Giving atheists a bad name

I've mentioned before that I'm not religious. I don't know that I'm exactly an atheist, either. I just don't know if there is a God (note capitals, meaning a non-generic god). I just don't know. Neither do priests or the born again, but they believe that God exists. It's an act of faith, and they're proud of their faith.

I don't operate on faith. It's simply not in my make-up. Believer friends of mine have suggested that I probably should believe in God, just in case. To avoid going to hell and all that.

Well, if there is a God as they describe, He gave me a brain, and that brain is what prevents me from accepting anything on faith.

OK? Are we clear? Because I'm not arguing about this. I'm not trying to convert anyone away from their religion. I'm only explaining my position.

So having said that, what I don't understand is religious intolerance, even when it comes from self-proclaimed atheists, or especially so. Many people may be familiar with the story about the cross in Death Valley. It was made of steel or iron pipes and mounted on a rock in the desert by a group of WWI veterans. As I heard the story, the cross didn't represent any particular religion -- although crosses are certainly symbolic of the Christian crucifix. But these vets would gather at this place in the desert periodically to pray and meditate.

(Historically, Americans march into battle with dreams of glory, and even when we win, our soldiers generally come home shocked by the horror.)

Anyway, some butthead from Oregon or someplace filed a suit about that cross in Death Valley, claiming it violated the church-state separation. So I think someone bought the few square feet the cross stood on so it wouldn't be on public land. That wasn't good enough. The cross was entombed in a wooden box for a year or so, to cover it up while the whole mess went to the Supreme Court or something. And finally, a ruling from somewhere said the cross was OK.

So someone stole it.

Now in Utah is a story about how the State Troopers went around and put up crosses marking the spots where their fellow troopers have died in the line of duty. And some atheist group from Texas is complaining about that.

First of all, Utah is pretty well known as being founded and still pretty much run by Mormons -- the Latter-Day Saints. I'm not entirely convinced that the Saints consider themselves Christians in the same way Lutherans or Catholics do. They don't view other groups as Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, etc. The Mormons tend to lump all non-Mormons into what they call "gentiles." Or they used to.

So when I heard that the state trooper crosses were in Utah, that struck me as a little odd. A nice gesture, a little memorial, but not especially promoting what would be the state religion in Utah.

And why tear them down? They don't obstruct the highways. Motorists don't have to pay a toll or any kind of tax to support them. And it seems that the families of the fallen troopers appreciate the memorials, even if not all of those families are traditional Christians. So, why tear them down?

Similarly, I really hate all the flap that comes up every year around Christmas. America is mostly Christian. The feds might as well make Christmas an official holiday, because nobody's going to show up for work anyway, including many business owners, boards of directors, C-level execs and so forth. I mean, let's face it.

Personally, I don't care what anyone believes in as long as they don't require me to: 1) pay for it; 2) agree with them. Whatever anyone believes in is just about the most personal decision there is. It determines how you live your life, the mate you pick, often the food you eat (or don't), who your friends are, etc. etc.

Your personal faith or philosophy is the source of your individuality -- which is exactly what America is founded on, and also why the 1st Amendement claims "special protections" and is privileged above other rights. I don't care one way or the other if Christians put up a creche in front of the courthouse, or if Jews decorate the lampposts with menorahs. Go ahead. Celebrate. It's pretty and even joyous.

And while I firmly believe in religious freedom -- which is why I'm so opposed to the Comrade and his buddies appropriatng my income and spending it on what they believe in -- I still think building a mosque at Ground Zero in New York is a calculated insult to the USA. It doesn't appear to be religious so much as it is political. Islam doesn't really separate the two.

I liked Greg Gutfeld's suggestion to build a gay bar right next door to the mosque (possibly named Ji-Hot, You-Mecca-Me-Hot, Suspicious Packages, or Heaven and Hillel, and serving 72 "virgin" or non-alcoholic drinks.) The people promoting the mosque said that a gay bar right next door would offend their sensibilities. Do they mean like building a mosque to mark the spot where their cohorts killed 3,000 innocent people? How could that mosque be anything but offensive in that location?

Seems like muslim sensitivities only go in one direction. Just like the sensitivities of some of these loony atheists.

The Supreme Court took up a 1st Amendment case many years ago. A person complained that someone in a courthouse -- public property -- was wearing a jacket with "FUCK YOU!" written across the back. The person who brought suit was offended and wanted that kind of display and language banned from publicly-owned property. The Supreme Court decided that the complainant had every right to divert his eyes.

So can we get a little tolerance and respect here? From everyone?

Save the republic.

But he's OUR butthead....

I'm worried about citizens getting complacent about the upcoming election. The general consensus and most polls indicate that the dems will be booted out in strong numbers. The majority party in congress usually does lose big in the first off-year election following the election of a new president. But let's not forgot how these people got elected in the first place... and remain alert and active.

George Bush II was extremely unpopular. I'm not sure why. I can understand disagreeing with his policies, etc. etc., but George Bush was piled on by the press and public in a genuinely inprecedented and shocking way. Over my lifetime, I've seen a lot of presidents come and go. LBJ was not well-liked and neither was Nixon, but I don't recall the same kind of name-calling and passionate hatred that was heaped on "W" being directed toward those eariler presidents.

I think the open contempt and bashing given to "W" was part of the democrat's 2008 campaign, and it began about 2006. I think it was done deliberately to ensure that the dems could elect anyone they wanted in 2008. So we got the Comrade.

And as far as the "mess George W left behind," that was in large part created by the Pelosi-Reid congress, which began their vile machinations in 2006. Not that preceding Republican majorities were a whole lot better.

Anyway, the dems still have a few tricks up their sleeves and lots of money, although I've worked in and around advertising long enough to know that if you've got a truly crappy product that no one wants, no one will buy it no matter how much money you spend to advertise it. I have to laugh at Pelosi's naivete in this regard, thinking that if she simply renamed socialized medicine, people would like it. We don't call her Pazzo for nothing.

To tell you the truth, the dems as they stand right now remind me of a big bunch of frat boys (and girls) on spring break. They get drunk, or feel intoxicated, because this is spring break, and that's the way you're supposed to feel. They funnel tequila directly into their esophagi, display their boobs and other usually covered parts to video cameras, they screw anything that moves, perhaps with an audience to egg them on. That was the Comrade's 2008 campaign. Just nuts. It was like someone said, "Hey! It's OK to let go of your rational judgment and just go crazy!"

Unfortunately, now we all have to live with the consequences. And as these off-year electrions begin to crank up, you can probably expect to see compelling and well-funded efforts to inspire the same kind of madness.

Because to re-elect the loonies in congress requires madness.

Then there's the traditional wisdom to explain why the same old jerks get re-elected to the same districts: He may be a jerk, but he's OUR jerk.

What do you want to bet that Charlie Rangel and Maxine Waters will be re-elected, despite being on trial for corruption during the campaign? Anyone remember Adam Clayton Powell? This is not the young man currently running in Harlem, but his dad. Adam Clayton Powell was actually censured by congress for misbehavior, which included spending congressional sessions in the Caribbean and fathering a number of children that he didn't always acknowledge or support. That Adam Clayon Powell was famous for telling voters, "Keep the faith, Baby." This was turned around after one scandal to the more appropriate, "Keep the baby, Faith."

He was re-elected and would probably still be in office, except he died.

I look at some of these congressmen who are approaching 300 years old and who have been in congress since Ford was making Model T's, and it makes you wonder, what are their constituents thinking? Many of them simply represent bad habits. Arlen Specter and Robert Byrd -- King of Pork -- come to mind. Tottering, demented old fossils, but think of them as they once were. I'd rather not. And don't worry about them being turned out after decades of public service. They retire with pensions greater than what 80% of the population will ever make, and they made sure of that while they held office.

Vote the bums out.

Save the republic.

Lying then or lying now?

The White House seems to be emitting varous timid signals about moving to the center of the political spectrum. Or its idea of center, which is probably further left than any sane person could imagine.

Robert Gibbs, White House press secretary (and I give his title because I'm not sure I've got his name right; I may be confusing him with the BeeGees) a few weeks ago remarked that the dems were going to lose their majority in the House in the November election. Now he's criticizing "professional leftists" for not being happy with all the socialist goodies the Comrade has already delivered. Believe Gibbs said something like the left wouldn't be happy until the USA had Canada-style single-payer health care and the Pentagon was disbanded. Or something like that.

With the comment about losing the House majority, Pazzo Pelosi pitched a hissy fit. Now apparently the "professional left" is all raddled and offended. So? The professional left is a very small minority. They should get used to being marginalized. They're actually idiots with nothing useful to contribute.

However, I don't think Robert Gibbs is just spouting off impulsively. That's not how you get to be press secretary at the White House. No, I think he and the professional leftist-in-chief, the Comrade, are doing what they can to make the Comrade look like a rational person. That is, look like he's leaning toward the center (not that the center is all that rational, being a mixed bag of wishful thinking and CBO projections.)

Anyway, I don't believe the White House is dumping the professional left. If the Comrade can lie to the right, he can lie to the left.

Don't remember which movie it was, but do recall Cary Grant in some role relating the story of the Blackfeet and the Whitefeet Indians. The Blackfeet were notorious liars. The Whitefeet always told the truth. And, sadly, they didn't actually have black and white feet. They were indistinguishable from each other physically.

So the question was, if you asked an Indian if he was a Blackfoot or a Whitefoot, what kind of an answer could you believe? A Blackfoot would lie. A Whitefoot wouldn't, but you couldn't tell the individual members of the tribes apart from each other. So do you believe it when the Indian says, "I'm a Whitefoot"? I mean, how can you? It's a total gamble, 50-50 odds.

Or as D.A. McCoy says so succinctly in the oft-aired ad for reruns of "Law and Order": Were you lying then or are you lying now?

My idea is the Comrade and Robert Gibbs, Pelosi, Reid, and the whole congressional rat pack -- all the merry marxists -- lie all the time, like the Blackfeet. I doubt they even remember what "truth" is as a stand-alone concept. They just say whatever is most convenient at any given moment and seems to place them in the best light. Their central "truth" is keeping themselves employed at the public expense. Everything else is second to that and insignificant enough to lie about.

In short, they have no honor or integrity. And they surely don't have a handle on how the USA is supposed to operate.

You can't believe anything they say. So watch what they do. Remember how they voted on socialized medicine. There's a nice indicator. It's telling that they tried to pass all their socialist crap by "deeming" so that their votes won't have to be recorded. Such courage of their convictions, huh? Like, what courage? What convictions?

Meanwhile, Michelle Obama "showed her ass," as a friend of mine would say. Visiting castles in Spain -- and apparently renting one for her friends -- as the USA begins yet another descent into economic disaster. She and the Comrade were made for each other. Spain might be a good place for them. They'd love the green-economy-induced double-digit unemployment. Perhaps Michelle was studying its social impact in her spare moments and decided she could just ignore it and ordered another Sangria.

That's it for now. Working on my novel, which I hope to publish in time for this year's election campaign.

Save the republic. At least vote the bastards out.

Why come to the USA?

OK, I get it. People come to the USA from all over the world for a variety of reasons: to make money; to escape political oppression; to escape religious oppression; to better their lives and those of their family.

But what I don't get, and what apparently the Comrade and ICE and the so-called Cordoba Project doesn't get either, is that if any of them try to "fundamentally transform" the USA, all they really accomplish is to turn this country into the armpits and hell-holes they're fleeing.

So poor Mexicans want to come here for work. Fine, we can put together some kind of program -- we did a few decades ago and it seemed to work. But when millions of Mexicans come here, not necessarily to work, but to give birth to an "anchor baby" so that they can import all their relatives and live on welfare -- that doesn't do the USA any good. And when Mexican drug lords move in to claim whole sections of Arizona and Texas as their gang territory -- that only puts the USA at the mercy of criminal thugs and corrupts our government.

In effect, the USA degenerates into a poverty-stricken third-world rats nest of crime and corruption.

So here's an idea: When you come to the USA, leave all that crap back home. The USA doesn't want it, either. And isn't that why people come here? To leave all the garbage behind? Isn't that what the USA has always been about?

And I do believe muslim sharia law violates the First Amendment. We separate church and state in the USA. Sharia law doesn't. Why come to the USA if you want to live under sharia law? I mean, really, why not stay in Iran or wherever? Sharia law does not allow for free trade, free exercise of religion, the free exchange of ideas, prosperity, or personal liberty. Leave it where it is. We don't want it here.

If the Comrade, or Hamas, or Mexican drug gangs or anyone else wants to rewrite the rules for the USA, it will cease to be the USA. It will be just one more dumping ground for poverty and despair. No one seems to understand that.

So immigrants are welcome, as long as they understand they're going to have to come up to American standards, not pull the USA down to theirs.

And about that mosque at Ground Zero? Go ahead, build it. Then on some pretty, sunshiney day, maybe some wayward pilot will lose his way over Manhattan....

Hey, it could happen.

Save the republic.

Don't "Show Me" socialized medicine

Interesting. In Missouri yesterday, they had a vote on something called Proposition C, which basically guts the "individual mandate" section of the federal socialized medicine bill. That is, vote "Yes" on Proposition C, and you're voting to invalidate the federal law that requires that people buy insurance or get government-funded insurance.

About a million voters turned out -- which some reports say is about what Missouri gets for primary elections. And they voted 71% in favor of the bill... that is, to tell the feds where to stick it.

The actual polls, like Gallup, Rasmussen, Zogby, etc., put public opposition to socialized medicine at anywhere from 51% to 59%, so Missouri seems a bit ahead of the curve. And good for them!

And to the (barf-choke-gag) "Political Class," that's what happens when you ignore public opinion and pass legislation that only marxists really want -- and not even Europe anymore. They tried it; it doesn't work. Unless your goal is bankruptcy.

Read an interesting article at Rasmussen Reports (dot-com), too. The article is linked through Rasmussen, but written by some pollsters' trade magazine. They were talking about how the "Political Class" has a very distinct -- and I must say "warped" -- view of economics and the economy.

Like in some polls, members of the "Political Class" were asked to prioritize issues that included Unemployment and Government Spending. Apparently the "Political Class" regards Fixing Unemployment as virtually the same thing as Massive Federal Spending. That is, they seem to believe that their spending actually is jumpstarting the economy and creating jobs.

Quite possibly, the "Political Class" are the only people in the nation who see the issues this way. I mean, they're all nicely insulated inside the Beltway. But you'd think every so often they'd take a look around.

People with actual functioning brains realize that the more the government spends, the more it has to rob from the "Non-Political Class." The more the feds rob from this private sector, the less can be invested in economic growth and job creation.

The "Political Class" just don't get it. It's what I've been saying: Washington has a very advanced case of terminal stupidity.

Those who want to end the so-called Bush Tax Cuts, which expire at the end of this year unless congress votes to extend them, claim that the resulting increase in taxes will bring in more revenue to the government. Wanna bet? Looks like more money will ph-h-h-h-t magically disappear from US enterprise and go elsewhere, or continue its rest in banks in the Cayman Islands or wherever.

When you offer higher taxes, you don't get too many volunteers. Not many people are that stupid. Not even congress, apparently, and other federal employees, who don't seem to be very scrupulous about paying their taxes. Taxes are for the Little People.

So, enough for now.

Save the republic!

A giant roller skate from the new GM

Wanna help me plan my vacation? I just got a brand new electric car from Government Motors and I'm dying to try it out on my trip to Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. It has a range of a whopping 40 miles before it needs recharging. (Bring your own cables?)

Day 1: Drive to the northern suburbs of Chicago. Re-charge car battery for 12 -14 hours. Might as well stay overnight.

Day 2: Drive through the city to the southern suburbs. Re-charge car battery for 12 - 14 hours. Might as well stay overnight.

Day 3. Drive to Gary, Indiana. Re-charge car battery for 12 -14 hours. Might as well stay overnight.

Day 4: Drive toward South Bend, Indiana (won't quite make it; it's 58 miles.) Re-charge car battery. Might as well stay overnight.

Day 5: Drive to Elkhart, Indiana. Re-charge car battery for 12 - 14 hours. Might as well stay overnight.

Uh-oh. Only five days of vacation left. Guess I better turn around and go back home if I plan to get back to work on time. But, gee, I got a great look at the I-80 Interstate and almost made it through Indiana.

H-m-m-m, so what are my other options? I could fly to Harrisburg, Penna., I guess, rent a car and... but gosh, what kind of a carbon footprint would that leave? Greenpeace is reeling.

I could buy a gas-powered car and, if I leave my house at about 4:00 am, before rush hour, I'd make Ohio before lunch and Somerset, Penna., in time for supper. I might even be able to stop and see the memorial to the "Let's Roll" 9/11 plane that crashed at Shanksville. Then reach Gettysburg morning of Day 2. And in a gas-powered car, I could actually drive around the battlefield without stopping to re-charge the battery.

OR -- and this is a big one -- with the $41,000 I paid for the new GM, I could have bought two pretty comfortable gas-powered cars and maybe bring a whole bunch of friends. And wouldn't be using up all that coal-powered electricity and spending all my vacation money on hotel rooms and battery re-charging.

H-m-m-m-m must be figuring something wrong here. The Comrade wouldn't want me to squander all that energy on any sort of vacation, would he? I mean, since he's put a moratorium on domestic drilling and all....

But I'm glad to see him flying his and Pazzo Pelosi's families all over the continent for their good times and convenience and entirely at public expense. I mean, they work so hard, don't they? Dreaming up an endless series of 2,000-page bills to hamstring all of us "little people."

You'd think we'd have all learned something from those useless and wasteful five-year plans Stalin and Krushchev and all those folks dumped on the Russians for half a century, wouldn't you? But, no. Central planning and socialism are so much more efficient than free market capitalism. Like impractical and expensive cars that no one could possibly afford to operate. Roller skates will take you just as far and without the 12-hour layover to re-charge the batteries.

I do hope the Comrade and the merry marxists take long, long, long, long vacations of their own. And have my fingers crossed that the electorate will assure it.

Save the republic.

Sic Semper Tyrannis

Virginia was sort of a linchpin in the American Revolution and during the Civil War. It was also home to George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Monroe, James Madison, Patrick Henry.... The state motto, Sic Semper Tyrannis! means "Thus always to tyrants." It's also what John Wilkes Booth cried out to the audience at Ford's Theatre just after he shot Lincoln.

Anyway, Virginia did good today. Virginia has a law regarding illegal immigrants that is similar to Arizona's. It was ruled OK today. So I guess the outcome of the issue depends upon how liberal your judge is. The Ninth Circuit, which covers Arizona, is known to be extremely liberal, and is the circuit that's most often overturned by the Supreme Court. Virginia seems to be better situated geographically.

Virginia also is suing the federal government over socialized medicine, claiming that it's unconstitutional to force citizens to buy something so that you can regulate them (commerce clause) for buying it. The feds argued that Virginia doesn't have "standing" to pursue the law suit. That means the feds were saying Virginia has no right to sue. Just like Dred Scot had no right to sue his master for freedom.

Oh well, according to another judge, yes it does!! So I'm waiting to see how that turns out. Here's hoping socializeed medicine is dead in the water. Sic Semper Tyrannis!

Poor -- well, not really -- Charlie Rangel's chickens are coming home to roost. Seems to be some kind of mental illness that affects chairmen of the Ways & Means Committee. Anyone remember Rostenkowski? He chaired Ways & Means and was busted for abuse of the franking privilege, which means he was sending out all kinds of personal and/or campaign mail at public expense. Believe he actually did time for that. This was after the elderly almost rolled his car over for trying to take away Medicare or something.

Anyway, now Rangel, who chaired Ways & Means when the 111th Congress opened, has got the idea that the tax laws he creates don't necessarily apply to him.

Silly congressman! Taxes are for everyone, their children down to the third generation now, and probably their dogs and goldfish, too. (Cats just ignore them.)

And now Maxine Waters, who represents Watts, Los Angeles, in the US House, is being busted for hooking up her husband in a sweetheart $12 million dollar deal involving Stimulus money, or was it TARP? Does it matter?

Ms. Waters is most famous for the little film clip where she said something like, "This democrat is all about socia....  nationaliz.... the government taking an ownership position......"

Just couldn't bring herself to be completely honest there, kept biting her tongue. Thinking (rightly so) that the American public just wasn't quite ready to be economically enslaved by the feds. And she just can't seem to be completely honest in areas of her life, either.

Both Rangel and Waters will have public hearings in September-October. Right before the election. Good timing!!

They just can't keep their hands out of other peoples' cookie jars. Or take the attitude that they're above the law. My theory is there's some kind of poison in the DC water supply. The longer you live there, the crazier you get. You begin to forget that the USA is a republic. Forget that you're dealing with other peoples' incomes. Forget that you have feet of clay.

Time to wake up and smell the coffee -- or something. DC is built on swampland, you know. Figures, doesn't it?

Save the republic.