Tuesday, February 27, 2007

Walter Reed Medical Center




I have read the information, I have seen the pictures, and I listened to most sides of the story about the care of soldiers at Outpatient Building #18 of the Walter Reed Medical Center and have come to some conclusions. Some press reports and the usual liberal blathering class have said that veterans organizations have been silent on this issue. That is not the case, the organizations I know of are gathering all the facts before they make any formal statement as they should, and that is the proper way to handle a situation like this. That is how I have decided to handle it. I waited to read all the reliable information I could gather and now I’m giving you my opinion on the matter.

First and foremost, I believe our soldiers and their families deserve the best treatment available and to be shown the utmost respect while doing do. Without exception our soldiers are being treated very well in the main hospital at Walter Reed MC where surgeries and therapies go on for the most severely wounded. I don’t think anyone with any knowledge about all of this could possibly argue with that. There is no excuse however for the treatment of the soldiers and their families at this outpatient building. These people should not have to negotiate the bureaucratic red tape, deal with dirty rooms, with roaches, mice and mold on the walls after serving their country and essentially putting their lives on the line for freedom. The Officers in charge of this operation need to be disciplined, the facility if it is going to continue to be used to care for soldiers, needs to be cleaned and staffed with professionals that care about the health and well being of our soldiers.

Cleaning up the facility though is going to be much easier to do than cleaning up the mess that bureaucrats make with all the rules and regulations they come up with to maintain their own positions. The process for gaining treatment in the repaired, cleaned and well staffed facilities has to be streamlined though. What is it that makes things so difficult? You go to the facility because your doctor has chosen for you to go there, you show your military ID, you fill out a couple of papers that say who your doctor is and other personal information so they know that you are who you say you are and there you have it, treatment starts as soon as it is scheduled. If the military said your family can be there then you take responsibility to prove they are your family and there you have that too, the family is there and taken care of. That’s the way it should work.

I am a strong believer that out of touch bureaucrats make things much more difficult in the medical care field. I have heard much talk about a government take over of the civilian health care system and this story only brings to light why that is a really bad idea. There is nothing trivial about this horrible situation for our troops but it is of a limited nature and is only one of a hundreds of facilities that are used for medical treatment for our military. Imagine the scope of the medical malpractice and mismanagement that would occur if the government would use these same types of bureaucratic minded people to run the huge civilian healthcare system.

I fully believe Defense Secretary Robert Gates will get a firm grip on this situation at the Walter Reed Medical Center because he appears to be the type you can trust to get the job done in no nonsense way. I like this man a whole lot after what I’ve seen and complained about in the past as far as Secretary of Defense goes.

This next part is the pointing out of the usual stories of malfeasance by a press that is all too glad to report anything negative about the “War on Terror” and in particular the military and the Bush administration. Don’t get me wrong though, this story needed to aired and brought to light but the tactics that are used by the press and others at the Walter Reed Army Hospital Center goes far beyond just uncovering of mistreatment of the troops by Army medical staff and dirty facilities. Everyday wounded soldiers and their families must run the gauntlet of a hounding press to give up some kind of incriminating evidence amid the signs of “Mama’s don’t let your boys grow up to be Killers” and the shouts of war protestors organized by the group “Code Pink”. I constantly have to remind myself when reading these stories about war protestors that I am a Christian and I must not let my hate for these people take control of me because revenge will neither be pretty or beneficial. When it comes to war protestors I am a boiling cauldron and I must keep the lid on it.

These links below are from Military.com, a place where I find the most unbiased and most accurate information about what is going with the military because it is us, the vets and the active duty personnel that put the information there. The first link is an interview with a volunteer from Walter Reed Hospital and she give a clear picture of what she sees going on there. It is about 15 minutes long so make time to listen to what this volunteer has to say, it is quite interesting and enlightening. The second link is a briefing by Defense Secretary Robert Gates (3-4 minutes.) The third link is the website of Walter Reed Medical Center. Click on the button that says soldiers first and see what soldiers must do when entering the facility. I remember the military quite well.

Interview with Volunteer

Gates News Briefing

Walter Reed Medical Center Website

Sunday, February 25, 2007

One More (a serious review)

I don't want to over do the You Tube deal and this will be the last one for a while. Consider the message though it didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what is really going on.

Tuesday, February 20, 2007

My Heroes



Music from "The Road Home" by the choir of Brigham Young University.

Saturday, February 17, 2007

Relentless Defeatist


Just a short time ago the United States Senate had the last word on defeatism for the legislative branch of the United States Government. The US Senate brought up for a vote; "the Joint Resolution on Iraq" (also known informally as the Joint Resolution for Surrender in Iraq) the motion failed to get the necessary votes to pass this resolution. The US Senate needed 60 votes in order to pass the resolution but the vote was 56 yeas to 34 nay votes. This is the second attempt and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (d) Nevada said “It is time to move onto something else.

One democrat Senator who constantly craves attention from the press and their cameras Charles Schumer (d) New York had this to say about the vote “democrats would be “relentless.” “There will be resolution after resolution, amendment after amendment . . . just like in the days of Vietnam,” Schumer said. “The pressure will mount, the president will find he has no strategy, he will have to change his strategy and the vast majority of our troops will be taken out of harm’s way and come home.”


Is this the kind of Senator that best represents the feelings of the people of the State of New York? Do the people of New York believe that the United States military should suffer the same humiliation and defeat that the democrats made our military and the rest of the nation suffer so they could have their defeat in Vietnam?

I have watched and opposed mostly everything Charles Schumer has ever said and done since his words have become public record. I still believe the most dangerous place in Washington DC is to be between Charles Schumer and a television camera that is about to be switched on. I’ve written about this particular Senator before and he hardly seems worth the time but I think it necessary to keep poking a stick in the eye of the people of New York until they send someone honorable to represent them in the US Senate.

Sorry folks no poem included when I write about this man, he doesn't deserve the time or effort spent including a poem from my collection. People like Charles Schumer that insist on humilating their own country to further their own narrow, self serving and petty political agenda are dragging the rest of the country down and we must put a stop to them!

Thank you to the 34 US Senators that stood up to show courage against this attack against America and her troops!

Friday, February 16, 2007

Iraq Surrender Resolution

This is the resolution as it was passed on 02/16/2007 as:


110th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. CON. RES. 63


Disapproving of the decision of the President announced on January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq.


CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Disapproving of the decision of the President announced on January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq.
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That--
(1) Congress and the American people will continue to support and protect the members of the United States Armed Forces who are serving or who have served bravely and honorably in Iraq; and
(2) Congress disapproves of the decision of President George W. Bush announced on January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq.

***This is the original Resolution proposed but it was watered down to get republican members to jump ship. The democrats don’t even have the courage of their convictions to pass legislation that represents how they see things because they know public opinion is not really with them.

This is the original House Resolution 41 :


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
FEBRUARY 12, 2007

Mr. SKELTON (for himself, Mr. LANTOS, and Mr. JONES of North Carolina) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that an increase in the number of members of the United States Forces deployed in Iraq is the wrong course of action and that a drastic shift in the political and diplomatic strategy of the United States is needed to help secure and stabilize Iraq.
Whereas the situation in Iraq is rapidly deteriorating and is increasingly becoming a problem that cannot be solved militarily;
Whereas President Bush has acknowledged that the current strategy in Iraq is not working;
Whereas December 2006 marked the deadliest month of the War in Iraq in over two years, and United States casualties surpassed 3,000;
Whereas it is crucial that the 110th Congress assert its constitutionally mandated authority to serve as a check on the President's handling of the war by overseeing the more than $300 billion already obligated or expended on the war and any requests for additional appropriations;
Whereas an increase in the number of members of the United States Armed Forces deployed in Iraq above the current level of 132,000 troops will continue to increase Iraqi dependence on United States forces and further prevents the Iraqi government from taking responsibility for securing their country;
Whereas General John Abizaid, Commander of United States Central Command, has testified before the Armed Services Committee of the Senate that he has met with the top military commanders in Iraq and they all agree that more troops are not necessary because `more American forces prevent the Iraqis from doing more, from taking more responsibility for their own future';
Whereas since June 2006, the United States has increased its military presence in Baghdad twice, while the violence and deaths of Americans has drastically increased since the last troop increase;
Whereas the neighboring countries and the region surrounding Iraq share a strategic vested interest in playing a constructive role in ending the violence in Iraq and creating a stable and peaceful nation;
Whereas it is critical that United States diplomats engage the countries of the world in this struggle and make it clear that no nation can afford to ignore the continued chaos in the Middle East; and
Whereas a growing consensus exists among the majority of the American people, military leaders, and the bipartisan Iraq Study Group that the United States should begin a phased strategic redeployment of United States troops from Iraq in 2007 in conjunction with a increase in diplomacy to stabilize Iraq: Now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that--
(1) after more than 3,000 American casualties, over $300 billion in expenditures, and almost four years of fighting, an increase in the number of members of the United States Armed Forces deployed in Iraq above the current level of 132,000 is the wrong course of action and should not be done without an express authorization for the increase in an Act of Congress; and
(2) a drastic shift in the political and diplomatic strategy of the United States, as well as the mission of the United States Armed Forces in Iraq, is needed to secure and stabilize Iraq so that the United States can begin a phased withdrawal of United States troops as soon as possible.


Republican - Yea - 17 Nay - 180 NV - 4
Democrat - Yea - 229 Nay - 2 NV - 2
Independent
TOTALS - Yea - 246 Nay - 182 NV - 6

DEMOCRATS THAT VOTED AGAINST THE DEMOCRAT LEADERSHIP

JIM MARSHALL
Georgia-8th, Democrat
504 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515-1003
Phone: (202) 225-6531

GENE TAYLOR
Mississippi-4th, Democrat
2269 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515-2404
Phone: (202) 225-5772


REPUBLICANS THAT CAVED AND VOTED FOR THE RESOLUTION;

MICHAEL CASTLE:
Delaware-At Large, Republican
1233 Longworth HOB
Washington, DC 20515-0801
Phone: (202) 225-4165

HOWARD COBLE
North Carolina-6th, Republican
2468 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515-3306
Phone: (202) 225-3065

TOM DAVIS
Virginia-11th, Republican
2348 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515-4611
Phone: (202) 225-1492

JOHN J. DUNCAN JR.
TENNESSEE-2ND, REPUBLICAN
2207 RAYBURN HOB
WASHINGTON, DC 20515-4202
PHONE: (202) 225-5435

PHIL ENGLISH
PENNSYLVANIA-3RD, REPUBLICAN
2332 RAYBURN HOB
WASHINGTON, DC 20515-3803
PHONE: (202) 225-5406

WAYNE T. GILCHREST
Maryland-1st, Republican
2245 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515-2001
Phone: (202) 225-5311

BOB INGLIS
South Carolina-4th, Republican
330 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515-4004
Phone: (202) 225-6030

TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON
Illinois-15th, Republican
1207 Longworth HOB
Washington, DC 20515-1315
Phone: (202) 225-2371

WALTER B. JONES
North Carolina-3rd, Republican
2333 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515-3303
Phone: (202) 225-3415

RIC KELLER
Florida-8th, Republican
419 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515-0908
Phone: (202) 225-2176

STEVEN C. LATOURETTE
Ohio-14th, Republican
2371 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515-3514
Phone: (202) 225-5731

MARK STEVEN KIRK
Illinois-10th, Republican
1030 Longworth HOB
Washington, DC 20515-1310
Phone: (202) 225-4835

RON PAUL
Texas-14th, Republican
203 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515-4314
Phone: (202) 225-2831

THOMAS E. PETRI
Wisconsin-6th, Republican
2462 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515-4906
Phone: (202) 225-2476

JIM RAMSTAD
Minnesota-3rd, Republican
103 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515-2303
Phone: (202) 225-2871

FRED UPTON
Michigan-6th, Republican
2183 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515-2206
Phone: (202) 225-3761

JAMES T. WALSH
New York-25th, Republican
2372 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515-3225
Phone: (202) 225-3701

See other important information Marie has at her blog too Marie's Two Cents

The Dagger of Betrayal

US Marine Unit in Iraq


Today, February 16th 2007 the Congress of the United States of America led by the democrat party has unsheathed and used a weapon of treachery. The United States House of Representatives has unsheathed and has violently and deliberately thrust the dagger of betrayal into the backs of the brave men and women that serve honorably and faithfully while they fight and die for freedom on foreign soil. The democrat controlled House of Representatives is about to pass a resolution condemning President George Bush’s plan to support and defend the troops that are stationed and fighting in Iraq with more troops so they can take back control of the city of Baghdad. This so called non binding resolution is nothing more than a political statement from a political party that has banked on its success and power by the defeat of our very own troops.

This is my binding Resolution in response to the treachery of the democrat party.

Resolution; Jennifer Gallagher #1 states: From this day forward I, Jennifer Gallagher will work with every resource available to me to defeat and humiliate every democrat and republican that votes for the treachery that is the concept behind "House Concurrent Resolution 63" (originally House Resolution 41). No political party in the history of the United States has ever earned the contempt that should be assigned to the 110th Congress led by Representative Nancy Pelosi (d) California. I urge all who read this Resolution, Jennifer Gallagher #1 to contact their own representative and voice your complete disgust with the 110th Congress and the betrayal they commit by passing House Resolution 41.


Will

THERE is no chance, no destiny, no fate,
Can circumvent or hinder or control
The firm resolve of a determined soul.
Gifts count for nothing; will alone is great;
All things give way before it, soon or late.
What obstacle can stay the mighty force
Of the sea-seeking river in its course,
Or cause the ascending orb of day to wait?
Each well-born soul must win what it deserves.
Let the fool prate of luck. The fortunate
Is he whose earnest purpose never swerves,
Whose slightest action or inaction serves
The one great aim.
Why, even Death stands still,
And waits an hour sometimes for such a will.

Ella Wheeler Wilcox

Monday, February 12, 2007

A Scary Difference

Mortally Wounded Brigand_Eugene Delacroix




On this past Saturday afternoon I decided not to go out because the temperature was about 20 degrees so I stayed in to avoid this most recent example of global warming outside of my high carbon output home. While I was doing my workout I was watching TV as I always do because working out without someone watching you struggle to kill yourself to be fit can be quite boring. I turned on the FOX News Channel and put the remote down and started my work out. I normally watch something on the History Channel because they always have some interesting things to watch that help me forget the pain I am putting myself through. I left the news on because the remote was out of reach now and there it was, right on the screen the “Town hall” meeting in New Hampshire with candidate for President, Hillary Clinton. I thought “I can’t reach the remote so I’m stuck watching this cartoon”. As I was watching the “Question and Answer” session the Clinton team had staged they had one of those”uh oh” moments that this experienced team of mudslingers and personal character destroyers should have known better to avoid. Clinton’s team let a man up to the podium to ask an unscripted question. The results of having to answer that question made candidate Clinton show her true character.

The man that was brave enough to face down the "Clinton Mean Machine" was named Roger Tilton and he was from Nashua, New Hampshire. Roger Tilton of Nashua, asked Candidate Clinton “right here, right now, once and for all, without nuance” to call her 2002 vote “a mistake.” then he added “Until we hear you say that, we’re not going to hear all these other great things you’ve said”. Well, I could hear the background sound effects from the scary movies. Yeah, you know the sound, just before something is going to happen along with the eyes becoming vacant like laser beams that were going zap this man and turn him into a pile of spent ionic dust. I have to tell you folks, I normally don’t feel sympathy for liberals when they are asking stupid questions as they are apt to do but I truly felt sorry for old liberal Roger standing up there in front of the mike being glared down to by Clinton. I just hope liberal Roger's wife has plenty of life insurance that includes an "Arkancide" provision. You old timers understand that terminology and it will be in vogue again in the upcoming election I’m sure.

Clinton tried to recover from her almost explosion but it was apparent she was now in a very bad mood and had to answer the question. Clinton referred back to a canned answer her team had come up with about if she had to do it over again knowing what she knows now she wouldn’t have voted to give the President the authority to go to war. Yeah, yeah, yeah the audience didn’t buy it either. They are supposed to be her people too. I’m just wondering now where they will find old Roger the liberal’s body holding a gun to his head.

Down below you will see two different versions of the story I just told. Something is missing from one of them. One story tells the same story I saw on TV (minus my obvious slant from above). The other story completely misses the whole point and goes on to read into the story something completely irrelevant to the whole meeting that went on up there in New Hampshire.


This is how one newspaper reported the incident:

In New Hampshire, Clinton Owns Up to Her Vote on Iraq War

While she tried to keep the audience of 300 people in Berlin focused on Mr. Bush, she was forced at one point to account for her own history on Iraq. One audience member, Roger Tilton of Nashua, asked her “right here, right now, once and for all, without nuance” to call her 2002 vote “a mistake.”

“Until we hear you say that, we’re not going to hear all these other great things you’ve said,” Mr. Tilton said.

In response, Mrs. Clinton repeated her standard talking points that she would never have cast it if she had had the intelligence information that she had now.

She also tailored some of her remarks to the economic struggles of Berlin, a city of about 8,000 people that has been shedding jobs from its pulp and paper mills...

Another news source reported it this way;


CLINTON FACES TOUGH QUESTIONS ON IRAQ FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE VOTERS

Her toughest questioner was Roger Tilton, 46, a financial adviser from Nashua, N.H. Tilton told the New York senator that unless she recanted her vote, he was not in the mood to listen to her other policy ideas.

"I want to know if right here, right now, once and for all and without nuance, you can say that war authorization was a mistake," Tilton said. "I and I think a lot of other primary voters — until we hear you say it, we're not going to hear all the other great things you are saying."

In response, Clinton repeated her assertion that "knowing what we know now, I would never have voted for it," and said voters would have to decide for themselves whether her position was acceptable.
"The mistakes were made by this president who misled this county and this Congress," Clinton said to loud applause.
Later, Tilton said he was not satisfied with her answer and was incline to support Democrat John Edwards or Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., who announced his candidacy Saturday.
"I love what she says about health care, I love what she says about capping troop levels, I love what she says about the war now," Tilton said, adding he would remain undecided until she offered a clearer answer. Clinton's refusal to recant her vote has been a sore point for many Democratic activists who tend to vote heavily in the party's primaries. End of example.

Obviously there is a discrepancy on what is important in reporting a story accurately and some newspapers are losing subscribers because they are sick of not getting the whole story. This is just one mild example of how it affects the reader’s understanding of what is being reported.

Here Is A Wound That Never Will Heal, I Know


Here is a wound that never will heal, I know,
Being wrought not of a dearness and a death,
But of a love turned ashes and the breath
Gone out of beauty; never again will grow
The grass on that scarred acre, though I sow
Young seed there yearly and the sky bequeath
Its friendly weathers down, far Underneath
Shall be such bitterness of an old woe.
That April should be shattered by a gust,
That August should be levelled by a rain,
I can endure, and that the lifted dust
Of man should settle to the earth again;
But that a dream can die, will be a thrust
Between my ribs forever of hot pain.


Edna St. Vincent Millay

Saturday, February 10, 2007

Rudy is Running

Rudy in Yankees drag



We’ve all heard about Rudy Giuliani throwing his hat into the ring to run for president. That’s good, Rudy has some very strong points and credentials that are unmatched by anyone on the democratic ticket so far. I’m writing this post now so we can get it out of the way because I know it will become an issue with some conservatives. Rudy Giuliani had a reputation for being a hard nose and you will hear stories about how he was the dictator of New York coming from the criminal oops, I mean liberal element. Rudy cleaned up New York and made the streets much safer and cleaner for the average citizen and most were very glad about that. Conservatives will be very pleased to hear those stories about Rudy Giuliani and they should be because it was quite the accomplishment.

Now I’m going to tell a few things that conservatives may not want to hear but they must said I because I believe that you should hear bad news from a friend rather than from an enemy or and opponent that will use the bad news against you. Rudy, I believe is a fair man and believes in non discrimination. His record as Mayor of New York City is a testament to that. Rudy would support the Gay community and would come out to march in the Gay Pride Parades dressed in drag. I thought that was pretty good and he had quite the sense of humor to get out do something like that. Let me tell you though, during the Republican primaries some will try to it use against him. I’m here to tell you that any candidate that tries to use this issue against Rudy I will be vocal in my attacks against that candidate.

It will be fair play if the other candidates say that they disagree with Rudy about Gay marriage, which he against or that they don’t think Rudy is right on gun control or abortion. They are issues that will be fair play to discuss but when Rudy was getting out there to parade with the Gay community he also went out to the Saint Patrick’s Day, Columbus Day, and Polish, Latino, and African American Day parades too. Rudy should be held above the rest of the candidates because in a city the size of New York creating good will and sense of community is so difficult and he did it. With the exception of the criminal and permanent whiner classes Rudy Giuliani went out of way to bring all the communities to work together to fix some of the problems New York City had after years of neglectful and irresponsible leadership. So Rudy put on a dress, a wig and some heels and brought the community together and had a few laughs, be prepared to see the pictures and hear the complainers on our side too.

Rudy in drag


The Road Not Taken

Two roads diverged in a yellow wood,
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveler, long I stood
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth;

Then took the other, as just as fair,
And having perhaps the better claim,
Because it was grassy and wanted wear;
Though as for that the passing there
Had worn them really about the same,

And both that morning equally lay
In leaves no step had trodden black.
Oh, I kept the first for another day!
Yet knowing how way leads on to way,
I doubted if I should ever come back.

I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

Robert Frost

Friday, February 09, 2007

Despicable Character

William Arkin, his own words speak to his despicable character

The words William Arkin wrote in his Washington Post blog were comments about an NBC Nightly News story from Richard Engel, who was embedded with an active duty Army infantry battalion from Fort Lewis, Washington.

William Arkin; “So, we pay the soldiers a decent wage, take care of their families, provide them with housing and medical care and vast social support systems and ship obscene amenities into the war zone for them, we support them in every possible way, and their attitude is that we should in addition roll over and play dead, defer to the military and the generals and let them fight their war, and give up our rights and responsibilities to speak up because they are above society?”
“But it is the United States, and the recent NBC report is just an ugly reminder of the price we pay for a mercenary - oops sorry, volunteer - force that thinks it is doing the dirty work.”



SO WHO IS ARKIN? That has proven to be a difficult thing to determine, for while Arkin is a prolific writer, his biography is hard to assemble, and maybe intentionally so.
Arkin is a veteran of four years in the Army (he served from 1974 to 1978) and many of his bylines from the past two decades described him as a "military intelligence analyst" during his service (his rank and units are not readily apparent). He received his BS from the University of Maryland. Fred Barnes Weekly Standard

His employment since leaving the service is easier to trace. Arkin cut his teeth with the lefty Institute for Policy Studies, and went from there to positions with Greenpeace, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and Human Rights Watch. He has been a regular columnist for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. In recent years he has taken more mainstream work as a senior fellow at the School for Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University (he appears to do most of his writing not from the SAIS campus, but from his home in Vermont).
information provided by Hugh Hewitt from an article in The Weekly Standard


Those are just some of the comments made and so much has already been written about this that I could not let it pass without me making some note of it. I did have a bad dream the other night and woke up suddenly after realizing that in my dream I was pounding the living daylights out this guy with a 2x4. This comes about from my intense hatred of anti war protestors that started back during the war in Vietnam. I know up in my profile I tell people I’m a Christian and believe me if I wasn’t a Christian there would be people that would be sorry that they ever left their house to go carry a sign. So I’ll just leave it that.

The Real Deal


A Comparison

Enough funnin, this is what the whole flap over the plane for Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is all about. The plane on the left is a C-32 transport plane that can carry 45 people with all of their cameras, microphones and checkbooks. It can fly from Washinton DC to San Francisco non stop. On the right is the C-21A, this plane was used by the former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert to fly back to his district in the Chicago area. The C-21A must stop to refuel in order for it to fly from Washington DC to San Francisco. The smaller C-21A cannot carry press and campaign donors aboard and would only have enough room to provide for the Speaker and a couple of members of her family. I think that is very reasonable. I think the bigger plane is a waste of taxpayers money and it would be used for purposes other than flying the current Speaker of the House back to her district in San Francisco. The new Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, I'm sure will find plenty of ways of wasting taxpayer money but let's have her at least begin this term with some ethics and not waste anymore of the taxpayer's money on this.

Thursday, February 08, 2007

Another Day of jihad

Flaps Down



Pelosi One


Well it seems that our first woman Speaker of the House just can’t go anywhere without making a flap. Madam Speaker, Ms. Pelosi wanted a big plane for her and her family to travel back to her district in San Francisco. Well, since she has gone and made big noises about cutting the military it appears the Air Force did find her a plane that can make it back to San Francisco economically. Today the Air Force awarded the first woman Speaker of the House her own plane and even gave it a name,“Pelosi One”. The friendly skies over at the Air Force threw in some of their personal touches too just to let Ms. Pelosi know how much they thought of her. Fly the friendly skies Ms. Pelosi and have a nice trip. Let us know if there something else we can do for you. As we always say “We aim to please”. Gee whiz those guys at the plane pool are some friendly fellows eh?

Tuesday, February 06, 2007

Ulterior Motivation?



I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart:
But the saying is true, "The empty vessel makes the greatest sound."
Shakespeare – Henry V




These words came to my mind the other night while I was watching Chris Wallace interview newly elected United States Senator James Webb er, uh now a democrat from Virginia. James Webb was formerly the Secretary of the Navy under Ronald Reagan during Reagan’s last year in office. James Webb is also a decorated Marine that fought as a young man in Vietnam. So how it is that James Webb has put himself into the position now that he would have spit on when he fought as a young Marine in Vietnam?

First let me make my position perfectly clear as I have in the past and will in the future. I believe a young person can show his or her honor and duty for their country and do some extraordinary things when they are put into a combat situation. Many serve heroically and are awarded medals to commemorate their dedication to their country and their fellow soldiers or sailors. Those same people go on with the rest of their lives living in the same honor as they had shown in the earlier part of their life; I salute them and honor those people with the utmost regard.

In other cases though people that have shown distinguished service to their country in their youth and then somehow get caught up with their own aggrandizement and use those honors to further there own selfish goals. Don’t get me wrong, I believe if you have earned the due respect from the honor you have shown there is nothing wrong with using those credentials to further noble goals.

Now back to James Webb as the newly elected United States Senator from Virginia. Chris Wallace asked Senator Webb flat out, “What makes your position now so different from 1985 when you stated that” when the fighting is going on it is not time to debate”? Webb was taken a little aback but in a quick thinking way tried to come up with a answer but it sounded very convoluted and his answer made no sense at all. After that Webb continually tried to talk over Wallace as politicians do when they know they’ve been caught in an inconsistent position or outright lie. Chris Wallace just went through this same situation just a month or so before when he caught former president Bill Clinton in another one of his stories. Webb, to his credit did not physically try to intimidate Chris Wallace as Bill Clinton did but clearly Webb was very uncomfortable having to answer for his very inconsistent position.

The point is this; James Webb apparently has an axe to grind with either George Bush or the Bush family. Webb has now made himself look very petty and small and will now try and use his former service as some kind of back up for his apparent lack of character and consistency. This is why I laid things out the way I did because if you are going to claim that you are an honorable person because of your service you must maintain that level of honor for the rest of your life in order to use that as a character reference or you dishonor your service and your country.

Benedict Arnold was a great General for the Americans during the early part of the American Revolution and he displayed much bravery and honor in his service for his country. Then Benedict Arnold perceived his service was being unrecognized and was passed over for promotion and decoration. That anger and perceived slight was a major contributing factor to Arnold turning on his countrymen. Benedict Arnold gave the plans of the American defenses at WestPoint to the British effectively branding Benedict Arnold a traitor to the Americans. The British then made Arnold an officer in the British Army but the other British officers had no respect for Arnold because they felt a certain disdain for someone that would turn on his own people and they could never fully trust someone that displayed such low character.

James Webb went on TV to give the democrat party response to President Bush’s State of the Union address to defame the President and the President’s plan to increase troop levels to take control of the situation in Iraq. Is James Webb being overlooked by George H.W. Bush to stay on as Secretary of the Navy or even being considered for Secretary of Defense reason enough to feel marginalized and to carry enough anger into the next century to exact revenge for a personal slight? I’ll leave it up to you to decide for yourself and you can draw your own conclusions to the parallels I have provided. Benedict Arnold will always be remembered as traitor and his service to his country before that is largely forgotten because of the still appalling nature of his treasonous acts. James Webb, a decorated United States Marine officer and newly elected democrat United States Senator from Virginia…


A Dream Within A Dream

TAKE this kiss upon the brow!
And, in parting from you now,
Thus much let me avow --
You are not wrong, who deem
That my days have been a dream;
Yet if Hope has flown away
In a night, or in a day,
In a vision, or in none,
Is it therefore the less gone?
All that we see or seem
Is but a dream within a dream.
I stand amid the roar
Of a surf-tormented shore,
And I hold within my hand
Grains of the golden sand --
How few! yet how they creep
Through my fingers to the deep,
While I weep -- while I weep!
O God! can I not grasp
Them with a tighter clasp?
O God! can I not save
One from the pitiless wave?
Is all that we see or seem
Is but a dream within a dream.

Edgar Allan Poe