Christmas *Poem* 4

Following in the footsteps of *poems* 1, 2, & 3, here is the final iteration in this grouping:

Christmas 4

If Christmas does nothing else
it provides us with a reason
to express to those who are closest
how much they truly mean
it may be in word or in deed
it's not necessarily 'bout
the biggest box under the tree
Not that there is anything wrong
with shiny paper and pretty bows
they help stir our emotions
but those feelings, much like the contents
are temporal by nature
friendship and family last a lifetime
and provide for us the cause
to celebrate the most wondrous season

Christmas *Poem* 3

Following hot on the trail of *poems* 1 & 2, here is the 3rd edition of a Christmas poem that I have written:

 

Christmas *Poem* 3

As Santa Claus
heads on in to town
I can't help feel
that we've let him down

As he makes his way
o'er the big city
can his heart be filled
with anything but pity

I stop and wonder
if he has taken
the time to ponder
how we went so wrong

If he stops to think
what has become of Christmas
and how the people he visits
no longer do it justice

Does sweet Virginia
run through his memory
along with the hubbub created
when she asked if he might be

the fact that we've turned
from all that made the day pure
does make any less
its historic lure

Piloting his sleigh
with Rudolph at the helm
all the thoughts that would weigh
a mortal man down

Must be lost in the sky
'cuz he still has that
same ol' twinkle in his eye

Optimism unseen
by those down below

Waiting on the day
when many more
will still Believe

Christmas Poem 2

Following in the footsteps of my first Christmas "poem", here is my second attempt:

Christmas Poem 2

With the world still at war
we all head to the store
in search of the perfect gift
to make Christmas right
all through the night
the children huddle with fright

uncertain that Santa
will find their door

the images they see
while watching their t.v.

death and destruction
rule the tube
and we all wonder
who is the rube

that has this
as a master plan

the world filled with dread
as we count all the dead
the number continues to rise
as tears form we close our eyes
and pray for a better day

a star in the sky
a star in the sky
fighting to be seen
through fog and snow
trying to tell us
what we should already know

no matter the terror
in spite of any tragedy
there is a lesson to be learned
by both you and me

our leaders in name
they aren't always sane
they look for a reason
even during this
most magical season

leaving the onus on us
to do all that we can
every last one
to help our fellow man

if we all were to help one
what a wonderful world
we could make

then last but not least
remember to leave
a glass of milk
and a big plate of cookies

Because Santa always has room
for one more

A Christmas "Poem"

Several years back, I got it into my head that I would become the Charles Dickens of Christmas poems.  It turns out, Dickens was a wicked good writer.  I'm a hack.  Enjoy, anyway:

Christmas

Rudolph with your nose so bright
and Elvis way up in the sky
Be beacons to us on this most holy night
lift our spirts and keep them high

keep in our minds the reason
that we are able to be so merry
let joy and peace reign this Christmas season
Oh Santa! I pray that you hear me

and for the little ones who wait
their beliefs not yet sullied
lying awake in a frenzied state
listening and listening ever so patiently

These starry-eyed children
who still can't sleep
huddled under blankets
listening for a peep

or a scrape
the dragging of a hoof
surely that was Santa
up on the roof

loaded down with presents
what toys might he bring?
for all the girls and boys
Oh! how they'll sing

Christmas morn', finally here
anticipation so thick, it fills the air
parents sit watching through worn out smiles
while ribbons and bows fly everywhere

perhaps family is the true reason
for each and every holiday season

Tom Brokaw Obviously Misses the Limelight

I'll be the first to admit, I didn't think that Donald Trump would stick around in the Republican Presidential race.  I'll also follow that up by saying under no circumstance will I vote for him when given the opportunity, either in a Republican primary, or God save us all, the Presidential election.

That being said, he's said a few things that I don't wholeheartedly disagree with, especially in light of recent events in San Bernandino, CA.  While it would be wrong to condemn an entire religion, or all persons who follow such a religion, it should give pause to our foreign policy, and those whom we trust to bring within our borders and allow the privilege of citizenship.

The reason I even mention any of this, after pointedly avoiding it for the most part is Tom Brokaw.  I don't know who let him out of his retirement pad, but he was out making remarks comparing Donald Trump's *proposal* to what FDR did during WWII.  In response to the Japanese bombing Pearl Harbor, FDR decided to imprison American citizens of Japanese descent.  There was likely not much of an outcry at the time (though I don't ever recall reading about German-Americans being interred, despite the fact they were attempting to destroy us, too.  It must really have been the bombing that was the trigger.)

To be clear, excluding someone from *immigrating* to the U.S., for whatever reason, is not in any way, shape, or form the same as imprisoning without cause U.S. citizens and nationals.  On the one hand, you have citizens of a foreign nation.  On the other, you have the U.S. Constitution, which is designed to protect the rights of all citizens, regardless of race, creed, or what a person's forbears' homeland has done to us.  For Brokaw to pretend to be ignorant of that fact, or to actually be ignorant of that fact suggests that he is a moron.  There's enough of that going around lately, without him spewing forth such nonsense.  It would have been enough to say something along the lines of "Donald Trump is an idiot, and he is proposing a plan that cannot be enforced."  Of course, such a statement does not generate millions of views on the internet, nor does it bring Tom Brokaw back to the forefront of the news cycle for more than a moment.  Instead, he takes a position that is at least as ignorant as he claims Trump's is, and for that is rewarded.  I hate our country sometimes.  

We now live in a world where anyone can get anywhere on the globe within 24 hours (or therabouts.)  We have lax border security, and don't seem to care whether or not the rule of law set up in our Constitution is followed.  Protecting our citizens should be every candidate's primary concern.  If Brokaw actually cared, he might have asked the governments of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates why they have not taken in any *refugees* or even offered any formal aid, according to a report by Amnesty International.

Of course, if those type of questions were asked, then we might have an entirely different debate.  One where the priorities of the nation, rather than of an individual candidate or *celebrity*.  Then again, we might not be the U.S.A. if we did things that way.

Congressman Alan Grayson Is Either a Moron or a Troll

On Wednesday, Representative Alan Grayson (D-FL 9th District) told radio host Alan Colmes if Ted Cruz is elected President, he “will file that beautiful lawsuit saying that he’s unqualified for the job” according to the Constitution.

Before we get in to the ridiculousness that is that statement, I think it is important to establish the fact that Grayson is not always the dumbest man in the room.  In fact, at points in his life, he has been fairly brilliant.  Like when he earned his Juris Doctorate from Harvard in 1983 (graduating magna cum laude.)  During his underclassman career, he finished in the top 2 percent of his class, and finished his bachelor's degree in only 3 years.  Later in life, he helped found IDT Corp., and served as its first president.

Of course, he hasn't always been brilliant, nor has he been polite as he began and continued his political career.  No one is perfect, though, so we'll just overlook his bitter partisanship, and chalk it up to bitter bitter butter corn due to losses he had suffered in that arena.

Before we fully delve in to the moronic statement that began this post, I'd like you to take a couple of minutes to listen to Rep. Grayson push forward a resolution to teach students about the Constitution.  It's quite obvious that Grayson should have pushed a similar resolution for Congressmen/women (along with POTUS and VPOTUS, members of the Supreme Court, etc.), but for whatever reason, he did not.  Perhaps that was an early warning sign of his fallibility on the issue.

Later in the interview, he would go on to say:

In a sense, I guess, Cruz is not technically that way — because technically he’s not even an America.  His mother was born here, so I guess like [President Barack] Obama, it's interesting to me that the people who had a problem with Obama’s birth certificate don’t have a problem with Ted Cruz, who literally was born in another country and renounced his Canadian citizenry.

I guess my first question would be the other side of that coin:  why didn't he have a problem with Obama not being vetted during his 2008 campaign for POTUS?  He was a big supporter of Obama's campaign, and has been a big supporter of many of Obama's unConstitutional attacks on these United States.

It is well known that Obama's father was not a U.S. citizen, and there have been those who have argued that even if Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961 as he maintains, his mother could not legally confer citizenship to her son.  The son who would grow up to despise her.  I'm not here to go down that road, again.  Obama's term is drawing to a close, and scaredy cat Republicans who have had had 8+ years to figure out what to do about that particular Constitutional crisis, and they've chosen to sit back on their laurels.

Rather, I'd like to enlighten Congressman Grayson to the particulars of the Constitutional requirements for a person to become President of the United States of America:

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

The Latin phrasing of this concept would be jus sanguinis (literally "right of blood") & jus soli (literally "right of soil"), and it is these concepts that are applicable to whether or not a person has the right to call themselves an American citizen.  As noted in the link above that detailed whether or not Obama may have been Constitutionally eligible to be elected President, determining exactly what 'natural born citizen' means is a bit difficult.  While Cruz would not qualify for American citizenship under jus soli, I don't believe (he was born in Canada), both of his parents are and were American citizens, which means that he would qualify under jus sanguinis.  This is a concept so basic, that Congressman Grayson shouldn't even need to take a Constitutional refresher course in order to understand it.

What it truly shows, I believe, is that Grayson is afraid that Ted Cruz is a strong enough candidate to defeat whomsoever the democrats put forth as their candidate in 2016.  On that front, I have an update for him:  unless some heretofore unseen democratic candidate emerges, a Republican will be elected President in 2016.  Grayson obviously has a bone to pick with all Republicans, but is doing his very best to scare voters away from Cruz.  That may work in some instances, but in others, it may draw people to him that might not otherwise had him as their first choice.  Persons such as myself, for instance.  Anytime someone so diametrically opposed to my belief system is so vehemently opposed to something or someone, it gives that item or person extra credibility in my eyes.  At the least, it will cause me to investigate the situation further for myself, to prove the moron wrong.

Another thought is that Grayson may be looking to get his name back out in front of the public eye, as he runs for the U.S. Senate seat that Marco Rubio is vacating at the end of his term.  I wouldn't think that insulting a Cuban-American would play well in many parts of Florida, but perhaps he is reaching out to those with prejudices against minorities (the very people he claims to despise) as he goes about his campaign.

However, it is also just possible that he's a moronic Troll.

The WWE Draw a Line In the Sand With ISIS

According to the (London) Daily Mail, the online group Anonymous has said ISIS is planning an attack at the WWE event Survivor Series which will be held in Atlanta, Georgia Sunday evening.  The FBI has said that there is no serious or credible threat, but they are taking it seriously nonetheless.  This must be a comfort to the thousands who will attend the event, to say nothing of the athletes who will be performing, given our government's recent track record of predicting exactly what ISIS is capable of doing.  Then again, it is possible that the FBI is attempting to deke ISIS into a fall sense of security, so that they might catch the terrorists in the act.

Bigger news to me is the fact that the WWE is (at the moment, at least) refusing to let the threat of a terrorist attack detract from their event.  While perhaps not as grave, it harkens back to how Vice President Dick Cheney and President George W. Bush responded in the hours after al Qaeda's attack on September 11th, 2001.  Cheney refused to go in to hiding, once others in the Presidential succession were secure.  Bush returned to Washington 9 hours after the attacks, against the advice of nearly everyone around him.

To confuse a WWE event with an attack on our nation would be ridiculous, but it's a positive attitude to see.  Terrorists thrive on the fear they spread, the way to combat them is to show that our way of life will not be changed, no matter what.  It shows that as Americans, we are not as weak as our current crop of leaders may lead terrorist leaders to believe.  Rather, the move echoes Bush's comments when he said

I knew these terrorists like al-Qaeda liked to prey on weak government and weak people.

ISIS may be terrorists operating under another name, but the message remains clear (for now):  Americans will go about their lives, whether or not their government leads.  The threat of terror is very real, but to succumb to it is to admit defeat in advance.  Kudos to the WWE, and the government officials who are charged with protecting the citizenry.

The U.S. Continues To Lead From Behind

Friday evening, as I listened to the horrific news that came out of Paris, I waited on the POTUS to come forward and offer a plan as to what would occur.  It never happened.  Mind you, he did come out and state that it was a great tragedy, and it was even a major setback in our battle with ISIS, but not once did he come out and say the words I longed to hear:  we are in a battle with Islamic jihadist terrorists.  These people are looking to destroy our way of life, and of course we will help the people of France in any way that we possibly can to help stop the global terror threat that is spreading around the globe. 

Instead, he went on to say that there was no credible threat to the U.S. from ISIS (despite the fact that ISIS has specifically stated that the U.S. is a top target.)  He also gave the thumbs up to continuing to allow Syrian "refugees" to come to our nation, despite the fact that governors from Florida to Massachusetts, out to Michigan, Wisconsin, Texas and points pretty much everywhere else have specifically stated they will not accept any new refugees from a nation that has such large numbers of terrorist leaning persons until there is a way to properly vett those who are seeking asylum on our shores, something that the FBI and other government agencies have specifically stated is an impossibility.  Not only that, but they can't even keep up with the thousands of people that should be getting observed already, but can't, because there aren't enough resources.

Of course, what else could Obama say, as he is the man who (in) famously called ISIS the JV of terrorist networks, and then admitted months later that he didn't have a plan to forestall their terror regime.  It turns out, he still doesn't, outside of sticking his head in the sand and hoping that someone else comes up with an idea.

Thank goodness the French (the French!!  I'm banking on the French, now!!) have no such qualms about what needs to be done.  They spent their Sunday bombing ISIS centers in the city of Raqqa, with no civilian casualties sustained.  To all those who are against that, or are worried about the consequence of such action, I have only this question:  What else could be done?  ISIS had already stated very plainly that they intend to continue their attacks against France and other Western nations, and as the U.S. is turning a mostly blind eye to the situation, it is a good thing that someone has the cajones to stand up to ISIS.  I just wouldn't have expected the French to be the ones to do it, is all, but perhaps the fact that this is the second major terrorist attack in their nation in recent years has awoke them to the dangerous world we now live.

As a citizen of the United States, I can only hope that our leaders at the highest level take appropriate actions to preserve and protect our Republic, to say nothing of the citizenry.

Rob Lowe, Paris. Paris, Rob Lowe.

So Rob Lowe got himself into a bit of trouble on Twitter yesterday.  I don't think he meant to do that, but perhaps when a future tragedy occurs, he'll learn to simply stay on the sidelines.  As a friend of mine has noted often, celebrities should avoid Twitter and all other forms of social media unless it is expressly for the purpose of promoting a project they are involved with.  Rob Lowe is not involved with European politics, and with his words yesterday, he put himself in the cross hairs of a large portion of the social media world.

I have no more to do with European politics than Rob Lowe does, and my opinions certainly do not carry the weight of his, because being a political-type blogger does not draw in the same amount of Twitter followers as being a Hollywood actor.  It's simply the world we live in, and I have no problem with that.

As an unbiased observer, I happen to think that Lowe is correct, and not just because his words echo my opinion from yesterday.  For those who missed it, I said:

 The time for pretending that there can be a coming together of the minds to solve the divide between the West and Islamic terrorists is gone.  Attacks continue on a daily basis in Israel, yet the press portrays Israel as the bad guys.  A *refugee crisis* was manufactured, much the same way it was in the U.S., which has allowed unknown amounts of terrorists and potential terrorists to enter the European mainland (to say nothing of the U.S. mainland.)  Western nations continue to absorb persons who wish to bring about the demise of the West, and then sit back and wonder where the problems come from.  Here's a hint:  from the people who you continue to allow in to your countries, even as said people state out loud that they want to destroy your country.

That message wouldn't have fit in to a tweet, and that is where Lowe limited himself.  If he had taken to YouTube, or other video formats, he may have been able to get his point across better than when he Tweeted:

Rob Lowe Verified account ‏@RobLowe

Oh, NOW France closes its borders. #Hollande

• Retweets 3,427
• Likes 7,285

5:56 PM - 13 Nov 2015

To his credit, unlike other celebs who make social media gaffes, Lowe has not backed down from his comments, nor has he removed them from his account (at least as of this writing.), which leads me to believe that he was not attempting to be crass or insulting, but rather was calling in to question policies that are harming the people of Paris directly, but greater Europe and the Western world, to boot.  I see nothing wrong with that.  Western *leaders* and the PC police continue to jeopardize the lives of the citizens they are supposed to protect.  While Lowe may have seemed to be insensitive with his remarks, what better time to make the point that has been largely ignored than while there is a tragedy occurring?  It's a page right out of the Liberal (U.S.) handbook, particularly whenever there is a gun tragedy, or a manufactured race crisis - Always use the storyline to push an agenda.  Never let a good tragedy go to waste.

I don't believe that Lowe was attempting to push an agenda, but rather was simply stating what all others who have the brain power to both walk and breathe at the same time:  things are the way they are, because of decisions made by the elected persons in charge.  If citizens want to be safe in their daily lives, they should elect officials that will put forth policies that protect them.  If they want to continue on in this new type of world where terrorists determine who lives and who dies, then there will continue to be consequences.  Hopefully the focus remains more on how best to protect the lives of the peace-loving citizenry, rather than any celebrity's remarks on the tragedy. 

Further, we can hope that this is the last such event that we have to mourn, because our leaders awoke to crisis that has been ongoing for centuries.

The Next Crusade Is Here, Like It or Not

This is a post I had begun writing weeks ago, when I read that the Swedish prime minister, among many others were concerned that Sweden was on the verge of collapse.  The causation of the collapse has less to do with the Swedish people, and the way they live their lives, and more to do with ideological failings of their 'leaders'.

Perhaps it's not simply ideological failings, but rather it is a belief that everyone can be saved, or converted to the *modern* way of living that has led to the problems that are occurring across the globe.  However, as today's attacks in Paris have shown,  there are some differences that cannot be bridged, no matter how many olive branches are extended.  The time has come to acknowledge this.

It is also past time for world leaders, and particularly those who are in positions of authority on the world stage to stand up and state

This is enough.  We draw the line in the sand here, and if you choose to cross it, we will crush you.  We will wipe every single man and woman off the face of the planet who seeks to disrupt and destroy our way of life.  We will not be overthrown, we will not be overcome.  We are who we are, you may accept that, or you may die trying to change it, but that is your choice.

 The time for pretending that there can be a coming together of the minds to solve the divide between the West and Islamic terrorists is gone.  Attacks continue on a daily basis in Israel, yet the press portrays Israel as the bad guys.  A *refugee crisis* was manufactured, much the same way it was in the U.S., which has allowed unknown amounts of terrorists and potential terrorists to enter the European mainland (to say nothing of the U.S. mainland.)  Western nations continue to absorb persons who wish to bring about the demise of the West, and then sit back and wonder where the problems come from.  Here's a hint:  from the people who you continue to allow in to your countries, even as said people state out loud that they want to destroy your country.  You should probably stop doing that if you want to continue on, and not be relegated past, failed civilizations.

The terror attacks in Paris may serve as harbinger for Western leaders, but it may not.  In the moment, France's President Francois Holland has taken a hard line approach, closing all borders to his country, he has imposed a curfew, shut the city down, and put the military in the streets.  Further, the government has the right under the state of emergency declared to control the media, and enter private homes.  This is a tenuous step, because a free people will tolerate such action for only so long, but it is a step that is necessary to help bring the situation under control in the moment.

Unfortunately, merely cleaning up the mess from this latest terrorist attack is not going to solve the problem.  What needs to occur is something that the people of Europe (or the U.S., for that matter) may not be all that interested in doing:  fully repel the Muslim invasion, and if need be, eliminate any who would pose a threat to the Western way of life.  What is needed at this moment is a leader as charismatic as Winston Churchill, with the gumption of George W. Bush.  Failing that, perhaps we could put some money in to resurrecting Charles Martel, who knows a little something about repelling a Muslim invasion.

If not, the future pages of history books will be written by those seeking to overcome us through any and all means.  To preserve the Western way of life, any and all resources must be put in to defending our basic rights.

Fall

the air has chilled
summer once again fading away
there's still hope though,
because none of the leaves
have thought to fall
to the ground
yes, the leaves are now plotting on their own
holding onto the branches as tightly as they can
trying to extend the life they have
clinging to the hope
that it may be true
that summer doesn't have to end
that dreams can come true
and life can be eternal

Israel Shows Great Restraint

Sometimes, when I read things that people have said who hold a diametrically opposed opinion to myself, I wonder why I even bother putting my thoughts out there, because they make my point so much better than I could ever hope to.

Such was the case recently, as I read through some of the commentary of Amman (Jordan) based cleric Abdullah el-Alawneh.  In short, he stated that all Jews are terrible, horrible animals that should die, but he went about it in a funny way.

For instance:

The jihad against the Jews is a mandatory jihad, incumbent upon any Muslim country and upon any Muslim who accepts Allah as the Lord and Islam as his religion, but it cannot be done through such an emotional thrust and with such excitement that only serves to harm us.

As I read that, I was reminded of how often I have been told that Muslims are part of a peaceful religion, who seek only to better themselves and the world around them.  Unless, of course, you happen to be in a part of the world that has Jews.  Then you should murder all of them in the most horrific way possible.  Also anyone who might tacitly or overtly support the Jewish state.  Just to be safe, anyone who has ever talked to a Jewish person should probably be murdered, too.  Also, innocents (non-Jews, non-Muslims, also known as "Infidels") sometimes need to be slaughtered, just because.  Apparently it helps with the recruitment message.  A religion of peace, though.  That's the main point.

Then in response to the question "Sheikh, is it true that (the Jews) do not attack you if you do not attack them?":

I haven’t lived in Palestine but this is what the brothers tell me. Our brothers in Palestine tell us that the Jews do not attack anyone who does not attack them.

So (as has been stated by most right-thinking persons, myself included), Israelis do not attack Palestinians, except as a matter of self-defense.  It's odd to me that I never see this in the *mainstream* press.  Always (or nearly always) they are portrayed as the aggressors, looking to wipe out the peace-loving, simple people that they allegedly *oppress*.  Very peculiar indeed.

 Abdullah el-Alawneh went further, stating:

Nobody should think that by saying this I am defending the accursed Jews. But this is the reality. If they killed any Muslim they saw, nobody would be left in Palestine. All the people would leave Palestine. They would flee to other countries. But all the people there stay put — in the 1967 territories, the 1948 territories, and Jerusalem. They remain there, with the Jews around them with their weapons. (emphasis added.)

So el-Alawneh, while not attempting to defend Israelis, does exactly that.  He admits that if the so chose, they could clear the area of all Palestinians, and likely do so with very little loss of life.  Yet, the Palestinians remain where they were, through the graciousness of the Jewish people (It is so very important to point out that in the history of the world, there has never been a Palestinian state.  Ever, at any point.  People who self-identify as such most often were parts of other nations that declared {and lost} wars with Israel, e.g., Egypt, Jordan, Syria.  It is also important to note that "Palestinians" were not part of the vernacular until 1964, when the Russians created the modern use of the term during the drafting of the PLO charter.)

el-Alawneh would continue:

You see (the Palestinians) killing (the Jews), who only kill (Palestinians) when attacked, but like I said before (the Jews) only do this out of wickedness and heresy. They have principles. They want to be able to say: ‘We are better than the Muslims, who kill us unprovoked. We don’t do that'.

"They have principles".  Principles like respecting human life, defending their people, not attacking their enemies in an unprovoked manner.  Such terrible manners, these Israelis have.  It would apparently be much better if only they would engage in open, unprovoked hostilities.  Then the Muslims would be able to take the moral high ground for the first time and 'defend' themselves.  In defense of those that would seek to destroy Israel, it has been 15 whole days (as of this writing) since there has been a rocket attack against their State. Of course, that does not mean that terrorist attacks have not occurred, as they have, on a near-daily basis.  Yet Israel continues to allow Palestinians to exist, and live within the Jewish state.  Because they have *principles*.

If only the Palestinians could develop such *principles*, we may not have any problems to discuss.  What a day that would be.

 

Shut It Down

Today, the U.S. Congress once again abdicated their Constitutional duties, and passed a Continuing Appropriations Resolution, in order to avoid shutdown.  It is nearly a carbon copy (it may be, in fact) of the CR that passed Congress on 09.18.2014, a mere 377 days ago.  

Whenever the *threat* of a shutdown is broached, the fear mongerers immediately take to the airwaves and beyond warning that Social Security benefits, food stamps, and other federal payments will not be made.  In fact, back in 2011, the POTUS either lied to the American people with intent, or was ill-advised and/or ignorant when he said that Social Security checks would not go out if there was a shutdown.  Ignorance would seem to be out the window, given his position as the head of government, but perhaps he just missed a memo.  Obviously there would have been no way in the world for him to get in touch with people, it would have taken at least seconds to get that kind of information.  Besides, if he found out, then it would be a Lie, or he would have had to change his script.  Even without looking information up, or making a phone call, or sending a text, his statement  flew in the face of what happened during the government shutdown in the mid-90s, and what would happen during the 2013 shutdown.

So the question I always ask when a government shutdown is on the horizon is "Who cares?"  Outside of our military, whose job it is to protect us from foreign invaders, what job is essential?  Certainly no member of Congress, as they do their job just as *well* whether or not they are actually working.  In fact, I think time off would greatly improve the quality of output from most members of Congress.  A government shutdown is simply a threat used by a specific political party in order to achieve the means that they want to, and in this case, it leads to the minority party (Quick digression - I am using "minority" to identify the party that is not in power at this moment.  No other use of the word is intended.) having de facto rule, because the CR came from the previous session of Congress, when they had control of the Senate, and because most Republicans have less spine than a cestoda.

The lack of a proper government shutdown is a huge disappointment, in my opinion, because it means that the men and women who were sent to Washington, D.C. in 2014 are refusing to do the job they were sent there to do, namely reign in government control of their lives, and reduce the cost of government.  None of that is occurring as they act much more like liberal Democrats than the LDs could dream of behaving.  If Republicans are unable to live up to the tacit (and oftentimes explicit) promises they made in 2014, they will find themselves *out of power* when the 2016 elections occur.  If they continue to do their job in the same manner, it's no less than they deserve.  It's time for them to stop governing like they are afraid to lead, and fully time to actually start leading.

Either that, or head on home and watch the daffodils grow, as that'd be a more productive use of their time, though certainly a less profitable one.

The Fall Tussle

The Fall Tussle

Fall, let us discuss

the ways I loathe thee

first we can look at

what has become of my

magnificent tree

all summer long

it stood proud and green

you turned its leaves brown

now they fall to the ground

leaving it stark naked

and adding to my toil

do not think that this salvo

    goes unnoticed

truly you are the most

fickle of seasons

one moment a warning

of what is to come

the next a reminder

of glorious summer

that has departed

your nights consume

     our days

to the point

that the sun

becomes a stranger

this will not stand

there are those

who choose to

     defend you

  by comparing you

favorably to spring

but I never buy that line

spring comes with

the promise of summer

   and better days

you serve only

as a harbinger

for winter

and all that

may entail

you bring with you

      football

but take from me

      baseball

laughing at me

as if to suggest

this might be

a fair exchange

it is not

but rather is

another example

of the warped

sense of humor

you choose to employ

I am not amused

no, not at all

in my head

I conspire against you

plotting ways to foil

your dastardly deeds

but nothing comes to mind

perhaps if I brought in

      a ringer

  Leonard Susskind, for instance

a solution would arrive

but it would be

     just my luck

that he is

a fan of yours

no, I must go it alone

so I offer this small truce:

take your cardigans and corduroys

I'll send your cold, crisp mornings

and all I ask in return

is for a sliver of land to call my own

where I never have to hear your name

(Autumn or Fall?  Honestly, how pretentious can you be?)

"and the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon"

These words were spoken by then-President George W. Bush, at the site of the WTC bombings, perpetrated by terrorists hell bent on destroying the American Republic, mere days after the bombing occurred.  To date, they have not succeeded, not in whole, at least, but to say they have made gains would be an understatement.  As the next generation of terrorists kills, maims, and destroys infrastructure the world over, it gives me pause to consider how much longer we'll be able to hold together our nation as we know it.

Great nations are not usually undone in one fell swoop, but in a series of soft jabs that in the moment may seem innocuous, but in reality, set the stage for the coming end.  Nations that understand the threat and face it head on - Great Britain under Winston Churchill's leadership comes to mind, as does the U.S. during the Reagan years as we battled against the U.S.S.R. to decide who would be the country that led the world surely is another.

Every year for the last decade or so, I've spent 9/11 going out in to the world to see what actions were taking place, and spending hours scouring the Internet for new to me things with regard to the Tragedy that occurred 14 years ago.  Often times it is a video of former President Bush, over the last few years it has been to follow along with former press secretary Ari Fleischer as he recreates that infamous day in a series of tweets, and always, I find something completely unexpected.

This year's 'find' is nearly as old as the Tragedy itself, and the words come from a man that I often times would find myself diametrically opposed to him in regard to any political comments I saw him make publicly.  However, 9 days after the Tragedy occurred, Jon Stewart gave this impassioned speech during the opening of his show, and I think he perfectly encapsulated the feelings of Americans at that time.  You should take the 9 minutes or so it takes to view it and while you're doing it, consider that we are still the United States of America.  We're not coming to an end any time soon, no matter who or what comes at us.  There will be times in the not too distant future to get back in to the politics that have harmed our Nation, and ideas that can help revitalize it, but in the moment, I'd rather focus on the Hope that Mr. Stewart attempted to imbibe on the American public nearly 14 years ago today.

Heroes

Heroes

Without a second's hesitation
death's evil grin is challenged time and again
            as molten steel bends
ceilings collapse, floors give way
fueling the rage and cacophony
screams engulf the peripheral
as smoke permeates
        the field of vision
professionalism, resolve, and focus
dictate that the sacrifice must continue
the tears and heartache that well up inside
must be saved for a future date
that might never be seen
the job at hand is far from over
clinging to life is a perilous proposition
a brief respite as another soul is saved
            -temporarily
        Ash fills the sky
Mt. St. Helen's explodes on a city skyline
        millions within its radius
the red line is their collective hope
they battle the blaze until well after dusk
        Four hundred and eleven was the final tally
   of those we lost in their call to duty
                Men and women whose only concern
            was protecting their fellow man
We should never forget their courage
                    nor the reason they were placed in harm's way

Lemmings Leap

 
Lemmings Leap

Jumping handinhand

Destiny determined

by outside forces

Knowing the pain

of going forward

Hopeful that it will

be of short duration

and less severe

than the pain

left behind

a searing sensation

the countdown to death

one final kiss

tears streaming down cheeks

then impact

no last request

Just eternal blackness

Expectations

    Expectations

in a time before now
when we still had our youth
and the world was uncomplicated
we looked out with bright eyes
and knew that it was ours
for the taking
then we grew up
and our lives became everything
we swore they would not
over run with details
that have thusfar
kept us from our rightful place
we are on the sidelines
passively watching others
as they move forward
with their vision
of what reality should be
there is still time
but the sands continue to run
not caring about our life's mission
nor the fact that there may not be
enough time to accomplish it

Louis Farrakhan Is Trying to Destroy America

The impetus of this article comes to the Hope that springs in my heart, even to this day, that we may somehow save the Republic that we were given by our forebears.  To say it more plainly, it is my Hope that we will somehow reclaim it, as all three branches of our federal government are out of sorts as to what exactly is their Constitutional responsibilities are.  It's also to get to the bottom of what exactly Louis Farrakhan was attempting to accomplish when he said:

So if the federal government will not intercede in our affairs, then we must rise up and kill those who kill us. Stalk them and kill them and let them feel the pain of death that we are feeling.

These remarks, and many others (he also calls for 10,000 blacks to volunteer to kill whites persons in the same *speech*) made by Louis Farrakhan initially led me to think that Farrakhan was attempting to incite a race war within the United States, just because.  My initial thought and reply to that would have been along the lines of perhaps it would be best if Farrakhan was actually interested in helping the black lives in these United States, then perhaps he would work together with blacks in the inner cities, places like Baltimore and Chicago to name just a couple.  Perhaps he would encourage black fathers and mothers to stay together for the sake of their children, who are often shuttled back and forth between family members.  Maybe he would instruct on the value of a 2-parent household, one where love was shown to all children, every day, instead of using his words in an attempt to cause disharmony. He might even push forward the notion, that yes, there are problems, but we need to come together and find a way to solve them together, not by murdering other, mostly innocent people.  He did not use his position of power to do that, despite the fact that he is now getting on in age (He is 82 years old currently), and could work on his legacy in the waning time he has left.

Then I realized my foolishness, it was never just about inciting a race war to teach white Americans about anything.  It wasn't about black Americans stepping up and becoming murderers because it beats the alternative.  At the moment of my realization, it dawned on me that Farrakhan is the leader of the Nation of Islam, and that the United States is considered the "Great Satan" by many followers of Islam throughout the world.

That's when it occurred to me:  Farrakhan couldn't care less about black Americans.  He couldn't care less about white Americans, Latin Americans, or any Americans, for that matter.  What he cares about is turning us against each other, in the basest way possible, in order to bring down the country that has provided him an opportunity to wreak such havoc.

The question that must be answered, then, is where are the criminal charges against Farrakhan?  How is it possible that such a man can call for 10,000 men to go out in to the streets of this Nation, and commit murder at his behest, remain free on the streets of the same Nation?  This is beyond the Theater of the Absurd, it is complete and total ridiculousness.

We are privileged, each and every one of us, to have our 1st amendment right to say anything we so choose.  Of course, there are consequences to certain words, in extreme cases.  The 1969 case, Brandenburg v. Ohio set the base line for what type of speech might not be used, and in so doing, it overturned the 1919 landmark case Schenck v. United States.  Brandenburg set the standard  "where speech is brigaded with action".  Ordering 10,000 persons to commit hate murders sure seems like 'speech...brigaded with action.'  I call on the Attorney Generals of the 50 states of the United States of America to bring charges against Farrakhan.  I ask that the Attorney General of the United States of America, Loretta E. Lynch to launch a federal investigation in to Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam for their attempts to bring down our Nation.

After all, it is only a small step from asking 10,000 persons to go in to the streets of the Nation to murder other citizens of the same Nation, and an outright Insurrection.

On a closing note:  to those who abuse positions of power, whether it is Farrakhan, or the incidents of police officers who are involved in criminal activity, or 'ordinary' citizens who commit crimes on the street and in the homes of other Americans:  there should be a price to be paid, and there is one, so long as there are men and women of strong moral fiber.

I'm not a huge fan of Glenn Beck (I should say, I don't read/listen to him at all, so I have no opinion of him whatsoever), but he led a, by the accounts available, peaceful march of 20,000+ people in Birmingham, AL last weekend that was resoundingly ignored by the national press.  Whether or not we agree with Beck, the fact that was pulled off without riots, without incident is something that should be looked to.  This is the type of positive behavior that leaders in name could be fomenting.

Instead, Farrakhan continues to spew his message of hatred and division.  America:  wake up, before it's too late.  The time for coming together is right now.

Rand Paul Takes a Big Step Forward

Rand Paul originally caught the eye of most of the general public because of his last name.  Having a father who is Dr. Ron Paul, the godfather of the modern American Libertarian movement has its perks.  Of course, being so closely connected with such a man has its drawbacks, too, namely that such a close association leads many to believe that all of latter's opinions have been handed down.

In the area that is most important - the Constitution as the leading document that should be followed with the original intent of its authors and signatories, is a huge deal.  Limiting the scope of government is another.  On these issues, both Ron and Rand Paul are without peer, which has been a huge part of why they have been able to gain such a strong following amongst the Gen Xers and Millennials.  These are the voters that Paul absolutely needs if he is going to remain in the race for the Republican Presidential race.


Most times, it is a candidate that is on the outside, and not in the upper tier of candidates that comes up with a catchy, witty slogan, or admission to help push their campaign forward.  Think back to Clinton in '92 with 'I smoked (marijuana) but didn't inhale'.  Once he became a 'serious' candidate, the campaign phrase was "It's the economy stupid."  In '08, it was Obama's 'Hope and Change' that propelled him (Also, the Republicans nominating John McCain played a big part in it) to the Oval Office.

Paul's official campaign slogan is "Defeat the Washington machine. Unleash the American dream."

This tapped in to the anti-establishment sect of voters, but in order to capture the White House, he would need to grab a larger swathe of potential voters.  For good or ill, his campaign took a giant step forward when it made this announcement via Twitter:

Dr. Rand Paul ‏@RandPaul 5h5 hours ago

Download our new app in the App Store and use the selfie feature! Then, send us in your photos and we'll retweet you. #selfieswithrand

While there are a certain amount of potential downsides to unveiling such an app, the upside is huge.  It will garner him large amounts of free press, and will lead to large gains with young voters, to boot.

Whether it's enough to get him all the way to the White House is unknown, but it's a bold step that certainly help him stay in the limelight.
 

"Immigration Without Assimilation is Invasion"

The impetus for this post is two-pronged:  firstly, the quote that acts as the title, courtesy of Governor Bobby Jindal (R-LA), and second, this article which states that the state of Illinois (home of our current *POTUS*) is allowing female persons of Islamic 'faith' to wear a burqa when they take their drivers' license photograph.

WTF?

For those that are unaware, a burqa completely conceals the face of the female, so that women are not leered at or do not have to be subject to unwanted male (or in this day and age, female) advances.  This article here lists many other reasons that women who are not forced to wear a burqa would continue to do so.

Honestly - I couldn't care less if women (or men) feel the need to wear a burqa to cover up their faces, for whatever reason they can come up with, in most situations.  However, getting a license/ID photo really isn't one of those situations.

The purpose of an identification is to be able to, you know, identify a person with ease.  It's one of those things that really should be non-negotiable.  In becoming part of a society, you must bend to their social norms, elsewise, you have not immigrated, you have invaded, and brought your cultural expectations along with you.

Immigration is at least a 3 pronged venture:

1. Learn your new country's language.
2. Take up the interests of your new nation.
3. Follow social norms and don't look for exceptions to laws just because the PC police are out there, pandering to future voters.

This is not to say that cultural identity has to be completely tossed away, there is room for celebration of holidays and High Holy days as they might be, so long as they are not an imposition on your new home.  Because if you're not in the mood to assimilate, then perhaps you shouldn't have made the move, or much worse, perhaps you are unknowingly a part of a future invasion.

Reticent

Reticent

To those whom my words have wounded
I offer a heart-felt apology
on occasion they miss their mark
or are misread, misinterpreted
or are otherwise mangled
sadly, the fault for that
can lie only with me,
your humble author
the words, which by
their definition attack
cannot be held responsible
they were merely following orders
taking their places as assigned
marching to the front lines
with nary a shred of cover
I have more than once
    left them naked
to play the part of scapegoat
this mea culpa goes out to them, too
I declare them innocent
and accept the punishment due them
this is the course of action prescribed
it must be followed
to the gallows I trudge
one last sweet breath before...