Too Many Memories

The Travelling Wall was in Colorado Springs last week. I didn't go this time. The memories from the first time are still to fresh, too painful. There are far too many names on that wall that to me are flesh-and-blood people, friends I've known over the almost-60 years of my life.

It seems it shouldn't hurt so much - most of those people were lost over 35 years ago - yet the pain is as fresh as if it were yesterday. Mike and I were together at the USO in Denver, long time ago. We did a lot together. He married the second-most-beautiful girl there, I got the first. Mike & Judy's children are grown now - as old or older than my 30-something daughter. They probably have children of their own, just as I have a grandchild. The difference is that Mike's not there to be with them. It hurts.

How many people remember Denny? Probably only some of his high school friends, and his fellow cadets at West Point. Possibly a few of his platoon remember his name, but how many others? Denny and I squared off against one another in football, baseball, and track, yet we were also good friends. I still have is West Point bathrobe, won in a wager over the Army-Air Force football game in 1964. I washed out of the Air Force Academy, Denny graduated from West Point. Hardly more than a year later, he died in Vietnam.

"Chuck" and I were friends even before I broke his jaw in a sparring match in 1964. We'd developed a rapport during Cadet Summer, and carried it on into the academic year, even though we were in different squadrons. He graduated from the Academy and learned to fly C-130's. He died as a passenger, going back to Pleiku to rejoin his squadron after some kind of medical treatment.

Three people - three of more than a dozen people I knew and respected - that gave the ultimate price for freedom. I don't need the Wall to remind me. Each day, each month, every year, reminds me of how lucky I am, and to make me ask, "why them?". Only God can answer, and He has yet not chosen to do so.

America's Democratic Fifth Column

There are a large number of people who hate George Bush, hate his re-election, hate everything he does, simply because he's NOT a Democrat. Their hatred leads them to criticize US foreign policy and the War on Terror, regardless of whether their criticism is real or not. In doing what they do, they are encouraging our enemies and giving aid and comfort to those who hate us.

It would be acceptable if the Left simply disagreed with what's being done and how it's being carried out, and had a coherent plan to offer in its place. Unfortunately, the Left is about as clueless as the fleas on a rat's back, not only about why we were attacked, but also why we MUST fight, and WIN, if we are to remain a free and independent people.

The goal of many of the Left, indeed, includes the destruction of the United States and its incorporation into a single global entity, apparently under a world government run by the United Nations. The lack of success the United Nations has had in virtually everything they've tried to do doesn't seem to phase the Left in the least - they feel all "warm and fuzzy" about the United Nations, and that's all that counts to them.

Life, however, is about struggle. Life is a struggle from the first gasp of breath until the last sigh at death. We struggle to breathe, we struggle to find food to eat, clothing to wear, and a place to shelter ourselves from the elements. Most of us wish to succeed, and struggle harder than those that don't care, or feel that struggling is too hard and everything should just be given to them. The only way to give to those who are unwilling (or the very much smaller subset that are unable) to provide for themselves has to come from somewhere. In real life, it comes from those who struggle to succeed. Governments are not productive - they don't create an excess that can be shared with non-producers. Every dime the government spends comes from someone who works hard for that dime.

The current war comes down to a conflict between two sets of ideas. On one hand there is the idea of personal freedom, private property, and individual choice that has the capability of producing more than is personally needed for survival. This creates profit, and goods that can be exchanged with others for what we personally don't create. The other set of ideas is that everything and everyone should be enslaved to the rigid practice of a religion created 1300 years ago, and that the individual must be totally committed to following these religious practices, no matter how onorous they may be, or how they keep the individual from every succeeding on his or her own. In fact, that idea delegates one-half of the population to even more stringent controls, which not only limit individual freedom, but makes women the equivalent of property to her husband, her father, or her brothers.

The majority of the people in the United States refute that religion and its practices. This is why the Islamists hate us - we refuse to surrender to their religion and its untenable practices. They express their hatred by trying to kill us. They also hate us because we believe in individual freedom, including the freedom to accept or reject any religion offered to us. The Islamists don't acknowledge that freedom - in their mind, there is only one acceptable path - submission to their religion and its god. They hate us also because we believe that governments should be elected by the people, to secure the rights of the people. To the Islamists, there can be only one source of authority - their god, through those who have gained the right to exercise authority by studying the word of their god, or by organizing the tribes under their leadership to worship their god.

The Islamists have decided that we must be conquered and subdued. They have declared war on us, with the open support of some nation-states, and the clandestine support of others. Their aim is to subjugate and enslave us - they have said so numerous times. There are only two responses to their threat: either surrender and become slaves, or fight back. THERE IS NO OTHER CHOICE, AND ANYONE WHO BELIEVES THERE IS IS DELUDED.

We, through our elected leaders, decided to fight back. We gave permission to our President to wage war on our behalf. That's our right, and our responsibility. Once we've done so, however, it's the PRESIDENT's responsibility as to how, where, and in what manner we wage that war. Hardly had the ink dried on the compact that authorized war before the Left realized a president that waged a successful war against our enemies would be hard to defeat in an election, and began undermining the war effort. Losing the war against the Islamists would have far more serious consequences than losing an election, but that doesn't seem to bother those on the Left. They lie, distort, ignore, and belittle every success, while exaggerating every tiny setback into a major defeat.

Understanding the current war is just that simple. There aren't any convoluted threads to follow to understand how it began, or how we became involved. Nor is there any duplicity in how we decided to choose the paths we did to fight this war. The objectives were established and identified to all of us. The methods were decided upon by the professionals in the Department of Defense. The constant harrangue that the war has been "mishandled" is simply the whining of armchair quarterbacks without the experience or knowledge to do as well, and certainly not any better. Those that constantly attack the President, the Defense Department, our soldiers, and those that stand behind them are on the wrong side of the argument, and even they know it. Their words are chosen in the hope that they will sufficiently weaken the President and his party so that those that constantly carp can get elected in their place.

There is no room in a government of free men for a political party that considers its own successes more important than the success of the nation and its people. A political party that puts politics ahead of victory, that puts political gain ahead of protection of the people, is a party of petty dictators and tyrants. The Democratic party has moved from "loyal opposition" to "disloyal power-hungry tyrants". It's time for the PEOPLE to stand up to the Democrats, and to their supporters, and say that they are wrong. We need to say that their patriotism is to party, not nation or government. Such patriotism is the patriotism of Stalin, Hitler, and Mao. It's the "party above all" of Fidel Castro's communism. It has nothing to do with freedom, with representative government, or of success. It's power for power's sake- naked tyranny.

It's putrid and sickening. It's a boil upon the body politic, and needs to be excised. It deserves, and should receive, continued disdain at the polls. Those currently in office, and others who help them, should be treated with the contempt they richly deserve.

"I've Got a Little List"

The following people are on my list to target for permanent removal from public office by any legal way possible:

SENATORS

1. Senator Joe Biden


2. Senator Barbara Boxer


3. Senator Robert Byrd


4. Senator Lincoln Chaffee


5. Senator Hillary Clinton


6. Senator Mark Dayton


7. Senator Chris Dodd


8. Senator Dick Durbin


9. Senator Russ Feingold


10. Senator Dianne Feinstein


11. Senator Lindsey Graham


12. Senator Chuck Hagel


13. Senator James Jeffords


14. Senator Ted Kennedy


15. Senator John Kerry


16. Senator Mary Landreau


17. Senator Frank Lautenburg


18. Senator John McCain


19. Senator Harry Reid


20. Senator Ken Salazar


21. Senator Arlen Specter


22. Senator George Voinovich

MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

1. John Conyers, Jr.


2. Nancy Pelosi


3. Henry Waxman


4. Maxine Waters


5. Linda Sanchez


6. Marion Berry


7. John Salazar

These people have a problem understanding our very clearly written constitution, and wish to change it through legislation or judicial activism without the approval of the people. They are no longer fit to hold public office in the United States of America. It's time for all people who love freedom to stand together to protect ourselves from these destroyers of liberty.

I request all bloggers read over my list, and recommend additions to it, if you have them. THe people on this list are known to me well enough that I know they need to be "unelected". I also hope each of you will find and publish on your blogs any information, both for and against retaining these individuals in office, so that we can create a thorough index for voters in the next election, and in each one after that. I will gladly create a file to hold this index on my personal website, with a prominent link from my blog. I will allow any blogger to also link directly to my file.

UPDATE: The list is up at http://www.citystar.com/~mweather/littlelist.htm Click here to go straight to the list. Enjoy!

Joe Biden, Target

Senator Joe Biden made a few choice comments Sunday, some of which should see him ridden out of Washington on the underwing pylon of a B-52 heading for the Arctic Circle. From Newsmax, here are Biden's too stupid by half remarks:

Sen. Joe Biden said Sunday that if President Bush nominates recently confirmed Circuit Court Judge Janice Rogers Brown to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court, Senate Democrats will launch a filibuster.

"If [Bush] sent up Edith Jones, I could assure you that would be a very, very, very difficult fight - and she would probably be filibustered," Biden told CBS's "Face the Nation."

In the next breath Biden corrected himself, saying: "I misspoke, I misspoke. Janice Rogers Brown is what I meant to say."

In other words, whoever President Bush nominates will be filibustered, unless it's a liberal judge that fits the Democrat's agenda of judicial rule. The Republican party has control of the Senate, the House, and the White House, yet the Democrats are still trying to rule. They are doing so through activist jurists on our nation's courts.

We do not elect people to rule, but to govern, according to the Constitution of the United States. Senator Biden is one of many Democrats that can't seem to get that idea through their head. Nor can they understand that this is exactly the behavior that led to their defeat in 2002 and 2004, and will probably cost them even more seats in 2006. We do not want rule by judicial fiat, by a bunch of unelected prima donnas in black robes that think their word, as Nancy Pelosi put it, "is almost the same as God's".

The Constitution establishes three branches of government. The legislative branch has the role of creating needed laws such as establishing judicial offices, funding the government, establishing armies and navies, coining money, establishing "post roads" and such. The second branch is the Executive branch, whose job is to enact the laws passed by congress, and to ensure they are obeyed. The Judicial branch has only ONE responsibility: to see that violations of the laws enacted by congress and enforced by the President are dealt with, and those who violate such laws are punished. The Supreme Court also has the responsibility to ensure that all laws in the nation are compatible with the Constitution under which we all are bound.

Asked whether that would break the Senate's much-heralded compromise last month not to filibuster judicial appointments except under "extraordinary circumstances," Biden explained:

"[The Supreme Court] is a totally different ball game. ... A circuit court judge is bound by stare decisis. They don't get to make new law. They have to abide by [legal precedent]."

Senator Biden, the Supreme Court is not supposed to make new law, either. That is the responsibility of the Legislature. Shifting the responsibility of the legislature to the courts is unconstitutional. Back off and shut up!

Asked if O'Connor's retirement was more likely to provoke a filibuster than would have been the case had the more conservative Chief Justice William Rehnquist retired, Biden responded, "Probably."

It's time to shove the Democrats so far into the dark they can't find their way back with the sun shining. They have totally destroyed the concept of checks and balances, and have determined that since they can't get elected, they'll see that judges are appointed that will do their will. It's time to target each and every one of these people that can't seem to read our constitution and understand it for removal from office, including activist judges. The ballot box is still the most potent weapon in freedom's arsenal. Today, there are new weapons as well: blogs, talk radio, citizen's organizations, "527" groups, and more. It's time to use these weapons against those that would destroy our freedom. We need to make a list of those that don't seem to want to work within the limits of the constitution, to see that they are no longer capable of doing harm to this nation and its citizens. Make a list, and come election time, see that each and every one of them feels the heat of our righteous wrath.

The American people in the meantime are being screwed by a bunch of legalists that think the law should be whatever they say it is on any given day. You cannot run a nation with that kind of behavior. Our rights are being subjugated to the whims of judges. I wish to remind everyone to study a little-taught bit of history - Shay's Rebellion. If the courts continue to infringe upon the rights of citizens, there may be a bigger rebellion than Shay ever thought about, and a bunch of black robes will have dark red holes in them. We cherish our rights, and will not allow ANYONE to take them away from us.
---

Time to Stop Playing Games

It's the 4th of July, our Independence Day - the day we declared we were big enough to decide for ourselves how we'll govern ourselves. This is a great time to take stock of what's right and what's wrong with our current government. There's a lot wrong. That means it's also time to start working toward correcting those wrongs. Here are my suggestions:

It's time for the Republican Party to stop playing 'nicey-nice' games with the Democrats. It only gives them delusions of grandeur, and make you look weak. It's time for the Republicans to assert the majority the American people gave them last November. There was a reason for that majority - the majority of the people of the United States didn't like the proposals (what few that were actually presented) the Democrats offered for governing the United States.

The American people want a government that first and foremost, guarantees their rights as expressed in the Bill of Rights of our Constitution. That is far more evident as the court's last session did its best to nullify two of those rights: to be secure in our personal property, including our homes and businesses, and to seek a redress of grievences from the Government.

The most important thing the Congress must do is to affirm, loud and clear, that the Constitution is fixed, and the only way to change it is by the processes outlined in it. That means by amendment, not by judicial fiat. The second most important thing Congress needs to do is to define what the term "good behavior" means for the judiciary, and to start removing judges who fail to meet that qualification. Be sure to include "applying the laws, rules, and traditions established in our founding documents, and bearing true faith and allegience to them as written or amended". I would strongly recommend beginning with Ruth Badder Ginsburg, Andrew Kennedy, and John Souter. Follow that by emptying about half the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. There's no reason to try to impeach these judges, just simply say they haven't lived up to the expectations of the American people. Nothing in our Constitution grants judges life tenure - that is merely tradition. It's about time some traditions were overturned and new ones implemented. If necessary, hold a national referrendum on them, but get the useless, the arrogant, and the dictatorial off the bench.

Secondly, if necessary, KILL the filibuster rule. There's nothing sacred about it, and it's time to stand up to the dimmocreeps. Then appoint well-qualified, conservative judges to replace the slackers that are given the boot. Explain to them that their tenure depends upon how they work. Those that actually do what JUDGES are supposed to do will remain. Those that don't will be shown the door after a thorough review. I'd suggest no more than four years' tenure. Explain to them in very simple terms that they are there to apply and interpret the law, not to make it or modify it. Also explain to them that the Constitution is as written, not as how they might think it SHOULD be written. Be very clear about this. We've had enough "judicial tinkering" and encroachment of our rights.

Thirdly, reassert the constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms every human being has, including unrestricted freedom of speech (especially Internet speech), the right to keep and bear arms, to be free of unreasonable search, and the right to worship when, where, and how they choose. If Congress needs some help, I'm sure there are about 100 million Americans that would gladly put in their bit.

Fourth, establish a clear and concise declaration of war against "any and all parties whose goal is to disrupt the government or commerce of the United States, or to bring harm to its citizens, wherever they may be." Be sure to include that any and all means necessary will be used to bring such a war to a reasonable and just conclusion - on OUR terms.

Finally, it's time Congress got ITS house in order. We need for our congressional delegations to begin trimming the federal budget, to begin closing down agencies whose reason for existence no longer exists, and to trim the bloated number of federal bureaucrats. Congress should remove its support for the federal employee's union, and revamp the entire Civil Service program. It's cumbersome, archaic, and inefficient - it's time it changed.

We the people will support these changes. We will not continue to support the status quo. With the Internet, we now have the ability to make our wishes known to Congress directly. We can also form coalitions and consensus within various constituencies far faster and easier than before. The power of the mainstream media to be gatekeepers of news is gone. This is a new era - learn to live in it. It's about time, too, for Congress to establish email addresses and webspace for every congresscritter. There's no excuse for them hiding from the efficient receipt of their constituent's wishes. If they're too dumb to learn to use the Internet, they're too dumb to be in Congress. If it's just a matter of not wanting to be bothered, we'll see that next election they won't have to worry about that any more.

The preamble of our Constitution says "We, the people...". It's about time Congress understood THAT, too. We're the boss, and we're not very happy with our current government. It's far better to change willingly than to have change thrust upon you. Consider that - it can very well happen, and as quickly as Nancy Pelosi makes a fool of herself.

Happy Birthday, USA!

Happy 229th birthday to the United States of America, and to the warriors, young and old, who ensure this won't be the last!

Saying Stupid Stuff

Molly Ivins has joined the list in saying stupid things about the Iraq war and the Republican government. Her latest tirade is here. Here are the relevant paragraphs:

The vote on invading Iraq was 77 to 23 in the Senate and 296 to 133 in the House. By that time, some liberals did question the wisdom of invasion because: A) Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11 and B) it looked increasingly unlikely that Iraq actually had great stores of weapons of mass destruction, since the United Nations inspectors, who were on the ground, couldn't find any sign of them -- even though Donald Rumsfeld claimed we knew exactly where they were.

Since my name is Molly Ivins and I speak for myself, I'll tell you exactly why I opposed invading Iraq: because I thought it would be bad for this country, our country, my country. I opposed the invasion out of patriotism, and that is the reason I continue to oppose it today -- I think it is bad for us. I think it has done nothing but harm to the United States of America. I think we have created more terrorists than we faced to start with and that our good name has been sullied all over the world. I think we have alienated our allies and have killed more Iraqis than Saddam Hussein ever did.

We know why France, Germany, Russia and China didn't want the United States to go to war: they were raking in huge profits under the "oil for palaces, er... food" program. They didn't want US killing THEIR golden goose. There wasn't much in the way of "good feelings" or "friendship" involved, just cold hard cash.

The Democrats just have to oppose any military action President Bush undertakes. They're the "party against war", except when a Democratic President wages it in the breakaway states of the former Yugoslavia, or when he's tossing around cruise missiles at tents in the desert and aspirin manufacturing plants. Bush is doing something that needed to be done: cleaning a cesspit that was just getting worse and worse. More than a dozen bloggers have compiled all the different links between Hussein and terrorism, including Al-Qaida, the people behind the 9/11 attacks.

As for killing more Iraqis than Saddam Hussein did, this piece of filth earns my everlasting condemnation of Molly Ivins. How can this woman be so stupid, and still get a paycheck for "writing"? How many mass graves have we uncovered, filled with how many hundreds of thousands of Iraqis? How many Kurds died when Saddam Hussein ordered chemical weapons be used against their villages? How many hundreds of thousands died in the futile and incomprehensible war between Iraq and Iran - a war that lasted eight years? How many people simply "disappeared", hauled into Mukhbarrat headquarters under orders of Saddam Hussein or one of his psychopathic sons? Molly Ivins has a HUGE apology she MUST give to the United States and its military. The civilian death toll in Iraq has yet to hit 100,000 for all causes. Most of those deaths have been caused by the wave of Islamofascists that have come out of the woodwork all around the world to attack the United States, and even more importantly, to try to stop democracy from taking root in Iraq.

Like Chuck Hagel, Charlie Schumer, Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, and a host of other "prominent" names in American politics and its syncopathic media, Molly Ivins has cast her lot with the people who want an American initiative in the Middle East to fail, solely for partisan politics. She now goes into my bit-bucket until further notice.

Hat tip: Arthur Chrenkoff.