jeffreymark

BOYS DOING A MAN'S JOB

Al Freakin' Franken got his big chance to enter the adult world today and indubitably informed us that everything he knows about the law came from Perry Mason. The incident reaffirms to me what I already knew-our lawmakers, particularly liberals, are nothing more than little boys and girls in adult bodies. Tom Hanks could not have topped this performance. (via Breitbart)

OBAMA AIN'T NO GEORGE BUSH

When it comes to manliness George Bush wins the debate over President Obama hands down. Tonight the Prez threw out the first pitch in the 2009 MLB All Star game. He threw a floater to St. Louis Cardinal's great Albert Pujols and hitting his glove in front of the plate. President Bush, on the other hand, always got the ball over the plate with plenty of steam. On a side note, noticeable boo birds came out during President Obama's appearance. Hey, you may not like the guy, but you ought to respect him in a public event like that because he does represent the Presidency of the greatest nation on earth. Debate him in the legislative halls, challenge him at press conferences, and show him respect during an entertainment event.

MR. WHIPPLE'S RESURRECTION

Don't Squeeze the Charmin Mr. Whipple is really Obama advisor David Axelrod. (Ann Althouse)

OBAMA AND NEOHISTORICISM

Obama, and his generation, unfortunately embrace a sort of neohistoricism when interpreting 20th century global affairs. Liz Cheney explains:

Speaking to a group of students, our president explained it this way: "The American and Soviet armies were still massed in Europe, trained and ready to fight. The ideological trenches of the last century were roughly in place. Competition in everything from astrophysics to athletics was treated as a zero-sum game. If one person won, then the other person had to lose. And then within a few short years, the world as it was ceased to be. Make no mistake: This change did not come from any one nation. The Cold War reached a conclusion because of the actions of many nations over many years, and because the people of Russia and Eastern Europe stood up and decided that its end would be peaceful."
The truth, of course, is that the Soviets ran a brutal, authoritarian regime. The KGB killed their opponents or dragged them off to the Gulag. There was no free press, no freedom of speech, no freedom of worship, no freedom of any kind. The basis of the Cold War was not "competition in astrophysics and athletics." It was a global battle between tyranny and freedom. The Soviet "sphere of influence" was delineated by walls and barbed wire and tanks and secret police to prevent people from escaping. America was an unmatched force for good in the world during the Cold War. The Soviets were not. The Cold War ended not because the Soviets decided it should but because they were no match for the forces of freedom and the commitment of free nations to defend liberty and defeat Communism.
It is irresponsible for an American president to go to Moscow and tell a room full of young Russians less than the truth about how the Cold War ended. One wonders whether this was just an attempt to push "reset" -- or maybe to curry favor. Perhaps, most concerning of all, Mr. Obama believes what he said.
Mr. Obama's method for pushing reset around the world is becoming clearer with each foreign trip. He proclaims moral equivalence between the U.S. and our adversaries, he readily accepts a false historical narrative, and he refuses to stand up against anti-American lies.

One of the mysteries of life for me will forever remain how elitists continually believe a lie-one that threatens  to undo their elitism and cause national self destruction. If anyone can logically solve this mystery please let me know. 

Continue reading Cheney here. 

LIBERAL VS LIBERAL

Fundamentalists of any persuasion make me a bit uncomfortable. Fundamentalism breeds intolerance not over truth, but opinions and represents an immature mindset. I applaud liberals who value life above doctrine. One such liberal is singer John Mellencamp. He always puts human need above ideological purity as demonstrated in the piece below from CMT:

When it’s mentioned that there’s no longer a chance to develop a career after a bad record, he replied that we aren’t going to have any more American heroes if we keep tearing people down on TV and online. I asked if he’s heard of the Low Information Diet, which is a way to manage your time without being so burdened by technology. He wasn’t familiar with the term, but heartily agreed with the concept. Then he launched into a long description about freedom of speech — specifically what it does and does not mean.
“I don’t have a cell phone. I mean, I can get on a computer and I can text people and e-mail people and I can look up stuff for information but I made the mistake once of reading blogs and I’m not doing that again,” he said. “I believe in freedom of speech but I also have the freedom to say, ‘You’re an idiot. You shouldn’t be writing things like that because you’re an idiot.’” He particularly condemns rude an unaccountable comments in blogs and YouTube videos.
“I don’t think people fought and gave their lives so that some guy can sit in his bedroom and be mean. I don’t think that’s what freedom of speech is,” he continued. “Freedom of speech is really about assembly — for us to collectively have an idea. We want to get our point of view out so we can assemble and I can appoint you to be the spokesman. That’s freedom of speech — to be able to collectively speak for a sector of people. But somehow it’s turned into ‘I can be an asshole whenever I feel like, say whatever I like, be disrespectful to people and not be courteous.’ It’s not good for our society. Not being courteous is not really freedom of speech. …
“When I was growing up in the 50s, to be a good neighbor, you minded your own business,” he said. “You were polite to other people. You were polite to their kids. You looked out for the kids. Now, none of those things mean anything. … I don’t think the founding fathers died so that you could call me or you or her anything you want to say about it. I think you have to be accountable for what you say and do. People just don’t believe that anymore — (and they think) ‘I can say whatever the f- I want.’”

KURT WARNER THE REAL DEAL

I've always like Arizona Cardinal's quarterback Kurt Warner. He is no puffing, pious, proud prima donna. He is the real deal. If more of our idolized professional athletes possessed Warner's behavior and character we might live in a better world.

A synopsis of the book from its publishers:

Kurt Warner is the two-time NFL MVP–winning quarterback of the Arizona Cardinals. Brenda Warner is an ex-Marine turned stay-at-home mom who collects coats for low-income kids and rocks babies to sleep at a hospital for chronically-ill infants. Together they’re the parents of seven, going into their 12th year of marriage, and founders of a foundation that helps disadvantaged children and families. Their formula for success? They put First Things First—family, faith, and giving to others—it’s their family motto, and it drives everything they do. First Things First is an honest, insightful, and entertaining look at life inside the Warner household. Kurt and Brenda speak candidly about their marriage, the values they are working to instill in their kids, things they’ve done right, mistakes they’ve made, the importance of giving back, and the legacy they hope to leave behind. Includes a 16-page full-color photo insert.

LIBERALISM A HOUSE OF CARDS

Now that we no longer have George Bush to kick around (Dems are still trying but the attempt is dying on the vine) the public seems increasingly aware of liberalism's bankrupt political ideology. Bill Kristol claims that liberalism's rise the last four years represents an interlude from Reaganism instead of a liberal intonation:

The stimulus hasn't worked. Cap-and-trade and health care reform are in trouble. The can't-we-all-get-along foreign policy isn't leading to a more peaceful world. And the administration seems to have no idea what to do about Guantánamo.
Congressional Democrats are nervous. Even Obama's media base is concerned. At the end of last week, three leading Obamaphiles offered their lamentations. "The fact is, Obama may be blowing a major opportunity for reform," worried Joe Klein. "There's now a real risk that President Obama will find himself caught in a political-economic trap," warned Paul Krugman. "Failure. Overwhelming, amazing failure," was David Brooks's take on the administration's effort to deal with health care inflation--something the president is (according to Brooks) "fervently committed to reducing."
Why such long faces? Because they realize that, despite the financial meltdown on the Bush administration's watch and the errors of omission and commission by the GOP over the last decade, the American public hasn't fundamentally rethought their turn in 1980 away from big government liberalism.
Gallup reports, "Thus far in 2009, 40 percent of Americans interviewed in national Gallup Poll surveys describe their political views as conservative, 35 percent as moderate, and 21 percent as liberal. This represents a slight increase for conservatism in the U.S. since 2008, returning it to a level last seen in 2004." This despite two decisive Democratic election victories in the intervening years. Gallup also reported that 39 percent of Americans say their political views have become more conservative in recent years. Only 18 percent say they've grown more liberal.
Similarly, a recent Washington Post/ABC News poll had Americans favoring smaller government with fewer services to a larger government with more services by 54 to 41 percent--a slightly more conservative result than in 2004. As Michael Barone summarizes the situation, "Americans seem to be recoiling against big government when it threatens to become a reality rather than a campaign promise."

If Kristol pegs the climate accurately, Republicans can use this opportunistic moment to spawn a continuance of the conservative revolution. They must, however, find a way to rally around leadership. At this point Republicans really do stand as the big tent party. Whereas Dems inherently intimidate and bully nonconformists into submission. Big tents house lots of opinions and lots of opinions can get a bit cacophonous.

 Past political conservative leaders such as Newt Gingrich and the Gipper, keyed off of two natural human motivators. First of all they engendered a tremendous sense of pride and hope for the future by zealously appealing to our great national heritage. Both made us feel good about our spiritual ancestry. These men vicariously sounded forth our forefather's cry for liberty and appealed to our recent father's overwhelming destruction of fascism. 

Second, both Gingrich and Gipper judiciously set forth major, yet limited fundamentals of conservatism. They steered us through the muddy waters of multifarious jots and tittles by shining a narrow, highly visible light of conservative's core. This also explains Sarah Palin's continued popularity among conservatives. She incarnates conservatism's basic principles. Where Gingrich philosophizes, Palin functionalizes. She makes conservatism work. I'm not endorsing Sarah Palin here, if indeed she needs a future endorsement. I'm simply illustrating a point about conservative values. And true conservative politics by nature chases away the moderate little foxes who threaten to destroy the vineyard.     

 

THE ART OF SELLING ONE'S SOUL

When a person sticks their hand out as politicians inherently do, one must reciprocate. This often comes in the form of porkulous spending, or vote getting, and other various under the radar means. But lately, I swear, if I did not know any better, I might think the recent supposed private confession of CIA director Leon Panetta may stand as one of the most blatant sellouts I've seen in politics. At least it appears that way on the surface. Appearances, however, form perceptions and perceptions become reality in many minds. Here is the letter from Democrat congressmen that caused the latest brouhaha: (click on image)

News Max offers this assessment from Republican House Intelligence Committee member Peter Hoekstra:

The senior Republican on the House Intelligence Committee calls Democratic accusations that the CIA lied to Congress "bizarre."
Michigan Rep. Peter Hoekstra criticized committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes of Texas, saying, "There's no leadership here."
Reyes and other committee Democrats sent Hoekstra a letter saying that CIA Director Leon Panetta had acknowledged that senior CIA officials have misled lawmakers repeatedly since 2001. But a GOP spokesman has suggested that the letter was timed to deflect a controversy involving House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's knowledge of CIA interrogation techniques.
Hoekstra told CBS' "The Early Show" on Thursday that it appears that Reyes is "working on the political equation."

Panetta defended CIA personnel earlier in the year when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi brazenly accused the CIA of intentionally misleading members of Congress on matters of interrogation techniques.  Now one wonders if our intelligence capabilities have been seriously compromised over a political blessing from Dem. cronyism. If Panetta is indeed a man of principle he will defend his agency from corrupt political swaggering. Just another day at the Dem. office in light of apologies delivered on foreign soil, arms reduction talks, increasing intervention into the private sector, tax increases over bogus climate change evidence, and the reduction of volunteerism in light of threats to remove philanthropic tax deductions. Nevertheless, we seem possessed by more pressing matters such as funerals for low life emotional dwarfs like Michael Jackson. What a nation. Ain't we proud.  

MY APOLOGIES TO PRESIDENT OBAMA

To President Obama, his staff, and all other comrades out there I apologize for this post. I don't know why I apologize-I just think apologies have become vogue with this new administration, as so aptly demonstrated in this piece:

Top 10 Obama Apologies

1. Apology to Europe: Speech in Strasbourg, France, April 3. “In America, there’s a failure to appreciate Europe‘s leading role in the world. Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.” 

2. Apology to the Muslim world: Interview with Al Arabiya, January 27. “My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy. We sometimes make mistakes. We have not been perfect.”

3. Apology to the Summit of the Americas: Address to the Summit of the Americas, Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago, April 17.“While the United States has done much to promote peace and prosperity in the hemisphere, we have at times been disengaged, and at times we sought to dictate our terms.” 

4. Apology at the G-20 Summit of World Leaders: News conference in London, April 2. “I just think in a world that is as complex as it is, that it is very important for us to be able to forge partnerships as opposed to simply dictating solutions.” 

5. Apology for the War on Terror: Speech in Washington, D.C., May 21.“Unfortunately, faced with an uncertain threat, our government made a series of hasty decisions. I believe that many of these decisions were motivated by a sincere desire to protect the American people. But I also believe that all too often our government made decisions based on fear rather than foresight, that all too often our government trimmed facts and evidence to fit ideological predispositions.” 

6. Apology for Guantanamo in France: Speech in Strasbourg, France, April 3. “In dealing with terrorism, we can’t lose sight of our values and who we are. That’s why I closed Guantanamo. That’s why I made very clear that we will not engage in certain interrogation practices. I don’t believe that there is a contradiction between our security and our values. And when you start sacrificing your values, when you lose yourself, then over the long term that will make you less secure.” 

7. Apology for America before the Turkish Parliament: Speech to the Turkish Parliament, Ankara, Turkey, April 6. “The United States is still working through some of our own darker periods in our history. Facing the Washington Monument that I spoke of is a memorial of Abraham Lincoln, the man who freed those who were enslaved even after Washington led our Revolution. Our country still struggles with the legacies of slavery and segregation, the past treatment of Native Americans.” 

8. Apology for U.S. Policy toward the Americas: Editorial “Choosing a Better Future in the Americas,” April 16. “Too often, the United States has not pursued and sustained engagement with our neighbors. We have been too easily distracted by other priorities, and have failed to see that our own progress is tied directly to progress throughout the Americas.” 

9. Apology for the Mistakes of the CIA: Remarks to CIA employees at Langley, Va., April 29. “Don’t be discouraged that we have to acknowledge potentially we’ve made some mistakes.” 

10. Apology for Guantanamo: Speech in Washington, D.C., May 21. “There is also no question that Guantanamo set back the moral authority that is America’s strongest currency in the world.”

OBAMANOMICS MADE SIMPLE

The video below explains to us eco 101 illiterate types, the implications behind Obamanomics.

PETER KING GETS IT RIGHT

New York Congressman Peter King said a mouthful yesterday about our obsession with celebrities particularly in relation to Michael Jackson. Opponents argue that Jackson was acquitted when charged with child molestation. King, however, asks the million dollar question, "Would you let your child be alone in a room with Michael Jackson?" Later King puts Jackson's life in perspective when he declares:

So I said it yesterday. I'm speaking today. I will not be speaking tomorrow, on the day of his memorial. I mean, here's a guy who had so much; in the end, he really had very little.  

The man who had everything and yet, had nothing. That's Michael Jackson. My God, is Peter King the only grownup left in America? 

REFLECTIONS FROM A FORMER SARAH PALIN SYMPATHIZER

Last week former Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin startled conservatives when she announced her resignation during mid term as Alaska's governor. I for one liked Palin. She stood on and seemingly practiced core conservative principles. Although a little green around the gills Sarah Palin gave me the utmost confidence in her ability to mature. Other than her spatty, adolescent responses to David Letterman, she carried herself with aplomb in the midst of intense scrutiny. 

Yet, her recent decision tarnished her image among the very voters who sympathized with her. I know of no single front and center conservative politician who believes her decision bolstered her image if indeed she makes a presidential bid in 012. Power Line's Paul Mirengoff offers a sound speculative assessment of the impetus behind Palin's move:

It's not clear why Sarah Palin resigned her position as governor of Alaska, but it must have been for one of the following reasons: (1) there is a scandal that would have made her position as governor untenable, (2) she couldn't take the heat that was coming her way, or (3) she concluded that it was in her best interests to do something other than fulfill the duties associated with the position the voters of Alaska entrusted to her.
In all three scenarios, Palin is unfit for high office, and certainly unfit to be the vice president or the president of the United States. Moreover, Palin's resignation confirms how disappointingly reckless it was of John McCain to choose the then-untested governor to be his running-mate.

I concur with Mirengoff on every point except his claim of McCain's recklessness. John McCain, in his quest to find a conservative voice, of which the public perceives he does not possess, made some unwise choices particularly in relation to evangelical patronage. Both John Hagee and Rod "who" Parsley are a little "out there" in relation to mainline evangelicals. And, both demonstrated how out of touch McCain really was with conservatives. Sarah Palin, however, embodied conservative principles. She offered unwavering support to her troubled family, unabashedly supported our troops, worshiped at an evangelical altar, and broke up cronyism in Alaska.  In addition, she compensated magnificently for both Bush's and McCain's lack of public charisma. Public image may provide only a small part of the qualification package, but in today's celebrity canonizing world podium presence rules. Sarah Palin offered life and zeal to an otherwise dead elephant, that prides itself in propping up old fading away soldiers. We latched on to her in the same desperate way liberals fawned over Obama. We loved her, wanted her, needed her, or so we thought. Now we understand even Ms. Palin walks on feet made of clay-feet without buoyancy. 

Time now for conservatives to get on with their political lives and forget Sarah Palin; forget the emotion. Don't get carried away by any sympathetic sentimentalism. We must fix our gaze straight ahead and govern with our principles as the guiding light. Like Mr. Mirengoff said Sarah Palin is unfit for high office.   

PATRIOTIC PICTURES FROM THE PAST

This July 4th reminds me of our great patriotic heritage. Shorpy captures that heritage on his phenomenal web site.  He transforms old photographs into digital like modern pictures. These photos confirm that the past really did exist in color. Imagine that. And I thought 50 years ago black and white covered the world until God said, "Let there be color."

This first photo was taken at a 1942 Memorial Day Parade in Southington, Connecticut.(love those old cars)

The second photo shows folks putting together our Army Air Corps' finest machines at Consolidated Aircraft in Fort Worth, Texas. My grandfather helped construct these babies and finally retired from CA after a lengthy, productive career. My mother worked there as well while in high school and college. She once informed me that the place was so complex and overwhelming her daddy personally walked her to her office each day. (click on pictures to enlarge)  

SARAH 2016

Our favorite man of letters historian Victor Davis Hanson speculates concerning Sarah Palin's resignation yesterday:

Conventional wisdom suggests that short-term the Palin decision was unwise — e.g., "quitter," unpredictable, sulking, etc. But what else are her critics really going to say? It's not like a Letterman can  trump laughing at her on late-night television as he puns that a Yankees star had sex in a dugout with her 14-year old daughter. Can Andrew Sullivan at the Atlantic website go beyond his slurs that she did not deliver her own child? How much more cleverly can N.Y. feminist pundits tsk-tsk her that she's a Wasilla trailer-park retread?
In other words, it doesn't matter that much what critics say, but — should she pursue politics — only what she does with her newfound time, especially if she travels widely, studies foreign policy, and helps galvanize the party base.

In the long run, she can lecture, earn a good income through speaking, develop a coterie of advisers and supporters, take care of her family, not have the constant political warring on all flanks, and invest time in reflecting and studying issues, visit the country, meet leaders, etc. She's not looking at 2012; but in eight years by 2016 she will be far more savvy, still young, and far more experienced. It matters not all that the Left writes her off as daffy, since they were going to do that whatever she did; the key is whether she convinces conservatives in eight year of travel and reflection that she's a  charismatic Margaret Thatcher type heavyweight.

PUBLIC ENEMIES ENTERTAINS

Long ago and far away, in the deep dark throws of an American depression emerged the short lived, but legend making gangsters. Infamous characters such as Pretty Boy Floyd, Bonnie Parker, Clyde Barrow and Baby Face Nelson prefaced the silver screen from week to week through Movietone News reels. The public developed a sort of mystical infatuation with these hardcore cop killers who usually robbed banks and did no harm to the public. The most notorious of all was a farm boy from Illinois named John Dillinger. His daring escapes including his making a mockery of the Crown Point, Indiana Sheriff, by bolting from her jail with a wooden gun provided Hollywood with eternal movie fodder. 

The current such brand Public Enemies, follows the more exotic escapades of John Dillinger (Johnny Depp) and special FBI agent Melvin Purvis' (Christian Bale) desperate attempts to bring him down. As with a host of action adventures today the story is followed through the eyes of a sort of "you are there" lens. 

The movie, based on historical events (not fully historically accurate, nor does it attempt such a feat), displays lots of old fashioned cops and robbers shoot 'em up scenes. Public Enemies reminds me of the good old days when James Cagney and John Garfield made daring escapes from the coppers. Only this time the bullets feel more real and the action gets quite intense. Somehow we knew with Cagney his gangster world abode consisted of fake bullets, studio props, and ham actors who over dramatized their lines for an effect. Fast forward 70 odd years. The set is real, filmed on Dillinger's stomping grounds, the bullets believable, and the actors... well with Christian Bale, things changed very little. Bale hammed it up with a ridiculously fake southern accent( Melvin Pervis was from South Carolina) casting him in a role both he and his audiences might seriously seek to forget. I never, however, stood in line for a ticket to watch Christian Bale. He's too affected for Hollywood. Good actors embody covert phoniness that paves the way for omnipresent mysticism while audiences remain subconsciously glued to their theater seats. Bale is simply, well...he's just too spurious. The mystical mythical halo passed him by at birth. He simply cannot rise to the level when in the presence of greatness like the late Heath Ledger.  

The classic Johnny Depp, on the other hand, exudes mysticism. The moment one enters the theater a sort of spiritual presence invades their soul. They chew their fingernails while eagerly awaiting Depp's big screen appearance.  Yet, with Dillinger the Depp mystique fades ever so slightly. This champion character actor plays an inherently boring personality. While Dillinger's antics were prolific, his disposition seemed subdued. Depp, aptly succeeds at the part because he plays Dillinger in proper Dillingeresque fashion. We could ask no more from him. Adding ham to John Dillinger might get unnecessarily risky.  Nevertheless, Johnny Depp's genius lies in the fact that he ardently seeks realism and believability.  That's why he shines when he plays more exotic characters.  Depp instinctively knows how to climb inside the skin of a loony Captain Jack Sparrow, or a Stephen King inspired psychotic Mort Rainey. Those characters transport us into a fantasy land so rich we find ourselves struggling mightily to leave their bizarre world behind when exiting the theater. If one seeks mere entertainment the classic Hollywood way then Public Enemies does not disappoint.

LET THE SPECULATION BEGIN

Human wisdom declares those rising stars like Sarah Palin who abruptly resign a position of responsibility must have done something wrong. Let the mindless, gossiping speculation begin. Truth is we simply do not know why she quit. Often the guilty deny their baneful plight and seem convinced they may ride the storm out against impossible odds. The thought of Palin resigning amidst brewing dark ethical clouds is a bit aberrant, but not overly so. Read her statement here. 

CELEBRITY WORSHIP

While this nation occupies itself with Michael Jackson and celebrities in general our politicians are busy making a mockery of the private sector. But, why should we care? Celebrities make us feel good and politicians are full of nothing more than ideas. And, the media only caters to what brings in the dough.     (Michael Ramirez)

WHY IS THIS MAN ACTING SO STRANGE?

When a man goes against his scruples and recklessly puts his family to shame he behaves rather bizarrely. Extra marital affairs drive men to the utmost shame one can imagine. Even King David of the Old Testament bible, a man after God's heart, went berserk following his affair with Bathsheba:

 ¹ In the spring, at the time when kings go off to war, David sent Joab out with the king's men and the whole Israelite army. They destroyed the Ammonites and besieged Rabbah. But David remained in Jerusalem.
 ² One evening David got up from his bed and walked around on the roof of the palace. From the roof he saw a woman bathing. The woman was very beautiful, ³ and David sent someone to find out about her. The man said, "Isn't this Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam and the wife of Uriah the Hittite?" ⁴ Then David sent messengers to get her. She came to him, and he slept with her. (She had purified herself from her uncleanness.) Then  she went back home. ⁵ The woman conceived and sent word to David, saying, "I am pregnant."
 ⁶ So David sent this word to Joab: "Send me Uriah the Hittite." And Joab sent him to David. ⁷ When Uriah came to him, David asked him how Joab was, how the soldiers were and how the war was going. ⁸ Then David said to Uriah, "Go down to your house and wash your feet." So Uriah left the palace, and a gift from the king was sent after him. ⁹ But Uriah slept at the entrance to the palace with all his master's servants and did not go down to his house.
 ¹⁰ When David was told, "Uriah did not go home," he asked him, "Haven't you just come from a distance? Why didn't you go home?"
 ¹¹ Uriah said to David, "The ark and Israel and Judah are staying in tents, and my master Joab and my lord's men are camped in the open fields. How could I go to my house to eat and drink and lie with my wife? As surely as you live, I will not do such a thing!"
 ¹² Then David said to him, "Stay here one more day, and tomorrow I will send you back." So Uriah remained in Jerusalem that day and the next. ¹³ At David's invitation, he ate and drank with him, and David made him drunk. But in the evening Uriah went out to sleep on his mat among his master's servants; he did not go home.
 ¹⁴ In the morning David wrote a letter to Joab and sent it with Uriah. ¹⁵ In it he wrote, "Put Uriah in the front line where the fighting is fiercest. Then withdraw from him so he will be struck down and die." (2 Samuel 11:1-15 NIV)

Later God sent a prophet by the name of Nathan to bring David to his senses. Here's the story:

 ¹ The LORD sent Nathan to David. When he came to him, he said, "There were two men in a certain town, one rich and the other poor. ² The rich man had a very large number of sheep and cattle, ³ but the poor man had nothing except one little ewe lamb he had bought. He raised it, and it grew up with him and his children. It shared his food, drank from his cup and even slept in his arms. It was like a daughter to him.
 ⁴ "Now a traveler came to the rich man, but the rich man refrained from taking one of his own sheep or cattle to prepare a meal for the traveler who had come to him. Instead, he took the ewe lamb that belonged to the poor man and prepared it for the one who had come to him."
 ⁵ David burned with anger against the man and said to Nathan, "As surely as the LORD lives, the man who did this deserves to die! ⁶ He must pay for that lamb four times over, because he did such a thing and had no pity."
 ⁷ Then Nathan said to David, "You are the man! This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: 'I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you from the hand of Saul. ⁸ I gave your master's house to you, and your master's wives into your arms. I gave you the house of Israel and Judah. And if all this had been too little, I would have given you even more. ⁹ Why did you despise the word of the LORD by doing what is evil in his eyes? You struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword and took his wife to be your own. You killed him with the sword of the Ammonites. ¹⁰ Now, therefore, the sword will never depart from your house, because you despised me and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own.' (2 Samuel 12:1-10)

Mark Sanford now needs a Nathan to shake him up a bit. Each of us possesses the nature to do indescribable evils. Our forefathers, far from mindless Utopians, instinctively comprehended the natural proclivity toward hurtful behavior as reflected in their checks and balances. I for one, believe somewhere deep in Mark Sanford's soul exists a spark of light. He will, however, need the help of fellow friends to see it and bring it to the surface. If he's serious about principled leadership he will step down and find healing. And, I indeed think his peers will convince him to do so. If he remains Governor he may open himself up for more hypocrisy charges, and poor judgment. The nation needs to know that conservatives refuse to tolerate moral hypocrisy in any party.  

South Carolina senate leaders offered substantial reasons for the Governor to resign. Those reason are cognitive more so than scrupulous. :

"He's lost the moral authority to lead our state so he needs to step down for the good of our state," said Sen. Larry Grooms, R-Bonneau, who said he called Sanford and asked for his resignation. Grooms has voted frequently in favor Sanford's ideas.
Senate Majority Leader Harvey Peeler, R-Gaffney, also said Sanford should resign.
"There's just no way he'll be able to continue as governor," said Peeler. "I'm really concerned about his mental well being. ... He changes his story, it seems like hourly. That's not a man who looks like he's focused." 

 

INTERNET ADDICTION

A recent Nielson study reveals the true identity of internet junkies. Let me give you a little hint-it ain't the utes of America:

If you had to guess who the real Internet heavy-users are--based on more careful stereotyping--who would they be? Well, we all know that the two biggest time-sucks on the Web are social networking and shopping. The heavy users would be seriously social people, sure, but they'd also have to have some time on their hands. And since shopping online takes a certain amount of expendible capital to make it fun, they'd also have to be financially secure.
If you guessed middle-aged women, you'd be right. In a study Nielsen performed back in May, the most influential surfers on the Net were so-called "Power Moms," women 25 to 54 with at least one child. They are "heavy online shoppers" in whose lives social networking "plays a prominent role."

That's right. Little women who ride their husband's coattails, spend his money, and whose most difficult task for the day is drumming up their next "concern." (Some of you school teachers know what I mean because your day gets filled with disgruntled whiny mothers who bombard you with their "concerns")

PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN GOVERNMENT SLIPPING SLIGHTLY

The latest Rasmussen report suggests the public's slipping confidence in Obama, and a continued low opinion of Congress. The recent personal moral lapses of John Ensign and Mark Sanford fueled the public's attitude. More noteworthy in my opinion, however, is the slow but sure changing tide concerning the government's handling of both our personal and collective economics:

Thirty percent (30%) of voters, for example, now say the $787-billion economic stimulus plan passed by Congress ishurting the U.S. economy, up three points from late last month.
Seventy-six percent (76%) say it is at least somewhat likely that a large amount of money in the plan will be wasted due to inadequate government oversight. Nearly half (46%) say it’s very likely.
In fact, just 17% of Americans say the government is more likely to spend its money wisely and carefully than a private business. Fifty-five percent (55%) believe decisions made by business leaders to help their own companies grow will do more to improve the economy than decisions made by government leaders.
A plurality of Americans (41%) continue to believe Congress has more control over the direction of the economy than the president or the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. But three-out-of-four Americans (74%) trust their own judgment more than that of the average member of Congress when it comes to economic issues facing the nation.
Sixty percent (60%) now trust their own economic judgment more than President Obama’s too. Most U.S. voters still blame the Bush administration for the nation’s economic problems, but a growing number are inclined to blame the new president’s policies – 39%, in fact.
Among those policies is Obama’s new proposal for wider regulation of the U.S. financialsystem by the Federal Reserve Board and other agencies, including some new ones. But 47% of Americans oppose more government regulation of the U.S. financial system, while 33% believe more regulation is a good idea.Only 23% of favor giving the Fed more regulatory control.

Interesting how younger voters tend to favor Obama significantly more than their adult parents. One particular college voter, whose parents I know, may epitomize young people's careless thinking on the matter. When his mother acted shocked at his prospect of voting for Obama all he could substantively say is, "Mom, you just don't understand."  What is it that we do not understand? Have we failed to comprehend the brilliance of an MTV pop culture crowd that idolizes materialism, sex, drugs, and orgies? Perhaps debating the color of Michael Jackson's next glove takes precedent over our dealing with rogue thugs such as North Korea who wants to destroy our ability to watch Mr. Jackson at all. And you young evangelicals who vociferously reject the perceived pejorative, yet unknowingly embrace historic tenets of evangelical theology, do you think that your salient responsibility lies in hand clapping, praying, and listening to the latest Joel Osteen heretical oration believing such behavior shall blow the dark clouds away? A substantial gap exists between Christian feel good recreation and Christ-like character. If youth cannot intellectually and emotionally grow up now the painful realities of their irresponsibility will cast them into an adult world that may leave them little room to come up for air. Perhaps the author of Proverbs offers us timely advice when he states:

 ⁸ Listen, my son, to your father's instruction 
       and do not forsake your mother's teaching.
 ⁹ They will be a garland to grace your head 
       and a chain to adorn your neck. (Prov.1:8-9 NIV)

 

WORSHIPPING POP STARS

If we must lower ourselves to animal status and worship some pop star at least we ought to pick a more virtuous individual than Michael Jackson. My God children, do you you really idolize this pathetic waste of humanity? Was his fame and fortune worth the hell he lived in? Perhaps we might do better to pick Billy Mays. Watch the video below. (via Big Hollywood)   

BLOW-HARD MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD

I disagree with Godfather blogger Don (Hugh) Hewitt on this one. He suggests Iran's president chastised our President for recent comments because Ahmadinejad perceives weakness in the West. I think Mr. Mahmoud is a blow-hard who fills the airwaves with idle threats and would descend to such lows no matter who occupied the White House. Instead of second guessing President Obama's character in relation to Iran conservatives should continue to hold him accountable for timely responses in support of protesters.  

ONE OF MANY TEXAS NATIONAL PASTIMES

Baseball, hot dogs, pecan pie, and Ford pickups certainly serve as a part of the Texas national character. And oh yes, who can forget the heroic adopted Alamo hero John Wayne (I mean Davy Crockett). Having lived in God's country all my life I understand that another summer pastime lives deep within our Texas soul. We call it goin' down to the hole. For you sissy yankees that means swimmin'. My boyhood days are filled with memories of dad dropping me off at the local pool. Surrounded by suntanned blond beauties, jackknife diving artists, and green haired towheads  (the chlorine turned white hair green) I stayed at the hole all day. And I became an expert swimmer, becoming a Boy Scout lifeguard. Man those were the days. The Dallas Morning News posts an article with superb photographs displaying some of the best swimming holes in the Lone Star State. Check them out here. 

ON FALSE GODS

The most compelling piece I have seen in a while on our nations infatuation with pop cultural icons. (via Breitbart)

Finally, pop culture worships the wrong gods. I wonder how many people who’ve attended a candlelight vigil for Elvis have recently said a prayer for a friend. I wonder how many people now crying over Michael Jackson’s death, outside his family and close friends, have visited the grave of a dearly departed in the last year. Music can salve. But it cannot save. The terrible lesson America has yet to learn is that as wonderful, pleasing and satisfying as art can be, we confuse the product itself, and its cultural immortality, with the deeply flawed people who make it. In our nearsightedness, we make gods out of monsters and mutants. I loved Michael Jackson’s music, but I have to say that if any of the allegations about his behavior with kids were in fact true–court gyrations and settlements aside–I’d hate the man’s actions … and pray for the strength to forgive him.

Read the entire commentary here.

WEST TEXAS PARADISE

Yes Virginia, West Texas does have character. (via Avalanche Journal)