Archive for May, 2009

*crossposted at The Hostages.

Its hard to be paying attention to the travesties being compiled by “our elected officials” in Washington D.C. these days and not feel like you’re shouting into the teeth of a hurricane. Each passing day brings a fresh outrage, and it is difficult in the face of such an onslaught of offal to not start to feel that it is all part of the left’s plan. Simply pile outrage upon outrage, until they become so commonplace that many people simply fail to take notice any longer. Compound these assaults upon the rule of law and the preservation of our body politic, until even the most astute and keen observers among us are robbed of their erudite criticisms of the audacious effrontery of the Pretender-In-Chief and his gang of socialist thugs, simply because there are only so many ways to cry wolf when you are nose to snout with the beast before the warning is bled of its urgency.

The cabal of CHANGE! has stepped to the podium, and is determined to enshrine its destructive ideals and policies by simply overwhelming the opposition. As Professor Klavan so astutely warned, “SHUT UP!” is now considered a valid response by the left to any criticism. This coup would not be possible without a willing press, and decades of declining educational standards, revisionist history, and an educational doctrine that embraces moral relativism and a deep seated “Hate America First” philosophy. It has proved to be a powerful concoction. It is much easier to report a story when the audience does not understand that the story is about the burning theatre in which they are seated. In this atmosphere, it is easier to marginalize those who would raise the alarm. The left can laugh and point to its detractors, while saying to the massed audience “See? They’re always saying that! That’s just crazy talk! They are such wingnuts, and we should keep an eye on them, in case they become dangerous some day.”

It is a remarkably safe direction for the left to take. In such an environment, with the assistance of a willing media, eager to aid and abet any crimes perpetrated against the republic as long as they can be praised for their “enlightened viewpoint” and continue to be invited to all the best parties, the architects and foot soldiers of this thus far bloodless coup can operate free from fear as they look us in the eye and tell us the most brazen lies, smiling as they do so. America is being gaslighted on a national scale, and those who keep telling us that we aren’t crazy unless we let this continue are being made to appear less relevant with each passing day.

So why the brazeness? Because the left understands the Right’s inherent respect for the rule of law that the left has no use for. There are many among us who, no matter how much the left chooses to slap us in the face and steal the fruits of our labors, will remain firm in the belief that a stern look and the threat to whistle for a cop will cause the offender to cease and desist. Many on the Right are reluctant, either as an expression of good manners or a strong sense of honor, are not compelled to do anything more. Our opponents suffer from no such impairments, and while they know that there are some lines that they dare not cross…yet…their current course of action is one in which they plan to remove all avenues of escape from their increasingly overt tyrannies, so that we will be left, in the end with naught but a terrible choice, the likes of which reformed a new nation on the corpse of more American dead in a four year period than suffered in any other conflict fought by Americans. If we are at last left with such a terrible result, it will not be without careful and deliberate maneuvering by the covetous kleptocrats currently in office. We can be assured that they will do all in their power to reserve any advantage for themselves, be it the deliberate redistribution of resources, the perversion of law until the expression of their demonstrable perversion of the Constitution is illegal as well as vilified, and of course the propagandic usurpation of the moral high ground with the assistance of the sycophantic and fawning media. They will have made all possible preparations before committing their most provocative actions against the American people. And therein lies the danger for the Right. React too soon, and you are a dangerous instigator. React too late, and you are a misguided soul, doomed to an unnecessarily dangerous and destructive course of action that will forever carry the stigma of having been avoidable in a better educated society. Its quite a precarious position that the left has brought us to. An increasingly uninformed and disinterested populace, crippled with a case of societal ADHD, encourged by a Fourth Estate with a vested stake in the outcome. Shake vigorously, and suddenly America descends into a lengthy flirtation with the very notions that defy every concept formerly held dear when we were busy building the shining city on the hill so poetically invoked byour past leaders. I find myself wondering quite a lot now how the average person felt in 1860, seeing the dark clouds on the horizon, and that knowing the complex and rickety framework of compromises that merely postponed the inevitable will not be able to withstand the coming storm, and wondering what event will be the spark, what collapse will precipitate the coming chaos. Ironically, much like then, it will once again be about freedom. The freedom to live without the chains of a debt forged by representatives more eager to be liked than to make the difficult decisions we appointed them to make in our stead. The freedom to take responsibility for our own lives, and stand on our own successes or fall on our own failures. The freedom to live under a government that provides the basic services that government should, in a frugal and responsible fashion, without continually having to pay for other people’s bad choices, mistakes and failures. The freedom to live in a nation too big to fail under the weight of the weight of an irresponsible and unsustainable debt incurred bailing out those that the government deems too big to fail. The freedom to keep the fruits of our own labors and decide for ourselves how our money will be spent. The freedom to rule ourselves in an environment that does not vilify and ridicule our religion and morality to the exclusion of inferior and and hollow beliefs. The freedom to achieve and be limited only by our ambition, our dreams, and our abilities. The freedom to live without government’s hand in digging in my pocket, and taking food off my family’s table. No matter how much a worldview shaped by an inherent belief in only the base and selfish desires of the human heart tries to tell me otherwise, I will not abandon my belief that these freedoms are my birthright, and the birthright of my children, bought and paid for with the lives, fortunes, and sacred honor of those who so solumnly gave of these things to provide it to us.

And yet America sleeps, somehow failing to understand or care. Never in recent memory has such a legacy rested so heavily on the shoulders of so few people. Still, we are the ones who tend the fires, and ultimately, history will judge us for how we act in the face of such adversity. Hold Fast. Do not surrender, for if we go quietly into the night, surely the future will become a place that we would not wish upon our worst enemy, let alone our children and grandchildren.

Read Full Post »

Lacking the good sense to nominate a qualified and impartial candidate to fill the upcoming Supreme Court vacancy has caused the Obama Administration some difficulty.  While I’m sure that they did not believe that the pesky conservative bloggers would let their nomination of a sexist, racist judge who violates the Model Code of Judical Conduct, and has admitted an inability and lack of desire to be impartial go unanswered, it is becoming clear that their typical “Baffle ’em with Bullshit” approach is not going to be successful this time.  I realize that when you populate government with idealogues and people who do not fit into the federal burocracy in any way that would keep them accountable to us, in some fashion, rather than to the Fist-Bumper-In-Chief, you arent going to get the sharpest tools in the shed to write the press releases.  Still, I do not believe that it would be too much to expect that someone might at least get on Google and double check before claiming that she would be the first latino appointed to the Supreme Court.  I wager a guess that this confidently delivered selling point came as a shock to the students at the law school named after Justice Benjamin Cardozo.  If I made an error like that at my job, I would now be looking for another one, but when your politics are pure and you are fighting the good fight of trying to continue the balkanization of America in the “post-racial” Age of Obama, it is certainly acceptable to put a spin on it and pretend that you just failed to “properly clarify your remarks.”

Faced with the realization that we all know what they knew, that being that Judge Sotomayor is unfit for the bench and has clearly violated several judical canons with her intemporate and revealing remarks, the White House deployed their designated bullshit dispenser, Robert Gibbs, who, upon forgetting that the complete subversion of the Republic by the “Chicago Way Thugocracy” has not yet been completed, had this to say:

“I think it is probably important for anybody involved in this debate to be exceedingly careful with the way in which they’ve decided to describe different aspects of this impending confirmation.” Gibbs said.

The real message of course being the same one that the Obama administration has had for its critics from its inception:  Shut up.  We won, and now we rule.  Challenge us at your peril.

Gibbs then took the opportunity to make sure to give the dutiful press the “official story” to repeat ad nauseum, rather than spending their time away from the cocktail parties and fundraising events checking into the good judge themselves and performing even the most cursory of journalistic functions. 

“I think we’re satisfied that, when the people of the Senate get a chance to look at more than just the blog of a former lawmaker…they’ll come to the same conclusion the the President did about Sotomayor’s qualiications” Gibbs said.

Of course, like most of the other ‘audacious’ miscalculations of this administration, she is proving to be more than many outside the White House Press Corps are willing to accept without question, which I’m sure to Lord Zero’s eternal consternation, required further ‘clarification’ from the Official Demurrer, who when faced with the rightful questions regarding the racial nature of the Judge Sotomayor’s unfortunate tongue, first cautioned against “taking remarks out of context”, a leftist chestnut that never seems to get old, and in this case, doesn’t help the good Judge’s cause, as the entire speech in which her racist remarks were made carried the same tone and flavor, and then showing the same kind of logic that Dhimicrats apply to tax policy, Gibbs later stated that “I think she’d change that word.”, believing that he had just provided adequate cover, despite the fact that the remarks were part of a speech almost certainly made from prepared remarks.  Obama, seeing the need to butress this latest version of the official story by repeating the nonsense in his typically sonorous tones.  The teleprompter worked flawlessly and no errors were made in his delivery.

“I’m sure she would have restated it,” the president said. “But if you look in the entire sweep of the essay that she wrote, what’s clear is that she was simply saying that her life experiences will give her information about the struggles and hardships that people are going through.

Nevermind the fact that as a lawyer, he knows that judges are supposed to be impartial, and the only hope for continued societal cohesiveness is the maticulous preservation of that perception.  Integrity of the bench be damned.  He has an ‘imperfect’ Constitution to fix, and he can oly accomplish that by impanelling judges with clear biases in favor of his “I love this country, that is why it is essential I change it” mentality.

“That will make her a good judge,” Obama said in the interview, which will air in its entirety next week in a two-part NBC News special on life in the White House.

Yeah.  I think I’m starting to understand.  White male judges who are members of a group called “The Race”, who publically express opinions on the record that white males, with their richness of experience that they could come to a better decision than latino females, and that judges make policy in the appellate courts would be a completely unacceptable choice by the standards established by lawyers and judges for those who wear the black robes, but when a ‘latina’ who does the same comes up, she is an excellent choice, precisely because of her race.  Another attempt to bleed the government of any legitimacy, and they will likely get  away with it.

Read Full Post »

As an attorney, I am very familiar with the requirement of ethical and honest dealing that is expected of me and other members of my profession.  I work hard to maintain these standards, and have occasionally had to consult with my state bar association’s ethics officials in order to help maintain these standards.  As high as these standards are, the standards for judges are an even higher bar, as they truly are Justice’s gatekeepers.  When they display bias or impropriety, the entire profession suffers from the loss of public trust and confidence that our legal system is just and provides predictable results that our society can rely on and use to build our economy and culture.

The Fist-Bumper-In-Chief has already done considerable damage to the notion of rule of law that has allowed our nation unparalleled success among the family of nations.  Whether it is his concerted efforts to continue the legality of murdering the unborn, to violate basic contract law because it violates his sense of justice and decency, and to allow the public vilification of those who would see those contracts enforced, or to expand the federal government’s role in the economy by expanding its duties as regulator by active participation in the market and the selection of those who will succeed.  While these activities all undermine the rule of law on which this society depends, they do have the virtue of being capable of reversal by subsequent administrations who have the wisdom that experience and practical knowledge so lacking in the Pretender who currently occupies the Oval Office.  However, as suspected, he has been presented with the opportunity to do lasting violence to the nation’s legal system.  With the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to fill the vacancy on the United States Supreme Court created by the retirement of Justice David Suitor.  His choice is predictably leftist and startlingly injudicious in her revealing remarks.

“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion [as a judge] than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.” — Judge Sonia Sotomayor, in her Judge Mario G. Olmos Law and Cultural Diversity Lecture at the University of California (Berkeley) School of Law in 2001

This assertion is breathtaking in its boldly racist attitude.  It also appears to me to violate the Model Code of Judicial Conduct promulgated by the American Bar Association. 

Don’t get me wrong.  I am no friend of the American Bar Association.  Its activities left me behind a long time ago when the activists in my profession got hold of the organization and started to use it to advocate for political views that I either did not agree with, or found repugnant.  However, the Model Code of Judicial Conduct is a well-reasoned set of rules designed to protect the integrity of the judiciary and to maintain the public’s confidence in the American legal system.

From its Preamble:

Our legal system is based on the principle that an independent, fair and competent judiciary will interpret and apply the laws that govern us. The role of the judiciary is central to American concepts of justice and the rule of law. Intrinsic to all sections of this Code are the precepts that judges, individually and collectively, must respect and honor the judicial office as a public trust and strive to enhance and maintain confidence in our legal system. The judge is an arbiter of facts and law for the resolution of disputes and a highly visible symbol of government under the rule of law.

The text of the Canons and Sections is intended to govern conduct of judges and to be binding upon them.

Even before taking a close look at the canons themselves, it would be difficult to reconcile the remarks above, uttered by a sitting federal Judge in a public forum with this statement of purpose.   This becomes an even more arduous task when you consider her elaboration on those remarks:

For men lawyers, what areas in your experiences and attitudes do you need to work on to make you capable of reaching those great moments of enlightenment [inherently belonging to minorities] which other men in different circumstances have been able to reach.

And however well-crafted the Model Judicial Code may be, her wisdom and insight are clearly more important than maintaining the integrity of the bench:

Sotomayor also referred to the cardinal duty of judges to be impartial as a mere “aspiration because it denies the fact that we are by our experiences making different choices than others.” And she suggested that “inherent physiological or cultural differences” may help explain why “our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.”

Cue the Twilight Zone theme music.  This runs contrary to everything that was beaten into my thick head in law school.  It might merely offend you; it makes me want to break something…a lot of somethings.

A closer examination of the Code highlights just how contrary Judge Sotomayor’s stated beliefs are to the conduct she and every judge is expected to maintain:

Canon 1

 A. An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society. A judge should participate in establishing, maintaining and enforcing high standards of conduct, and shall personally observe those standards so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary will be preserved. The provisions of this Code are to be construed and applied to further that objective.


Deference to the judgments and rulings of courts depends upon public confidence in the integrity and independence of judges. The integrity and independence of judges depends in turn upon their acting without fear or favor. A judiciary of integrity is one in which judges are known for their probity, fairness, honesty, uprightness, and soundness of character. An independent judiciary is one free of inappropriate outside influences. Although judges should be independent, they must comply with the law, including the provisions of this Code. Public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary is maintained by the adherence of each judge to this responsibility. Conversely, violation of this Code diminishes public confidence in the judiciary and thereby does injury to the system of government under law.

As an ‘unenlightened’ white male, I certainly would not expect a Justice Sotomayor to render any matter I brought before the Court without fear or favor, especially if my adversary was a minority, or a female, or a female minority.

Further reading of the Canons do not rehabilitate the good Judge’s apparent fitness for the bench.

Canon 2


A. A judge shall respect and comply with the law* and shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.


Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by judges. A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny. A judge must therefore accept restrictions on the judge’s conduct that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and should do so freely and willingly. Examples are the restrictions on judicial speech imposed by Sections 3(B)(9) and (10) that are indispensable to the maintenance of the integrity, impartiality, and independence of the judiciary.

The prohibition against behaving with impropriety or the appearance of impropriety applies to both the professional and personal conduct of a judge. Because it is not practicable to list all prohibited acts, the proscription is necessarily cast in general terms that extend to conduct by judges that is harmful although not specifically mentioned in the Code. Actual improprieties under this standard include violations of law, court rules or other specific provisions of this Code. The test for appearance of impropriety is whether the conduct would create in reasonable minds a perception that the judge’s ability to carry out judicial responsibilities with integrity, impartiality and competence is impaired. See also Commentary under Section 2C.

As I said, this doesn’t appear to help the Judge.  Being a practicing attorney, however, I realize that not all words in documents written by members of my tribe are accorded their everyday meanings.  “Impartiality” and “impartial” are actually defined terms.  From the “Terminology” section;

“Impartiality” or “impartial” denotes absence of bias or prejudice in favor of, or against, particular parties or classes of parties, as well as maintaining an open mind in considering issues that may come before the judge. See Sections 2A, 3B(10), 3E(1), 5A(3)(a) and 5A(3)(d)(i).

Given the Judge’s prior remarks, it would be safe to say that she flunks the impartiality standard.  A conclusion supported by the review of Canon 3.


A. Judicial Duties in General. The judicial duties of a judge take precedence over all the judge’s other activities. The judge’s judicial duties include all the duties of the judge’s office prescribed by law*. In the performance of these duties, the following standards apply.

B. Adjudicative Responsibilities.

(10) A judge shall not, with respect to cases, controversies or issues that are likely to come before the court, make pledges, promises or commitments that are inconsistent with the impartial* performance of the adjudicative duties of the office.


Sections 3B(9) and (10) restrictions on judicial speech are essential to the maintenance of the integrity, impartiality, and independence of the judiciary. A pending proceeding is one that has begun but not yet reached final disposition. An impending proceeding is one that is anticipated but not yet begun. The requirement that judges abstain from public comment regarding a pending or impending proceeding continues during any appellate process and until final disposition. Sections 3B(9) and (10) do not prohibit a judge from commenting on proceedings in which the judge is a litigant in a personal capacity, but in cases such as a writ of mandamus where the judge is a litigant in an official capacity, the judge must not comment publicly. The conduct of lawyers relating to trial publicity is governed by [Rule 3.6 of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct]. (Each jurisdiction should substitute an appropriate reference to its rule.)

Which is why any definitive answer to a ‘litmus test’ question is dangerous territory for a nominee.  My guess is that faced with a press that is eager to put a positive spin on her confirmation hearings, a Dhimicratic majority in the Senate, and the fact that she was nominated in spite of the very things she has said in the past, she will fearlessly provide clear answers to such questions.

I fear that she will be confirmed and appointed to the Supreme Court, and I reluctantly wonder how long I will be able to continue in my role as an officer of the court when I have no confidence in the judicial nominees of the government.  It is kind of hard to convince your clients that they should be patient and work within the system when you yourself have doubts about its integrity.  We all are damaged when Themis (or her younger Roman cousin Justicia) peeks, and the Pretender dishonors our entire profession with a nominee suffering from such obvious and open impairments to her ability to impartially perform her duties.

Read Full Post »

LONDON – Pringles’ tax status has been crunched by a trio of British judges.

Americans said to be fascinated.

The Court of Appeal judges decided Wednesday that the snack is a potato chip[…]

Whew!  Thank you, Britain, for answering the burning question searing the the remaining brain cells of munchie-crazed potheads everywhere.  Now maybe they can tell us how many licks it really does take to get to the center of a Tootsie-Pop, because I don’t think that old owl could count worth a damn.

— and that means it’s liable for Britain’s Value Added Tax.

And now we get to the heart of the matter.  Junk food for irresponsible left-leaning governments: Taxes. 

In Britain, most food isn’t subject to the 15 percent national tax, but potato chips are.

Fifteen percent??? Really???  How on earth do they justify that?  And of course this had to be the subject of litigation that went to the Court of Appeals.  That means money, time, and the government lost the first round.

The moral of the story?  Don’t get between the Crown and its junk food. 

I can’t wait until all the Dhimicratic state governments and the feds chew on this idea to bolster their tax revenues which have already taken a beating due to governments’ greed and inability to understand the difference between good and bad tax policy.

I wonder what news the media didn’t report today when they decided that this story was worthy of reporting.

Read Full Post »

Not only is he one of the principal salesmen of President Obama’s Politics of Lowered Expectations™, Lil’ Timmy Geithner is just as dishonest in selling the American People a load of crap and calling it “medicine”.  I first heard rumblings last week that the Fist-Bumper-In-Chief’s administration was considering giving some of our tax dollars to California, now that the consequences of institutional stupidity were starting to take effect.  I damn near drove off the road when I heard it.  It was bad enough that we took a bath because people who never should have had houses got them, and the Democrats in Congress used Fannie and Freddie as a way to line their own pockets and the pockets of their friends while resisting any and all inquiries, warnings, and efforts of the people who the very same Democrats attempt to blame for their failures.  Its bad enough that we are selling my children and grand-children into debt on a ‘stimulus’ plan that stimulates nothing of note, but gives billions of dollars to ‘community organizing” groups that engaged in wanton election fraud in the last election.  Its bad enough that these “brilliant men” have taken the government from a regulator of the economy to a participant in it, by confiscating the banking system, and two of the big three with “bailout money” and onerous terms.  Now they want me, you, our children, and everyone else to pay for California’s idiotic choices.

And the best part?  Lil’ Timmy and company do not want to admit out loud what they are doing.

“I wouldn’t use the word bailout or federal,” Geithner said. “I would say we’re in close consultation with the people who are looking at ways to make sure these markets are working so that states and munis can meet their needs.”

 Excuse me???   Excuse me???

No.  Absolutely not.  Not if I was three days dead.   And that’s what it will take to take my money to put toward a FEDERAL BAILOUT of Californistan.

Read Full Post »

I have had this picture trying to form in my mind for the last few months.  every now and then, there is a gap in the fog, and I get a glimpse of the overall picture, but I just can’t seem to get a good look at the whole thing.  These seconds of near-revelation seem to coincide with events that the Deciders seem to believe are news worthy.  One of these moments came when The Pretender™, Barry the Blessed choose to announce in a speech on foreign shores, that we are not a Christian Nation.  This, of course, is a half-truth, and the kind the left utters with eagerness and delight, because how it is perceived by those too busy or too lazy to consider it and parse the truth from the falsity, which is an inconvenient speed bump in the path of the left’s attempts to re-write history. 

This whiff of clarity came on again when the pink swastika brigades saw fit to get their manties, panties, and whatever other undergarments they were wearing in a twist when Miss California, when asked, expressed the opinion that marriage was only properly between one man and one woman.  To the left, a group so determined to dictate ‘tolerance’ to the rest of us that they will make an example of any people who do not share their views, this was an unpardonable sin, and one deserving of scorn, derision, ridicule, humiliation, and outrage.  Never mind that this opinion had been shared by a majority of voters in the very state she represented.  Never mind that it is the public position of the Fist-Bumper-In-Chief himself.  Later examination revealed that this opinion was the product of a Christian upbringing, making her a Christofacist and subject to attack by every weapon their arsenal had to bring to bear on her.  And thus far, she has borne those attacks with a humility and grace that has shamed me.  You see, I am tired of Christianity being under fire in this country.  I am tired of those who do not practice it, and do not possess more than the slightest superficial understanding of it seeing fit to define both it, and by extention me.  I am also tired of these same ‘enlightened’ individuals attacking the faith, and tenants of a belief that has been instrumental in our nation from since before we struggled to throw off the shackles of a government that chose to see us largely as a financial means to their ends…much like our own government in Washington D.C. does today.  This war is as much about what we do not see, or hear, as much as what does get through to us.  We cannot say a prayer in a public school, but California schools can force non-muslims students to study Islam.  You dare not have a nativity scene in the town square at Christmas, but we are told that we have to respect other cultures, so much so that a President of the United States has Ramadan celebrations in the White House.  We are preached at about man’s role in destroying the Earth, but we are somehow intolerant when we speak out against the wanton murder of unborn children by people who have tirelessly labored for three decades to ensure that this horrendous practice stays “safe, rare, and legal”.  Look at the numbers.  The practice is anything but “rare”, and its continued status as a legal institution in this country stains us all with a mark more deep and abiding than the practice of slavery, which, to hear the left tell it, only ended with last November’s election.  The cries of these victims still echo, and their blood still splashes on the ground.  The very same ground on which the blood of slaves was washed away in the torrent of the blood of the war dead between 1861 and 1865.  As a passionate man myself, I give the left their props for their passion, but I weep for their inability to accurately identify the immediate tragedy that lies before them.  This failing eyesight allows them to savage Catholics for their outrage over President Obama being invited to speak at Notre Dame’s commencement and receipt of an honorary degree.  But the President is stained more than most by this continuing travesty.  As an Illinois Senator, he was not satisfied with keeping abortion “Safe, rare, and legal”.  He went a step beyond to deny basic comfort care to those babies who survived their mother’s attempts to murder them.  While on the one hand, I can be happy that these innocent souls passed on to the everlasting embrace of God, the fact that a man who would deign to lead us would have them do so without even the comforting touch of another human being, instead seeking that they be abandoned to die alone, in trash bins and closets.  What does that say about that man?  Where did the “Choice” of these innocents enter into it at all?  What does it say for us as a nation that we would elect such a man with out seeking a serious accounting of him for it?  For being duly outraged by such effrontery, by reminding these people of what so many of them already know, we are branded bigots.  We are told that we are “intolerant”, and for this crime, they set out to malign and ruin all of those who would stand against their agenda, which seeks to over turn the rich history of this country by blatant attempts to rewrite history, and scour Christianity, and God from their place in it.

Today, I was reminded that these people really are in the minority, and that the history is there for all to see. My pastor returned from a trip to Washington D.C., and had some interesting perspectives to share. Among them, the fact that references to God are etched on nearly every landmark, monument, and building in that town. It is almost impossible to avoid any reminder of who God is and his role in our history. Apparently, everyone who lives there, or who works for the National Park Service wants us to be accutely aware of this also. Faced with such reminders daily, one can only conclude that the august persons who are representing us in that city are aware of God, and his authority over all men, and simply chose to deny that authority by denying his existence. Ponder this for a bit, but consider also this last election. Barrack Hussein Obama was a little known, extra-ordinarily young man to be seeking the office of President. But an ability to read speeches well, play the race card while accusing everyone else of doing so, and the vague and nearly meaningless promises of “HOPE!” and “CHANGE!” caused many to pin their hopes, desires, and adulation on a man, in a way not witnessed in this country since the allure of youth and beauty swept a young catholic war hero into the Oval Office. Some see this for the danger that it is. We are a nation of laws, not men, and yet this man has interjected his opinion into what are legal issues, and he has empowered his lackeys to make sure that his will be done. Indeed, if you were to press even the least spellbound of his supporters, they would be at a loss to explain to you exactly what it was they voted for when they cast that vote for “HOPE!” and “CHANGE!”

What about this “HOPE!”? Hope is defined thusly: To desire with expectation or with belief in the possibility or prospect of obtaining; to look forward to as a thing desirable, with the expectation of obtaining it; to cherish hopes of. So what was this hope for? Was it hope for change? Change was coming no matter who was elected. That was the whole point of an election. This “brilliant” man from Illinois offered something that we were already going to get anyway. Hardly seems to be a bargain there. Did we vote for “CHANGE!” that would fundamentally change the country by forcing it to be something that it never was? Maybe. He was honest about that. He told us repeatedly how he loved this country so much he could not wait to change it. The problem lies with us. Christians, in their heart of hearts, know this. As Christians, knowing that we are subject to a higher authority means that we do not focus our hope, or even HOPE! on man alone, and certainly one who failed such a huge test of character when it was brought upon him. In the denial of God by those who know better, they have deceived others who they were to lead. These others have been taught to hate Christianity for what it is, and for who we are. Some come by it casually. Others grow into it by a lifetime of frustration. A life spent seeking answers, perhaps even touched by others who could share the liberation of the Gospel with them, only to be disappointed in the failings of the messengers. This disappointment is often transmuted into the smug accusations of hypocrisy, often without the understanding that deep faith and understanding brings…the knowledge that while we have high aspirations and standards, there was only ever one who could meet them without failure. The result is that we have been browbeaten because of this faith by those not of it. It has hampered our ability to honestly full fill both both parts of the instruction “But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is within you, with meekness and fear;” 1 Peter 3:15, NKJV. We haven’t given a good defense in recent years. Yet those who would speak against us still seem to know the reason for that hope, and in whom it is placed, and they don’t like it very much. We do have our work cut out for us, and it requires wisdom and grace, and yes, a very righteous indignation at the proper times.

Read Full Post »

From Yahoo:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Social Security and Medicare are fading even faster under the weight of the recession, heading for insolvency years sooner than previously expected, the government warned Tuesday. Social Security will start paying out more in benefits than it collects in taxes in 2016, a year sooner than projected last year, and the giant trust fund will be depleted by 2037, four years sooner, trustees reported.

I guess using a crisis to crash the economy with massive and silly spending, monetizing our debt, and muscling government into banks and industry doesn’t seem like such a good idea right now, huh?  The real story here is not that it is failing sooner than expected, it is that it is failing at all.  Social Security and Medicare claim millions of dollars a year from the paychecks of working Americans.  These funds are not put into a pool to pay the expenses of these programs.  They are spent, along with other tax revenues, on dubious pursuits like studying the link between alcohol and promiscuity among gay men in Argentina, or the billions we will pay to ACORN, so they’ll have funds to fight the charges of voter fraud brought as a result of their, well, voter fraud.  Or the Billions that we are giving to GE, so we can be inundated with messages about “green” this, and “green” that by their various (and numerous) media outlets, or so we can pay Keith Olberman’s salary, because there is nothing like a shill for the demented left nightly denouncing others as “The Worst Person In The World!!!11!!!!” on my tax dollar.  And yet the Democrats are using this occasion to show us just how concerned they are about this “crisis” that they have eagerly contributed to over the years.  Lil’ Timmy Geithner, known for his fantastically successful Turbo Tax Skillz, is the de facto head of these “trust funds”.  Wow.  I was able to say “Geithner”, “Tax”, and “Trust” in the same sentence without busting out into laughter.  When questioned about this impending crisis, he immediately adopted a serious pose, stroked his chin, and said

“the longer we wait to address the long-term solvency of Medicare and Social Security, the sooner those challenges will be upon us and the harder the options will be.”

He is right, of course, but I really don’t need ANOTHER tax hike when I expect the bums rush from double digit inflation any moment.

Lacking the courage or originality of thought to propose a solution that would work, Geitner stayed with the Obama Administration Game plan, and decided to say something that doesn’t address the issue at hand, but leads the attention of most people away from their inability to be honest problem solvers, with the aid of a willing media, which refuses to follow up, of course.

“Geithner said that President Barack Obama was committed to working with Congress to find ways to control runaway growth in both public and private health care expenditures, noting the promise Monday by major health care providers to trim costs by $2 trillion over the next decade.”

Gee, uh, thanks.  I guess.

Thankfully, there really are some people in D.C. who are not baffled by the bullshit.

“Instead of getting existing public programs in order right now, some are saying we should create a new government-run health insurance plan,” Sen. Chuck Grassley, the top Republican on the Finance Committee, said in a reference to the administration’s health care proposals. “When we can’t afford the public health plan we have already, does it make sense to add more?”

House Republican leader John Boehner said the trustees report “confirms what we already knew: Our nation cannot afford to continue this reckless borrowing and spending spree.”

Amen, gentlemen.  We cannot keep spending on silly things, and we cannot continue to give away the store.   And I know this isn’t popular to say, but it was never supposed to be retirement.  It was supposed to be help.  If it is going to be preserved without taxing the snot out of the pool of workers paying in, it needs to be means tested, and benefits will have to be reduced.  And it will have to be dedicated when it comes in, period.  Entitlements have to stop if we are to survive.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »