Good Riddance

Charlie,

Don't forget the fires he started out west!

The tsunami's in Asia

His hate speech about nice gentlemen like youself

His stupidity in rejecting the fact that his ancestors were monkees.

His audacity in ducking a thrown pair of shoes from people of high intelligience like yourself

And foremost, you forgot about the fact that he is too dumb to be a part of the pure and upright Chicago political machine that is smart enough to sell senatorial seats to pad their coffers.

A new day has arrived, hallelujah! Let's just all work together now that the jerk is gone and the messiah has arrived. Let the redistribution of ignorance, oops! Wealth begin.

Roy Hargrave - ignorant creationist

charlie,

just when i was starting to give you a little respect or credit, you come up with some off the wall............i don't know where in the hell you are coming from..........garp!

i will be setting back to see your.... "words of wisdom".... when gov. rod blagojevich of illinois starts to spill the beans of illinois politics to save his own butt. i strongly beleive that will happen.

how can you be so angry with a president that has kept your family and mine safe in times like these? i hope and pray we can say that on o'bama's watch, but i wouldn't count on it.

the thing that really bothers me about far leftist like yourself is your party before country reasoning. i guess there's just somethings i'll never understand.

i do hope you and your's have a great and SAFE CHRISTMAS. we can still say CHRISTMAS can't we?

rjb

Whoa, Charlie, looks like you struck some nerves there. I too am perhaps not always so respectful of other people's opinion of our sitting president and I do mourn the loss of respect we all seem to have for the most important position in our land. I have to admit I have a tendency to take the decisions of President Bush more personally than ever before.

But I must say I am glad to see the end of this administration and I feel that the very structure of our government has been dangerously eroded in the last eight years.

And I also hope we can all be respectful of the incoming president. He really has a big job ahead of him and all our futures depend on him and his decisions and our support.

Christa

Very interesting commentary this week. I can truly say I am glad to Dubbya is soon to become our ex-president if for no other reason than the fiscal fiasco that has touched every American nearly as badly as did the Great Depression. All I have to do is look at my retirement portfolio to know that fiscal responsibility was not the order of the day under his administration. I don't intend to shed any tears as he leaves Washington.

Dear imaupr,

Though your point is well taken that President Bush is complicit in the state of the present economy, perhaps to a greater or lesser degree than we could possibly have knowledge of, that is certainly not the whole of it. And if you, or others believe that the Congress of the USA had nothing to do with the present disaster then you're living in a fairy tale world. It seems that a vast number of Americans think less of the congress than the President. As of last week, Congresses approval ratings were at 12% according to the CBS\NYTimes Poll. And CBS or the NYTimes could not possibly be considered by the most ardent Democrat as being in the tank for conservatives.

This mantra of vilification that is always placed upon the President without due regard to multiplied entities such as the Liberal Congress, Media (including liberal Republicans), and the criminals who have been running our financial institutions into the ground for 2 decades while enjoying their villas and luxuries from our losses, is promoting faulty information which only serves to keep the ignorant, well, ignorant about the depths of our present dilemma.

And one thing we might not be able to say at the end of the next 4 years, is that the USA has been kept safe from terrorists since 9/11. How many of us thought that possible 7 years ago. I hope for the best, but I'm fearful of the worst.

Thank you SandraR for pointing out the necessity of civility in giving due honor and respect to those who have been given god-ordained authority (Romans 13). When some in the media and others I dare not speak of at the moment laugh when our President has shoes thrown at him by a media maniac it is disgusting and a sign of the continued decline of the Western Culture as we have known it in our generation. The fact that there has been so little indignation in our own nation concerning that incident disturbs me greatly and speaks of worse things to come.

We had better wake up, or we'll all have our heads sawed off before we know it by those who intend our demise at any cost. If you don't believe me, ask the Brits, they'll inform you as to the ways and means employed by our most ardent enemies. An enemy, by the way, that will cooperate with us until they reach the point of superior numbers and then they'll dominate and destroy everything this nation was built upon.

Too bad that the pocket-book trumps freedom from tyranny and the continuation of liberty for our children and grand-children as set forth by our founding fathers. "In God we Trust" is etched into the Granite in Washington D.C. as well as our coins we carry around in our pockets, but apparently it is not etched in our hearts as it was in the mighty heritage passed down to us by the men and women who sacrificed all for their posterity. What a shame. What an end! Unless, by the grace of God, there is a spiritual awakening among us, that alone can heal the divide and calm our fears. Obama, Bush, or any other man can not possibly bring this nation together or solve our overwhelming problems unless God intervenes and strikes at the root of the problem - our hearts! No, NOT the Guns, our HEARTS!

Look around friends! Hurricanes, fires, mudslides, floods and every other disaster known to man is multiplying in our land exponentially. It is as though God Himself is depleting us of our undeserved resources because of our rebellious spirits and destructive ways. We love not our God nor do we love our neighbors.

I know of no illustration that describes present America more than the words found in Ezekiel 25:6-7{6} 'For thus says the Lord God: "Because you clapped your hands, stamped your feet, and rejoiced in heart with all your disdain for the land of Israel (USA IN OUR CASE), {7} indeed, therefore, I will stretch out My hand against you, and give you as plunder to the nations; I will cut you off from the peoples, and I will cause you to perish from the countries; I will destroy you, and you shall know that I am the Lord."

TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT!

Roy Hargrave

jck-tex,

A little over 200 years of history in this great land and it has come to this. What a pity for such a young country to succumb to such mindless dribble a mere two centuries after it was built upon such high and lofty virtues. At least, I will admit dear sir, that you readily understand exactly what Charlie's intentions are and furthermore you illustrate perfectly what his example produces in others.

Apparently, if you and Charlie are primary examples of the other side of the aisle, the next 4 years are going to produce an even greater divide in this nation. I guess the pre-election talk of unity and one America was mere political propaganda from Obama and his surrogates. Too bad for the nation. It will only serve to hasten us on to hell a little faster than we anticipated.

Roy Hargrave

OUR TROOPS AT GITMO TIRED OF BEING CRITICIZED AT HOME Terrorists Treated Better than American Troops

"There is nothing in the world better than being in the company of American military men and women. They are the greatest, and we see every time why they are the real pride and joy of the United States of America. We are dismayed to hear them express disgust at dim-witted American politicians and their liberal friends in the media continually demeaning our troops at Gitmo, while feeling sorry for the cut-throat terrorists we have behind bars..." says, Move America Forward Chairman Melanie Morgan as she waves before boarding a Navy plane to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

We were pretty excited to get on board our small military plane and get to Guantanamo Bay. We couldn't wait to get here and express our thanks and appreciation for the great job our troops are doing. The female part of our MAF delegation

in was Kylie Williams, Melanie Morgan, Catherine Moy and Debbie Lee.

Once we landed at the airport, we had to take a boat across the Bay to our visitors quarters on the base. The reception we received from our troops all along was outstanding! They were so appreciative that someone had come to Guantanamo Bay to express thanks and appreciation.

The only thing they actually asked:

That when we return to the United States we tell people how wrong the critics of Gitmo really are!

We promised we would do that loud and clear. Life for the terrorists is pretty good - actually better than it is for our own troops!

While the terrorists throw urine and feces on the guards and find ways to set traps to injure them the medical care for terrorists is BETTER than our men and women get. The terrorists get movies, a choice for 6 diets, yes I said SIX, of their choice and perfect climate controlled accommodations. Most Americans would be glad to have it this good.

We are heading over to the detention center in a short while, and we will give you a full report tomorrow. We all have to cover ourselves so as to not offend the terrorists.

Can you believe that!? These murdering zombies can't see an uncovered woman so we have to adhere to their standards!?

And we have the left wing in America complaining about their treatment?

Defensor Fortis,

Clearly you do not know how these blogs work dear sir. Your continual arguments that make sense are unacceptable to this venue. If you keep it up somebody's head is going to explode with FIO, or for the layman, factual information overload. Everybody knows that Bush is the Beast, so stop confusing the rest of us with the facts until we can at least beat the poor man into the grave. Adios and good riddance to you and your high dose of reality that makes our heads spin like tops. Don't you know that all "true" Americans are now looking forward to world peace, goodwill, hope, unity, free housing, Israel's demise and the Obamanation Coronation? Stop raining on our parade!

Imaupr,

You said three things and I don't actually know what you meant to say. Respect for the office of presidency doesn't ensure respect for the holder of the office - Somewhat agreed but certainly can be abused by rancorous partisanship.

Representatives of congress and senators who have ignored the decline gripping our economy - Agreed. Some members of our population succumb to greed paying themselves . . . Agreed.

So does that mean that you agree that one man, even the president cannot possibly be fully responsible for the mess we're in? Granted, he is culpable, maybe to a greater extent than others, but to blame one person for the present decline of the western culture and the world-wide economic disaster is pure insanity and implies too high a view of the office of presidency. So what is it? Do you or do you not agree that the Congress, greedy people as well as the president have had their hands in the cookie jar a little too much. If so, you have helped restore some bit of sanity as to the over-the-top crowing about one man being responsible for every problem we face as a nation that began this particular blog. Looney Tunes is for kids not grown men.

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." That's the oath of office for the President of the United States. Preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. So how come the presidential candidates don't discuss the Constitution more? Their job is to protect and preserve the Constitution. Towards that end, they are assigned the position of Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, they have the power to make treaties (with Senatorial approval) with foreign entities, appoint ambassadors to represent the United States, and appoint Supreme Court Justices.

Essentially, the scope of the office of President of the United States is to ensure that the Constitution is upheld and not infringed upon. Do the candidates even know this? Most of them talk about all the things that they are going to do and how they are going to make the country better for everyone. They talk about health care, immigration, war, and what they are going to do about these things, but that's not their job! Legislation is the job of Congress. The Presidents job is to make certain that laws passed by Congress are properly executed. They are empowered to appoint officials to aid in this. They also have to sign and authorize the laws that Congress passes. That allows them to review the laws and make sure that they do nothing to endanger the Constitution.

Shouldn't the candidates be spending their campaigns enlightening us as to their knowledge of and dedication to the Constitution? Shouldn't they be offering their interpretation of every article and amendment to the Constitution? Should we not choose a President whose position on the articles and amendments most closely matches our own? Are the candidates afraid to tell us their positions? Do they even have positions? What do our candidates even know about the Constitution?

The article of the Constitution establishing the office of President does contain the following clause: "He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient" and it seems that this minor allowance is what all of the candidates have gravitated towards. The President is allowed to make suggestions to Congress about things they should consider "from time to time". Presumably, these suggestions would be in the specific interest of defending the Constitution and would be matters that Congress was not already considering. It seems unlikely to me that in this day and age, there are many things that have escaped our legislators notice, so these suggestions shouldn't occur too often should they?

I'm tired of the rhetoric and the fluff. The things I'd like to know about each candidate are how they interpret each article and amendment of the Constitution, how they are qualified to lead the military, how they intend to treat with foreign powers, and what if any measures not already under consideration by Congress they feel need to be addressed in an expedient manner. The should also inform us of any Constitutional Amendments that they support. Everything else can be left to the Senatorial and Congressional candidates.

We continue to elect presidents who fail to deliver on their promises and many of us continue to be disappointed in them. The reason is simple: they're making promises of things outside the scope of their job responsibilities. It's like the pizza delivery driver promising to put more cheese on the pizza next time. The driver may want more cheese and they may recommend it to those who make the pizza, but ultimately it's not in their power to make it happen. If the candidates want to make laws and enact changes, they should run for Congress, if they want to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution then they should start telling us how they'll do it.

In order to understand my perspective one would have to spend time with secular, moderate and radical Muslims as I have since 1985 within the civilian, law enforcement and military sectors across the globe when the violence increased just as the radicals bank accounts increased.

READ AND LEARN... be sponges for true knowledge, not the creatures of the main stream media, Nancy Pelosi, barnie Frank, Harry Reid, John Murtha, John Kerry OR Proverbs 26:11.

Oh, BTW... several non-profit organizations funded/backed by wealthy liberals to include Morons.org, I'm sorry I mean Moveon.org, IVAW, A.N.S.W.E.R., Code Pink and many others receive funds via radical Islamic orgs and or activities the liberal socialist Dems do FUND TERRORIST Activity!

One clear example outside my own experiences comes from a woman who lived in Syria, her birthplace, or a female from any other Arab Muslim country.

EXAMPLE: Since Wafa Sultan immigrated to the United States more than five presidential elections ago, she always regarded American politics as a luxury that did not concern her. Living in the US was enough to satisfy her emotionally, physically and intellectually. Anything beyond that was more than she required.

She came to regard America's might as much greater than any president that happened to be in power - Democratic or Republican. Hence, she assumed that any person, who attained the rank of presidential candidate, regardless of party affiliation, was capable of safely leading this great nation. Because of that, Ms Sultan never took the trouble to inquire which candidate was more worthy of victory; for her it was a mere toss-up.

However, the events of September 11th, 2001 stripped away Wafa's confidence. I began wondering how well Americans understand Political Islam

Americans DO NOT have a clue what the underlying cause of this and other heinous attacks and how willing will Americans be to probe into its ideology or comprehend its objectives.

The events surrounding the most recent election have increased Ms Sultan's doubts and her concerns for the United States, which she loves with all my heart.

So what is the problem? During and after the recent election, her fear for America was that Obama's victory could breathe fresh life into the further rise of Islamism, including Islamic terrorism.

Why?

Islamists' psychology is worlds apart from that of Westerners.

They believe in ABSOLUTE terms in their divine mission to submit the world to Islam. They are engaged in a constant search for divine meaning and inspiration - even in mundane matters.

First, there was Senator Obama's Muslim background. It is well known that Mr. Obama was born to a Muslim father, spent part of his early life in Indonesia - a Muslim country - and attended a Muslim school there. Almost every day my inbox was flooded with e-mail rumors about Obama which reflected many American citizens' fears regarding the Democratic candidate's Muslim background.

But Mr. Obama tried reassuring the gullible Americans and the media that he is a Christian and that was enough to dispel the doubts I might have had about him being a Muslim.

Wafa let go of her fear for America should Obama win. Briefly, she gained some confidence in him.

However, Salafists interpret even daily events in a way that may not necessarily appear significant to Westerners.

In this context some Islamists go so far as viewing the Islamic background of Obama as a heaven-sent confirmation of the first step in realizing the dream of submitting the West to Islam.

The mere fact that American president bears a Muslim name like Hussein is enough to assure them that Islam is marching into America and has already infiltrated the White House.

Once, I was browsing through a website in Arabic and came across a news item announcing that the American actress Halle Berry gave birth to a daughter whom she named Nahla; an Arabic name meaning "bee". I then read readers' comments on this piece of news. A considerable number of them were jubilant, since they regarded this report as a God's sign that Islam had begun to advance into America, because the word nahla is mentioned in the Koran.

As for Mr. Powell, does he understand that Islam is not just a religion but a political doctrine that seeks to impose itself on non-Muslims even by force? If he does, why should people not be doubtful?

This is not an Islamophobic prejudice I present. Muslims, like any other national group, can be either good or bad, and the best among them do not act in accordance with Islam's political ideology, either because they are not familiar with it, or because they have deliberately progressed beyond it. But how are we to scrutinize the good from the bad when a high level political official like Mr. Powell undermines the questioning of any concerns related to this issue?

Certainly, Mr. Powell knows that Muhammad, the Prophet of Islam, is most revered among Muslims. Does Mr. Powell realize that it is incumbent upon every devout Muslim male to emulate Muhammed's ways? If so, has Mr. Powell studied the life of Muhammad as it is recounted in the original Arabic sources, as I learned it in my schooldays?

One particular part of the prophet's historical account I studied in third grade at primary school. We read with pride how Muhammad beheaded eight hundred Jews from the Bani Quraiza tribe in one night, then took their wives and children hostage and spent that same night with a Jewish woman Safia, whose husband, father and brother he had just killed. This wretched story is only a drop in the ocean of numerous Arabic narratives written about Muhammad's misconduct.

Moreover, according to Islam's most revered jurists, a true Muslim must believe in Islam as both religion and a political entity. A committed Salafi Muslim does not recognize the American constitution. His willingness to live under that constitution is, as far as he is concerned, nothing more than an unavoidable step on the way to that constitution's replacement by Islamic Sharia law.

The Koran states: "Believers, take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends. They are friends with one another. Whoever of you seeks their friendship shall become one of their numbers. Allah does not guide the wrongdoers" (5:51). Is it legitimate for Christians and Jews to be concerned about this tenet?

American government officials must spend funds to interpret Arabic texts word for word, without distortion or falsification. Among other illuminating tenets they may find, is the concept of taqqia (literally, "caution, prudence, dissimulation"). It allows a Muslim to conceal his true cherished beliefs when he feels that non-Muslims around him have the upper hand, while at the same time working secretly to achieve his "noble" objective, so that he can attack them when the time is ripe....

When Colin Powell endorsed Obama in October, he went out of his way to criticize those who were troubled by the idea of a Muslim President. Hugh Fitzgerald explained what was wrong with Powell's analysis in his article "Colin Powell and Jihad: A dereliction of duty." And now the heroic Wafa Sultan contributes some observations of her own: "Contemplating Islam," by Wafa Sultan in Hudson New York, December 15.

If we consider the Islamic texts, their content and the devotion that so many Muslims - including in America - attach to them; if we consider the tragic upshot of these teachings in terms of our current world's security, is it not a duty for each one of us to view Islam not frivolously but in a most serious manner?

There was an episode during the current Presidential election that greatly disturbed me. It was former Secretary of State Colin Powell's interview on "Meet the Press." For me this interview was a defining moment. He expressed his displeasure at some of his colleagues' accusations that Obama might be a Muslim, and stated: "And what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim?"

Mr. Powell's admonition at others who dare questioning Muslims, or Islam and its implications, in particular, people like me, who suffered immensely precisely because there is "something wrong with being a Muslim," would indeed be disheartened.

If Powell doesn't understand what may be the dire consequences for being a Muslim, then who should understand?

The man, who once held the post of American Secretary of State, asserts categorically that there is nothing wrong with being a Muslim, even though the country he led has been suffering immensely from Muslim terrorism and has paid a high price because of it.

I appreciate that Powell, who has been nurtured by the American moral code, refuses to judge people on the basis of their religious affiliation. That is his right. But he does not have the right to nonchalantly disregard people's apprehensions of Muslims, especially at those of us who have lived in Muslim countries. We have risked our lives to escape from them, and are now risking our lives again to speak up against the harm they cause, induced by Islamic theology and culture.

Dear Razorback,

Why call on anyone to respond to my, as you say, "my nonsense" ? My impression is you are not reading and barely skimming my posts...

these are not ramblings of a liberal... but one who despises their acts of ignorance... oh blissful ignorance I say... read the opening to my previous post again:

In order to understand my perspective one would have to spend time with secular, moderate and radical Muslims as I have since 1985 within the civilian, law enforcement and military sectors across the globe when the violence increased just as the radicals bank accounts increased.

READ AND LEARN... be sponges for true knowledge, not the creatures of the main stream media, Nancy Pelosi, barnie Frank, Harry Reid, John Murtha, John Kerry OR Proverbs 26:11.

Oh, BTW... several non-profit organizations funded/backed by wealthy liberals to include Morons.org, I'm sorry I mean Moveon.org, IVAW, A.N.S.W.E.R., Code Pink and many others receive funds via radical Islamic orgs and or activities the liberal socialist Dems do FUND TERRORIST Activity!

I HOPE you can see, by me naming some of the most heinous among our congrees and senate, likened them and their Pavlovian following to the creature mentioned in Proverbs 26:11 ...

I am no friend of the left... because no lefty would be found on the front lines of the GWOT as I've been, and still to this day, you will find me FAR from family and friend, far from home this holiday season....

A little arebyrd landed sent a dispatch to my AO that I might aid you and kindly enlighten the blissful... for they are in a blissard of ignorance...

Oh, by the way, Merry Christmas all your blogimist!

RAH

Roy... check this out:

http://www.honestreporting.com/a/who_spe...

yall are killn' me!! 34 years?? , but how's that when i'm only 40??

Defensor Fortis,

I don't take kindly to frivolous apologies or the word "geez," so cut it out. All seriousness aside, read my following philosophy that is only in the theoretical stage at the moment. Perhaps it will help explain my present state of insanity.

The Rules of Engagement with Absurdity (Only a theory)

By Dr. R. A. Hargrave

It has been a hobby of mine for quite some time to learn the art of engagement with people who's point of origin is Mars, or so it seems. For some, my conclusions will be confusing, for others they will be somewhat confrontational, which, as those who actually have a pulse know, is politically incorrect. Of course, the translation of which is, "absurdity." So how does logic meet with absurdity? That is the question I dare to answer.

Since I am foundationally theological in my worldview, I am prone to draw my rudimentary principles from the Bible. So in this particular case, I can find no better illustration of my present argument than Jesus' explanation of using parables to both teach and confuse. Now I'm certain, that at first glance, such a statement would seem to be rather blasphemous to the unlearned as it pertains to biblical knowledge, but consider carefully the Words of Christ in Matthew 13:10-15 {10} Then the disciples came and said to him, "Why do you speak to them in parables?" {11} And he answered them, "To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. {12} For to the one who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. {13} This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. {14} Indeed, in their case the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled that says: " 'You will indeed hear but never understand, and you will indeed see but never perceive. {15} For this people's heart has grown dull, and with their ears they can barely hear, and their eyes they have closed, lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their heart and turn, and I would heal them.'

What do we learn from His teaching on this point? First, we see in verse 10, that a pertinent question is asked of Jesus. "Why do you speak to them in parables?" Let me remind you, that put simply, a parable is an earthly story with a heavenly or spiritual meaning. But back to the question, why does Christ speak in such terms. The answer is astonishing! He said to His followers, in verse 11, that, "To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven but to them it has not been given." He even goes further in verse 13 and states, "This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand." So Jesus distinguishes between those who hear and understand and those who hear and do not understand. This is explained to a greater extent in John's gospel when Jesus said in John 10:14-16 "{14} I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, {15} just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. {16} And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd."

So Jesus teaches us that He spoke in parables that could be understood by His sheep but not by those who were not His sheep. This brings me back to my earlier statement, that Jesus used parables to teach as well as confuse. To teach His own but to confuse His detractors who were unwilling to believe His message.

Now, what does that theological lesson have to do with engaging absurdity, especially as it relates to the political realm? It has everything to do with it, at least by way of a narrow application. It is a fact that some, perhaps most, will not listen to reason and logic because they are encased in absurdity just as Jesus used parables to confuse those who were encased in unbelief. So what is the theory that I propose as to our seeking to engage ourselves with those who are seemingly locked into absurdity? It is this in a nutshell; Absurdity has short arms (metaphorically speaking) and cannot reach across the great divide that spans between such absurdity and logic or truth. Therefore, one must begin with a measure of absurdity in order to gain the ear of the absurd seeing that the truth is at too great a distance to jump immediately from non-sense all the way to common sense.

So in an ironic way, to make too much sense with those who are entrenched in non-sense is absurdity. So what must be our approach? Well, to put it bluntly, one must engage in some degree of non-sense before they can bring those entrenched in absurdity to their senses. It's funny business in a way, but when we're in ignorance, the last person we want to hear from is a person who is not ignorant. They intimidate us and thusly lose our ear. So if we're to engage the absurd in ideas we must speak to them in the language of absurdity at least to some degree. I'm not advocating the logical to fall headlong into complete absurdity in order to gain an ear, but at least throw in a measure of absurdity to cloak your logicality.

Now it is vitally important to begin here, but don't think for a moment that this is where you need to end up. For the goal is to bring the absurd across the great divide to logic and truth. In a way, and I'm giving away trade secrets here, you must utilize clandestine measures in order to hide your logical propensity long enough for the illogical to believe that you are as absurd as they are. To put it in simple terms, it would be like bringing Barney Franks' mind all the way across the universe to the mind of the late William. F. Buckley. That just can't happen overnight. For that matter it probably can't happen throughout an endless eternity, but don't let this extreme case discourage you from trying.

There is also the confusion effect that must be maintained. Even as Jesus spoke in parables to both teach those who would hear and confuse those who wouldn't, we must learn to confuse the confused who think they're not confused so that they will finally learn that they are confused. I hope that's not too confusing. Let me put in another way; you must knock the liberal props out from under absurdity, not with one fatal blow, but with one little blow at a time. (To put in simply, fight more like Sugar Ray Leonard than George Foreman, because a gnat is subtler than an elephant any day of the week and you'll need the full 15 rounds to get the job done anyway) Each little blow should contain a little truth and a lot of absurdity at first, but with each passing blow there must be a larger dose of truth and a lesser dose of absurdity until the whole thing is true.

Now, believe me when I say this. If a confused person discovers that you think they're confused before they become un-confused then you've lost a convert. So you'll have to use wisdom as to how big a dose of truth you give them at a time in order for them not to recognize it as being truth lest they turn back as a dog returns to his vomit.

In closing, I know it's difficult for sane people to engage in absurdity, but you must reach across the great divide and lead the absurd one step at a time. And alas, when they've been brought all the way across to sanity and truth they'll forget everything that the New York Times and CNN ever taught them. It's sort of like the positive effects of amnesia when a liberal becomes a conservative in that it is a defense system against having to live with the fact that we were once so stupid.

I hope that this all made sense or non-sense according to whatever category you fall into. And remember, this is only a theory, similar to the theory of evolution, so you're not allowed to question it or argue against it. So don't be a smarty pants and bombard me with intelligent designs.

RAH - (A sheep in wolves' clothing)

I love Rector!

I thought the unconfused would be further edified as to another statement made by Charlie about Bush's apparent low standing and failures: "Collapse of the financial markets as a consequence of unchecked deregulation of commercial lenders and investment banks, and inability to take timely corrective action in the face of the worst financial downturn since the Great Depression."

May the facts speak for themselves on this matter.

Go to and see for yourself from the politician's own mouths.

http://www.youtube.comwatch?v=cMnSp4qEXN...

This might interest some. It is information on Obama's friends.

Excerpts from article:

When the violence failed, the Weatherman core and their followers didn't give up or fade away. They remained underground in a new way. They melded into society, they took teaching positions in college to reach that younger generation. They took jobs in the media to take control of its message. They worked their way up in the hated corporations to gain control of policy. And they surged into government at all levels, boring into the core of America, to impose their agenda at every chance, from the Federal government to state legislatures to city councils. Today, for example, we have Congressman Bobby Seal, one of the infamous Chicago Eight; State Senator Tom Haydon, the founder of the SDS and another of the Chicago Eight.

It's interesting to note that a great number of the members of the "revolution" went into the environmental movement. Unable to get Americans to outright accept Marxist ideology in their revolution, instead they wrapped it all in a nice green blanket of environmental protection. Ever since, under the banner of environmental protection Americans have happily tossed their liberties on the bon fire like a good old-fashioned book burning. They accepted the premise that private property and business must be controlled or destroyed, simply for the good of the environment. It's not just a happy coincidence. In this way, the revolution of the sixties is now progressing at a rapid pace.

And what of Ayres, Dorhn, Rudd and Jones?

Ayres took the route into education as a professor. But that certainly hasn't replaced his activism for the cause of communism. Recently he traveled to the new red Mecca, Venezuela, a nation quickly falling behind a new red curtain of tyranny under Hugo Chavez. Ayres is influential enough with the new American-hating dictator to meet with him and appear on the same platform. There, Ayres proclaimed his support for "the profound educational reforms underway here in Venezuela under the leadership of President Chavez. We share this belief that education is the motor-force of revolution… I look forward to seeing how you continue to overcome the failings of capitalist education as you seek to create something truly new and deeply humane…" Does it sound like Ayres has changed a single stripe from his "college activist" days?

Mark Rudd also went into education. He feels at home there, after all, he is the man who shut down Columbia University with a student strike in the Sixties. And he is still active in the cause. Recently, he turned up making comments on a radical blog called Rag Blog, where he attempted to calm nervous "progressives" (a new euphemism coined a few years back to provide cover for those who didn't want to be called communists). The "Progressives were growing nervous by the cabinet appointments Obama has been making. These people are so radical that they actually consider Hillary Clinton to be from the right! Of course keeping a bunch of old Clintonestas, not to mention a Bush holdover like Secretary of Defense Gates, has caused great concern for those who thought Obama was the answer to the revolution. Said Rudd, the Obama appointments are part of a deliberate strategy to "feint to the right" and "move left." He said, "Any other strategy invites sure defeat." Rudd, to be sure, wants Obama to be victorious in his goals. Now why would that be? Rudd is a dedicated communist, yesterday, today and tomorrow, seeking to destroy the American way of life.

http://americandaily.us/index.php/item/5...

Defensor,

I was joking. Keep up the good work. I checked the link you recommended and signed up. Good stuff! Keep writing, it needs to be heard by all. Thanks.