Put A Little Love InYour Heart...

The UK Daily Mail reports this week that two hunters in New England died.  While tracking a wounded deer, one of the men shot at what he thought was the animal.

Tragically, it was his friend and long-time hunting partner.

In his angst and distress after watching his friend die, the man then shot himself.

At the end of many online news stories, readers may publish comments.  I was disheartened by the tone of the comments.  Liberal animal lovers rejoiced in the double tragedy.  Conservative sportsmen mocked the lack of prowess and caution that led to a hunter-on-hunter shooting.

Precious few of the commenters remembered the families of both men and the terrible loss they're experiencing.

Can't we remember our humanity?  Can't we return to a civil society?  Can't we remember to do to others the things we would like done to and for us - in the way that we would like them done?  Can't we give more mercy, feel more empathy, send more love into the world?

This Thanksgiving and Christmas Season, despite the "world turned upside down", let us remember that God who gives all good things loves every one of His creations.  He loved the world so that He gave His Only Begotten Son so that we all can hope for better things to come.

This time of year - and all times of the year - let us remember to put a little love in our heart.  And the world will be a better place for you and me.  Just wait and see....

No-No-No-No-No! Not Again...!

Are we REALLY going to allow ourselves (we "US Americans") to be FOOLED again?

The UK Guardian is already starting the fear mongering with this headline:  "Supercommittee Failure Could Trigger US Credit Downgrade, Economists Warn"

If forming this idiotic, extra-legislative, unaccountable supercommittee wasn't enough to keep us from having our debt downgraded, what in the name of all that's holy makes us think that any product they come up with - or DON'T come up with - is going to affect whether or not our debt takes another beating?

The ONLY answer that financial markets will respond to is a fiscally responsible answer.  They will not respond to a political answer.  We learned that this past summer!

E-freaking-NOUGH, already!

We "US Americans" and our so-called "leaders" need to grow a pair at least the size of Greece's (sad commentary on our national vigor and virility) and confront the cold, hard reality that the PONZI scheme we call the New Deal and the Great Society is just that: an unsustainable house of cards.

The answer is that everyone already on the dole - Social Security, public service pensions, etc. - can stay on it and expect to receive everything they "have coming to them".  Those who are closer than 10 years away from that golden hammock can expect to see their benefits fixed at today's rates.  Everyone who is 10 or more years away from that magical retirement age can expect nothing.

If the 401k/403b scheme is good enough for the masses, then by gum, it's good enough for the drones who pretend to be "public servants".

All "US Americans" not already on the dole should be allowed to save and invest an unlimited portion of their income before taxes in retirement accounts that will grow tax-free forever and that will not be subject to the estate tax upon the owner's death.

It's time for Americans to return to their rugged individualist, self-sufficient roots and for American government to return to its limited, tightly controlled, closely defined role.

Walt Kelly may have been right.  "We have met the enemy; and he is us!"  Our apathy as Americans, our blind and naive trust in "leaders" to do the right thing, has brought our nation to this point.  We've allowed seemingly benign or well-intentioned overreaching until now we don't even notice when our natural rights are abridged or annihilated altogether.

We've done it to ourselves!  The good news is that we can UN-do it for our children.

Historical Marker Near Truckee, CA...

I often hear politicians, Republican and Democrat, including President Obama tell us that government spending is needed to drive the development of a high-speed rail system in our country.  I'm not sure what that means, but if it looks like the simple overpass near my house that has been under construction for more than a year, I'm not interested in repeating that all the way from "the New York islands to the redwood forests". 

Further, I heard President Obama claim that the United States government created the transcontinental railroad system.  I could have sworn that the Central Pacific Railroad and the Union Pacific Railroad built the railroad beginning in Council Bluffs, Iowa and Oakland, California and working toward eachother to a meeting point near Ogden, Utah in 1869.

This plaque, placed near the railroad on Interstate 80 in California doesn't even mention government involvement.  In fact, it specifically cites Chinese labor and a man named Charles Crocker.

As Americans, let us not lose sight of the fact that the vision of great men and women combined with the incentive of possibly improving one's own station and standing in life drove the founding and the development of this great nation.

This primary season, support and vote for the candidate you feel best reflects your values and will best protect and restore your liberty.  Do not be bullied into accepting mediocrity or compromise in your primary choice.  And in the general election, vote for the candidate whose values are closest to yours again.  Do not sit on the sidelines because failing to vote is the same as giving half a vote to the "other side". 

Let us not lose sight of the fact that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights and that no earthly force or philosophy can rightly abridge or deny us those rights. And let us, this election, seek those who would break the shackles, lighten the burdens, ease the bondage and look to the betterment of the condition of Americans today and of future generations.

Inconsistent...?

Mother Jones magazine (yes, I'm a subscriber) featured an article called "Michele Bachmannn:  Crazy Like a Fox?" in its August 2011 issue.  http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/08/michele-bachmann-iowa-frontrunner?page=2

I thought it was a well-done piece with a decided bias.  In part of it the author, Tim Murphy, examined Mrs. Bachmann's views on creationism and her effort to include it in charter school curriculum.

I want to quote a piece of the article that exposes the inconsistency of the progressive or liberal mindset.  It comes from a then-opponent of Mrs. Bachmann's efforts named Bob Beltrame.  He told Mrs. Bachmann, as he recalls it, "Everybody can have their own beliefs, but it doesn't belong in the classroom."

So, subscribing to the Theory of Evolution, or the Big Bang Theory does not constitute having a "belief", but subscribing to the idea of Creationism does?  So far as I know, none of us was around to see the "Grand Beginning", and so by definition, we all simply "believe" what we will about it.

The liberal assertion here seems to be that the liberal line is fact and the non-liberal line is superstition. Mrs. Bachmann's belief is not welcome in Mr. Beltrame's classroom; yet Mr. Beltrame's belief must be accepted in Mrs. Bachmann's?

You see, we MUST talk about the substance of the issues.  Here, the substance is not whether God created the Universe, or whether it came about by happenstance.  The substance is whether it is the place of a public institution to promote one philosophy or theory over another.

I argue that if we are going to talk about the beginning of the world, we ought to expose children to as many of the ideas about it as possible.  We do it to some extent in examining Native American, Greek and Roman mythology in elementary school.  We do it extensively when discussing Darwin's ideas in middle and high school biology .  Why do we ignore the idea that an intelligent force or a god may have had a hand in the work, as well?

"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

If one "belief" is welcome, should not all be?  This seems more in keeping with the First Amendment than the current practice of promoting one over the other.