Archive for October, 2007

Damn Yankees

When somebody tells you that Americans aren’t liked overseas you may at your whim laugh or ignore him. We were never liked overseas. Never, that is, by what passed for the ruling elites of the day. They always disdained and despised the young Americans. They still do.

Anyway, the only proper response to such a question is ‘Who cares?’ Really, should we go all weepy and school girlish if some effete Frenchman sniffs our way?

Of course, normal folks have always loved the US. They still do. They line up to get here. They cross shark infested waters to get here. They cross borders illegally to get here.

How many folks are begging, borrowing or stealing to get into Germany? France? Russia? China? Switzerland? Iran?

The reality is that our own effetes hang out with European effetes and share stories about how they both disdain America. They do not mean their America, the America of Manhattan and San Francisco, of Boston and Hollywood, but the ‘other America,’ that of cowboys and rednecks and Christians and gun lovers.

I revel in the effete disdain for that ‘other America.’ I would be very, very worried if these moral and physical weaklings thought otherwise. Never forget that men and nations are measured by their enemies as well as by their friends. To be despised by, say, The New York Times, is a mark of honor.

Besides being looked down upon by the effetes of the world, Americans have always been underestimated by them. In every single war since the French had forts in the Ohio River Valley, the elites of the world predicted defeat and humiliation for us New World folk. Even after the French loss in the French and Indian War (1756 – 63) those wise old Europeans said that it was the British who had won the war, that the ‘colonials’ were merely along for the ride, that they had contributed nothing of value.

Then along came our first war with Great Britain. There was laughter all around in all the right European circles. How could a rough and tumble bunch of militia and backwoods boys with no army to speak of, no training facilities, few canon, no discipline and no navy possibly beat the greatest empire in the world, an empire that had distinguished itself on battlefields across the globe, an empire whose navy prowled where it willed, an empire who already had 30,000 highly disciplined troops on American soil?

Then along came Ticonderoga. And Saratoga. And Yorktown.

Then the European effetes said we could never prevail against those pesky Barbary pirates. Why, even the British paid them tribute!

Then along came the march to ‘the shores of Tripoli.’

Then the British insisted on another round of warfare, the War of 1812. The effetes clucked, “Now the Brits will show them!” They had a point. The American navy had languished, the army had shrunk, and the Americans were up against the troops and the navy that had defeated Napoleon.

Then along came Andrew Jackson and the Battle of New Orleans (1815).

When Americans began to lust over all that Mexican land south of the Brazos and north of the Rio Grande—and all points west—the Europeans smirked. “How can those barbarous Americans possibly defeat the armies of Mexico, whose military traditions go all the way back to the Spanish Hapsburgs?”

Then they saw the US flag over the ramparts of Chapultepec castle (1847).

When we fought our Civil War the effetes of Europe laughed yet again. “See how that experiment in Republicanism has failed!” They called the North a bunch of merchants while the South was a chivalric and romantic ideal whose military traditions recalled the days of Ivanhoe.

Then along came Gettysburg and Sherman and Richmond and Appomattox.

During WW I it was doubted that the ‘yanks’ could do much against the Kaiser’s legions. During WW II Hitler laughed at America and the Japanese thought us barbarous weaklings. During the Cold War most of Europe’s elites could not imagine the US stopping Soviet aggression, yet alone defeating it.

During both Iraq wars the world’s effetes predicted ‘tens of thousands of body bags’ if the US invaded hallowed Islamic lands. The American invasion of Afghanistan was seen as the utmost folly. Why, even Alexander had had trouble there, as had the British. And those foolish Americans were invading during the Winter!

Those foolish Americans conquered the Taliban in a matter of weeks.

Since the 1700s those who were the movers and shakers of the world continually saw the enemies of America as near invincible, and America herself as a bumbling incompetent that needed a lesson in the power of the Old World elites.

Now the same type of cut-rate doomsayers who have always yammered about the coming defeat of America are issuing dire and apocalyptic warnings about military action against Iran. “Iran will send forth her hosts of terrorists around the globe to spread fire and death!” they say. “She will unleash 11,000 missiles!” they say. “She will shut down the oil supply for the entire globe!” they say.

Yawn. We have heard it all before. The reality of the thing is that Iran will suffer a total and comprehensive military and economic defeat—and it will be a quick one. There will be a short burst of outrage from the usual suspects, and then the world will continue along its merry way. Behind the scenes in every capital men in striped pants will express sighs of relief that Iran’s nuclear fantasies have been extinguished.

And then will come the next challenge to the US—perhaps from China. Or Russia. Or from some nation that today scarce anyone pays attention to. Really, the list of potential problems for the US is as endless as such a thing can be.

And America will win every battle but the last one.

Such is the way of empire. Such is the lesson of History.


Denying Caesar His Due

(Updated below

Some Catholic bishops have been busy of late. Have they been hearing more Confessions? Giving more Masses? Speaking out more against abortion? Working to eliminate sodomy from Catholic seminaries? Preaching more homilies against Sin and Hell?

Not exactly.

They have been busy assisting millions of felons to live in this nation illegally. They are trying to do to our nation the same thing that they did to the Church.

Since at least the early 60s and especially since Vatican II much of the US Catholic Church has fallen into heresy. Legions of priests, nuns, bishops and laity have simply ignored the Catechism and have done ‘what was right in their own eyes.’ The result was a whole mess of idiocy and scandal issuing forth from pulpits.

We remember the US Catholic bishops sticking their miters into public policy in the 70s and 80s. Their manifestos were full of socialist theories and pacifism, and resembled nothing more than the blathering of drooling Quakers. They were objectively pro-Soviet, anti-American and had by and large surrendered Catholic Dogma to the dictates of ‘liberation theology.’

Many of these same bishops had turned a blind eye to the swarms of homosexuals who had entered Catholic seminaries since the 60s in direct violation of Vatican rules. The homosexual sex abuse cases were only one result of this. The greater disgrace was those priests, bishops and a cardinal who had covered up these outrages by playing ‘hide the sodomite,’ moving their abusive brethren from parish to parish, thus insuring a new crop of potential homosexual rape victims for these priests.

This scandal has already cost the Church over 1 billion dollars in legal fees and judgments. And you thought your weekly tithe went to the poor, to the orphan, to the widow? Ask yourself how much of your money goes to pay for the victims of priestly homosexual rape of children and adolescents? The grotesque career of Thomas Gumbleton is instructive and all too common.

And the bishops are at it again. Just as they adulterated Catholic teaching and Doctrine so they now adulterate the very idea of what constitutes the nation of the United States.

Their latest attempt to subvert this Republic is their unabashed and complete support of the millions of illegal who pour across our borders—and US law be damned. From the silly and insulting 2006 pamphlet Is There Room For Me?—you may find stacks of these at many parishes, revealing another way your tithe money is spent—to their statements on their official web site, the bishops stance on immigration is one directly against the continued existence of this nation as one of free people living under law.

In plain fact, in their own deeds and in their own words, these bishops are a lawless bunch. From ignoring Catholic Dogma to ignoring the Vatican they also ignore US law—and they try to get all Catholics to be as equally lawless.

But do not believe me. Read their own writings. After falsely claiming—that is, lying—that they neither condone nor encourage illegal immigration, they provide justification for it.

What we are trying to do is change our laws to reflect the reality of migration in the world today and to ensure that basic human rights and dignity are respected. Yes, those in the United States without legal status have broken the law, but they do so in order to survive and to support their families. At the same time, they contribute to our economy through their hard work and work in important industries. So we must consider if the law is a just one and whether it is in the best interest of the nation to change the law. We obviously think the law should be changed.

This smarmy passage deserves a close look.

Somehow ‘illegal immigration’ has morphed into ‘migration,’ as if millions of illegals simply move about harmlessly like birds or sea turtles. And their lawbreaking is justified ‘in order to survive and to support their families.’ There are many crimes hidden in that phrase. Indeed, what outrage could not be justified by it?

And it is tedious to mention that their ‘contributions to our economy’ include murders, rapes, robberies and general mayhem. Any visit to the border area of our nation proves this dismal point. The area is lawless, violent and polluted—just like the Latin American nations from where these illegals come. Once here these criminals extort free medical care and education and get away scot-free from paying taxes. Try doing that as a law-abiding citizen.

And the bishops simply lie about their motives. They do not want to change the law, they want it ignored. Witness the activities of Archbishop Beltran here in Oklahoma City. He is outraged against HB 1804. He claims a higher law, that of ‘charity and helping your fellow man,’ than that issued by the state of Oklahoma. He calls the bill ‘fiercely anti-immigrant’ and ‘not reflective of values which respect people and their families.’ Not a peep about respect for law and those who obey it.

Archbishop Beltran might read these words again.

Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.

The most basic responsibility of any state is to protect its borders. The bishops are actively working to make this impossible. To this end they have spent parish tithe money on hosts of attorneys and lawsuits to keep our Republic from protecting her frontiers. They function exactly as noisome liberals who ignore the voting booth and work through the courts to deny the citizens the laws they have freely chosen.

From dissolving Catholic Dogma to dissolving Catholic teaching to dissolving Catholic seminaries to dissolving this nation is but a step for these bishops.

I left the Church in 1963 and returned in 1989. I left a faith where men and women were somberly dressed for Mass, where women wore hats and veils and the liturgy was in an ancient tongue. I returned to a faith where people dressed for Mass as for the beach, where the liturgy was full of references to pop culture and homosexuals had filled the priesthood. Where once priests were respected and Catholic teachings revered, today priests are ridiculed and teachings ignored.

All of this was the work of Catholic bishops.

What a disgrace.

(Update: I should have seen this coming.)

After Mass our priest said that there was a ‘Pledge of Resistance‘ against HB 1804 located on a table in the hall. He recommended that we all sign it to ‘pledge resistance’ to the new Oklahoma law. In other words, our priest counseled us to violate the laws of our state.

This is out and out rebellion, paid for by the parishioners’ tithes—more of our tithe money gone to waste—and fomented by Catholic bishops.

I have a copy of this ‘pledge’ in my hands. It is a tissue of lies and obfuscations. Anyone who has read HB 1804—you may read it here—will see this clearly.

And of course, the ‘pledge’ is written in Spanish as well as English. I wonder why?

The ‘pledge’ calls HB 1804 ‘unjust and immoral.’ It uses the Orwellian turn-of-phrase to morph illegals into ‘undocumented persons.’

This absurd ‘pledge’ ends with a pompous and fatuous declaration that ‘We people of faith and conscience refuse to allow ourselves to be intimidated by Oklahoma’s law…’

Intimidated? Archbishop Beltran calls obeying the law ‘intimidation’? And those of us who support the laws of our Republic are not ‘people of faith and concience’?

And just how far will those who signed it go? In reality they risk nothing at all. They are preening and posing, pretending they are at a higher moral plane than the people of Oklahoma who support HB 1804.

Here is part of another document where the men who signed it risked everything they had.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Do the preening poseurs who signed the ‘Pledge of Resistance’ really place themselves on the same plane as Hancock and Jefferson?

Ironically, one of the readings today was about the Pharisee who boasted in the Synagogue that he was not like the tax collector. Yes, and now those same types are boasting about their superiority to those of us who simply want the borders of our Republic defended.

Here is part of the bill.

The State of Oklahoma finds that illegal immigration is causing economic hardship and lawlessness in this state and that illegal immigration is encouraged by public agencies within this state that provide public benefits without verifying immigration status.

A call from the citizens of the state to enforce the laws of the state is called by bishops and priests ‘unjust and immoral.’ And they claim that a higher allegiance to God leads them. Since when did God get into the business of defending Oklahoma’s borders?

These bishops are a bunch of silly, foolish men who posture in public just as did that Pharisee.

If I were not in my apartment I would spit.

The End Is Not Nigh

There is much ado about some sort of looming World War III. Or World War IV. Or V. It depends upon who is doing the counting. It seems that right now in the Middle East there is developing what political scientist geeks call a ‘correlation of forces.’ One writer even tossed in some Biblical prophecy for good measure.

US President George W. Bush said a nuclear Iran would mean World War III. Israeli newscasts featured Gog & Magog maps of the likely alignment of nations in that potential conflict.

Channel 2 and Channel 10 TV showed the world map, sketching the basic alignment of the two opposing axes in a coming world war, in a manner evoking associations of the Gog and Magog prophecy for many viewers. The prophecy of Gog and Magog refers to a great world war centered on the Holy Land and Jerusalem and first appears in the book of Yechezkel (Ezekiel).

On one side were Israel, the United States, Britain, France and Germany. On the other were Iran, Russia, China, Syria and North Korea.

Nothing like a reference to Gog and Magog to get the old end-of-times apocalypse types heading for their word processors.

Here is what has happened to cause all of this froth: Iran is racing pell-mell toward a future where she controls the Middle East through nuclear terror. She has enlisted on her side Syria, North Korea, Russia and China. She has promised to annihilate Israel, launch 11,000 missiles if she is attacked and generally continue to be the pain in the neck that she has been to the West for 2500 years.

The only nations able to stop her are the US, Britain and Israel—and you may toss in a couple of NATO ‘allies’ if you wish.

Should we worry?

Nope. All is smoke and mirrors, sham and fakery, bombast and bluster. All those militia types running around in the northern Idaho woods need not drop everything and head to Wal-Mart to stock up on ammo and cans of tuna.

Head to a map and take a look at Iran. You will immediately notice her strategic problem, and it is insolvable. Iran is surrounded by the US military in Afghanistan, Iraq, Turkey and Azerbaijan. Iranian pal Syria just received very unpleasant attention from Israel. The US Navy completely controls the Persian Gulf, through which almost all Iranian oil and exports must pass. The enemy whose citizens she has murdered, whose ambassadors she has held hostage, and whom she calls ‘The Great Satan’ has a superb army of 180,000 on her border.

Would even the most worried striped pants fellow at the State Department exchange our strategic situation for Iran’s?

Iran has tried to breakout from this strategic chokehold by enlisting Russia and China. Our media hear the scarcely hidden threats from these two states and quiver in their dress shoes. They equate words with deeds.

We saw how quickly Israel disposed of Russian technology a few weeks ago when she destroyed a nuclear facility in Syria. There are two lessons here: the best Russian technology is worthless; and Syria cannot defend herself against Israel. Is this really news?

Shall I remind you that when Russia was the much larger USSR that the US defeated her, dismantled her empire and eliminated her from History without a shot being fired?

The media look at China and see a great looming mass of humanity all supercharged with technology, possessing a huge army and soon to surpass the US in strategic reach, military power and economic might.

All nonsense. China cannot even build toys safely. All of her technology is stolen. Outside of her show cities she is a wallowing mass of unemployment, mind-boggling environmental degradation and rebellion. The only thing that might save her from complete disintegration is the election of Hillary Clinton.

And as far as Iran enlisting North Korea as an ally…well, call me when that ridiculous and posturing, weird haired midget monster imbecile who runs that asylum learns how to feed his people.

Worrying about Iran because she has China and Syria and Russia and the NorKos on her side is like worrying about Venezuela because she has Bolivia on her side.

What me worry?

When war comes between the US and Iran—and the sooner it comes the sooner will end the wars in Iraq and Lebanon— Russia and China will squawk and jump up and down, Syria will defecate on herself and North Korea will issue dark threats. That’s it.

Armageddon, Gog and Magog and all the rest of that Apocalyptic scenario will have to wait for another day.

At 54

At 54 I am subject to the usual ills that men my age experience. Injuries take longer to heal, energy levels are not what they once were, new pains make themselves known.

I am not complaining, merely describing.

Such things are of course more than offset by the wisdom that comes with—that should come with—age. I delight in the knowledge that the idiocies of my youth no longer control me. I laugh at them now. I can afford to laugh at them, for I survived them.

An acquaintance described me as an old tom cat who is amused at the silliness of young felines. I sit there relaxing in the sun, one ear torn, a few patches of fur missing, a tooth gone, and watch the young cats scurry about as if they had nine lives.

Some of those cats will make it to my age. Some won’t. This is in the nature of things.

I hear from time to time of how some men mourn their youth. They lament things not done, dreams not lived, roads not taken. “Oh,” they say, “If only I could live it all over again! The things I would do!”

I wonder if they really would do things differently. I have no idea if I would, for my fantasies look ahead not behind. I think of what I will do in one, two, five years, not what I could have done ten or twenty years ago.

There is one question that I cannot answer about my life at 54, and this is it: Why did I choose the life I have? But I chose nothing. I was born and this is what I do. I can see no coherent plan, just vague patterns and seemingly random choices.

And I regret nothing. What is the point of regret anyway? You make a mistake and try to make amends for it. A man who feeds upon regret will come to have a gnawing at his very soul that no elixir can cure.

I can say that I spent the first part of my life making a mess of things, and I am spending what remains of it cleaning as much of it up as I can. If God grants me enough time and enough Grace I will succeed.

I have caused much grief in my 54 years and have been paid in kind. What of it? A life lived with no pain is not a life at all. I once knew a man and his wife who had never suffered, yet they were almost 30. I could not bear to be around them. They were as silly as spoiled children and as insubstantial as gas.

And yes I know that there were those—many—who could not bear to be around me. Who could blame them? Long ago and far away I was an arrogant fool and engaged in all those things Christians call ‘occasions for sin.’ But I learned.

In visions of the night, like dropping rain,
Descend the many memories of pain
Before the spirit’s sight: through tears and sorrow
Comes wisdom over the unwilling soul.

Such an education was costly but worth it.

A Roman conqueror had a slave behind him in moments of triumph to whisper in his ear, “Remember, thou art mortal.” I received such reminder last week, a reminder of the way of all flesh. There was a sudden shooting pain in my chest, a lightness of head and my heart seemed about to leap out of my body.

I thought heart attack, but the reality was more mundane—acid reflux. There was something more, a slight arthritis that had developed around the cartilage that binds the ribs to the sternum. It appeared exactly where I had broken my ribs on three occasions.

So now I take one pill every day, and will have to take it until I die. Big deal. I had gotten used to always having a bunch of antacids at the ready. So now rather than take a handful of these after eating I now take only one of the new ones.

And I feel better than I can remember. It occurred to me that I have had this condition for more than ten years.

Someday there will be a pain in my flesh that is not so easily dealt with. That will spell the end of my earthly life. One moment later I will be called to answer for things done and things undone.

I had best prepare now, at this instant.

The Greatest Killers Of All

There is much nonsense all around about the competence, the efficiency and the compassion of government. To the Democrats such beliefs are sacred text. All of their plans reveal child-like trust in government—government as protector, government as nanny, government as watch dog, government as big brother.

Of course those at the very top of that party are not so foolish. To them government serves merely as a tool to be used for the acquisition of power. Hillary certainly sees government this way. Her words are full of the marvels of government, while her actions are full of perfidy, corruption, vulgarity and contempt for one and all.

Washington wrote that government is about force. Indeed, that is all it is—force. Government is not about choice or happiness or honor or dignity. It knows only coercion, for that is the only tool it has. To forget this or to be completely unaware of it in the first place is to be what Aristotle called a ‘natural slave.’

‘We need to be reminded more than we need to be instructed,’ and so here is a reminder of the only competency possessed by government.


Forget Al Capone, Jesse James, Albert Anastasia, Lucky Luciano, Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy, Son of Sam, the Boston Strangler, Jack the Ripper, Vito Genovese, Dutch Schultz, Machine Gun Jack McGurn, Pittsburgh Phil, Baby Face Nelson, Bonnie and Clyde, Billy the Kid, Butch and Sundance, the Barkers, John Dillinger, Pretty Boy Floyd, Bugs Moran—in fact, forget all of their ilk, all the murderers and robbers and mafiosi and rapists and thieves and hustlers and racketeers and loan-sharks and pimps and drug dealers and cheap hustlers that have graced the pages of dime novels and ‘B’ movie scripts.

Toss them all out. They were all cut-rate, two-bit, dime-store and penny-ante pikers, bumblers and incompetents, none worthy of the criminal calling. To deem them outlaws is grant them a respect they have not earned. It is a terrible insult to the real pros, the true masters of the art of murder and rapine.

And who are these champions in the contest of death and destruction and mayhem?

You know them already. A short list: Tamerlane, Genghis Khan, Sennacherib, Mao, Castro, Stalin, Hitler, Ahuitzotl, Idi Amin, Mithridates VI, Lenin, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein, Kim Il-Sung, Shaka Zulu, Scipio Minor, Ogodei, Napoleon, Hannibal, Caesar, Alexander, Ashurbanipal, Nebuchadnezzar II, Sargon II, Tiglath-Pileser III: now here is a roster of the greatest killers of all, gold medalists in their craft, experts in their field.

They devoured—and some still devour—men and nations and civilizations. They went from kill to kill only to be stopped by death natural or otherwise—and some are still killing. And what makes them so different from the others listed above? What gave their genius for slaughter its proper scope? What do the masters have that the cheap hoodlums do not?

Short answer: They were all government employees.

The others were mere freelancers, a bunch of laissez-faire catch-as-catch-can mountebanks. These fumblers had no state organs to supply their impulses with real killing power, no tax base to pay for legions of soldiers and secret police, no subject populace to enslave, no economic base to turn to the immensity of war, no fearful sycophants to make easy their paths to glory, no coterie of dilettante intellectuals to explain away their every outrage, no gulag of schools to indoctrinate their people into the party line.

They built no prisons, but could end up in one; they invaded no nations, but were always hiding from their own; they designed no gallows, but often swung from them; they devised few exquisite tortures, for their time did not allow for such frivolities. They slept in few palaces, attended few feasts, seldom wore fine clothing, built no skull racks, incinerated no cities, gassed no populations, called no press conferences, dug no mass graves, plowed no killing fields, spilled no oceans of blood and carried out no genocide.

Compared to the lives of the champions, their own were mostly ‘solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.’

Your chances of running into one of these hopeless incompetents is almost nil. But who can escape government and all its minions?


No one can. Try it and you will see very quickly. Try not paying your taxes, for example.

The greatest criminal minds have always been attracted to government, for there is where the real power lies. Where before a thief might rob one, give him a government post and he will rob millions.

A small government means fewer opportunities for pelt and pelf than a large one. Thus the naturally criminally minded are as drawn to the Democrat Party as are flies to corrupt flesh. That is the party where the action is, the party that promises to increase government so as to include every area of life that was once wholly private: housing, employment, retirement, health care, education and even what one can do in his own home. It is not an accident that all such ‘general welfare’ initiatives originated in the Democrat Party.

It is also no accident that the true head of the party is Bill Clinton, a superbly accomplished criminal, though on the vulgar side. To his minions and followers Clinton is a rock star. To a rational being Clinton is the most corrupt man ever to occupy the White House. By all possible measures his wife will be worse.

The genius of our republican government has always resided in separation of powers, limited democracy and a small and restricted government.

Our Republic has abandoned such antiquated notions. 

Even a cursory reading of History shows where we are headed as a people.

(This was originally published four years ago. Here is the link, with some commentary.)

Let Us Now Praise Famous Men

Al Gore won a peace prize. Bully for him. There is much talk around that he has now cemented his place in history’s pantheon.


Name the peace prize winners from 1901 until today. Having trouble? Well then, name the American presidents during the same time. Enough said.

We remember the things that matter and discard the things that do not.

Gore and his acolytes spend lifetimes earnestly seeking approbation from just the right sort of people. You know, all those literati in New York and at international forums such as Davos and the UN, and all those glitterati who swarm over Hollywood, Sundance and Cannes.

Why is it unusual and deserving of merit that likeminded folk give awards, plaudits and praise to people who think as they do?

The Oscars—Gore won one of those too—are awarded by adulterous, incontinent, addicted, poorly educated, flighty, treasonous and irrational flotsam to adulterous, incontinent, addicted, poorly educated, flighty, treasonous and irrational flotsam.

Of course normal folk watch the awards from time to time, much as they watch dancing seals and dogs walking on their hind legs.

Oh…name the Oscar winners for the past 50 years.

One must though pity Gore. The wretch had suffered a rejection from his own countrymen in 2000, and so sought redemption among the rich, the famous, the renowned and the bejeweled. He succeeded. No doubt he will win myriad more awards from them as well.

Allow me to state the obvious: peace prizes, Oscars and other such baubles, bangles and beads are as meaningful as your average Hollywood star’s wedding vows.

But then a question intrudes. If such internationally recognized awards are not worth what they claim to be, how then does an ambitious man seek worldly fame and glory?

Short answer: He does not. Such handclapping from the Beautiful People is a mere trifle, a useless bauble, and is not worthy to be sought after by honorable men. Such things belong entirely to the world. One cannot serve the world and serve God. One chooses. Gore chose—long ago actually.

It is thus no surprise at all that those who belong to this world and seek its acclaim all think the same on the issues of our day—abortion, environmentalism, patriotism, sodomy, the role of government, privately owned firearms. They march lock-step with the Prince of the World and do his bidding.

If you have ever wondered why the culture of our Republic seems so Godless you may wonder no more. It seems Godless because it is Godless. The movers and shakers of the culture have made their peace with the world and have received their due rewards.

We also see the true reason why Bush is so hated by the Al Gores of the world. He does not belong to the world. We also see the reason why Gore and Hillary and all their acolytes in the media, in Washington and in Hollywood so despise the men and women of our nation who belong to Christ.

If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you. (John 15:19)

You may clap for Gore and his type and admire them as you will, but would you really like to spend Eternity with them and with their father?

(Update: Here is the proper response to receiving a Nobel Prize.)

(Update: Ouch)

The American public won’t accept at face value Gore’s self-righteous proclamations or his self-serving predictions of looming global catastrophy. And Gore has to know that, which is why he will almost certainly stick to the world of make-believe — Hollywood and International Do-Goodery — where he can pretend to be the great sage and savior he wishes he really were and left-wing Europeans and thespians try to convince us he is.

(Update: Again ouch)

To see the humbugs of the Nobel committee embracing the charlatan Gore to endorse his falsification of reality in what has become, globally, the flagship politically correct cause was as morally illuminating as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.

The Heart Of The Problem

This scenario has happened many a time:

I am at a parent-teacher conference. I sit on one side of a table across from the mother and the father of some kid who is having innumerable academic and social problems in school. The parents are divorced and each sees their child every other weekend. The kid is there too, sitting extremely uncomfortably across from and between a bunch of adults who are talking about him.

The parents bicker but do not look at each other—not once. Neither do they address one another—not once. Neither do they even acknowledge the other’s presence—not once.

Each declaims the reasons for the child’s difficulties. Each blames the kid, alternately looking at him and raising his voice and looking at me. The father will put on a fierce look and say something like, “I will knock some sense into him when he is at my home this weekend!” The mother will put on a world-weary look and say something like “I just don’t know what to do anymore.”

Meanwhile the unlucky kid is doing his best not to cry. Sometimes he succeeds, sometimes not.

And through all of this waste of time it takes all of my control not to spit.

The problem has nothing to do with the kid. The problem has everything to do with the parents.

Years before the that wretched conference they had met. Something had passed between them—a look, a word, a soft touch—and in their bliss they believed that each was the one for whom the other was seeking. They said all the usual words, promised all the usual promises, felt all the usual feelings, did all the usual things.

Not long after their rapture they stood in front of a preacher man and a bunch of witnesses and vowed a series of vows that they would keep ‘until death do us part.’ Who would have then guessed that this new husband and wife would soon begin the dismantling of every vow, of every promise, of every obligation, taken on that day?

Very soon upon their marriage bed in one of the usual bursts of passion common to such folks they conceived a child. They were delirious with joy, naturally. Even after they held their child in their arms their passion continued for a while. Perhaps they even conceived another.

Then came the tedium common to raising children. You all know the routine. That is when things began to go amiss. The wife could not control her weight, though she tried very hard. The husband became buried under the responsibilities of his work. Tempers shortened all around, the wife demanding more attention and the husband demanding more understanding.

The marriage bed, once a place of ecstasy, became merely a place to sleep. Where once no man could even force a spoon between the sleeping bodies of the man and wife, there now opened up a chasm that no one dared cross.

They began to argue, first about petty things and then about big things. They yelled at each other—beyond each other—neither knowing nor caring that their little ones huddled behind the door. They shook with fear and cried big tears, and could not understand the horrible words their parents were screaming.

Then one day their father was gone. There were lawyers and bitterness and anger all around. The children could in no way comprehend what had happened. When they were with their father he went on and on about how awful their mother was. When they were with their mother she went on and on about how awful their father was.

The children learned about lying. And shoplifting. And drugs. And failing at school. Each parent blamed the other. Where once love ruled now was only hostility. They could not even stand to be in the other’s presence.

And so we all have now found ourselves sitting at a table at that conference. The parents need an answer but can only conjure up more acrimony—toward each other, toward their child. It is a waste of my time.

In a fantasy I see myself grabbing the two adults and shaking them like rats. I scream at them and say, “You selfish fools! You are the problem! You chose your own egos over love. Your lies and bitterness have spread to your children. Stop this! Stop this now!”

But I say nothing and silently curse my weakness. I nod my head at the useless suggestions to keep track of their child’s progress. The parents depart, dragging the poor kid with them. I hear their loud voices as they walk down the hall.

I sit alone in the classroom and mourn for that family, for all families like them. I gather my records and walk out, heading for the nearest bar.

Yours. Mine. Ours.

What right do you have to reach into my pocket and grab some of my cash? Good answer: You have no such right. If you try it and I catch you…well, things will get very interesting very quickly. I would rather not call the police, if you know what I mean. Too much paperwork.

I care not at all for your reason for trying to grab some of my money. Perhaps you are hungry or unemployed. Perhaps you are what we call ‘homeless’ Perhaps your car payment is due and you are a bit short this month. Perhaps you want to send your brats off to college. Perhaps you want to sock away some cash for your retirement.

I could not care less. In a free country among free people none of those reasons grant you the right to take my money. You might walk up to me and ask for it—and I would have no problem with that. You might hold up a cardboard sign explaining why you are broke and need some quick dough—and I would have no problem with that. You might hang out at street corners asking passersby for ‘spare change’—and I would have no problem with that.

But whether such shenanigans convince me to reach into my pocket is entirely up to me. You really have no say in the matter.

If that is where the matter ended there would be no problem. But the matter does not end there.

There have arisen in our Republic entire classes of folks who believe that I—and you and he and she and everyone else—am responsible for their material welfare. By some odd alchemy they lay claim to my wealth so as to increase their wealth. And these classes are not simply composed of drifters, losers, vagabonds and the addicted. They are composed of folks at every income and educational level. Even doctors, lawyers and Indian Chiefs demand some of my hard earned dough.

These demands are made not after rendering a service to me but by asking the government to seize part of my wealth for their own benefit—and of course the government first skims a little off the top for the required paperwork. Such naked thievery hides behind mellifluous phrases like ‘general welfare’ and ‘it’s for the children.’ But the difference between this and the activities of Al Capone are negligible, except that Scarface was honest and up front about what he did.

Once the principle is allowed that government has the right to extract part of the wealth of one citizen for the benefit of another citizen, much mischief ensues. Men being men, there is hardly any limit to what they demand. You know the list already: work, retirement, disaster relief, housing, education, health care—really, the thing is endless.

Once one class of men is granted the wealth of another class of men, the men whose wealth was commandeered make demands of their own—all in the name of ‘fairness’ of course. And herein lies much wickedness. Soon every single class of citizens begin to make demands upon every other class. And the government is only too happy to comply, for governments everywhere and always seek to increase their power and influence. And the only way they can do this is to extract wealth from their citizens and divvy it up as they see fit.

And here we come to the great Bastiat (1801 – 1850).

Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else.

It was written of the Athenians that as soon as they learned they could force half of the citizens to support the other half, their great experiment in democracy was finished. The Founders of our Republic knew this, which is why they did not create a democracy.

Naturally, these things government provides have come to be called ‘entitlements.’ This is no mere bureaucratic term. It means exactly what it says. To put the matter simply, the government of the United States of America says clearly and boldly that part of my wealth belongs to another—and my opinion on the matter is irrelevant. In fact, if I resist such legal depredations it is I who will be tossed into gaol—and the other guy will get my wealth anyway.

There is not much to be done about this. For the embarrassing fact is that every one of us has joined in the looting of everyone else. And our government encourages this looting, for it is by granting entitlements that its power is increased.

We cannot say we were not warned about this plunder of individual wealth by a rapacious government. Bastiat again:

See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.

There it is, exposed for all, the perfect philosophy of our government: What would be a crime if done by a private citizen becomes legal when done by our betters.

That it is as fine a definition of organized theft as has ever been written.

The Little Enemies Within

You have read I am sure the tale of the 13 year old girl who was taken to the doctor by her mother. She wanted to play Lacrosse and so the school required a health checkup.

The little tyke got more than her mother had bargained for. She was asked to become an agent for the all intrusive nanny state to inform on her parents. She was asked if her parents’ drank or used drugs, whether the parents got along and if her father ever made her ‘uncomfortable.’

Of course all such questions were asked without parental permission.

There are similar accounts of such invasive and improper questioning, all of it done without the parent’s permission or even knowledge. Some of the questions involve gun ownership. Others read like some perverted inquisition concerning parental child molestation. This was asked of a 10 year old girl:

Have you ever experienced … fondling or sexual intercourse that was against your will?

When the mother complained to the doctor he said that

state law requires that all children are treated as if they are promiscuous and doctors have every right to offer sexual advice, birth control, etc. without parental permission.

Such is the arrogance and power of the nanny state that parental authority can be so easily brushed aside. Well should we ask: To whom do these children belong? The nanny state has its answer.

The American Society of Pediatrics has a long-standing policy of using children to discover things about the parents. The wording of its official statement ‘Confidentiality in Adolescent Health Care’ is positively Orwellian and beautifully bureaucratic. It is what we will come to expect from any health care system run by the government.

Some gems:

Adolescents tend to underutilize existing health care resources. The issue of confidentiality has been identified, by both providers and young people themselves, as a significant access barrier to health care.

Translation: Children need to be questioned in private because they might not trust their parents. Besides, no parent would allow any doctor to ask such questions or their children to answer them. Better to get the little ones alone.

This obligation includes every reasonable effort to encourage the adolescent to involve parents, whose support can, in many circumstances, increase the potential for dealing with the adolescent’s problems on a continuing basis.

Translation: Doctors will work not to involve parents in the health care of their children. Notice the smarmy and unctuous phrases ‘reasonable effort’ and ‘in many circumstances.’ Guess who decides what a ‘reasonable effort’ might be?

The adolescent will have an opportunity for examination and counseling apart from parents, and the same confidentiality will be preserved between the adolescent patient and the provider.

Translation: The doctor will establish a relationship with the child outside of the family and at times hostile to parental authority.

Ultimately, the health risks to the adolescents are so impelling that legal barriers and deference to parental involvement should not stand in the way of needed health care.

Translation: Doctors can ignore the law and parental wishes as they see fit. 

Read more if you can stomach it. As for doctors who would willingly make such inquiries of our innocents, the Carpenter has an answer.

But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. (Matt. 18:6)

To put the matter simply: The state will use children to spy on their parents. And as everything and anything is coming to fall under the rubric of ‘health care’ then any agent of the state from the most pesky bureaucrat to the most arrogant ‘health care provider’ will have access to any sort of information he deems necessary.

We have been here before.

Pavel Trofimovich Morozov …was a Soviet youth glorified by the Soviet Union propaganda as a martyr. His story, dated to 1932, is that of a 13-year old boy who denounced his father to the authorities and was in turn killed by his family. It was a Soviet morality tale: opposing the state was selfish and reactionary, and state was more important than family.

Read that last line with due care.

It has always been part of the game plan of the socialist state to decrease or eliminate entirely the authority of the family. The reason is because that authority exists outside the state. Such independence cannot be allowed. Thus, the state forces all children into indoctrination centers called ‘the public school system.’

This is where the state can fill your child with tales of Heather Has Two Mommies and Daddy’s Roommate. Where teens are encouraged to have abortions without parental consent or knowledge. Where the founders of our nation can be safely denigrated or ignored. Where prayer can be banned and Christianity insulted.

And where your opinion on these things does not matter at all.

And all of this is just the beginning. We Americans are feebly turning over major decisions of our lives—concerning medical care, education, retirement—over to the state. We are becoming mere wards of an all-intrusive government.

It is so intrusive that doctors are required to question small children about the number and location of their parents’ guns.

Now, why would the state want to know that?

(Hat tip: Kathy Hall)

Fear And Loathing In The Classroom

Much of what passes for education at the elementary and middle school level is nothing more than force feeding nonsense to kids. Much of my time in the classroom is spent unraveling this nonsense.

It is not really difficult to do so. Young teens are not at all stupid, not at all bigoted and not at all close minded. Appeals to reason work.

Would that such appeals worked with every adult.

The greatest amount of time spent peddling nonsense is occupied with environmentalist goo-goo. Here we see the usual childish pap: recycling, global warming silliness and rainforest idiocies. Teachers—mainly females at the lower levels—earnestly enlist their budding little charges in ‘green’ crusades. It amuses to see 6th graders oh-so-seriously going about the school from classroom to classroom with boxes to pick up paper.

Never mind that in earlier, more rational ages we would call such paper what it really was, trash. And such detritus of teaching would always find its final resting place in a garbage can where it belonged—where it still belongs.

Yes, such activity amuses. But I do not try to stop this nonsense. I learned long ago not to attempt to inject logic into a conversation with an ‘green’ adult about the environment. It is a complete and utter waste of time. No adult ego could possible survive having his cherished fantasies destroyed. So I leave such in peace, much as I would a homeless vagrant muttering to herself while pushing a shopping cart down the street.

It marvels that teachers think that enthusiasm for recycling equals a ‘concern for the environment.’ Here is what a teacher will say to her class:

Well boys and girls, who would like to collect the school’s recycling today?

Here is what the kids hear:

Hey kids! Who would like to leave this boring class filled with writing and reading and arithmetic and head out with one of your pals and go to every classroom—of course taking your sweet time—collecting paper? You then get to head out to the ‘recycling bin’ outdoors and goof off there where no one can see you!

Naturally every little hand shoots straight into the air. Like I said, kids are not stupid.

Another oddity of schoolhouse recycling idiocy is that no ‘green’ teacher I have ever known or heard about mentions basic economics. They are as innocent of the Dismal Science as politicians are of honor. For the most simple fact of Econ 101 is Opportunity Cost.

In economics, opportunity cost, or economic cost, is the cost of something in terms of an opportunity forgone (and the benefits which could be received from that opportunity), or the most valuable forgone alternative (or highest-valued option forgone), i.e. the second best alternative.

Every moment spent teaching environmental foolishness is a moment not spent teaching grammar or spelling or multiplication tables. The quickest way to increase test scores all around would be by the simple expedient of banning recycling and its attendant idiocies from the classroom.

Alas, recycling is not the only goofy ‘green’ thing pushed into the classroom to the detriment of real teaching. We need not unduly detain ourselves other than to mention a couple of them.

Of course we have ‘global warming,’ or as it is currently packaged, ‘climate change.’ It is taught as science, as received wisdom as thus immune to challenge. No contrary arguments are presented. Indeed, perhaps the teacher is simply ignorant of them. It is fun to present to my charges the fact that as recently as 1974 the Big Thing was…global cooling. The same arguments we hear today about ‘global warming’ were made then about ‘global cooling.’

Even if temperature and rainfall patterns change only slightly in the near future in one or more of the three major grain-exporting countries—the U.S., Canada and Australia —global food stores would be sharply reduced.

Sounds familiar, yes?

Elementary and middle schools are chock-a-block full of ‘rain forest’—formerly known as ‘the jungle’—platitudes. The silliest of them is that the jungle offers myriad cures for a whole host of ailments, up to and including AIDS. Thus, it must be preserved at all costs.

The reality is—like so much of the green hoopla—entirely different. The jungle is host to the most bizarre and debilitating diseases known to man. Many are frightful and incurable. But it is even worse than that. Everywhere one wanders in the jungle one encounters death. It walks and crawls and flies and slithers and creeps along and wriggles into your flesh. Any man dropped into the tropical rainforest without the accoutrements of civilization would be dead in a week.

Such is the nightmare presented to our children as some Edenic Arcadia.

The childishness of environmentalism is clear when we see how it is taught in the classroom, using coloring books and cartoon characters. And all of this silliness is ladled with fear, of spooky tales of vanishing polar bears, disappearing ice caps and penguins in the desert.

Imagine if algebra were taught using fear and coloring books.

But like I said, kids are not idiots. They have brains and they will use them.

Would that those who teach environmentalism did likewise.