DISCLAIMER: (Please read before proceeding)

Gentle Reader:



I realize my opinions and the wording used to express them may cause tender souls some distress. Therefore, in the spirit of brotherly concern for my fellow man, I advise anyone who takes offense at any portion of this blog to go piss up a rope.



About Me

My Photo
The title of this blog refers to the routine evolution of pressurizing & emptying to sea a human waste tank of an American submarine built prior to the mid 70's. If you don't do it right you wind up covered with excrement. The same can be said for blogging at times. Been there, done that, got the tee shirt. I'm a retired Senior Chief A-ganger from the US Submarine Service. Revert back in the Catholic Church. Recovering alcoholic. Living in Texas. 59 years old, happily married with three children, all eight years of age or under. Fully "retired", the wife works while I take care of the kids and home.

Playlist


Get a playlist! Standalone player Get Ringtones

Monday, June 29, 2009

An award for me?

I'm flattered. Really.


Okay, time to get into the rules of the thing.

1) Say "Thanks!" to the presenter of the award and provide a link to their blog.

Consider it done to Paul at Thoughts of A Regular Guy and Joe of Verbum Veritatis.

2) Share 10 honest things about myself.

Not much to share really, I'm fairly simple and straightforward.

a. I love the writings of Mark Twain.

b. I left the Church back in my teens. One of the writers who led me back was Hans Kung, go figure.

c. "Guy" movies that end with the hero dead or defeated are my favorite. A few examples would be "Das Boot", "Moby Dick" (Gregory Peck version), and "The Culpepper Cattle Company". I tell the War Department the story is in real men making a stand for what they believe in. She tells me "real men" are idiots! We agree to disagree on this.

d. I believe the Pope does his job best when he annoys the snot out of everyone.

e. Being in the military was really the only work enviornment I fit into. Since getting out into the civilian community, the majority of formal jobs I've held ended with my quitting or being fired. I forget who said it, but he noted submarine sailors were misfits who work well together. Kinda makes sense.

f. I left the Navy back in January of '93. Many folks told me I'd regret it someday. I'm still waiting. IMHO it was definetly time to go!

g. I was required to take a computer familiarization course when I first went to a community college back in '94. The instructor had low expectations of me, maybe because my first question was, "How in hell do I turn this thing on?". I went on to score a 3.9 on a 4.0 scale.

h. My brother and I constantly battled as children. One of my biggest successes in our ongoing war was when I convinced him he'd been adopted. My parents were not impressed.

i. That same brother died unexpectedly 25 years ago. Still miss him.

j. I don't like to argue but when I do there's no backup in me. The War Department has said thats an asset and a liability. Whatever.

3) Present this award to 7 others whose blogs I find brilliant in content and/or design, or those who have encouraged me.

Let's see, that would be;







Sebelius: Lying or just stupid...

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- President Barack Obama's health secretary claimed in a weekend interview that a government health care plan wouldn't include rationing. That a governmental health care plan could lead to euthanasia and assisted suicide is one of the top concerns of pro-life advocates.

Kathleen Sebelius, the pro-abortion former Kansas governor who now heads the Health and Human Services Department, made the claims on Fox News Sunday.

“I don't think there’s anything about the public option that would ration care," she said. (She is either lying or incredibly stupid. If the government has enough money for ten appendectomies and eleven people need one just what in Hell do you think will happen? Check out the EU if you don't believe it. I've a cousin who lives in Ireland, he needed a routine procedure performed just like his neighbor "Paddy" across the street. Paddy went via the government and waited six months, my cousin had his own insurance and waited two weeks.)

She deflected concerns about the Congressional plans by saying that health care is already rationed, though the three plans in Congress could make matters worse.

"Unfortunately care is being rationed each and everyday right now. Often private insurance companies stand between a patient and a doctor deciding what treatment can be provided,” she told Fox News. “We also have a situation where a lot of people are told that they can't have insurance because they have a preexisting condition.” (The old stereotype about using the emergency room is true. I know from dating a welfare queen twenty years ago, that was how she got by. Didn't feel she needed a job, she was a lifetime student. All on the taxpayer's dime.)

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, on the same Fox program, rebutted Sebelius' remarks and focused on the cost of the program in terms of how it could ration care.

“What they really have in mind, Bret, is to create a government-run plan after which there won't be any private insurance companies,” he said.

“When you get to the question of paying for it, it appears as if they want to pay for it on the backs of seniors through Medicare cuts and raising taxes. (Wait for the big push for euthanasia, it's coming.) All of this in an effort to have a massive takeover of [16 percent] of our economy -- it strikes us that a better way to go is to deal with the equalization in the tax code," he said.

Members of the Senate have already dealt with the rationing issue and heightened the concerns for pro-life advocates.

The Senate HELP Committee, last week, defeated a pro-life amendment that would help stop the rationing of health care in the Kennedy restructuring bill. The amendment concerned the section on comparative effectiveness research, which pro-life advocates say prompt euthanasia concerns.

Critics say the section would allow the government to create an arbitrary means to determining when medical treatments are allowed or could receive government funding.

Sen. Mike Enzi, a Wyoming Republican, sponsored a pair of amendments to curb the problem but they were defeated during the HELP Committee markup of the Kennedy bill by a party-line vote.

"President Obama promised that under his health reform proposal, every American who had coverage that they liked could keep it. This bill fails to deliver on that promise," Enzi said.

Enzi said the provisions in the bill "provide the government with an unprecedented role in the doctor-patient relationship. Government bureaucracy will end up dictating the treatment that we can and cannot have, and the result will be a delay and a denial of health care services." (Anyone who ever dealt with the old CHAMPUS system of the military knows what he's talking about. A four-star flaming nightmare.)

Bottom line, this woman saying, "Trust me!"

My fat butt!

B.O. and the topic of human rights...

Out of sheer necessity this lady has a very good grasp of politics in South America. So when she gives a quick sketch of what's going on I tend to trust her more than any of the talking heads. Here it is; http://jungle-hut.blogspot.com/2009/06/understanding-latin-american-politics.html

Our present Chief Executive is now coming down foursquare against the Hondurans. Even without the primer on South American politics I reflexively view anything Chavez & Castro condemn as good. Those two aren't exactly at the head of the "freedom and equality parade'.

But B.O. doesn't think so, he is right in line with those two thugs. This is after he waffled on the topic of the Iranian elections and after his Secretary of State went to China and assured the leaders there the USA wouldn't be asking any embarrassing questions about human rights.

Somebody tell me again how this guy is an improvement over G.W. Bush? I must be missing it.

American Clean Energy & Security Act and a tie-in with the culture of death?

I've been under the weather lately in addition to being naturally a wee bit slow on the uptake. So when I came across a quote regarding the American Clean Energy and Security Act which stated it would result in green house gas emissions being reduced over 15 % by 2020 and over 75% by 2050, a thought that should have arisen didn't. Specifically, the thought is "How do they accomplish that one if the population keeps increasing as it has?"

I've recently spent more time on prolife issues, so the old adage of, "to a hammer every problem is a nail." applies. This explains my suspicion that we'll see the prochoice crowd ramping up their endorsement of the culture of death.

Just to be certain I wasn't hallucinating I did a Google search. Took a bit, I'm still fairly computer stupid. But I did find several sites stating emission reductions on the order I'd seen. Here's one; http://www.wri.org/publication/usclimatetargets

The pertinent portion was cut/pasted;
"When all complementary requirements of the ACESA are considered in addition to the caps, GHG emissions would be reduced 28 percent relative to 2005 levels by 2020 and 75 percent relative to 2005 levels by 2050.

When additional potential emission reductions are considered, the ACESA could achieve maximum reductions of up to 33 percent relative to 2005 levels by 2020 and up to 81 percent relative to 2005 levels by 2050. The actual amount of reductions will depend on the quantity of international offsets used for compliance."


So how are these goals achieved without really pushing, and I do mean REALLY PUSHING for zero population growth via increased accesability & endoresement of abortion and euthanasia?

I don't believe there's any active conspiracy, just a mindset that takes for granted the pro death crowd is right, the entire "debate" is over, and it's time to start saving Gaia from those nasty humans.

Please remember, even Hitler had the best interests of his country in mind when he implemented the "Final Solution".

R.I.P.

The following military personnel were killed in action in Iraq or Afghanistan during the period of June 14-21. Please spare a moment to pray for them and their families

Staff Sgt. Edmond L. Lo, 23, NH
Lt. Paul Mervis, 27, England
Pvt. Robert McLaren, 20, Scotland
Ch Wrnt Ofcr 2 Ricky L. Richardson Jr., 33, MO
Spc. Eduardo S. Silva, 25, CA
Pvt. Alexandre Péloquin, 20, Canada

May the souls of the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace. Amen.

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Humor break

Found at The People's Cube;


"Waddaya mean kids don't do it like rabbits?"

Found this via ProLife Blogs;

ACLU Bullies Schools Teaching Abstinence

A California school district is being bullied by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) for teaching abstinence education.

The ACLU Chapter of Northern California has written a letter to each of the 40 schools in the Sonoma County School District asking for confirmation that they will stop teaching Free to Be, an abstinence-based sex-ed curriculum. The ACLU claims the curriculum violates the California Education Code by emphasizing abstinence instead condoms.

Valerie Huber, president of the National Abstinence Education Association, said the ACLU is just going by its playbook.

"This is an example of a tactic that the ACLU typically uses — trying to win their suits by out-of-court intimidation rather than actual legal standing," she said. "There's nothing, to our understanding, of California law that prohibits abstinence education as a supplement to the health curricula."

Reports indicate the group has even sent e-mails to school officials with their demands. It's a move Candi Cushman, education analyst for Focus on the Family Action, finds troubling.

"The arrogance of the ACLU in trying to micromanage what local school districts are doing is appalling," she said. "It's outrageous and local taxpayers shouldn't put up with an outside advocacy group trying to control their schools."

I don't get it. Abstinence doesn't necessarily have a religious connotation (which is normally the hair going up the butt of the ACLU). Abstinence could be practiced with the idea of "waiting for the right one", it could also be seen as cutting down on chances of catching an STD. Either one of those mindsets should be commended, yet is seems if the schools don't act as if the kids are copulating in every nook & cranny they must be derelict in their performance. I wish some liberals would read this blog on occasion so they might just answer that one for me.

If they could.

Prolifers don't need no stinking protection...

Hey, remember how the Justice Department swung into action to protect abortionists throughout the land after George Tiller was shot by a nutcase? Remember the instructions that went to the FBI, Federal Marshals, etc. regarding possible trouble? Well it seems the desire for peace and safety only covers one side of the abortion debate;

Wichita, KS (LifeNews.com) -- A pro-life group is asking the Justice Department to review several death threats it has received in the wake of the shooting of late-term abortion practitioner George Tiller. However, Operation Rescue officials say the Obama administration has not responded.

The pro-life group has released the copies of audio recordings of calls it has received from abortion advocates who threatened the pro-life organization after Tiller's death.

One caller says it's "time to start killing Bible-thumping morons" while another says "I hope somebody comes and kills you all" and a third caller says "One of you is going to die."

"Would you want some protection after receiving these kinds of threats?" asked Operation Rescue president Troy Newman. "Too bad. The current government isn't interested in protecting your life... unless you happen to be pro-abortion."

In an email to LifeNews.com, Newman says there is a dichotomy in how the Obama administration has responded -- with Attorney General Eric Holder offering protection to abortion centers and staffers but pledging no support for pro-life groups that feared retaliation.

"Apparently, the Obama administration's Justice Department is playing favorites when it comes to protecting the lives of Americans," Newman says. "If you promote or provide abortions, Attorney General Eric Holder will dispatch U.S. Marshals to protect you when threatened. But if you're not one of those privileged minority... you're out of luck. Even if you receive scores of death threats."

"We expected that Barack Obama would not be a friend to life; but we didn't expect the favoritism to be so blatant and so callous," he added.

Other pro-life advocate shave also received death threats in the aftermath of the Tiller shooting.

Staff at the Wichita office of Kansans for Life received calls from abortion advocates that were threatening.

"This person was out of control, emotionally, you could just tell," Mary Wilkinson said of one call.

"I hope you're happy," the person said. "You've killed him. Now I hope somebody comes and kills you all."

At the office of the Kansas Coalition for Life, one person left a text message a few hours after the shooting: "One of you is going to die for what you did to Tiller."

Instead of responding to the threats, Newman says he worries the Obama administration and abortion advocates will use the Tiller killing for political gain.

"To be honest, I'm very concerned for the safety of my family and friends who are making a stand for life every day. But I'm also very concerned that the Obama administration and other Democrats may try to capitalize on the murder of Tiller to defuse the abortion issue in upcoming Supreme Court confirmation hearings," he says.

"Like so many other pro-life leaders, I have condemned the killing of Tiller. But I'm also concerned that pro-abortion activists are going to use this incident to brand the entire pro-life movement as 'extremist,'" he said.

Now lest anyone think there actually isn't any animosity being directed towards prolifers, here's another article, found via Prolife Blogs;

Wichita, KS – Friday afternoon a man on a bicycle attacked Operation Rescue’s national headquarters in Wichita, Kansas, and attempted to disable the security system. There were four people working in the office at the time.

Operation Rescue President Troy Newman heard noise outside his office and observed the assailant through the security cameras attempting to gain access to the roof. Newman rushed outside and confronted the man, who then tried to punch Newman. When that failed, he flung his bicycle at Newman then fled the scene.

One security camera was stolen causing an estimated $1,000 in damage. No one was hurt in the fracas.

Police were called and a report was filed, but the suspect is still at large.

Ironically, at the time of the attack Newman was on the telephone giving an interview to a reporter from the Washington Times about the increase in threats against Operation Rescue staff members in the wake of the murder of late-term abortionist George Tiller.

“In light of the recent events, the targeting of our security system is troubling. We can’t help but think that if this attack happened to an abortion clinic, there would be federal marshals patrolling and investigating. The police seemed apathetic. It’s almost as if pro-lifers are second-class citizens,” said Newman.

“We are just thankful that no one was injured and that the attacker was interrupted before he could do more damage. We will be increasing our security precautions as a result of this incident. We have a very dedicated staff, and no amount of intimidation will deter us from our work.”

What the hell, everyone knows prolifers are terrorists in the making. Just look to the recent memo from the Department of Homeland Security that stated that. Sorry folks, having it retracted as speedily as it was does nothing to convince me that Department doesn't hold that particular mindset. By extension I'd bet the entire current Administration in Foggy Bottom has the same view.

School board: parents have no need to know...

Sacramento, Calif., Jun 27, 2009 / 08:04 am (CNA).- The Modesto City School Board on Monday voted to allow junior high and high school students to leave campus during the school day for “confidential medical services,” such as abortions, without the consent or knowledge of their parents. (Why are parents being marginalized so much in our current society? I know, dumb question but I had to ask.)

The school board adopted the new policy in a preliminary vote of 4-3, the California Catholic Daily says. The board members will take another vote on the issue on July 13. (And the link for the email addresses of board members is right here; http://schools.monet.k12.ca.us/Public/Board/default.aspx )

Karen England, executive director of the pro-family lobbying group Capitol Resource Institute, attended the meeting and reported that four people testified in favor of “excluding parents.” Three were from Planned Parenthood while one was described as an “activist.” ("Activist"? WTF kind of description is THAT?? I don't hear "parent" necessarily being included in that job title.)

“Every single additional testimony asked the board to include parents,” England said in a statement following the meeting. “Modesto parents and pastors left the meeting fired up. They are ready to tell their communities what is going on -- so that more families can get involved, because people are still unaware.” (In a previous post the good Rev. Gregori suggested tarring and feathering school board members. I'm starting to question his restraint.)

England encouraged opponents of the decision to contact school board members before the July 13 vote and to attend its next meeting.

School district attorney Roman Munoz said the new policy updates district regulations to conform to a provision of the state Education Code which took effect in 1986.

The relevant section of the Education Code says the governing board of each school district in each academic year should notify pupils in grades 7 to 12 and their parents and guardians that school authorities may “excuse any pupil from the school for the purpose of obtaining confidential medical services without the consent of the pupil's parent or guardian.” (How does an abortion qualify as something so confidential a parent shouldn't know their child is getting one?)

England said the law “provides permission” for implementing confidential medical release but “certainly does not impose a mandate.”

“There are over 900 public school districts in California and many do not offer their students confidential medical release. Modesto's current policy is parent-friendly,” she added. “Unfortunately, Modesto has sided with Planned Parenthood for now, against parents.”

Planned Parenthood Mar Monte Vice President Deborah Oritz told the Sacramento Bee that the law on confidential medical services covers more than sexual or reproduction issues.

The Sacramento Bee said that medical services can include pregnancy testing, contraception, abortion, sexually transmitted disease testing and treatment, counseling and treatment for rape, drug abuse, mental health and other services. (DUH!! All of these are things a parent should be aware of! Possible pregnancy? I'd want to know so I can start planning how to raise my grandkids! Contraception? I'd REALLY want to know why my teenage daughter wants THAT! STD testing/treatment? I'd want to know how my son/daughter caught the sucker, probably not from a toilet seat! Rape? You can bet I want to know all about that one! Drug abuse? Ditto. Mental health? Maybe I'd want to know so I can start hiding the guns a little better. Bottom line, parents need to know about these things for the welfare of the child.)

The issue of schools permitting students to seek confidential medical services is being considered by several other California school districts.

On March 12 the Vista Board of Education in northern San Diego County unanimously adopted a policy requiring students to have parental consent before leaving campus during the school day for medical services, the California Catholic Daily reports. (Bravo.)

The Fairfield-Suisun Board of Education, which presently requires parental or guardian consent for a student to leave campus for any reason, is scheduled to consider the matter on July 25.

For those who feel an abortion is "just another procedure" I'd recommend checking this site out; http://realchoice.blogspot.com/. If my kid needs permission to get a tattoo they damned well should need my consent for something that might end their life!

It seems these nitwits are deadset against any kind of parental involvement in education. Here's a link to a previous new byte involving the same Board of Miseducation; http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=17899 I normally take anything from World Net Daily with a grain of salt, this appears to be the real deal however.



Friday, June 26, 2009

Obituary of a hero...

Michael "the pervert" Jackson died yesterday. God rest his demented soul, but I'm more impressed by this obituary (found via Catholic Military.org);

Father Vakoc, a Minnesota Army chaplain who was seriously injured in Iraq in 2004, died June 20. No cause of death was given. Family and friends were with him when he died, according to his CaringBridge Web site.

Visitation is from 4 to 8 p.m. Thursday, June 25, at Gearty-Delmore Funeral Chapel, 15800 37th Ave. N., in Plymouth. A funeral Mass will be celebrated at 10 a.m. Friday, June 26, at the Cathedral of St Paul. Interment will be at Fort Snelling National Cemetery, 7601 34th Ave South, Minneapolis.

Father Vakoc, 49, had been living at the St. Therese of New Hope nursing facility in New Hope. He lost an eye and sustained brain damage when a roadside bomb exploded near his Humvee on May 29, 2004, as he was returning to his barracks after celebrating Mass for U.S. soldiers.

In recent years, Father Vakoc (pronounced VAH-kitch) had been showing signs of physical and cognitive improvement.

A June 11 entry on Father Vakoc's CaringBridge site noted that he participated with family and friends in a special Mass June 10 celebrating the 17th anniversary of his ordination, five years of post-accident life and appreciation for all those who were contributing to his care.

‘A man of peace'

"All of us in this Catholic archdiocese are grieving with the family of Father Vakoc," Archbishop John Nienstedt said in a statement. "We are joined in that grieving, to be sure, by the men and woman whom he served as chaplain in Iraq and those who witnessed his extraordinary courage and faith at Walter Reed Hospital and here at our Veterans' Hospital."

Calling Father Vakoc "a man of peace," Archbishop Nienstedt said "he chose to endure the horror of war in order to bring the peace of Christ to America's fighting men and women. He has been an inspiration to us all and we will miss him.

"We ask everyone to remember him in prayer," he added.

Praying with soldiers

Father Vakoc was born Henry Timothy Vakoc Jan. 8, 1960, and attended Our Lady of the Lake in Mound. He graduated from Benilde-St. Margaret's School in St. Louis Park in 1978 and then attended St. Cloud State University. Prior to entering seminary, he worked with college students and university officials as the regional president of Tau Kappa Epsilon international fraternity. He was an avid traveler.

After his ordination in 1992, he served as an associate pastor at St. Charles Borromeo in St. Anthony and St. John Neumann in Eagan from 1993 to 1996 before joining the Army.

His military service took him to Germany, Bosnia and Korea. He was stationed at Fort Lewis, Wash., when he was called up for active duty in Iraq in 2003. He was the first Army chaplain to be seriously injured in Iraq.

According to a National Catholic Register story printed just a month before his own accident, Father Vakoc flew to a combat surgical hospital to be with two soldiers who had just been injured in a roadside bombing in which two others had been killed. One died before he reached the hospital.

He prayed for the soldiers who died and with the injured soldier, and then prayed with the other soldiers in the convoy who were not injured, but "in the state of shock."

Father Vakoc's ministry - which earned him the rank "major" - also included presiding at a memorial service for a young man killed in a roadside explosion, who just days before had talked about faith with Father Vakoc and read at Mass.

"The bottom line in helping these soldiers through the grieving process is to be present to them and walk with them," Father Vakoc told the Register in an e-mail. "I prayed with the soldiers who died. I brought the sacraments of the church and the light and love of Christ into the darkness of the situations."

‘Intentional presence'

Father Vakoc called his ministry one of "intentional presence," and it included counseling soldiers, ministering to Catholics and soldiers of all faiths, escorting the bodies of fallen soldiers, speaking with soldiers' family members and keeping up morale.

"I live with the soldiers, work with them, eat with them, care for them, listen to them, counsel them," Father Vakoc told the Register. "The soldiers know if you are real and genuinely care or not. The soldiers see me out there with them and that makes a difference."

The day Father Vakoc was injured in Mosul, Iraq, the two soldiers traveling with him were not harmed and administered first aid to him, Jeff Vakoc told The Catholic Spirit in June 2004.

"They couldn't wait for the medics or they would have lost him, so they drove him back on two flat tires to the base, and he was flown to Baghdad from there." Father Vakoc underwent surgery to relieve brain swelling at a U.S. Army hospital in Landstuhl, Germany, before being flown to Washington, D.C. He eventually went into the care of the Veterans' Hospital and St. Therese of New Hope nursing facility.

‘A reason he's alive'

The date of his injuries was also the 12th anniversary of his priesthood. Just days after Father Vakoc was injured, Jeff told The Catholic Spirit that he felt God put his brother in Iraq, and he was doing what he was supposed to do there.

"There's got to be a reason he's alive," he said. "I've got to believe there's a purpose." He still believes that, he told The Catholic Spirit June 22.

"He just plain old inspired a lot of people towards the Lord," he said. "There are a lot of people who were very needy spiritually, and just his example and fortitude and strength really played on that for a lot of people and helped them along."

Jeff's own faith grew during the five years after his brother's injury, he said. "I think it has brought me closer to the Lord. I've seen things that are miracles - little things, but I think that's how miracles come. It's changed the entire family."

It is a tremendous feeling to know people are praying for him and his family, Jeff said. "We're going to miss him. He was a part of our lives," he said.

Jeff visited his brother every week as his guardian and conservator, he said. Members of the Franciscan Brothers of Peace also visited and prayed regularly with Father Vakoc, who followed along in a prayer book and mouthed the words.

The Franciscan Brothers of Peace were friends with Father Vakoc's sister, Anita Brand, at the time of his injury, said Brother Paul O'Donnell. Because of his pro-life work, Brother Paul consulted on Father Vakoc's medical care shortly after the accident. After his condition stabilized, the brothers continued to visit him regularly to pray and help with exercises.

Those who knew Father Vakoc before his accident described him as having a sense of humor and an inclination to reach out to others. Those qualities were still evident after his injuries, Brother Paul said, describing how he would joke with the brothers.

Along with his family, the brothers advocated on Father Vakoc's behalf to continue to receive physical therapy, Brother Paul said.

"His greatest gift is that he accepted the cross that God gave him, and for any one of us, it would be a tremendous hardship, but he accepted it," he said. "He obviously had a strong, strong will to live."

Father Vakoc taught others about the value and sacredness of life, Brother Paul added. "We can learn from Father Tim to embrace the crosses that come our way," he said. "They may not be the end of our life - they may be a new beginning."

Members of Franciscan Brothers of Peace spent time with Father Vakoc just a few days before his death, and three of them were present at his bedside when he died.

A changed ministry

The brothers feel as if they have lost a very close friend, Brother Paul said. He recalled Father Vakoc placing his hand on the brothers' heads and blessing them. They asked him to pray for them, too.

"When people saw him, they became grateful for their own lives, no matter what they were experiencing," he said. "His ministry didn't end at the time of his injury; it just changed."

Father Vakoc received the Purple Heart and Bronze Star. He also received the 2007 Distinguished Alumnus Award from St. Paul Seminary School of Divinity and the Combat Action Badge in 2007, which is awarded to soldiers actively engaged in a hostile action by the enemy in a combat zone or imminent danger area.

Jeff is very proud of his brother, he said. "We all wished he had been around more, but he was doing what he considered his calling," he said.

While stationed in Bosnia, Father Vakoc told his sister, "The safest place for me to be is in the center of God's will, and if that is in the line of fire, that is where I will be."

We need more heroes like this.


UPDATE: A picture of his casket being carried into the cathedral;


A cruise I'd like to take...

The War Department has a dream of taking a cruise someday. I've let her know my days at sea are long over. This might qualify as an exception to that rule...

(From ananova.com) Luxury ocean liners in Russia are offering pirate hunting cruises aboard armed private yachts off the Somali coast.

Wealthy punters pay £3,500 per day to patrol the most dangerous waters in the world hoping to be attacked by raiders.

When attacked, they retaliate with grenade launchers, machine guns and rocket launchers, reports Austrian business paper Wirtschaftsblatt.

Passengers, who can pay an extra £5 a day for an AK-47 machine gun and £7 for 100 rounds of ammo, are also protected by a squad of ex special forces troops.

The yachts travel from Djibouti in Somalia to Mombasa in Kenya.

The ships deliberately cruise close to the coast at a speed of just five nautical miles in an attempt to attract the interest of pirates.

"They are worse than the pirates," said Russian yachtsman Vladimir Mironov. "At least the pirates have the decency to take hostages, these people are just paying to commit murder," he continued.

Found the story via Jihad Watch. It's probably an indication of a sinful nature but my first response is, "Do they give discounts?"

In case it isn't apparent, I've no sympathy for pirates. If you're gonna play, be prepared to pay.

Watch out for those flying pigs!!

Well, I'll be damned;

Story By DANIELA ALTIMARI

The Hartford Courant

5:02 PM EDT, June 25, 2009


Saying it is a matter of free speech, the ACLU has filed a brief in support of the Diocese of Bridgeport's battle against a state agency seeking to require the church to register as a lobbyist.

"The free exchange of ideas are at stake here,'' said Andrew Schneider, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut. "The application of this lobbying law to public gatherings such as the church's rally have the effect of chilling free speech.''

The diocese filed a lawsuit in federal court last month, seeking an injunction against an attempt by the Office of State Ethics to require the church to register as a lobbyist.

In March, more than 4,000 Catholics descended on the Capitol to protest Bill 1098, which proposed having lay councils of seven to 13 people oversee the finances of local parishes, relegating Catholic pastors and bishops to an advisory role.

Church officials were sharply critical of the bill and organized the rally and, on their website, asked parishioners to contact their local legislators to protest the plan. The bill was eventually withdrawn amid questions about its constitutionality.

But the issue did not end there. About a month later, church officials received a letter from the Office of State Ethics informing them that they were the "subject of an ... evaluation" to determine whether the diocese had violated state statutes by failing to register as a lobbyist before the rally.

Schneider said such a requirement undermines the church's First Amendment rights.

Registering as a lobbyist, he noted, is more intrusive than merely filing out a form. "It requires you to be subject to certain financial disclosures, to submit to audits of expenditures,'' he said. The diocese issued a statement welcoming the ACLU's brief. "

"The ACLU's decision to join with the Diocese in this case demonstrates that this is a matter of fundamental civil liberties that threatens the Constitutional rights of all citizens," says The Most Rev. William E. Lori, Bishop of Bridgeport.

"Holding a protest rally on the steps of the State Capitol and posting information on our diocesan website are not lobbying but an expression of our First Amendment rights of free speech. We welcome the support of the Nation's leading civil liberties organization, and look forward to making our case against the misguided actions of the Office of State Ethics."

Old folks too expensive to treat?

Found this over at Newsbusters, all emphases and comments are my own.

Obama Says We Shouldn't Treat Old Folks to Save Money And the Media Goes Deaf
By Warner Todd Huston


Created 2009-06-26 01:19

I am wondering when the euthanasia folks are going to start touting this one? I mean, it sure seemed to me as if the most caring, most civil, most intelligent president evah just said that healthcare could be cheaper if we don't give old folks and the infirm the full measure of care they now get. It appeared that Obama said we should just let them die or suffer because they aren't worth the effort. Imagine if Bush had said something like this? The left wouldn't have hesitated to call him any manner of names. (They'd have been on him like white on rice.) Oddly, though, the Old Media have not had so much as a raised eyebrow over his statements on Wednesday.

Obama said during the ABC Special on Wednesday night that a way to save healthcare costs is to abandon the sort of care that "evidence shows is not necessarily going to improve" the patient's health. He went on to say that he had personal familiarity with such a situation when his grandmother broke her hip after she was diagnosed with terminal cancer. (Did she get her hip replaced? That question doesn't seem to be answered, my guess would be "Granny's" wishes were honored and cost didn't enter the picture. Remember, this is the President that eats $100 dollar a pound steak with his family.)

Obama offered a question on the efficacy of further care for his grandmother saying, "and the question was, does she get hip replacement surgery, even though she was fragile enough they were not sure how long she would last?"

But who is it that will present the "evidence" that will "show" that further care is futile? Are we to believe that Obama expects individual doctors will make that decision in his bold new government controlled healthcare future? If he is trying to make that claim it is a flat out untruth and he knows it.

Does your homebuilder negotiate with your city hall over whether you get a building permit, or does the permit get levied no matter what? Does a cop decide if you really broke the law, or does he simply arrest you and let the courts hash it out? Does your tax preparer negotiate with the IRS or is he supposed to just calculate your tax bill on their terms and have you pay the required amount?

Government does not work by negotiation. Government does not work from the bottom up. It works from the top down. This singular fact means that no doctor will be deciding if you are too old or infirm to get medical care. It will be a medically untrained bureaucrat that sets a national rule that everyone will have to obey. There won't be any room for your grandma to have a different outcome than anyone else's.

So, what will it be then? Who will decide when medical care is just too expensive to bother with? Who will be left to perish because they just aren't worth the lifesaving effort? Well, for sure it won't be any members of Congress or anyone that works for the federal government because they won't be expected to suffer under the nationally socialized plan. It also won't be Obama's buddies in the unions who are about to be similarly exempted from the national plan, at least if Senator Max Baucus has his way.

Ah, but we are told that Obama's ideas on healthcare are "evolving," dontcha know? During the recent campaign for president (that was only 7 months ago, if you'll recall) Obama insisted that he would never tax your healthcare benefits from work. He even ridiculed McCain for proposing such a plan. Lately, however, he's "evolved" toward saying that such a new tax is on the table. What about his stance against fining people and businesses that don't join his UberPlan? He was against that sort of coerciveness before. Now he's "evolved."

Originally, he said it was "healthcare for all," but as of Wednesday night, it seems he's "evolved" to say that only those worth the bother should get healthcare. The rest should be left to die and/or suffer. If he does any more "evolving" we'll all be finding just who is "worth" what as far as he and his Democrats are concerned. Somehow I'd guess that many of you reading this today won't quite be worth as much as certain others! (Go figure.)

Let's hope none of us are ever in a position to find out if Obamacare deems our grandmothers worth saving.

And what ever happened to the left's mantra that healthcare is a "right" and that money should never enter into a life or death decision? Now The One is saying it's just too darn expensive to save the old and infirm? Will our friends on the left now disown Obama the "murderer"? (They haven't disowned him for voting against the Illinois version of federal law that mandates basic medical care for abortion-surviving babies, why quibble about the death of anyone else?)

Even worse, why has the media remained mum on the possibility that President Spock, Doctor of life, just said that old folks are too expensive to treat? Hello, CNN, NBC, New York Times... anyone?

For the shape of things to come, check out what goes on in the Netherlands these days. Old folk are actually afraid to go to a doctor, thinking they'll be euthanized against their will. And don't look for quality care for the masses, as this article states the elite will get their own health plan separate from ours. That isn't done or deemed necessary if everyone is assured of topnotch care.

The end result would be seen in what went on in the Soviet Union where the comrade on the street received piss-poor care. In part this explains why life expectancy actually DECREASED under the Soviets! Socialized medicine doesn't attract the best and brightest in the medical field which is why the Soviets valued their garbage collectors more than the doctors there. I'm not making this shit up either.

It isn't just the elderly that would have to rely on the mercy of government bean counters either, you can expect any fetus detected with a possible abnormality to have it's life weighed on the scales of cost effectiveness. This hits close to home with me, my two oldest boys by the War Department are slightly autistic. Had their condition been diagnosed prior to birth under a state-run system, I doubt any bean counter would take a pass on the option of mandatory abortion.

If you think we'll never get that far then I'd like some of what YOU'RE smoking!

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Before and After Vatican II, Novus Ordo, TLM, etc.

When are Catholics in general going to get their heads out of their asses?

Since I began blogging a few years back I routinely run across Catholic sites bemoaning the Novus Ordo Mass, slamming the changes since Vatican II, denigrating the use of the Traditional Latin Mass, casting the time before Vatican II as the Dark Ages, etc. The fighting never stops. It's like a large (and dysfunctional) family bickering their lives away as the house they're in burns down.

Hey folks, there's a whole culture out there flying apart because no one is showing a moral example. I stand corrected, maybe the Amish are but they're not exactly mainstream. The Bible tells us to be in the world but not of it, well we've got the second part right. How about we get going on the first part?

IMHO we need to stop all the penny ante bullshit, start working together and try, REALLY TRY to get our nation and it's culture back on track instead of staying in our echo chambers and slamming anyone who doesn't dot all the "i's" and cross the "t's" in a way we like.

Okay, that's off my chest. Time to go start getting supper ready.

Demonizing the normal..

That's what this is all about, period. Take your bloodpressure meds before reading further;

ANN ARBOR, Michigan, June 24, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Researchers at the University of Michigan have concluded that the love stories told in classic Disney and other G-rated children's films - such as the Little Mermaid - are partially to blame for the pervasiveness of what they label "heteronormativity."

"Despite the assumption that children's media are free of sexual content, our analyses suggest that these media depict a rich and pervasive heterosexual landscape," wrote researchers Emily Kazyak and Karin Martin, in a report published in the latest issue of the Sociologists for Women in Society (SWS) publication Gender & Society.

Kazyak and Martin said they studied the role of heterosexual relationships in several of the highest-grossing G-rated films between 1990-2005.

The results, say the researchers, illustrate two ways that the children's films "construct heterosexuality": through "depictions of hetero-romantic love as exceptional, powerful, transformative, and magical," and "depictions of interactions between gendered bodies in which the sexiness of feminine characters is subjected to the gaze of masculine characters."

"Characters in love are surrounded by music, flowers, candles, magic, fire, balloons, fancy dresses, dim lights, dancing and elaborate dinners," the researchers observed. "Fireflies, butterflies, sunsets, wind and the beauty and power of nature often provide the setting for - and a link to the naturalness of - hetero-romantic love."

The SWS press release on the research blamed what they called the "old ideals" of romantic relationships, specifically those found the Brothers Grimm fairy tales, which in many instances inspired the films' storylines, for "such heavily gendered depictions and glorified portrayals of heterosexual relationships."

The team says the results point to heterosexuality achieving a "taken-for-granted status" "because hetero-romance is depicted as powerful."

"Both ordinary and exceptional constructions of heterosexuality work to normalize its status because it becomes difficult to imagine anything other than this form of social relationship or anyone outside of these bonds," they concluded.

"These films provide powerful portraits of a multifaceted and pervasive heterosexuality that likely facilitates the reproduction of heteronormativity."

The SWS press release concluded: "President Obama may have declared June to be Gay Pride Month, but entertainment for children therefore continues to perpetuate a less inclusive message, leaving those outside its confines with little to build their own dreams of happily ever after."

Sexuality expert Dr. Judith Reisman told LifeSiteNews.com (LSN) yesterday that the "politically correct" study reveals "the growing dominance of Heterophobia within academia and the spread of heterophobes among female professionals."

"Now, if the Ladies of the Sociology Society think pornography is becoming the heteronorm and that Disney is contributing to that form of what is really Heterophobia, they might have an argument," Reisman noted.

"However, the Ladies of the Sociology Society appear to favor Homoerotic child propaganda, as the current academic party line dictates."

So what comes next, I wonder? Disney got on a tree hugging kick some years back (Pocahontas and Fern Gully come to mind) but seem to have gotten over it once they lost serious money (Did anyone even see the sequels and yes, there WERE sequels to those pieces of shit!). Will we now see a Disney adaptation of "Romeo & Juliet", to be more aptly titled "Romeo and Julio" ?

When trash like that tanks at the box office will we see revised fairy tales distributed to local school districts (as often happens with tree hugger flicks) , including mandatory viewing by all children K-12? A few years back that question would have been viewed as so outlandish it never would have been asked. These days it's a different story.

These fools don't quit. First they want it "accepted" that their perverted tastes constitute an acceptable lifestyle, then it gets shown as perfectly normal (check out the flicks "The Jane Austen Book Club" or "The Family Stone" if you don't believe me.) At the same time we're seeing an aggressive push for the "experimentation" of homosexual acts in the sex ed classes of local schools. Now this crap comes up.

Please note that heterosexuality is cast in the report in a negative light. Those damned heteros, just pushing their view of sexuality and refusing to be "inclusive". Pretty soon wanting to kiss a pretty girl will be a capital offense if you're a man, but perfectly okay if you're a dyke.

Thinking about it a bit further, it isn't just heterosexuality being denigrated by inference. It is traditional morality as a whole that gets attacked by reports such as the one referenced. This has gone on for decades now and we're seeing an increase in the assaults. It's as if a critical mass has been reached, we now see that aberrant behavior is not just defended but actively promoted. Defenders of traditional morality are cast as bigoted hatemongers who pick on the defenseless and innocent.

It's gone beyond being funny, it's downright grim if you're a parent of young children. Seriously, we're fighting for the right to have our kids learn it's acceptable to be attracted to the opposite sex.

If that isn't sick and bizarre, tell me what is?

With hate crime bills being pushed through the national legislature and the mindset exhibited in California during the runup for voting on Propostion 8 it seems we'll soon experience active persecution. Look for the voices of morality and conscience to be muzzled, all in the name of "diversity" and "fairness". The justification will be found in reports issued by ivory-tower intellectuals and rubber-stamp think tanks for special interest groups.

Soon the children of those who protest will be removed, ostensibly for their own good. The IRS will be crawling up the asses of the newly demonized. All that will be missing is a set of chains to be fastened before we're cast into the outer darkness.

See you in the reeducation camps.

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Teaching the children well...

...Or not. Found this via Pewsitter.com.

June 24, 7:27 AM · Jake Jones - Evangelical Examiner

In the town of Big Bear Lake, CA, family advocates are crying foul over recent comments by a school superintendent who derided parents seeking to opt students out of a presentation orchestrated by the ACLU and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).

The school assembly (presentation) was prompted by an incident last November when high school authorities asked a student to change her tie-dyed shirt that read "Prop 8 Equals Hate." After the ACLU threatened the school district, the Superintendent agreed to force high school students and teachers to attend a forum about student speech and "nondiscrimination." The ACLU then apparently enlisted the Anti-Defamation League to speak at the forum.

In an e-mail to attorneys at the ACLU, the Superintendent of Bear Valley Unified School District, Carole Ferraud, sought help to prevent a parent from opting his student out of a school assembly discussing, somewhat ironically, student free speech and name-calling. The ADL school assembly discussed a "Pyramid of Hate" that pointed to "non-inclusive language" as a precursor to genocide (I'd love to find how they tie that in, bet it requires a fair amount of mental gymnastics). The assembly also pushed acceptance of controversial hate crimes laws and other "anti-bias" efforts seen by many parents as a politically-correct cover for promotion of alternative lifestyles, especially homosexuality. (Ya think?)

Superintendent Ferraud complained to the ACLU, "I have a parent who wants to opt his student out of the presentation. We explained that parents can only opt their children out of sex education and he is asking to see that in writing. Ugh .. small minds!" (So small that as taxpayers they feel justified in getting their money's worth from you clowns? Maybe they feel more qualified to raise THEIR children than to have you do it.)

The e-mail was unearthed by the Pacific Justice Institute as part of an ongoing investigation. PJI staff attorney Karen Milam, who heads PJI's Southern California office, commented,

"It's telling that school officials cozy with the ACLU preach tolerance for certain politically-correct groups but slam parents with religious or moral convictions. If free speech means anything, it is the right to dissent from government indoctrination. It sounds like school officials - not students - need a lesson in respect."

For those who are interested the web page for this school district is; http://www.bigbear.k12.ca.us/

Once you get on it you can scroll down for contact information. Just a thought for those wishing to express their opinions.

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Jobs under Obamacare...

Fear not, Obamacare will mean jobs for some and that will aid our financial recovery, (Boy, these guys really know how to do satire.)




Healthcare rationing in the cards for the future...

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- The leading pro-life group working to get members of the Senate to add an amendment to the Kennedy health care bill to stop rationing is upset that lawmakers voted against the amendment on Monday. Rationing of health care could involve cutting off lifesaving medical treatment and resulting in euthanasia. (Something of this nature perhaps; http://new.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&art=15587 )

The National Right to Life Committee had been pressing members of the Senate HELP Committee to adopt an amendment from Sen. Mike Enzi, a Wyoming Republican.

The committee defeated the Enzi amendment on a partisan vote, with Democrats opposing it and Republicans supporting it.

Enzi's measure would have prevented the use of “comparative effectiveness” research methodologies as a basis for denial of benefits to patients against their will based on their age, expected length of life, or of the patient’s present or predicted disability or quality of life. (This is already being done in Washington, recently a woman with breast cancer was denied treatment while at the same time encouraged to apply for euthanasia meds.)

Senators Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, Tom Coburn of Oklahoma and Richard Burr of North Carolina, all Republicans, spoke in favor of the pro-life move.

Burke Balch, director of the National Right to Life Committee’s Powell Center for Medical Ethics, emailed LifeNews.com about the amendment following the vote.

“The current sources of funds being considered to pay for health care restructuring are so inadequate in the long term that rationing will be compelled,” he charged. (Unlike private care where the patient and their insurance company foot the bill, there will be a definite cap on money available for government funded treatment. This already takes place in Europe, I've a cousin in Ireland who needed a routine operation on his knee, a neighbor needed the same op. My cousin was covered by his own insurance, the neighbor depended on the government. Six month difference in time spent waiting for availability of a doctor. It's all about the Benjamins.)

Balch pointed to one example in the medical literature showing an attempt made to assess different “quality adjusted life year” scores for each of the following: “no physical disability, limp, walk with crutches, and need a wheelchair. (Beancounters in action. Something to look forward to.)

In another, the authors wrote, “[I]t may be judged that one year of life with a moderate disability is equivalent to 0.75 years of life at optimal health.”

Senator Barbara Mikulski, a Maryland Democrat, led the opposition to the amendment, claiming it was unnecessary. ("Trust me.")

However, Balch said that, while the existing bill language says that comparative effectiveness research such as this “shall not be construed as mandates for payment, coverage, or treatment,” nothing in the current bill prevents it being used to deny treatment.

Balch concluded, “By rejecting the Enzi amendment, the Senate HELP Committee today cleared the way for that rationing to be based on discrimination against people with disabilities, older people, and anyone considered to have a poor ‘quality of life.’” (That last is a really subjective term. How in hell do you measure that one? Maybe I don't want to know.)

More progress for the culture of death.

You. Are. Kidding. Me.

Found this via Lucianne.com, I had to double check to insure it wasn't The People's Cube or some other humor site.

WASHINGTON (AFP) — The United States said Monday its invitations were still standing for Iranian diplomats to attend July 4 celebrations at US embassies despite the crackdown on opposition supporters.

President Barack Obama's administration said earlier this month it would invite Iran to US embassy barbecues for the national holiday for the first time since the two nations severed relations following the 1979 Islamic revolution.

"There's no thought to rescinding the invitations to Iranian diplomats," State Department spokesman Ian Kelly told reporters.

"We have made a strategic decision to engage on a number of fronts with Iran," Kelly said. "We tried many years of isolation, and we're pursuing a different path now."

But he said it was not clear if Iranian diplomats had accepted the invitations.

The State Department has said that the invitations are largely a symbolic gesture of goodwill and that the July 4 barbecues were not intended to take up substantive policy matters.

Obama has walked a tightrope since the violence broke out in Iran, urging the Islamic regime to end its repression of protests but insisting he will not let Tehran's leaders cast the United States as a bogeyman.

The mullahs of Iran are having young girls gunned down in the streets and the nitwits running our country invite their diplomats over for hot dogs.

Words fail me right now.

Monday, June 22, 2009

Unforseen consequences and the like...

Found this little beauty at pajamasmedia.com, the man hits the nail on the head;

OPPORTUNITY’S UNEXPECTED TURNS By Michael S. Malone

Two stories from history . . .and a third story that we are living through at this very moment.

First story: The transcontinental railroad was one of the greatest - perhaps the greatest engineering achievement of the 19th century. But what is surprising to note is that when the great Union Pacific/Central Pacific line finally linked the two coasts of the United States in May, 1869, the achievement was most celebrated for what it meant to trade and travel outside the country, rather than within.

Here’s a description of that thinking from Stephen Ambrose’s Nothing Like it in the World:

“Throughout the building of the [rail]road, its proponents had predicted that the China-Japan-India trade from the East Coast of America and with Europe would pass through San Francisco and then over the transcontinental railroad to points east, or to be shipped to Europe via New York. The first through-car on the transcontinental line carried a shipment of India tea, forerunner of the future.

“But trade with Asia didn’t happen, certainly not to the extent that people hoped. . .”

Instead, the real impact of the transcontinental railroad was upon trade and migration within the U.S.; indeed, it opened up continental America to everyday citizens, not just intrepid pioneers. Meanwhile, the much promise international trade instead found its way through another new engineering marvel: the Suez Canal.

Second story: The microprocessor, perhaps the single most ubiquitous and influential invention of the 20th century was invented by a team of four scientists - Federico Faggin, Ted Hoff, Stan Mazor and Masatoshi Shima - at the end of that annus mirabilus, 1969. The microprocessor, it almost goes without saying, went on to sell by the billions, and transform every corner of modern life, from cars and planes to personal computers and cell phones to medical equipment to games to the World Wide Web. In the process, as the leading supplier of microprocessors, Intel quickly became a hugely wealthy company - and justly described as “the world’s most important company.”

Less well known is the fact that, at first, Intel wasn’t even sure it wanted this so-called ‘computer on a chip.’ Intel had been founded just a couple years before as a memory chip company and had done extremely well in that business. Indeed, the microprocessor project had been merely a way to help one of Intel’s calculator clients - Japan’s Busicom - build a competitive product that would, it was hoped, help sell more Intel memory chips in the future. In fact, when Busicom complained about the project taking too long, Intel agreed to a lower fee, but demanded ownership of the technology, believing that it could be used to sell Intel memory chips to other companies.

Now, with the Intel 4004 and 8008 microprocessors completed, Intel found itself not only with a fast-growing existing business, but owning the most celebrated new chip technology on the planet. The Intel leadership troika of Bob Noyce, Gordon Moore and Andy Grove were smart enough business people to know that a young company had neither the workforce nor the resources to tackle two exploding businesses at the same time. So, the growing consensus inside the company was to stick to what Intel knew - memory - and license way the microprocessor.

But within Intel, there were two true believers in the future of the microprocessor. One was marketing director Ed Gelbach, who began vigorously promoting Intel’s microprocessors in speeches and ads even as the rest of the company was having second thoughts. The other was the company PR person, Regis McKenna, who would go on to become Silicon Valley’s most famous marketer. Regis, for his part, was so convinced of the importance of the microprocessor that, on his own, he prepared a series of notebooks showing potential applications for the new device.

It was a pretty bizarre list, ranging, in Regis’ words, “from automatic toilet flushers to cow milking machines, airport marijuana sniffers, electronic games and blood analyzers.” But that list, combined with the orders beginning to trickle in from Gelbach’s heroic efforts, finally convinced Intel’s senior management to stick with the microprocessor.

The rest is history. It is estimated that there are more 25 billion microprocessors in use around the world right now, with the number of transistors they contain equal to the amount of raindrops that fall on North America in a year.

But here’s the punchline to this story: None of the applications that Regis described, that convinced the Intel execs to stay with the microprocessor, ever panned out . . .well, at least not for a decade or more. In other words, the Invention of the Century was sold on falsehoods.

And that brings us up to today, and the news - of the disputed election in Iran — that is breaking as I write this column.

Even five years ago, it might have been possible for the Mullahs of Iran, facing rioting and protests in the streets and the potential of revolution or civil war — to institute a news black-out both within the country and to the outside world. All it would have taken would have been a shutdown of the phone system (which would have stopped the Internet as well) and the tossing out of AP, Reuters and CNN reporters. Iran would have looked like Burma/Myanmar or North Korea, and all we would have known about events there surrounding the election would have come from refugee reports and, a week from now, perhaps a few jumpy, graining amateur videos.

Instead, despite the government’s crackdown on news coverage, we have been deluged with blogs, cellphone videos, Facebook entries, and Twitter tweets covering every aspect of the protest. And every attempt by the Iranian government to shut down these sources only seems to pop up even more. The Mullahs are faced with the unsolvable dilemma that in order to make Iran a regional and nuclear power they have to put in place the same sophisticated digital infrastructure that will keep Iran from ever again being a closed society. They are going to lose this fight, if not now, then soon, because their old autocratic apparatus for running the country has now proven to be incompatible with life in the 21st century.

But there is another story in this too, one that harkens back to those other historical examples I just gave. It is that Great technologies are typically sold, incorrectly, on applications we know - but succeed on applications we can’t yet guess. Trade with Japan was what sold the transcontinental railroad; populating the western United States was what made it a historic milestone. Automatic toilet flushing sold the microprocessor to Intel; the personal computer, cellphone, iPod and video game player is what made Intel and its competitors rich and famous.

The same is true, I think, for the technologies of Web 2.0. MySpace and Facebook saw their initial success as platforms for people to connect socially online. Twitter began as side project, a novelty application for smartphone users to share their day with friends.

But now, under the press of history, these technologies are beginning to morph before our eyes. Suddenly, as you read the Facebook postings of Iranian protesters, it suddenly becomes apparent that social networks are becoming their own pseudo-nation states, complete with voluntary citizens, laws (often in conflict with their real-life counterparts) and degrees of sovereignty.

Meanwhile, Twitter (and video counterparts like YouTube and Qik) is becoming the new wire service, replacing newspapers and television as “the first draft of history.” I think we are going to see the same thing happen with other Web 2.0 companies, such as LinkedIn, which will likely become the vast global job pool for protean corporations.

Like the people of the late 1860s and the early 1970s, we have seen the future - but it has only been through a glass, darkly. Now, that glass is becoming clear . . .

I often tell the War Department that the Computer Age is rapidly altering history in the same degree that Gutenberg's movable type printing press did. From my little bit of reading done on the topic, it helped turn society on it's head. As for the computer and all it spawns, we won't stop seeing the applications and their impact in our lifetimes. This is gonna go on for a few hundred years at least.

Old Chinese curse; "May you live in interesting times."

Did I miss something...

Remember the rescue of the merchant ship captain from the Somali pirates? The one where Navy Seals killed three pirates when it appeared the captain's life might be in danger?

Did they ever get any public recognition from B.O. for that?

Yes, it's their job. Noted. But in past administrations we'd have seen the Seal team and that civilian captain being met at the White House by it's occupant. I'm being deliberately vague on naming that occupant because I believe Bill Clinton would have done it as readily as his predecessor or successor.

So did B.O. do something of the sort and I just missed it?

Seriously, it floors me that there might be such a genuine lack of appreciation for the actions of our troops. I'm hoping I'm wrong. Because if I'm right it's one more indicator of where we as a country are headed.

Any comments?

Speaking up for the boomers...

This guy is right on the money. FWIW, I am SO sick and tired of being gratuitously demonized for no other reason than the year of my birth (1952). Here's the article in it's entirety;

This Boomer Isn't Going to Apologize

By STEPHEN MOORE (Wall Street Journal)

Last weekend I attended my niece's high-school graduation from an upscale prep school in Washington, D.C. These are supposed to be events filled with joy, optimism and anticipation of great achievements. But nearly all the kids who stepped to the podium dutifully moaned about how terrified they are of America's future -- yes, even though Barack Obama, whom they all worship and adore, has brought "change they can believe in." A federal judge gave the commencement address and proceeded to denounce the sorry state of the nation that will be handed off to them. The enemy, he said, is the collective narcissism of their parents' generation -- my generation. The judge said that we baby boomers have bequeathed to the "echo boomers," "millennials," or whatever they are to be called, a legacy of "greed, global warming, and growing income inequality."

And everyone of all age groups seemed to nod in agreement. One affluent 40-something woman with lots of jewelry told me she can barely look her teenagers in the eyes, so overcome is she with shame over the miseries we have bestowed upon our children.

The Wall Street Journal reported last week that graduation ceremonies have become collective airings of guilt and grief. It's now chic for boomers to apologize for their generation's crimes. It's the only thing conservatives and liberals seem to agree on. Mitch Daniels, the Republican governor of Indiana, told Butler University grads that our generation is "just plain selfish." At Grinnell College in Iowa, author Thomas Friedman compared boomers to "hungry locusts . . . eating through just about everything." Film maker Ken Burns told this year's Boston College grads that those born between 1946 and 1960 have "squandered the legacy handed to them by the generation from World War II."

I could go on, but you get the point. We partied like it was 1999, paid for it with Ponzi schemes and left the mess for our kids and grandkids to clean up. We're sorry -- so sorry.

Well, I'm not. I have two teenagers and an 8-year-old, and I can say firsthand that if boomer parents have anything for which to be sorry it's for rearing a generation of pampered kids who've been chauffeured around to soccer leagues since they were 6. This is a generation that has come to regard rising affluence as a basic human right, because that is all it has ever known -- until now. Today's high-school and college students think of iPods, designer cellphones and $599 lap tops as entitlements. They think their future should be as mapped out as unambiguously as the GPS system in their cars.

CBS News reported recently that echo boomers spend $170 billion a year -- more than most nations' GDPs -- and nearly every penny of that comes from the wallets of the very parents they now resent. My parents' generation lived in fear of getting polio; many boomers lived in fear of getting sent to the Vietnam War; this generation's notion of hardship is TiVo breaking down.

How bad can the legacy of the baby boomers really be? Let's see: We're the generation that spawned Microsoft, Intel, Apple, Google, ATMs and Gatorade. We defeated the evils of communism and delivered the world from the brink of global thermonuclear war. Now youngsters are telling pollsters that they think socialism may be better than capitalism after all. Do they expect us to apologize for winning the Cold War next?

College students gripe about the price of tuition, and it does cost way too much. But who do these 22-year-old scholars think has been footing the bill for their courses in transgender studies and Che Guevara? The echo boomers complain, rightly, that we have left them holding the federal government's $8 trillion national IOU. But try to cut government aid to colleges or raise tuitions and they act as if they have been forced to actually work for a living.

Yes, the members of this generation will inherit a lot of debts, but a much bigger storehouse of wealth will be theirs in the coming years. When I graduated from college in 1982, the net worth of America -- all our nation's assets minus all our liabilities -- was $16 trillion, according to the Federal Reserve. Today, even after the meltdown in housing and stocks, the net worth of the country is $45 trillion -- a doubling after inflation. The boomers' children and their children will inherit more wealth and assets than any other in the history of the planet -- that is, unless Mr. Obama taxes it all away. So how about a little gratitude from these trust-fund babies for our multitrillion-dollar going-away gifts?

My generation is accused of being environmental criminals -- of having polluted the water and air and ruined the climate. But no generation in history has done more to clean the environment than mine. Since 1970 pollutants in the air and water have fallen sharply. Since 1960, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles and Pittsburgh have cut in half the number of days with unsafe levels of smog. The number of Americans who get sick or die from contaminants in our drinking water has plunged for 50 years straight.

Whenever kids ask me why we didn't do more to combat global warming, I explain that when I was young the "scientific consensus" warned of global cooling. Today's teenagers drive around in cars more than any previous generation. My kids have never once handed back the car keys because of some moral problem with their carbon footprint -- and I think they are fairly typical.

The most absurd complaint of all is that the health-care system has been ruined by our generation. Oh, really? Thanks to massive medical progress in the past 30 years, the chances of dying from heart disease and many types of cancer have been cut in half. We found effective treatments for AIDS within a decade. Life expectancy has risen and infant mortality fallen. That doesn't sound so "selfish" to me.

Yes, we are in a deep economic crisis today -- but it's no worse than what we boomers faced in the late 1970s after years of hyperinflation, sky-high tax rates and runaway government spending. We cursed our parents, too. But then we grew up and produced a big leap forward in health, wealth and scientific progress. Let's see what this next generation of over-educated ingrates can do.

For those who would cite the 60's as proof of our inferior status, I'll just mention that the so-called Greatest Generation was running the country then. Take it up with those clowns.

While we're talking about both the boomers and the "Greatest Generation", I'll reprint a post on the topic I authored a few years back. Much of it is still germane. Here it is;


I guess I'll stop hearing about inter-generation comparisons after I'm dead. Recently I (once again) came across a spate of articles dealing with the selfishness & self-centeredness of the Baby Boomers as opposed to the noble characteristics of the Greatest Generation. Oh, bull crap!

Am I the only one who thinks it's all a bunch of crap? Maybe I'm not normal but I try to take folks as I find 'em. Nothing more or less. I've known some real jerks from that "Greatest" generation and some really selfless folks from the Baby Boomer ranks.

For what it's worth, the "Greatest" generation, those who came of age during the Depression and went on to fight in WWII did what they had to in order to survive. That's it. Period. During both the Depression and WWII they did what they were told and lived to tell the tale.

The Depression years saw them as too young to make any difference in the world. When WWII came along they filled the ranks of the military and successfully brought the Axis to it's knees. Yep. However during that war all leadership and policy making was done by a generation preceding theirs. The blunt truth is that they were the cannon fodder of WWII. No leadership required, just fill the open billets in the military. With a draft in place to make that happen I question if the call to arms was as willingly taken up as many would have us believe.

Following that the "Greatest" went on to run the country and lead the world. How did they do? The record is a mixed bag, IMHO.

It was the "Greatest" generation in the person of JFK who left our allies high and dry at the Bay of Pigs in Cuba. Who took us into a no-win war that hinged more on public relations than a true desire for victory (Viet Nam). Thanks LBJ. It was the "Greatest" generation who unleashed the police dogs and turned the fire hoses on peaceful, non-violent civil rights marchers. It was the "Greatest" generation who trashed the environment to the point of rivers literally catching fire (anyone else remember the Mahonganela River burning for years?). It was the leadership of the "Greatest" generation in the person of Jimmy Carter who caved in to the Ayotollah of Iran, paving the way for our present day clash with Islamofacists.

On the other hand, they also gave us men on the moon and the leadership of Ronald Reagan. They developed our economy to be the powerhouse of the world.

Like I said, a mixed bag.

As for the much reviled Baby Boomers, what does our record show?

Viet Nam war protests (done by the same age group that was fighting there, I really think one cancels out the other). Sex, drugs, rock & roll, (guilty as charged). Cindy Sheehan, Bill Clinton, John Kerry.

On the other hand we've given the world Bill Gates & the Internet, Collin Powell, GW Bush, John McCain and Rudy Guiliani.

Another mixed bag, IMHO.

This crap could go on for days. And generations that follow on could continue playing the game of "one-up". For what reason, really?

Why don't we all take a deep breath, stop the comparisons and start identifying with one another? Hey who knows, we might all learn something in the way of humility then.

And we all might just start growing up!

Sunday, June 21, 2009

My Father...

...was a flaming asshole. That opinion was shared across the board by our neighbors, extended family, casual acquaintances and folks in general.

He drank like a fish whenever he could, constantly belittled anyone who might disagree with him. It was his way or the highway. As a gauge of his personality in general, he stopped watching "All In The Family" because he felt Archie Bunker was too much of a wishy-washy, spineless dolt who wouldn't stand up to his daughter and son-in-law. Nope, Dad was not a snuggly-wuggly, cuddly type of guy.

He also taught me the very few things I know about being mentally and physically tough, showed me that even tough guys can cry at the proper time and stressed the importance of family ties.

For the sake of my brother and I he stayed married to our mother, even during the years she was out catting around and weeks would go by when we had no idea if she was alive or dead. For our sake he made peace with her later and never allowed us to speak ill of the woman. If you've seen "Divine Secrets of The Ya-Ya Sisterhood" you've an idea from the Ashley Judd character what she was like. Hollywood sure glamorized the hell of that one, actually living that life was another thing entirely.

He gave me the most important piece of advice of my life, "Experience is a great teacher but only a damned fool relies strictly on his own."

I recall an incident when I was 17, he got pissed off at the two clerks in an appliance store while I was with him. I forget what it was about but the upshot of it was him shouting at the top of his lungs, informing them they were a couple of idiotic shitheads. These guys were fairly big and young so as this was going on I began laughing, thinking we were sure to get our asses kicked when they took on the crazy one-legged man and his son. Funny, they just stood there taking his abuse. He wore a wooden leg so they couldn't know he was crippled and if it'd been me in their shoes I'd have come over the counter in a heartbeat. They just stood there, open mouthed and jaws dropping to the floor.

He lived hard by his own choosing, alienating all and sundry at the drop of a hat and dying at the relatively young age of 57. It's always puzzled me that his funeral was so well attended. The church was packed. The family and friends who came actually missed him, they weren't there to make sure he was finally in the box.

When I named my five year old son after him my mother was shocked. "What the heck did you do that for?" was her question. The followon comment was to the effect that my brother and I always "took his side". Because of the respect the man ingrained in me for her, I never said that was easy when he was the one we could always count on to be around if necessary during our childhood, that he might knock me on my ass for being intentionally stupid but he'd always give me a second chance. No one was beyond redemption in his book, everyone had sins to answer for and nobody was a genius all the time.

Dad, Happy Fathers Day. It's been thirty-two years since you died, I still miss you.

Saturday, June 20, 2009

Dem. Senator gives a history lesson...

...and it's a beauty, (H/T to Harry @ Garbanzotoons);

Acknowledging Israel’s History
by Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ)
From the Congressional Record - Senate (S6613) June 16, 2009

Mr. MENENDEZ: Mr. President, last Wednesday, a few blocks down the street, a neo-Nazi opened fire at the Holocaust Museum. He murdered a security guard and terrorized the museum’s visitors, including schoolchildren, who had come to learn, to express sympathy, and to pray.

That evil act was the work of a killer who had made his hatred of other religions and ethnic groups well known. And it was a reminder that intolerance, ignorance, and anti-Semitism have not yet been defeated in our world. This tragedy reminds us of the need of sound understanding of one of the darkest episodes in the history of the world.

Far too many misrepresent the significance of the Holocaust, especially in regard to the State of Israel and her people. And far too many people deny it happened altogether, out of bigotry, hatred, and spite. In the face of so much misunderstanding, I am compelled today to speak up about the role of the Holocaust in Israel’s history and Israel’s challenges in preventing anti-Semitic murder from continuing to happen. The Holocaust was the most sinister possible reminder that the Jewish population in exile was in constant jeopardy. It was a definitive argument that anti-Semitism could appear anywhere, and its horrors galvanized international support for the State of Israel.

But let us be very clear: While the Shoah has a central role in Israel’s identity, it is not the reason behind its founding and it is not the main justification for its existence.

The extreme characterization of this mistaken view is the following: The Western powers established Israel in 1948 based on their own guilt, at the expense of the Arab peoples who lived there. Therefore, the current state is illegitimate and should be wiped off the face of the map.

This flawed argument is not only in defiance of basic human dignity but in plain defiance of history. It is in defiance of ancient history as told in biblical texts and through archeological evidence. It ignores the history of the last several centuries. Because of what is at stake, it is well worth reviewing this history in detail, and let me make a modest attempt at a very broad overview.

There has been a continuity of Jewish presence in the Holy Land for thousands of years. Jewish kings and governments were established in that area that is now Israel several millennia ago. After untold years of Jewish sovereignty, based in Jerusalem, the land of the Jewish people fell repeatedly to invaders—Assyrians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, and many others. Jews were repeatedly massacred and expelled, and the departure of so many from the land they had always called home developed into an unparalleled diaspora. From the 16th century until the earliest 20th century, the land that is now Israel was under the control of a distant Ottoman caliphate based in Istanbul, and during this time, as earlier, many Jews returned to their ancestral homeland.

The Ottoman Empire collapsed after World War I, and the treaty granted Great Britain a mandate over the area then known as Palestine. The League of Nations endorsed and clarified this mandate in 1922, requiring Britain to reconstitute a Jewish national home within the territory they controlled, in accordance with the declaration made by British Foreign Secretary Balfour in 1917, making the restoration of Jewish communities in that area a matter of international law. By the time World War II had ended, there were more than 600,000 Jews living in the British Mandate of Palestine.

In 1947, the United Nations approved a plan to partition the territory into Arab and Jewish states. The Jewish Agency accepted the plan. The Arabs did not. On May 14, 1948, the State of Israel declared its independence. On May 15, five Arab nations declared war. Despite being surrounded on all sides, Israel prevailed and expanded its borders, providing a small additional measure of security against attacks which were certain to come and did. So to be clear, the more than 700,000 Palestinians who left Israel were refugees of a war instigated by Arab governments, bent on seizing more land for themselves. But the Arabs who left Israel after its modern founding weren’t the only displaced population in the Middle East. In addition to the hundreds of thousands of Jews who left Europe during and after the Holocaust in the 20th century, more than threequarters of a million Jews fled or were expelled from their homes in Arab and Middle Eastern nations—in cities that many of their families had lived in for nearly a millennium. Their possessions were taken, their livelihoods were destroyed, victims of nationalism and hatred of Israel.

Several thousand years of history lead to an undeniable conclusion: The reestablishment of the State of Israel in modern times is a political reality with roots going back to the time of Abraham. And so the way to consider the immeasurable impact of the Holocaust in Israel is not to ask whether the State would exist otherwise. It is, at least in one sense, to imagine how even more vibrant Israel would be if millions upon millions had not been denied a chance to know it. The attacks on Israel have barely stopped since 1948—not just attacks by armies but attacks by individuals, attacks by tanks and terrorists, attacks that have come in the form of stones and they have come in the form of speeches. Its enemies have attempted to assassinate its people with rockets and assassinate its national character with hateful rhetoric.

Today it is still surrounded by hostility; its back is still to the sea. It is surrounded by hostility from Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza strip. In looking at the threat Israel faces on its southwestern border, one fact must be absolutely, indisputably, unequivocally clear: There is no moral equivalency between Israel and Hamas. Israel is a sovereign democratic state of 7.5 million people—Jews, Muslims, and Christians. Hamas is a terrorist organization. It won control of Gaza after men in ski masks waged gun battles with another branch of Palestinian leadership. It used that control to launch rockets at sleeping children in the nearby Israeli cities of Ashkelon and Sterot. This is the thanks Israel got for withdrawing from Gaza.

Hamas does not recognize agreements that Palestinian leaders have reached with Israel in the past, it does not recognize Israel’s right to exist at all, and in fact it is ideologically committed to Israel’s annihilation. Gaza’s people thirst for freedom and opportunity but are held hostage to Hamas’s thirst for destruction. And even today, after the consequences of menacing Israel became clear in a disastrous war, weapons are flowing freely through tunnels into Gaza, Hamas has rearmed and is readying itself for the day when it is going to take on Israel again. Hamas and Hezbollah may be the head of the snake when it comes to terrorism, but the tail extends much further. The weapons terrorists use were sent from Iran. Money they received was sent from Iran. Propaganda supporting Hamas’s campaign of terror and calling for Israel’s destruction was conceived in, produced by, and broadcast from Iran.

The fundamentalist regime in Teheran isn’t just an emerging threat. It doesn’t just have the potential to be a threat to Israel’s existence. It is a threat to Israel’s existence. Under no circumstances whatsoever can we allow that conventional threat to become a nuclear one. Especially in light of the threat of Iran, and in light of the threat extremists pose to so many innocent civilians around the globe, the importance of Israel as a strategic ally and friend to the United States could not be clearer. It is hard to overstate the value of having such a stalwart democratic ally in such a critical part of the world—an ally in terms of intelligence gathering, economics, politics, and culture. Israel arose in a desert rampant with repression, a force of moderation against fundamentalism and extremism. It is an ally we can constantly depend on and count on to be with us in international fora and on the key decisions that affect the safety and security of Americans around the world.

For more than six decades, it has been a key U.S. trading partner and a scientific innovator. We have Israeli engineers to thank for everything from advances in solar power to cell phone technology to AOL Instant Messenger. Equipment we are using in Iraq to fight terrorism and keep American troops safe was developed in Israel. Medical treatments we are using in U.S. hospitals to fight cancer, heart disease, and chronic pain were developed in Israel. Israeli-born actors are stars of Hollywood, and an Israeli astronaut has accompanied Americans into space. So it is not only in the interest of Israel to have its full history recognized, it is in the national interest and the national security interests of the United States. It is in our interests to fully remember the unbreakable bond that has made us both stronger over the last 61 years and to make it unmistakable that our commitment is as strong as ever. The argument for Israel’s legitimacy does not depend on what we say in speeches. It has been made by history. It has been made by the men and women who have made the desert green, by Nobel prizes earned, by groundbreaking innovations and enviable institutions, by lives saved, democracy defended, peace made, and battles won.

There can be no denying the Jewish people’s legitimate right to live in peace and security on a homeland to which they have had a connection for thousands of years. We can and must move forward in the peace process, and look for ways to reach agreement between all sides. But we cannot erase the moral distinctions between tyranny and freedom, and we must not edit history. If we stay true to history and follow our moral compass, I am optimistic that talks can lead to understanding and resolution of the very sensitive, detailed, and tough issues we face. The next pages of Middle Eastern history are not doomed to be stained by an endless, senseless fight to the death. It doesn’t have to be that way. Different peoples of vastly different backgrounds have peacefully thrived in the Middle East for generations upon generations, and this coexistence can happen once more. Let us remember the words of Egyptian President Anwar al-Sadat in 1978, when he accepted the Nobel Prize for peace—words that not long before would have seemed incredibly unlikely. He said: Let us put an end to wars, let us reshape life on the solid basis of equity and truth. And it is this call . . . of the great majority of the Arab and Israeli peoples, and indeed of millions of men, women, and children around the world that you are today honoring. And these hundreds of millions will judge to what extent every responsible leader in the Middle East has responded to the hopes of mankind.

I have been to Israel. I have shaken the hands of its citizens and visited its holy places. I know that in the heart of Israelis there is a strong desire for peace. We can never lose sight of why peace is so important. After the unspeakable horrors of the Holocaust, the Jewish people would forever be mindful that no one knows what turns history will take and every day we are mindful that anti-Semitism has not gone away, whether in the form of a firebombing of a French synagogue, defamatory comments of a government official in South Africa, or a senseless murder in Washington DC. Israel is the one place in the world, the one place where anti-Semitism can be structurally impossible. It is a field of hope on which fear can be vanquished, an island of refuge that can stand firm no matter how stormy the sea of history turns. That is why we must always keep it safe and always keep it free.

The United States is not simply allied with a government, it is an ally of Israel’s people. It is an ally of Israel’s democratic ideals. It is an ally of its history, of its aspirations for peace and prosperity, its can-do spirit, and amazing resilience in the face of threats from all sides. In that sense, we are not just Israel’s allies, we are admirers, we are partners, and we are friends. I plan to do everything I can to see that we support this friendship this year, next year, and every year thereafter. Let me close by saying Martin Luther King said: The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice. We know that in Israel’s quest for security, there will be trials along the way, there will be setbacks, and there will be dangers too tremendous for words. But if we continue the work we do and continue to stay true to the values that drive our journey, then the long arc will eventually rest in place in the land of Israel and it is a just and lasting peace that will be at hand.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/

The article is something to keep in mind when the "all things are relative" parrots start to sing and we're advised to look for "nuance" in the question of Israel's survival.

Blog Archive

THIS is depressing!!

THIS is depressing!!
Our education system must have REAL problems!

Proper Care of The Koran

Proper Care of The Koran
A place for everything and everything in it's place

Our Lady of America, pray for us (we need it!)

St. Gabriel Possenti, (unofficial) patron saint of handgun owners, pray for us.

Humane blogger award

Humane blogger award