Saturday, October 31, 2009

Christmas in Hawaii

This year, I will be spending Christmas in Hawaii. I’m keeping a promise I made over thirty years ago to a friend. He and I were in the Army together; I was barely twenty, he a little over thirty. Born in 1941, he was an infant when he lost his father, who was on the USS Arizona on Dec. 7th of that same year. Being raised by his step father, he had made himself a promise that one day he would go stand on the Arizona Memorial and honor his father’s sacrifice. Sadly, that day never came.

After leaving the service at the end of my first hitch, but before going back in for my second, I heard from my friend who had stayed in, as he had planned to make it a career. That too, was not to be. He’d gotten cancer and was calling to tell me it was terminal. He had but a short time left, and in one of the last few long talks we had together, before he passed, one of the things he told me he regretted most was that he wouldn’t be able to keep the promise he made to go stand on the Arizona and honor his father. As his friend, and brother in arms, I told him that when I was able to make the trip, I would stand in his place and render the honors to his father for him.

As the years passed something always prevented me from making the trip; either I had the means or I had the opportunity but never, it seemed, both at the same time. Until now.

I was telling some of my relatives the other day that I wouldn't be coming home for Christmas this year, I would be instead seeing them for Thanksgiving, as I would be traveling to Hawaii for Christmas. One of my young nieces asked why and I told her. She is eleven. When I explained the situation and mentioned Dec. 7th and why I would be going to Pearl Harbor, she surprised me by not knowing about the Japanese attack that propelled us into WW II. Frankly, I was dumbfounded and quite saddened by this fact. I asked if they had learned anything at all about it in school, to which she replied, no. I can only wonder what else they don’t teach in public school these days. I know in some schools, England for instance, a couple of years ago they elected not to teach about the Holocaust because (are you ready for this?) it might offend the Muslim students who didn’t believe it happened.

I wonder how long it will be before they start deciding to not teach about 911. Some things should never be forgotten, and ALWAYS taught to the children of this nation; Concord and Lexington; Valley Forge; The Alamo; Gettysburg; Pearl Harbor; 911.

This Christmas I’ll be in Hawaii keeping a promise to a friend. I will also consider the trip a promise to the 1177 Americans who paid the ultimate price for our freedom, so that the memory of their sacrifice never dies, but shines eternal.

It Has to Be Manmade, Because If it Isn't.....

Global Warming, Climate Change, or whatever they are calling it this month (always to suit their political ambitions, goals and the temperature of the day) HAS to be man made, because if it isn't then the consequences are devastating to the believer.  Audacity of Logic readers know that if you base your world view on a system of beliefs that turns out to be false, then you are shattered at the realization.  All of our beliefs, actions, goals, and dream are formed and shaped by how we view the world.  If we have put our faith in a worldview that turns out to be false, then our entire existence becomes meaningless.  Everything we have worked for and believed in was based on a lie and we are diminished in our own eyes as well as the eyes of the world. 

Thus, in spite of what hundreds of scientists are proving, despite what even the most simple minded troglodyte can observe out their back porch, and in spite of the exposure of greed and capital gain that green leaders stand to make from green energy, the staunch environmentalist will not change their mind.  To do so will destroy their soul.  It will nullify their beliefs, their lives, and call into question their ultimate belief and worship of the earth.  They will stand in the face of overwhelming evidence and shout you down.  You are a heretic, a hypocrite, and a blasphemer.  They will not change, they will not concede, and they will not ever stop.

Tyrannical and fascist Islam shares the same goals and end game with the environmentalist. Take over of the world, conversion of its inhabitants, death to the infidels, global government and control.  Their methods and ideologies differ only in their Utopian visions of earth.  One comes with a gun and a bomb - the other with laws and regulations that will collapse and strangle the system into submission.  Both must be fought with equal fervor, both are a danger to our liberty, society, and our freedom.  The difference is one is wearing a suit and flying to Copenhagen for a conference and the other is building nuclear facilities and stoning women and protesters in the street.

Obama has unclenched his fist at the one and is participating with the other.

Friday, October 30, 2009

General Welfare

I recently read a post somewhere from some left-leaning-loon who was trying to make a case for congressional mandated health care. She started out citing the ‘fact’ that the Constitution’s goal wasn’t to limit government power (she must have attended a public school in the last few years), which I won’t even waste breath on trying to explain the sheer lunacy of this belief, but whom also tried to make the case that because the Constitution refers to providing for the ‘general welfare,’ this is somehow justification for government controlled health care. A Constitutional scholar she isn’t.

There are only two times the term ‘general welfare’ is used in the Constitution, in the Preamble and in Article 1, Section 8. The Preamble to the Constitution states:

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Article 1, Section 8 states:

“The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;”

First, the Preamble of the Constitution establishes no powers or rights. It merely states the purpose of the Constitution. No further development of what ‘general welfare’ means can be made based on the mention of it in the Preamble. A preamble is nothing more than a summary of, or introduction to, what is to follow. If the idea is not in the context of the Articles, then it is not in the Preamble. The meaning in the Preamble must be defined by what is in the context of the Articles, not the other way around.

Second, what did the word ‘welfare’ mean in the age of the Founding Fathers?

It should be obvious words can change over time. In order to more accurately assess the meaning of the word ‘welfare’, with respect to its use in the Constitution, we can consult a source from that period. In the 1828 edition of Noah Webster's American Dictionary of the English Language, the word ‘welfare’ was defined 40 years after it was written in the Constitution:

“1.Exemption from misfortune, sickness, calamity or evil; the enjoyment of health and the common blessings of life; prosperity; happiness; applied to persons.”

“2.Exemption from any unusual evil or calamity; the enjoyment of peace and prosperity, or the ordinary blessings of society and civil government; applies to states.”

A clear distinction is made with respect to welfare as applied to persons and states. In the Constitution the word ‘welfare’ is used in the context of states and not persons. The "welfare of the United States" is not congruous with the welfare of individuals, people, or citizens.

The welfare concerned the whole of the Union at the federal level, the matter of binding the states together for mutual benefit, the health of the arrangement of the separated powers, the federalist structure, not the well-being of groups or individuals. The strongest reading would be that the benefit of this ‘general welfare’ had to be a benefit for all rather than some people, without it being a direct benefit to every individual.

In short, the clause, called the ‘General Welfare Clause’ or the ‘Spending Power Clause,’ does not grant Congress the power to legislate for the general welfare of the country’s individual citizens; that is a power reserved to the states through the Tenth Amendment. Rather, it merely allows Congress to spend federal money for the general welfare of the nation. The principle underlying this distinction—the limitation of federal power—was one of the reasons for the Constitution in the first place.

As one of our Founding Fathers, speaking on this very subject, put it so eloquently, “Words meant by the instrument to be subsidiary only to the execution of limited powers ought not to be construed as themselves to give unlimited powers, nor a part to be so taken as to destroy the whole residue of that instrument." --Thomas Jefferson

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

An Open Letter To President Obama

This letter sent by Lou Pritchett is verified as being attributed to him and he personally has acknowledged it's authenticity. Further, he says the letter was originally sent to the NY Times but they never acknowledged it. He is aware that it has gone viral on the Internet, however, and seems to enjoy that fact. Since this is an open letter, which is now in the public domain and is correctly attributed, I am posting it here.

Lou Pritchett is one of corporate America 's true living legends- an acclaimed author, dynamic teacher and one of the world's highest rated speakers. Successful corporate executives everywhere recognize him as the foremost leader in change management. Lou changed the way America does business by creating an audacious concept that came to be known as "partnering." Pritchett rose from soap salesman to Vice-President, Sales and Customer Development for Procter and Gamble and over the course of 36 years, made corporate history.


Dear President Obama:

You are the thirteenth President under whom I have
lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me.
You scare me because after months of exposure, I know
nothing about you.

You scare me because I do not know how you paid for
your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale
lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support.
You scare me because you did not spend the formative
years of youth growing up in America and culturally
you are not an American.

You scare me because you have never run a company or
met a payroll.

You scare me because you have never had military
experience, thus don't understand it at its core.

You scare me because you lack humility and 'class',
always blaming others.
You scare me because for over half your life you have
aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate
America and you refuse to publicly denounce these
radicals who wish to see America fail.

You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the
'blame America' crowd and deliver this message abroad.

You scare me because you want to change America to a
European style country where the government sector
dominates instead of the private sector.
You scare me because you want to replace our health
care system with a government controlled one.

You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to
responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and
shale reserves.

You scare me because you want to kill the American
capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which
provides the highest standard of living in the world.

You scare me because you have begun to use
'extortion' tactics against certain banks and

You scare me because your own political party shrinks
from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible
spending proposals.

You scare me because you will not openly listen to or
even consider opposing points of view from intelligent

You scare me because you falsely believe that you are
both omnipotent and omniscient.

You scare me because the media gives you a free pass
on everything you do.

You scare me because you demonize and want to silence
the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O'Relllys and Becks who offer
opposing, conservative points of view.

You scare me because you prefer controlling over

Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second
term I will probably not feel safe in writing a
similar letter in 8 years.

Lou Pritchett

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Health Care Reform - One Question

When considering what the 'leaders' in Washington are currently trying to do to our health care system, you need to ask one simple question: Is it constitutional?

Judge Andrew Napolitano - a constitutional scholar - recently wrote in the Wall Street Journal;

"The practice of medicine consists of the delivery of intimate services to the human body. In almost all instances, the delivery of medical services occurs in one place and does not move across interstate lines. One goes to a physician not to engage in commercial activity, as the Framers of the Constitution understood, but to improve one's health. And the practice of medicine, much like public school safety, has been regulated by states for the past century."
As such, using precedent set by the Supreme Court, the Democrat's claim that the Federal Government has the right to regulate health care, due to its interstate nature, simply does not hold up. There is no constitutionally supported power of the Federal Government to force Federal Government run health care down the throats of American citizens.

Taking the next constitutional step, we look at the 10th Amendment. As the above mentioned, power is not specifically granted to the Federal Government; it is clearly reserved as a power of the State Governments. The State of Massachusetts in 2006 established the Commonwealth Health Insurance Connector Authority, which provides free health care for residents earning less than 150% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) and partially subsidized health care coverage for those earning up to 300% of the FPL. While I'm not commenting on the effectiveness of this legislation, I will say that it was certainly more in the purvey of the State Government to enact this legislation, than it is for the Federal Government to do so on a national level.

Here is the thing that really slays me in all of this: The Feds are using interstate commerce to back their authority to enact health care reform, while simultaneously continuing the ban on insurance companies selling health policies across state lines... can you say Hypocrites?

Wake up America, your President and House and Senate leadership seem to have our Sacred Constitution printed up on rolls of Charmin and are using it to wipe their backsides. I can only imagine that my namesake is rolling over in his grave.

So ask yourself the question, is it constitutional? The correct answer is no.

Sunday, October 25, 2009

Hollywood - Your True Colors are Showing Through

Maybe it is just me, but I am sick of Hollywood.  Decades of contempt held for the American People and our way of life is oozing through in all they do.  Audacity of Logic readers may recall my last foray into this subject, Not Too Smart where we dealt with the risks of going public with your political beliefs and how you can alienate half of the country by espousing your pseudo-intellectual, loony beliefs.  This post, however, will deal with their complete and utter rejection of all that Americans hold dear and one must wonder, how long will they continue to go blindly down a path that holds financial doom in its forecast.

I preview the upcoming movie releases and think to myself, ho hum.  I rent DVD's and find my self sighing at the undertones of anti-Americanism that bleeds through.  For example, we watched the Soloist with Robert Downey Jr and Jamie Fox last week.  Robert Downey Jr is a LA Times reporter looking for a story and lamenting the downturn in the newspaper industry.  Jamie Fox is a gifted musician who while attending Julliard is struck down by Schizophrenia and is living on the streets of LA.  I got half way through the movie.

It was well acted, shot, directed, and edited.  It was the underlying hopelessness of a world and a character without God that was completely off putting.  The reporter sees beauty and life in watching the musician play and enjoy music; how shallow and sad.  Of course we have throw in our anti-American messages, while walking through the newsroom they play clips of George W Bush speaking and then follow up with pictures of dead children.  It is inferred that if there was just more money and less discrimination, the street people would not be on the street.

Were these things intentional?  No, probably not, but at the end of the day if you eat a steady diet of American and Capitalism hatred day after day and year after year it will begin to seep out in all that you do.  I believe this is what has happened to Hollywood.  No, starting with the derelict Baby Boomers and Jane Fonda we have been entertained by a group of folks who hate us.  Paradoxically, it is these folks who need us, not the other way around.  The capitalist system that they so despise will eventually bring them to their senses, when people stop going to see their movies - that is unless the government so determines that Hollywood is too big to fail.

Saturday, October 24, 2009

The Religion of Environmentalism

Audacity of Logic readers may recall another blog I wrote on this subject in early September, The Green Movement - The Marriage of Environmentalist and Anarchist.  Today, I will examine the duped Environmentalist and through a fictional debate, show the unsuspecting, the truth behind their beliefs.

Dolley:  What role does God play in Environmentalism?
Greenie:  What do you mean?
Dolley:  I mean do you believe in a Creator that regularly tends to His creation?
Greenie:  A Creator? Well no, all the evidence proves that we got here by evolution.  Before you go getting all crazy on me, I do believe in a higher power and God of the universe.
Dolley:  So you believe that god is in the earth?
Greenie:  Yes, that's it exactly and as members of the universe have to take care of the earth.
Dolley:  So, what you are saying is that you have to take care of god?
Greenie:  (Sigh) We don't believe in god that way, but in essence yes.
Dolley:  Since you believe that man was part of evolution, are humans on the same level as other creatures?
Greenie:  Actually, humans are the destroyers of the earth and are by their behavior less than other creatures.
Dolley:  What do you feel is the greatest threat today to the earth?
Greenie:  Pollution, development, industry - we are destroying the earth.
Dolley:  So do you think we should "decivilize"?
Greenie:  Ideally, yes.
Dolley:  Do you believe the earth was best when man lived in caves and hunted and gathered?
Greenie:  Sure, of course.
Dolley:  What would you say to me if I told you that Global Warming was a hoax?
Greenie:  I would say you are ignorant of the truth and need to be educated.
Dolley:  What if I refused to believe your education and insisted on living the way I chose?
Greenie:  Well then, we would be forced to pass laws and make you conform.
Dolley:  So if I understand this correctly, you do not believe in a Creator that regularly tends to His creation.  You worship the god of the universe who requires you to take care of it.  You believe that humans are an accident and the biggest threat to the earth and that all vestige of civilization should be wiped out to return to the perfect environmental state.  If I do not believe you, you will just legislate my compliance with your religion.
Greenie:  I don't like the way you make it sound, but yes, we must protect the earth and take you along kicking and screaming if we have to.

Would such an exchange ever take place?  No, because most environmentalists would not answer the questions in a straight forward manner.  They would dodge, misdirect, and name call.  The question remains, if the above true, is it an accurate representation of their beliefs?  I believe it is. 

The environmentalist reject God of the Bible.  My God is all powerful and the maker of this earth.  My God loved me so much, he died on the cross for me as penalty for my sin.  The environmentalist god demands that its subject serve it.  Their god is weak and must be cared for at all costs.  My God created the Heavens and the Earth.  My God created man in His image and gave him dominion over the earth.  The environmentalist believes that man is a scourge upon the earth and the destroyer thereof.  My God gives and inspires innovation and invention that improve the plight of man on this earth, through drugs, safety, transportation, electricity, comfort, and long life.  The environmentalist god says that all of these things are bad and must be dismantled.  My God says, "Come to me all you who are burdened and I will give you rest, for my burden is light and my load is easy" and "For God so loved the earth, that He gave is only begotten Son, that whosoever that believith in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life."  The environmentalist god proclaims that if you don't believe in me I will force you, for your own good, of course.

Which do you choose?

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

I Am a Conservative, Not a NeoConservative; I Am a Liberal, Not a Progressive

Hmm, as Audacity of Logic readers know we are constantly refining our positions, investigating our beliefs, and testing our tenants to insure that they conform to logical and linear arguments.  I stumbled upon a debating Democrat this morning who when asked to define what he believed in was articulate, reasoned, logical, and firmly held beliefs based on the wisdom of our Founding Fathers.  So how then could he possibly consider himself a Democrat?  What I discovered was that he considered himself a liberal and thus historically identified with the Democratic Party and had not yet realized that is not who they are anymore.  Conversely, he attacked the conservative writer by bringing up the failures of the Bush Administration obviously assuming that anyone of the conservative mind set must be a defender of GW Bush and a fellow NeoConservative.

It is the Progressives that are running the Dems and the Neo-Cons that are running the GOP - that is what is dividing us politically because the American people are not Progressives or Neo-Cons. Thus, those of us with a conservative mind set view the Progressive agenda with horror and the Dems do the same with the Neo-Cons. The challenge in our discourse is that WE THE PEOPLE are not represented by either of the major Political parties, but are tearing each other apart for things we have perceived the "other" side to believe.

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

ABC comes to the Defense of FOX?

President Obama and his minions have been attacking FOX news as not being a true news organization. Interestingly enough, Jake Tapper of ABC News got in to a heated debate with Robert Gibbs, calling the administration out for their actions in this.

How to be a...

best selling author, top rated TV show, or top rated radio show... be conservative.  This isn't about Palin, Beck, Rush, O'Reilly, or even Olbermann or Matthews.  What it is about is what overwhelmingly sells books and advertising.  What is even more amazing is why a bunch of so called knuckle dragging, illiterate, redneck conservatives would even buy a book, let alone enough copies to make it an overwhelming success, or best seller.  Case in point.  Sarah Palin, like her or leave her, has a top selling book and it hasn't even been released.  Books with religious context sell more than anything typically written by liberal authors as well.  Everywhere I have looked, Barnes and Noble,, NY Times, it is the same.  Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" had pretty lame sales and he won more press for it than you could shake a stick at, including the Nobel Prize (oooohhhhhhh!).  People aren't watching the liberal news and opinion guys.  They aren't buying their books.  And liberal talk radio is almost non existent.

Bottom line.  Left leaning, progressive, liberal minded people are the minority.  Conservative values, which include Judeo-Christian values, are more common and prevalent in American individuals, yet we continually let the minority set the bar for us.  I hope the surge of conservative assembly, debate, and protest will continue, and that we will reverse the tide of politically correct, progressive ideals that have been allowed to ripple through our society.  We can do it, and we will do it.

Friday, October 16, 2009

A Letter to The President

This is my letter to President Barack H. Obama to express my concerns over a few issues.  I did not necessarily expect a response, although I have always gotten some form of response in the past.  I am used to the form letter that doesn't specifically address my concern.  But what I got this time hit me differently.

 August 12, 2009

President Barack H. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear President Obama:

I write this letter to express my sincere concerns over the state of our country at this very important time in its history. I was disappointed in the passing of the stimulus package without an appropriate period of time for review and debate. I was disappointed in the handling and passage of the Cap and Trade legislation. And now I am extremely disappointed in the handling of this health care issue.

I understand your concern over our health care problems and agree wholeheartedly that reform is needed. It is obvious that this issue is creating intense emotion and division between opponents and supporters. But I also think that it is only a small portion of a bigger picture that has finally come into view for many American’s. I fully understand that you have to pick a side and that passage of this legislation is of extreme importance to you. However, I feel that you are making accusations about your opponents in an effort to garner support that is equally applicable to you and your supporters.

You have made statements referring to the opposition trying to maintain status quo, and statements to the effect that we cannot afford to do nothing about this health care issue. I would contend that if you were honoring one of your campaign promises and forcing a truly bipartisan effort there are many ideas that your opponents have and believe would help in solving many of our health care issues. I am left to think that we have come to a cross road where you have your ideas and approach, and anything contrary to that will not be entertained. Your reluctance to include measures to address significant root causes is maintaining status quo, just from a different side.

While I do believe that my following ideas will not find much support in our current Congress and Executive administration, I would like to exercise my rights to at least express them in the hopes that one day someone will do something truly radical and succeed in making real change that does away with the status quo in a real and effective way. Every public servant we elect takes an oath to defend our Constitution from enemies both domestic and foreign. I believe that we have been on a slow road to ruin in the sense that we continuously chip away at the framework that our founders put in place. Weakening that framework is weakening our country. We need to reverse that trend, but it cannot be done with one wholesale change. It must be done by attacking the problems in manageable bites. Once they have been brought under control, take another step, another bite. This would be my surgical, precision approach to health care reform.

I firmly believe that the myriad of problems we see in this country go back to three root causes that are intertwined in a way that they must all be addressed with respect to one another and at the same time. These not only have adverse effects on healthcare, they impact everything in one way or another. They are universally responsible for the majority of our countries ills. Do this one thing and step back while many other problems begin to get fixed through bipartisan effort with the people’s true best interest and desires being met. For this country to move forward and regain our prosperity we must initiate term limits and have significant tort and lobbying reform.

I know that your time is valuable and will not debate these three items in much detail. I am educated and of above average intelligence. Knowing that you are more educated than I, and likely of higher intelligence, you are fully capable of coming to a similar logical conclusion. Simply stated career politicians will oft times serve their best interest, not necessarily that of their constituents. Oft times that so called best interest is highlighted by a lobbyist. Money is a strong motivator, and staying in a position to benefit from the flow of money from the lobbyist becomes a primary objective. And this vicious circle intertwines itself with tort reform keeping it from happening because the trial lobbyists have extreme power and there are politicians who want to stay in office to benefit financially and otherwise. Legal costs in this country inflate the cost of doing business in all industries and sectors of our lives. Health care is a prime example of this.

Our presidential term is limited. Shouldn’t all elected officials terms be limited? I would like an honest answer to an honest question. Have you ever benefited personally in any way from any lobbyists actions, and have their actions ever influenced your decisions in any way? I would question any career politician who tried to say no. After all, we are all human. And this is why we need boundaries to keep our inherent flaws from doing damage to our nation. But, as you can see, expecting our elected officials to change this system is likened to putting the fox in charge of the hen house.

President Obama, we need change. We need real change. I hope that you may find it in yourself to agree with at least some of what I have said, and in doing so make an effort at change that will truly preserve and protect America and all Americans.


cc: The Honorable Jim DeMint, United States Senate
The Honorable Lindsay Graham, United States Senate
The Honorable Bob Inglis, United States House of Representatives
The Honorable Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives

This is his "form letter" response.

Not that I expected a PERSONAL response, but I have yet to get a response that even closely addresses the point of any of my letters.  But in this letter, I want you to read what he says and tell me if you really believe what is being sold.  I am personally offended that his aides couldn't do a better job of picking a form letter that tries to address at least a portion of my concerns, but it is also offensive to be sold a bill of goods for an empty basket.  This letter is riddled with false claims and false promises.  Transparency?  Lobbyist reform?  Encourage open debate of issues?  Come on!  I know there are people who like Obama.  I don't know him personally to like or dislike him in that way, but I do not like him as our president.

I try to find intellectual debates on this but it appears you are either for or against Obama.  Once you pick a side there isn't any changing of minds that any debate will cause.  So please read this response and if you want to think of me as just another Obama hater, fine.  But when you look in the mirror tonight with noone but yourself to answer to, ask yourself if you really trust Obama.  Would you trust him the way you trust other people in your personal life to look after you and take care of you with your best interest in mind?  Or, at the end of the day, is he just another politician looking out for himself and his cronies?  In my opinion he does not have enough personal integrity to be someone I would ever consider as a close friend.  I trust my friends without question in any situation with everything I own, including my life.  But not Obama, nor Bush, nor 80% of the knot heads taking up valuable space on Capitol Hill.  I've made my decision, make yours.  And we will both go about our ways and live with the consequences.

Thursday, October 15, 2009

Of Conservatism and Racism

Bill O'Reilly takes on the issue of Rush Limbaugh and his quest to own an NFL Franchise. Now Rush says a lot of passion invoking things, but I have never heard him say something that was plainly racist. You do not have to like him, and at times I find him way to much, to over the top, but notice that the claims of racism and racist comments from his detractors have not been substantiated. At the same time, Guys like Jessie Jackson can make all the racist comments he wants about Jewish people, and Al Sharpton can jump on the bandwagon condemning Duke Lacrosse players, but they are never called out by our mainstream media.

Racism in any form is wrong and it flat out is not something we should accept in this country. But it is a knife that cuts both ways and everyone should be held to the same standards.

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Torte Reform Could Save $54 Billion

And thanks to the Old Jarhead for bringing this to our attention.  A new CBO analysis released last Friday reports that torte reform could save $54 Billion over the next 10 years, 10 times more than the original estimate.  This is the same group health care supporters were so quick to point to as validation of the Baucus plan.  So we should give this a look see, shouldn't we?  Want to place bets how much we will hear about this in the news or from our lawmakers up on the hill.  It's been 5 days and I had to stumble across it in the blogosphere.

I'm Tired

This Old Jarhead is tired!  And after reading what he has to say, I must say Amen.  And this was posted in February.  He must really be tired now.  I think we are all tired.  But, don't drop your guard Audacity of Logic readers and followers.  We have a long road ahead of us and a hard fight to return our government to The Constitutional limits it should be observing.

Inconvenient Question

An Inconvenient Question for Al Gore

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Next for Obama, the Pulitzer Prize

Obama - Prize Rooster

Thomas was a chicken farmer; his farm was dedicated to the fertilized egg business. In his farmyard, Thomas had 450 young hens to lay the eggs. Incidentally, at this stage the female hens are called 'pullets'. Now to fertilise the eggs, which the pullets laid, Thomas had 12 male birds called roosters. The farmer kept careful records, and any rooster that didn't perform went straight into the cooking pot and a replacement was introduced. Thomas found this task time consuming, so he bought a dozen tiny bells and attached one to each of his roosters. Cunningly, each bell had a different ring tone so Thomas could tell from the comfort of his porch, which rooster was performing.

So now Thomas could sit on his rocking chair and tick the boxes on his efficiency report simply by listening to the bells. The farmer's favourite rooster was Obama, a very fine specimen he was, too. But on this particular morning Thomas noticed Obama's bell hadn't rung at all! Thomas went to investigate. The other roosters were chasing pullets, their bells-a-ringing. The pullets, hearing the roosters coming, would run for cover. But to Farmer Thomas's amazement, Obama had his bell in his beak, so it couldn't ring. He'd sneak up on a pullet, do his job and walk on to the next one.

Thomas was so proud of Obama, he entered him in the Worcester County Fair and he became an overnight sensation among the judges. The result... The judges not only awarded Obama the No Bell Piece Prize, but also they awarded him the Pulletsurprise!

There is an eary parallel to this story...

And now, breaking news...

Obama wins the Heisman Trophy... after watching a college football game!  Go figure.

Dalai Lama wins Nobel Peace Prize - 1989

I have to give the Eye of Polyphemus credit for pointing this out.  The 14th Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989.  He was awarded the prize for his persistent opposition to the use of violence in his many years of struggle for the liberation of Tibet.  I am not an expert on the plight of Tibet.  However, based on what I have read I would have to say that he was a deserving candidate for the prize and a deserving recipient.  Now flash forward 20 years.  Our current recipient of this estemed prize, the one who has done so much to forward the movement for peaceful alternatives to international conflicts, human rights issues, and global environmental problems, refuses to meet with the Dalai Lama during his visit to Washington, DC.  Apparently he is the first president to do this since the Dalai Lama began visiting DC in 1991.  In a cartoon sent to me via e-mail, Obama was poked at for agreeing to a meeting with Ahmadinajad, Chavez, Castro, and Kim Jong-Il, but refusing to meet with Fox News.  I think the message would have been more powerful if the Dalai Lama had been put in the place of Fox News.  Why would Obama refuse such a meeting?  It does make you wonder.

Friday, October 9, 2009

How to Destroy a Country - Course number 1101

If you wish to destroy a country, you must destroy its men.  The American man is under greater attack than at any time in our history and many have already been destroyed.  The man is tasked by God to be the protector and provider for the family.  He is the spiritual head and charged with teaching his children about God and what it means to be a man or a woman in our society.  He is the physically strong worker who lifts, carries, and builds.  The man is the enforcer with the children and protector of his wife.  If men fail to do what God has set before them to do - the family fails and then society fails.

Men are undermined in the following ways:

Their Fathers deserted them, so they do not know how to be men.
Their wives and girlfriends abort their children
Their physical labor (farming, building, manufacturing) are being destroyed at the highest rate in this economy.
They are depicted as buffoons and idiots on sitcoms and movies
The church has failed to engage them and instead has become a female dominated institution.
Their sexuality is under attack by the homosexual agenda.
Their maleness and masculine traits are discouraged and frowned upon.
They attend schools and jobs where they are expected to be still, be quiet, and behave.

The results are catastrophic - our men are without honor, conscience, and purpose.  They are users; selfish and needy.  They are criminals or lay abouts.  They are passive.  They are abusers of women and abandoners of children.  They are humans without purpose. 

It is so sad.

The Slobbering Love Affair Continues

My title references Bernie Goldberg's book, noting the media having a slobbering love affair with Obama, which resulted in securing his election. It obviously continues with the people over in Sweden who have awarded Obama the Nobel Peace Prize, which I have now lost all respect for, and will here after refer to as "The Nobel Appeasement Prize," for surely that is Obama's only contribution to date. I will be putting my name in for the next round of awards from Sweden, as I have contributed as much as Obama has to further world peace. I will be donating the money I receive back to the people on the voting committee in Stockholm, as it is apparent they are in need of some serious therapy.

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

Obama's Poem - Pop

Audacity of Logic - a look at an early poem, Pop, written by 19 year old Barack Obama about a Frank Marshall Davis man who his Grandfather thought would be a good influence on him. 

Sitting in his seat, a seat broad and broken
In, sprinkled with ashes
Pop switches channels, takes another
Shot of Seagrams, neat, and asks
What to do with me, a green young man
Who fails to consider the
Flim and flam of the world, since
Things have been easy for me;
I stare hard at his face, a stare
That deflects off his brow;
I’m sure he’s unaware of his
Dark, watery eyes, that
Glance in different directions,
And his slow, unwelcome twitches,
Fail to pass.I listen, nod,
Listen, open, till I cling to his pale,
Beige T-shirt, yelling,
Yelling in his ears, that hang
With heavy lobes, but he’s still telling
His joke, so I ask why
He’s so unhappy, to which he replies…
But I don’t care anymore, cause
He took too damn long, and from
Under my seat, I pull out the
Mirror I’ve been saving; I’m laughing,
Laughing loud, the blood rushing from his face
To mine, as he grows small,
A spot in my brain, something
That may be squeezed out, like a
Watermelon seed between
Two fingers.
Pop takes another shot, neat,
Points out the same amber
Stain on his shorts that I’ve got on mine, and
Makes me smell his smell, coming
From me; he switches channels, recites an old poem
He wrote before his mother died,
Stands, shouts, and asks
For a hug, as I shrink, my
Arms barely reaching around
His thick, oily neck, and his broad back; ’cause
I see my face, framed within
Pop’s black-framed glasses
And know he’s laughing too.

This is truly chilling on many levels and I find that my spirit cries for this boy. There are serious undertones of sexual abuse in this poem, especially the part about screaming, and his smell "coming" from the boy. This poem written about Frank Marshall Davis - an alcoholic, communist, pedophile. Davis was a good friend and drinking buddy of Stanley Dunham, who decided that he would be a good role model for his grandson, Barak Obama.

The more I read about Barak Obama's early life, the more disturbed I become at the emotional trauma that was inflicted upon him by those he should have been able to trust. I am no psychologist, but I have been researching a lot of web sites by people who are and the picture that is emerging is chilling. Regardless of your politics, we need to pray for this man in a serious fashion - if not the man, then this little boy.

Did Ayers write Dreams From My Father for Obama?

Very interesting post at American Thinker. Follow the link. Reportedly Anne Leary of Back Yard Conservative ran in to Bill Ayers at Reagan National Airport in DC last week. She discussed the authorship of Barrack Obama's book "Dreams From my Father" with him. According to Anne Leary, Bill Ayers the Weather Underground co-founder admitted to writing this book for Mr. Obama. Reportedly at the urging of Michelle Obama.

A lot of people use ghost writers in this manner, and I'm not taking issue with that right now. But if this is true, then what about all of those statements that Barrack Obama made stating he had only a casual acquaintance with this admitted Leftist Terrorist? And please tell me, where were the hard hitting journalists pre-election concerning this issue?

Sure seems like this is starting to unravel for the President. Hold on, it's getting interesting...

Monday, October 5, 2009

Interesting Point by George Will

I don't always agree with George Will, but he makes a very interesting point on the Obama's quest to bring the Olympics to Chicago. His point was that the Obama's made their appeal for the olympics all about themselves, rather than about the great city of Chicago. Nothing much to add, but interesting nonetheless.

For Hire!

I will be brief.  I will not pontificate on the politics and economics, and all the other issues we are facing in our country and world.   I will not dwell on the recession.  I will not try to point out differences between liberal and conservative ideas and ideals.  I heard a joke that started "A recession is when your neighbor is unemployed, a depression is when you are unemployeed, and a recovery is when...".  Well, Audacity of Logic readers, we have now entered into a depression.  Forget what you read, this depression is full blown.  As of Friday I offically became a casualty of the construction industry.  Grieve not, I have faith in myself and my God to see me through this and expect to look back on this as being the greatest opportunity in my life.  I have chosen to go it alone.  To become a small business.  To work for myself.  So with an abundance of other things to worry about in my life at present, I may not be as regular on the Audacity blog.  I hope my compatriots will rise to the occasion and fill my place so that there will always be something new to read and ponder when you visit.  And when the one who promised hope finally tells AT&T to run a DSL line out to my "country estate", I plan to be back to my ways.  Until then I will post when I can and when I am up late enough for the phone lines to carry my 0's and 1's at a more tolerable speed.  To those who may know me personally, I'll be donning a tool belt and looking for work if you hear of anything.


Friday, October 2, 2009

Capitilism is EVIL!

Capitalism: A Love Story (2009)

That great thinker of the American Left, Michael Moore, has a new movie hitting the theaters today. The premise seems to be that Capitalism is evil... not really surprisingly, the film has garnered mostly positive critical reviews. OK, fair enough from the same American Sub-culture that seem to generally think it was OK for Roman Polanski to drug and rape a 13 yr old girl...

If capitalism is such an evil thing, then Michael Moore and the rest of these people ought to put their money where their mouths are. IF capitalism is so bad, why then should I have to pay money to go and see the film. Maybe what we should do is go and get a bootleg copy of this theatrical masterpiece, copy it to thousands of DVD's and hand the bootleg copies out in front of every theater showing the film around the country.

Surely Mr. Moore and company would applaud this effort. Or, do you think they would protest, and prosecute anyone involved in the bootleg plan for interfering in Hollywood's right to profit in a capitalist society? Methinks this is another case of Liberal hypocrisy rearing it's ugly head. I can tell you that I'm not surprised, and I defend the right of these people to produce a movie with this message. But if the American people, who are according to the movie so bad off financially, pay their hard earned money to watch this, then they get what they deserve.

Yet more (Moore) Lemmings following another siren song off of the cliff...

Our Flag

So I come into work this morning and our American Flag and state flag are draped over a piece of equipment in the yard.  Strange.  I come inside and our office manager is in a rage.  Her son is in the Army awaiting deployment to Afghanistan.  She is a very patriotic person and this really has her bothered.  We find out the business in front of ours had their flags stolen a few weeks ago.  Now, stealing at least leaves the possibility that someone took the flags for their own use.  It could have been around the time of 9/11, I'm not sure.  But ours were actually somewhat neatly draped over the boom of our crane truck.  Additionally the lanyard was tied up in a manner that you had to get an 8' ladder to get the thing untied in order to put the flags back up.  Whoever did this wanted to make it difficult to raise them again.  Very odd way to start your morning.  And it gets someone like me thinking.

Primarily who and why?  Young kids?  Just a prank?  Some anti-American sentiment involved?  Some message trying to be sent?  We'll never know.  But it does raise some more questions.
As a Boy Scout and a graduate of a military school, I have spent most of my life with a strong understanding of how our flag is to be honored.  I cringe if I see one touch the ground during a raising or lowering ceremony.  There is only one way to fold a flag, there is only one way to dispose of a flag.  There is proper etiquette for our flag.  So how do you dispose of a flag.  It should be disposed of in a dignified manner, preferably by burning.  BY BURNING!  Yes, there is a dignified way to dispose of a flag by burning it.  Cerimoniuosly.  Not disrespectfully.  Regardless of how you try to explain the who, what, and why someone did what they did last night, it was still disrespectful to our flag.

The sight of Old Glory still gives me goose bumps at times.  It is a powerful symbol to me, and a strong reminder of the sacrifices that so many have made so that I can live a life of freedom.  I am free to make my own choices and live with the rewards, or deal with the consequences.  It is a symbol to others from other nations who have come to this great nation so that they can live in a free society.  Unfortunately, to some people it is a symbol of oppression, hatred, even evil.  This bothers me.  It bothers me deeply.

Maybe it was just some kids.  Maybe they really weren't doing anything other than a childish prank.  Maybe is was really all innocent fun.  But, there in lies another problem with our me-me society.  We are getting out of line in certain areas.  How many people, especially young people, are taught flag etiquette?  How many people, especially young people, have the kind of reverence for our flag that I do?  Do they see it and know all that it stands for?  Do they see all the sacrifice?  Or do they see it and know exactly what it means to some people and choose to disrespect the flag and our countrymen in such a way?

Our country, the United States of America, is great.  We are the greatest nation on this planet.  We are not perfect, but we are great.  Man is imperfect.  Man is sinful.  Man will make mistakes.  And any nation that is governed by man will be imperfect, sinful, and make mistakes.  But we are still great.  Does that mean everyone should agree with us or like us.  No, not necessarily.  We are free to have our own opinions, and our great nation and our great Constitution may not be for everyone.  To each his own.  But, again, to each his own.

There are many things I do not agree with and do not like.  I do not like certain restaurants.  I don't like certain stores.  I don't like smoky bars.  I don't like what I see going on in politics, and Washington, DC.  I don't like certain cars, clothes, foods, etc.  I don't even like to be in the company of certain people.  I have that freedom.  And I also have the freedom to choose.  But I ramble this way for a reason.  If I didn't like my country to the point where I would disrespect the flag of this great nation, why would I not choose to live in whatever other "great" nation I had such apparent reverence for.  I am free to move to any other country that would have me.  There are no chains binding me to America.  And there are many countries waiting with open arms.

Again, our nation and our Constitution are great.  We have a means by which our voices can be heard and changes can be made.  We are a diverse nation and there will always be multiple sides to every story.  There will always be winners and losers.  There will always be disagreement.  But when dissent bubbles and boils into a true dislike for our great nation, to the point of disrespecting our flag, it is time to move on.  Maybe it was some misguided kids that just need an old fashioned butt whippin' and some education.  But if it was some anti-American gesture, whoever you are you are in the minority.  There are some things that will never change.

Many Americans before me have fought and died to keep this flag flying.  I will too.  Go somewhere else and leave my flag alone!

Thursday, October 1, 2009

A Whole Lotta Nuthin'

I see we really got a lot out of sitting down and talking with Iran about their nukes; we got them to agree to talk with us again, and everyone seems to be overjoyed at this. My reaction is a little different. It would be something on the order of, "WTF?!?" Does anyone really think they are hiding a second nuke facility in the mountains because they plan to use if for peaceful purposes??? I would go with my good friend Jimmy G. and his plan. Tell them, "You have till tomorrow to show us your nuke facilities. If you don't, the day after we make your installations parking lots. That's the best deal you're gonna get; take it or leave it."

Done Deal

Well... it's official. The most powerful person in the world flies to Copenhagen today to lobby on behalf of the city of Chicago, in order to bring the 2016 Summer Olympic games to the Windy City.
You know... I would have thought Opra had better things to do with her time...

Free Hit Counter

Copyright © 2009 - 2012 The Audacity of Logic