September 21, 2006

Hollywood Hate

Excellent article by Brent Bozell at the Media Research Center site. He writes of the double standards in Hollywood when choosing a victim for receipt of their brand of hate speech.

I don't mind Hollywood being ignorant about issues of faith. They don't know anything about it. Faith scares them so they choose to mock it. I expect them to offend me. What I DO mind is the double standard involved. Where's the Hollywood movie mocking islamo-fascists? Wouldn't that be a great movie? The bungling terrorists who couldn't even blow themselves up let alone other people?

However, when mocking Christians, it's open season.

I saw a bumper sticker on a car the other day. I think this is the first that I have ever really been shocked by. I think there are a plethora of distasteful displays of verbage devaluing cars the world over but this one took the cake for me..."So many Christians, so few lions".

I was shocked because it was essentially condoning murder. Yes, this is only written on a bumper sticker but the person who confidently decided to gum up their paint job made a conscious decision to choose that particular sticker. What is funny about that? What if the sticker had said, "So many Jews, so few gas chambers"? Maybe "So many Rwandan's, so few weapons"? How about "So many pedophiles, so few children"? I had a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach that there were people so callous as to find humor in any of those "jokes"? We are all free to be as offensive as wish wish. There are however limits to "free" speech.

If boycotting, pressuring, letter writing and other forms of expressing ones displeasure with being offended offends the offender. Uh, too bad. There is no Constitutional guarantee of "freedom from reaction" when exercising your free speech rights on either side of an argument.

Here's a good article on the tax exempt status for churches and it's use for stifiling free speech.
Tom's Memorial

It took longer than I expected to get this finished but I'm happy with the results. My brother-in-law, Tom Eckhardt was much too young to have passed away. He was 44. That's only two years ahead of me. I felt a need to have something lasting that I could see any time I needed to remember. Tom was a genuine guy. He had his struggles just like every other human on this planet, but he was a good guy and I'll miss him a great deal.

September 19, 2006

Media Predisposition to Bash Bush

mThe media bias never stops. There is a prediposition for advancing the causes of the enemy. In this article from the Wichita (Kansas) Eagle, the story has the Bush administration preparing for their deceptive tactics to take us into war with Iran. They set the stage for questioning whatever policy positions the administration determines on Iran.

"It seems like Iran is becoming the new Iraq," said one U.S. counterterrorism official.

This official and others spoke on condition of anonymity because the information involved is classified.

The MSM completely miss the story when they have an opportunity to Bush bash. The "investigative", "unbiased" journalism which I'm sure they believe they are doing is really opinion journalism. The quote below from the Wichita Eagle shows this by the inclusion of one word! "unusual"

The International Atomic Energy Agency complained in an unusual letter made public on Thursday that a House intelligence committee report on Iran contains "erroneous, misleading and unsubstantiated information."

Simply by removing the word unusual you have an unbiased assesment of the letter. Throughout the article there are only "sources", "analysts" and "officials" quoted. Who are these people and what are their credentials? The article reads more like a gossip column.

We can always count on the MSM to talk to unnamed or anonymous sources in regards to classified information. Apparently our safetey and the safety of the men an women in the armed forces is not a concern when it applies to "getting the story".

If you read the "unusual" letter it appears (in my humble opinion) that Mr. Vilmos Cserveny from the Office of External Relations and Policy Coordination is upset that the perception of Iran is that of a sinister nation. I think the most telling paragraph is the second to last where he states,

"Finally, it is also regrettable that the Staff Report did not take into account the views of the United Nations Security Council..."


That sentence alone is enough to relegate the whole letter to being bird cage liner. When has the UN Security Council ever accomplished anything? The United Nations is a joke! The organization is like the points awarded in the comedy show "Who's Line is it Anyway?". They just don't matter. Like the Surgeon General's warning on a pack of cigarettes.

September 18, 2006

More Comedy from "Pranksters of Peace"

I just get a warm fuzzy feeling every time I read press releases about the peaceful religion of radical Islamo-fascists. The open dialog they have with other's about their differences in faith, values and moral foundations. It would be a great day when the other major religions of the world would be able to contain themselves as well as the Islamo-fascists and be just as peaceful. I'm sure the world leaders of their sect are planning to meet with the Pope to discuss their differences of opinion rather than call for his death. Or the death of any other non-believer infidel for that matter. We should be in awe of their peacefulness and appease them in any way so we can all just get along.

I just love their sarcastic sense of humor too! A group of Islamo-fascist pranksters held up banners in front of the Vatican embassy in Jakarta, Indonesia that said "Pope is building religion on hatred." They really know how to make a point through humor!

I'm considering moving my family to a Muslim nation because of their peaceful nature as well as their fairness (not to mention the humor). For example, Islam requires non-Muslims to pay a head tax to safeguard their lives if conquered by Muslims. They are exempt if they convert to Islam. Is that not the epitomy of freedom and justice. All I need to do to ensure that I am not killed by conquering Muslims is either pay a "head" tax (to keep it, presumably) or convert to Islam. No muss, no fuss!

The freedoms of Islam are numerous. Speech being the most highly prized. The following quote from the previously linked AP article will obviously be taken out of context.

The secretary-general of the Turkish HUKUK-DER law association submitted a request to the Justice Ministry asking that the pope be arrested upon entering Turkey.

The appeal by Fikret Karabekmez, a former legislator for the banned pro-Islamic Welfare Party, called for Benedict to be tried under several Turkish laws, among them obstruction of freedom of belief, encouraging discrimination based on religion, and inciting religious hatred.

Actually they were speaking with one of the folks from the same group of pranksters in Indonesia. He was just doing his "schtick". They are a political satire group that does comedy sketches about political and religious figures. One of their latest comedic sketches has this scene in the opening act...

"The Mujahedeen Shura Council said Muslims would be victorious and addressed the pope as "the worshipper of the cross" saying "you and the West are doomed as you can see from the defeat in Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya and elsewhere. ... We will break up the cross, spill the liquor and impose head tax, then the only thing acceptable is a conversion (to Islam) or (killed by) the sword."

For more first rate comedy from these peaceful folks, stay tuned!!

Theodore Roosevelt Had it Right

"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

Theodore Roosevelt 1907

If he had it figured out then, why couldn't the current administration figure it out now?


September 11, 2006

Tribute to Ada M. Davis - 1944 to 9/11/01

Today, 9/11/06 I am paying tribute to Ada M. Davis as part of the 2996 Project whose goal is to have 2,996 individual bloggers each post a memorial to one of the victims of 9/11. She was a civilian employee with the U.S. Army.
Ada was 57 years old when she was taken from us. She was from Camp Springs, MD. Her life was taken from her at The Pentagon 5 years ago today - 9/11/01.

These links will take you to sites that have memorial tributes to her from friends and family. Their words can certainly tell more about her than my humble tribute. Please take a moment to visit one of the links below and share in her memory.

Her memorial page at

Her memorial page at

Her memorial page

9-11 Heroes memorial page

Leave a message for her at

Ada's quilt square on

The Sonic Memorial Project

September 10, 2006

A Dog's Life

Our spoiled dog, Misty, lives the life of a pampered Queen.

September 08, 2006

In Memory of My Brother-In-Law

Tom Eckhardt. Laid to rest many years too soon. At 44 he only had two years seniority on me. A hard working guy who would give you the shirt off his back if you needed it. He wasn't one to turn down a cup of coffee either. Morning, noon or night, if you offered, he would drink one. He could barbecue like nobody's business. Give that man the golden spatula! He was my newborn daughters' surrogate father while I was overseas in the Navy. He was a tremendous help to my wife while I was gone. He learned some of his first Daddy skills from helping with my daughter. Consequently the two of them had a special relationship. She was his other daughter, and he was her other Dad.

A funny story to share -
One evening he and I went to Jack-in-the-Box to pick up some dinner for both our families. He was still driving Grandpa B's fliver (the old white 3-on-the-tree El Camino). He had the back loaded up with juniper branches for a run to the dumps the next day. We left J-i-t-B and drove behind the gas station next door. He slowed down a bit and handed me a little bag to toss in the dumpster behind the gas station as we drove by.

Continuing on home, about a mile and a half down the road, we get pulled over. We didn't know why. He wasn't speeding, hadn't ran any red lights or anything of the sort. The officers ask us to step out of the vehicle. We're both fairly confused at this point. He implies that we were looking to dump the juniper bushes somewhere. That's what we were doing behind the gas station. Scoping out the dumpster, looking to illegally dump our trash. (Maybe the little lunch bag I tossed out could be considered "illegal dumping" since it was not my dumpster.) Tom explained that was not what we were doing and that he had plans to go to the dump the next day. The officer informed him that he only had a driver side external rear-view mirror. This was inadequate for "hauling" but since the bushes were not blocking the field of vision of the interior rear-view mirror he would allow the hauling to proceed (gee, thanks).

At some point at the beginning of that discussion the second officer asked for and was given Tom's permission to search the vehicle. While Tom was being grilled about his nefarious Jack-in-the-Box activity the officer doing the search shouts, "We've got a gun!"

I believe it was at this point that I became acutely aware of the contents of my bladder. I'm envisioning an overnight stay with Bubba and the boys in the holding tank. I'm not sure I have ever been so angry (at Tom for having a gun in his car), frustrated (at the police for the ridiculousness of the dumping allegation), and scared at the same time. The officer was digging behind the bench seat to retrieve the weapon. He held it up gently between his thumb and forefinger just like they do on TV when they find evidence.....and began laughing.

It was a silver, ivory handled revolver. I couldn't imagine why he thought it was so funny or why Tom had it in his car. I'm going to jail on weapons charges and he's getting a a good laugh out of it! I also noticed that Tom was laughing.

"Great, the cops and Tom are having a good ol' time at my expense."

Tom looked at me while laughing. He could probably tell that the blood was draining from my head as I was nearing vertical unconsciousness.

"It's Bobby's squirt gun!" he says with a big grin. Fortunately, I had enough instantaneous relief as the bloodflow returned to my head, that I could laugh at the situation as well.

We'll miss you Uncle Tom.

From the liberal Supreme Court Justice....

....William O. Douglas, comes an opinion that I was quite surprised to be reading. This excerpt is from 343 U.S. 306 Zorach v. Clauson, decided April 28, 1952.

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS delivered the opinion of the Court.

We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being. We guarantee the freedom to worship as one chooses. We make room for as wide a variety of beliefs and creeds as the spiritual needs of man deem necessary. We sponsor an attitude on the part of government that shows no partiality to any one group and that lets each flourish according to the zeal of its adherents and the appeal of its dogma. When the state [p314] encourages religious instruction or cooperates with religious authorities by adjusting the schedule of public events to sectarian needs, it follows the best of our traditions. For it then respects the religious nature of our people and accommodates the public service to their spiritual needs. To hold that it may not would be to find in the Constitution a requirement that the government show a callous indifference to religious groups. That would be preferring those who believe in no religion over those who do believe. Government may not finance religious groups nor undertake religious instruction nor blend secular and sectarian education nor use secular institutions to force one or some religion on any person. But we find no constitutional requirement which makes it necessary for government to be hostile to religion and to throw its weight against efforts to widen the effective scope of religious influence. The government must be neutral when it comes to competition between sects. It may not thrust any sect on any person. It may not make a religious observance compulsory. It may not coerce anyone to attend church, to observe a religious holiday, or to take religious instruction. But it can close its doors or suspend its operations as to those who want to repair to their religious sanctuary for worship or instruction. No more than that is undertaken here.

September 07, 2006

Here's a good sign of progress in Iraq. It may be baby steps, but it's steps.

What frustrates me is the anti-war crowd that rants about bringing the troops home now. If I'm not mistaken...we still have troops in Germany and Japan. That war was over like 60 years ago man, and our troops are still there! Why the problem with Iraq?? We just got there a couple years ago. Where's the consistancy?

September 06, 2006

9/11 tribute to the 2,996 victims of terrorism

Came across a site called 2996 (H.T. to Neo-Con*Tastic). This project is being spearheaded by D.Challener Roe. It's a tribute to the 2,996 people who perished in the attacks on 9/11. You can sign up to post a memorial for one of the victims. Check it out.

September 05, 2006

Establishment Clause Bantering

Joe over at Joe's Big Blog and I have an ongoing friendly (and sometimes heated) discussion over the establishment clause in the First Amendment. He's a good friend, fellow blogger and co-worker and we love to "torture" each other over this topic. In my last post I linked to an article about Chuck Norris becoming a board member of the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools.

Joe commented that it would be better for "parents to directly oversee the relgious teachings of their children". This, as I replied to Joe, missed the point entirely. I'm not dumping on Joe, I think it's a great start to a passionate discussion by both sides.

The Constitutional language that states...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"

...refers to the two clauses in the First Amendment that guarantee freedom of religion (not from). The establishment clause prohibits the government from passing legislation to establish an official state religion or preferring one religion over another.

The Bible is an historical record of facts. The people and places written about are historically accurate. The Bible is also backed by writings from other secular authors as well as archeological finds that all substatiate it's accuracy.

Here is a link to an excellent page that shows the evidence that I refer to. This is a must read page if one is to understand the foundation of this disagreement. It is a lengthy and detailed page but certainly provides ample evidence.

The following excerpt is from an article on the Liberty Legal Institute's website. The quotes are from Hiram Sasser, director of litigation for Liberty Legal Institute, attorneys for the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools.

Attorneys for NCBCPS respond to Texas Freedom Network’s (TFN) attack on an elective Bible course offered in public high schools across the state.

“It is ironic that a group which claims to be against censorship is now attempting to become the biggest censor in the state of Texas.”

The NCBCPS curriculum has been approved by 300 school districts in 37 states and endorsed by many of the nation’s leading constitutional scholars, public officials and law professors. In the case Abington v. Schempp, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that “the Bible is worthy of study for its literary and historic qualities,” so long as it is “presented objectively as part of a secular program of education.”

In addition to providing an interfaith perspective on the material, NCBCPS
curriculum is also designed to broaden perspectives and stimulate discussion and

“NCBCPS course material is designed to utilize the vast historical and cultural
insight found in the Bible,” Sasser said. “Depriving students of such important
study is totally ridiculous and contrary to the U.S. Supreme Court statement.”

Unfortunately the frantic folks at the "Asinine Communist Liberal Uber-anger" society ("ACLU" for those who read mostly MSM) who hate everything this country stands for won't be happy until all traces of religion, or references to, are eliminated from society. Somehow in their faith tradition (Liberalism - which is a religion unto itself) they have determined that all other religions are invalid and should therefore be eliminated. Sounds a bit like the current swath being burned by radical Islamo-fascists.

I just had to include some quotes below from the Founders. I'm a sucker for the folks who gave up everything to preserve their freedom.

"The Bible is a book worth more than all the other books that were ever printed."
Patrick Henry

"It is impossible to enslave mentally or socially a Bible reading people. The principles of the Bible are the groundwork of human freedom."
Horace Greely

"I have always said, and will always say, that studious perusal of the sacred volume will make us better citizens."
Thomas Jefferson

While President of the United States, Thomas Jefferson was elected the first president of the Washington, D.C. public school board, which used the Bible as a reading text in the classroom.

A Round-house Kick to the Head

Came across this article about actor Chuck Norris and his wife, Gena, joining the Board of Directors of the National Council on Bible Curriculum In Public Schools. Not that this surprises me. He is an outspoken proponent of faith and family values issues.

I'm sure he will take a great deal of heat from secular sources and from "the industry". Especially those folks who say the "Council" that he is now a board member of is promoting the teaching of religion in schools. This, of course, would be a violation of the "seperation of church and state" clause from the Constitution. Oops, wait a minute. It really doesn't say that anywhere in the Constitution. What were they thinking? Oh...I remember, they weren't.

The article is also available at this PDF link.

I better stop before I overdose on sarcasm. Somebody please get me my purple pills!!

Technorati links
, , ,

September 02, 2006

This Spartan Life Episode 2 Module 1

Really tough apartment hunting in New Mambasa

Technorati links
, , ,