Gay Rights Are Not Civil Rights

Today, as I looked over the review of the Philadelphia mayoral debate last night, I read the issue of civil rights versus gay rights.
The issue has been divided, as all things seem to be in this country, between politics, definition of morality and what the definition of civil rights really means.
On the Republican candidate side, Al Taunenberg, is staunchly against a decision made by the Fairmount Park Council which will charge the Boy Scouts of America $200,000 a year to use city land for their yearly gatherings. If elected, he intends to reverse the Park Council's decision. For the past 80 years, the Boy Scouts, who pay but a dollar to rent the grounds but who also do a lot of caretaking, for free, for the property, have used the land without incident. However, seven years after the Supreme Court struck down a lawsuit by gay rights activists claiming that the Boy Scouts, who are run on Christian values, have the right to deny the position of scoutmaster to homosexual men, the same activists are now using blackmail to obtain their means. The 'threat' made to the Boy Scouts was literally, either allow gay men to play with boys in the Boy Scouts or we will evict you from city property.
On the Democrat candidate's side, Michael Nutter, a politician I had actually liked up to this point and who I considered voting for, has claimed that gay rights are the same as civil rights and claims that either the Boy Scouts pay the 'fee' or get off the land.
In any other place and time, this request would be considered extortion and blackmail.
I disagree, however, with Mr. Nutter's assumption that gay rights are the same as civil rights. There is no comparison between how homosexuals have been treated to the slavery that African Americans and other racial minorities endured before the start of the American Civil War and through the Jim Crow and the Civil Rights Era of the 1960s.
African Americans were considered genetically and racially inferior. They were barred from public education, religious institutions, holding property or public office. They ate in the back of diners and sat in the rear of buses. They were lynched, shot, burned and terrorized for the simple crime of saying hello to a white woman.
Homosexuals, however, have not experienced the same type of attitude and behavior towards them. They can and do hold public office and own property. They can vote freely, without harassment, eat where they want and travel from state to state without hardly a second glance. They have access to educational institutions and can speak freely without being shot at.
African Americans were born as they were. Homosexuals choose to be what they are. This is not an issue of genetics or race as it is an issue of morality.
Throughout civilization, homosexuality has been looked down as abherant behavior. Even outside of Christian influence, other religious faiths, including Buddhist, Hindu, Jews and Islam, also condemn same sex relationships. God states, quite clearly, in the books of Leviticus and Deuteronomy that men and women who lay with the same sex is an abomination to both God and man.
Biologically, same sex relationships are not normal for if they were then there would not be a need to seperate the sexes into two. Although sex is pleasurable, it's ultimate function is to produce life. People of the same sex cannot reproduce. It is physically impossible. If we were, as gay activist Chris Crocker states, all meant to be 'gay' then we would be asexual instead of heterosexual. There would be no need for male and female sex organs.
Gay activists claim that being 'gay' is a right. In this, I actually agree. God did give us free will to sin or not to sin. What you do behind closed doors is your own business, however, I do not believe that you should expect preferential treatment because of your sexual activities.
Elton John, Boy George and George Michael never experienced the same mistreatment as Martin Luther King, Malcolm X or even Mohammed Ali or Colin Powell.
Opening the door to gay rights is a Pandora's box. After this, what will be next? Will it be pedophiles claiming that they cannot control their sexual urges with children? Will prostitutes demand 'equal rights'? How about drug dealers, after all, peddling drugs is capitalism, isn't it? A free market?
Gay rights is not civil rights and I think it is disrespectful for homosexuals to claim an alliance or kin to how African Americans have been treated in this country. Their rights are nothing more than a political ploy to change the culture and morality of the United States and nothing else.
Being gay is not love but a corruption of love. Jesus was not gay but he loved everyone equally. He didn't have sex with anyone he chose to. I love my Dad and my brother in law but I've no desire to have sexual relations with them. I've had friends in the service I'd give my life for and consider brothers but no desire to be between the sheets with them. I can love them without sexual intercourse. This is something homosexuals cannot understand.
Gay rights are not civil rights.
I expect to be condemned for my thoughts and opinions but I would rather be honest and upfront on them then to hide them behind being 'cool' or politically correct.
It is not a crime, although there are those who are trying to make it so, to tell someone they are doing something wrong; particularly in the realm of morality.
You don't see me burning crosses, standing picket lines or beating up homosexuals. Those homosexuals I do know claim that I have always treated them with fairness and dignity even though I do not agree with their lifestyle.
You can love the sinner and hate the sin.
Let the chips fall where they may.

Living Up To Your Word

There was a time, not that many decades ago, where a person lived and died by his word, by his promise to do something or to live up to a certain code of ethics. That time, as I found out today, thanks to liberalism and the duty shirking role models we have today, is one that is in grave danger of fading away into history.
Giving your word is something not to be taken lightly. It is to be considered and given with all reverence and solemnity. It is, as stated, a solemn promise or oath. Giving your word doesn't mean just saying you'll do something but also requires you to live up to what you say. Your word, when given, tells the other person you gave it to that, you can count on me; don't worry.
I have served in the Navy for nearly 20 years. During this time, I have been sent on many deployments across the globe starting as a 23 year old sailor at the tail end of the First Gulf War. During this deployment, I learned of the death of my mother from diabetes. I was saddened and wept like a child but I still carried out my duties. In addition to this deployment, I had been sent to Kosovo and to the Arabian Gulf in support of both Afghanistan and the Iraq War. In between wars, I've even chased pirates in the caribbean in a attempt to thwart drug smuggling into the United States. While I was away, I missed births, deaths, funerals, holidays, birthdays, weddings, anniversaries and other special events with my family. There were times that I was away from my family for months communicating only through regular mail or a 10 minute phone call when my ship decided to visit a port. There were times I was afraid or did not want to go on the scheduled, and often unscheduled, deployments but I went because I felt it was my duty to do so.
Why did I feel duty bound to do this? Because, on a cold day in January of 1988, I freely rose my hand and took an oath to God, the President and to everyone who lives in this nation, to 'support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic'. It was an oath I did not take lightly and one, although I struggled with it, I have lived up to it regardless of the long seperation from family and loneliness and fear I endured.
Today, I had a 22 year old boy, not a man for he is still far from ever being called that, who, out of fear, rejected his orders to report for duty in Iraq. He was not going to be sent to a combat unit but to a logistical one in the confines of the Green Zone in Baghdad. He would have lived in a barracks, not in a ditch, eating 3 warm meals a day and be able to communicate to his family through e-mail and telephone calls. This, in comparison to the life experienced by soldiers in the field, is not only safe but pretty comfortable.
It was not only fear that motivated him to repudiate his orders but also because he was unwilling to give up time he would have lost with his friends and girlfriend he sees every weekend. When I look at all the lost moments I can never regain with my own family and friends I have but little sympathy for this boy.
If he was a draftee, perhaps I would feel some form of compassion for him but I cannot find it within myself. He is a volunteer; just as I am. With the uniform they issue him come certain obligations we must adhere to including the possiblity of having to serve in a combat area. The Navy, as are all the other branches of the service, is not something to just waste 2 to 4 years of your life just so you can gain free money for college; there are expectations expected of you as well. Obligations we cannot refuse. Duties we must perform.
To add insult to injury, after the discipline review board was held on him determining that he must face non-judicial punishment, my sailor was found outside holding court with his friends and openly mocking the entire proceedings including a horrible and disgraceful mock salute he laughed with his friends about. His behavior has been noted and will be mentioned at the judicial proceedings in front of our commanding officer where they will, without doubt, bring great influence upon the CO's decision to punish this boy.
He additionally holds no guilt over the fact that because of his absence, another sailor has been detailed to take his place in Iraq. He gave no thought to this man's family, or friends or financial considerations; he only thought about his own comfort and safety and spending time partying with friends and making out with his girlfriend in somewhere-ville, North Carolina.
I think that he should write a letter to apologize to the man who took his place. Others agreed and he will be forced to write such a letter.
I don't understand where he can get off thinking that he can shirk his duties? Why he must be held to a different standard than the 110,000 other men and women already in country in Iraq and Afghanistan? There are men and women there who have sick fathers, or strained marital relationships or children they have never seen but they go about their duty because they gave their word.
My sailor doesn't know the meaning of the words "I promise".
Because of legalities (and liberalism), I cannot send him to the military prison he so rightly deserves. I believe that a year in Leavenworth, Kansas; one of the worst military prisons in the country, literally, a hell on earth would properly punish a boy who is far too selfish for his own good. Because of 'sea-lawyers' I cannot punish him as he needs to be but can only provide 'administrative' punishment.
Still, I fully intend to see that 'administrative' punishment is dealt to him as he deserves.
He deserves his rank to be removed from him.
He deserves the restriction to the barracks and additional manual labor over a period of months that will be assigned to him.
He deserves his college money taken away from him.
He deserves his benefits stripped from him including not being able to ever hold a government job or work for the police, postal or fire department. Personally, I don't even think he should have the right to ever vote either.
He deserves to be mocked and made fun of in front of the entire command where he will be made an example to others.
He fully is deserving of the label of coward because he failed to live up to his 'word'.

Rudy Gaining on Hillary

Rudy Gaining on Hillary Current mood: calm Category: News and Politics
Hillary Clinton's dreamwalk is ending and her nightmare has just begun.
Because of her flip-flopping and blatant lies about her voting record concerning the Iraq War and authorization of military force against Iran, she is losing the confidence of her supporters allowing the Republicans to gain ground on her. The latest Wall Street Journal/NBC (found on Townhall.com) poll shows Senator Hillary Clinton slipping in the polls and former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani gaining ground to pull even with her.
Although conservatives bristle at the idea, Rudy's stance on abortion and gay rights may sway moderates away from Senator Clinton's neo-socialism and firmly into the Republican camp.
I hate to say that during this election I must vote for the lesser of the two evils and I've been looking into Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson and John McCain as candidates I would be willing to support in the upcoming Presidential election.
Although I've lost confidence with the current Republican leadership I'm still willing to stay the course with them.
You may ask why and I'll be glad to tell you.
1. The Democrats say they support the troops but not the war but they not only have forwarded efforts to cut the funding to our soldiers in the field but they said very little when MoveOn.org made their false accusations towards General Petraeus during his Senate hearing last September. As a serviceman myself, my unit is currently operating without a budget thanks to the Democrats stalling in Congress.
2. The Democrats claim they support religion but yet they continue to also support abortion, gay marriage and the use of fetuses for stem cell research. They say one thing but do another.
3. I'm actually for some sort of medical insurance reform (notice the word reform; not re-create) but I'm not for socialized medicine which would only bankrupt the economy and prevent the patient from making their own choices when it comes to health care. It is interesting to note that on VoteSmart.com's website, both Senator Hillary Clinton and House Speaker Pelosi receive over 40% of their funding for their campaigns from insurance companies. Does the public really think that the Democrats are going to bite the hand that feeds them?
4. Granting an amnesty for illegal immigrants and offering them health and educational benefits is, to me, not only criminal, but an insult to those of us who pay taxes and live, legally, in this country. However, this is just what the Democrats desire to do. The Democrats refuse to acknowledge the very laws they claim to protect.
For awhile, I was going to support the Democrats but no longer. I finally came to some common sense. It looks like the rest of the country is too.

Party of Lincoln Must Become the Party of Teddy

It is time to look reality in the face. The Republican Party is in deep trouble. The 2006 midterm elections should have been a clarion call to the Republican leadership that their conservative platform, which can trace its roots to Ronald Reagan and perhaps further to Richard Nixon, has lost it's flavor with the voters.

Does this mean that the Republicans should abandon it's principles and become just another socialist, left wing party such as the Democrats?

Not by any means whatsoever. It's not so much time to make a change in course as it is time to turn the page in Republican doctrine.

It is time to make the Party of Lincoln the Party of Teddy Roosevelt.

In the early 20th Century, Teddy Roosevelt represented the more progressive elements of the Republican Party. Arising due to concerns over the unexpected social side effects of the Industrial Revolution, Teddy became a voice of change for the party as well as the architect of the Square Deal.

Like Roosevelt, it's time for Republican leadership to refocus it's principles. It is time to stop being stoic and become more progressive.

In what ways?

• Become champions of scientific ingenuity. The technology is available, in at least theory format, to ween America off of foreign oil once and for all. The Republicans need to become champions of science and not stalwarts of the stone age. Problems won't fix themselves but we can use technology can be used to help alleviate them.


• Get onboard with the working class. It is the American labor force that has made America strong. Our businesses are only as good as our workers. Attempting to stop the minimum wage hike was a major mistake and it put a black eye on the Republican elephant.


• Be frontrunners on the environmental scene. Take the rug out from the Democrats by being proactive. Sign the Tokyo accords.


• Re-establish the Square Deal and mediate effectively between unions and business owners. Penalize business owners for taking their companies overseas. Make them want to stay here but also encourage the unions to be fair with their demands.


• Be leaders in social justice and avoid being labled ignorant and arrogant. The Republicans have an unwarranted label of being snobbish and prejudiced. It's time to break that mold and be the champions of minorities as the party originally was with the African slaves.


• Stop being an isolationist party. Like it or not, we are a part of a global society. This does not mean we surrender our sovereignty, but we must work with other governments and stop playing the role of cowboy.


• Reform the UN and retake it's leadership. Its nothing but a huge beauracracy right now.


• The gay rights and abortion issue is not going to be solved in the Senate or the Supreme Court; there is too much partisanship there ... let each state decide it's own course.

The Republicans, of course, do not have to change their ways but there already is a growing number of disaffected souls who are thinking it may be time to leave the party ... Chuck Hagel and Michael Bloomberg are just two. There are also those who are taking stances against traditional Republican values such as Arnold Schwarzeneggar, Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani.

We can either change with the times or become extinct like the dinosaurs.

Truths and Lies

With the good comes the bad and we are reminded of the words General William Tecumseh Sherman said in an interview during the American Civil War, "War is Hell".

As a US Marine faces charges for committing real war crimes against civilians in the village of Haditha, Iraq a former Army recruit faces charges for falsifying a video he made for Iraq Veterans Against the War where he stated he participated in a massacre of civilians in an Islamic mosque. The soldier, in question, of course, never made it out of basic training and has never been to Iraq but that didn't stop the IVAW from initially trumping up the video in an attempt to smear both the US military and President Bush.

Here is the truth: Marines who committed war crimes in Haditha have been arrested and are going to face justice. That is the end of the story. Ironically, Jesse Macbeth, a liar, is also about to face justice too.

There have been real crimes committed. Such is the nature of war and the purpetrators who committed such acts should be, and are going to be, held accountable, however, the vast majority of military personnel act honorably and with a deep respect for the safety of civilians. To support a liar like Jesse MacBeth just to make political points is just as dishonorable as the Marines being charged for war crimes.

It's the pot calling the kettle black.

Focusing on the Negative

I think that Ollie North has hit the proverbial nail on the head in his coloumn about negative reporting in Iraq. The media is controlled by left-wing idealists who revel in every mistake America has ever made. They love it when America fails and hide our successes. For every death reported by the media coming out of Iraq they hide the truth about food supplies delivered to Iraqi civilians. They hide the truth about power restored to communities or new schools or vaccines being administered. The media loves to make body counts and report the grisly goings on in Iraq but, due to their own ignorance, they miss the real human story of the war. Why focus on the positive when you can dwell on the negative?

Not a Hero

Yesterday, former Marine Cpl. Lance Korkesh lost his appeal and was discharged from the Corps for wearing his uniform to an anti-war protest and for using disrespectful language to a superior officer. To the political Korkesh is looked upon as a hero.

If Kokesh is a hero, then the left's definition of that term is completely befuddled if not ridiculous.
Kokesh broke several long standing codes of honor in the service. Just because he took off his unit patch did not exempt him from the regulation stating that servicemembers will not wear a uniform to any official protest. He also used profanity towards a superior officer which is a breach of discipline. Kokesh also had contempt for one of the board members, a Chief Warrant Officer, who sat on his appeal. Kokesh stated that the Warrant should not have sat on his board because he is not a commissioned officer.

The last time I looked at the Navy/Marine Corps rank system, we called Chief Warrant Officers as 'sir' symbolizing that they are indeed officers. Chief Warrant Officers are normally senior enlisted personnel who have been granted a commission as officers due to their sustained superior performance.

I guess Kokesh and I serve in two different militaries?

Not only is Kokesh in need of a lesson in discipline but he also needs a course in officer recognition.

Kokesh is no hero and to call him one is dishonorable.

Duty is a 24 hour Job

In a recent Washington Post article, a US Marine reservist and Iraq War veteran has been charged with misconduct after appearing at an anti-war protest while wearing a uniform. In addition, he insulted a superior and used offensive language when told that he was violating regulations by wearing the uniform. The Marine, CPL Lance Kokesh, stated in his defense that "This is clearly a case of selective prosecution and intimidation of veterans who speak out against the war," Cpl. Kokesh said. "To suggest that while as a veteran, you don't have freedom of speech is absurd." In regards to his participation in the protest, Cpl. Kokesh argues that he was not representing the military at the protest in Washington, and he made that clear by removing his name tag and other military insignia from his uniform. Mr. Lebowitz said Cpl. Kokesh technically is a civilian unless recalled to active duty and had the right to be disrespectful in his response to the officer. He called the proceedings against Cpl. Kokesh highly unusual and said the military usually seeks to change a veteran's discharge status only if a crime has been committed.

Sadly, CPL Kokesh is mistaken for serving in the military is a 24 hour a day/7 day a week job. We are accountable for our behavior both on and off duty whether or not we wear a uniform or not. CPL Kokesh can be, and will be, held accountable for his remarks towards his superior and for dishonoring a uniform whose honor, he knows full well he is to uphold.

There is freedom of speech and those in the military are allowed to participate in protests but there are also rules and wearing a uniform at an official protest is one one of them. Why? Because by wearing a uniform he is endorsing a Marine Corps position. CPL Kokesh's position, however, is not the Marine Corps position. Therefore, he should not have worn his uniform and should have worn his street clothing to represent his own opinion.

CPL Kokesh is also a member of the group known as Iraq Veterans Against the War which has been known for pulling publicity stunts and for distributing false information such as the so-called veteran who published a video on You Tube where he talked about US attrocities in Iraq which were later proven to be false. The soldier in question was also discharged while in basic training and never served in Iraq at all.

An American Terrorist Says Hello

Hello. I would like to take this opportunity to introduce myself. My name is Michael and I am a sailor in the United States Navy. I have served in the Navy for nearly 20 years. I am going to retire and go home to Philadelphia in December. I am, according to reknown TV personality, and apparent foreign policy and engineering expert, Rosie O'Donnell, a terrorist.

Over my term of service to my country, I have been called many things. Being in the Navy has afforded me the opportunity to travel the world and to meet a variety of people. I have been called a 'hero' by Viet Nam vets and from a man who owned a restaraunt in Haifa, Israel. I was called 'friend' by a Greek in the city of Rhodes and was given many thanks from the citizens of New Orleans for helping them to recover from the devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina.

I have defended the interests of my country in three different wars. In the First Gulf War, my command aided Kurdish refugees with humanitarian supplies. In the Balkans, I helped throw back the aggressive Serbs and put an end to their genocidal practices in Kosovo. In the Caribbean, I chased and helped capture drug smugglers who poison our children with their 'product'. In 2003, I participated in the overthrow of dictator, criminal and human rights abuser, Saddam Hussein. I returned to the Gulf in 2005 and resumed my mission. Everywhere I have gone, I have fought for liberty, the security and the safety of other people.

But, according to the wisdom of Rosie O'Donnell, I am a terrorist.

I strongly believe that Ms. O'Donnell is greatly mistaken in her concept and definition of just what a terrorist is. A terrorist, by Webster's dictionary, is one who uses terror to accomplish a political end. The only "end" I have pursued in my career is the safety of others and to defend them against aggression.

In the beleagured nation of Iraq, Islamic extremists have pursued a campaign to put an end to the spread of democracy in the Middle East. The insurgency is being funded and aided, militarily, by elements of the group known as Al-Qaeda and by the governments of Iran and Syria who fear a democratic regime on their doorstep.

In this extreme version of Islam, women would become slaves and the people would fall under the rule and whims of mullahs instead of being able to rule themselves. Their rights and liberties would be determined by a few instead of by the many.

Rosie O'Donnell is mistaken in her definition of the word terrorist; just as she is in a great number of things. Unlike these people, I do not believe in the selfish and dictatorial practices of 'one man rule'. I do not enforce my religious beliefs upon others. I do not blow up markets or kidnap people and leave their dead bodies laying in some river. I do not behead prisoners of war nor do I make threats against civilians.

Nor do any of my comrades in arms in the US Army, Air Force, Coast Guard or Marine Corps.

Unlike Rosie O'Donnell, I know what it is like to be dedicated to something and to show loyalty to my friends and co-workers. After seeing the world, I also know what it is like to not be able to enjoy the freedoms we do in a democratic society. Ms. O'Donnell would prefer it if American soldiers left Iraq to the wiles of Islamic extremists and the predatory desires of Iran and Syria. I would much prefer if the people of Iraq were allowed to determine their own path and to rule themselves freely.

I have been to Israel and the Middle East and have seen with my own eyes what real terrorists do to people and the society which they infiltrate. I know fully the difference between right and wrong; good and evil. I have seen, with my own eyes, the sacrifices people have been willing to make in the name of freedom and security.

But, still, according to the all wise and knowing Rosie O'Donnell I am a terrorist?

Ms. Rosie O'Donnell has no idea, whatsoever, what it means to 'sacrifice' for anything or for anyone. She is a selfish, self centered woman who allows her ignorance of facts to determine her beliefs. She relies not on truth but upon propaganda and malicious rumors and loudly relays them on national television. Ms. O'Donnell has no concept of just what a 'terrorist' is. She is not a journalist nor is she professional by any means and I recommend that she, at least, ask someone who has lived under terrorism just how they feel about it instead of just spouting off her own misled and misinformed opinions before the world.

I stand fully behind my friends and fellow servicemen in Iraq. They are good men and women doing a job that no one else who stayed behind on the safety of their sofas know anything about. I know this from having served side by side with these men and women for nearly 20 years. They are my friends, my comrades and my family. I don't betray either of those for anyone let alone for politics.

If I am a terrorist, then I am in very good company for I follow in the footsteps of those who gave their lives at Valley Forge, Gettysburg, the Somme, Iwo Jima, Chosin Resevoir and Viet Nam.

So, as they say in Alcoholics Anonymous, I repeat with tongue firmly planted in cheek, Hello, my name is Michael and I am an American terrorist. Pleased to make your acquaintance.

Rudy Giuliani says he can represent Blue states

Former NYC Mayor, Rudy Giuliani, who has come under fire from many on the conservative Republican side for his pro-abortion stance, states that he can represent both the Red and the Blue states; making it clear that he is a compromise candidate.

"My view of this race for president is that the Republican Party should not go into this election, as we have in the past, having to write off New York, Connecticut, New Jersey," he said. "We've got to make this a 50-state election." Recent polls from the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute showed Giuliani leading the pack of Republicans and Democrats in both Connecticut and New Jersey. He trailed Clinton, 50 percent to 42 percent, in New York - the strongest showing of any Republican there. Part of Giuliani's plan, according to Democratic strategist Hank Sheinkopf, "is to tweak Hillary at home - to say to the Republican base, which is decidedly anti-Clinton, anti-Hillary Clinton, that he can give her a run at home."

Click here to read more on this article.

Iraq Veteran no Veteran at All.

This is how far the left is willing to go to make our President and our country look bad.

A man who claimed in an anti-war video to have "slaughtered" hundreds of civilians while serving with the Army Rangers in Iraq faces federal charges of falsifying his record.
Jesse MacBeth, 23, alleged in a 20-minute production by a 1970s antiwar activist he personally killed 200 civilians, many of them at close range, while on patrols with the Army Rangers during 16 months in Iraq before being discharged due to wounds.

click here to read more on this story.

What is Wrong with People?

It is with great sadness that I read the story about the young mother in Philadelphia who placed her dead baby in the trunk of her car. As I read the story I have to ask myself what is wrong with people? We live in a society where tragedy seems to have become an everyday event in our schools and neighborhoods, and because of it, people are becoming more and more apathetic towards their surroundings. You would think that all of this would have just the opposite effect and make people more aware and want to help but it is not. We are becoming numb towards the value of a human life or the welfare of our neighbors. We seem to place more value upon personal belongings and societal status than we do about each other and this is a sad state of affairs.

When I grew up, my neighbors knew whose child I was and would watch and report my doings to my mother and father. I was never afraid to go to a neighbor for help. It was also not uncommon for me to be brought by the ear by my neighbors to them when I did something wrong. Nowadays, people just want to mind their own business.

The idea of a community is fast slipping away as we become more isolationist in our ways. I wonder why this young woman could not go to anyone for help? Why, if she was pregnant, could she not talk to someone? I'm puzzled completely.

The full story, of course, has not been told concerning the reason how the baby died and why it was placed in the trunk of the car. It is even more bizarre that the young woman, a freshman in college, did not have the common sense to go to the authorities or to a local hospital. But, I believe that something is seriously wrong with our society.

Know Your Coffee

I love coffee. I drink every morning and at least once more in the afternoon. The best coffee I have ever had has been in a cafe in Hania, Crete. I believe it was Turkish coffee. Anyway, Men's Health has a great article about coffee and coffee etiquette.

Perchance to Dream ...

I am never going to be rich or even moderately wealthy. It's just a fact of life that I have readily accepted. Still, although I may never be able to travel around in expensive Hermani suits or associated expensive hotels on the Riviera or playing high stakes poker at the casinos at Monte Carlo while drinking martinis, shaken, not stirred, I can always dream of being Secret Agent 007 ... that's Bond, James Bond to you.

What guy doesn't want to dress debonaire, thwart villianous spies and nab gorgeous girls?

Like I said, it's a fantasy, reality is a heck of a lot less dramatic and is actually pretty mundane.

C'est Le Vie! As the French say ....

But still ... the car... man, what a dream!

Ever since I saw the latest James Bond film, Casino Royale, I have been in love with Bond's Aston-Martin. I viewed the models of the car and colors available and I love the one pictured above. Forest Green has always been my favorite color. Sigh, but at a cost of $170,000 the only way I'll ever be behind the wheel of James Bond's car is in the fantasies in my head.

Oh well, there is nothing wrong with having dreams .....

Hey, what are you staring at? This is MY fantasy! Get your own!!!

John Edwards Poor Choice of Days

For quite a while, I've had a begrudging respect for Senator John Edwards even though he is a Democrat. I relate to his growing up in the lower middle class. I admired the fact that he got where he was through his own efforts. Even during the 2004 Vice-Presidential debates, the soft-spoken South Carolinian seemed to have a grasp of what it is like to be a common man in America.

My respect for Senator Edwards has fallen, however, by his plan to stage anti-war protests across the country this Memorial Day.

I am not criticizing Senator Edwards right to protest, in fact, I encourage it. It's his right to do so under the First Amendment of the Constitution. What I do find fault with is the Senator's poor choice of days.

Memorial Day is a day when we are to remember those who have fallen in battle while defending our great nation. Although I believe Senator Edward's respect for veterans is true, it is with my deepest regret and sorrow that he chooses a day to remember veterans to make a political statement about the war in Iraq.

As much as Senator Edwards states that we should 'support the troops, not the war' I know, deep in my heart, that not everyone feels this way and that the rally will only end up as an ugly display and as a golden opportunity for those of the radical left to mock those who wear a uniform.

As a whole, I believe that the vast majority of Americans look favorably upon the men and women who serve in the Armed Forces. Still, there is that very loud minority who do not like soldiers and who take every opportunity afforded them to stir up dissent and to spout hatred towards servicemen.

I now believe that the slogan, "support the troops, not the war" is a false statement for you cannot do both. It is like cheering for your home team at the Superbowl all the while secretly rooting for the visiting team to win. It is therefore impossible to support the troops without supporting the war.

The radical left is going to take over and use this rally to shout out their ridiculous and unwarranted hatred of the military. Because of this, I wish that Senator Edwards would choose a different day to make his statement. Already there has been one burning of a US soldier in effigy in Oregon. How long will it be before returning soldiers are spit on again just like their Viet Nam predecessors? Or are attacked in airports? There are too many leftist radical who yearn for a return to those days of Viet Nam protests.

As a letter written by a young woman named Serai1 to the editor of Salon.com states: " are you seriously suggesting that people shouldn't protest on Memorial Day because it isn't polite?? In case you haven't noticed, this entire WAR isn't polite. War is filthy, nasty and obscene - what makes you think being polite about protesting is going to do a damn thing to make it stop?
And Memorial Day being "sacred"? Oh, give me a break. Armistice Day was sacred. Memorial Day (weekend - nobody celebrates the holiday anymore) is, for the vast majority of people, the first three-day weekend of the summer, and the weekend when the first big summer blockbusters hit the theaters. Most people have no idea what it is that's being memorialized, even."

This is the sentiment expressed by many on the side of the radical left; the side made up of crazy new agers, ultra-liberals, socialists, anarchists and just plain troublemakers.

I know that Senator Edwards only wants to honor veterans, or, at least, thinks he does, but this isn't the way to do it and his choice of day to hold his rally is an extreme poor one that has cost him my respect.

Chuck Hagel & Fred Thompson

Senator Chuck Hagel (R) Nebraska on the Iraq War Funding Bill

Fred Thompson: What I Believe

On Abortion On the Issues

Mitt Romney for President

Mitt Romney on 60 Minutes Protecting America Securing the Border Strong Conservative Leadership Benchmarks for America I Won't Project Failure in Iraq On Mormonism 5 Brothers

A Short Musical Interlude

Darryl Worley: Have You Forgotten



Toby Keith: American Soldier



Skid Row: I Remember You



Night Ranger: You Can Still Rock (In America)



Damn Yankees: Don't Tread On Me



Def Leppard: The Gods of War



Bruce Springsteen: Born in the USA

A Gift of Life

I read with horror that since Roe vs Wade was passed in 1971, over 46 million abortions have been performed in this country alone. Abortions are horrible and I am thoroughly against them not only because of the procedure itself murders a human being but because I am speaking from the viewpoint of a child who escaped the process itself.

I was born in 1967. My mother discovered that she was pregnant with me in the summer of 1966. My mother, a lifelong diabetic, was advised by her doctor that she should abort me instead of carrying me to term. He warned that carrying me would be an incredible burden to her body; putting a strain upon her kidneys and possibly costing my mother her own life.

My mother, raised a Catholic, scoffed at her doctor's suggestion and took it upon herself to carry me to full term. My mother and I both survived the birthing process and I was granted life. My mother was ill for some time but she did not die. An abortion, therefore, would have been pointless. My Mom was so determined to be a 'mother' that three years later, she gave birth to my brother. Again, she survived the process.

I am very grateful to my Mom that she took such a courageous stand. Because she did, I have experienced the joys of growing up in a family that loved me completely. I experienced sunrises, sunsets, laughter and sorrow. I learned to love to play baseball and to swim in the ocean. I saw the stars shine brightly at night and listened to birds sing in the sunlight. I learned to appreciate sublte joy of petting a cat and the brittle coldness of a snowball thrown in winter by my brother; laughing all the time.

I learned to read and to write. I learned about teamwork and about responsibility. I graduated high school and enlisted in the US Navy. I learned meteorology as a trade and even became somewhat of a writer.

I can play a harmonica and am learning the keyboard. I've also learned what it is to love someone and to have them love me back. I learned what it was like to be alive.

I never would have learned or experienced any of this had my mother been a selfish person and placed her own safety over mine.

As a survivor, I believe that every child has the right to know what it is like to be alive. They need to experience the same joys and sorrows that I did. These experiences make up that which we call life. It's an amazing journey.

Thank you, Mom.

A Remarkable Obituary

Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Mr. Common Sense. Mr.
Sense had been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he
was since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape.


He will be remembered as having cultivated such value lessons as knowing when to come in out of the rain, why the early bird gets the worm and
that life isn't always fair. Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial
policies (don't spend more than you earn) and reliable parenting
strategies (adults, not kids, are in charge).

His health began to rapidly deteriorate when well intentioned but
overbearing regulations were set in place- Reports of a six-year-old boy
charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended
from school for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired for
reprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition.

Mr. Sense declined even further when schools were required to get
parental consent to administer aspirin to a student; but, could not inform the
parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion.

Finally, Common Sense lost the will to live as the Ten Commandments
became contraband; churches became businesses; and criminals received better
treatment than their victims.

Common Sense finally gave up the ghost after a woman failed to realize
that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled a bit in her lap, and was
awarded a huge financial settlement.

Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents, Truth and Trust, his
wife, Discretion; his daughter, Responsibility; and his son, Reason. He
is survived by two stepbrothers; My Rights and Ima Whiner.

Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone.

If you still remember him, pass this on; if not, join the majority and do
nothing

Great Leaders Part Two

This is how leaders speak:

Great Leaders Part One

An awesome discussion of the leadership abilities of George Washington.

Newsweek

Fred Thompson on Hannity & Colmes

Part One



Part Two

Liberally sprinkled with Intolerance & Bigotry

For all of the liberal claim to openly embrace everyone there seems to be quite a few people left behind in this massive group hug of theirs. I am speaking mainly about the growing liberal hatred of anything Christian. Recently, in New Jersey, a school held a terrorist drill where the 'terrorists' were right wing Christians. The supposed terrorists seized the school because two students were expelled for openly praying in school. Although a clamor was raised over the insult to the many people who claim Christianity as their religion; the apology offered by the school district definitely could have been of a more sincere nature.

It is becoming increasingly popular to ridicule and openly attack Christians in public. As a Scarborough Country article which appeared on MSNBC writes, "American media companies are raking in millions of dollars from movies, books and TV series that attack Christians and depict Jesus as a fraud. This week’s Newsweek offers a thoughtful piece on whether God even exists, but its respectful approach to a subject once thought taboo is the exception rather than the rule. It seems big media is cashing in on a growing trend to attack God, Christians, and followers of all faiths."

It is not just Christians who are the targets of liberals for conservatives, of every type, are also under a scrutinizing attack from the left. Open debate, once the cornerstone of our society, is no longer tolerated nor practiced by the left who much prefer falling back from debate and into a more seedier discussion filled with name calling and slanderous attacks. Thomas Sowell, himself a victim of many of these attacks, writes in a Townhall.com article that "The source of the anger of liberals, "progressives" or radicals is by no means readily apparent. The targets of their anger have included people who are non-confrontational or even genial, such as Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. "

So, the left has declared an open hunting season on both Christians and conservatives and this is from those who claim that they embrace everyone?

It must be one heck of an embrace for it is laced not with compassion and understand but with a liberal sprinkling of intolerance and bigotry.

We Come In Peace ....

Do you remember those old 1950s science fiction films where the alien spaceship lands near the Washington Monument and some alien in a silvery space suit steps out, raises his hand in supplication and says ... "we come in peace"?

You do? Then you might remember the next scene ...

Where the alien blasts the surrounding crowd with a ray gun!

I find it often very funny how life imitates art ... or is it art imitating life?

Our new 'aliens' nowadays come not from an far off planet but from a far off country in the Muslim lands of the Middle East and Eastern Europe. The right thing to do is not to judge a book by it's cover. We try, or at least should try, to look at everyone with an open heart and an open mind. Even when I was a little boy, my mother had always taught me to treat everyone the way I wanted to be treated until they gave you a reason not to. I believe that it is called the Golden rule.

I am trying very hard not to get to that point where I will look at anyone who calls themselves a Muslim as being a possible terrorist but when 6 men are arrested for planning a terrorist attack upon the US Army base at Ft. Dix, New Jersey I cannot help but be suspicious of their intent.

Then, when I am not looking, I find that a Hamas sponsored video was played on a US Government Arab speaking channel which implored people to perform violent acts of terror upon the State of Israel.

I do not want to choose sides in this conflict but it is fast becoming a time when I will have no choice but to do so. I know that there are good Muslims ... there are also very good Jews and Christians too. Still, if I have to choose, I may someday have to choose to support my brothers in Jerusalem over my brothers in Mecca.

Jesus was a Jew ... Mohammad was not. It's that simple.

Until then, I will abide by the Golden rule and my mother's teachings.

All the while watching over my shoulder very carefully because sometimes, the aliens do not always come in peace.

Where is the Party of Lincoln?

Where is the Party of Lincoln?

Abraham Lincoln is my favorite American hero. Not only did he preserve the Union but he also ended the scourge of African slavery; beginning the long fight carried on by such people as Frederick Douglass, Marcus Garvey and Dr. Martin Luther King jr to prove the words, 'all men are created equal'.
Lincoln held sway over a political party which championed not only the rights of the individual but also became, for awhile, the self proclaimed protector of the Constitution. Lincoln had a vision as to what he intended to see the post-Civil War America become. Sadly, his plans were cut short by an assassin's bullet at Ford's Theater in Washington, DC.
Lincoln's dream became lost as his political descendants became embroiled with corruption and came under the influence of businessmen and corporations.
If Lincoln were alive today, I often wonder if he would recognize those who claim to be the political heirs of his legacy. Would he agree with the 'compassionate conservatism' of George W. Bush or the right wing talk of Newt Gingrich? Would he approve of Mitt Romney's Mormonism or Rudy Giuliani's stance on abortion and gay rights? Or, would he argue with Ron Paul on his absurd government conspiracy theories or agree with them?
Or would Lincoln, perhaps, find something more in common with more erstwhile Republicans such as Chuck Hagel, John McCain or Fred Thompson?
I think that over the years, the Republican party I call my own has somehow lost Lincoln's message in transmission. I am not even sure if it is even the same party Ronald Reagan called his during his administration in the 1980s. It's conservatism seems to be befuddled of late and the party acts as if it knows not which direction to steer.
I'm not sure where we are but I am sure of this: it sure would be nice to return to that long ago, Party of Lincoln again.

Does the Republican Party have to change?

Is the Republican Party in trouble? I think so.

Recently, several moderates journeyed to the White House to discuss their concerns with George Bush's intent to veto the Iraq War Bill signaling dissent and dissatisfaction within the Party of Bush over his management of the war. With the loss of the Senate and poor showings in the mid-term elections, many Republicans are concerned over the future.

In addition, Presidential candidate Rudy Guiliani has openly shown his support of pro-choice and gay rights activism which goes against the grain of the long time, Repubican platform of pro-life and family values.

Lastly, Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, a lifelong Republican, former Viet Nam vet and yet another potential Republican Presidential candidate, has openly claimed that the Republican Party has been hijacked and that it is no longer the party of Reagan or Lincoln. Hagel believes it is time to form a new, third party.

Should the Republicans abandon their stance on abortion and gay rights? My thinking; no they should not. However, they do need to deflect the assault being driven upon them by the liberal (if not completely out-there) Democrats. There are other fronts that need to be fought such as greatly improving our decaying educational system and taking the lead on a national health care reform (it's time to take the air out of the insurance companies balloon). Both of these issues are, by far, of more interest to the common people than are the supposed rights of a minority.

In this age of media darlings such as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama it will be important for the Republicans must do one of two things; they either must change the way they do business or to find themselves another Ronald Reagan. As their was only one Gipper, change is most likely the path they must follow; for better or for worse.

Ronald Reagan, "It's Morning Again" 1984 TV ad

The New Pledge of Allegiance

For these highly sensitive and ever-changing times. We are an all encompassing society you know.

Brother Orwell knew this was coming. 1984 here we come!

Subject: FW: Written by a kid in school

New Pledge of Allegiance (TOTALLY AWESOME)

New Pledge of Allegiance!

Since the Pledge of Allegiance and The Lord's Prayer is not allowed in most public schools anymore because the word "God" is mentioned....

A kid in Arizona wrote the attached NEW School prayer.

I liked it.

Now I sit me down in school
Where praying is against the rule
For this great nation under God
Finds mentioning of Him to be very odd.

If Scripture now the class recites,
It now violates the Bill of Rights.
And anytime my head I bow
It becomes a Federal matter now.

Our hair can be purple, orange or green,
That's no offense; it's a freedom thing
The law is specific, the law is precise.
Prayers spoken aloud are a serious vice.

For praying in a public hall
Might offend those with no faith at all.
In silence alone we must meditate,
For God's name is prohibited by the state.

We're allowed to cuss and dress like freaks,
And pierce our noses, tongues and cheeks.
They've outlawed guns, but FIRST the Bible.
To quote the Good Book makes me liable.

We can elect a pregnant Senior Queen,
And the 'unwed daddy,' our Senior King.
It's "inappropriate" to teach right from wrong,
We're taught that such "judgments" do not belong.

We can get our condoms and birth controls,
Study witchcraft, vampires and totem poles.
But the Ten Commandments are not allowed,
For the Word of God must ever reach this crowd.

It's scary here I must confess,
When chaos reigns the school's a mess.
So, Lord, this silent plea I make:
Should I be shot; Please Lord, My soul do take!

Where Have You Gone Joe DiMaggio?

Growing up, I was fascinated by baseball. I would listen intently to my father, on those lazy summer afternoons gone by, telling stories about baseball players he loved to watch when he was a kid. His stories were vivid and I could almost imagine seeing Richie Allen hitting a homerun or the blaze of a Robin Roberts fastball.

My Dad was, and still is, a fan of the Philadelphia Phillies and his favorite player was Richie Ashburn. My Dad has stayed true to his team through the ups and the many downs of that beleaguered franchise. He remembers seeing the old Shibe Park, sitting in the bleachers at Connie Mack Stadium and the first year of the Vet.

I saw my own very first Big League Game in 1978 as I watched the Phillies beat up on the Chicago Cubs. I have inherited my Dad’s love for the game but, as things often turn out, I am more than disappointed by today’s baseball players.

Those who played during my Dad’s youth were blue collar men who held jobs in the off season to make ends meet. There were no limos, no chauffeurs, no fine dining. Ballplayers ate at the hot dog stand at the corner and drank at the bar down the street. Ballplayers were household names and more often than not they played their entire career with the same team.

Today’s ballplayers, however, make me sick with their million dollar salaries and overblown personalities. Free agency has destroyed the team concept of baseball. There is too much focus on personal stats than there is on winning as a team.

So, I am looking at the paper and am sighing in disbelief and disgust to read about Roger Clemens ‘comeback’ and Barry Bonds pursuit of Hank Aaron’s homerun record. If it weren’t for the salaries which are greater than the GNP of most third world nations, the self-centeredness and now, the use of narcotics and steroids, I might be interested in these two headlines but unfortunately, I am not.

I yearn for the ‘old’ days of baseball when the players were more personable and you knew everyone on the team. When players played because they love the game; not so they can get endorsements.

As Simon & Garfunkel once sang, “Where have you gone Joe DiMaggio?”

Show me the Money?!?!?

President Bush gave a speech this afternoon telling reporters that one of the major reasons he vetoed Congress's proposed War Funding Bill is that it is laced full of 'pork barrell' projects for certain Senators and Representatives districts. Bush vehemently refused to sign the bill as the projects are not related to the war.

So, this really isn't about the War in Iraq as much as it is about putting money in politician's pockets.

Gays Taunting Priests

Well, this is a switch and doesn't do much to promote the homosexual propaganda that they are nothing but victims.

Homosexual Activists Track, Taunt Priest(CNSNews.com) - An Episcopal priest in Colorado Springs is being hounded by homosexual activists who tossed a pie at him in church on Sunday; and then photographed him parking illegally outside a coffee shop, the Rocky Mountain News reported. "Don Armstrong deserves it for any number of reasons," said Noel Black, publisher of a self-described satire and gay advocacy publication. Black said that Armstrong has been ongoing fodder for the publication because of his history of opposing "gay rights."

Stupid is As Stupid Does

In an interesting quirk of fate, the (so called) Rev. Al Sharpton is now finding himself in the same bit of hot water he recently placed CBS's Don Imus in resulting in Imus's firing from CBS. Sharpton stands accused of making 'bigoted' statements concerning Presidential candidate, Mitt Romney's Mormon faith.

Can we fire Al Sharpton?

As the wise sage, Forrest Gump once said, "Stupid is as Stupid does".

The Press Determined to Give Up Hero of Ft DIx

In Japan, they practice something called 'Responsible Journalism'.

In America, we practice 'Whatever sells'.

The reporter who wrote this article should be tarred and feather with a sign stating "I collaborate with terrorists" hung around his neck for he has done all but name the man who helped authorities capture the Ft Dix Six.

What did they do? They gave up the city he lives, where he works and what month he spoke with the terrorists.

When the terrorists avenge themselves, I hope that this reporter will be sure to send his condolences to the man's family. As a commentator posted on the article: "But I can't help but want to smack this reporter upside the head for giving out this kind of information on a private citizen who was just trying to do his part".

... and they say that the liberal media does not support terrorism?

Securing the Land of Liberty

"God grants liberty only to those who love it, and are always ready to guard and defend it." ~ Daniel Webster

In this age of violence, it is important to many to have a sense of security. We all crave it and will guard the safety of our families and friends with our lives. However, sometimes all is not what it’s cut out to be. A false sense of security is a dangerous trap to fall into. Unfortunately, it is one that I feel that many Americans, particularly those on the left, have already found themselves lured into.

Those on the left, the liberals, the Democrats, talk too much. They feel that negotiation will solve all the problems in the world. Let me rephrase that. It’s not so much negotiation that the Democrats and their liberal contingency want as much as it is appeasement of an enemy which wants to usurp and to destroy the United States. They are willing to sell out our nation for a false sense of security. Like Neville Chamberlain, the Democrats talk so much and are so willing to compromise the standing, if not the security, of the United States to the point where it would not surprise me at all if the liberal Democrats were completely willing to surrender the entire country to radical Jihadists. After all, the Democrats do not like Christianity; perhaps they will embrace Islam instead. Ladies, buy your burqas now while you can. Perhaps you can get them before they change the fashion style next spring.

Although many seem to ignore it, America is in a state of war. While millions of us go about our daily business everyday nearly oblivious to the fact that there are thousands of American soldiers, sailors and airmen who are fighting that war everyday. Sadly, many of us are apathetic to their cause or their welfare. They would rather spend their time musing over the goings on of Desperate Housewives, who got dumped on American Idol and what was the score of the NBA game last night.

America has enemies who are bent on our destruction. As much as the left would love to place the burden for all of this squarely in the lap of America itself, this is not so. Sometimes, people hate just because they can. In the case of the Jihadists, they want to destroy America so that there will be no one to stop them from spreading their evil form of Islam throughout the globe. This is Fascism but on a different level than we’ve ever seen before. Our enemy doesn’t arrive on our shores on military ships and planes but as tourists and illegal immigrants. They arrive stealthily and lay in secret waiting, like a coiled snake, for their opportunity to strike us when we are not looking.

It is therefore necessary for us, as Americans, to be eternally vigilant for the enemy is not only without; but within. Just look at the most recent headlines concerning the foiled terrorist attack at Ft Dix, New Jersey and the arrest of the Miami-7 last summer.

America needs to wake up from the terrible slumber we have fallen into. 9/11 was only the opening phase of an attack upon our nation. Our enemy is patient and they are willing to wait for their next chance to take a swing at us. 9/11 will happen again and the only way to stop it is to remain vigilant and not surrender ourselves to complacency.

U.S. Grant We Need You Now

"Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country." ~ Unknown

My most favorite hero from American history is President Abraham Lincoln. I have read, and treasure, Stephen Sears noted biography of Lincoln as well as Gore Vidal's fictional novel of his administration during the Civil War. Whenever I visit Washington, D.C., which is far and in between, I make it a point to stop by his memorial to pay my respects. Other than the Viet Nam memorial, Lincoln's is the most solemn of memorials to our fallen and our great leaders. To say that I admire the 'Rail Splitter' would have to be called an understatement.

It is with abject irony that I write about Lincoln today as I read through the news clippings of the day. Other than perhaps for George W. Bush, no other President has ever faced the challenges that Lincoln has faced. He came into office in 1861 the President elect of a divided nation on the brink of war. The United States of America was united more in name than it was in actuality. We Americans were divided by geography, cultural, ideological and political boundaries. We were the North and the South. What we call an American today did not exist.

In April, insurgent Confederate forces opened fire upon the Federal garrison at Ft Sumter, SC initiating the bloodiest war in American history. 620,000 men died in combat far surpassing the number of dead in all of America's wars together. As President, Lincoln did what was considered then to be the most ill advised and today is the most daring decision ever made by a President. He ordered the Federal Army to march south into Confederate territory and to defeat the rebel army. Lincoln was President of the entire United States, not just a part of it, and he was not going to allow a section of the country to dissolve the Union Lincoln swore to protect without a fight.

I see many similarities between Abraham Lincoln and George W. Bush.

For the first few years, Lincoln, like Bush, had a serious problem with his generals. For all their braggart ways and beefed up military records, not one of his generals was able to lead the Union Army to victory over the Confederate. Lincoln went through several generals starting with Irwin McDowell, to Burnside, McClellan (twice), Hooker and George Meade before finally settling upon a young western general who seemed to succeed at bringing the fight to the Confederacy and in winning his battles. Who was this upstart general?

Ulysses S. Grant.

As I look at the paper today, I am shocked to find an article describing dissent being spread against our nation's commander in chief by a triumvirate of former U.S. Army generals: Wesley Clark, Paul Eaton and John Batiste. Not since McClellan was a general has a soldier so openly defied the President of the United States. This trio of has beens is calling for American troops to put their tail between their legs and to come home in defeat. They are doing the unthinkable; they are asking American soldiers to surrender their positions to the enemy and to come home in disgrace.

The current general in charge of American forces in Iraq is Gen. David Petraeus who is charged with halting the growing insurgency in Iraq. Like Meade who was tasked to stop the advance of Gen. Robert E. Lee into Pennsylvania, Gen. Petraeus has been given a hard task to undertake. A good man, I believe that Gen. Petraeus only has the best interests of American soldiers at heart and that he wants a victory in Iraq like everyone else does. Unfortunately, I do not think that our good general is aggressive enough.

Today's officers tend to be more boardroom educated than they are battlefield tested. Too many are content to lead from the safety of their desks or behind enemy lines than they are to lead from the front as their Civil War counterparts did. Today's military officers are more concerned about their futures in the corporate world than they are about winning the war.

This is why we need a modern day, Ulysses S. Grant.

Grant was not a popular general and many in both his administration and Lincoln's political opponents disagreed with Lincoln's choice of Grant to lead the Federal Army. Lincoln once sighed in frustration over the many rumors spoken about Grant by saying, "I cannot relieve this man; he fights!"

The war in Iraq is a different war. We need someone who is both bold and aggressive. We need a general who even when faced with a defeat can rally his troops to still strike back at the enemy again and again until our foes cry a proverbial "uncle".

We don't need green zones or defensive perimeters; we need to go on the hunt. We need to stop being turtles living in the comfort of our own box and start becoming predators looking for the kill.

We don't need any more complacent generals. No more George B. McClellans or George Meades. We need tigers ... We need another Grant to snare victory from the jaws of defeat.

Our modern day Ulysses is out there somewhere. I hope he is reading this for it is now time for all good men to come to the aid of their country.

No More Heroes?

I sometimes think that we Americans walk around with perpetual blinders on. We claim that the age of heroes is gone. There are no more to be found. We exist in a state of continual apathy; a lack of feeling. Heroes are not born; they are made. A hero is not someone without fear but a man who faces his fear and stands his ground 5 minutes longer than he would really like to. As John Wayne once said, "Courage is being afraid but saddling up anyway".

We all have opportunities to be heroes every day but we choose not to. We ignore the pleas of those around us who need our help; those people who are looking for a hero.

I ran across these videos of Cpl. Chris Mason on YouTube quite by accident. Cpl. Mason was killed in Iraq on November 28, 2006. Cpl. Mason believed in his mission to take down Saddam Hussein and to help the people of Iraq learn to govern themselves. He loved God, his country and serving in the US Army. I have never met Chris Mason but his dedication to duty and his unselfish love for others is a true inspiration.

Chris Mason is a hero because he gave willingly of himself. He was not a draftee but a volunteer. While thousands of able bodied men sit around in front of their video games or in coffee houses in campuses across the nation complaining about the War in Iraq Chris Mason decided to stop talking and to do something about it. He joined the US Army. He did his duty and paid the ultimate sacrifice for it.

While our troops engage both Iraqi insurgents and elements of Al-Qaeda there are members of Congress who wish to cut off all funding to men like Chris Mason. They wish to surrender them to our nations enemies all in the name of political expediency. While the President and our men and women in uniform wish to stay the course the Democrats wish to cut and run just so they can save face. The Democrats want to unmask our heroes, take off their cape and nullify their powers. They wish to destroy the very people who help to defend our country. They wish to nullify people like Chris Mason.

You don't have to wear a uniform to be a hero but it sure doesn't hurt either.

There are no more heroes?

I think that it is high time we took our blinders off.

Please take a moment to view the videos of an American hero; Chris Mason.