Monday, May 28, 2007

A Must Read Article

We all know people who make comments that make us wonder what planet they live on because of the complete disconnect to the group understanding. Unfortunately, the rise of political correctness has prevented our leaders from saying what they truly believe. The latest point being the second coming of the radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr as he "drove in a long motorcade from Najaf to its sister city of Kufa to deliver an anti-American sermon to 6,000 chanting supporters at the main mosque." We can only imagine the deaths to follow as this man is allowed to spew venomous rants from his mosque bully pulpit.

But what is really astounding is the inability of our leaders to admit this unavoidable truth. I encourage everyone to read Andrew G. Bostom's article Ignorance, Cognitive Dissonance, and al-Sadr at the ever excellent American Thinker. Mr. Bostom is highly qualified to write about Jihad, as he is the author of The Legacy of Jihad and The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism.

It is important for everyone to realize the extent of power the Muslim world desires. Islamic control of the world is their ultimate desire. This is a war to preserve Western Civilization.

Sunday, May 27, 2007

Terrorist Training Camp in Texas

Everyone likes to think they are safe in their own backyards, so imagine the creepiness of learning of a terrorist training camp for foreign students located in the woods just down the road.

The Houston Chronicle reports (emphasis added):

A Dallas college student who was linked to a Houston-area plan to aid the Taliban was found guilty Thursday of two weapons violations.

A Houston federal jury found that Syed Maaz Shah, 19, unlawfully possessed a firearm while in this country on a student visa.

After participating in firearms training staged by government informants last year at a campground north of Conroe, Shah was charged in a plot to fight for the terrorist organization overseas against U.S.-led forces. On secret recordings, he can be heard railing against the U.S. and quipping that his passport showed the face of a terrorist.

As a student-visa holder, the Pakistani, who attended the University of Texas at Dallas on a scholarship, was not allowed to have a firearm.

Thankfully, the jury didn't get hung up on the intellectual Left and Libertarian's "Why do they hate us?" carousel and returned a swift and sure verdict:

The jury returned its verdict after deliberating for slightly more than an hour. Shah, who is to be sentenced Sept. 14, faces up to 10 years in prison on each charge, plus deportation.

In another Houston Chronicle article we learn (emphasis added):
Syed Maaz Shah was arrested for firing weapons during two camping trips last year. Authorities said the trips were actually training camps organized by several men who wanted to engage in holy war against U.S. troops in Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries.

Presidential Candidate John Edwards (D) is a real man of genius award winner when it comes to foreign policy. His The War on Terror is Just a Bumper Sticker Slogan mentality allows others to base their defense on the notion that there is no war on terror. Shah's Defense Attorney, Frank Jackson believes the verdict was just anti-muslim sentiment in this post 9/11 world:
It was a difficult case because of the times we are in. This so-called war on terror is as phony as can be.

Shah was not the only terrorist in training arrested at this camp.
His cousin, Adnan Mirza, faces three firearms charges, in addition to a charge of conspiracy to defraud the United States by making donations to the Taliban. The 30-year-old Pakistani, who also was here on a student visa, is scheduled for trial in October.

Kobie Williams, 34, who pleaded guilty to a conspiracy charge last year, is to be sentenced in October.

Thankfully, this local terrorist training network was captured and prosecuted. The question is: How many others are operating in the woods down the road from your backyard?

Friday, May 25, 2007

Maybe It Was About The Money After All

Over and over, financial planners tell us that the path to wealth is a balanced portfolio. Grandma pointedly reminded us to not put all our eggs in one basket. Grandma, being the wise woman she was, knew that counting on only one thing, one hope, one idea would leave her grandkids vulnerable to things outside their control. So, we wisely spread our precious savings across several different investment opportunities just in case something outside our control happens.

In a previous post, It's Not The Money It's The Message It Sends the jackalope described a certain shady deal between Chet Edwards (D-Tx. 17), our military, and the predatory insurance company American Amicable. This insurance company is located in Waco, Texas; Chet's home stomping grounds.

So, dear readers and fellow constituents, it might interest you to learn that Chet Edwards' portfolio is 100% invested in insurance. Maybe he knows how to control things a bit more than the rest of us when it comes to those things normally outside human control. How else to explain an intelligent person putting all his eggs in one basket?

Thursday, May 24, 2007

Learning From History in the War on Terror

Last night I began the DVD series Lord Mountbatten: The Last Viceroy. The story is about the British delivering a self-ruling government in India in 1946. The Jewel in the Crown, as India was described, then operated under a half system of self governance called the Raj. Under the Raj, tribal leaders ruled territories but ultimately answered to British authority. The Crown gave Lord Mountbatten authority to aide the Indian leaders in establishing a democratic Parliament and ultimately complete self-determination.

The comparisons to our work in Iraq are very interesting. One of the problems the blossoming Indian Parliament faced was religious animosity between Muslim, Sikh, and Hindu. Different leaders had their own desires for the future of India. Genocide followed as religion divided the nation into three parts. The British had been able to keep order, but as they discussed pulling out to allow self rule, factions sprung up to take advantage of the situation. There are historians that say the British set an unrealistic date for the Indian government to gain control and settle differences.

This sounds very close to the current situation in Iraq. The Iraqi government must have authority across the entire country and over each tribe and faction within their border. Some Indian Muslims, lead by Mohammad Ali Jinnah, wanted their own country; a complete Muslim state. Some Muslims, Sikhs, and Hindus wanted to remain where they currently lived with the freedom to practice their own religion. If the United States were to pull out our troops too soon, could what happened in India happen in Iraq? There are even more comparisons.

The DVD shows Mohammad Ali Jinnah, leader of the Muslim League, stirring up a mob by declaring, "We will have Pakistan or we will destroy India!" It is hard for our pragmatic western minds to understand such thinking. However, when we recall the kamikaze pilots of WWII, Buddhist monks torching themselves in protest of the Viet Nam war, and the current crop of suicide bombers, we should realize that self immolation has been a route to paradise in the eastern mind.

The undeclared war between Muslim and Sikh along with the usually fate-driven Hindu in the Punjab is reputed to have killed between 200,000 and 360,00. This number could be higher if the 10 years before 1946 are counted. The migration of the different ethnic peoples to the portion of India they preferred to occupy was a dangerous journey because of violent attacks by other factions. The anger boiled over and blood flowed freely.

President Bush is wise to stand firm against any timeline for American departure in Iraq. The Congressional leaders that demand America pull out now have not studied their history and because of this educational lack, the blood of Iraqi innocents would be on our hands. It is very disturbing that the people that preach "caring" for others to their vassals here in the United States deride our military for being in Iraq and taking the time to empower this new democratic government.

Today India and Pakistan have joined us in The War On Terror. Maybe the memories of the brutality they endured spur them to action to join us. Whatever their reason, we welcome them in this fight. If the Democratic Party joined the fight maybe Ahmadinejad and Bashar al-Assad, the Mohammad Ali Jinnahs of today, would not be openly supporting insurgent terrorists with money and tools of destruction or threatening to wipe Israel off the face of the earth.

Human nature dictates that when benevolent authority is perceived as weak, evil men will rise to fill the void. If the American troops leave Iraq and Afghanistan before self-rule is strong, evil will respond as it will. Most of America seems to understand this, but Bush-hating tunnel vision has destroyed the Democratic Party and innocents are being slaughtered every day because of their weak and selfish rhetoric. I suggest they be quiet, sit in their comfortable chair and read The Life of Reason by George Santayana because "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Wednesday, May 23, 2007

Well Worth Our Support

Too often, we complain when someone does something wrong while saying nothing if something is done right. It goes against our human nature to edify one another. The state of Texas has much to be proud of when it comes to debate in the Senate and House on the illegal immigration issue.

Both Texas Senators, Kay Baily Hutchison and John Cornyn are standing strong against the effort to pass this bill without debate. Serious issues are in need of debate and Congress has a bad habit of rushing headlong into legislation without proper consideration of the rule of unintended consequences. Pressure in Washington to get a "done deal" is a tough thing to resist.

District 17 cannot boast of its contribution to this debate. However:
  • Jeb Hensarling (R-TX 5),
  • Randy Neugebauer (R-TX 19),
  • John Culberson (R-TX 7),
  • Mike Conaway (R-TX 11),
  • Kenny Marchant (R-TX 24),
  • Joe Barton (R-TX 6),
  • Michael Burgess (R-TX 26),
  • Nick Lampson (R-TX 22),
  • Michael McCaul (R-TX 10),
  • Ted Poe (R-TX 2),
  • Lamar Smith (R-TX 21),
  • John Carter R-TX 31),
  • Pete Sessions (R-TX 32) and
  • Sam Johnson (R-TX 3)

all deserve a word of thanks and appreciation.

This list also clearly reveals the delineation between Democrats and Republicans on this issue.

Note: The jackalope visited the website of every Texas Representative to get this information. If a Representative is not listed, and is strong on border security and anti-illegal immigration, I was unable to find information supporting it.

Chet Edwards - Democrat First, American Second

Chet Edwards (D-TX17) has an unjustified reputation as a conservative Democrat. The reality is that he follows closely the far left ideas of the Democratic Party. He is careful to never be photographed with members of his party that would tarnish that carefully constructed persona, but his voting record mirrors theirs in most respects.

A major problem concerning the (il)legal immigration issue is that nothing is backed up by enforcement. Legislation is a great concept, but unless it is actually followed through in practice we only worsen the situation. Problems become a "make work" project for Congress allowing them to posture and prattle for the news camera rather than the hard work of solving a problem. If they were to solve the problem then they would have nothing to preen about before the Sunday Talking Head hosts. Making hard decisions is not always conducive to Congress' first job: re-election. And it goes without saying that pleasing their idiot hick constituents back home could make them persona non gratia with the tony Washington cocktail circuit. This is a problem for even some (most?) Republicans.

It is in this light we must contemplate the current (il)legal immigration bill because the law of human nature dictates that we get the behavior we reward. Any legislation that does not first address the problem of a porous border is doomed to be a future and much larger problem. If our schools and social programs are already overburdened, inaction concerning the open border issue means in mere months these taxpayer funded programs will be exponentially so. Tax funds are not some bottomless coffer regardless of how legislators may treat them.

It is not wrong for citizens to prefer to keep as much of their own money to provide for their own family and extended family. This is the intent of the proverb: Charity begins at home. Unbridled taxation to provide social services for illegal aliens will eventually make all native and naturalized citizens wards of the state because it will lead straight to poverty because the more services provided, the more people will come. To assert so is not to be anti-immigrant, but rather to recognize the reality of human nature.

That explained, this morning in his weekly radio interview, Chet Edwards (D-Tx17) distanced himself properly from the Senate's illegal immigration bill. He listed off his requirements: illegals must pay a fine, learn to speak English - even their children - so illegals can provide better for themselves rather than expecting to receive myriads of social welfare, and oh yeah that other thing, border security.

Wait a minute, he just described the current embattled Senate Bill. By listing border security last, Edwards makes clear his priority. After 16 years in the House, Edwards understands perfectly the reality of not enforcing the laws he passes. He has a history of not enforcing the laws he votes for. He is facile in speaking the "correct" talking points, knowing that those constituents who are not well-versed politicos will hear his words outside the context of political realities and nod their heads thinking the incessant bickering has been solved.

The political reality is that the Senate and House Democratic majority could pass the current bill and the President would sign it into law. Their dilemma comes when the people, realizing that the problem is not in fact solved, blame them for passing a problem intensifier. President Bush will not be running for office ever again. To blame him would be moot and the proverbial chickens will come home to roost infecting the Democratic Party with its political pox.

This is why the word bi-partisan is the key word. If the Republicans do not play this game, and fall into the sprung trap, Democrats will not pass this bill. This indicates that the bill was never in the best interest for the long run of the country, but rather another piece of legislation whose main purpose is the destruction of their political foes. The ugly truth is that our Representative is extremely adept in playing this game. It is Mr. Edwards' and his Party's behavior that constitutes a major loss to his constituents and to the nation.

Friday, May 18, 2007

The Revolution #4: A Modest Proposal: the Solution of Illegal Immigration and Foreign Terrorists Living in the United States

Note: This post was nominated for a Weasel Watcher Award during the week of May 23, 2007

In 1729, Jonathan Swift published the satirical pamphlet A Modest Proposal: For Preventing the Children of Poor People in Ireland from Being a Burden to Their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Publick. It was Swift’s proposal that Irish parents sell their children to be eaten to provide a family income.
“A young healthy child well nursed, is, at a year old, a most delicious nourishing and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee, or a ragout.”

Needless to say, the public did not see the humor in his modest proposal nor did they recognize Swift’s homage to the Roman tradition of satire that disparaged the solutions they actually supported. Swift lost nearly all the subscribers to his pamphlets. Today, this work stands as the greatest piece of satire ever written.

It is with true jacklope humility that I set down my own modest proposal. I hope you enjoy:

A Modest Proposal: the Solution of Illegal Immigration and Foreign Terrorists Living in the United States

Regarding the upcoming Illegal Immigration Bill, rejoice that Congress has at last streamlined the legislative process so much that the mere idea is passed into law without all that troublesome legal fine print ever being written. We already know we can’t possibly understand the yearly tax code, so why bother our stressed out brains with another piece of congressional mumbo jumbo? We can just jump to the obvious outcome: instant citizenship, a voter card in Spanish card with a preprinted “X” in the box next to “Democratic Party”, and a Pueblo, Colorado publication listing all the social services that come with citizenship.

And, by logical extension, the only natural conclusion to the immigration problem is for the United States to simply declare universal sovereignty over the entire globe, making all earthly inhabitants Americans. Think of the problems that would instantly be solved by expanding our borders to include every continent, island, peninsula, sandbar, and floating flotsam and jetsam! No more illegals dying in the brutal trek across the American southwest deserts, or sweltering in the back of 18-wheelers with no air, water, food, or bathroom facilities. Never again would we have to hear of such tragedies and risk having our free time and peace of mind disturbed.

Even if the new citizens stay in their current locations, now they wouldn’t have to work to change the governments they would otherwise desire to flee. The former nation of Mexico can cease in its almost-achievable quest to achieve a true two-party democracy. Hugo Chavez can offer symposiums for Democratic Congressmen on how to nationalize private business as he did Citgo Oil and how they aspire to do with our health care system. The reality of a fast track to making all citizens both wards and employees of the state would be created ipso facto. The Democratic Party is thinking small-time in its present goal of making only people residing within the current borders of the United States citizens. Imagine the possibilities for complete domination if the Democratic Party were able to make every single person on the planet their ward and vassal. Surely when they examine the absolute magnificence of this modest solution they will realize that this short proposal has barely begun to explore the possibilities.

The idea of annexing the entire world is so pregnant with opportunity that one could not even begin to list the benefits to the future power of the Democratic Party. Instantly the need to travel in order to receive the benefits of the United States becomes moot. Instead we can export government social workers and labor union members to provide all benefits accorded with citizenship. Like lawyers descending on the Bhopal tragedy, government agencies could be set up at the four corners of the world and incremental points in between to provide all benefits and necessities to new citizens at taxpayer expense. Furthermore, since we celebrate diversity already, no new citizen need suffer the burden of learning English (lest they assimilate into the bigoted and racist present American culture, developed as it was by dead white men). If this proposal were enacted, all people could continue to speak in their indigenous language and dialect. Because after all, that’s what being an American is all about: making America just like the place you fled.

So brilliant is this plan that Democratic Party leaders will be guaranteed voters and power for life, possibly even eternity. Their pursuit of wealth could then be expanded to include every tax-free offshore account or even the banks of the new state of Switzerland. All wealth will now be subject to the American tax code and every redistributionist PAC or 501(c) receiving federal funds. It is hard to believe that no one at the DNC has thought of this plan sooner. It appears there is not a political visionary in the entire party.

Even terrorists will receive incredible benefits by becoming American citizens. It goes without saying that now they will be able to kill Americans with greater ease, as they will not have to risk the sneaking and hiding, the plotting and scheming it currently takes to set up splinter cells bearing outdated visas over here. Why travel when just killing your own neighbor is a death of an American? Consider the double bonus when a terrorist's own child becomes a self-detonating bomb: an American child killing other Americans! Jews will be Americans, infidel Christians will all be Americans, Shi’ias will be Americans, Sunnis, Hamas, PLO, Chechen, all are Americans. Now they can really mean it when they drive a bomb-laden truck into a shopping mall with the cry, “Death to America!” The simplicity of absolute cultural nihilism borders on divine perfection.

Not to mention the benefit of outmaneuvering the United Nations, a bureaucracy that could be swiftly rendered null and void. Never again will we need to seek permission to establish democracies in terrorist states. Surely a nation that had no problem gassing and torching Branch Davidians would have no compunction about bombing itself, wherever and whenever needed. It’s good to have a frame of reference when it comes to the almighty state delivering justice swift and sure. Nothing keeps a citizenry in order better than them knowing their proper place in the power hierarchy.

The benefits of this modest proposal are so bold, so enlightened and radical, that to not put it into action immediately could blight humanity forever. Let us cease striving after such clearly unworkable legislation as building a border fence and increasing a well trained and equipped border guard. There is no sense wasting taxpayer money on high-tech satellite equipment, unmanned drones, and expensive gadgetry like night-vision goggles and infrared cameras. We all know it is impossible to track every person within the borders or defend ourselves indefinitely against a far more determined worldwide jihad. Why strive after mediocre stopgap half-measures when a self-evident solution exists? Why continue the suffering for one more second? Call your Congressman and Senators immediately and urge them to pass this simple proposal with all haste, and begin planning a family vacation to the new America—no visa, passport or papers required. Brilliant.

Thursday, May 17, 2007

The Revolution #3: Federalist Democrats

In the 1790’s Thomas Jefferson was able revitalize the nation’s quest for individual liberty because ordinary citizens formed political discussion groups, newspapers and broadsides were printed to cover debates and forums, and pamphleteers wrote their ideas on how to further the individual’s right for self-determination. Today this same action is taking place with the popularity of political issue groups, talk radio, blogs, and other media alternatives. The old media of network news and printed newspapers that firmly support Democratic Party control is no longer the federalist monolith of power.
The reason Jefferson’s revolution against the Federalist Party was successful was because there was an important decision to be made about the future of the nation.
Today, the revolutionary ideas challenging the Democratic Party are of equal importance.

While Jefferson’s success was fueled in part by the French Revolution and its ousting of a hierarchical monarchy, today’s ideas are triggered in some part by the fall of communism.
America has something fundamental to decide: do we continue toward the socialistic future envisioned by the Democratic Party, or set a new course of republican liberty as envisioned by the Republicans?

Is liberty to be defined and passed down to the individual by the totalitarian elitism of the Democratic Party and their federalist sensibilities? Or will liberty continue to be defined as the ability of individuals through self-determination having their say in regards to the power delegated to the state and its intrusion upon their private lives?

The Democratic Party is failing in part because the various groups that support it have forsaken the common good in their quest to solidify power. They have acted in the worst of human nature. What else can be expected from a generation steeped in the belief that The Constitution was flawed from its very inception? So much is their belief that they govern in a manner diametrically opposed to its very words. The 1st Amendment has degenerated into a protection for selfish hedonism, while the 2nd Amendment has become the denial of the right to self-preservation. Words that don't even appear in The Constitution , separation of church and state, are now presented as absolute law.

The Federalist Party failed when it fundamentally reconnected its ideas of legislative power with monarchy. The Democratic Party must fail because of its connection with the failed atheistic communist state and the denial of the rights of man. These ideas deny the fact that man is a spiritual being, finding meaning in life in a relentless search for God, and that self-determination is an inherent part of being human. America’s very survival and its beacon of liberty to the rest of the world are at stake in these upcoming elections.

Just as the Federalists thought of government power in the manner of the English gentry, today’s Democrats consider their power in Stalinist terms. The “Fairness” Doctrine and the new rules of Campaign Finance Reform show that contrary speech is to be silenced. So ingrained is their thinking that any citizen disagreeing with them is derided with name-calling, vulgarities, and ultimately accusations of mental illness. All these methods of discrediting detractors come directly from Stalin himself. Leaders of the various Democratic Party support groups attained their positions through fraud and deceit. Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, George Sorros, Cindy Sheehan to name a few leaders. NOW, NARAL, and PETA to name a few groups.

A revolution is the proper recourse when a government no longer serves the purpose of the people it serves.

What is needed today is a revolution that completely repudiates a political party that no longer represents the constitution it serves.

Like the Federalist Party before them, the Democratic Party must be repudiated with such vehemence in these next elections that the party and its socialist ideas are forever destined to be past history.

A New Species of Democrat

Back during the days of the Viet Nam war, the left came up with the name Chicken Hawk to describe those that were pro-military but did not serve in the military. Yesterday's vote in the Senate to cut off funds for the troops overseas fell from the sky in flames. Only 29 Democratic Senators voted for the measure, including Hilary Clinton (D-NY) and Barak Obama (D-IL) in a political machination to vote for a bill they knew would fail in order to satisfy the blood lust of their wacked out base.

In light of the fact that new species of animals are being discovered at an alarming rate, it should be noted that a new species of Democrat has been discovered in the Senate: the Chicken Nugget Dove Democrat. The Chicken Nugget Dove can be recognized by the biological oddity of the lack of any bones, which causes the new species to do a lot of flapping and squawking but an inability to vote its conscience because of re-election fears.

Wednesday, May 16, 2007

The Revolution #2: Human Nature and Republicanism

Human nature has been an overlooked reality for the past generations as government has sought to legislate the nation into Darwinian perfection. Supposedly, human nature was to “evolve” with each new law. However, look where we are now: attempting to legislate hate (thought) crime. An intelligent person only has to read the book of Job, written 5 thousand years before Christ, to conclude that in both reasoning and the poetic arts man has not progressed much—regardless of his technologies.

There is much to learn from Job concerning human nature. Man will always testify to his innocence and friends are always capable of piling on when the chips are down, for even a good man. There it is folks, the Darwinian theory of human nature: we secretly love it when bad things happen to good people. This is the unvarnished truth about human nature; we are jealous, selfish, antagonistic, little hedonists who hypocritically deny it all.

Considering such a truth, it is amazing that we have created any sense of civil society at all. Given our sinful human nature we certainly deserve the rule of an autocratic despot, if not certain death. History records man’s ability to balance ever so precariously personal freedom with civil society. Western civilization, aided by Christianity has developed the best form of this balance. Tiananmen Square and The Branch Davidians should be a constant reminder that Gandhi’s method of peaceful protest only worked because of the British adherence to Christian principles. Slavery in Britain met its end because of Christianity. Christianity recognizes the truth of human nature with Christ’s crucifixion the ultimate and only reconciliation between man and God. In many ways, our government’s usurpation of Christianity has allowed generations to disallow the truth of human nature.

An example of this usurpation is revealed when citizens pray to government to supply their needs, rather than to God. Previous generations would be appalled. This is all aided by the Democratic Party’s relentless quest to eradicate any reference to God in government buildings and pursuing the path of eradication even in public places. However, a more insidious method of usurpation of Christian values comes through an attempt to deny 2nd amendment rights which is derived from that basest of human needs, the right of self-defense. The government in this instance enforces with law Christ’s teaching of turning the other cheek. Ask any student, at any government school, what happens when a bully attacks them and they dare defend themselves. You will learn they will each be punished equally under zero tolerance rules. Even worse, the victim is urged to try to understand the problems associated with his attacker.

This twisted deviation of Christ’s teaching is reflected in Democratic Party policies. In foreign policy we are told if this nation only treated our enemies “nicer” they would not be so mean to us. The implied message being that this nation is responsible for creating its own enemies. In domestic policy, we are forced to give tax money to the government as offerings for the poor, the children, or the victims of (insert cause here) because Christ taught the same. Democratic Party policy is a sort of Christian/Nihilism that while denying the existence of God and His Law, they then enforce with penalty various teachings of Christ. In both instances individual rights and human nature are ignored because the responsibilities of an individual before God are denied. The Democrats absolve the foreign evildoer without penance, while God does not respect their enforced piety upon others at home.

Human nature dictates that we all want something for nothing, would enforce on others what we would never accept for ourselves, and quite frankly would cut off our nose to spite our face. While the Democratic Party plays to the worst of human nature, republican thought addresses the qualities of human nature and the need to rise above it, which is why so many evangelicals are members of the Republican Party. However, republicanism resides in the heart of any individual who while believing in self-determination, is also able to rise above personal interests in regards to civil society.

Therefore, it is imperative that the Republican Party be a big tent for all those of like mind. And nothing is more indicative of this than the variety of Presidential candidates: pro-life, pro-choice, Mormon, nominal Christian, fervent evangelical, along with a myriad of immigration and security ideas. The Republican Party has been blessed by the number of men willing to accept the brutal gauntlet of the election process and the sobering responsibility of the presidency. As Republicans we vote in the primaries for the ascendancy of our candidate of choice. However, as republicans we are also called to vote for the party candidate for the better good of the republic even if not the man of our personal choice. It is our belief in self-determination coupled with that ability to rise above personal interest that unites us as Republicans and makes our ideas the best course for the country.

Tuesday, May 15, 2007

The Revolution #1: The Fork

In the 1790’s, this nation approached a fork in the road. The single party, the Federalists, had assumed the same hierarchy of power as the English government they'd just rebelled against. In a mere 25 years, the nation was running adrift in its journey toward the concept of government intent upon expanding the limits of individual freedom and liberty.
The Federalists were supremely in charge, but devoid of groundbreaking ideas that set apart the nation in a manner befitting the boldness of the Declaration of Independence.

Thomas Jefferson was the man with ideas to push once again the limits on personal freedom and liberty. Understanding the becalmed political scene, Jefferson set about coalescing a republican counter to the Federalist Party.
In classical republican thought, it is the requirement of citizens to do what they believe to be the best actions for the long road, to rise above their selfish human nature and do the higher, nobler action for the betterment of the community as a whole. The republican value of civic virtue requires that citizens be responsible for conducting their life and their business in a manner that does not harm the fragile and precious commodity of civil society.

Citizens of a republic are also required to speak up if they believe they have a better idea for government than those in elected office.

Jefferson coalesced this second party from disparate groups that believed in a set of ideas rather than in a certain group of people. Farmers, small business entrepreneurs, and evangelicals united under these ideas and a second party was born. By the turn of the century the Federalist Party ceased to exist, and our nation returned to its original course.

Today, the nation approaches a new fork. The Democratic Party has no new ideas in regards to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Their one idea is socialism and strong government control; views diametrically opposed to the bedrock foundation of the nation. Like the Federalists, today’s Democrats speak down to the people in a highborn, condescending manner, with ridicule and legislative silencing tactics for their critics because like their predecessors, they are incapable of accepting criticism.

The opportunity presented at this current fork:
do we continue down the failed path toward complete socialism and government control or do we seek to unite diverse groups under a set of ideas and again push forward the limits of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness?

Despite our falling down in the last election, one good thing occurred: the RNC realizes that it must respect the people’s support of a challenger to an incumbent Republican in name only (R.I.N.O.). In the next election the RNC must recognize that challenges to long-time Republican incumbents are in the highest form of republican ideals.

Let the RNC be aware: Any incumbent not able to rise above poll-driven democratic opinion is fair game. The ultimate goal being that the 110th Congress be the last defiled by any incumbents insensitive to the fleeting opening of the radical fork in the road toward rugged individualism.

Our goal is simple:
that in our own pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness the earth be turned upside-down and freedom flourish in intolerant lands.

Tuesday, May 01, 2007

Cultural Relativism Harms Young People

Jesus answered, "… Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice." Pilate said to Him, "What is truth?" John 18: 37c- 38a

For Pilate, Truth became the road of political expediency. Today, Truth slides on a scale of public opinion. It becomes nothing more than grains of sand in an hourglass, falling into a pile only to be turned upside down again. No wonder our young people live in a “ ...whatever...” world. For them, everything is in flux.

The human mind needs the guardrails of absolute truth, as surely as children thrive under acceptable rules of conduct rapidly followed by swift justice for infractions. How can the average or below average young mind handle complex evaluations otherwise? Without parameters, every “if/then” situation becomes nothing more than a throw of the dice with no ceiling, no standardization, no moral frame of reference. The fabric of our present society is riddled with dropped stitches and flaws due to years of cultural relativism for whatever reasons. Political pressure, public pressure, misguided do-gooderism, and simple ignorance have all had their hand in ill-equipping our children for entry into the fast world of our national economy.

A friend of mine manages these kids in the food service business. He sings his woes to me. Because the economy is so good, young people can choose to switch jobs instead of developing personal job skills. My friend tells me how his employees are incapable of making change even when every price, sale tax included, has been rounded to the nearest quarter. How walking in their personal “style” prevents them from moving quickly and with purpose. How speaking in an intelligible dialect is an affront to their sensibilities. And you can forget writing altogether, because spelling and the standard formation of letters are nonexistent. Even showing up for work is a matter of personal choice. Not only does the need for personal change never occur, it isn’t even considered for future contemplation.

Because the economy is so healthy, there is a glut of available jobs. It is possible to move from one entry-level job to another if fired for not showing up for work. Currently, there is no need to develop a better personal work ethic. If some work related problem arises, these young people are ill prepared to deal with it. They choose the method of problem solving they have been taught – the path of least resistance - and simply move on to the next situation. After all, everything is in flux and relative. Our own economic good fortune has become the course of their downfall. But what happens when, not if, the economy eventually declines?

A dynamic economy requires absolute truth. Hard facts are required. Your product either works or it doesn’t. It is available or it isn’t. Planes are on time or they aren’t. Customers are there to be satisfied, even the ones that are intent on being dissatisfied. When the music stops, someone is going to be left without a chair.

Which gets us back to the revolving door of employment young people are currently enjoying. The current system of relativism has left them sorely prepared for life. The only entrepreneurs among this group are criminals. Does this mean society can “tsk, tsk” while saying, “We did everything we could” while continuing to deny the existence of absolute Truth? The evidence speaks louder than words.
The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt, they have committed abominable deeds; There is no one who does good. Psalm 14:1

One only has to look into the eyes of the lost lambs behind the service counter to know this culture of relativism has sacrificed Truth for political expediency and we are drenched in the blood of innocents.