Under the Wolf Archives For 2008
Freedom Of the Eagle
Courage Of the Lone Wolf
American Heritage
©2006-2008
What’s In A Name?
Deborah Venable
12/24/08
Shakespeare posed the question in that age-old
classic, Romeo and Juliet, so many centuries ago. But for their last name, the two lovers may have lived to a ripe
old age. Their feuding families saw to
it that tragedy would seal their fate and that of the question itself. Why should a name cause hatred in some and
reverence in others?
The holiday, (holy day) is Christmas. Named for Jesus Christ by those who revered
Him and shunned, out of hatred, by all who refuse to tolerate Him, Christmas
should never be a time for the tragedy of hatred to overcome the peace, love,
and joy of the Holy Day.
It has nothing to do with government or politics
being “tainted” by religion – especially not in the government of a land
founded on the very religion named for Him.
While Christians endure persecution all over
this world as evil seeks to dominate good, Americans must strive to keep this a
safe haven for the simple faith of Christianity. As we go forward into this New Year, let us not be discouraged,
for it is a time of rejoicing, no matter what the detractors say. We have survived adversity to get here, and
we can face anything with a strong faith in our traditions and in the Spirit
that directs our celebrations.
Happy Birthday,
Jesus, and Merry Christmas to all!
Defining Individual Responsibility
Deborah Venable
11/29/08
So, Mr. Obama defines
individual responsibility with the example that corporate CEOs should refuse to
take their Christmas bonuses huh? HUH?
Let’s see if he
remembers that if the country goes to hell in a hand basket over the next four
years under his stewardship. Will he
refuse to run for re-election do you think?
That would be the “responsible” thing to do, wouldn’t it?
Please, can we just
dispense with the class envy long enough to heal America’s financial wounds
before it’s too late? Class envy is a
seed of socialism, pure and simple, and socialism will not fix the problems we
have in this country!
You want to grow
something from the bottom up, Mr. Obama?
Try planting the seeds of that individual responsibility that you are
inept at correctly defining. Water them
not with admonishments about suffering or doing with less. Instead, remove the weeds of overreaching
government regulation, irresponsible and unrealistic labor union demands, and
the infestation of punishing taxation, then, watch that garden grow!
Let the bottom as well
as the top take pride in accomplishment and success without the artificial
fertilizer of government subsidies. Let
individual mistakes on both ends be dealt with swiftly with individual failures
that need not take out the whole garden.
Good people will want to work with good people and not tolerate bad
decisions or sloth.
If bonuses are a part
of the hiring package, individual responsibility does not dictate withholding
those bonuses. That would constitute
fraud, would it not? If those bonuses
are tied only to performance, then the problem of not deserving such bonuses
will take care of itself. People make
what they are worth or they change jobs.
That, Mr. Obama, defines individual responsibility much better, don’t
you think?
Oh, and Mr. Obama,
only a socialist would pit the classes against each other or make a presumption
about another person’s wealth being enough or too much. America was not built on socialist
philosophy, Mr. Obama, and I’m sure you must know that. Your brand of change is most certainly not
something that I can believe in.
Although I am
colorblind to your race, I am not blind to controversy over your unwillingness
to provide proof of your qualifications to your future office. It is a simple request to substantiate your
ability to keep the oath you will take.
We have a constitution, Mr. Obama, and that defines us as a nation of
laws. It would seem that you intend to
undermine some of those basic laws. You
have made attacks against the first and second amendments and ignored parts of
the fourth, but I am sure you would have to count on the fifth if you were ever
charged to defend yourself in a court of law.
I have faith that the
American people can prosper nicely with or without you, but we do not need the
setback that your “vision” could bring.
You purposefully went after the vote of ignorance. That cannot be denied. Your power will, therefore, be based on the
consent of the governed ignorant and fortified with others of your ilk, who
would place collective power above the good of America.
That, Mr. Obama, is
most definitely individually irresponsible.
I believe that sufficient evidence exists to
require the president-elect to produce proof that he is Constitutionally
qualified to become our 44th president. To learn more and sign a petition to that effect go to
If you haven’t seen or heard the results of this poll
judging the overall knowledge of those who elected him please take the time to
read the article.
DebV
American Thanksgiving
Deborah Venable
11/26/08
My blessings are so
many,
As I ponder all the
cost,
Here in the land of
plenty,
Where freedom is not
lost.
The price is always
being paid,
As the product is
consumed,
But while heroes are
being made,
Then freedom’s not
presumed.
Our soldiers always
pay the price,
And brave souls
everywhere,
That will not let ill
will suffice,
Will show us we must
care.
So as we gather ‘round
the feast,
On this Thanksgiving
Day,
Remember those who
have the least,
And bow our heads to
pray.
Pray that freedom will
remain,
And charity will give
laud,
For giving thanks will
help retain
This nation under God.
While much of our history is being rewritten to
take America ever closer to a socialist/communist regime, we must remember and teach
those who do not know that communism has already been tried here in
America. It was almost the downfall of
the fledgling Plymouth Colony until Governor Bradford was smart enough to
institute private property ownership and capitalist rules. It was the direct results of this action
that led to that first Thanksgiving.
Read about it here.
Another worthwhile Thanksgiving link from yours
truly is here.
Have a blessed and
happy Thanksgiving! DebV
The Mourning After
Deborah Venable
11/05/08
It would seem that Sarah Palin is about to be
shoved into the spot that has been reserved for George W. Bush for the past
eight years. Now it is her turn to be
used as the political whipping post for all the ills that befall the nation and
the Republican Party in particular.
I am ashamed of any conservative pundit that
would sink that low.
John McCain did not lose the election because of
his choice of running mate, Sarah Palin - he lost because he is not a
conservative. Conservatives had to hold
their noses to vote for him, and the only thing that made it easier WAS Sarah
Palin!
But she will be relentlessly dumped upon for a
long time to come, and John McCain will never again play a maverick role toward
the conservative viewpoint with any of his future decisions. He is only a maverick when he moves toward
the left – never toward the right.
Yesterday’s election proved one thing: when it comes to a history making decision
where the choice is race or gender first – gender will usually take the back
seat. I think I’ll just let that one
sink in for awhile and not even bother to explain or justify it. Somebody prove me wrong.
God bless Sarah Palin, though. At least she made the last couple of months
of this painful election cycle less painful for true conservatives. I dare any true conservative to intelligently
argue that point.
Now, as for the aftermath, we should turn our attention
to this transition period and see just how differently the “mourning after” is
handled. Let’s think back to the
election of 2000 when Al Gore was expecting his coronation and chose to act
like a spoiled child when it didn’t happen.
(There are perhaps many more reasons to doubt the validity of this
election than there ever were to doubt that one, but that is just the
difference between how liberals and conservatives handle the “sore loser”
syndrome.) As I recall, President
Clinton actually stood in the way of the transition, making Bush scramble in
the last half of that period to be ready in time. Dangerous, juvenile behavior really!
While I disagreed with President Bush on many of
his policy decisions over the past eight years, I have always admired his
character. He and his wife were
exemplary first citizens, and their moral character will go down in history as
among the most outstanding to occupy the White House. Theirs’ will be a hard act to follow for the Obamas.
We conservatives must do what is necessary to
rebuild the party that boasts of representing us, and we must remember that
those who would rise to future power on that platform should not do so unless
they truly understand and represent conservatism at its best. The test should not be how well they can
walk across the aisle, but rather how well they stand for our principles.
As a little sidebar request, I wonder if we could
finally get the real evidence to substantiate that we have a president-elect waiting
in the wings now that has a valid, constitutional birthright to the
office? Or is that STILL asking too
much?
Accentuate the
Positive
Deborah
Venable
10/28/08
If Republicans, conservatives, and all others who
care to preserve as much of American heritage as possible don’t get on the same
page soon, this election will go down in history as the one we gave away.
Is anyone else out there sick of hearing so much
second-guessing and negative commentary on Sarah Palin to the almost complete
ignorance of the positive effect her candidacy for vice president yielded just
a few weeks ago? We should have
expected liberals and the whole Democrat camp, (which includes most of the MSM)
to jump on her with both feet, but I am ashamed of the “right’s” waffling on
the wisdom of the Republican vice presidential pick at this point in the game.
Let’s remember why so many of us were pleased with
the choice in the first place. We
thought finally that we could send someone to Washington, a “heartbeat away”
from the presidency that actually reflected and would represent the majority of
mainstream America. That hasn’t
changed. Now, however, those
conservative “intellectuals” are piling on Palin because she may not have the
“right stuff” to be a Washington politician!
How absurd!
As for Sarah Palin’s “questionable” ability at media
interviews – well, I haven’t been particularly disappointed. The way she takes every opportunity to
highlight John McCain is admirable, since she is, after all, number two on the
ticket. Her answers about foreign
policy and Russia in particular are, if nothing else, honest. I don’t want to see her mouthing answers
like a Washington wonk that condescends to we, the little people!
Evidently some of my conservative teammates don’t see
it that way, though. They have become
concerned over her lack of political polish.
Oh, they say it is her lack of “experience” but that doesn’t hold water
since Palin has more executive experience than the other three candidates
combined. They are appalled at her
so-called gaffes, but I have yet to see one that compares to gaffes from the
two candidates on the Democrat ticket.
(I’m still waiting for Obama to visit those other seven states and for
Biden to admit that FDR did not have the benefit of either the presidency or
television in 1929!)
Sarah Palin lives in and has presided as governor
over the only state that borders two foreign countries, which she aptly points
out when the subject of foreign policy comes up, and she has successfully dealt
with the Canadian government in pipeline negotiations. The Alaska National Guard, over which she is
Commander-in chief, is tasked with much greater responsibility for national
defense than, say, Delaware or Illinois.
Russia is a short flight or boat trip from Alaskan shores, and the
shared border with Canada is vast and remote.
Her “neighbors” are foreign after all.
Accentuate the positive, and let her shine! It’s either that, or give this election and
the well-being of this country to the most radical group of political leftists
ever assembled here in America. You’ll
have real political polish then, and conservatives will be effectively polished
off the political scene.
Oh, and another thing – since the debates are all
over now and the advertising push of the major campaigns will be the chosen way
to get the candidates’ faces on television, expect to see more and more outcry
about “negative” ads working against Republicans. Believe me, if there was anything positive to accentuate about
Democrats, (that were not outright lies of course) negative ads would not be so
necessary.
The Science Of Shared
Risk
Deborah Venable
09/29/08
I’m sick of hearing about how much Main Street
will suffer if Wall Street goes under! Main
Street has been under the thumb of Wall Street for years, so what else is
new?
Let’s examine what is really happening, shall
we? The world – not just America – is
teetering on the edge of reality. The
reality that everyone is at risk is not a new concept, but the false reality
that no one need ever take a risk has compelled us into the current
crisis. It is only when the choice for
taking such risks is removed from those who will eventually bear the cost that
reality really bites!
Breaking down the somewhat complicated business
of insurance to its most basic elements, we find that the idea of shared risk
has been a part of human community thinking for centuries. Not a bad original concept, the idea of pooling
the resources of many, on a voluntary basis of course, to insure for
devastating loss of any member(s) of the pooled resources made sense. But when this pool is then placed in a risky
financial jeopardy via more than risky investment, we find that greed takes
over and regulation becomes mandatory.
Of course in a “free” market, the “risks” must
always be attractive enough to induce the would-be profit takers to underwrite
them, and government must always have its profit percentage as well. Combining financial institutions, such as
banks, with private and public backed insurance institutions is a recipe for
eventual disaster that has nothing to do with the original risks being
insured. When an economy becomes
dependent on an insurance against failure of any kind, well, you have exactly
what we are facing now.
The science of shared risk has succumbed to the
reality of greed and irresponsibility.
No one wants to own it, but everyone will be coerced to do so.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not lending
institutions; they are merely government insurance companies. AIG is an insurance behemoth of conglomerate
interests that stagger the mind.
Millionaires have been made in these organizations, yet poverty still exists
- sometimes as a direct result of their actions.
Before 1944 the responsibility of regulation and
supervision of insurance companies in America was reserved for the states. All of that changed when Congress got into
the act of insurance regulation under the Interstate Commerce clause of the
U.S. Constitution. Shortly thereafter
insurance companies were allowed to expand their coverage to multiple types
instead of just one line of insurance.
It didn’t take long for the various shared risk pools to become oceans
of resources to offset everything from fire and casualty to life, health,
theft, auto, home, labor - liability of all sorts were now grouped under
massive umbrellas and underwritten by anyone that saw a possibility, not only
of need, but of potential investment wealth.
America had gone from an innovative, industrialized
country of rugged individualist risk takers to a coddled, whimpering community
demanding more and more security and insurance against any risk. The government has accommodated us well by
demanding insurance as a necessity of our everyday lives. We are no longer allowed to assume risk to
the degree that our proud ancestors did, and that has been deemed a good thing.
Well, too much of a “good thing” will eventually
sour on everyone’s stomach. I think
that is exactly what we are seeing now.
The Seven-Year Itch
Deborah Venable
09/10/08
It’s funny how the
mind can wander sometimes, and in doing so end up with such a profound thought
that it scares you to think you may never have recognized it.
We are staring down the
barrel at the seventh anniversary of the worst foreign attack on American soil
in our two hundred and thirty-two year history. The event, September 11, 2001, started as a beautiful morning and
ended with a nightmare that shook us awake from our apathetic slumber. Most of us came away from that day with a
new appreciation for the American freedom and security that had allowed us to
fall into such a slumber.
Thoughts of that
event, seven years ago, forgotten by some, but remembered by most, (I hope) will
probably play a profound role in our selection of a new president, but only
time will tell. I’ve commented so much
lately on the problems that would await us with an Obama presidency, and his
“change we can believe in” policies that I hardly know what else to say on the
subject, so my mind began to wander back in seven-year increments.
1994 – Seven years
before the terrorist attack that rocked our world, Republicans rocked
Washington when they gained control of both houses of Congress for the first time
in decades. They did it with the
“Contract With America” where they vowed to simply cut federal spending and gut
the welfare state. Sadly, the vow
didn’t last long enough to get America out of debt and totally away from
government imposed economic folly. But
it was nice while it lasted. Real
Change.
1987 – Seven years
before the Republican attempt at less government, President Reagan was making
his final demands on the Soviet Union with his speech at the Brandenburg
Gate. Most historians agree that this
“Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall” speech cinched the demise of the Soviet
Union and the Cold War as we’d known it.
Real Change.
1980 – Seven years
before that great speech, Ronald Reagan was elected our fortieth president in a
landslide victory over the incumbent, Jimmy ‘do little good’ Carter. He began the arduous task of rebuilding the
military, the economy, and the people’s investment in a much brighter future
than we had known in the previous administration. Real Change.
1973 – Seven years
before Reagan reminded America that we are one nation under God, the U.S.
Supreme Court decided to play God and legislate from the bench with the worst
decision in the Court’s history. Legal
abortion became the law of the land and sentenced tens of millions of innocent
lives to a horrible and unjust death that continues today. Real Change.
1966 – Seven years
before abortion became America’s most shameful legal industry, there was a
groundbreaking in New York for the future structure that would become the
world’s tallest building for awhile.
That’s right, the World Trade Center builders broke ground in 1966. Thirty-five years later it would be wiped
off the face of the earth. Real Change.
1959 – Seven years
before that famous groundbreaking, the last two states were admitted to the
union. Alaska became our forty-ninth
state in January and Hawaii the fiftieth in August of 1959. Real change.
It seems that for the
last half century at least, America has been afflicted with a “Seven-Year Itch”
of sorts. The need for real change is
palpable after all. As we can see from
this trek back through history, we’ve experienced both good and bad change, so
the promise of more change is not all that comforting to think about. I can think of changes I would like to see
and a whole lot more changes that I never want to see.
I guess the real point
of this little exercise is to point out that the amount of change we are up for
really depends on our attitude about our country as it is. I’d much rather the big changes in my life
be up to me – the decisions I make, the relationships I have, the choices I
make in my own life. I don’t need
politicians determining all that for me and promising some abstract definition
of change that I should desire. Bottom
line, unless it’s good change, I’d rather lose the itch.
The Encapsulated Present
Deborah Venable
08/26/08
Wow! In one week recently we had the opening of
the Summer Olympics, finally an admission of a top tier politician’s sexual impropriety,
and a previous super power’s super imposition of its will over a sovereign
democratic country.
Now, the only
important consideration in the list above is the plight of Georgia. I couldn’t care less about the sham that is
the Olympics and the fallout from having them hosted by a dictatorial communist
regime that keeps its power and position in the world via ungodly lies and
intimidation. I also couldn’t care less
about another liberal power player having his personal fallacies undressed for
the world to see. But I DO sure as heck
care that the usual dopes in this country are trying to make a comparison of
Russia’s invasion of Georgia to America’s actions in Iraq!
I’ve read reams of
so-called analysis on the situation from all points of view, and the subject is
not to be approached from a sophomoric understanding of foreign policy or of
what causes war - cold or otherwise.
Wars are not touched off by an itchy trigger finger – skirmishes maybe,
but not real wars. War is planned and
pursued whenever there exists a weakness in foreign policy that can be
exploited.
As long as America is
seen as leaning toward electing an obvious socialist/communist practitioner of
political philosophy, there is that weakness in foreign policy. With a lame duck president, a Congress that
can’t even dope out the real will of the people they are supposed to represent,
and a moth eaten press that only cares about expanding the socialist/communist
agenda, why shouldn’t the thugs of the world make their move against freedom
and democracy now. It’s the perfect
time!
Financially, America
is mortgaged to the hilt and restricted from turning a fair, capitalist profit
to pay it off. All the politicians can
think to do about it is to take more from the producers and restrict or
regulate their ability to pay to an even greater degree. From the folly of threatening environmental
disaster, to the absurdity of ignoring the resources that are the fuel of
progress, the politicians and the special interest groups they support have dug
us into a hole that we almost cannot see our way out of. And where is the incentive to keep trying to
produce?
If you can imagine
jumping through the financial hoops to purchase a home only to find out that
you must pay for it but you cannot live in it, perhaps you can get the
picture. On top of that, imagine that
you paid cash for a brand new automobile, but you must park it in the garage of
the home you cannot use and never drive it – but you must keep paying the
registration, insurance and tax fees every year. Oh, by the way, anyone else may live in your home and drive your
car and not pay a single cent to you because the government has declared them
“entitled” to do so.
I think the summer
heat must have gotten to an awful lot of people, even though this year will go
down in recent climate history as one of the coolest.
Okay, so now the
Olympics are over, with Obama’s little publicized comments about what a great
country China is – so much better in so many ways than the one he hopes to lead
soon – John Edwards all but dead and buried politically, and Russia is STILL
dragging its feet getting out of Georgia!
But, center stage this
week is the Democrat Convention in Denver, where the press outnumbers the
delegates five to one! The “new”
Democrat product message is on display like never before. The bottom of the ticket has been filled out
with an almost equal left-wing radical to the top, and the sales pitch to the
American voter is the same old “new” cry for change.
Our encapsulated present? The more things change, the more they stay the same. That may be true in only one respect; the push for power in an election year must still make it past the overwhelming conservative majority that is the American voting public and will once again vote their minds and hearts in less than two months.
Interesting!
Thanks Don!
Professor Wichman Email The Real Story
A Michigan
professor sent an e-mail telling Muslim students to leave the country.
It is a matter of
history that when Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces, General Dwight
Eisenhower, found the victims of the death camps, he ordered all possible
photographs to be taken, and for the German people from surrounding villages to
be ushered through the camps and even made to bury the dead.
He did this because he
said in words to this effect: 'Get it all on record now - get the films - get
the witnesses - because somewhere down the track of history some b*stard will
get up and say that this never happened.'
The UK removed The
Holocaust from its school curriculum because it 'offended' the Muslim
population which claims it never occurred. This is a frightening portent of the
fear that is gripping the world and how easily each country is giving in to it.
It is now more than 60
years after the Second World War in Europe ended. This is posted in memory of
the six million Jews, 20 million Russians, 10 million Christians and 1,900
Catholic priests who were murdered, massacred, raped, burned, starved and
humiliated with the German and Russian peoples looking the other way! Now, more
than ever, with Iran, among others, claiming the Holocaust to be 'a myth,' it
is imperative to make sure the world never forgets.
“All that is necessary
for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
-Edmund Burke
Thanks Dee!
The Morning After
Deborah Venable
07/09/08
Collectivists of the
liberal philosophy are celebrating their many victories for the “hearts and
minds” of their fellow citizens as this first decade of the twenty-first
century approaches its “end times.” The
ever-persecuted individualist conservative philosophy finds itself on the
defensive. Defending the individual’s
rights need not, must not degrade into a special interest, collective tool that
can be used to erode the very freedoms which should protect those rights from
an overzealous government. But that is
precisely what we see happening.
Take a look at a couple
of the persecuted, (read that, perceived victim) groups, including blacks,
Muslims, even illegal aliens, and of course the poor. Who has so persecuted these groups? Conservative big, rich, white folks, of course.
If you are white and
make big profits pursuing legitimate capitalist endeavors, you are just
naturally taking advantage of all the “little people.” For that you must have your profits seized
and your business controlled. This is
an idea whose time has come, according to the keepers of the socialist
gate. Just ask Maxine Waters, Nancy
Pelosi, and the presumptive Democrat nominee for president.
I’m sick of this
attitude defining the “powers that be” in my country!
There is evidence to
support the claim that conservatism and individualism is far healthier for the
human mind and body than is liberalism and collectivism. It should be evident from America’s own
short history that this is true for the health of a nation. So why must we continually have to fight
this epidemic of change to a socialist collectivist theology? Yes, I call it a theology. If Ann Coulter can make a strong case for
liberalism being a religion, then I think this follows nicely. The Black Liberation Theology, of which
Barack Obama has definitely been a part, is but one branch of it.
It is no wonder to me
that many liberals, including the candidate, find it hard to stick to one
definition of their own philosophy.
That is just how relativism works.
There are not basic moral tenets or spiritual faith that can define it
for others, yet it can be defended with misplaced declarations of “fairness” or
tolerance. Many have accused Obama of
flip-flopping on key issues, but I don’t think it is that simple. Much more confusing and frightening is the
concept that he really doesn’t have any idea what he believes. In other words, there is no constant in the
man’s life.
The fact that so many
Americans are drawn to him and will be casting their votes for him in November
should be a wake up call to anyone who truly understands and loves this
country.
The poor in America
will not be helped by his election; their ranks will grow into a previously
unimaginable majority. Hopelessness
will take over the American Dream as fewer and fewer are able to conceive the
climb out of poverty on their own. The
“middle class” instead of being a comfortable transition towards happiness and
health will become an angry mob that is sicker and weaker than ever before. And the very wealthy? They will continue to be wealthy and much less
compassionate and much more selfish as they foot the bill for tyrannical
government.
That is what
overbearing government does to a society.
That is what doing away with individual responsibility, willing charity,
and a definitive moral compass does to a people.
Anyone old enough
might remember an old Jerry Lewis comedy from the fifties – a spoof about John
Paul Jones I believe. Anyway, there’s
Lewis all decked out in the period Naval garb uttering those memorable words, “Follow
me!” as he jumped off the ship. The
voiceover said it all, “Luckily, no one did!”
I don’t really know
why that stuck with me all these years, but if there was ever a time to see
that played out, it is now. If Obama
expects us to follow his example of questionable moral character, even more
questionable personal entanglements, and unquestionable philosophical
confusion, I sincerely hope we are smarter than that. I hope we all awaken the morning after the election to a
“luckily, no one did” result.
Rambo – In My Unsolicited Opinion
Pin the Tail On the Donkey
Deborah Venable
06/08/08
The game of politics
in this election year has finally come down to this. We need only put on our blindfolds, let the media spin us around
in a circle, and send us forward with the donkey tail attached to our vote.
Meanwhile, all the
elephants are conspicuously hiding under the furniture!
I think that pretty
well describes it, don’t you?
There are some who say
that after four years of our government in total control of the Democrats, the
only way to go will be up for Republicans.
After the onslaught of concentrated socialism we are about to experience
when the liberals have their way with us, we may regain some ground, but it all
depends on how well our memories work at that point. Will we remember that the concerted effort to destroy our
culture, our heritage, and our uniqueness succeeded because we allowed the
media to do all our thinking for us?
Will we remember a time when we had the chance to send genuine
conservatives to Washington to represent our interests, but couldn’t tell the
difference between truth and fiction, so we opted for too many Democrat and
RINO liberals instead?
After higher taxes,
more regulation of our personal lives than we’ve ever known, and ridiculous
costs of food and fuel due to invented environmental concerns gone wild, will
we finally entertain the idea of self sufficiency instead of government
dependency? After experiencing further
moral decline, dangerous risks to our lives and fortunes due to an appeasement
foreign policy, degradation of our military superiority, our border security,
and our ability to defend ourselves as individuals, will we remember that
liberal dogma caused it all, or will the truth be so disguised that Bush will
still be blamed for everything negative in America?
What kind of change
can we hope for in four years?
Is unity so important
to the average American these days that we are willing to toss out our core
beliefs to follow a liberal mantra that will paralyze the machine of freedom
that is our economy and crush the morality that drives our very spirit?
It sure looks that
way. Primary season is over and we have
our candidates – hand picked by the media and well on their way to receiving
the crowning tail. I really don’t see a
choice – the tail will fit any of them.
So, as it stands now a
jackass is headed for the Whitehouse.
That’s the totally
negative view. The positive one is that
in locations all over the country there is an effort going on to find and
promote the best in future statesmen to represent individual interests over
government tyranny. It has always been
so and will continue to be. The battles
for American Constitutionalism and conservative heritage are waged and often
won at the local level, with a few of these victors going on to achieve higher
office at the state and federal levels.
That’s how the system works best.
Feeling hopeless about
the outcome in November will accomplish nothing. We must make the best choices we can at those other levels up for
grabs. At the federal level, we can
replace the whole House of Representatives if we choose and one-third of the
Senate. If we truly want real change –
that is where it can happen. Sitting
out the election in refusal to pin the tail on this donkey or wasting a vote on
someone who has no chance of winning just to make a statement succeeds in proving
only one thing – that you are exercising your free will in an unwise way. Serenity comes in having the wisdom to know
what can be changed and doing everything in your power to make it so.
Even a jackass can
prove useful at times, and in the game of politics, there still can be happy
endings.
Through the Lens Of Happy
Endings
My salute to Charlton Heston
DebV
The Most Important Issue
Deborah Venable
05/10/08
As media microphones capture
responses from the question about the most important issue facing us in this
election cycle, those of us who really think about it can probably list a
plethora of issues that might answer it.
Let’s see, in the last few months I have heard the so-called top
response change several times depending on whichever way the wind happens to be
blowing at the time. I doubt if any
politician running for office this November can pin it down on a day-to-day
basis.
As for the general
public’s response to the question, it seems to fluctuate between the war in
Iraq and the underlying threat of terrorism in the world, the economy and our
shrinking dollar with our trade deficit figured in, border security and the
effects of illegal aliens on our strained infrastructure, and global warming –
reality or hoax. No matter how you
slice it though, all of it eventually ties into the economy, and most Americans
are just not savvy economists.
Here is what I
believe. If the American people could
come together in a common goal to elect only those representatives that could
legitimately prioritize expenditures, take what’s left of our national
checkbook and make it stretch to cover only what must be covered, and encourage
individual citizens to do the same, the correct solutions to all our problems
would come automatically and with lightening speed. I realize that is pie in the sky dreaming and more than a little
wishful thinking, but that is precisely what it would take.
What comes out of this
thinking is a very important fact. We,
as a people, can still do whatever it takes to survive and prosper if and only
if we are not divided. So, what divides
us then? We are divided by our
insistence on defining our basic philosophies, even if we don’t know the true
definitions, even if we float back and forth across those lines of divisions
depending on the specific issues we are addressing, or worse than that, sitting
in the middle and refusing to make clear choices. We are at the mercy of politicians who will exploit our indecision
and our ignorance.
It is bad science to
only hear one side of a story, only consider one set of solutions to a problem,
or make up “facts” that cannot be proven.
It is bad economics to turn our finances over to someone else without periodic
accountability, to shirk all responsibility for our financial outcomes, or to
base our financial futures on what we can convince someone else we will be
worth in that future. But it is truly
very bad form for us to toss aside the importance of historic knowledge, the
proliferation of a free and courageous spirit, and the absolute dedication of
all who have unselfishly sacrificed to build and secure the greatest country on
earth.
Some of the
politicians we have elected for years and years have continued to lie, cheat,
and steal the best that is this country just to satisfy their thirst for
power. We are responsible for
that! We are! We gave them their power, our trust, and our money and they gave
us back a total misuse of all of it!
Because of our poor decisions in the past, the pool of “hopefuls” to
attain the highest office in the land is poisoned with ambitious power seekers
who are woefully ignorant of the most important issue.
The most important
issue is the treasure that is America.
America is a living, breathing sea of humanity in a world that is
starving for what we have. Ancient
foreign lands have rich histories and proud citizens, natural wonders and
abundant resources, strong armies and intellectual prowess, but none of them –
not one – has pulled itself up by the bootstraps from a fledgling colony of
misfits and castoffs to become the most strident defender of humanity the world
has ever known – in a mere 230 years.
That took uniqueness, individual sacrifice, and courage to learn from
past mistakes and fix what was broken every single time we were
threatened.
So, what is the most
important issue facing us today?
Preservation of the treasure – that sometimes ill-defined uniqueness
that makes us tick. If we don’t start
teaching our children exactly what that is, and insisting that the
representatives we elect defend it with the power and resources we provide,
then we will surely fall prey to a continuing divisiveness that will eventually
wipe out the best thing humanity has going for it. The most important issue should always be the spirit that is
uniquely American.
Defining the Dream
Deborah Venable
04/05/08
“I believe a stronger sense of empathy would tilt the balance of our current politics in favour of those people who are struggling in this society. After all, if they are like us, then their struggles are our own. If we fail to help, we diminish ourselves.”
Exerpt from The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream by Barack Obama
Although
I have not read Barack Obama’s book, The Audacity of Hope, I have read some
excerpts from it. The above quote is
typical “Obama Speak” in the usual style of his rhetorical speeches on the
stump. Sounds great, sounds hopeful –
if more than a little condescending – but void of real substance and showing a
shocking lack of understanding of this thing called, “the American Dream”.
For
a man who is himself a product of one version of it, he seems to think that it
is out of reach for just anybody, which would include most of us regular
folks.
The
truth is that the American Dream is individually defined. It is the life we choose to make for
ourselves, and it is that choice which insures American success. Success is measured only in positives and
need not be balanced against negatives to achieve credibility – unless, I
guess, your worldview is of a socialist nature.
The
“against all odds” scenario is inspiring and useful in an anecdotal sense, but
is not a requirement to prove attainment of the American Dream. Satisfaction with a life well lived, comfort
in one’s own company, and pride in a community and way of life that did not
stand in your way suffices nicely as that proof.
It
seems most modern politicians must have a label to define their beliefs, an
allegiance to one or more collectives, and a commitment to enforce their
perception of justice from their acquired seats of power. It is also evident to us “regular folks”
that representation of us is not something they consider important in their job
description. What they consider most
important is defining what they want to represent and then selling it to us to
get elected. All too often we buy it hook,
line, and sinker.
I
have written many times about the “silent majority” or “sleeping giant” and how
I truly believe that it exists. The
glaring fact is that it has been inadequately represented for so long that is
more like a “cry in the wilderness” than a strong influence on the American way
of life any more. Politicians have been
allowed to get away with the rationalization that they really do represent the
majority, and disenfranchisement of the many for the few is now commonplace in
American government.
So, here is my cry in the
wilderness: representation does not
exist in the candidates for leader of the free world this election – not for
any of us who have achieved the American Dream, and not for anyone striving for
it honestly. If the giant rouses up
enough to reach for a pot of coffee before the next election cycle, perhaps we
can change that.
Contrary to popular belief, the definition of the dream does not
need changing.
Rejoicing in Easter
Celebration is uniquely Christian. I
invite you to read last year’s Easter
Page again for it is still very relevant today. DebV
Thanks to Alan for
supplying this interesting tidbit:
Easter this year is:
Sunday March 23, 2008
As you may know, Easter is
always the 1st Sunday after the 1st full moon after the Spring Equinox (which
is March 20). This dating of Easter is based on the lunar calendar that Hebrew
people used to identify Passover, which is why it moves around on our Roman
calendar.
Based on the above, Easter
can actually be one day earlier (March 22) but that is pretty rare. This year
is the earliest Easter any of us will ever see the rest of our lives! And only
the most elderly of our population have ever seen it this early (95 years old
or above!). And none of us have ever, or will ever, see it a day earlier!
Here are the facts:
The next time Easter will
be this early (March 23) will be the year 2228 (220 years from now). The last
time it was this early was 1913 (so if you're 95 or older, you are the
only ones that were around for that!). The next time it will be a day earlier,
March 22, will be in the year 2285 (277 years from now). The last time it was
on March 22 was 1818.
So, no one alive today has
or will ever see it any earlier than this year!
Political Quagmire
Deborah Venable
03/16/08
If you don’t feel
trapped in a political quagmire right now, you really are not paying any
attention. That is a fact. This was a blowout news week, from the
governor of New York’s sex scandal to the Democrat frontrunner for president’s
church outrage. Sex scandals have been
a dime a dozen lately, so I don’t even care to comment on that, other than to
say in the words of someone famous, “let it be.” He’s out, and the public shouldn’t care about any more press on
that story.
Moving on to Senator
Barack Obama – it is way past time for the media to care about this guy enough
to quit giving him a pass. I have
always thought that he was the most dangerous candidate for president in this
election.
At least with Clinton,
we have familiarity and plenty of illumination in the dark corners of that
powerful campaign. What we see is what
we get with the Clintons.
I think maybe Obama is
slightly ahead of his time, though. We
haven’t quite fallen to the depths we would have to in order to hand over the
reins of power to such an unknown quantity as he represents. Obama’s questionable religious beliefs are a
regular smorgasbord of possibilities – and at this time in our history that had
better concern us.
Obama is the product
of two radical activist atheists spawned from different religious backgrounds
and two different races. Those are the
facts. If Barack Obama thinks that his
extensive exposure to different cultures, different religions, and life in
different parts of the world qualifies him for foreign relations in some unique
capacity, I have to wonder about his judgment.
If he thinks that he can bridge all the gaps in race relations in this
country, I would have to question the construction of such bridges, or at least
see some blueprints. If he thinks that
he can fairly represent the values of this predominately Christian nation, I
must thoroughly understand how his religious values were formed from such
chaotic beginnings to whatever he truly believes now. I also have to understand his political philosophies that were so
obviously fired in the furnace of communist influence from his parents.
On the race thing too,
I would truly like an answer to some questions. Why did he decide to identify with his black side and all but
renounce his white heritage? He supposedly
loved his white mother and detested his black father, so how did that
happen?
Nothing would please
me more than supporting a black person or a woman of any race for the office of
president, IF I thought he or she was the best person for the job, but race or
gender should NEVER be the primary reason to support anyone! Neither of these candidates is qualified for
the office, and neither would be considered if not for race or gender. Period.
Ferraro had it half right.
I must appeal to John
McCain to step up and lead us out of this political quagmire. If you cannot defeat these two, God help us
when you try to defeat our enemies and set America on a righteous path back to
freedom.
Extreme Radical Views?
Deborah Venable
02/24/08
For the Irish in anyone and the human spirit in us all, a very
Happy St. Patrick’s Day!
The story of Saint Patrick is a tribute to overcoming negative
odds as well as a tribute to Christian influence. If you haven’t taken the time before, this
link and this one should be interesting. From a pagan, to a slave, to a Christian convert,
and finally to the Patron Saint of Ireland, his was a life filled with meaning.
We associate the Shamrock, (actually the three leafed clover) with
St. Patrick’s Day because he so eloquently used it to explain the Christian
Trinity.
DebV
I must thank my dear sister-in-law for reminding
me (via a recent email) of an incident that happened some twelve years
ago. The fact that it still has legs
after so long, is heartening, even though it could have been today’s news. We should all stop and think the next time
we hear a story of Christian persecution about how we should be
responding.
On January 23, 1996, Christian Church Pastor, Joe
Wright, was asked to deliver a prayer before the Kansas House Of
Representatives. This is that
prayer:
Heavenly Father, we come before you today to ask
your forgiveness and seek your direction and guidance. We know your Word says,
"Woe to those who call evil good," but that's exactly what we've
done. We have lost our spiritual equilibrium and inverted our values.
We confess that we have ridiculed the absolute truth of your Word and called it
moral pluralism.
We have worshipped other gods and called it multi-culturalism.
We have endorsed perversion and called it an alternative lifestyle.
We have exploited the poor and called it the lottery.
We have neglected the needy and called it self-preservation.
We have rewarded laziness and called it welfare.
We have killed our unborn and called it choice.
We have shot abortionists and called it justifiable.
We have neglected to discipline our children and called it building esteem.
We have abused power and called it political savvy.
We have coveted our neighbors' possessions and called it ambition.
We have polluted the air with profanity and pornography and called it freedom
of expression.
We have ridiculed the time-honored values of our fore-fathers and called it
enlightenment.
Search us O God and know our hearts today; try us and see if there be some
wicked way in us; cleanse us from every sin and set us free.
Guide and bless these men and women who have been sent here by the people of
Kansas, and who have been ordained by you, to govern this great state. Grant
them your wisdom to rule and may their decisions direct us to the center of
your will. I ask it in the name of your son, the living savior, Jesus Christ.
Amen.
The prayer hit the
internet in various forms and has circulated ever since in email boxes all over
the world. At least one lawmaker walked
out of the session in protest during this prayer and others took to the floor
afterwards to make speeches criticizing what the House Minority Leader at the
time, a Democrat, called, “the extreme radical views” reflected in the
prayer.
Paul Harvey aired
the prayer nationally on the radio in February of 1996.
Let’s take a closer look at these “extreme
radical views” shall we?
The views expressed in this prayer are those of a
practicing Christian seeking forgiveness and guidance for a legislative body
about to embark on a session of deciding law for the predominately Christian
citizens of a state within a predominately Christian nation. Furthermore he was invited to do so! Radical?
His point was adequately proven by the admonishment of those who
complained I would think. “Woe to those
who call evil good.” To that I would
add, “ and to those who call good evil.”
Alexis de Tocqueville, in his famous 1836 book Democracy in America, described the
common thread important among differing denominations:
“The
[denominations] which exist in the United States are innumerable. They all
differ in respect to the worship which is due from man to his Creator; but they
all agree in respect to the duties which are due from man to man. Each sect
adores the Deity in its own peculiar manner; but all the sects preach the same
moral law in the name of God...Almost all the sects of the United States are
comprised within the great unity of Christianity, and Christian morality is
everywhere the same.”
The representatives who so resented the
sentiments of this pastor, and others who have spoken out against his prayer
did nothing more than prove the appropriateness of his words. These people who are oh so tolerant of other
beliefs, including those who wish us all dead, will always be Johnny on the
spot to persecute the true Christian viewpoint. Always.
There is a very good background article on this site – from which I pulled the above quote. Here is one more quote from the same site
and from a more modern source:
"All
are free to believe or not believe, all are free to practice a faith or not,
but those who believe must be free to speak of and act on their belief, to
apply moral teaching to public questions… Tolerant society is open to and
encouraging of all religions, and this does not weaken us; it strengthens us…
Without God, there is no virtue, because there’s no prompting of the
conscience. Without God, we’re mired in the material, that flat world that tells
us only what the senses perceive. Without God, there is a coarsening of the
society and without God, democracy will not and cannot long endure." -
Ronald Reagan
Thanks again, Dee! I love you, and we all needed that! DebV
Answering the Critics
Deborah Venable
02/08/08
As most of my regular
readers know, I write with a “take no prisoners” attitude when dealing with
ignorance, apathy, and liberal philosophy.
I consider myself part of a necessary balance in a mostly liberal
literary medium.
While I receive very
little feedback to this website, occasionally I will get a communication from a
thoughtful person coming from a more than slightly different point of
view. One such communication hit my
email box recently from a person describing himself as holding both liberal and
conservative views. He sent me a copy
of an ebook he has written called, My America . . . Is
Democracy Floundering? His feedback
was directed at an article I wrote some time ago called, Democracy By Default, and his
comments were very polite and positive.
His book is passionate
above all else, but thoroughly sprinkled with an obvious dislike for George Bush
and the current administration.
However, the stated purpose and theme of the book was to encourage a
more active involvement of the electorate.
To that end, we agree that too many know and care too little about the
power of personal involvement in our self-governing political system.
The following is my
response to Mr. Flanagan :
Hi Fred, Thank you for
the comments on the article, Democracy By Default, and for providing me with
your ebook, My America . . . Is Democracy Floundering?
I have read it, and
have benefited from what you have to say via additional understanding of your
particular species of Patriotic American Liberal. It is obvious to me that you care deeply about the country and the
future. There are some – on both the
right and the left – that leave me wondering about them in that respect.
I could answer much of
what you have to say piece by piece, but I think the core difference in our
philosophies hinges on our differing expectations of government. I expect very little from government. Because the numbers of those who expect more
and more seem to be growing, the size, scope, and power of government is
growing at an alarming rate. This
accounts for the party power battles that have rendered both parties so
ineffective at doing the people’s bidding.
If government power were not such a trophy, party political power would
not be the attractive asset it is to so many politicians. It would simply be a job that needed doing
by a few dedicated and qualified representatives of responsible individuals to
promote differing policies in getting the same job done. Politics is a lousy career to pursue, but
the power we have anointed on government has led to politics appearing to be an
attractive way to make a living. Shame
on us!
All of government,
from the smallest localities to the U.S government, has been given the go ahead
to control all individuals from cradle to grave. If we have a spat with our neighbors, we run to government. If we find hardship in our family
relationships, we expect the courts to sort it out. If we can’t handle our own financial security, there must be a
government plan to help us. If we don’t
want to investigate our own purchasing choices well enough to avoid certain
pitfalls, it is up to government to “protect” our outcomes. A large percentage of Americans don’t even
want the responsibility to protect themselves from bad people – so the rest of
us can’t be trusted to do that for ourselves either! And for all the talk of personal privacy in decisions of health
and well-being, far too many think the government owes them health care on a
silver platter and on demand! Choice is
the paper tiger of philosophical arguments when you consider just how little of
it we have.
But we are still the
best and greatest country on earth, with the very best working system of
government ever conceived.
Ramming education down
the throats of American children from an ever more tender young age and through
even more years of mandated, standardized schooling has NOT resulted in a
smarter society. Here again, education
is certainly not something that government should ever be in control of – but
we, the people have demanded it, haven’t we?
You talk about wasteful government spending – there is an excellent
example of it!
I have to take
exception to your definitions of conservative and liberal philosophies. It is the conservative platform that
believes in limiting government powers, and the liberal view that uses government
to control those things and people that they are anything BUT tolerant of. You have fallen into the trap of assuming
that conservatives are not caring, considerate people on social issues just
because the majority of us think that mothers should not legally be allowed to
kill their babies in the womb. We also
think that people should not be coerced into accepting aberrant “lifestyles” as
normal via government legislation, and we don’t think that government should
make decisions about our private property, (including our income), and taunt us
for being racist, bigots for encouraging charity to begin at home and not with
government.
Social Security was
one of the most flagrant misuses of government power in our history! The largest purpose it has served is to
remove much of the social responsibility for individuals to care about each
other while using a vast resource of wealth in ways that do not measure up to a
benevolent people! It has also given
politicians of all stripes a bone to chew on, bury, and dig up to chew on again
every time they need a distraction from far more important issues. Government will never trust people to take
care of themselves, so people can never trust government to do it for them. Now why is that such a hard paradox to
understand?
Limited government, on
the other hand, as our Founders envisioned, is the necessary evil that must
constantly be constrained by a decent and moral people that want very little
from it. Just protection of our borders
from foreign hostility, fair trade representation in a world economy, and a
positive face on a proud land of rugged individualists to the rest of the
world’s governments. Our entangling
alliances with other nations have always and will always lead us into wars, but
once we are there, we must be victorious in our efforts. To do less is to betray each and every
American who ever bled and died to protect us.
That is what the last few generations of Americans have had a hard time
understanding. War is a serious
endeavor and not one that we can walk away from without sacrificing the soul of
our nation.
The Military
Industrial Complex is real and has been necessitated by the many evil
entanglements we have found ourselves in.
We must remain the strongest nation on earth because we are the
freest. We are “man’s last best hope” –
philosophically, governmentally, and economically – and it falls to that
military superiority to keep it that way.
It also falls to the American people, through the leaders we elect, to
keep that power under moral control.
You may have noticed
that I have not chosen to answer the many specific concerns you mention in your
text dealing with your assessment of this administration and decisions they
have made. Your thought process is obviously
entrenched in a negative opinion of the last few years – just as mine were
through much of the previous administration’s terms. I don’t believe we could prove each other right or wrong in our
opinions of these specifics. But we
must realize that the media did much to effect the environment of both
administrations. What we know or don’t
know about them is largely due to what was and wasn’t reported. I do believe that presidents make decisions
based on a body of evidence that the general public never sees. Second-guessing leaders who have been duly
elected and appointed to administrations is like a jury deciding a case after
viewing only a smidgeon of the evidence.
Granted, sometimes decisions are not made on the evidence alone, but
also on motives of lesser or greater worth.
That is why we MUST
take special care as an electorate to put into power those people we consider
to be the most moral choice we can make.
Morality in this nation of ours DOES matter. I don’t think it comes from belonging to an organized religious
group either, but I do believe that the morality of this nation is rooted in
Christian values, and trying to dispute that just shows an ignorance of our
history. Upholding a true Christian
identity is not something I would see as a black mark against a political
candidate. True Christianity already
makes the “separation” between that religion and government, (“render unto
Caesar . . .”), so it is a moot point.
I wholeheartedly
support your efforts to encourage more people to become involved in the
selection process via voting, debating, and voicing clear opinions after
educating themselves well enough to do so.
This will be an interesting election cycle because I do not believe that
either party is truly satisfied with the roster of candidates for president
each has presented thus far. I know my
favorites have already dropped out of the race.
Sorry to have bent your ear for so long with this response, but I
thought your contact deserved it.
Regards, DebV
In my quest to find previous
articles I have written but have been lost in my own files due to my
inadvertent computer data dump, I retrieved this one from the Federal Observer
site. It was originally published at Etherzone almost six years
ago, but their archives are not complete now.
The subject of the article is very fitting in this election cycle.
DebV
What a Deadly
Combination,
Old Age, Bad Health,
and Government Insurance
By Deborah Venable
Whatever
caused a free society to think that government could answer to real human need?
That is not and never has been its goal or its purpose, yet Americans in ever
increasing numbers continue to look in that direction for answers to basic
problems of being human. As long as the Social Security system continues to
exist, there will be a shackle on the souls of Americans from the cradle to the
grave - a shackle that spits in the face of human decency and laughs at real
human need.
While
politicians spew promises to that all-important sector of American voters,
aging and disabled, the wool is pulled further and further down over the eyes
of all ages. Charity is no longer understood for what it is supposed to be and
duty is extracted through coercion instead of encouragement and free will. Need
is not assessed in reality by government agencies - never has been.
Applications for assistance are dealt with in the same way as lottery winnings
might be passed out. No rhyme or reason exists in the machinery of government
intervention in personal lives. Each time a new bill comes up on the floor of
Congress, (to help older and disabled Americans), it is debated with all the
compassion of a pack of wolves deciding which prey to go after for supper.
No,
government is not a friend to the needy among us. The future of those who will
become needy is largely in the hands of the voting bloc that is now dependent
on government, so what are we, who are not quite there yet, supposed to do to
inject some sanity into such an impossibly insane system? Those much younger
have been conditioned by a lifetime of government brainwashing to accept
eventual dependency as a good thing, and those who will never need it are
continually coerced into feeding the destructive system. Meanwhile the courts
are filled with bankrupt citizens fighting to survive in this immoral climate
created by greed and ignorance. Defying all laws of economics, legislative
bodies continue to add insult to injury while they nurture the idea of
"social security."
Suspect
any politician who claims to "fight" for the rights of older
Americans, just as you would steer clear of those who herald themselves as
champions of "the children" - for they do not represent either group.
They are merely riding the socialist train to the political winners' station
and will embark on unrelated journeys to their own success. Listen and heed the
scant handful of concerned representatives who preach individual independence,
and unencumbered family cohesiveness. True "social security" is found
in the soul of humanity that embraces respect and charity for real need. It
cannot be mandated - nor should it - and it cannot be replaced by a system that
will sit in judgment of disbursing the hijacked funds of hard working citizens
without any regard to personal need. The disabled and infirm are forced to
sacrifice their pride to beg for what is rightfully theirs, while many lazy
and/or less deserving citizens are encouraged to accept a stipend they are
unwilling to earn. It happens all too often in this horrendous system of Social
Security. Yet, politicians are unwilling to place the demolition charges
necessary to bring it down. It is the untouchable third rail of the political
track and everyone knows it.
Home Access
To Previous Archives