A good man was killed in my town today by someone I can only imagine as a soulless, brutish thug. A man, who owned a business in town for many years and contributed much to his community and church, is dead today. Another man, who thought it easier to kill than to profit from his own industry, will sleep in his own bed tonight. Steal or work, kill or create, these are not legitimate options for a rational person. A rational person does not bludgeon another man to death when he needs money for alcohol either.
Five blocks from the courthouse and six blocks from our shinny new police station, on a main street, and in broad daylight, a man with a bat walked into a small office building, demanded money, and then beat a seventy-six year old man to death and critically injured a woman. He then walked out and disappeared. The police showed up after the fact to put up their tape, take pictures, and oversee the removal of the body. Maybe they’ll catch the guy, and I sure hope they do, but who among you can tell me these people did not deserve the right to protect themselves from this horrific attack?
Every time a good guy goes down and a bad guy walks away, the balance of our society tips in the wrong direction. Every year in this country, four million crimes are prevented by the legal use of firearms. The mere presence of a firearm could have saved a life today. Every argument I have ever heard against the right of free citizens to keep and carry firearms is moot and irrelevant.
I am so deeply pained by the loss of life and injury felt today by the good people of my community. My heart and prayers go out to the families and friends of all those affected by today’s tragedy. Now is a time for tears and comforting. I hope the police can bring a swift end to the growing fear in our community of a killer walking free. However, there is nothing, nothing, nothing they can do to undo the terrible tragedy that occurred today. I would give anything for someone to have been there to supply a few ounces of prevention to avoid a pain that can never be completely cured.
04-21-2010
alaniz
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Gun Control?
Recently, the question of gun control came before the Supreme Court. The question had to do with whether the Second Amendment extends to States. Does the Federal Government have the right to force a State to change it's Gun Control laws? Does a State have the right under the Constitution, to ban particular types of firearms? These questions had me in a bit of a divide. I believe in a person's Rights as defined by the Constitution; I also believe in the rights of the individual States. This seamed to me to be a real challenge. It was a question of personal rights versus States rights, wasn't it?
Well, to solve this little quandary, I went to the Constitution itself. After all, I wasn't getting any background from the press. What DID the constitution say on the matter? And why wasn't anyone talking about it? Maybe people think it's not relevant anymore. Maybe people think it's too complicated. Maybe we've been TOLD it's too complicated. Well, I went ahead and had a look anyway, and here's what I found.
The Bill of Rights has a Preamble. A “first part,” that explains why the thing was written. Here is, in part, what it says:
THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent starts of its institution.
What this means is this: That when the Federal Government was created, several States wanted to limit it's ability to abuse power by listing several restrictions and declaring certain freedoms that could not be messed with. This was done to make the people less fearful and ensure a smooth start to our fledgling Government. You see, people had just gotten out from under an overbearing, tax-happy King, they had no intention of creating a new one.
The next part is one we hear quoted all the time, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,” Period. Right? This is what people call, “The Separation of Church and State.” This has led to many people feeling generally uncomfortable even mentioning faith in public and official lives. Public prayer has been banned from schools, outdoor civic events, and High School football games. All we can dare to do is have a “moment of silence.” But, it's not “period.” Look back up there, THAT'S a comma, NOT a period. What's that, you say? Why, it's the second part we have forgotten: “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof“ So, what this second part is saying is this, “Congress shall make no law... prohibiting the free exercise... of religion.” Really, go back and read it. I'm honestly not kidding. So what it basically says is this, the Federal Government cannot establish a State Church; AND the Government can never tell us what to pray, when to pray, or where we can pray. What the Constitution is calling for is not a Government free of prayer, but a prayer free of Government. That when the people pray, the Government needs to bow it's head, be quiet, and wait for the amen. That, my friends, is the separation of State from Church!
So how did we get it so backwards? How did we allow someone to read that line to us in such a way that it somehow made since to let Government control prayer? How did we let that one get so upside-down and backwards? And, if we missed that one, what else have we got wrong? And what about the order of the Amendments? Like it said back in the Preamble, this document was created to address some pretty serious concerns the people of the day had about Government power. So straight up, out of the box, the Government has to promise to never interfere with a person's right to worship, speak, publish, assemble, or petition the Government for a redress of grievances. All these things are in the First Amendment. The very first change to the constitution was a promise to keep their hands off of our ability to communicate with God and each-other. A vocal people, free to exchange ideas and express grievances, are more likely to remain free.
That brings us to the next part, the Second Amendment:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
That's it. The whole thing. The entire Second Amendment is one-sentence-long. Albeit, a complicated sentence for those of us who went to public school. What's more, it has been interpreted in many ways, by many factions within this country, to mean many different things. Fortunately, you've had me to drag you through all that First Amendment stuff to establish context. Remember, we are talking about a document that was created to demonstrate to the people that they were free and Government was harnessed, not the other way around. Most importantly, these rules were being written into the very fabric that defined the nature of what Government was to be in this country. I am not making this up. Go back and read the preamble: these amendments were meant to be restrictive clauses to the powers of Government.
So what exactly is the Second Amendment saying? And, what's up with all the commas? At first glance it looks like a poorly worded, jumble of a sentence. On second glance, it looks as if it could be argued lots of different ways. So, what the heck? Why were the founders so lazy that they couldn't be more specific? Why follow so profound a First Amendment, with a throw-away one liner open for debate? What made this one rank higher than the right to a jury trial or, no cruel or unusual punishment? Well, it's because the Second Amendment is the one that backs up the first. It is the one that keeps a free State free.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
If you look at this sentence like an English teacher or a Lawyer, you will see that it is not vague at all. It looks complex only because it is intensely specific. There are only a few things that we need to understand before we can completely parse it out.
What is a Militia and why is it necessary to the security of a free State? Well, we're not talking about the State's need to defend itself from international invasion. This was covered under Article Four of the original Constitution. We are talking a State's ability to protect itself from tyranny from above, the right of the free States to guaranty their ability to remain free. Specifically, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms so that they would never again become subjects to a crown. The founders understood that it was necessary for a free people to be able to rise up and defend their rights, their homes, and their families from oppression, whatever its source.
It was assumed at the time, that each home that contained at least on man and one rifle could be called upon to defend their community. That, these men together represented the greatest security to the citizenry in time of need. It was the declaration of the Federal Government, in the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, that this right to self defense would never be taken away. The right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. This was the promise necessary to secure the support of the American People. The single right that guaranteed our ability to keep all the others.
It is important to note that these Rights are not granted by the Constitution, they are protected by it. These Rights are understood to be granted by God and the Constitution specifically states that they shall not be infringed. The Bill of Rights was required by the people to prove that the free States and their people would remain free. Sadly, not all of the people within the States were free at the time. This would take another eighty years to change. But when freedom finally came to all peoples within the states, the Constitution was ratified again to guaranty the rights and freedoms promised by it would apply to all, equally. No State would be allowed to restrict the Rights and Freedoms of it's citizens protected under the Constitution of the United States of America.*
*Article VI of the Constitution and the 14th Amendment.
alaniz
Well, to solve this little quandary, I went to the Constitution itself. After all, I wasn't getting any background from the press. What DID the constitution say on the matter? And why wasn't anyone talking about it? Maybe people think it's not relevant anymore. Maybe people think it's too complicated. Maybe we've been TOLD it's too complicated. Well, I went ahead and had a look anyway, and here's what I found.
The Bill of Rights has a Preamble. A “first part,” that explains why the thing was written. Here is, in part, what it says:
THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent starts of its institution.
What this means is this: That when the Federal Government was created, several States wanted to limit it's ability to abuse power by listing several restrictions and declaring certain freedoms that could not be messed with. This was done to make the people less fearful and ensure a smooth start to our fledgling Government. You see, people had just gotten out from under an overbearing, tax-happy King, they had no intention of creating a new one.
The next part is one we hear quoted all the time, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,” Period. Right? This is what people call, “The Separation of Church and State.” This has led to many people feeling generally uncomfortable even mentioning faith in public and official lives. Public prayer has been banned from schools, outdoor civic events, and High School football games. All we can dare to do is have a “moment of silence.” But, it's not “period.” Look back up there, THAT'S a comma, NOT a period. What's that, you say? Why, it's the second part we have forgotten: “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof“ So, what this second part is saying is this, “Congress shall make no law... prohibiting the free exercise... of religion.” Really, go back and read it. I'm honestly not kidding. So what it basically says is this, the Federal Government cannot establish a State Church; AND the Government can never tell us what to pray, when to pray, or where we can pray. What the Constitution is calling for is not a Government free of prayer, but a prayer free of Government. That when the people pray, the Government needs to bow it's head, be quiet, and wait for the amen. That, my friends, is the separation of State from Church!
So how did we get it so backwards? How did we allow someone to read that line to us in such a way that it somehow made since to let Government control prayer? How did we let that one get so upside-down and backwards? And, if we missed that one, what else have we got wrong? And what about the order of the Amendments? Like it said back in the Preamble, this document was created to address some pretty serious concerns the people of the day had about Government power. So straight up, out of the box, the Government has to promise to never interfere with a person's right to worship, speak, publish, assemble, or petition the Government for a redress of grievances. All these things are in the First Amendment. The very first change to the constitution was a promise to keep their hands off of our ability to communicate with God and each-other. A vocal people, free to exchange ideas and express grievances, are more likely to remain free.
That brings us to the next part, the Second Amendment:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
That's it. The whole thing. The entire Second Amendment is one-sentence-long. Albeit, a complicated sentence for those of us who went to public school. What's more, it has been interpreted in many ways, by many factions within this country, to mean many different things. Fortunately, you've had me to drag you through all that First Amendment stuff to establish context. Remember, we are talking about a document that was created to demonstrate to the people that they were free and Government was harnessed, not the other way around. Most importantly, these rules were being written into the very fabric that defined the nature of what Government was to be in this country. I am not making this up. Go back and read the preamble: these amendments were meant to be restrictive clauses to the powers of Government.
So what exactly is the Second Amendment saying? And, what's up with all the commas? At first glance it looks like a poorly worded, jumble of a sentence. On second glance, it looks as if it could be argued lots of different ways. So, what the heck? Why were the founders so lazy that they couldn't be more specific? Why follow so profound a First Amendment, with a throw-away one liner open for debate? What made this one rank higher than the right to a jury trial or, no cruel or unusual punishment? Well, it's because the Second Amendment is the one that backs up the first. It is the one that keeps a free State free.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
If you look at this sentence like an English teacher or a Lawyer, you will see that it is not vague at all. It looks complex only because it is intensely specific. There are only a few things that we need to understand before we can completely parse it out.
What is a Militia and why is it necessary to the security of a free State? Well, we're not talking about the State's need to defend itself from international invasion. This was covered under Article Four of the original Constitution. We are talking a State's ability to protect itself from tyranny from above, the right of the free States to guaranty their ability to remain free. Specifically, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms so that they would never again become subjects to a crown. The founders understood that it was necessary for a free people to be able to rise up and defend their rights, their homes, and their families from oppression, whatever its source.
It was assumed at the time, that each home that contained at least on man and one rifle could be called upon to defend their community. That, these men together represented the greatest security to the citizenry in time of need. It was the declaration of the Federal Government, in the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, that this right to self defense would never be taken away. The right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. This was the promise necessary to secure the support of the American People. The single right that guaranteed our ability to keep all the others.
It is important to note that these Rights are not granted by the Constitution, they are protected by it. These Rights are understood to be granted by God and the Constitution specifically states that they shall not be infringed. The Bill of Rights was required by the people to prove that the free States and their people would remain free. Sadly, not all of the people within the States were free at the time. This would take another eighty years to change. But when freedom finally came to all peoples within the states, the Constitution was ratified again to guaranty the rights and freedoms promised by it would apply to all, equally. No State would be allowed to restrict the Rights and Freedoms of it's citizens protected under the Constitution of the United States of America.*
*Article VI of the Constitution and the 14th Amendment.
alaniz
Sunday, February 14, 2010
My personal relationship with God
Today I was asked about my personal relationship with God. I am asked, “Do you understand that God personally loves you?” I hear another member of my Sunday school class say, “God loves us so much, and he just wants us to love Him back.”
Each of us is a reflection of God. In each of us is an image of our creator as unique as we are. I wonder though, if we don’t also limit our understanding of God by remaking Him in our own image?
I believe that we are each born with a God shaped hole in our hearts. I have seen cultures reject God and then feel compelled to reinvent Him in some other guise. Filling an inborn need for spirituality with crystals, or incense, or God Himself renamed. I hear them chant, “The Power of the Universe is Light and Love.” And I think, “Yeah, you’re right.”
The flipside of rejecting God, I think might be recreating Him in OUR image. Recreating Him as our best friend, our confidant, our slightly oversized eternal Father figure waiting for us to climb up into His lap and pout about our hard day at work. I’m not really saying that there is anything wrong with feeling a personal connection with the Creator. I am saying that in over personalizing our image of God we run the risk of losing our sense of SCALE. We are, after all, talking about the Lord God Almighty, Creator of Heaven and Earth, Architect of the Universe.
So, I’m sitting in Sunday school class today, surrounded by people I know well enough to make a down right fool of myself in front of (a fact that my wife continues to fail to appreciate). But today is different. Today I am asked about my personal relationship with God. My, “personal” relationship with God. Well, I don’t know. I mean, I have thought about my sense of place in God’s creation. I have thought about my responsibilities to God and my family. I have (often) thought of my debt to God for giving me life and love, for my family, for simply allowing me to participate. I thank God for letting me live a life that is much more than I deserve. I thank God for my Wife, and my Son. Two people in my life I sure as heck don’t deserve. I think of and thank God, every waking day of my life. But as to my “personal” relationship with Him, that’s a trickier topic.
I would sooner ask a flounder about his relationship with the sea. A fish is of the sea, he is from the sea. His proportions are derived from a life in the open water, far from land in the cold blue currents. The sea is his home, his sustenance, his protection; his very life’s blood runs with the same measure of salt. And yet, what can we expect that fish to know about all the wide oceans? Perhaps there is some flounder out in the North Atlantic right now, contemplating his personal relationship with that little patch of water where he sits. What sort of grasp do you suppose he has?
But here, we are not talking about some dumb fish at the bottom of some puddle of water, we are talking about the Soul of Man, and his relationship with The Creator, He that breathed light into the Stars! How about that?
As you might be able to tell, I have thought a lot about the SCALE of God. I see those pictures come back from the Hubble, and I think about the light, and the dust, and the stars being born in distant reaches of this tiny little galaxy we float around the edges of, on our tiny little raft of rock, and I am humbled by my own insignificance. Surly the Master of all creation has far more important things to do than to care about my day. Right?
But, in thinking this, am I not limiting God? Am I not imposing the limits of my ability to comprehend on the Creator Himself? And in the face of my doubt, I know, I KNOW conversations I have had with God over the years have not all been one sided. I have had many hard lessons handed to me that have steered me along this narrow, rocky path. I have seen the hand and face of God too many times in my life to believe in anything but his direct guidance and influence on the direction of my life.
So which is it? Is God this roiling infinite sea of creation far beyond the understanding of we few motes floating in the middle of some boundless universe? Or is He that loving, guiding force I know to have helped steer the course of events in my life. You know, I really don’t understand it, but I’m going to have to say, “Yes.” Yes he is, to all these things and more I am sure. So much more than this little minnow can understand, that much is for sure.
If you know me, you have probably heard me say that, “I know very little, but I suspect a great deal.” Having said that, there are a few things I believe right down to my very marrow: That no matter how far man travels, he will never out reach the beauty of God’s creation; and, I am loved by my creator. For this reason, I will forever be indebted to He who knew me before I was conceived.
That, my friends, in a nutshell, is my “personal” relationship with God.
Each of us is a reflection of God. In each of us is an image of our creator as unique as we are. I wonder though, if we don’t also limit our understanding of God by remaking Him in our own image?
I believe that we are each born with a God shaped hole in our hearts. I have seen cultures reject God and then feel compelled to reinvent Him in some other guise. Filling an inborn need for spirituality with crystals, or incense, or God Himself renamed. I hear them chant, “The Power of the Universe is Light and Love.” And I think, “Yeah, you’re right.”
The flipside of rejecting God, I think might be recreating Him in OUR image. Recreating Him as our best friend, our confidant, our slightly oversized eternal Father figure waiting for us to climb up into His lap and pout about our hard day at work. I’m not really saying that there is anything wrong with feeling a personal connection with the Creator. I am saying that in over personalizing our image of God we run the risk of losing our sense of SCALE. We are, after all, talking about the Lord God Almighty, Creator of Heaven and Earth, Architect of the Universe.
So, I’m sitting in Sunday school class today, surrounded by people I know well enough to make a down right fool of myself in front of (a fact that my wife continues to fail to appreciate). But today is different. Today I am asked about my personal relationship with God. My, “personal” relationship with God. Well, I don’t know. I mean, I have thought about my sense of place in God’s creation. I have thought about my responsibilities to God and my family. I have (often) thought of my debt to God for giving me life and love, for my family, for simply allowing me to participate. I thank God for letting me live a life that is much more than I deserve. I thank God for my Wife, and my Son. Two people in my life I sure as heck don’t deserve. I think of and thank God, every waking day of my life. But as to my “personal” relationship with Him, that’s a trickier topic.
I would sooner ask a flounder about his relationship with the sea. A fish is of the sea, he is from the sea. His proportions are derived from a life in the open water, far from land in the cold blue currents. The sea is his home, his sustenance, his protection; his very life’s blood runs with the same measure of salt. And yet, what can we expect that fish to know about all the wide oceans? Perhaps there is some flounder out in the North Atlantic right now, contemplating his personal relationship with that little patch of water where he sits. What sort of grasp do you suppose he has?
But here, we are not talking about some dumb fish at the bottom of some puddle of water, we are talking about the Soul of Man, and his relationship with The Creator, He that breathed light into the Stars! How about that?
As you might be able to tell, I have thought a lot about the SCALE of God. I see those pictures come back from the Hubble, and I think about the light, and the dust, and the stars being born in distant reaches of this tiny little galaxy we float around the edges of, on our tiny little raft of rock, and I am humbled by my own insignificance. Surly the Master of all creation has far more important things to do than to care about my day. Right?
But, in thinking this, am I not limiting God? Am I not imposing the limits of my ability to comprehend on the Creator Himself? And in the face of my doubt, I know, I KNOW conversations I have had with God over the years have not all been one sided. I have had many hard lessons handed to me that have steered me along this narrow, rocky path. I have seen the hand and face of God too many times in my life to believe in anything but his direct guidance and influence on the direction of my life.
So which is it? Is God this roiling infinite sea of creation far beyond the understanding of we few motes floating in the middle of some boundless universe? Or is He that loving, guiding force I know to have helped steer the course of events in my life. You know, I really don’t understand it, but I’m going to have to say, “Yes.” Yes he is, to all these things and more I am sure. So much more than this little minnow can understand, that much is for sure.
If you know me, you have probably heard me say that, “I know very little, but I suspect a great deal.” Having said that, there are a few things I believe right down to my very marrow: That no matter how far man travels, he will never out reach the beauty of God’s creation; and, I am loved by my creator. For this reason, I will forever be indebted to He who knew me before I was conceived.
That, my friends, in a nutshell, is my “personal” relationship with God.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Why he won't call!
Why he won't call!
Category: Romance and Relationships
... See More
Of course!! What the hell were you thinking? That's all it has ever been for us guys. The chase. That's all a guy wants is that notch in his belt. And you gave it to him! Haven't you ever heard of the milk and the cow? Ok ok ok, look. . .
Here is a secret. Everyone used to know about it, and then feminist shit all over it. To even TALK about it I am going to be labeled a misogynist. Someone who degrades women. So, here it is.
Women have all the power. They always have. Sure, men can move heavy stuff and break things, but women have control over men's desire. It is desire that drive men to move mountains. It was a woman's face who sailed a thousand ships, not her ass.
A woman's power is in her restraint and control over her body. Once she gives up that control, what is there for the man to hunt? The mystery is gone. All that made her desirable has vanished. A young man will fight for what he does not have. It is in his nature. The words "allure" and "desire" imply need and want. To a young man there is only the hunt. It is that which drives our species.
TV would have you believe it is desirable for a woman to "have sex like a man." I have seen the propagation of this lie for the last twenty-five years! This lie is based on the untrue assumption that we are the same. That men and women are EQUAL! THIS IS NOT TRUE!! We are NOT equal! We are different. One is not equal to the other! One cannot be replaced with the other. We are each part of a whole, but we are WORLDS apart. Each of us has our strengths and these are NOT the same.
A woman's strength is in her ability to control what a man desires. Her affections, her approval, her admiration, and yes even her body. It therefor falls to the man to win these prizes by contest. His strength and perseverance are thus bent to the task of winning each small measure a woman allows him. The greater the challenge the greater the effort. The greater the effort the greater the passions. It is passion that drives men to move mountains.
It has always been the ability of a woman to control those passions. The feminists have taken your power away! They have insisted that the only way for a woman to have worth is for her to COMPETE with a man! To be as strong and as fast and as bloodthirsty. What a terrible, tragic lie. To do so is to deny your greatest strengths! It is to deny all value in being a Woman. How tragic.
A man values most that which is hardest to achieve. Have you ever heard the term "easy come, easy go?" Think about your actions. Have you been "powerful," or "easy?"
Category: Romance and Relationships
... See More
Of course!! What the hell were you thinking? That's all it has ever been for us guys. The chase. That's all a guy wants is that notch in his belt. And you gave it to him! Haven't you ever heard of the milk and the cow? Ok ok ok, look. . .
Here is a secret. Everyone used to know about it, and then feminist shit all over it. To even TALK about it I am going to be labeled a misogynist. Someone who degrades women. So, here it is.
Women have all the power. They always have. Sure, men can move heavy stuff and break things, but women have control over men's desire. It is desire that drive men to move mountains. It was a woman's face who sailed a thousand ships, not her ass.
A woman's power is in her restraint and control over her body. Once she gives up that control, what is there for the man to hunt? The mystery is gone. All that made her desirable has vanished. A young man will fight for what he does not have. It is in his nature. The words "allure" and "desire" imply need and want. To a young man there is only the hunt. It is that which drives our species.
TV would have you believe it is desirable for a woman to "have sex like a man." I have seen the propagation of this lie for the last twenty-five years! This lie is based on the untrue assumption that we are the same. That men and women are EQUAL! THIS IS NOT TRUE!! We are NOT equal! We are different. One is not equal to the other! One cannot be replaced with the other. We are each part of a whole, but we are WORLDS apart. Each of us has our strengths and these are NOT the same.
A woman's strength is in her ability to control what a man desires. Her affections, her approval, her admiration, and yes even her body. It therefor falls to the man to win these prizes by contest. His strength and perseverance are thus bent to the task of winning each small measure a woman allows him. The greater the challenge the greater the effort. The greater the effort the greater the passions. It is passion that drives men to move mountains.
It has always been the ability of a woman to control those passions. The feminists have taken your power away! They have insisted that the only way for a woman to have worth is for her to COMPETE with a man! To be as strong and as fast and as bloodthirsty. What a terrible, tragic lie. To do so is to deny your greatest strengths! It is to deny all value in being a Woman. How tragic.
A man values most that which is hardest to achieve. Have you ever heard the term "easy come, easy go?" Think about your actions. Have you been "powerful," or "easy?"
Thursday, November 12, 2009
The End of America
It’s over folks. We’ve lost. We have given up and now it’s only a matter of time until the ol’ flag comes down for the last time. No, really. The United States of America is O-V-E-R!
-A-
Please don’t think this is something I’m happy about. I love America, all my stuff is here. I love the dirt and the air and the trees. This is my home. I hope to be buried in American dirt, if there’s any left by the time I kick off. I hope there is, but let me tell you folks, there is a real possibility that there won’t be. And this is not me being coy, people. I am not saying that there is a possibility of our survival as a nation, of which there is NOT. I am saying that I don’t know whether or not I will be alive to see the end of America, but an end there will be all the same.
-A-
Also, let me be clear, I am not saying the end will come in astronomical terms. As in, one day the sun will explode. I am saying, the United States of America is on final notice. Start the morphine drip and call the priest, because she’s not getting up.
-A-
Who did it? How did this happen? What do we do? All of these are good questions. The answers should be obvious, but if you are reading this with ANY doubt that I am terribly, horribly correct, then you have no idea how we got here. Heck, you probably doubt we are in any trouble at all. You’ll probably enter the afterlife with a confused look on your face, saying, “What train? I don’t see a train.” If you already know what I’m talking about, stop reading now. Go hug your kids and tell them you love them. Tell them to be strong and to never stop fighting. It won’t help them, but it needs to be said. So that one day, generations down the line, one brave soul may remember what great, great, great, great grand-pappy used to say, and rise up. Only then will there be real hope for a resurrection of this ol’ gal. Only then will we be saved.
-A-
Saved? Why, “from what?” you might ask, from our own cowardice my friend. That’s right, t’was cowardice that killed the country. We are a nation of cowards. Not just us, the entire “civilized world” has turned yeller. We champion the unsuccessful. We mythologize the failed. We punish kids who defend themselves on the playground. We prosecute police who injure a criminal while stopping him running from a crime. Prison is the ultimate “Time Out Chair.” Don’t hit, share. If we judge, (even though we’re not supposed to), we judge a person by their intent, not their actions. We intentionally allow evil to hurt and kill innocence and call it, “misunderstood.” Our soldiers have to call and ask permission to shoot at the enemy; an enemy who, by the way, can cut off the heads of our private citizens without ANY reprimand.
-A-
If you hate me by now, if you have already started typing your angry response, don’t bother. You have already won. My time in this world is short and soon enough, I and all my kind will have gone the way of the Dodo. Replacing us, however, will be your new masters. I’m talking about the end of free speech, rap music, independent film festivals, and any hope of legalizing marijuana. Soon will come the LGBT death camps. Go ahead, laugh. It’s funny, isn’t it? It really is hard for me to believe you can’t see it coming. If you agree with any of what I have said so far, I am sorry. Go hug your kids.
-A-
So, “How did we get here?” Easy, we got here by being reasonable. Back in 1945 the United States was criticized by the world for the way in which it helped save the world. It is true, we did some truly horrific things to end the war.
-A-
We firebombed Dresden for starters. We set fire to a whole city with bombs that burned at five thousand degrees, the flames of which could be seen for miles around. It was our intention to break the spirit of the German people. After all, who could fight an enemy so ruthless, so terrible? The after effect was a short rally of Nazi support, but as power shifted the German people had no doubt about the tenacity of their enemy. Defeat was inevitable. A more swift and terrible version of this same story played out in Japan. Thousands died in an instant, tens of thousands more to follow in the most slow and torturous ways imaginable. VE. VJ.
-A-
Victory came at too high a cost to (our) humanity. We pledged to never again allow the need to unleash such hell upon the Earth. And so it began; the turning away from violence to a more peaceful and perfect world had begun. With each new armed conflict around the world we impose upon ourselves greater and greater restraint. While our military technology has increased, our willingness to use it has all but disappeared. We face condemnation from the “civilized” world for using force that is considered, “disproportionate.” Never mind the disproportionality of a suicide bomber against a shop full of mothers and children. What matters is that we are held to a “higher” standard, because we are supposed to be the good guys. Besides, isn’t one man’s “terrorist” another man’s “freedom fighter?”
-A-
So now here we are, more than sixty years after the beginning of our end, facing a ruthless enemy who knows that we can never really take off the gloves. Who knows we can never really use our full power to defeat him, for fear of being seen as using “disproportionate” force. We will hobble ourselves for his sake. We will weaken our selves if he becomes weak. We will not defend ourselves from his attacks for fear of being seen as the aggressor. Like kids on the playground, we will be punished for defending ourselves. He may bomb us, burn us, maim our children, and we defend his cause. On this road, there is nothing but time between him and his victory.
-A-
We face an enemy who is ruthless, and we ourselves are not. We face an enemy who would kill us to silence his own internal conflict*, and we will do nothing except champion his cause. With no want for victory there can be no hope for victory.
-A-
There will be a few of us who hang on to our guns and religion to the end. A few stragglers left to watch the final and inevitable surrender. I am sure there will be fewer still left to see the slaughter and decimation that will follow. In the end, I can only hope that a few tattered threads of Red, White, and Blue survive hidden away somewhere. Waiting for the archeological interests of one of our descendants to rediscover the freedom we so carelessly threw away.
-A-
*The most popular television show in the Islamic world today is Baywatch. Men watch in private and feel ashamed at their sin. However, they know that sin is not of the flesh, but of Satin. It is not their fault they want to watch Baywatch, it is Satin tempting them. And who, pray tell, is Satin? Why, the originator of the SHOW of course! The Good ol’ US of A. It is our FAULT the most popular television show in the Islamic world today is Baywatch because we are Satin.
-A-
Please don’t think this is something I’m happy about. I love America, all my stuff is here. I love the dirt and the air and the trees. This is my home. I hope to be buried in American dirt, if there’s any left by the time I kick off. I hope there is, but let me tell you folks, there is a real possibility that there won’t be. And this is not me being coy, people. I am not saying that there is a possibility of our survival as a nation, of which there is NOT. I am saying that I don’t know whether or not I will be alive to see the end of America, but an end there will be all the same.
-A-
Also, let me be clear, I am not saying the end will come in astronomical terms. As in, one day the sun will explode. I am saying, the United States of America is on final notice. Start the morphine drip and call the priest, because she’s not getting up.
-A-
Who did it? How did this happen? What do we do? All of these are good questions. The answers should be obvious, but if you are reading this with ANY doubt that I am terribly, horribly correct, then you have no idea how we got here. Heck, you probably doubt we are in any trouble at all. You’ll probably enter the afterlife with a confused look on your face, saying, “What train? I don’t see a train.” If you already know what I’m talking about, stop reading now. Go hug your kids and tell them you love them. Tell them to be strong and to never stop fighting. It won’t help them, but it needs to be said. So that one day, generations down the line, one brave soul may remember what great, great, great, great grand-pappy used to say, and rise up. Only then will there be real hope for a resurrection of this ol’ gal. Only then will we be saved.
-A-
Saved? Why, “from what?” you might ask, from our own cowardice my friend. That’s right, t’was cowardice that killed the country. We are a nation of cowards. Not just us, the entire “civilized world” has turned yeller. We champion the unsuccessful. We mythologize the failed. We punish kids who defend themselves on the playground. We prosecute police who injure a criminal while stopping him running from a crime. Prison is the ultimate “Time Out Chair.” Don’t hit, share. If we judge, (even though we’re not supposed to), we judge a person by their intent, not their actions. We intentionally allow evil to hurt and kill innocence and call it, “misunderstood.” Our soldiers have to call and ask permission to shoot at the enemy; an enemy who, by the way, can cut off the heads of our private citizens without ANY reprimand.
-A-
If you hate me by now, if you have already started typing your angry response, don’t bother. You have already won. My time in this world is short and soon enough, I and all my kind will have gone the way of the Dodo. Replacing us, however, will be your new masters. I’m talking about the end of free speech, rap music, independent film festivals, and any hope of legalizing marijuana. Soon will come the LGBT death camps. Go ahead, laugh. It’s funny, isn’t it? It really is hard for me to believe you can’t see it coming. If you agree with any of what I have said so far, I am sorry. Go hug your kids.
-A-
So, “How did we get here?” Easy, we got here by being reasonable. Back in 1945 the United States was criticized by the world for the way in which it helped save the world. It is true, we did some truly horrific things to end the war.
-A-
We firebombed Dresden for starters. We set fire to a whole city with bombs that burned at five thousand degrees, the flames of which could be seen for miles around. It was our intention to break the spirit of the German people. After all, who could fight an enemy so ruthless, so terrible? The after effect was a short rally of Nazi support, but as power shifted the German people had no doubt about the tenacity of their enemy. Defeat was inevitable. A more swift and terrible version of this same story played out in Japan. Thousands died in an instant, tens of thousands more to follow in the most slow and torturous ways imaginable. VE. VJ.
-A-
Victory came at too high a cost to (our) humanity. We pledged to never again allow the need to unleash such hell upon the Earth. And so it began; the turning away from violence to a more peaceful and perfect world had begun. With each new armed conflict around the world we impose upon ourselves greater and greater restraint. While our military technology has increased, our willingness to use it has all but disappeared. We face condemnation from the “civilized” world for using force that is considered, “disproportionate.” Never mind the disproportionality of a suicide bomber against a shop full of mothers and children. What matters is that we are held to a “higher” standard, because we are supposed to be the good guys. Besides, isn’t one man’s “terrorist” another man’s “freedom fighter?”
-A-
So now here we are, more than sixty years after the beginning of our end, facing a ruthless enemy who knows that we can never really take off the gloves. Who knows we can never really use our full power to defeat him, for fear of being seen as using “disproportionate” force. We will hobble ourselves for his sake. We will weaken our selves if he becomes weak. We will not defend ourselves from his attacks for fear of being seen as the aggressor. Like kids on the playground, we will be punished for defending ourselves. He may bomb us, burn us, maim our children, and we defend his cause. On this road, there is nothing but time between him and his victory.
-A-
We face an enemy who is ruthless, and we ourselves are not. We face an enemy who would kill us to silence his own internal conflict*, and we will do nothing except champion his cause. With no want for victory there can be no hope for victory.
-A-
There will be a few of us who hang on to our guns and religion to the end. A few stragglers left to watch the final and inevitable surrender. I am sure there will be fewer still left to see the slaughter and decimation that will follow. In the end, I can only hope that a few tattered threads of Red, White, and Blue survive hidden away somewhere. Waiting for the archeological interests of one of our descendants to rediscover the freedom we so carelessly threw away.
-A-
*The most popular television show in the Islamic world today is Baywatch. Men watch in private and feel ashamed at their sin. However, they know that sin is not of the flesh, but of Satin. It is not their fault they want to watch Baywatch, it is Satin tempting them. And who, pray tell, is Satin? Why, the originator of the SHOW of course! The Good ol’ US of A. It is our FAULT the most popular television show in the Islamic world today is Baywatch because we are Satin.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
