New Page 2

| HOME | PHILOSOPHY | LISTEN | CONTACT | THE WORD |
Andrea's Blogs

Now blogging at new blogsite!
Wednesday, August 2, 2006

Now you can find Andrea and Mark at their new blogsite The Radio Patriots launched July 29, 2006.
Head on over and find out what's going on!

To whom we owe so much
Saturday, July 8, 2006

The weather is changing here on Florida’s Space Coast, and the first hints of autumn have arrived coincident with the turn of a page. October. As I sit here comfortably, listening to a CD of compositions that take me back to autumn in New England (longing for those crisp, bright blue-sky days and flame colored leaves!), I peruse blogs written by some of our fighting men in Iraq. And I am moved. My heart fills with appreciation and gratitude to those who are sacrificing so much (in too many cases, everything) to defend us and protect us against vileness that lives to destroy us.

It’s because of their sacrifice and faith in our flag and to the country for which it stands that I am able do what I do. I feel pangs of guilt. There MUST be something more I can do to help them in this effort. This war on “terror”. This fight for the life and soul of our country.

Perhaps I can help in some small way by bringing you to their stories. To the truth. To share what I’ve learned and am learning about this war and those who understand it best, who are giving their all to fight it on our behalf – you and me, cozy in our armchairs on a fall afternoon, watching football, baseball, or whatever it is you do on a day such as this.

Let me take you to the websites I’ve been. Fair warning, though. Prepare to be moved beyond whatever emotions you’ve had about this war. Prepare to laugh, ache with pride, marvel at the courage, be amazed at the smarts, and weep at the heartbreaking losses that are written about so intelligently by our fellow countrymen on the front lines.

I started this journey when I logged on to the site kept by freelance journalist Michael Yon, whose reports from those hot, dusty places with odd sounding names draw you in until you are lost in the labyrinthian mazes of Iraqi cities where the battle rages. You are there. His photos bring his posts alive. Read here what you won’t and don’t read in the mainstream press or on the nightly TV news. The truth about this war and why we MUST win.

Then read the daily posts of “Major K”, a 35-year-old reservist Infantry Officer from southern California, whose wife is expecting their first child. Major K trains the Iraqi army as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom in the Sunni Triangle of Iraq. His accounts of the fight and the Iraqi people will captivate you. And again, give you a perspective very few of us are getting from the daily news.

You will find links to other military blog sites on most of these sites, including Frontlineblogs.com which publishes observations and thoughts from three other fighting men who poignantly share their experiences from that part of the world, far away from their homes.

Then check out Training for Eternity, a look at the war from the eyes and heart of an Army chaplain:

“Instead of a weapon and body armor, I carry a small bottle of oil. As my soldiers prepare for their mission, without interfering with their activities, I walk around and pray for them and with them. It is something spectacular to see an American Soldier, armed to the gills with pistols and rifles and all manner of explosive accoutrements, covered head to toe with Kevlar, and watch him bow to pray as I dab oil on his forehead and pray the protection and blessing of God on his life and his mission. Then to hear that same battle hardened warrior, in a voice shaky from anticipation, adrenaline, and appreciation say, “Amen” and “Thank you, chaplain.”

After you have read their stories, at about the time you’re thinking you could and should be doing more than you are to help our brothers and sisters defend the U.S. (and that’s us), you can demonstrate your gratitude to the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines serving our country by going to Operation Troop Appreciation where your donation will help build and maintain the morale of deployed troops by providing items that ease the burden of deployment. You can also communicate in letters to the troops your support and gratitude for their service and sacrifice.

I never served in the military. The closest I've come to military life? My Dad served in the US Navy during WWII (before I was born), and his brother Sam chose a career in the US Army. Sam and his wife Sophie spent several years in Germany and I only met their children -- my cousins -- after they returned stateside. Sam’s firstborn son Phillip proudly followed in his footsteps and chose a military career in the Army.

It all seemed so unusual for me, this dedication to a greater cause.

But now I understand.

Take this journey with me. Log on. And read the truth about this war. From those in the front. Those who know.

And say a prayer every now and then for our fighting men and women and their loved ones. God bless every one of them.

Memorial Day - What will their memories be?
Saturday, May 27, 2006

When I think of Memorial Day I always think of my grandfather. He never served in the military, but he loved this country and the men and women who died defending it. Both my grandparents worked – he as a chauffeur, she as an assembly worker. Their entire married life they saved to own their own home, and the day their dream came true, the first thing my grandfather did was plant a 14-foot flagpole in the middle of the front yard which was no bigger than a postage stamp. The pole was as tall as the house.

Every morning “Pepere” would go out there to raise Old Glory. He’d water the geraniums he planted around the pole for decoration. And then he’d go about his day.

If it even smelled like rain, he’d head for the pole and start bringing her down. He really respected the flag – he knew what it stood for.

At sunset, he’d lower it, fold it carefully and set it on a colonial chair in the front hall. It was his ritual. I think my grandfather was the first "red, white, and blue" patriot I ever knew.

On Memorial Day, we’d walk to the end of my grandparents’ street, skipping along happily waving our little flags, to watch the high school bands, the Boy Scouts, and veterans from the VFW and American Legion posts parade past.

The drums pounded and the fifes whistled, and for the Vets parading by, it seemed that their memories gave lift to their steps far beyond the strength of their aging bodies.

They’d wind up in a little park across the street where they placed a wreath of flowers at the base of a granite monument dedicated to the war dead. The din of the parade ceased, and in the warm morning sunshine, the only sounds were the chirping birds or someone coughing, punctuating the solemn silence of the people gathered there. That’s what I remember most: the quiet dignity of the wreath-laying ceremony.

Memorial Day has taken on a more profound meaning for me since we were attacked on 9/11. I grieve for and celebrate the brave men and women of a new generation who have paid dearly for our freedom and now lie in peace with those who went before.

Memorial Day should mean more than cookouts, 20 percent off sales at the local hardware store, and the beginning of a summer season. It should honor our heroes who loved this country with everything they had and who gave so that we may have.

What does this Memorial Day mean to you? What are you teaching your children and grandchildren about this precious day?

What will their memories be?

More Reaction from NFL treatment of troops
Monday, February 13, 2006

From the Inbox:

From ThirdWaveDave:

Thanks for including my NFL post on your blog. I credited you and your show at mine, as well.

My article is still moving around the internet, and seems to be picking up momentum. You're the 3rd person today that has contacted me from some form of media outlet. Our troops deserve so much better and it seems many other folks feel the same way. Bless them all.

I listened to your show this evening over the internet, and am very glad I did. You have some special going on there, Andrea. As one who listens to many radio shows all week long, I know a great show when I hear one. Your local program may not be so local in the future, at least I hope that's the way it works out.

The caller who was a Korean vet brought up many good points and your discussion of Iran was sobering. Most don't understand what exactly is going on at this time. It's a shame.

Anyway, again, thanks, and I will listen to your show again.

Dave

Thirdwavedave

PS: The way you end your show by mentioning our troops and asking for prayers for their safe return was heartening.

***

Thanks for sending me your e-mails. Since I can't pick up your radio show here in Vero Beach, your e-mails are all I have to fall back on. I look forward to receiving them.

Bob P.

***

I didn't even know that this was done, as I have given up on the SuperBowl as it is not about a football game to me anymore.

Ham B.

***

Wow! That poem is deep, right from the heart. I recognize that second commentary, and hope it was not too dreary. It's been said that people can't empathize with another's sorrow, until they have felt it in themselves. Perhaps this opens thoughts on the meanings of how Jesus was said to have taken on the sorrows of the world so that we would not have to bear them. In a way, our troops are doing that, suffering for the sins of the world so we don't have to suffer here at home. I think in the end, it is less about religion, than about psychology.

Gretta H.

***

Thanks for sharing. I have spread to our contact list as well.

Beth Y.

***

IT MAKES ME ILL TO THINK THAT SO MANY IN THIS COUNTRY DO NOT HAVE THE TIME TO THINK AND PRAY FOR OUR SERVICE PEOPLE. IT IS SO SAD. THEY GIVE THEIR LIVES TO SAVE US AND WHAT DO MOST OF US DO? JUST IGNORE THEM. WELL NOT ME. I PRAY EVERY DAY AND NIGHT FOR THEM AND FOR THIS SAD COUNTRY WE ARE NOW LIVING IN. GOD BLESS ONE AND ALL.

PENNY G.

***

How sad that not one moment was spent honoring our military... don't people realize that were it not for them, that stupid game might not have been able to be played? What is wrong with this country????

Great comments, especially the one regarding the liberals in California.

Gary D.

***

I have forwarded this on to all the support groups (parents and families of soldiers with the Stryker Brigade out of Ft. Lewis, WA. My son is one of those soldiers) I stay in communication with. These range from the families of when my son was first deployed to the two other Stryker Brigade families whose soldiers have been deployed. As families face all the issues surrounding their soldiers’ deployments, there needs to be support. It is not necessarily provided for those who are not on base...especially so for single soldiers and their families.

When my son was first deployed, I was wrapped in a veil of unknowns. I made it a point to get information and pass it on to other parents with same concerns. Now, my son is preparing for his second deployment. Now I have parents who know this, their sons are home, and they are providing moral support to me.

It is discouraging to have our soldiers and what they are doing so easily swept under the carpet. My heart goes out to anyone injured there but am disappointed that when reporters get injured, they seem to get more coverage than our soldiers. Then, to have nothing at such a major American event...well...

Thank you for sharing poetry and messages from others.

Best regards,

Janie N.

***

You are so right, there was nothing mentioned at the Super Bowl about our brave Military men and women who are defending not only our freedom, but a better life for the Iraqis. Good for you!!

Blessings, Marta F.

***

What's all the fuss? A paraphrase of the definition of a 'sport' is that it is an entity that seems real but it shoots blanks. No danger at all.

Respectfully,

Patricia

***

As a matter of fact, I noticed it too. I was looking for a jet flyby during the national anthem.

Dolores K

***

Thank you for sending this to me, and it was an eye opener, although I should have been more aware when watching large sports events on TV. But am very aware when some of our major politicians during their prime time talk, never say a thing about our service people and about what they are so very involved in - THIS WAR. It is sad when you see so many being killed and nothing said. Well I try to do my best when I talk to people and try to help in anyway I can.

In Spirit, Penny

***

Thank you for that thoughtful blog, and I wish everyone cared, but I fear that a half century of anti war sentiment in this country has created a sense of complacency, if not hostility, against the military for about half the population. I have sisters on the west coast who automatically argue on the issue if I get into it with them. They don't realize the war is actually happening, it is like a TV film to them, and even the fact that my husband is military doesn't hush their hostility. It is a cultural thing, and long ago I stopped expecting them to see the light. So I appreciate those who stand up on the issue.

Gretta H.

***

Excellent.

Steve H.

***

I wouldn't expect the NFL to do much for the military while there are ethnicities to placate; sorry, that may sound racist but apparently the media is unaware that there were a lot more areas and people who suffered from two years of hurricanes not just one hurricane. I also cannot help but feel that the majority of New Orleans suffering was the result of abject incompetence on the part of the Mayor of New Orleans and the Governor of Louisiana; and they're getting a pass despite their criminal negligence or just plain stupidity.

And lastly the rendition of the National Anthem was an absolute disgrace: I can sing better than that guy and our National Anthem is just that, an anthem not a rock song - sorry Aretha.

Gary

***

I would think the most telling tribute to our military forces in Iraq would be displaying 2206 flags to commemorate those who have died in cobat in retaliation for those WMDs and building a "democratic" government for people who could care less about a representative form government in a culture bent on honoring Alla via loving nations of the world.

Jim H.

***

Not Super Bowled over
Sunday, February 12, 2006

Got some interesting comments about the Super Bowl festivities which did NOT include a salute to our troops. I've included some. One was moved to pen a poem (see below).

THE SHAME OF SILENCE

Amidst the roar of that Sunday crowd,
Above the music from the stage,
A silence was heard so clear and loud,
As empty as a fresh new page.
As fantasy heroes took to the field,
From coin toss to final gun,
The silence stood firm and would not yield,
Still hasn't; that day is done.
Not so much as a single word,
No request for a moment of prayer,
No wish for true heroes was ever heard,
Had they forgotten they were there?
The heroes on a different field,
In a world so far away,
Where the guns they hear are far too real;
Who chose to ignore them that day?
Before a crowd of millions of hearts,
Free to enjoy that game,
How special a thanks to those apart,
Would have been in their world insane.
Amidst the roar of that Sunday crowd,
Above the hype the profit the greed,
Lingers that silence so deafeningly loud,
A silence for which there was no need.
Ron Hyatt copyright 2006
twc3212644269@earthlink.net

Another wrote:

"I wish everyone cared, but I fear that a half century of anti war sentiment in this country has created a sense of complacency, if not hostility, against the military for about half the population. I have sisters on the west coast who automatically argue on the issue if I get into it with them. They don't realize the war is actually happening, it is like a TV film to them, and even the fact that my husband is military doesn't hush their hostility. It is a cultural thing, and long ago I stopped expecting them to see the light."

The comments that filled my inbox were overwhelmingly in favor of honoring our military -- with this exception:

"I would think the most telling tribute to our military forces in Iraq would be displaying 2206 flags to commemorate those who have died in cobat (sic) in retaliation for those WMDs and building a "democratic" government for people who could care less about a representative form government in a culture bent on honoring Alla (sic) via suicide missions against the freedom-loving nations of the world."

Call the NFL and tell them what YOU think.

212-450-2000

or, write to them at:

280 Park Ave.
New York 10017


I am not Bowl-ed over
Sunday, February 12, 2006

Notice anything missing from the Super Bowl game?

From the Blogspot of ThirdWaveDave

NFL "SPINS" TROOP SUPPORT ISSUE

After the Super Bowl I posted my thoughts on the game. One of things I noted about the event was the lack of any tribute to our military. I noticed 3 pre-game tributes (King, Parks, Katrina) but apparently our military didn't make the cut.

Another blogger, Alex at The Noonz Wire, noticed this omission, as well, and ripped into the NFL in this post last Tuesday. His post got me motivated to take the issue beyond just a mention on my blog: I decided someone was going to explain this to me, and that "someone" was going to be the NFL.

**THE INTERVIEW**

I took me the better part of two days to work my way up the food chain of Paul Tagliabue's office in New York, but, finally, I was put in contact with someone who was authorized to discuss the matter. That person was Matt Hill, who works in corporate communications. However pleasant and professional he was, he was not prepared for my main inquiry. The phone call was not recorded, so I'm constructing it from my notes.

TWD: When does planning for a Super Bowl begin?

MH: Planning begins 2 years in advance. And we have sites identified through 2010.

TWD: Does the NFL decide on what activities take place pre-game, half-time, ect?

MH: The NFL controls everything. But there are a couple issues the network has a say in.

TWD: Why was there no tritbute to our military at this year's Super Bowl?

MH: Not sure why.

TWD: At some point in the planning process, the subject of a military tribute had to come up, and someone at that table had to say why you were or why you weren't going to do it.

MH: Again, I'm not sure why.

TWD: Ok, then put me in contact with someone who can answer my question.

MH: I'll forward your call to Brian McCarthy. I'll put you on hold. (holding)

MH: I wanted to put you in touch with Brian McCarthy but I just noticed he's leaving for a meeting. I'll have him call you back when he's free.

TWD: Thanks very much.

Take note of Matt's first answer to my question as to why there was no tribute. "Not sure why." He admitted there was no tribute but just didn't know why there wasn't one. If there had been a tribute, this was his opportunity to point it out. But, there was no tribute. McCarthy just leaving for a meeting was code for, "we better get organized here before we say more." I expected this and would've done the same thing. About 2 hours later, I received a return call from Tagliabue's office. Again, it was Matt Hill.

MH: I wanted to get back to you and fill you in on what we did for the military during the Super Bowl.

TWD: Thanks, and I appreciate you getting back to me so soon.

MH: Here's what the NFL did this year: 6 colors guards representing each branch of service during the anthem tribute. TV crews from each branch providing live feeds to military units across the globe. On the live feeds, some of the players gave personal tributes to the military. The NFL mailed 5000 Super Bowl programs to service members. Staff from the NFL and the Washington Redskins visited Walter Reed and watched the game with some of our wounded. Cleveland Browns' owner, Randy Lerner, provided tickets for 50 marines to attend the Super Bowl.

TWD: You know, that's some great stuff you listed. It would've been nice if you had announced this to the viewing audience. We would've liked to have known about it.

MH: Yes.

TWD: But, getting back to my original question. Why was there no tribute to our military at this year's super Bowl?

MH: There was. We had 6 color guards representing each branch of service during the anthem tribute.

TWD: The 6 six color guards?

MH: Yes, during the pre-game tribute.

TWD: Ok, Matt, I appreciate the time you've taken with me and, again, thanks for getting back to me so soon.

Let me respond to some of what Matt listed. 6 Color Guards do not constitute a tribute--not when we're at war--nor is it special. Color Guards are always present during professional sporting events. Because this was the Super Bowl, where everything is done bigger and with more flash, of course there would be more than one Color Guard presenting the Colors. And, if you remember, the National Anthem was announced as a tribute to the victims of Katrina. Not the military.

An owner, as in one, bought 50 tickets for some Marines to attend the game. The NFL has 32 teams. This is something the NFL is touting as support? Something to be proud of ? I think not. Don't get me wrong, I commend Mr. Lerner for his support of those 50 Marines. But where in the hell was everyone else? Where was the NFL?

Obviously, the military was downplayed this year. There was no tribute at all. The NFL, for whatever reason, decided on this policy and they aren't saying why. All the items Matt listed off to me were "behind the scenes" events and the viewing audience was not made aware of them. In other words, everything Matt said was simply NFL spin. Period.

Why would the NFL snub our military? Your guess is as good as mine. But, the fact remains that they decided not to pay tribute to the most important people on the face of the earth: The men and women of the United States armed forces. Some of whom were shot at, wounded, or killed during the broadcast of this year's Super Bowl. And for the NFL's lack of respect for these precious warriors, they owe us all an explanation.

There's more going on here, so if you're inclined to contact the NFL about this, and I hope you are, you can do so in one of two ways:

212-450-2000

or, write to them at:

280 Park Ave.

New York 10017

The NFL has no "general" email address. The NFL.com site only entertains inquires regarding site content. Not NFL issues.

Hey, if enough of you blog about this, and call, maybe the NFL will show some appreciation to our military at this week's Pro Bowl.

See you in the comment section.

posted by ThirdWaveDave

THIRDWAVEDAVE


To my Democrat Friends
Friday, January 13, 2006

The D's moderate side has been hijacked by leftists who are jihadists just as surely as many Muslims are. And it appears mainstream Americans are waking up to that fact. Slowly. But surely. A friend of mine is a Democrat who can't stand George Bush or Dick Cheney, and doesn't have much of a particular use for Rummy either. And though he would never say so, he is disgusted with the world class asses who have commandeered the nation's center (or is it left?) stage on behalf of the Democrat Party. And though my friend tries loyally to defend his team, when cornered with the facts he winds up castigating the lot -- Republicans and Democrats -- sputtering "A pox on all their houses!"

If you want to be a voice for the more moderate Ds, go for it. But do it knowing that Democrats want you to believe that government is the answer to all of society's "problems". That philosphy has created gargantuan, trillion dollar social programs for the several apathetic, dole-dependent generations that we the people have to underwrite with our first five months' salary taxes. Look at your paycheck. Look at the "victims" of Katrina who are first and mostly victims of a welfare and education system that has reduced them to helpless, hopeless barnacles clinging to the rusted hulk of a lifetime lifeboat of public assistance.

The founders had it right: A republic that incorporated lessons learned from the great classical civilizations. Jefferson, Madison, Adams, Franklin, et al, constructed and compromised, argued and agreed (finally) on a constitution that laid out in specifics the structure (three separate branches) and the rules. And made the whole thing answerable to "we the people" through our votes.

We the people are supposed to be at the top of the food chain. Not the other way around. And we were doing pretty well with that formula until modern times.

I know that very little is perfect, and this Great Experiment borne of the Revolutionary War and man's yearning to be free is revealing structural fissures that are cracking into ever-widening maws. But I know of no other government that was designed to be so perfectly balanced by its assured mutual checks.

If we had followed the rulebook -- the Constitution -- today's federal branches would be balanced. Limited. Answerable TO the people and not the other way around. (Ever try to tell the IRS you aren't going to pay any taxes? Or protect your property from a city or town that has decided it can make more tax revenue from it if you're off it, and someone else is on it? Try taking that to the Supreme Court. Oh wait. Suzett Kelo did. Look what she got for her trouble.)

So, while I'll give you that the Republicans lately have done a lousy job of keeping the founders' flame burning with a pure white light (Prescription Drug Progam? Katrina aid to New Orleans? No Child Left Behind?), the Democrats continue to come up with extra-constitutional social programs for every "disadavantaged" group they can name -- the "poor", the "elderly", the "children", the gays, Blacks, Hispanics, etc. etc. and, going back to FDR, blossoming like a mushroom cloud with LBJ and Carter, the Democrats have left us to pay the tab, loading the bill on our backs with onerous, burdensome and crippling taxes. Is this fair? To whom? They take from your pocket to support me? You work a 40-hour-plus week so someone else can imprint a couch? The founders would cringe at the thought. They did. Think "tea party" in Boston harbor.

Some call our present federalist government socialistic. Others say it represents varying degrees of Marxism. How ever you describe it, it's not AT ALL what the founders intended. They debated, argued, went without comforts of hearth and home, because they understood that if one wanted liberty, one must create a JUST society. Where people can own property. Can protect themselves against any enemy or government gone awry. Where people are free to speak their minds, and worship their God. Where people understand that answering to a higher power keeps their baser instincts in check, allowing self-governance and freedom. Where opportunity is available to anyone and everyone, if they're willing to work for it. Where States are sovereign, superior to the united federation created first and foremost to efficiently and effectively protect "we the people" from enemies, foreign and domestic.

My Democrat friends, don't you think it's time we cease looking to Washington as the givers and takers of all we hold dear, arbiters of what we are to keep and what we MUST give away or share?

The once-great global collosus Rome collapsed, rotted and decayed from abundance, decadence, and complacency. The magnificent Greek civilization died of hubris. History tells us that without moral and spiritual absolutes, the longevity of a nation is not assured. History is telling us that unless we learn it, really learn it, we are doomed to repeat it. Reading the Constitution would be a good start.

Time to take off the gloves
Sunday, December 18, 2005

Like a cleaver striking a butcher’s board, this country is surely being divided by those whose lust for power has overcome their good sense, their patriotism, and whatever honor – if any – they ever possessed. The philosophy of the Democrats in Congress and the leftist followers, including their handmaidens in the mainstream media – will surely bring this country down and cause our destruction.

Strong words? Well, hang on to your stocking caps.

I have grave concerns for my country – OUR country --- grave concerns about the constant attacks on our President as he conducts this war --- legally – against an enemy that lives to destroy us and life as we know it.

The enemy that our president and our country faces is NOT just foreign. No, my friends, the DOMESTIC enemy we face is just as destructive to our existence as the enemy outside the gates.

The great Roman, Marcus Tullius Cicero said almost 2000 years ago that “A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within.

An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.

But the Traitor moves freely amongst those within the gates, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself.”

Friends, we are facing the challenge of our age. The challenge of our generation. And if we fail to meet this challenge with every available weapon and advantage we have – and if we don’t have the courage and fortitude and might to fight and defeat a foreign enemy so barbaric and cruel they would kill us without remorse, history WILL NOT be kind to us --- our posterity, if we have any, will revile us for the corruption, cowardice and weakness that those among us are exhibiting – relentlessly.

Today we find ourselves in a fight on two fronts –to defeat a domestic enemy so besotted with power lust and hatred for this President and his Administration, that they will sacrifice us without blinking an eye. By continually attacking our President and leaking classified information and enacting legislation that defeats our weapons, they sacrifice us to our foreign enemy on the altar of their own self-centered ambition, while burning the acrid incense of hatred, deception, envy and ego.

The left. I’m talking about the Democrat leadership in the House and Senate, and their hateful accomplices at the New York Times, CBS, and other leftist propagandists and yes, even some Republicans -- who put their hatred of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and company above our country’s security by accusing the president of violating our civil rights, who say we can’t win this war, who refuse to extend the provisions of the Patriot Act, who place our troops in mortal danger when they tie their hands with amendments about torture, who demand an immediate withdrawal – or “redeployment” of our troops.

I want to know what makes them think they can boldly put their partisan politics above the security of the United States and think they can get away with it?

Several weeks ago on my program, I said it was time to take a cold, hard look at what defines treasonous behavior. And I said it should apply to those who give aid and comfort to our enemy. We were one of the first talk shows to say the “T” word. Have you noticed that the drumbeat is now getting louder to call those who betray us to account?

Treason. Traitors. They argue that the President violated our civil rights under the Patriot Act. Nonsense! The Patriot Act tore down the legal and bureaucratic wall that kept law enforcement and intelligence authorities from sharing vital info about terrorist threats. Congress passed this law with a large bipartisan majority, including a vote of 98-1 in the Senate. In the weeks after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the President authorized the National Security Agency, consistent with US law and the Constitution, to intercept internal communications of those with known links to al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations.

This was a highly classified program that is crucial to our national security. Our president has said so. Yet the existence of this secret program was cunningly revealed in media reports after being deliberately leaked to news organizations. It was held for a year! Held until they – the leftist media – could use it to their advantage – to turn the Iraq election into yesterday’s news. Does it matter a jot to them that in publishing this classified information, they have given our enemies have a huge intelligence advantage? Would it be too outrageous to conclude that the Democrat side of the aisle is in league with al Qaeda? Does this not damage our national security, hurt our ability to scope out with the enemy is planning against us, and put us at risk?

Revealing classified information is illegal. If you’re paying attention, you know that the President informed Congressional leaders and the intelligence committees about this program to intercept terrorist communications. The Justice Department, NSA’s top legal officials and the Attorney General and Counsel to the president have all been on board since its implementation.

I want to know who would put the power of their party above the security of the United States -- of you and me and our families and friends – with the disingenuous argument that our civil liberties are protected so long as the president takes time to consult with a judge?

I would argue that it is completely irrational to suggest that -- at a time when a suspected al Qaeda operative or sympathizer is on the phone talking to a counterpart of his overseas -- that the President has to go to a judge before he can act?

Have we become so bureaucratically constipated that the slightest thing the President does to uphold his Constitutional obligation to protect our people, our freedom, our way of life, has to be cleared either through congressional or judicial bureaucracy? In a time of fast moving and overwhelmingly dangerous conflict? The time it takes to go through the process could render the whole process moot.

I think you have to give the president the benefit of the doubt here. Particularly when he has reported their actions after the fact.

Here’s the question I have for the Democrats: if the President does what you want, and jumps through every bureaucratic hoop you set up, and then 50 thousand Americans die in New York City, or any other city, will you take responsibility for their deaths? Frankly I doubt it. I don’t think the left has the conscience or the honor to do it. In fact, with the exception of maybe Sen. Joe Lieberman and former Senator Zell Miller, I don’t think they have any honor at all.

I believe the only thing that guides their course is their lust to return to power, no matter how high and whatever the price.

I can’t help but think of what Samuel Adams said as far as the Democrats in the Congress today – “May posterity forget you were ever our countrymen”.

I am throwing out a challenge to the Left: You believe the president isn’t doing the right thing in the conduct of this war? Impeach him.

Here’s what I want for Christmas. I want whoever leaked classified information to the New York Times a YEAR AGO, and who sat on this information until an advantageous time to publish it – I want whoever leaked that information to be found, indicted, and if convicted, hanged for treason. There is no Senatorial privilege for what happens OFF the floor of the senate. If it is a senator, I want him – or HER -- hanged. If it’s an aide, I want him or her hanged.

Our security – our lives – are at stake, my friends. It is time for us and the Republicans in congress to join the president in taking off their velvet gloves and strike the Democrats with a steel fist.

An assault of civil liberties? I DEFY anyone to give me an example of an American citizen OTHER than al Qaeda operatives who may be citizens – I defy anyone to give me an example of an American citizen whose rights have been violated under the Patriot Act or an act of the President.

The Supreme court’s decision on eminent domain in the Kelo vs. New London case did more to damage our civil rights as Americans than eavesdropping on the enemy without getting a judge’s permission ever would or could.

The Democrat leadership clearly was informed. The president went to them six times to tell them and the intelligence committees. The President is asserting his Constitutional right and duty to act as our chief executive and commander in chief.

As a citizen, I am demanding an investigation by the Justice Department into who was responsible for leaking this information to the New York Times. And that person or persons should be held to account, and serve as a warning to others who are tempted to give aid and comfort to our enemy – that we are not above hanging you from the highest tree. In a less civilized society, we’d stick your heads on a pike, and line the Washington Mall with them.

Communist Rules for Revolution
Sunday, November 27, 2005

In May 1919 at Dusseldorf, Germany, the Allied Forces obtained a copy of the "Communist Rules for Revolution". Nearly 90 years later, Communists are succeeding in every area.

Yesterday's communists are today's adherents of Karl Marx. They are secularists who misrepresent the Constitution's First Amendment. Who will try anything within their power and influence to refute the existence of God.

They are hedonists whose desire to live without consequence for their actions drives them. They refuse to be held accountable to a higher power. They call "freedom" the wanton ability to do, say, or commit whatever acts they choose. They ignore and repudiate the moral absolutes upon which this nation was founded. And use every ruse to silence and prevent those who believe otherwise, those who "get in the way" of their craven lust.

They are secularists who deny the possibility of intelligent design, and force their pagan view by trying to erase God from our courtrooms, our institutions, our schools, our public places, our holidays, even our national motto "In God We Trust". They spin and twist the truth into pretzel logic that defies defense, and resort to screams and shoutsto obliterate any debate they know they cannot win with logical and provable facts.

The devils' disciples? As a child I learned that evil despises anything godly or holy. Like Dracula cringing from the sight of the cross, evil runs from justice and right, seeking instead to create chaos as subterfuge. It's not coincidence that Communists don't want to believe we are answerable and accountable to a higher power. They want to be the ultimate power. They seek to rule. They lust for a lifestyle that ignores, defies God's Commandments. And toward this pursuit, the Godless left arrogantly believe the end justifies whatever means are at hand.

Where are today's Communists, Marxists, secularists found? Everywhere. In America's fanatic Left, in academia, media, Congress, the Courts, non-governmental organizations, and our governmental bureaucracies. They're easy to find. They create and star in the headlines. Everyday.

The Godless, in pursuit of power, licentiousness, promiscuity, avarice, gluttony, (yes, THOSE grave sins) gain advantage by bringing about the decay of our nation, which they despise. They are assited by the ignorant, the clueless, the uneducated, the dolts, the sheep who follow along mindlessly, the "useful idiots":

1. Corrupt the young; get them away from religion. Get them interested in sex. Make them superficial; destroy their ruggedness.

2. Get control of all means of publicity, thereby getting people's minds off their government by focusing their attention on athletics, sexy books, plays and other trivialities.

3. Divide the people into hostile groups by constantly harping on controversial matters of no importance.

4. Destroy the people's faith in their natural leaders by holding them up to contempt, ridicule, and disgrace. our Armed Forces?

5. Always preach true democracy, but seize power as fast and as ruthlessly as possible.

6. By encouraging government extravagance, destroy its credit, produce fear of inflation with rising prices and general discontent.

7. Incite unnecessary strikes in vital industries, encourage civil disorders and foster a lenient and soft attitude on the part of the government toward such disorders.

8. By specious argument, cause the breakdown of the old moral virtues: honesty, sobriety, selft-restraint, faith in the pledged word, ruggedness.

9. Cause the registration of ALL firearms on some pretext with a view to confiscate them and leave the population helpless.

Radical Islam's Plan to take over America
Sunday, November 27, 2005

Anis Shorrosh, author of "Islam Revealed" and "The True Furqan", says Islam has a 20-point plan for conquering the United States by 2020. Shorrosh is a Christian Arab-American refugee from the Muslim Middle East who emigrated from Arab-controlled Jerusalem in 1967. A summary of the plan was published in World Net Daily.

Will we Americans sleep through this invasion as we did until we were attacked on 9-11? Are we still being lulled by the Left into demanding a date for withdrawal from the battle against these Islamofascist barbarians?

Here's Shorrosh's analysis of the Islamic invasion of America, the agenda of Islamists and visible methods they're using against us:

1. Terminate America's freedom of speech by replacing it with statewide and nationwide hate-crime bills.

2. Wage a war of words using black leaders like Louis Farrakhan, Jesse Jackson and other visible religious personalities who promote Islam as the religion of African-Americans while insisting Christianity is for whites only.

What they don't say is that it was Arab Muslims who captured them and sold them as slaves. In fact, the Arabic word for black and slave is the same - "Abed".

3. Engage the American public in dialogues, discussions, debates in colleges, universities, public libraries, radio, TV, churches and mosques on the virtues of Islam. Proclaim how it is historically another religion like Judaism and Christianity with the same monotheistic faith.

4. Nominate Muslim sympathizers to politicial office to bring about favorable legislation toward Islam and support potential smpathizers by block voting.

5. Take control of as much of Hollywood, the press, TV, radio and the Internet as possible by buying the related corporations or a controlling stock.

6. Yield to the fear of the imminent shut-off of the lifeblood of America: black gold. America's economy depends on oil and 41 percent (according to some reports) of it comes from the Middle East.

7. Yell "foul", "out of context", "personal interpretation", "hate crime", "Zionist", "un-American", "inaccurate interpretation of the Quran", anytime Islam is criticized or the Quran is analyzed in the public arena.

8. Encourage Muslims to penetrate the White House, specifically with Islamists who can articulate a marvelous and peaceful picture of Islam. Acquire government positions and memberships in local school boards. Train Muslims as medical doctors to dominate the medical field, research and pharmaceutical companies. (Ever notice how numerous Muslim doctors in America are, when their countries need them more desperately than America?) Take over the computer industry. Establish Middle Eastern restaurants throughout the United States to connect planners of Islamization in a discreet way.

9. Accelerate Islamic growth via:

* Massive immigration * Muslim men must marry American women and Islamisize them. Then divorce them and remarry every five years - since one can't legally marry four at one time. This is a legal solution in America.

* Convert angry, alienated black inmates and turn them into militants.

10. Reading, writing, arithmetic, and research through the American educational system, mosques and student centers should be sprinkled with dislike of Jews, evangelical Christians, and democracy. There are currently 300 exclusively Muslim schools in the U.S. which teach loyalty to the Quran, not the US Constitution. In January 2002, Saudi Arabia's embassy in Washington mailed 4,500 packets of the Quran and videos promoting Islam to America's high schools, free of charge. Saudi Arabia would NOT allow the United States to reciprocate.

11. Provide very sizeable monetary Muslim grants to colleges and universities in America to establish "Centers for Islamic Studies" with Muslim directors to promote Islam in higher education institutions.

12. Let the entire world know through propaganda, speeches, seminars, local and national media that terrorists have hijacked Islam, when in truth, Islam hijacked the terrorists.

13. Appeal to the historically compassionate and sensitive Americans for sympathy and tolerance towards Muslims in America who are protrayed as mainly immigrants from oppressed countries.

14. Nullify America's sense of security by manipulating the intelligence community with misinformation. Periodically terrorize Americans concenring impending attacks on bridges, tunnels, water supplies, airports, apartment buildngs, and malls.

15. Form riots and demonstrations in the prison system, demanding Islamic Sharia as the way of life, NOT America's justice system.

16. Open numerous charities throughout the U.S. but use the funds to support Islamic terrorism with American dollars.

17. Raise interest in Islam on America's campuses by insisting freshmen take at least one course on Islam.

18. Unify the numerous Muslim lobbies in Washington, mosques, Islamic student centers, education organizations, magazines and papers through the Internet and at annual conventions to coordinate plans, propagate the faith, and engender news in the media.

19. Send intimidating messages and messengers to the outspoken individuals who are critical of Islam and seek to eliminate them.

20. Applaud Muslims as loyal citizens of the U.S. by spotlighting their voting record as the highest percentage of all minority and ethnic groups in America.


Remove Christmas from the schools? Now we fight.
Sunday, November 13, 2005

In an effort to counteract what secularists and atheists are trying to accomplish in our schools and public places, I recommend you do something surprisingly simple: buy "Before the Beginning Began" and read it to your children. Often. Author Francis Cavalli believes the story of God's love is very important. So important, that if you can't afford to purchase it ($19.95 plus shipping), you can contact Cavalli through his website and ask him to email you a free copy.

"Before the Beginning Began" answers the questions "Who is God? Where does he live and what does he do?" - questions typically asked by a child in a moment of innocent introspection and outward observation. “Who made the sky? When did God make the birds and the flowers? Why did he make me?”

"The book develops your child's self-esteem through their realization that they are God's best creation, not an evolutionary accident," Cavalli says. "It introduces your child to the concept of their purpose in life and provides a foundation for the next step in your child's education about God."

Beautifully illustrated by American Greeting Card artist Kellee Riley, “Before the Beginning Began” is a touching love letter that tells of the wonder and beauty of God’s love. Cavalli’s use of simple, easy to understand language helps even the youngest child grasp the concept of God’s deep love and caring for all His creatures, especially His children.

Cavalli’s lyrical prose conveys the message that there is someone great and wondrous to whom we belong and who cares for us. And all God asks is that we love Him, and that we love and take care of our family and friends and the world He has created.

Parents and grandparents will enjoy sharing with their little ones this non-denominational, captivating story of God’s eternal love. Cavalli has thoughtfully included a workbook section that encourages a dialog with your child about his favorites parts of God’s creation, and activities he or she enjoys doing with God’s gifts.

Add this book to your child’s library. Destined to become a classic, “Before the Beginning Began” is a wonderful way to introduce your child to God and his creation. Help spread the story. After you've read it, recommend it to others in person, by mail, and through email. Recommend the story to your church, your school, home school, book store, organization, newspaper, magazine, radio show, tv show. Help spread the story. And fight back against those who want to erase all vestiges of God from our schools, our holidays, our laws, and our way of life.

“Before the Beginning Began”
By author Frank Cavalli
Illustrated by Kellee Riley
Stardome Publishing
$19.95

Governmentium
Monday, November 7, 2005

I wish I could claim authorship of this, but some other genius thought it up!

NEW ELEMENT DISCOVERED: Governmentium

A major research institution has recently announced the discovery of the heaviest element yet known to science. The new element has been named "Governmentium."

Governmentium has 1 neutron, 12 deputy neutrons, 75 assistant neutrons, and 224 deputy assistant neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312.

These 312 particles are held together by forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons. Since Governmentium has no protons or electrons, it is inert. However, it can be detected, because it impedes every action with which it comes into contact.

A minute amount of Governmentium causes a reaction to take 4 days to complete, when it would normally take less than a second. Governmentium has a normal half-life of 4 years. It does not decay, but instead undergoes a reorganization in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places. In fact, governmentium's mass will actually increase over time since each reorganization will cause more morons to become neutrons, forming isodopes.

This characteristic of moron promotion leads some scientists to believe that Governmentium is formed whenever morons reach a certain quantity in concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as "Critical Morass." When catalyzed with money, Governmentium becomes Administratium, an element that radiates just as much energy as Governmentium since it has half as many peons but twice as many morons.

Bush Lied.
Monday, October 31, 2005

Here are some quotes from various people going back seven years, (at least two years PRIOR to Bush's 2000 election into the White House). If the Bush administration lied about going to war, then there were also a lot of other people, including quite a few prominent Democrats, who told the same "lies" since the inspectors pulled out of Iraq in 1998. Notice who and how many of them now dispute their own statements in an effort to discredit the President and regain/maintain their footing in the power arena.

This war is being fought on many fronts with various weapons. Propaganda is one of the arrows in the quiver being used by the savage Jihadist enemy, and within by the Domestic Left who detest Bush, and conspiratorialists ("tinfoil hat wearers") on the Hard Right who hate him as much. Both sides have met and merged in an amazing bit of policy ju-jitsu, echoing each other in a frenzy of hatred that "Bush lied".

Contemplate these observations by those who, in a thinly veiled attempt to bring down this President, now find it more politically expedient to contradict themselves:

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002

"Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction. -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002

"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

© copyright 2001-2005 John Hawkins
Design & Various Scripts by Nicole Baker

If I can encourage you to do one thing, it is to visit some of the military blogs being written by our young men over there. They post their thoughts and observations on a nearly daily basis, telling the truth about this war straight from the front, and the real reasons we are there. This will give you a different perspective. Copy and paste these addresses to add to your Favorites or Bookmark file.

http://strengthandhonor.typepad.com
http://michaelyon.blogspot.com
http://chaplain.blogspot.com
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com
http://strata-sphere.com/blog
http://www.defendthedefenders.org
http://www.mudvillegazette.com
http://www.blackfive.net

Did Bush lie? The research says otherwise.


Between the Covers with Military Blogs
Saturday, October 29, 2005

Military blogger Matt, "Blackfive" has announced that Simon & Schuster will publish an Anthology of Military Blogger Experiences. This is great news!

"In the past, the experiences of war have produced poetry and novels and memoirs. The War on Terror is different: we're seeing through a new set of eyes, a new kind of literature. In real time, on the Internet, officers and enlisted men and women are chronicling the war on weblogs."

First hand, eliminating the need for historians who may or may not get it right, the number of blogs from the soldiers and journalists themselves at the front and on patrol continue to increase every day. "Blackfive"compares the effect of these blogs with that of the printing press on the Reformation – it is giving the world the opportunity to experience the world’s latest war – the War on Terror.

“Bloggers are being characterized as an army of millions of "citizen reporters." Their strength lies in their advantages - instantaneous publication (speed), expertise in any subject matter imaginable (knowledge), and low, low cost of production (free in most cases). But their greatest advantage may be their ability to reach their readers with content unfiltered by an editor and to engage in a similarly direct and unmediated dialogue with them."

"Blogs were the perfect source to fill in the gaps of information that people really wanted to know about. Websurfers were turning to the soldiers themselves to find out what was happening overseas. Imagine if the men and women fighting World War II could have somehow told their stories daily for all to hear…imagine if Audie Murphy or George Patton could have broadcast their experiences of a battle the day after it occurred – while the experience was still fresh in their minds and without time taking the edges off of their memories.

"That’s what military bloggers are doing today – offering unfettered access to the War on Terror in their own words – each one speaking to anyone, everyone who has access to the Web. For the first time, the public does not have to wait months or years to hear what happened from the individual soldier’s point of view. They don’t have to settle for the government’s approved messages. These bloggers are soldiers who return to their bases and type their daily experiences onto the Internet for anyone to read. Never before has this happened, has the information come so fast, so real and so unfiltered. This is the power of a blog."

Besides satisfying their reader’s curiosity, "Blackfive" says military blogs are maintaining and expanding their readership due to the multi-dimensional experience they provide. Using the tools of the military blogger - webcams, digital cameras, blogs, email, and cell phones – we can be there right next to a Corporal on point during a patrol in Baghdad, can experience what it’s like to be a combat surgeon fighting to save the life of wounded soldier, or a spouse hoping never to see a notification team at her door announcing the death of a loved one. The military blogs are the windows into a world that few know first hand. While the mainstream media continues to focus on the numbers of casualties and the grand pronouncements in the war, these bloggers focus on the collective triumphs and individual sacrifices. Simon & Schuster will publish a collection from military bloggers sometime in late 2006. "Blackfive"submitted the proposal and will be the editor and one of the many authors, bringing together the best of the military blogs, the purest distillation of the myriad voices of this war.
“These bloggers provide a powerful insight into the military, the War on Terror, and the heart of our nation. By bringing these voices together, we offer the first real-time, "oral" history of a war while it still going on. We will provide stories from many of the military blogs that cover the full range of the experience of this war – from the decision to serve in the military to their return home, from the front lines to the home front, and from the med-evac units and hospitals where the price of freedom is paid in blood and suffering to the friends that made the ultimate sacrifice.

We will provide a new way to view the military - uncensored, unmediated, direct, intimate and immediate. For everyone on both sides of the computer screen—the military blogs have been an experiment in putting lives that are on the line, online: Now, by pulling together these voices into a choir, by giving the ephemeral internet bits and bytes a permanent place to live by putting them between covers, we hope to, in some small way, pay lasting tribute to those men and women who have opened this window into their lives and to convey a better understanding of what it’s like to be a part of the War."

IF YOU HAVE AN IDEA OF what posts you would like to see in a book (on the history) of our soldiers in the War on Terror, email Blackfive with your suggestions. He’s looking at a wide range of experiences - Saying Goodbye (from deciding to serve in the military to leaving loved ones behind), Combat, the Weight of Command, the Fallen, Homefront (spouse and parent blogs), Humor, Time Off, and Coming Home.

Testing, one, two, three.
Tuesday, October 25, 2005

Test your knowledge of the U.S. Constitution (credit to The Federalist Patriot)

Twenty-five questions you should be able to answer about the U.S. Constitution

1.) How does the Constitution of the United States provide for changes, so that it may be fluid with time and appropriate for future generations?

a.) Congress may pass bills which overrule or ignore the Constitution

b.) Judges may redefine the Constitution

c.) The Constitution can be amended

d.) Public opinion can nullify certain parts of the Constitution

2.) An amendment to the Constitution must pass by what minimum margins?

a.) Over 50% of the vote in the House and Senate, a signature by the president, and adoption by at least 3/4 of the states.

b.) Over 50% of the vote in the House and Senate and adoption by at least 3/4 of the states - a signature by the president is not required.

c.) A 2/3 majority in the House and Senate, a signature by the president, and adoption by at least 3/4 of the states.

d.) A 2/3 majority in the House and Senate and adoption by at least 3/4 of the states - a signature by the president is not required.

3.) When the Constitution was first ratified, how were U.S. Senators elected?

a.) By a vote of the state legislatures.

b.) By a vote of the people

c.) By election from the House

d.) By appointment of the president

4.) The Constitution creates what type of government?

a.) A pure democracy

b.) A Republican form of government

c.) An aristocracy

d.) An oligarchy

5.) In the form of government expressed in the Declaration of Independence and defined by the Constitution, power flows:

a.) From God to the elected officials, then to the people

b.) From the elected officials to the people - God is not involved

c.) From God to the people, then to the elected officials

d.) From the people to the elected officials - God is not involved

6.) The Constitution requires Congress to be assembled:

a.) All year long - except for short recesses - so that it may address any emergencies which might arise in the states.

b.) Only once per year.

c.) Twice per year.

d.) Three times per year.

7.) The powers which are not specifically enumerated in the Constitution as powers of the federal government, are:

a.) Automatically given to Congress

b.) Automatically given to the states

c.) Given to Congress or to the states by the president

d.) Given to Congress or to the states by the Supreme Court

8.) Choose the only power in the following list which the Constitution does not give to Congress.

a.) The power to borrow money

b.) The power to provide for the common defense of the United States

c.) The power to create a Social Security system

d.) The power to establish post offices

9.) Choose the only power in the following list which the Constitution does not give to the states.

a.) The power to create a Social Security system

b.) The power to create a Welfare system

c.) The power to enter into an agreement with a foreign power

d.) The power to build its own roads

10.) Prior to passage of the 16th amendment in 1913, income taxes were unconstitutional. How did the federal government pay for itself before income taxes were collected?

a.) Import duties, excise taxes and taxes divided among the states by population

b.) It didn't - the U.S. government was in debt and almost bankrupt

c.) A tax was paid to vote (a poll tax)

d.) Property taxes only

11.) The Constitution does not allow any bills of attainder to be passed - bills of attainder are:

a.) Bills which would allow the Congress to attain any of the rights of the people

b.) Bills which allow the president to attain any of the rights of the people

c.) Bills which allow the judiciary to attain any of the rights of the people

d.) Bills which allow forfeiture of rights or property without trial

12.) The Constitution does not allow the passage of any ex post facto law - ex post facto laws are:

a.) Laws which take effect before they are passed

b.) Laws which take effect before the people are notified

c.) Laws which take effect in the next legislature

d.) Laws which take effect after any need for the law exists

13.) The Constitution allows the president to make treaties and agreements with foreign powers, providing that

a.) A 2/3 majority of the Senate concurs

b.) Over 50% of the House and Senate concur

c.) A 2/3 majority of the House and Senate concur

d.) A 2/3 majority of the House concurs

14) According to the Constitution, the minimum infraction necessary for the impeachment of a judge is:

a.) A felony

b.) A misdemeanor

c.) Treason

d.) Bad behavior

15.) The Senate and the electoral college share a common reason for their existence, which is:

a.) To make government more cumbersome

b.) To make government more deliberate

c.) To give a greater voice to the larger states

d.) To give a greater voice to the smaller states

16.) Which of the following phrases does not appear in the Constitution?

a.) ...a wall of separation between Church and state

b.) All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States,...

c.) No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States:...

d.) No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law;...

17.) The Constitution states that:

a.) The right of the people to keep and bear arms for the purpose of gaining sustenance and for self defense shall not be infringed

c.) The right of the military to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

d.) The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

18.) The Constitution states that the people have a right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures, and requires that warrants specify:

a.) What the police want to see

b.) The crime that has been committed

c.) The place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized

d.) The place to be searched only

19.) According to the Constitution, a trial by jury cannot be denied if the value of the lawsuit exceeds:

a.) $20

b.) $2000

c.) $20,000

d.) $200,000

20.) The Constitution allows government:

a.) to restrict the uses of land for environmental purposes

b.) to declare large tracts of land as wilderness areas

c.) to take private property without compensation for the building of roads

d.) to take private property for public use, but only if the owner is paid a fair price for it

21.) The Constitution states that no person may be deprived of:

a.) Life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness

b.) Life, liberty or property

c.) Life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness or a decent education

d.) Life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, a decent education or reasonable housing

22.) To whom does the Constitution guarantee a right to vote:

a.) Citizens

b.) Citizens and legal aliens

c.) Anyone residing within the United States for more than seven years

d.) Citizens and all aliens

23.) The Constitution forbids slavery or involuntary servitude, except:

a.) In the military

b.) As a punishment for a crime

24.) The Constitution allows the federal government to promote the progress of science and the useful arts by:

a.) Giving tax money to artists and scientific research

b.) Giving authors and inventors exclusive rights to their work

c.) Establishing an endowmnent for science and the arts

d.) Deciding which of the arts and sciences should be promoted

25.) According to the Constitution, who has the right to govern that part of the military employed in the service of the United States?

a.) The president

b.) The Congress

c.) The Senate

d.) The Joint Chiefs of Staff

Answers for the Constitution Test

1.) How does the Constitution of the United States provide for changes, so that it may be fluid with time and appropriate for future generations?

c.) The Constitution can be amended

Article V of the constitution states that "The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution..."

2.) An amendment to the Constitution must pass by what minimum margins?

d.) A 2/3 majority in the House and Senate and adoption by at least 3/4 of the states - a signature by the president is not required.

Article V of the Constitution further states that amendments "...shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States...". A signature by the president is not required.

3.) When the Constitution was first ratified, how were U.S. Senators elected?

a.) By a vote of the state legislatures.

Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution states that "The Senators of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof...". This ensured that the states would have a formidable voice in the federal government, thus making it difficult to erode states rights. It also held down the cost of federal elections, since statewide campaigning for a Senate seat was not required. This Section of the Constitution was modified by the 17th amendment in 1913, which states that "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof...".

4.) The Constitution creates what type of government?

b.) A Republican form of government

Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution states that "The United States shall guarantee to every State in the Union a Republican form of Government...". This is not to be confused with the Republican party, which is named after our type of government. A Republican form of government is a representative democracy, where the people elect representatives who cast votes on legislation to be enacted. By contrast, a pure democracy is one in which the people vote directly on all legislation.

5.) In the form of government expressed in the Declaration of Independence and defined by the Constitution, power flows:

c.) From God to the people, then to the elected officials

The Declaration of Independence states 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." The Declaration of Independence, therefore, states that the rights of the people are endowed by God. The Constitution sets up a Republican form of government, whereby the people elect their representatives.

6.) The Constitution requires Congress to be assembled:

b.) Only once per year.

Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution states that "The Congress shall assemble at least once in every Year..."

7.) The powers which are not specifically enumerated in the Constitution as powers of the federal government, are:

b.) Automatically given to the states.

The 9th amendment to the Constitution states that "The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." and the 10th amendment states that "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it [the Constitution] to the States, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

8.) Choose the only power in the following list which the Constitution does not give to Congress.

c.) The power to create a Social Security system

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution describes the powers of Congress in detail so that the power of the various states is not diluted. Article I, Section 8 does not allow the federal government to create a Social Security system. The Constitution could never have been ratified if the federal government had retained the power to collect and disperse vast amounts of money.

9.) Choose the only power in the following list which the Constitution does not give to the states.

c.) The power to enter into an agreement with a foreign power

Although states may create programs such as a Social Security system and a Welfare system under the Constitution, Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution states that "No state shall, without the Consent of Congress...enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power...". The founding fathers were wise to make the states responsible for those powers not enumerated in the Constitution, since competitive state-run programs will be neither insufficient nor excessively generous. The former may cause people to leave a particular state, whereas the latter may cause a large enough influx of people to justify a state tax increase - which may also drive people from a particular state.

10.) Prior to passage of the 16th amendment in 1913, income taxes were unconstitutional. How did the federal government pay for itself before income taxes were collected?

a.) Import duties, excise taxes and taxes divided among the states by population

Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution states that ...direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States...". Article I, Section 8 states that "The Congress shall have the Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises...but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States...". and Article I, Section 9 states that "No Capitation, [a head tax, or poll tax] or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken."

This means that the only continuous taxation power Congress had was indirect taxes - import duties and excise taxes [luxury taxes]. Any direct tax on a person had to first be apportioned, or divided, based upon the population of each state and, by definition, could only be levied at periodic intervals. Direct taxes were levied sparingly and were used primarily to pay war debts. This was changed in 1913 with the passage of the 16th amendment, which states that "The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."

11.) The Constitution does not allow any bills of attainder to be passed - bills of attainder are:

d.) Bills which allow forfeiture of rights or property without trial

Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution prevents Congress from passing any bills of attainder and Article I, Section 10 prevents the states from doing so. Article I, Section 9 says "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed". Article I, Section 10 says "No State shall...pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts".

12.) The Constitution does not allow the passage of any ex post facto law - ex post facto laws are:

a.) Laws which take effect before they are passed

Therefore, according to the Constitution, the retroactive portion of any law is clearly unconstitutional. Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution prevents Congress from passing any ex post facto law and Article I, Section 10 prevents the states from doing so.

13.) The Constitution allows the president to make treaties and agreements with foreign powers, providing that

a.) A 2/3 majority of the Senate concurs

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution states that "He [the president] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur...".

14) According to the Constitution, the minimum infraction necessary for the impeachment of a judge is:

d.) Bad behavior

Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution states that "The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior...". The founding fathers were quite adamant that the original intent of the Constitution and its amendments would always be enforced by the judiciary.

Speaking on this issue in Federalist #81, Alexander Hamilton (a member of the Constitutional Convention, later to become Secretary of the Treasury under President George Washington) stated that "In the first place, there is not a syllable in the plan under consideration [the Constitution] which directly empowers the national courts to construe the laws according to the spirit of the Constitution, or which gives them any greater latitude in this respect than may be claimed by the courts of every State."

On June 12, 1823, Thomas Jefferson wrote to Supreme Court Justice William Johnson "On every question of construction, carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed."

James Madison wrote to Henry Lee on June 25, 1824 "I entirely concur in the propriety of resorting to the sense in which the Constitution was accepted and ratified by the nation. In that sense alone it is the legitimate Constitution...What a metamorphosis would be produced in the code of law if all its ancient phraseology were to be taken in the modern sense."

15.) The Senate and the electoral college share a common reason for their existence, which is:

d.) To give a greater voice to the smaller states

The Senate was devised as a way to balance the power of the House, where the number of Representatives per state is divided by population. The smaller states, feeling always at the mercy of the more populous states, wanted a check upon this power. Each state, therefore, was given equal power and an equal number of members in the Senate. Likewise, the electoral college was a compromise between allowing the president to be chosen by Congress (too much power for the legislative branch of government) or by a direct popular vote (too much power for large states) or by the state legislatures (too much power for the states over the federal government). The electoral college gives each state a number of electors equal to the number of House and Senate members for that state. Small states, therefore, have a much greater vote than their population would otherwise allow. Since the winner of the presidential election in each state receives all of that states' electoral votes, this system requires the victor to win enough states all across the country to enable him to govern. The electoral college makes it virtually impossible for one region of the country to elect the president of the United States. And although this system also requires the victor to obtain a sufficient popular vote to govern, there are times when the electoral college will elect a president who has not obtained an absolute majority of the popular vote. This was deemed secondary to the ultimate goal of preserving the Union by the founding fathers.

16.) Which of the following phrases does not appear in the Constitution?

a.) ...a wall of separation between Church and state

The phrase "...a wall of separation between Church and State." appears in a letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Baptist Association of Danbury, CT on January 1, 1802 - it does not appear anywhere in the Constitution. The eight words contained in that phrase were taken out of context by the Supreme Court in 1947 when it struck down school prayer in the case of Everson v. Board of Education. The Supreme Court, which cited zero precedents for its ruling, stated that "The First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach." Thomas Jefferson's letter says "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God; that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship; that the legislative powers of government reach actions only and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting [regarding] an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State." President Jefferson's meaning was further clarified in a letter to the Reverend Samuel Miller on January 23, 1808 when he said "I consider the government of the United States as interdicted [prohibited] by the Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions...or exercises."

The 1st amendment to the Constitution states that "Congress shall make no law respecting [regarding] an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...".

17.) The Constitution states that:

d.) The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

The 2nd amendment to the Constitution states that "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

18.) The Constitution states that the people have a right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures, and requires that warrants specify:

c.) The place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized

The 4th amendment to the Constitution states that "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

19.) According to the Constitution, a trial by jury cannot be denied if the value of the lawsuit exceeds:

a.) $20

The 7th amendment to the Constitution states that "In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law."

20.) The Constitution allows government:

d.) to take private property for public use, but only if the owner is paid a fair price for it

The 5th amendment to the Constitution says "...nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation."

21.) The Constitution states that no person may be deprived of:

b.) Life, liberty or property

The 5th amendment to the Constitution states that "No person shall be...deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law". The 14th amendment says "...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law". The phrase "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" appears in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.

22.) To whom does the Constitution guarantee a right to vote:

a.) Citizens

The 15th amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1870, states that "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude." The 19th amendment, ratified in 1920, states that "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex."

23.) The Constitution forbids slavery or involuntary servitude, except:

b.) As a punishment for a crime

The 13th amendment to the Constitution states that "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."

24.) The Constitution allows the federal government to promote the progress of science and the useful arts by:

b.) Giving authors and inventors exclusive rights to their work Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution states that "The Congress shall have Power...To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their Respective writings and Discoveries".

25.) According to the Constitution, who has the right to govern that part of the military employed in the service of the United States?

b.) The Congress

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution states that "The Congress shall have Power...To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States...".

Each question is worth 4 points. Grade yourself according to the following curve:

90 - 100% = A

80 - 89% = B

75 - 79% = C

70 - 74% = D

69 and below = F

And keep taking the test until you get an A!

W is for Wilma - and Weary
Monday, October 24, 2005

Well, we survived "WILLLLL-MA!!!" and as of 3:30 this afternoon, it was gone -- offshore, pushed along by a cold front that is blowing in on a wind of its own -- temps expected to drop to upper 40's tonight!!!! Yip, yip, yahoo!!!

The new roof leaked (the one we put on after last year's hurricanes). Woke up early this morning to the sound of a steady drip, drip, drip coming from the loft. Got up to see, and sure enough, a new little dark spot on the carpet revealed a silver dollar size puddle of water, dripping from the knotty pine board ceiling above. It was probably wind and rain getting underneath the roof's end cap. Whatever. I stuck plastic wastebuckets under the plopping drops, and eventually it stopped, but not before soaking a length of pine board. Drip, drip, drip.... We started hearing and feeling the storm approach around 6:30-ish this morning. And by noon it was a full-on hurricane or what certainly looked and sounded like one.

By God's grace and Florida Power & Light, the electricity kept humming. I enjoyed air conditioned comfort and the luxury of watching TV, the virtual world on the computer, brewing this morning's coffee and cooking a meal. I'm so thankful we weren't ordered to evacuate. It made it so much easier to endure this late season stunner, of a hurricane season that has been the most wearying yet. Some Key West residents reportedly refused to evacuate, saying they were fed up and sick and tired of boarding up, packing up, and heading for "safety". Come what may, they weren't doing it again. (I get it.)

A couple or three tornadoes touched down in Brevard, the closest one in Cocoa Village early yesterday evening. We were already in Orlando prepping the program, so we were out of harm's way. The show was interrupted several times for automatic EAS alerts that beeped in, overriding with weather alerts. But the ride back to Brevard at midnight was uneventful -- in fact, the skies had cleared for a respite between a couple of vicious thunder cells.

That's the good news.

The bad news for those of you on the rest of the eastern seaboard: forecasters are predicting this "Halloween Hurricane" is spinning into the Atlantic, where it will meet up with another super weather system and turn into a heavy nor'easter, headed for the mid-Atlantic states and an already water-logged New England, where it hasn't been much of a blue-sky October for them either.

Yeah, W is for Wilma. And weary. And weather. Stormy weather. And to come? Winter.

The Conservative Herd: Over the Cliff?
Monday, October 10, 2005

The conservative herd of pundits have been particularly bullish this week, drinking from the Beltway Trough & Pub where they’ve been snorting that Harriet Miers is “unqualified” for the Supreme Court, and that her nomination reeks of “cronyism,” ignoring the fact that one man’s crony may be another’s trusted associate.

Maybe the President has made a mistake, and maybe he hasn’t. But the reaction from the punditry over his announcement might lead one to believe they had been stuck with a cattle prod.

To us conservatives, this is a Very Important Appointment. Miers could be the swing vote that reverses a lot of the damage done to the Constitution by activist judges over the last 40 or 50 years. If the President is right, she will be what Sandra Day O’Connor was not: A reliable conservative who judges the Constitution by the intent of the founders and NOT by international law or some alien philosophy like the “Living Document” lie.

So what does the Miers nomination mean to the court? Well, if the President is telling the truth about the way she thinks, she will vote conservative and originalist (i.e. limited government), and who cares whether or not she ever wrote treatises on Constitutional issues no one ever read or cared about?

And if he is mistaken, or worse – if he is lying -- we will know by the time she has been on the court a year. And Americans likely will condemn George W. Bush as a man who betrayed his friends and his base, and possibly splintered his party.

The thundering herd of radio and TV talkers and syndicated intellectual essayists harrumph, “We don’t know anything about her!” forgetting – or ignoring – that THAT’s what the confirmation process is supposed to reveal. Who is qualified to sit on the Supreme Court IS a determination made on a nominee-by-nominee basis by at least 51 U.S. Senators. There are no set rules for qualification. Forty-one of the 109 justices had no prior judicial experience. John Marshall, widely revered as one of the greatest Chief Justices, never served a day in judicial robes and lost the only case he argued at the high court before he joined the Supreme Court in 1801.

Why would the President nominate someone with no known “bona fides”?

Maybe the President doesn’t trust the members of his own party in the Senate to give him the votes he’d need to confirm a better-known conservative candidate. He fought hard for his conservative constructionist nominees to the circuit courts, refusing to withdraw their names, but fellow Republicans, who could’ve launched the nuclear option anytime in the last few years to prevent Democrats’ filibusters, didn’t. Instead, they left Janice Rogers Brown, Priscilla Owen and Miguel Estrada twisting because they didn’t have the cojones to pull the trigger on the obstructionist Dems.

And there are seven Republicans in the “Gang of 14” -- the deciding votes who might find “extraordinary circumstances” in a better-known conservative nominee that would allow them to join the Democrats in a filibuster. If that happened, the President would not have enough votes to confirm his “known constructionist” nominee.

Maybe the President knows that Harriet Miers is a constructionist, and because she leaves no paper trail evidencing her “bona fides”, CAN get through the Senate confirmation hearings without a bloody battle. So if Miers is what President Bush swears she is and she’s confirmed, it will be the greatest and most subtle political sleight of hand you’re ever likely to see.

Antonin Scalia, the conservative intelligentsia’s gold standard, the very man they want the next justice to emulate, appears to support Miers’ nomination, saying the high court needs someone who has never served as a judge. “I think it’s a good thing to have people from all sorts of backgrounds (on the Court).”

If the President has been fooled, he won’t be the first to be duped. Anthony Kennedy came to President Reagan as a devout Christian family man. He also nominated Sandra Day O’Connor, whom he thought was a strict constructionist. President Reagan had not worked with either, unlike President Bush, but took them on the recommendation of others.

The President says he knows Harriet Miers. And he trusts she will be the kind of jurist he promised us he would nominate to the Supreme Court. If he's right and Miers comes through, Ann Coulter, George Will and the rest of the conservative cud chewers will have had their hats handed to them by the cowboy from Crawford, Texas. You know, maybe these bulls should just moo-ve on.

Loose Lips Sink Ships
Thursday, September 29, 2005

From news reports, we learn that US District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein in New York has ruled in a case brought by the ACLU that 87 photographs and four videotapes concerning Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq must be released by the federal government.

In his 50-page decision, the judge asserted that the terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan "do not need pretexts for their barbarism."

Hollerstein added in his opinion that, "Our nation does not surrender to blackmail, and fear of blackmail is not a legally sufficient argument to prevent us from performing a statutory command.... Indeed, the freedoms that we champion are as important to our success in Iraq and Afghanistan as the guns and missiles with which our troops are armed.”

You may not be old enough to remember that during WWII, a popular slogan posted everywhere admonished Americans to keep it zipped. "Loose Lips Sink Ships" was the "Don't Get Stuck on Stupid" of the times, reminding all that we were at war and spies were everywhere.

My parents and grandparents lived on the east coast, in the harbortown of Salem, just north of Boston. My grandfather volunteered to walk the neighborhood each night, making sure everyone's windows were "blacked out" with heavy black drapes or shades, lest the German submarines lurking off the coast have clear sight of their targets should they choose to fire. Thousands of dockworkers in the nearby ports of Boston, New York, Baltimore and Norfolk, worked on the docks and knew when the ships were sailing. German spies in the US would have transmitted the sailing times of ships if they had been published in the newspapers, as they were during peacetime.

It didn't take a genius to understand the vital importance of protecting certain pieces of information. The media and the citizens knew, and everyone did their part to protect our country and the fighting men and women in harm's way. It was common sense. Pure and simple.

So what of it?

Well, today we have a judge who is obviously devoid of common sense. He is willing to endanger and perhaps condemn who knows how many Americans and others because he hasn't a clue that the First Amendment does not require the forced publication of deadly information in time of war.

If my grandfather were alive today, he'd be horrified and say that what this judge has done is give aid and comfort to the enemy. He would describe this black robed charlatan as a traitor. And so should we. The black-out curtain should surely come down like a black hood on the treasonous Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein. For good.


Website Designed & Maintained By Mike Murillo
 ©2005 The Andrea Shea King Show. All Rights Reserved.