ConRail

FUN, FUN,FUN

2009-04-16T17:40:00.000-07:00

I have to vent. Something has happened to our language over the past couple of decades. Call it dumbing down, call it carelessness, call it plain idiocy. What's my gripe? It's our abuse of the word "fun." Somewhere along the line, we have forgotten how to properly use it, whether it's a verb or noun. For example check out the following sentence:
My trip to Disney world was the funnest vacation I ever had?
Funnest? There's no such goddamn word in the English language; yet I have heard kids and adults use it, I have heard talk show hosts and journalists use it.
Then there is this abuse:
How fun was your trip to Disneyworld?
How fun? Are you illiterate? There should be a modifier in there. The correct sentence should read: How MUCH fun did you have at Disneyworld?

Our society and culture have come to a serious crossroads when even college educated adults use bad grammar. I am sure my old high school English teachers must be turning over in their graves at these inexcusable abuses.

Please, unless you have just been smuggled across the border by a coyote in the back of a U Haul van, use proper English. Words are communication. Words express our thoughts and feelings.When language is corrupted, communication is disrupted; and when communication is disrupted, civilization and culture perish.

How fun is that?

OUT OF THE DARKNESS

2009-03-29T13:03:00.000-07:00

Saturday, March 28, 2009 was the second annual Earth Hour promoted by the World Wildlife Fund. We were encouraged to turn off all our lights between 8:30 and 9:30 p.m. and live in darkness as a symbolic gesture to save our planet and preserve our resources. Rather than a sensitive and selfless act, I contend that the individual who authored the theme is intellectually and morally impoverished, intellectually and morally dishonest, and intellectually and morally bankrupt.

Lights out indeed! Those lights are a symbol alright--they are a symbol of human acheivement, human resourcefullness, human intellectual prowess. What's next? Vacate our homes for a day and live in a cave? Pull the plug on all medical facilities and devices that ease or pain and suffering and increase our longevity?

It is imperative that we understand the mindset of those who devised and promote Earth Hour. They despise and distrust humankind, yet worship nature; they deplore scientific and technological innovation that has allowed us to escape the tyranny of nature, providing the human race with the opportunity to survive and flourish.

Go back ten thousand years. Life was short and brutish. Each day was a constant struggle against hunger and illness. The average lifespan was twenty years of age, infant mortality above fifty percent. We were helpless against the vagaries of nature, falling prey to disease, drought, cold, heat, floods, as well as larger, faster more powerful predators of the animal kingdom. It was the human mind and our ability to think and reason that not only levelled the playing field, but gave us a decided edge.

Now in the 21st. century we have machines to do the laborious, backbreaking work, we have computers to help our minds solve seemingly incalculable problems and delve deep into the mysteries of science and the world around us. No longer are our days filled with the endless task of filling our bellies. No longer must we garner our shelter by huddling around an open fire in a dark, damp cave.

We have the light. It illuminates our journey from cave dweller to interstellar explorer. It is the light that eradicates hunger and disease. It is the crowning acheivement of the human intellect and reflects the unlimited potential of the human mind and spirit.

Those who seek to extinquish the light, are not the friends of earth, but rather, the enemies of the human race. They long for a world of past millennia, where we huddled in the shadows and feared the dark. They want a world where humankind is tormented by nature and preyed upon by beasts. The light is their nemesis.

To turn off the light is to turn off the human intellect; to turn off the human intellect is to deny our very nature. We must celebrate Human Hour, a time to pay tribute to what the human mind has acheived, and what innovation and greatness it can yet accomplish.

HUTZPAH & HYPOCRISY

2008-12-22T14:15:00.000-08:00

Never underestimate the hypocrisy of politicians. Ever since the bailout last October, our Congressmen in D.C. have demanded that the institutions receiving the 700 billion dollars in cash inforce certain fiscal disciplines. One of the things demanded of the banks, lending institutions and auto industry bigwigs is that they forego their huge salaries and bonuses in return for the taxpayer money. Given the size of the bailout and the dire economic conditions of these companies, it was not an altogether unreasonable request.

When it comes to taxpayer money, however, the street does not run both ways. Last week our Congressional representitives received a 4.7% salary increase. Given the state of the economy, one might have thought that those same people who lectured and badgered Wall Street CEO's about their bloated salaries would, themselves, refuse to take a bump in pay. Yeah, right. That's as likely as Barbra Striesand inviting the Bushs'to her home for dinner.

Democrat Representitive Harry Mitchell of Arizona even sponsored a bill that would have nullified the automatic pay raise. To no one's amazement, the bill never got out of committee.

If ever one needed proof that our Congressmen are vile, self-serving, repugnant rabble, one has only to look at their check stubs. Sacrifice is what they demand, not what they do.

WHY I AM A LIBERTARIAN

2008-12-09T15:41:00.000-08:00

Today, Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich was busted by the Feds for--among other things--attempting to auction off Barack Obama's senate seat to the highest bidder, and for withholding 8 million dollars earmarked for a children's hospital because the head of that hospital would not kick in 50 large to the Governor.The word "vile" would have to be considered an understatement when discussing Blago's actions. He joins a long list of Illinois politicians indicted and ultimately imprisoned for wrongdoing. In my lifetime (and admittedly I am a bit of a geezer) he makes the fourth Illinois governor to be busted by the Feds. Otto Kerner, Dan Walker and of course George Ryan were all convicted and did or are doing time behind bars. That alone sums up why I am a libertarian.

Libertarians believe in limited government. We put no trust in politicians. The very fact that someone wants to run for public office makes them suspect. One of the real puzzles regarding Blagojevich is how the people of Illinois were dumb enough to re-elect this guy. The first time around can be forgiven. But after he has served 4 years and you know what this guy is about, how can you vote him back in office? The voters of Illinois should be ashamed of their electoral stupidity.

Based upon what was heard on the tapes of his conversation, it's clear that Blago is an immoral, greedy, power-hungry gangster who has betrayed and spat upon the public trust. This should serve has a lesson to all citizens in Illinois and elsewhere: Do not trust politicians. Government is not your friend; it is malevolent by nature, not benevolent.

It is said that people get the government they deserve. When you keep electing the same moral trash from the same gangs, whether that gang calls itself Democrat or Republican, then you deserve to be victimized by graft, corruption and the thirst for power.

The Who said it as well as anyone: Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.

OIL AND THEORIES DON'T MIX

2008-11-30T13:14:00.000-08:00

This past summer when oil hit $147.00 a barrel, and gas was over $4.50 a gallon, pundits on both the Left and Right pointed their fingers at the oil companies as the culprits. The theory was that the greedy oil barons controlled the market and manipulated the price so as to reap outrageous and obscene profits at the expense of us downtrodden car owners.

Well, the last time I looked, the price of oil was hovering close to $50.00 a barrel, and I recently filled up for $1.63 a gallon. Have those greedy and ruthless oil barons suddenly gone soft in the head? Someone please tell me how the price of oil can drop more than 60% within a few months if the oil companies control the market and manipulate prices. Did they all take a vow of altruism over the autumn months?

The plummeting prices should end the crackpot notion that the oil companies run the world. Price is determined by supply and demand. The problem is, there is always an ample supply of ridiculous theories demanded by people who have no conception of how the dynamic engine of free markets operates.

BARACKING MY BRAIN

2008-11-30T13:00:00.000-08:00

The election of Barack Obama should lay to rest for all time the dated notion that the United States is a racist nation. Even though 95% of black voters cast their ballot for Obama, they are only 12% of the population, meaning that Obama could not have been elected without the support of white voters. And what racists are going to vote as their leader someone of a different color? Speaking of racism, anytime the issue has been raised, particularly by Black leaders, the assumption has always been that the only racism in this country is white racism. How many times have we heard or read about white racism, white supremists, white bigots, skinheads? You would have to be an utter fool to think there are no Black or Hispanic racists, no Black or Hispanic supremists, no Black or Hispanic bigots. The race industry led by its two primary CEO'S, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, is on its last legs, like analog television. This is one industry that does not deserve any bailout.

CUBS, AS IN SHLUBS

2008-10-06T08:12:00.000-07:00

My blogs are generally about politics and social issues, but this one is going to be different. This one concerns sports--baseball, to be exact. And to be more exact, the Chicago Cubs.

I have been a Cubs fan for 60 plus years. I've seen them in first place, I've seen them in last. What I haven't seen is the Cubs playing in a World Series. I'm already in my sixties, time is beginning to run out. That's why I thought this year was going to be THE year. They won their division and had the winningest record in the National League. Considering the entire 25 man roster, this was the best Cubs team I ever saw.

Then came the post season.It has been exactly 100 years since their last championship. This had to be the year. They had home team advantage and faced the Los Angeles Dodgers in the friendly confines of Wrigley Field. No way this would be a repeat of the 2007 playoffs in which the Cubs dropped 3 straight to the Arizona Diamondbacks. Guess again.

They ended up dropping 3 straight to the Dodgers, looking pitiful in the process. For whatever reason this ballclub has a split personality. They have swagger and fire during the regular season, but in the playoffs, their demeanor undergoes a transformation. They look stiff and tentative. The surehanded fielders boot routine grounders, while the patient hitters swing at anything within five feet of homeplate.
Starting pitcher Ryan Dempster walked 7 in the opening game. It took the entire month of September for him to walk that many during the season. Every man wearing Cubby blue has that "deer in the headlights" look.

Do we blame it on the billygoat curse? I don't believe in curses and spells. What I do believe in is chokers, and the Cubs were suffering from severe ligature marks around the throat. I, for one, have had it. I've suffered through 6 decades of disappointment and frustration. Enough is more than enough. The Cubs will no longer get my money or attention. What they should get is about thirty-five thousand empty seats for every home game.

Come to think of it, maybe we can fill those seats with goats.

RETURN OF THE NEANDERTHALS

2008-09-18T07:13:00.000-07:00

Like animals jarred from hibernation, the economic and financial Neanderthals have re-emerged from their caves to plunder the countryside. The recent bailouts of AIG, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae have energized these intellectual throwbacks. Headed by people like Nancy Pelosi and just about any other liberal you care to name, as well as a majority of Republicans, they are now screaming for economic reform and greater and more stringent regulation of Wall Street and lending institutions.

Their whipping boy in this mortgage debacle is the free market. Not enough government oversight, they scream. Too few regulations, they rant. Insatiable greed of bankers and Wall Street traders, they bellow. Were it not for the unregulated capitalist system, this crisis would have never occurred. Their solution is three fold: More government control; more government control; more government control.

The probelm is, government involvement in the economy is what created this financial hell house. Think back to the image of banking and lending institutions of 40, 50, 60years ago and longer. Bankers had reputations as parsimonious people who guarded their money jealously and ferociously, and who made people jump through hoops to obtain a loan or mortgage. It was common practice to require a minimum of 20% down to obtain a home mortgage. On top of that, they had stringent requirements in terms of employment histories and financial assests before you were approved for a loan.

So what happened? Starting in the 1970's with the Fair Housing Act, the Feds got involved in the banking industry. Under pressure from people like Jesse Jackson,Al Sharpton and the NAACP to loosen standards for minorities, politicans decided to pander for votes and make it easier for low income people to obtain home loans. In the 1990's, President Bill Clinton, the quintessential liberal do-gooder, ordered the banking industry to relax their loan standards for the express purpose of allowing more minorities and low income Americans to become homeowners. Implicit in his order was a threat that if they didn't loosen standards, the Feds would come after them with all regulatory guns blazing. President George W Bush, the faux conservative, continued this policy, often bragging about the increase in home ownership under his administration.

Under pressure from the Feds, the loan industry opened their vaults to just about any warm body that walked through the door. No upfront money was necessary, employment and income requirements were virtually nonexistent. It didn't take an Alan Greenspan to predict what the results of this free money giveaway would be. People purchased homes they couldn't afford, and as a result, an epidemic of foreclosures swept the financial landscape, paving the way for the economic collapse we are now enduring. Here is a sobering statistic that would have never developed had the Feds not intervened: Sixty percent of all the loan applications on foreclosed properties in 2006 and 2007 had false information on them. People lied about their job histories, income, assests. Fifty years ago, lenders would have examined those apps like a doctor studying a biopsy. But with the politicians putting a gun to their heads while assuring them they had their backs, these lenders had no real incentive to scrutinize those applications. They simply complied with the demands of Washington. Now that its crumbling all around them, these same politicians are blaming the bankers and the free market.

Don't be fooled. This crisis was caused by too much Washington, not a lack of it. We can only hope that these Neanderthals crawl back into their caves before we are all reduced to cave dwellers.

NORTH TO ALASKA

2008-08-29T16:56:00.000-07:00

The upside to having Governor Sarah Palin on the McCain ticket:
1) Her youth is a good contrast to McCain's age.
2) Her conservatism offsets McCain's lack of solid conservative credentials.
3) Her polished good looks are an image enhancer for the ticket.
4) As a female she certainly will snare at least a portion of disenchanted Hillary Clinton supporters.

The downside to having Governor Sarah Palin on the ticket:
1) She hails from a state with few electoral votes.
2) She has little experience in national politics.
3) Her conservative views on issues such as abortion and gun rights could turn off some voters, particularly women.

In either case, studies and polls have indicated that vice-presidential candidates are only a minor factor in a voter's decision to vote for a particular presidential candidate.

THINGS TO DISCUSS DURING A LULL IN THE CONVERSATION

2008-08-26T07:18:00.000-07:00

1.) Eighty percent of all the tea consumed in the US is iced tea.

2.)Thomas Edison did not invent the electric bulb in 1879, as is generally assumed. There were already numerous lightbulb patents issued between 1849 and 1879.

3.)Only 19% of African American males in Indianapolis finish high school.

4.) If Adam and Eve were created by God, and not given birth by mothers, did they have navels?

5.) By the year 2050, 60% of children under the age of twelve in Italy will have neither brothers, sisters, aunts or uncles.

LET THE GAMES BEGIN!

2008-08-25T12:23:00.000-07:00

Following on the heels of the Olympic Games extravaganza staged in Beijing are the political games of the 2008 Democrat Convention in Denver, Colorado. Both are about breathtaking imagery and mind numbing spectacle. But unlike the Olympic Games, we already know who the winners are at the Dems convention.

There was a time not too long ago when the political conventions held mystery and suspense. No one knew with any large degree of certainty who the party nominee for president or vice president would be. There was always talk of a "dark horse" candidate who just might sneak in somewhere around the sixth ballot. Those days are as dead as VHS. With the recent reforms to the primary election process, the party nominee is decided months prior to the convention. The vote on the floor is a mere formality.

Rather than a nominating process, the Republican and Democrat conventions have become week-long glorified infomercials. It is about presenting an image, pithy soundbites and photo ops. They are as staged and orchestrated as the opening and closing ceremonies in Beijing, except with fewer people. It's a chance for politicians to do a lot of of waving, hugging and pontificating.

To regard these conventions as anything other than harmless fun and self-aggrandizement would be a mistake. It is theatre of the absurd, and in the words of Shakepeare,sound and fury signifying nothing.

For proponents of alternative energy sources, these conventions will be a boon. There will be enough hot wind in those halls to power several medium sized cities.

RANDOM RANTS

2008-08-07T10:08:00.000-07:00

Responding to John McCain's call for more domestic oil drilling, Barack Obama countered with a plan of his own to help ease the pain at the gas pump. Rather than drill for more oil, Obama said we could obtain the equivalent amount of oil if Americans would simply check their tire pressure and get engine tuneups, as if American drivers are too stupid to think of this on their own. He touts himself as the candidate of change and a man of vision. But is this the extent of his vision regarding gas prices? Tuneups and tire pressure? What is his solution for rising unmemployment? Everyone go into business for themselves by selling apples on the sidewalk? His statement reeks of condescension and reveals himself as a man who truly believes he is smarter than the average citizen, and that we are a nation of dunces.Besides his sage advice to drivers about checking the air in their tires, he recently gave a speech in which he ridiculed Americans for not being bi-linqual. His words betray him as an elitist who looks down on middle America. I, for one, will never cast a vote for someone who looks down their nose at me.

Did you know that China exports more goods in a single day than they did in the entire year of 1978? And for those of you who fear that trade with China is a one-way street, with all our money going in their direction, it may interest you to know that China also imports annually 300 billion dollars worth of goods from us. In addition, they have to date sent a trillion dollars back to the United States in the form of Treasury bond purchases.

We keep hearing and reading about China's dynamic economy and how it will surpass the US economy within a few decades. Fear not. China is still an authoritarian Marxist state that controls every aspect of their booming economy, which means that at some point in the near future, their progress will come to a screeching halt. Statist economies directed by faceless bureaucrats have severe limitations when compared to a free market like our own. At some point their stringent policies and controls will be self-defeating and halt their progress. Think of it as a dog tied to a long leash. For a period the dog will be able to frolick freely, but at some point that leash will halt his progress and bring him to an abrupt stop. No statist economy has ever run as efficiently and prosperously as a free market economy.

HOLD YOUR NOSE

2008-06-27T14:11:00.000-07:00

The recent Supreme Court ruling upholding the Second Amendment emphazises the crucial need to put another Republican president in the White House.The narrow 5 to 4decision in favor of gun rights was due in large part because President Bush had appointed Chief Justice Roberts to the Supreme Court. Now just imagine if Al Gore had won the 2000 election. Rather than a conservative like Roberts, no doubt Gore would have nominated a liberal judge, someone more in line with Gore's own political viewpoint. Had that occurred, it is very possible that the Supreme Court decision might have gone 5 to 4 against the Second Amendment. Consider what a crucial blow to individual liberty that would have been.

There are many Republican/conservatives who are disenchanted with John McCain and are considering either sitting out this election, or voting for Obama or a third party candidate. I can sympathize because I have very little enthusiasm for McCain's candidacy. Yes, there are a number of issues where his position, either for or against, go against the grain of a substantial number of conservatives; however, it may behoove those of us who dislike McCain to put aside these differences for one specific reason. There are 2 or 3 Justices on the Supreme Court who are long in the tooth, and at least one of these may be replaced in the next 4 years. For this reason alone it is incumbent upon Republicans to support their candidate, like him or not. There have been numerous Supreme Court decisions in recent years that have been favorable to the conservative philosophy, gun rights being the most important of these.More often than not, these rulings have been 5 to 4 decisions. All it takes is one more liberal judge to completely alter the political slant of the Court.

If Republicans lose the White House this November, it is all but guarenteed that they will also lose the Supreme Court. For that reason alone, I will hold my nose, swallow hard, and cast my vote for John McCain.

2008-06-01T07:28:00.001-07:00

POLITICS AND RELIGION: A DANGEROUS CONCOCTION

2008-06-01T06:59:00.000-07:00

Father Michael Pfleger, pastor of St Sabina Catholic Church on the southside of Chicago, stormed his way to national prominence with his outrageous remarks regarding Hillary Clinton and white people in general, while speaking from the pulpit of the notorious Trinity United Church of Christ, former home of the equally notorious Rev. Jeremiah Wright. It would be a supreme understatement to say Pfleger's comments were racist and imflammatory. One has to think that one night Michael Pfleger went to bed, woke up the next morning, looked into the mirror and determined that he had been transformed into a black man. What other explanation can be given for his behavior? He is the white pastor of an all black parish, has embraced Louis Farrekhan and called him a brother and a friend, and speaks in an accent that can best be described as faux Tupac Shakur. So what would possess an Obama supporter, like Pfleger, to scream such racist nonsense that could only serve to bring more embarrassment to Obama? There's one simple answer. He wanted to endear himself to his black audience. This was his moment to solidify his street cred as a genuine black man wannabe. It was a black church, a black congregation, and a speech to support a black presidential candidate. Pfleger must have thought he died and went to wigger heaven.

There is a lesson to be learned here for all political candidates: Do not mix politics and religion. I am sure Barack Obama would concur. Jeremiah Wright and Father Pfleger have been his biggest obstacles in his trek to the White House. John McCain has had his clergy eruptions as well. He has had to repudiate and seperate himself from the remarks of evangalists and supporters John Hagee and Rod Parsley.

During his presidential campaign, Geore W. Bush caught tremendous heat for speaking on the campus of Bob Jones University, a fundamentalist college.

There is a seperation of church and state in this country for a reason. If religious leaders want to get involved with candidates and politics, then let their tax exempt status be revoked, and let them pay taxes like the rest of us.

As for the candidates, stay out of the churches. If you truly believe in your Bible, then remember the passage about rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar's.

A NATION OF IDIOTS

2008-05-18T05:59:00.000-07:00

Imagine this scenario: The oil companies, out of sympathy for the overburdened car owners, declare a gas holiday between Memorial Day and Labor Day and drop the price of a gallon of gas between 10 and 20 cents. Would you be in favor of such a proposal by Big Oil? Of course you would. What possible reason would you have not to approve of this action?

In a recent poll, 60 percent of respondents said they opposed the gas tax holiday proposed by both Senators McCain and Clinton. The only rationale I can think of that would garner such polling results is that 99 percent of those who opposed the idea had recently undergone lobotomies. All of us, rich and poor,are bitching about rising gas prices--and rightfully so. Along comes two powerful senators who offer a temporary, albeit small reprieve from high gas prices and a majority of Americans are against it. HELP ME UNDERTAND THIS THOUGHT PROCESS! Have we become a nation of mush-brained, dumbdowned idiots?

I'm sure most of us recall the old proverb about not looking a gift horse in the mouth. Well, apparently too many of my fellow Americans currently have their heads stuck in the horse's larynx. The major complaint is that this tax holiday is a gimmick and outright pandering. Maybe it is, but so what? Anytime the Feds are willing to relinquish tax dollars is a time for national celebration, especially when this tax break occurs during the busiest driving period of the entire year.

Americans have forgotten. or perhaps never learned one important fact: Taxation is theft. It is the theft of honestly earned wages from the pockets of working people. Taxes are the moral equivalent of a mugging or paying protection money to organized crime. It is the initiation of force against citizens. Don't believe me? Try not paying your taxes for a few years and see what government force is really about.

If you were mugged in a dark alley one night, and the same mugger came to your door the next day to return your money, would you refuse to take it? Neither would I.Afterall, we're not idiots.

GAS TAX HOLIDAY

2008-05-07T16:24:00.000-07:00

Both John McCain and Hillary Clinton have suggested suspending the Federal tax on gasoline throughout the summer as a way of easing the sting of soaring gas prices on the budgets of consumers. Barack Obama has called this a gimmick and pandering to voters. It may be a gimmick and it may be pandering, but so what? I am sure an overwhelming majority of Americans would welcome some relief at the gas pumps, no matter how small or how short the duration. How can putting more money into the pockets of working people be a bad thing?

Politicians love to demigogue the oil issue and attack the oil companies, decrying what they love to call "obscene profits." But what about the obscene profits being made by all levels of government as a result of soaring gas prices? Whether its local, state or Federal, government has been raking in huge tax revenues during this run-up. Why is it perfectly permissible for government to make huge profits at the gas pump, but not the oil companies?

Suspending the Federal gas tax over the summer is the right thing to do. No, it won't solve the oil crisis or permanently bring down prices. Government has already dropped the ball in that regard by refusing to permit drilling in Alaska, the Gulf, the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Politicians should at least do the moral thing and temorarily rescind all taxes on gasoline because taxation is theft, regardless of who or what is being taxed.

Americans desperately need gas relief, and they won't find it in their medicine cabinets. It's a prescription only Washington can provide.

DENYING THE DENIERS

2008-04-30T09:36:00.000-07:00

Al Gore says that anyone who doubts global warming is the equivalent of someone who still thinks the earth is flat. In his mind and the minds of all the "climate change" miniions, to disbelieve in the dogma of global warming is sheer heresy, if not outright stupidity. They speak of the scientific "consensus" and how gobal warming is now accepted by all scientists with an IQ higher than an ice cube.

Well, the earth may not be flat, but Al Gore's brainwaves certainly are. The consensus in the scientific community that Gore so often speaks of, upon closer inspection, has little merit. A medical researcher named Dr. Klaus-Martin Schulte studied a total of 528 peer reveiwed papers concerning global warming published between 2004 and 2007. What he discovered blows glacier-sized holes into Al Gore's 'consensus." Of the 528 papers published by scientists, only 45% unequivocally endorsed the theory of global warming.For some reason, Al failed to mention this in his recent "60 Minutes" interview.

So if you are one of those skeptics who is unconvinced the world is coming to an overheated end, you are not alone. Despite what Al Gore tells you, you are in the company of many of the world's most astute scientific thinkers.

CHILDREN OF THE CORN REVISISTED

2008-04-26T05:49:00.000-07:00

I hate to say I told you so, but I TOLD YOU SO! Back in November 2007 I posted an article about the boondoggle and scam that is the ethanol program and how it presented a potential danger to our food supply. Well, the danger has already materialized.

In this country and around the world, food prices are skyrocketing and shortages have begun to appear on food shelves. Even in the United States, a staple like rice has started to be rationed by some major retailers.One of the causes of the price hikes and shortages is the ever-increasing price of oil. The second reason is the rush to produce biofuels. It is not too difficult to see why we have escalating food prices for basic commodities. It takes 400 pounds of corn to produce 25 gallons of ethanol. Right now, 30% of our corn is being used, not for food, but for ethanol production.Tons of corn that would be going to feed people is now being diverted away from the market. As a result, the law of supply and demand kicks in and prices go up. And because corn prices are so high, farmers are devoting more acreage to growing corn, causing the supply of other crops like wheat and soybeans to decrease, which in turn makes their prices increase. Senator John McCain called our ethanol program "highway robbery perpetrated on the American public by Congress."

Ethanol is a dubious alternative fuel for many reasons: It is expensive to produce; it costs more per gallon than gasoline; it gives less gas mileage than gasoline; it produces less horsepower than gasoline. In addition, we now know it is reeking havoc with our food supply.

This all boils down to one basic question. Do we want to raise crops to feed human beings, or do we want to raise crops to put in the gas tanks of our cars? Human deprivation and starvation is a mighty high price to pay for fuel.

CAN OBAMA WIN PRESIDENCY?

2008-04-24T06:49:00.000-07:00

Going into the Indiana and North Carolina primaries, Barack Obama is still the frontrunner for Democrat presidential candidate. When the feverish primary campaigning and debates began early in 2007, the pundits had all but sent out invitation to Hilllary Clinton's coronation.A substantial number of Americans didn't even know who the hell Barack Obama was. Now he's on the verge of running for president. The big question is: Should he get his party's nomination, can an African American be elected President of the United States in 2008?

Obama's main support has come from African Americans (no surprise) who have given him 95% of their votes.His second largest block of supports have been young people, particularly those of college age. But to win in November, he would require support from a much broader section of the electorate. That gives rise to a second question: How many white Americans are prepared to cast their presidential vote for a black man?

It is one thing to cast a vote for an African American in a primary contest; afterall, it doesn't put him in the White House; it merely makes him eligible for residency. It is quite another thing to cast a vote in a general election, where the votes do determine the next White House occupant. Given the history of this country, I truly believe that when it comes time to cast that vote, many white Americans will have second thoughts and serious misgivings about casting their vote for an African American.

The polls, in my opinion, will not give an accurate picture.Cowed by political correctness and a desire to avoid coming off like a racist and bigot, I believe many whites will tell pollsters that they would cast a vote for Obama. As a result, virtually all the polls will overestimate the strength of Obama's support among white voters. I am not suggesting that the vast majority of white Americans are racially biased and will cast their vote on the basis of skin color. I am saying that a signifigant number of whites will vote on that basis.

Of course there are many diverse factors and issues other than race that will influence a person's choice of candidate. What we can be sure of is race has been and will continue to be a major issue in the political life of America.

BOYCOTTING THE OLYMPICS

2008-04-10T16:59:00.000-07:00

Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi--among others--is urging President Bush to boycott the opening ceremonies of the Olympics in China this summer. There are also a number of people who say we should completely boycott the competition like we did in 1980. This is one of those extremely rare instances where I find myself in agreement with Speaker Pelosi. Given the recent incidents of violence against Tibet, along with China's generally abysmal track record of violating basic human rights, a Presidential boycott of the opening ceremonies would be the appropriate symbolic gesture to the Chinese government and the rest of the world. Given that we consider our country to be the bastion of liberty and human rights, it would appear inconsistent for the President to attend the ceremonies, and thereby indirectly paying tribute to this repressive Marxist regime.

What do we have to lose by not attending? Is President Bush afraid of offending the political leaders who brutalize and terrorize their own citizens? And what if they are offended? Are they going to stop trading with us, their number one buyer of Chinese goods? Are they going to turn off the flow of billions of our dollars into their country?

The next logical step would seem to be a complete boycott of the Olympics; however, to do so would be to interfere with the lives of thousands of American athletes. Olympians devote their lives to the competition. They spend years in hard work, intense training, pain and sacrifice all for the hope of basking in the Olympic spotlight of athletic glory. The government has no right to trounce on those dreams. It should be left to the individual conscience of each competitor to decide whether or not they will compete.

The root of the problem lies with the Olympic Committee. They should have never awarded the Games to a country that spits on human rights. Tens of thousands of ordinary Chinese have been ruthlessly uprooted from their homes for the sole purpose of constructing the necessary infrastructure for the Games. Their suffering and anquish rests not only on the shoulders of the Chinese government, but on the Olympic Committee as well.

The Olympics should be hosted only by countries whose governments recognize and respect the rights of their citizens. The Games are about celebrating and rewarding
individual human acheivement. To award the Games to a country like China is to denigrate the spirit that symolizes the best that human beings can be.

HOUR OF DARKNESS

2008-03-30T16:43:00.001-07:00

On saturday, March 29, between the hours of 8pm to 9pm everybody on the planet was supposed to turn off their lights as a symbolic gesture in our fight against climate change and the destruction of our environment. I didn't turn off my lights, and judging from my drive through the neighborhood at that hour, neither did any of my neighbors. Either everyone was too engrossed reading War And Peace and didn't want to stop, or most folks aren't really ardent believers in global warming. Attempting to plunge us into darkness for an hour truly was an ironic act of symbolism, because radical environmentalists would love nothing more than to usher us into an era of darkness. It is the mindset of the Luddites, the flat-earthers, anti-intellectuals and those who despise the human race and would choose any insect or dweller of the ocean floor over the wellbeing of your son or daughter.

They rationalize their actions by saying that even if we can't prove that global warming is real beyond the shadow of scientific doubt, we need to take drastic measure now, just in case it is true. That is the strategy of shamans, witch doctors and other assorted mental deviants. Let us examine this premise in more concrete terms. Let us suppose you receive a physical from a doctor who then tells you that he believes you have bone cancer and that you should have both legs amputated. You ask him if he's positive in his diagnosis. He says he's not positive but he's pretty sure, and anyway, why take the chance? Would you submit to such drastic action on the basis of your doctor being "pretty sure" ? Of course you wouldn't. You would get a second and maybe third opinion before agreeing to have your legs cut off.

So why do we allow radical environmentalists to scare us into drastic actions on the basis of their being 'pretty sure" about the unproven theory of climate change? Instead of cutting off our legs, they want to turn off our lights, stop our cars and end every activity that enhances our survival and brings pleasure to the lives of human beings the world over.

I would bet that fifty thousand years ago there were people who attempted to snuff out the fires in the caves of Europe. Had they been allowed to do so, no one would have experienced the uplifting experience of reading War And Peace.

RANDOM RAILS

2008-03-05T05:45:00.000-08:00

Hillary has come back from the dead with wins in Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island. I get a sense that white and Hispanic middle Americans are having second thoughts about electing a candidate of African American descent. It may not be right or noble, but it is a part of human nature, particularly given race relations in this country over two centuries...

So the Russians have elected a new president. Can anyone seriously believe this will change the course of that country? What the Russian people actually elected was a form of alien body snatching. Putin took over the body of another middleaged Russian, and although the face and voice may be different, it is still Vladimir Putin who is running Mother Russia...

Could this be where the American nanny state is leading us? British newlyweds attempted to emigrate to New Zealand. The New Zealand oficials said the young man could stay in their country, but they would not permit the young bride to enter. Why not, you ask? Because she was considered to be too overweight, and the New Zealand nannies said she would present a strain and drain on their healthcare system. You just wait until the US liberal do-gooders mandate scales at the entrance of all restaurants. Exceed your desirable body weight and you will be barred from admittance. Big government advocates in this country need to consume a huge steaming bowl of leave-me-the-hell-alone!

WE'RE BAAAAACK

2008-03-05T05:41:00.000-08:00

There haven't been any recent posts because my lovely wife and I took a 7 day Caribbean cruise on Freedom of the Seas. Absolutely delightful. What made this cruise extra special was the fact that we shared it with my son Craig, his lovely wife Amy, and our 2 beautiful granddaughters, Lillian Eve and Camille Grace. Those are memories we will savour for the rest of our days. Thanks, guys.

DRUGS AND BASEBALL

2008-02-13T13:12:00.000-08:00

Given the problems facing this country and the rest of the world, one would think that Congress would have better things to do than hold hearings to determine whether or not overpaid prima donna athletes ingested performance enhancing substances. Why should it matter to Congress? If Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds or any other baseball star took steroids, how does that negatively impact my life or yours? The only life it directly effects is the user's. As a baseball fan, I have discussed this issue with other fans, and virtually no one is outraged. The subject is usually met with a shrug and an admission that no one is really surprised that this sort of cheating goes on. If the fans couldn't care less, why should the Federal Government? Even the players themselves have not risen up in outrage over the use of Human Growth Hormone and steroids by some of their fellow players.

The Government's involvement is wholly unneccessary in attempting to police this problem. There is a very simple solution, and it doesn't require an act of Congress. Simply test every major league baseball player at regular intervals, and make public all the players that tested positive for performance enhancing drugs. Then let the fans decide if they want to support these cheaters or not. If fans are sufficiently outraged, they will no longer purchase tickets to the games, buy souveniers and jerseys, and stop watching the games on TV. Baseball owners will get that message loud and clear. On the other hand, if the fans and fellow players know who the cheats are and still don't care, why should anyone else? And is it really cheating and fraud when everyone is aware of who is doing it, while allowing it to continue?

We take sports way too seriously in this country. If a bunch of millionaires want to inject themselves with potentially health threatening substances that pose no threat to anyone else as they do so, then I say let them. It's their livelihoods and lives.
Let Congress tackle truly serious issues--like holding Congressional hearings to investigate substance abuse by Congressmen.

END OF A MYTH

2008-02-06T08:17:00.000-08:00

Now that Super Tuesday, 2008 has been relegated to the history books, it is time to lay to rest the myth of America being a racist nation. Barack Obama won 13 of the 21 states in question and is now neck and neck with Hillary Clinton in the all important delegate count. Exit polls showed that Obama garnered 80% of the Black vote--certainly no surprise; but exit polls also showed that he received the majority of white male votes--the very group that is typically cast as the most racist. In truth, the African American community, as well as leftists, love to characterize white Americans as racist, bigoted, white supremist rednecks. We are constantly told about the huge racial divide in this country and how racism permeates every institution. If this were true, then Barack Obama would have been soundly defeated on Super Tuesday. In fact, if white Americans were the racists we are constantly being told we are, Obama wouldn't even have gotten this far. He would have remained a mere blip on the political radar screen and forgotten months ago. Instead, he has a genuine shot at being the very first African American presidential candidate of a major political party in our history. Win or lose, the fact that he has gotten this far is proof enough that the hairshirt of racism that this country seems to wear with sado-machochistic glee should now be shed. Martin Luther King would be proud. We finally have become a color-blind nation.

RANDOM RANTS

2008-02-02T05:56:00.000-08:00

If anyone is still unconvinced about the moral degeneracy of Islamic fundamentalists, the latest suicide bombings in Iraq should lay those doubts to rest. Islamic fascists strapped explosives to two women with Downs Syndrome. The subsequent blasts killed nearly 80 people. It is hard to conjure up a more vile act. Someone please name me another religion that has recently strapped explosives to mentally handicapped individuals for the purpose of killing innocent men, women and children...I didn't think you could.

For decades the automobile has been the bane of radical environmentalists and Greenies of all stripes, including Al Gore, Ralph Nader and Bill Clinton. They see the family car has the embodiment of corporate greed and capitalist excess and crass materialism, not to mention a defiler of nature. For them the solution is obvious. Dump the oil burners in favor of electric cars. It's that simple. The only reason we don't, we are told, is because of a conspiracy of those evil oil companies. Let's put aside the paranoid conspiracy theories and deal with scientific fact. The reason we're not all driving electric cars is because Detroit (and Japan and Germany)have been unable to perfect the technology. The batteries are heavy, cumbersome, in need of frequent recharging, and unable to generate sufficient speeds. Lithium-ion batteries--the kind that power laptops and other accessories--looked like the solution. That is, until those laptops began to catch fire because of the batteries. Not quite the safety and security required for those soccer moms driving minivans filled with kids.There is a lesson to be learned from all this. Beware of those who clamor for ends without means. Leftists would have us snap our fingers and presto! We would be living in a world of alternative energy. Never mind the tiny problem of how we get there and how we acheive this goal. They demand the ends without ever considering the means. That kind of mindset is the hallmark of the anti-intellectual.

The Mississippi state legislature is considering a bill that would make it a crime for restaurants to sell food to obese people. Talk about your nanny state. What has this country sunk to when the government outlaws feeding people? How is a restaurant owner to determine who is or is not obese? Will they need a scale at the front of their establishment? How about a tape measure to measure waist size as you enter? How about this for a law? Any legislator deemed to be obese must immediately resign his or her fat ass from office.

SCARY SCARY SCARY STUFF

2008-01-16T07:39:00.000-08:00

Although at this point I have no real favorite in the Republican horse race, until several days ago I felt you could do a lot worse than elect Rudy Giuliani president. Now I'm not so sure. What changed my mind about Rudy was a quote he made concerning his concept of freedom. It reads like a passage from Orwell's novel "1984." Quote Rudy: "Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what to do."
According to Rudy's definition, freedom is allowing government to run your life. Joe Stalin couldn't have said it better.

While we're on the subject of government running your life, the California Energy Commission is considering instituting regulations requiring any resident installing a new furnace or thermostat to install a programmable communicating thermostat (PCT).
This thermostat would allow the government to control the temperature setting in your home by remote control. That means whenever the government declares an energy emergency, it would have the ability to dial up or dial down the temperature in your home, and you would not have the ability to override it. How scary is that? Regardless of your health, regardless of whether there are elderly or infants in your home, regardless of your own personal comfort level, the government would ultimately decide how warm or cold your own home would be. I'm feeling a chill running down my spine and it has nothing to do with the weather. When the government can decide how hot or cold you will be, you have crossed the over the line from individual freedom and liberty, to being mere chattel of the state.

RANDOM RAILS

2008-01-13T08:38:00.000-08:00

Because this is an election year, even the death of a mountain climber can have political implications. Sir Edmund Hillary, the first man to reach the highest peak of Mount Everest, died this past week. While she was first lady,Hillary Clinton stated in an interview that her parents had so much admiration for Hillary and his heroic exploits that they named their daughter after him. Charming story. There's only one problem. Hillary Clinton was born in 1947. Sir Edmund Hillary's famous feat occurred in 1953. Clearly she lied. Did the media take her to task for this obvious falsehood? Of course not. With Hillary's death in the midst of a heated presidential campaign, it hasn't even been raised in any stories or obituaries about the man. Clinton's deliberate misstatement does indicate two things that I don't want in any presidential candidate: She is a teller of falsehoods, and she has an abysmal knowledge of history. Aside from that, she is the perfect candidate.

Speaking of the presidential campaign,the noises we've been hearing since the New Hampshire primary may be a preview of what may be in store if Obama wins the Democrat nomination. During the New Hampshire campaign, both Bill and Hillary attacked Obama, which is exactly what one would expect in a political campaign. But because the recipient of these attacks is black,Al Sharpton and all the racial harpies immediately played the race card and accused the Clintons of being racists and bigots. Does that mean that no one is allowed to criticize Obama lest they be called racists? Is he to be above reproach because of the pigmentation of his skin?
The logical conclusion is that if you don't vote for Obama you're anti-black. If you don't vote for Hillary, you're anti-woman. If you don't vote for Baptist minister Mike Huckabee you're anti-christian. And if you don't vote for Gulianni you're anti- bald men. Pointing out the perceived flaws of your opponent is a valid and legitimate strategy in a political contest. The true test of equality is when everyone is subjected to the same crap.

VOTING RESULTS

2008-01-06T09:12:00.000-08:00

Before all the supporters of Obama and Huckabee start making plans to attend the inauguration, and before the supporters of Clinton and Romney seek out Jack Kevorkian to end their despair, please note the following: In 1992 Tom Harkin grabbed 71% of the vote in the Iowa Democratic caucas, while Bill Clinton garnered an anemic 3%. We know how that ended up. Ronald Reagan lost the Republican primary in New Hampshire in 1980, as did Walter Mondale in 1984. The fact is, the game isn't won or lost in the first inning. There is still a lot of b.s. to be slung, backs to be stabbed, reputations to be sullied and lies and half-truths to be told. Truth is, not only ain't it over till it's over, it ain't over even when it's over. That is not the fat lady singing; it is the American electorate screaming for it all to end.

TEN UNLIKELY HEADLINES IN 2008

2008-01-02T06:15:00.000-08:00

1) BRITNEY SPEARS QUITS SHOWBIZ TO BECOME HIGH SCHOOL GUIDANCE COUNSELOR.
2) BIN-LADIN CAPTURED: ADMITS TO BEING JOHN KERRY'S LONG LOST BROTHER.
3) OBAMA WINS PRESIDENCY: VOWS TO UPHOLD CONSTITUTION AND ALL PROMISES MADE TO OPRAH.
4) PARIS HILTON SAYS SHE WILL BEND OVER BACKWARD TO HELP ENTERTAIN TROOPS.
5) ANN COULTER PREGNANT WITH BILL CLINTON'S BABY.
6) HILLARY CLINTON PREGNANT WITH ROSIE O'DONNELL'S BABY.
7) JOHN EDWARDS WINS "DANCING WITH THE STARS."
8) MILITARY WITHDRAWN FROM IRAQ: SENT TO LOS ANGELES.
9) COMMANDER OF LA. TROOPS SAYS HE LONGS FOR PEACEFUL DAYS FIGHTING INSURGENTS.
10) ALL THE CHILDREN IN STATE OF KANSAS ADOPTED BY ANGELINA AND BRAD.

MORE BLOOD ON ISLAM

2007-12-27T07:03:00.000-08:00

The assassination of Benazir Bhutto in Rawalpindi, Pakistan is one more glaring and bloody example of the moral degeneracy of militant Islam. The former leader of Pakistan was killed for two primary reasons: 1)She was a woman, and to a Muslim fundamentalist, a woman in a position of power is an abomination. (2) She wanted to pull Pakistan into the 21st. century by revitalizing its economy. To a religion bent on keeping its mindset in the seventh century, the very idea of economic and technological progress is akin to blasphemy, and therefore something to fear and attack.

There is no question that it took enormous courage for Bhutto to return to Pakistan, knowing the opposition she faced.She was ousted as President in 1996 over charges of rampant corruption in her administration. The validity of these charges have never been fully adjudicated. Nonetheless, the Pakistani middleclass saw her as their salvation. India, their neighbor as well as their enemy, along with China has had one of the most dynamic economies in the world over the past decade. Understandably, a large segment of the Pakistani's want a piece of that action. They saw Benazir Bhutto as someone who could set their country in that direction. Now with her killing comes the question: Will free elections come to Pakistan as scheduled in January, and if so, who will oppose President Musharraf?

Once again, a religion whose credo is violence, and whose dogma is saturated with the blood of innocent victims has brought chaos to a region in desperate need of entering the 21st. century and the community of civilized nations.

A LITTLE LESS RELIGIOSITY

2007-12-23T06:47:00.000-08:00

We have yet to hold the first presidential primary, and already I've had it up to here with all the talk about religion. Some discussion of religion was inevitable considering Mitt Romney, a Mormon, is seeking the Republican nomination. Outside the state of Utah, most Americans know little about Mormonism beyond their propensity for polygamy.

With Pastor Mike Huckabee's rise in the polls, the subject of religion remains a salient issue for many. Perhaps the highpoint (or lowpoint, depending on your viewpoint) was a recent Huckabee campaign ad that appeared to have a floating crucifix in the background.This mysterious cross turned out to simply be a bookcase reflecting light; however it served to keep religion on the front burner of campaign rhetoric.

The presidential candidates of both parties have fallen all over themselves to declare their personal religious beliefs and Christian values, apparently so no one mistakes them for heathens or Wickens. I have no interest whatsoever in anyone's devotion to the Bible. The only document I want my elected officials to swear allegiance to is the Constitution of the United States of America. And it should be noted that nowhere in the Constitution is there any mention of God. That is the ultimate separation of Church and State. The Founding Fathers had the wisdom to realize-unlike the current batch of politicians--that mixing of the two would create a heady concoction poisonous to liberty.

As the godfather of modern conservatism, Barry Goldwater, once stated: There is no place in this country for practicing religion in politics.

POLITICIANS OR CAR DESIGNERS?

2007-12-19T16:43:00.000-08:00

Regardless of whether you are driving a brand new Lexus or a twelve year old Chevy Lumina with chipped paint and cigarette holes in the upholstery, you may want to pamper it as if it were a bottle of Chateau Lafite 1959. Why? Because on December 19 President Bush signed into law a bill requiring automobile manufaturers to increase fuel economy to 35 MPG by 2020. When politicans begin to see themselves as auto design engineers, it may be an early indicator of the coming Apocalypse.

In order to achieve this mandated goal, carmakers will have to radically alter car designs. Those big powerful sedans and Suv's that we Americans love will become relics of the past, like rumbleseats and Betamax VCR's. Instead, those fuel efficient vehicles will have to be smaller and lighter. Translated, that means slower, cramped and more dangerous. The next time you're at a stoplight and a Mini Cooper pulls up next to you, take a long hard look, because it's the future of automobiles.

Sure, hybrids will take up some of the slack, but you'll be paying a premium for them. And when you have no choice but to pump ethanol into your tank, be prepared to pay more and get less mileage than gasoline.

The ultimate goal is certainly a laudable one: Be less energy dependent on the unstable oil Mullahs in the Middle East; yet there is a way to do it without sacrificing our lifestyle, pocketbooks and automobile safety. We must ignore the shrill and radical rants of the environmental left and begin drilling for our own oil. We can make huge steps toward energy independence simply by utilizing the vast oil reserves in the Gulf of Mexico and the Anwr reserves in Alaska. Geologists estimate that the oil beneath the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge may be second in size only to the reserves in Saudi Arabia, the world's largest repository of petroleum. For those concerned about despoiling nature, it should be pointed out that extracting the oil would require only 8% of the 19 million acres of the Alaskan Refuge.

Until we come to our senses and devise a rational energy policy, you better treat the family car with more consideration than a prom date.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY, CAMILLE GRACE

2007-12-06T18:50:00.000-08:00

December 7 is the one year birthday of my granddaughter, Camille Grace. She was born on Pearl Harbor Day, 2006. To commemorate the occassion, I wanted to name her Pearl Bailey Gurtatowski. Fortunately for her, her parents ignored me. Like her older sister, Lilly, Cami is beautiful, smart and an absolute joy to her grandparents.We have been blessed twice over. Happy birthday, Cami.

ONE OUT OF TWO AINT BAD

2007-12-03T18:01:00.000-08:00

First the bad news: Vladimir Putin's United Russia Party won last Sunday's election by garnering 68% of the vote.

The good news: Hugo Chavez lost his bid to be president for life in Venezsuelan elections. In an obvious repudiation of his socialist agenda, Chavez reported that he lost the election 51% to 49%. Many experts say if that is what the Chavez government claims are the results, then the real results are probably closer to 80% to 20%. Despite his country being awash in oil money,the country is enduring a food shortage. So much for socialism helping the poor.

The Russians, who have no conception of what a democracy is, gave Putin almost unlimited powers. Even though he must vacate the post of President in 2010, the referendum allows him to maintain power. It is presumed he will declare himself Prime Minister, and then handpick the next President, who will, of course, be a puppet for Mr. Putin. Scratch Vladimir Putin deep enough and you will find an old school Bolshevik straight out of the Stalin-Kruschev school of dictatorship. What else would you expect from a guy who once ran the KGB?

A RELIGION OF PEACE?

2007-11-30T18:15:00.000-08:00

If anyone still harbored doubts that Islam is the most dangerous religion on the planet, events in Sudan should eridicate those doubts. A Sudanese court convicted Gillian Gibbons, a 54 year old British schoolteacher, to 15 days in prison for the heinous crime of permitting her students to name a teddybear Muhammad.While she sits in a Khartoum prison, thousands of Sudanese have taken to the streets-many brandishing knives and swords-- demanding her death simply because she named a teddybear Muhammad. When their religion is offended, do Hindus demand death? Do Christians? Or Jews? Or Buddhists? It is only Islam, the supposed religion of peace.

Before anyone accuses those of us who voice anti-Muslim sentiments as being anti-Arab, many may be surprised to learn that most of the world's 1.2 billion Muslims are non-Arabs.

Finally, there is a quote from the holy book of Islam that is a perfect summation of the Muslim mindset: "Muhammad is Allah's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers..." Qur'an 48:29.

Iraq Troop Surge: Strength In Numbers

2007-11-19T13:37:00.000-08:00

By any measure, the American military troop surge that began in February of 2007 has to be considered a success. In January, death by shooting and execution in Iraq numbered 51 a day. Now it is 18 a day. In January,killings as a result of bombings were 43 a day. Now it is 9 a day. Violence overall is down 55%.Obviously, Iraq is still a violent and dangerous country, and any amount of deaths are a trajedy, but the surge has clearly reduced the number substantially. All of this came about with the addition of approximately 30 thousand additional troops. These numbers certainly beg the question: Why didn't we invade Iraq with more troops to begin with? Colin Powell was a strong advocate of invading with overwhelming troop strength. Then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld had the opposite view. He believed in a smaller, more mobile, more agile military presence. In retrospect, it is obvious who was right and who was wrong on this issue. How different would have the Iraq war been had we gone in there with 200,000 troops instead of the 125,000 mandated by Rumsfeld? If a mere 30,000 soldiers can make a signifigant difference, what kind of difference would have been made by 75,000more boots on the ground for the invasion?

While I supported the original invasion of Iraq, it is clear that the occupation has been an ill-planned fiasco. The Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld team had no coherent strategy for post-Saddam Iraq, and despite their denials, they also had not anticipated the thousands of insurgents that have devasted that country.

The lesson is clear: Do not go to war unless you intend to devastate and destroy the enemy through overwhelming force through numbers. Islamic Radicals would not waste a second on showing us mercy. Tens of thousands have needlessly died because we pulled our punches.

ANOTHER IRAQ FILM BECOMES A CASUALTY

2007-11-10T14:32:00.000-08:00

"Lions For Lambs," yet another Iraq war (or more accurately, anti-Iraq war) film opened this weekend to terrible reviews and tepid boxoffice. The film has a stellar cast of Tom Cruise, Meryl Streep and Robert Redford, who also directed. Despite the superstar cast, the only audience "Lions For Lambs" will draw are insomniacs searching for something to put them to sleep. Like its Iraq war predecessors, "The Kingdom," "Rendition," and "The Valley of Elah," this Tom Cruise vehicle fails to find an audience for its liberal agitprop. Critics and the media attribute the failure of these films to the war weariness of filmgoers. And it is a legitimate claim. You cannot turn on the TV or radio, or open a newspaper or news magazine without confronting the violence and bloodshed in the Middle East. Audiences apparently want diversion from the war when they buy a movie ticket--and who can blame them? The great Viet Nam war films like "Apocalypse Now," "Platoon," and "Full Metal Jacket" were released five to ten years after the war ended.

There is another factor for the failure of these Iraq war films that no movie pundit has cared to address. Maybe the producers of these films and the liberal media refuse to accept the fact that a majority of Americans support the war, our military and George Bush. The last thing they are going to spend their money on is a movie that attacks and demeans everything they believe in. The polls keep telling us how unpopular the Iraq war is, but people are also voting with their wallets. What they are saying to the Hollywood leftist elite is "We're not wasting our hard earned money on your anti-military, anti-American propaganda posing as entertainemnt."

Hollywood, in its self-absorbed culture, believes that most Americans think exactly like they do. Their cinematic jihad is hemmoraging red ink, proving that Robert Redford and his ilk are the film business eqivalent of suicide bombers.

CHILDREN OF THE CORN:THE GREAT ETHANOL BOONDOGGLE

2007-11-04T13:53:00.000-08:00

Wouldn't you love to have had a dollar everytime you heard or read the term "alternative fuels?" We are constantly being told by environmentalists, politicians and the media that we need to be less dependent on foreign oil, and how we must wean ourselves off of gasoline. Ethanol has become the poster child for alternative fuels. This bio-fuel derived from corn is touted as the primary panacea for all of our energy problems, but is it really the Holy Grail of alternative fuels that its proponents claim it is?

On closer investigation, you'll find that rather than conserve energy, ethanol represents a tremendous expenditure of energy. It takes 70% more energy to produce than it actually generates. According to research done by David Pimental, Professor of agriculture at Cornell University, processing a single acre of corn requires 140 gallons of fossil fuel at a cost of $347 per acre. On a per gallon basis, ethanol cost $1.74 to produce, compared to $0.95 per gallon for gasoline. There are also environmental costs. Corn production erodes the soil 12 times faster than the soil can renew itself. If we were to replace half of our gasoline consumption with ethanol, it would require that 90% of our farm land be converted to corn growth.

In terms of money, there would be no savings whatsoever for consumers. Ethanol costs more at the pump, and gives the average driver 2 to 5% less gas mileage. The International Institute for Sustainable Development says that government subsidies for ethanol development costs taxpayers 5.5 to 7.3 billion dollars a year. Because corn has become a cash crop bonanza for farmers, they are devoting more acreage to the crop. This has a twofold effect: First, the ethanol production itself, because of the law of supply and demand, drives up the cost of corn, and because growing it has become so lucrative, farmers are planting it in place of other crops, such as soybeans, wheat and tomatoes, thereby driving up the cost of those commodities and creating shortages.

If we truly are serious about acheiving greater energy independence, we have only to look in our own backyard. The Anwr Reserve in Alaska comprises 19 million acres. Geologists tell us there is as much oil beneath it as there is in Saudi Arabia. To extract it would require the use of only 8% of that area, hardly the desecration of nature that environmentalists claim it would be. In addition, there are huge oil reserves in the Gulf off of Florida, but because of pressure from environmentalists, our lawmakers refuse to allow us to extract a single ounce. Meanwhile, Mexico and Russia are busily engaged in sucking out that oil, while we pay more and more at the pump.

A coalition of politicans, farmers and corporations have produced their own personal gusher: our tax dollars that are being used to line pockets in the name of dubious science. Only a reasoned and rational approach to the energy problem will plug that geyser.

Betrayal From the Inside

2007-10-31T08:20:00.000-07:00

Let me preface my remarks by saying I am a radical for capitalism. I'm talking about no-holds-barred, laisseze faire, free market capitalism unimpinged by misguided politicians with all the economic expertise of Neanderthals. I provide this disclaimer so my critique will not label me as another anti-capitalist, socialist/collectivist knucklehead.

On Tuesday, October 30, Merrill Lynch announced the retirement of CEO Stan O'Neal. Mr. O'Neal was shown the door after the country's largest brokerage house reported a quarterly loss of $2.24 billion dollars, the worst quarter in its 93 year history. This, combined with almost a fifty percent decrease in its stock value, sealed the CEO's fate. For his inept and incompetent mismanagement of the company, Mr' O'Neal was rewarded with a "departure package" of nearly 160 million dollars. It begs the question: How much would he have gotten had he done a good job?

These humongous golden parachutes given to failed executives goes beyond the absurd and irrational. They are fundamentally wrong for two reasons. First, they make for horrendous public relations. Big business and the corporate world have enough trouble with their image without such profligate and irresponsible spending. What is the public to think when they see their stock investments plummet and people losing their jobs, while the CEOs' responsible for the debacle receive severance packages the size of Rumania's Gross National Product? No wonder people hold a dim view of big business.

Second, these packages breed incompetence. Where is the incentive to do a good job? Who would be overly concerned with their performance and quality of their work when they will become rich whether they succeed or fail? What kind of message does this send?

What we have is a case of the "good-ole-boys" executive club taking care of one another. Once you become a member, your financial nirvana is all but guaranteed.

All it would take to end this stupidity is for one major company to come forward and declare that there will be no golden parachutes for failure. If you screw up, you get a pat on the back, six months salary and don't let the door hit you on the ass on your way out. Only trouble is, a company taking that stance would never be able to hire a quality executive--not when every other corporations is still offering the golden parachutes to top managerial talent. And who could blame them?

A CEO who heads up a successful and highly profitable firm is entitled to whatever the market will bare in terms of financial renumeration for a job well done. But to reward failure is the corporate equivalent of injecting yourself with the E Coli virus. Capitalism's biggest players may ultimately be its biggest threat.

Hillary care scare

2007-10-29T14:35:00.000-07:00

It is a mystery as to why anyone with normal intelligence and the ability to count past ten without using their fingers would support Hillary Clinton's proposal for universal healthcare. If you've been walking around this planet for more than a couple of decades with eyes and ears intact, one thing should have become painfully obvious: Whatever government touches turns to crap. One only has to look to Social Security, Medicare and the Medicare drug program, Medicaid, the Postal Service, Fema, the IRS, the Viet Nam War, the Iraq War, ad nausem. Can you name one government bureaucracy that is run with the efficiency and cost effectiveness of Microsoft, Walmart or Toyota? Of course you can't; nonetheless, we still demand that the government take charge of our health. For those of you still clamoring for Hillary care, let me drop one more name: Walter Reed Hospital. It was only a matter of months ago that we found out about the deplorable conditions at that facility--a facility that is supposed to provide state-of-the-art care for our brave warriors injured in the ongoing war on terrorism. It is no coincidence that Walter Reed Hospital is run by the Federal Government.

Those with a socialist mindset attack our healthcare system, while praising the Canadian, Cuban and European systems. If you want a similiar system put in place in our country, consider this:

In the Canadian "single payer" system, every major medical procedure is put on a waiting list. According to Canadian physicians, patients are forced to wait twice as long as is medically reasonable for specialized care such as surgery and chemotherapy. As a result, cancer death rates are twenty percent higher than in the United States. Those who are financially able come to the US for their healthcare. So much for the glory of the Canadian system.

The National Center for Policy Analysis in Great Britain says that one in eight patients in that country is forced to wait over a year for neccessary surgery--the same surgery that patients here receive within a matter of days following diagnosis.

In his documentary "Sicko," Michael Moore paid homage to the Cuban system. What the movie didn't show was its two-tier approach to medical care. The top tier, which has access to the finest doctors and facilities, is reserved for Communist Party leaders and other elites. The bottom tier, infamous for dirty , understaffed and woefully ill-equipped hospitals, is for the average Cuban citizen. The best testament to Cuban healthcare came months ago when Fidel Castro fell seriously ill. He was cared for, not by the doctors of his glorious Socialist healthcare, but by doctors flown in from Venezuela.

Finally, someone, somewhere has to pay for universal healthcare. Again, taxes in Canada are 28 percent higher than in the US.

Libertarian writer P.J. O'Rourke said it best: If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it's free.

The Solution To War

2007-10-26T16:35:00.000-07:00

The same crazies who protest free trade in the United States and around the world are usually the same crazies who participate in anti-war protests. What they fail to realize is that they are contradicting themselves.

Economics--along with religion--is a major instigator of war. When a country is isolated from the rest of the world, it becomes a prime candidate to strike out at surroundings nations in order to insure its economic survival. The Second World War is a perfect example. Japan, isolated for centuries, attacked its neighbors to gain much needed land and resources. Germany, hamstrung by the Treaty of Versailles, took military action against its neighbors for the same reasons.

Only international free trade can forestall such catastrophies. This concept is the bane of leftists and socialists around the world, who see it in the narrow Marxist context of capitalist exploitation. In reality, it is the natural antidote to war.

When nations engage in open and free trade with other nations, they become entwined like tree roots, each dependent upon the other for its economic prosperity. With such economic co-dependence, it is highly unlikely countries will initiate military action against each other. Japan attacked us on December 7, 1941. Can anyone even remotely conceive of Japan doing the same tomorrow? Of course not. Why? Because we have become trading partners. And trading partners have too much to lose to go to war against one another.

Maybe one of these days the free trade protesters will realize they are railing against their own solution.

Myth of Iraq Democracy

2007-10-24T10:15:00.000-07:00

After Saddam Hussein, his two sons and the Republican Guard had their butts handed to them, the United States launched the second phase of its offensive: bringing democracy to Iraq. It has been a long and frustrating struggle, and for good reason. The only true democracy in the Middle East is Israel, and it is no coincidence that it is the only non-Muslim nation in that region. Why should religion be a factor? Because in order for a democracy and free market system to take root and flourish, there must exist two prerequisites: a belief in the sanctity of the individual; and the rule of law. Islam embraces neither of these.

Islam is a religion that repudiates human intellect and free will. The concept of the sovereignty of the individual is totally lacking in Shia law.One's needs and desires are subordinated to the religious collective. A primary example is the treatment of women. Are they free to fulfill their lives? They are not even free to show their faces in public. In some Muslim nations, they are not allowed to drive, and are permitted to work only as teachers and nurses. During the rule of the Taliban in Afghanistan,young girls were not even allowed to attend school. Religious police prowl the streets in search of the most trivial violations of Islamic law. Violations are met with swift and cruel punishment.

If you doubt the anti-intellectual charges agains Islam, then ask yourself these questions: Where are their renowned institutions of higher learning?Where are their major hospitals and medical research centers? What scientific and technological breakthroughs have they spearheaded? Other than oil, what other major industry thrives in the Middle East? And speaking of oil, it is Western technology and engineers that keep the oil flowing.

The reason for the dearth of intellectual progress and accomplishment is because the Islamic religion is mired in superstitious dogma authored over a thousand years ago. Note that despite the enormous wealth derived from oil, most of the populace live a lifestyle only marginally improved from their brethren centuries ago. And as for the rule of law, there can be none wherever tribalism is the primary means of social order. Throughout the region, violence between Shiite, Sunni and Kurd has existed for centuries, as warlords seek to broaden their power and control. Tribalism rules by brute force, and freedom is the first casuality. Regardless of how much money or how many troops we send to Iraq, there can be no democracy until the shackles of superstition are broken. Only the values of reason and rational thought can bring peace and democracy to that country.

Didja Ever Notice...

2007-10-24T06:08:00.000-07:00

...Al Gore's winning the Nobel Peace Prize is the equivalent of Lassie winning an Oscar for best actress (or actor, since Lassie is actually a he, which would make him the first gender-bending actor in films. Oh, those Hollywood types.)

...now the Southern California fires are being blamed on Global Warming. Shows you how stupid Smoky the Bear was. He blamed fires on people being careless with matches. Does a bear shit in the woods when its burning? Just thought I'd ask.

...due to long production time lines, Hollywood is finally releasing anti-Iraq films, like Rendition, and Lions For Lambs, all of which portray our military in a negative light, making one think that most of our soldiers are murderers and rapists. Could it be because Iraq is viewed as President Bush's war, and the war of the Republican Party? By contrast, do you recall the film, BLACKHAWK DOWN, released several years ago? That was the film about our military action in Somolia. In that movie, our military was portrayed as brave and loyal warriors. Maybe that was because that was the war of liberal Democrat president, Bill Clinton. Apparently when there's a Republican in the White House, only murders and rapists enlist.

...Congressman Pete Stark, Democrat from California, finally apologized for implying that our military in Iraq were killing innocent women and children...I forgot. It's a Republican President's war.

...now that Dumbledore has been outed as gay, how long will it be before Harry Potter is revealed to be Dakota Fanning in reverse drag?

A SPEC OF TIME

2007-10-23T18:53:00.000-07:00

We are but a cooling cinder
left over from the Big Bang
a spec of dust lodged in the
corner of the eye of the universe

ALMOST THERE

2007-10-23T18:45:00.000-07:00

(Published in the OCT. issue of The Oak Magazine)

It is like being alone...

despite her constant presence--
the unraveling mind, shriveling heart,
the uncontested compression of thought

when the eyes resemble frosted glass
upon which longings etch random shapes,
lucidity fading like worn denim.

In front of a sun-mottled window
she eats a Hershey bar, the chocolate
melting on her tongue the way memories
melt away in her synapses.

I reach out to stroke her hair,
yet even this close,
it is like being alone.

Debating The Great Scam

2007-10-23T18:24:00.000-07:00

Below are a list of ten points to use against Al Gore and his minions should you find yourself debating the validity of of the concept of Global Warming. Caution: Do not use around anyone allergic to the truth.
1. There has not been an increase in global temperatures since 1998.
2. Global warming isn't really global. In the past century there has been no recorded increase in the temperatures in the Southern Hemisphere.
3. Antarctica was warmer in the 1930's than it is today.
4. The period from 1300 to 1500-known as the Midieval Warming-had higher average temperatures than today.
5. Weather stations at the South Pole show a cooling trend.
6.Contrary to claims made by Al Gore, the polar bear population is increasing, and at its highest numbers in forty years.
7. 550million years ago, CO2 levels were 18 times higher than today. During the Jurassic period, they were 9 times higher.
8. Al Gore is correct when he states there is a correlation between increased warming and increased CO2 levels, except he has it backwards. CO2 levels increase has a result of atmospheric warming, not the other way around.
9. While ice bodies are melting along the coast of Greenland, ice formations are actually growing inland.
10. The five hottest days on record in Chicago--with temperatures between 102 and 109--all ocurred prior to 1940.