 'It was God who dictated the mass murderer's actions', then I would have to say I don't believe in God." you cannot report, "J Rob doesn't believe in God" because that is not what I said.
The second problem with the folk at Kos is that they are subscribing to the same fallacy they would deride a fundamentalist Christian for. Namely the idea that reporting/portrayal is the same thing as endorsement/advocacy. Again, context is everything. The report they cite does nothing more or less than report what some detainees have claimed. It does not substantiate the claims at all.

Sunday, May 22, 2005

I Think This Speaks for Itself

In Leaving the left / I can no longer abide the simpering voices of self-styled progressives -- people who once championed solidarity Keith Thompson describes the same processes that I went through though I went through the same during the 80's (obviously events in Iraq and Afghanistan weren't factors for me). It is a great read.
Thanks to Sister Toldja

Sure Newsweek was Reckless, but...

Cao makes an excellant point in Cao’s Blog � Newsweek. Not to absolve Newsweek because they were reckless in their reporting of things at Gitmo. One thing we must always bear in mind is that we are at war with a group that looks for an excuse to kill, even if they have to fabricate it.
Speaking of fabrications, one of the commenters to Cao's piece there has been a claime that the information about the Koran abuse came from the International Red Cross. The commenter said that they could find nothing about it on their website. I am currently checking the site so see if there is something hiding somewhere. I agree with the commenter that if they were the source of the information there would be something on the site. I did however, find out something interesting. If you Google search to references of ICRC allegations of Koran abuse at Guantanamo you get a tone of links...none of them to to the ICRC's site in the first six pages (that is far as I got). I did find links to Daily Kos and Smirking Chimp and other moonbats along with CNN and Reuters, but not to ICRC. One would think that they would have it prominently featured somewhere. Of course there was also no mention of the Muslim desecration of the Church of the Nativity.

Friday, May 20, 2005

A Great Idea for Interreligious and Ideological Dialogue

BlogsforTerri has a great post regarding dialogue with those of a differing point of view. We have all seen cases where discourse turned ugly. Here is the "Dialogue Decalogue" by Leonard Swidler:

FIRST COMMANDMENT: The primary purpose of dialogue is to learn, that is, to change and grow in the perception and understanding of reality, and then to act accordingly. Minimally, the very fact that I learn that my dialogue partner believes "this" rather than "that" proportionally changes my attitude toward her; and a change in my attitude is a significant change in me. We enter into dialogue so that we can learn, change, and grow, not so we can force change on the other, as one hopes to do in debate--a hope realized in inverse proportion to the frequency and ferocity with which debate is entered into. On the other hand, because in dialogue each partner comes with the intention of learning and changing herself, one's partner in fact will also change. Thus the goal of debate, and much more, is accomplished far more effectively by dialogue.

SECOND COMMANDMENT: Interreligious, interideological dialogue must be a two-sided project--within each religious or ideological community and between religious or ideological communities. Because of the "corporate" nature of interreligious dialogue, and since the primary goal of dialogue is that each partner learn and change himself, it is also necessary that each participant enter into dialogue not only with his partner across the faith line--the Lutheran with the Anglican, for example--but also with his coreligionists, with his fellow Lutherans, to share with them the fruits of the interreligious dialogue. Only thus can the whole community eventually learn and change, moving toward an ever more perceptive insight into reality.

THIRD COMMANDMENT: Each participant must come to the dialogue with complete honesty and sincerity. It should be made clear in what direction the major and minor thrusts of the tradition move, what the future shifts might be, and, if necessary, where the participant has difficulties with her own tradition. No false fronts have any place in dialogue.

Conversely--each participant must assume a similar complete honesty and sincerity in the other partners. Not only will the absence of sincerity prevent dialogue from happening, but the absence of the assumption of the partner's sincerity will do so as well. In brief: no trust, no dialogue.

FOURTH COMMANDMENT: In interreligious, interideological dialogue we must not compare our ideals with our partner's practice, but rather our ideals with our partner's ideals, our practice with our partner's practice.

FIFTH COMMANDMENT: Each participant must define himself. Only the Jew, for example, can define what it means to be a Jew. The rest can only describe what it looks like from the outside. Moreover, because dialogue is a dynamic medium, as each participant learns, he will change and hence continually deepen, expand, and modify his self-definition as a Jew--being careful to remain in constant dialogue with fellow Jews. Thus it is mandatory that each dialogue partner define what it means to be an authentic member of his own tradition.

Conversely--the one interpreted must be able to recognize herself in the interpretation. This is the golden rule of interreligious hermeneutics, as has been often reiterated by the "apostle of interreligious dialogue," Raimundo Panikkar. For the sake of understanding, each dialogue participant will naturally attempt to express for herself what she thinks is the meaning of the partner's statement; the partner must be able to recognize herself in that expression. The advocate of "a world theology," Wilfred Cantwell Smith, would add that the expression must also be verifiable by critical observers who are not involved.

SIXTH COMMANDMENT: Each participant must come to the dialogue with no hard-and-fast assumptions as to where the points of disagreement are. Rather, each partner should not only listen to the other partner with openness and sympathy but also attempt to agree with the dialogue partner as far as is possible while still maintaining integrity with his own tradition; where he absolutely can agree no further without violating his own integrity, precisely there is the real point of disagreement--which most often turns out to be different from the point of disagreement that was falsely assumed ahead of time.

SEVENTH COMMANDMENT: Dialogue can take place only between equals, or par cum pari as the Second Vatican Council[1] put it. Both must come to learn from each other. Therefore, if, for example, the Muslim views Hinduism as inferior, or if the Hindu views Islam as inferior, there will be no dialogue. If authentic interreligious, interideological dialogue between Muslims and Hindus is to occur, then both the Muslim and the Hindu must come mainly to learn from each other; only then will it be "equal with equal," par cum pari. This rule also indicates that there can be no such thing as a one-way dialogue. For example, Jewish-Christian discussions begun in the 1960s were mainly only prolegomena to inter- religious dialogue. Understandably and properly, the Jews came to these exchanges only to teach Christians, although the Christians came mainly to learn. But, if authentic interreligious dialogue between Christians and Jews is to occur, then the Jews must also come mainly to learn; only then will it too be par cum pari.

EIGHTH COMMANDMENT: Dialogue can take place only on the basis of mutual trust. Although interreligious, interideological dialogue must occur with some kind of "corporate" dimension, that is, the participants must be involved as members of a religious or ideological community--for instance, as Marxists or Taoists--it is also fundamentally true that it is only persons who can enter into dialogue. But a dialogue among persons can be built only on personal trust. Hence it is wise not to tackle the most difficult problems in the beginning, but rather to approach first those issues most likely to provide some common ground, thereby establishing the basis of human trust. Then, gradually, as this personal trust deepens and expands, the more thorny matters can be undertaken. Thus, as in learning we move from the known to the unknown, so in dialogue we proceed from commonly held matters--which, given our mutual ignorance resulting from centuries of hostility, will take us quite some time to discover fully--to discuss matters of disagreement.

NINTH COMMANDMENT: Persons entering into interreligious, interideological dialogue must be at least minimally self-critical of both themselves and their own religious or ideological traditions. A lack of such self-criticism implies that one's own tradition already has all the correct answers. Such an attitude makes dialogue not only unnecessary, but even impossible, since we enter into dialogue primarily so we can learn--which obviously is impossible if our tradition has never made a misstep, if it has all the right answers. To be sure, in interreligious, interideological dialogue one must stand within a religious or ideological tradition with integrity and conviction, but such integrity and conviction must include, not exclude, a healthy self-criticism. Without it there can be no dialogue--and, indeed, no integrity.

TENTH COMMANDMENT: Each participant eventually must attempt to experience the partner's religion or ideology "from within"; for a religion or ideology is not merely something of the head, but also of the spirit, heart, and "whole being," individual and communal. John Dunne here speaks of "passing over" into another's religious or ideological experience and then coming back enlightened, broadened, and deepened. As Raimundo Panikkar notes, "To know what a religion says, we must understand what it says, but for this we must somehow believe in what it says": for example, "A Christian will never fully understand Hinduism if he is not, in one way or another, converted to Hinduism. Nor will a Hindu ever fully understand Christianity unless he, in one way or another, becomes Christian."

Feed back?