Representative Andre Carson, (D-IN, 7th District) is one of the congressional black caucus who has “distinguished” himself by continuing to claim overt racism on the part of Tea Party protestors. In a staged parade from the house office building to the capitol on March 20th, he and others in that caucus went in search of a racial component in the crowd surrounding the capitol. When the search proved fruitless, they did what Democrats do best—they made up a compelling story.
Rep. Carson claims a strong background in “intelligence” prior to taking his grandmother’s seat in Congress. He was with Homeland Security prior to seeking his present position. That would be the same Homeland Security which identifies military veterans, cookie packing grandmas, and just about anyone who disagrees with the current administration as a “terrorist.” His “intelligence” background allows him to ignore such gentle figures in our midst as Abdulhakim Mujhad Muhammad (Little Rock,) Nidal Malik Husan (Ft. Hood,) Umar Farouk Abdulmuttalab (Detroit,) and Faisal Shazad (New York City.) Each of the former participated in acts of terrorism which had the potential for or the actual taking of the lives of American citizens.
As one of only two Muslim members of this congress, is it possible that Rep. Carson could have some personal motive to avert his eyes when an Islamic terrorist is bent on the destruction of our county and its citizens? He chooses to ignore the fact that there is little hard evidence of any white supremacist group which is actually responsible for a terrorist act in our country. Avoiding the data, he claims that they are the “greatest threat.” This fits nicely with our current policy at the federal level of not identifying any Islamic effort to disrupt our national purpose and serenity by those with affiliation to that group.
Hear Rep. Carson in his own words outline his observations on the threats to the security of the nation on this You Tube piece. It’s well worth your time and it’s a short clip. Take a look and see just what Rep. Carson thinks about you, the people
It is imperative that we recognize those who would destroy America and not continue to allow them to infest our higher legislative bodies and positions of power. It is our personal responsibility to understand who is representing us and make whatever changes are necessary to alter the make-up of those bodies. Barring that, it is obvious that none of us will recognize the government which made this country the most exceptional in the world.
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
Friday, May 7, 2010
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Navy Seals – 3, Government Prosecutors – 0
In a welcome verdict, the last of the three accused Navy Seals was released and found “not guilty” and cleared of all charges. The faulty witness against him was found unreliable upon other testimony and that was all that was needed to secure the final verdict.
They had been collectively accused of mis-treating a captured prisoner who was part of the torture and hanging of security personal from a bridge in Iraq. This will not come as good news for the administration who was hoping for a conviction to justify their hopes of a demonstration of our “fair” system of military justice. As it turned out; it was fair.
Now McCabe can get out of the Navy and pursue his dream of becoming a California Highway Patrolman. Our congratulations go to the three of them and special thanks for their service to our country.
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
They had been collectively accused of mis-treating a captured prisoner who was part of the torture and hanging of security personal from a bridge in Iraq. This will not come as good news for the administration who was hoping for a conviction to justify their hopes of a demonstration of our “fair” system of military justice. As it turned out; it was fair.
Now McCabe can get out of the Navy and pursue his dream of becoming a California Highway Patrolman. Our congratulations go to the three of them and special thanks for their service to our country.
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Political Correctness Run Amok
Nowhere has there been a better demonstration of these phenomena than the reaction of public figures regarding attacks on the nation by Islamic extremists. As each of the continuing parade of incompetent attackers of the nation unfolds their bizarre plans (exploding underwear, firecracker ignition systems, etc.,) we hear high public officials shifting assertions of blame to far less dangerous suspects. Most recent is Mayor Bloomberg’s remark about displeasure with Obama’s health care pogrom triggering outrage sufficient to threaten the people in Times Square with wholesale death and destruction.
I truly believe that it all starts in early childhood development when, as parents, we use a laundry list of euphemisms for unpleasant aspects of human existence. Who has not used the traditional #1 and #2 rather than accurately describe common bodily functions? Have we referred to a grandparent or friend as “taking a long trip” or “going to live with Jesus” (which may well be a reality) thus avoiding articulating life’s most significant outcome—death? It is little wonder that raised in such an unrealistic environment, our children never become adults prepared to confront life head on and face up to actual problems and realities.
As usual, a commenter, on Roger Simon's blog (#20 Banjo,) came up with the perfect evaluation of our current condition and its source:
“Political correctness, a virus first identified during Stalin’s murderous tyranny, infected the academy in this country twenty years later. The professorate passed it on to a generation of students who then carried it to the highest levels of government and Corporate America. It blinds the eye and silences the tongue. It robs the will and steals a nation’s courage. It leads to civilizational surrender and then death. We’ve entered the end stage with paralysis beginning to spread.”
Re-read that brilliant observation and savor it for the sure identification of the problem and the prediction of the outcome. His (her?) use of the word “paralysis” in the last line accurately describes what we may expect from a collective use of political correctness as our guide.
Perhaps the most disappointing response to the Times Square incident is that of Fox News. Their use of their most hysterical commentator, Geraldo Rivera, and constant program interruption for “no news” could best be described as a fool’s errand. His jubilant observation of “white”, constantly repeated, took on racial overtones and lessened the value of his report. Had the plot succeeded, the blood spilled would have been the same color from every victim. You don’t need a news anchor to imagine or remember the size of the crowd in that particular location.
NYPD did a praiseworthy job in basic police work to locate the principal suspect in the case in a timely manner. Unlike a night-time cat burglar, he was operating with little expectation of privacy and left substantial clues behind to track his activity. The professionals at NYPD simply did the job they are trained to do, without fanfare, and were apparently successful. The apprehension at the airport with the destination of Dubai was simply icing on the cake. The war on terror has produced few heroes but these folks rank very high.
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
I truly believe that it all starts in early childhood development when, as parents, we use a laundry list of euphemisms for unpleasant aspects of human existence. Who has not used the traditional #1 and #2 rather than accurately describe common bodily functions? Have we referred to a grandparent or friend as “taking a long trip” or “going to live with Jesus” (which may well be a reality) thus avoiding articulating life’s most significant outcome—death? It is little wonder that raised in such an unrealistic environment, our children never become adults prepared to confront life head on and face up to actual problems and realities.
As usual, a commenter, on Roger Simon's blog (#20 Banjo,) came up with the perfect evaluation of our current condition and its source:
“Political correctness, a virus first identified during Stalin’s murderous tyranny, infected the academy in this country twenty years later. The professorate passed it on to a generation of students who then carried it to the highest levels of government and Corporate America. It blinds the eye and silences the tongue. It robs the will and steals a nation’s courage. It leads to civilizational surrender and then death. We’ve entered the end stage with paralysis beginning to spread.”
Re-read that brilliant observation and savor it for the sure identification of the problem and the prediction of the outcome. His (her?) use of the word “paralysis” in the last line accurately describes what we may expect from a collective use of political correctness as our guide.
Perhaps the most disappointing response to the Times Square incident is that of Fox News. Their use of their most hysterical commentator, Geraldo Rivera, and constant program interruption for “no news” could best be described as a fool’s errand. His jubilant observation of “white”, constantly repeated, took on racial overtones and lessened the value of his report. Had the plot succeeded, the blood spilled would have been the same color from every victim. You don’t need a news anchor to imagine or remember the size of the crowd in that particular location.
NYPD did a praiseworthy job in basic police work to locate the principal suspect in the case in a timely manner. Unlike a night-time cat burglar, he was operating with little expectation of privacy and left substantial clues behind to track his activity. The professionals at NYPD simply did the job they are trained to do, without fanfare, and were apparently successful. The apprehension at the airport with the destination of Dubai was simply icing on the cake. The war on terror has produced few heroes but these folks rank very high.
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
Monday, May 3, 2010
Monday Morning Rant 144
As I typed the header for this post, there came a flash-back to those heady days of my post war youth—the late forties. Typical of kids in most any time period, we had an overworked expression which we thought clever. “That’s gross!” had a constant presence in our speech and was applied to almost anything which was even slightly out of line or disgusting. That word—gross—always comes to mind when the number “144” surfaces for whatever reason.
This is a perfect number for a conservative mind if you think about it. In the universe of numbers it is neat and tidy and functions well and evenly with numerous divisors (2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 12, 16, 18, etc.) Even 48, the number of states in the union at that time was an exact division (3) and perfect for a display of stars on a field of rich blue.
It has long been a popular measure of commerce because of its convenient divisions. It stacks, shelves, and orders well and often offers substantial discounts when the quantity is offered. An early success in business is often achieved when one first orders any item in that exceptional quantity for resale or manufacture.
Even as a clueless teen I often wondered why a number of such perfection was assigned as a descriptor of disdain. Looking back, I have nearly abandoned the search for explanations of what triggers such a substitution. One can only pray that the reader does not assign that decades old expression to the posting which carries its venerable identity.
Propaganda in Texas Schools
Many thanks to Elissa Stautner at Pajama's Media for an article on a clear cut case of dispensing the party line in a Texas High School.
In a class hand-out, accompanying illustrations were used to identify our two great divisions in thoughts on government by using both angelic and demonic cartoons. In the instructors mind, the liberal case was presented using the angel and the conservative was assigned the devil. The hand out then proceeded to distort the truth of the difference in egregious detail to perpetuate the typical liberal bias. Don’t take my word for it; check it out and see the hand out for yourself.
The example presented in the article is overt, clumsy, and suggests foregone conclusions for the students. Fortunately, the piece came to the attention of one of the parents and he was not amused. Imagine, if you will, your personal reaction to a child bringing this piece of outright propaganda home from school. Would you be willing to “take up the cudgel” and insist on fairness in the classroom? Since I know many of our readers personally, I can assure you their outrage would match the alert father’s.
The Harvard “Brand”
As newlyweds, we took upstairs rooms in a home just off Mass’ Ave in Cambridge within walking distance of Harvard Square. She worked for the FBI and I went to school. No, it was not Harvard but the Army Security Agency school at Ft. Devens, near Ayer, Mass. It was a huge change from our previous experiences in Washington, DC.. The proximity of that Ivy League powerhouse had a negligible affect on our lives there—as I said, we were newlyweds.
We saw little of that institution other than the ivy-covered brick walls at the entrance gates. An excellent view of the school was pervasive in the community and they enjoyed a superior reputation academically with little of the usual “town and gown” problems which some universities suffer today. In the long interval between then and now, my opinion of the institution has changed, as has Harvard.
Modern progressive attitudes appear to be taking over with the additional result of diminished loyalties to the founding principals of both the school and the nation. It is rapidly becoming little more than a training academy for leftists to further the destruction of the nation. Currently, we find the dean of Harvard Law purposely at war with a student over the revelation of private emails with alleged racial overtones. The privileged correspondence was furnished by the recipient months after their sending and probably in spiteful response for some imagined grievance. As is often the case, no party in the matter has clean skirts in the affair and none does any credit to the university.
It has provoked much conversation and exchange in the blogosphere and particularly on blogs sponsored by those in the legal (Volokh, Althouse, Reynolds, etc.) community since it involved advanced law students and Dean Minow of Harvard Law. For those who follow these blogs you already know the details. A quick Google will easily bring you to the others and you won’t have to search much to find the stories.
As usual, the wisdom is exposed mainly in the comments on the various sites. This one, in particular caught my eye:
"Harvard is a broken brand. Most of the people responsible for the housing mess, the Iraq war, Enron, the S&L crisis and all sorts of other poor policy have been created by the highly "regarded" Harvard Education."
It is a timely observation and one which should evoke shame on the part of the administration of this once fine university. A ‘sheepskin” describes a hide lacking its wool. Obviously the missing wool has been pulled over our collective eyes.
And finally
Despite a couple of gloomy days, we did have a little rain here on the ridge and the leafy cover has fully returned. The four acres of grass is now trimmed with a new (?) Troy built mower which mercifully is self-propelled. It is much more comfortable to use now that the legs have become accustomed to chasing it. I’ll admit that training to use it was a trial but the results are dramatic. Riding the previous mower was fun but this new exercise opportunity is both more healthful and less wear and tear on the lawn.
With a dozen and a half species identified at the feeder, it suddenly dawned that we don’t have any sparrows. Are they allergic to store bought feed; embarrassed by their more colorful cousins or just not all that common to this neck of the woods? We have acquired a new visitor—a hummingbird—and as soon as he slows down enough to not just appear as a blur, we shall attempt a further more detailed identity.
In closing, we ask a few more penetrating question. Am I underestimating the severity of the New York City firecracker attack as reported (constantly) by Fox News? Have we heard anything else about the attack on Allee Bautsch or the suspects in New Orleans? Will Barack Obama now “own” the oil spill in the Gulf because he acted too slowly? Is there a crisis which we have overlooked? Answers: could be, no, probably, never.
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
This is a perfect number for a conservative mind if you think about it. In the universe of numbers it is neat and tidy and functions well and evenly with numerous divisors (2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 12, 16, 18, etc.) Even 48, the number of states in the union at that time was an exact division (3) and perfect for a display of stars on a field of rich blue.
It has long been a popular measure of commerce because of its convenient divisions. It stacks, shelves, and orders well and often offers substantial discounts when the quantity is offered. An early success in business is often achieved when one first orders any item in that exceptional quantity for resale or manufacture.
Even as a clueless teen I often wondered why a number of such perfection was assigned as a descriptor of disdain. Looking back, I have nearly abandoned the search for explanations of what triggers such a substitution. One can only pray that the reader does not assign that decades old expression to the posting which carries its venerable identity.
Propaganda in Texas Schools
Many thanks to Elissa Stautner at Pajama's Media for an article on a clear cut case of dispensing the party line in a Texas High School.
In a class hand-out, accompanying illustrations were used to identify our two great divisions in thoughts on government by using both angelic and demonic cartoons. In the instructors mind, the liberal case was presented using the angel and the conservative was assigned the devil. The hand out then proceeded to distort the truth of the difference in egregious detail to perpetuate the typical liberal bias. Don’t take my word for it; check it out and see the hand out for yourself.
The example presented in the article is overt, clumsy, and suggests foregone conclusions for the students. Fortunately, the piece came to the attention of one of the parents and he was not amused. Imagine, if you will, your personal reaction to a child bringing this piece of outright propaganda home from school. Would you be willing to “take up the cudgel” and insist on fairness in the classroom? Since I know many of our readers personally, I can assure you their outrage would match the alert father’s.
The Harvard “Brand”
As newlyweds, we took upstairs rooms in a home just off Mass’ Ave in Cambridge within walking distance of Harvard Square. She worked for the FBI and I went to school. No, it was not Harvard but the Army Security Agency school at Ft. Devens, near Ayer, Mass. It was a huge change from our previous experiences in Washington, DC.. The proximity of that Ivy League powerhouse had a negligible affect on our lives there—as I said, we were newlyweds.
We saw little of that institution other than the ivy-covered brick walls at the entrance gates. An excellent view of the school was pervasive in the community and they enjoyed a superior reputation academically with little of the usual “town and gown” problems which some universities suffer today. In the long interval between then and now, my opinion of the institution has changed, as has Harvard.
Modern progressive attitudes appear to be taking over with the additional result of diminished loyalties to the founding principals of both the school and the nation. It is rapidly becoming little more than a training academy for leftists to further the destruction of the nation. Currently, we find the dean of Harvard Law purposely at war with a student over the revelation of private emails with alleged racial overtones. The privileged correspondence was furnished by the recipient months after their sending and probably in spiteful response for some imagined grievance. As is often the case, no party in the matter has clean skirts in the affair and none does any credit to the university.
It has provoked much conversation and exchange in the blogosphere and particularly on blogs sponsored by those in the legal (Volokh, Althouse, Reynolds, etc.) community since it involved advanced law students and Dean Minow of Harvard Law. For those who follow these blogs you already know the details. A quick Google will easily bring you to the others and you won’t have to search much to find the stories.
As usual, the wisdom is exposed mainly in the comments on the various sites. This one, in particular caught my eye:
"Harvard is a broken brand. Most of the people responsible for the housing mess, the Iraq war, Enron, the S&L crisis and all sorts of other poor policy have been created by the highly "regarded" Harvard Education."
It is a timely observation and one which should evoke shame on the part of the administration of this once fine university. A ‘sheepskin” describes a hide lacking its wool. Obviously the missing wool has been pulled over our collective eyes.
And finally
Despite a couple of gloomy days, we did have a little rain here on the ridge and the leafy cover has fully returned. The four acres of grass is now trimmed with a new (?) Troy built mower which mercifully is self-propelled. It is much more comfortable to use now that the legs have become accustomed to chasing it. I’ll admit that training to use it was a trial but the results are dramatic. Riding the previous mower was fun but this new exercise opportunity is both more healthful and less wear and tear on the lawn.
With a dozen and a half species identified at the feeder, it suddenly dawned that we don’t have any sparrows. Are they allergic to store bought feed; embarrassed by their more colorful cousins or just not all that common to this neck of the woods? We have acquired a new visitor—a hummingbird—and as soon as he slows down enough to not just appear as a blur, we shall attempt a further more detailed identity.
In closing, we ask a few more penetrating question. Am I underestimating the severity of the New York City firecracker attack as reported (constantly) by Fox News? Have we heard anything else about the attack on Allee Bautsch or the suspects in New Orleans? Will Barack Obama now “own” the oil spill in the Gulf because he acted too slowly? Is there a crisis which we have overlooked? Answers: could be, no, probably, never.
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Impending Disaster
We suffer a level of justifiable paranoia at our house over what we see as the immediate dire future for our nation. We have tried dismissal, avoidance, willful ignorance and pie in the sky dreaming but none seem to work. The warning signs keep piling up and we have become increasingly worried. Currently, our fears are centered on the apparent lack of concern the Democrat Party demonstrates over the possibilities of a party reversal as a result of the upcoming November elections. This prompts the question of why they show little hesitation in continuing their downward spiral to socialism when they must realize that it is a recipe for disaster. They appear oblivious to the impact their activities will have on their established influence in holding both house of congress and the presidency.
Historically, we are unaccustomed, as a people, to extracting nefarious purpose from every political move. While we typically have much to criticize about the party, or president, in power, we seldom assume that down deep they hold animosity for or actively seek to blatantly alter our form of government. We have joined millions of others, who have giggled, chuckled, guffawed, and generally been otherwise unimpressed by the promises of “hope and change.” We figured it was campaign sloganeering and dismissed the seriousness of the thought. Now, we must grudgingly admit that we were wrong.
Over the last fifteen months we have seen dramatic changes in the functions of our government. Bank bailouts, industrial federalization, record breaking spending, national debt without any ceilings, enactment of socialized medicine, alienation of our former allies, Marxists filling major posts in government and worst; continued emphasis on separations of our peoples by ethnic and racial identity. These are the results of the “hope and change” which was promised to the people. Any one of the preceding would represent an absolute alteration in the way the United States does business. If this process is not identified and acted upon; in a scant few months our former country will become unrecognizable.
This brings us to what the current occupants of the seats of power can possibly do that will render the threat of the upcoming elections moot. In plain language, they can call them off. You may plead that it cannot be done and underestimate the ultimate goals which are at stake for these people. It would necessitate the manufacturing of a sufficiently important national crisis to negate the constitutional mandates currently in place. It would require a crisis of sufficient magnitude to require the institution of martial law and dispensing with habeas corpus.
So far, the efforts to paint the Tea Party as violent, racist, and disruptive have been largely unsuccessful. In the blatant attempt by the congressional black caucus members to manufacture a race based incident, we found no substantive evidence to back their ridiculous claims. Most recently, they called for a SWAT team in Quincy, Ill to face down a collection of grandmas bearing cookies. These would be laughable if it were not for the seriousness of the effort to discredit the patriots involved. Given the deportment of the Tea Party participants, it will be difficult to find a way to incite them to the violence of which they are routinely and falsely accused.
This prompts observers of the news to question each and every cataclysmic event which occupies the headlines. One is ongoing at the present which has the earmarks of a potential manufactured crisis. At the expense of eleven killed, a mysterious explosion occurred on a BP oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico just off the Louisiana coast. The result was a spill of mammoth proportions which has resulted in an uncontrollable spill to rival the Exxon Valdez in Alaska several years ago. This crisis has the potential to bring grief at many levels. In terms of actual damage, it will affect the fishing, ecology, tourist, boating and oil extraction businesses now and for years to come.
More important, it has an affect on the public perception of drilling which the administration will no doubt use to abate the recent clamor for more drilling to free us from dependency on foreign oil. Further it represents an opportunity, with established causation, real or imagined, to place further federal controls on oil rigs, and service companies in the oil patch. One can easily imagine the placement of “security” personnel on the offshore rigs as well.
For several years in the early eighties we ran an arms business in Houma, LA with a three part customer base; hard working blacks, hard working Cajuns (old time) and hard working oil well “monkeys.” We valued every category and learned from each of them. All, and especially the oil people, were fun loving, loyal and were more friends than customers. The oil guys had a special seriousness which was born of working in a constant dangerous environment. There is no contention that accidents cannot happen but knowing the types of people who man the rigs, it is difficult to imagine that this occurrence was a result of carelessness or happenstance. It is even harder to imagine when one projects the benefits available to enemies of the United States both foreign and domestic. As a caveat, let me assure you we have no solid evidence of sabotage on the rig. Would we be surprised to learn of it at some later date? Absolutely not!
As each new crisis arrives—and they will—carefully examine the details and question the circumstances. Could this have been manufactured from “whole cloth?” Does it serve to further divide an already fractured society? Does it call for more governmental control, personnel and expenditure of already short funds? Does it present an opportunity to shift blame to something already under attack from the administration? A measure of cynicism is required of our people to be certain that civic breakdown has an explainable source and that the government is reacting with logic and skill and no over-reaching. Enough tragedy occurs in a nation of 310 million people without supplying more to satisfy any political agendas. Our constitution guarantees this government to be directed by “We the people…”; we must never stand still and be deprived of the ability to exercise that intention.
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
Historically, we are unaccustomed, as a people, to extracting nefarious purpose from every political move. While we typically have much to criticize about the party, or president, in power, we seldom assume that down deep they hold animosity for or actively seek to blatantly alter our form of government. We have joined millions of others, who have giggled, chuckled, guffawed, and generally been otherwise unimpressed by the promises of “hope and change.” We figured it was campaign sloganeering and dismissed the seriousness of the thought. Now, we must grudgingly admit that we were wrong.
Over the last fifteen months we have seen dramatic changes in the functions of our government. Bank bailouts, industrial federalization, record breaking spending, national debt without any ceilings, enactment of socialized medicine, alienation of our former allies, Marxists filling major posts in government and worst; continued emphasis on separations of our peoples by ethnic and racial identity. These are the results of the “hope and change” which was promised to the people. Any one of the preceding would represent an absolute alteration in the way the United States does business. If this process is not identified and acted upon; in a scant few months our former country will become unrecognizable.
This brings us to what the current occupants of the seats of power can possibly do that will render the threat of the upcoming elections moot. In plain language, they can call them off. You may plead that it cannot be done and underestimate the ultimate goals which are at stake for these people. It would necessitate the manufacturing of a sufficiently important national crisis to negate the constitutional mandates currently in place. It would require a crisis of sufficient magnitude to require the institution of martial law and dispensing with habeas corpus.
So far, the efforts to paint the Tea Party as violent, racist, and disruptive have been largely unsuccessful. In the blatant attempt by the congressional black caucus members to manufacture a race based incident, we found no substantive evidence to back their ridiculous claims. Most recently, they called for a SWAT team in Quincy, Ill to face down a collection of grandmas bearing cookies. These would be laughable if it were not for the seriousness of the effort to discredit the patriots involved. Given the deportment of the Tea Party participants, it will be difficult to find a way to incite them to the violence of which they are routinely and falsely accused.
This prompts observers of the news to question each and every cataclysmic event which occupies the headlines. One is ongoing at the present which has the earmarks of a potential manufactured crisis. At the expense of eleven killed, a mysterious explosion occurred on a BP oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico just off the Louisiana coast. The result was a spill of mammoth proportions which has resulted in an uncontrollable spill to rival the Exxon Valdez in Alaska several years ago. This crisis has the potential to bring grief at many levels. In terms of actual damage, it will affect the fishing, ecology, tourist, boating and oil extraction businesses now and for years to come.
More important, it has an affect on the public perception of drilling which the administration will no doubt use to abate the recent clamor for more drilling to free us from dependency on foreign oil. Further it represents an opportunity, with established causation, real or imagined, to place further federal controls on oil rigs, and service companies in the oil patch. One can easily imagine the placement of “security” personnel on the offshore rigs as well.
For several years in the early eighties we ran an arms business in Houma, LA with a three part customer base; hard working blacks, hard working Cajuns (old time) and hard working oil well “monkeys.” We valued every category and learned from each of them. All, and especially the oil people, were fun loving, loyal and were more friends than customers. The oil guys had a special seriousness which was born of working in a constant dangerous environment. There is no contention that accidents cannot happen but knowing the types of people who man the rigs, it is difficult to imagine that this occurrence was a result of carelessness or happenstance. It is even harder to imagine when one projects the benefits available to enemies of the United States both foreign and domestic. As a caveat, let me assure you we have no solid evidence of sabotage on the rig. Would we be surprised to learn of it at some later date? Absolutely not!
As each new crisis arrives—and they will—carefully examine the details and question the circumstances. Could this have been manufactured from “whole cloth?” Does it serve to further divide an already fractured society? Does it call for more governmental control, personnel and expenditure of already short funds? Does it present an opportunity to shift blame to something already under attack from the administration? A measure of cynicism is required of our people to be certain that civic breakdown has an explainable source and that the government is reacting with logic and skill and no over-reaching. Enough tragedy occurs in a nation of 310 million people without supplying more to satisfy any political agendas. Our constitution guarantees this government to be directed by “We the people…”; we must never stand still and be deprived of the ability to exercise that intention.
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
Thursday, April 29, 2010
A Time Out --- for humor
I found these quotes on Knowledge is Power and shall re-post them here for the grins with a caveat. I question the attribution. I fully realize that comics will shed any vestige of principal for a laugh. Most, however, have an agenda and hold Obama as a god and are sympathetic to his ideas. That having been said: read them, join me in laughter and take the attribution with a grain of salt.
“The liberals are asking us to give Obama time. We agree - and think 25 to life would be appropriate.” Jay Leno
“America needs Obama-care like Nancy Pelosi needs a Halloween mask. “ Jay Leno
“Q: Have you heard about McDonald’s’ new Obama Value Meal?
A: Order anything you like and the guy behind you has to pay for it.”
Conan O’Brien
‘Q: What does Barack Obama call lunch with a convicted felon?
A: A fund raiser.’ Jay Leno
“Q: What’s the difference between Obama’s cabinet and a penitentiary?
A: One is filled with tax evaders, blackmailers and threats to society. The other is for housing prisoners.” Letterman
“Q: If Nancy Pelosi and Obama were on a boat in the middle of the ocean and it started to sink, who would be saved?
A. America.” Fallon
“Q: What’s the difference between Obama and his dog, Bo?
A: Bo has papers.” Kimmel
“Q: What was the most positive result of the “Cash for clunkers” program?
A: It took 95% of the Obama bumper stickers off the road.” Letterman
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
“The liberals are asking us to give Obama time. We agree - and think 25 to life would be appropriate.” Jay Leno
“America needs Obama-care like Nancy Pelosi needs a Halloween mask. “ Jay Leno
“Q: Have you heard about McDonald’s’ new Obama Value Meal?
A: Order anything you like and the guy behind you has to pay for it.”
Conan O’Brien
‘Q: What does Barack Obama call lunch with a convicted felon?
A: A fund raiser.’ Jay Leno
“Q: What’s the difference between Obama’s cabinet and a penitentiary?
A: One is filled with tax evaders, blackmailers and threats to society. The other is for housing prisoners.” Letterman
“Q: If Nancy Pelosi and Obama were on a boat in the middle of the ocean and it started to sink, who would be saved?
A. America.” Fallon
“Q: What’s the difference between Obama and his dog, Bo?
A: Bo has papers.” Kimmel
“Q: What was the most positive result of the “Cash for clunkers” program?
A: It took 95% of the Obama bumper stickers off the road.” Letterman
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Amnesty Games
Arizona governor Jan Brewer has signed the legislation which puts teeth into the effort of restricting the flow of illegal immigrants into that state. In response to ever increasing crime and lack of responsible enforcement from the federal government, the legislature took on the job as a sovereign state. With the backing of 70% of the people they had little difficulty passing it.
The US Constitution is very clear on the issue:
Article IV, Section. 6 states:
"The United States shall guarantee to every State in the Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on the Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence." (Color highlighting for emphasis.)
The “invasion” and “domestic violence” which has occurred in Arizona and the other Border States adjacent to Mexico has resulted from an influx of illegal aliens numbering from 10 to 20 million. Like it or not, each and every one of those persons who have crossed the border illegally can only be defined as having committed a criminal act. Our federal law is clear on the matter and appropriate penalties are available for those who chose to violate our statutes. There are no exceptions for gender, age, or any other criteria. In response to the demands of the citizens, the state of Arizona has elected to enforce the laws which the federal government has chosen to ignore.
The history of the issue takes us back to 1875 and the prohibition of convicts and prostitutes entering the US. Under Chester A. Arthur, in 1882, nearly all Chinese, paupers, criminals, and mentally ill were also banned thus establishing a criteria of legal and illegal immigrants.
During the 39 years between 1881 and 1920, 23,500,000 from the rest of the world, came to America legally. Thereafter, Congress continued to pass reduced quotas, based on the ethnic mix of the country, and the flow diminished. Even then, the traffic in immigration from Mexico—largely illegal—was swept under the rug. Since that time, the problem has only accelerated along with the need for lower paid workers.
Over history, the only times which have seen a drop in illegal immigration are those of economic distress in our country. This of course, puts the lie to the observation; “they are doing the jobs which Americans won’t do.” For all the criticisms of Americans, we will work when the cupboard is bare. Once Hoover left office, Roosevelt also limited immigration but omitted Mexicans and Canadians and the pattern continued culminating in the “bracero” program in WWII to supply workers in food production. These “undocumented” led the way to tidal wave of illegals which the new Arizona law addresses.
During the administration of Eisenhower, the problem was recognized and the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS, now ICE) launched the politically incorrectly named “Operation Wetback” and violators by the tens of thousands were deported. In 1965, the Immigration and Nationality Act was passed and led the way to a series of amnesties. Here are seven:
1. Immigration and Reform Control Act (IRCA), 1986: A blanket amnesty for over 2.7 million illegal aliens
2. Section 245(i) Amnesty, 1994: A temporary rolling amnesty for 578,000 illegal aliens
3. Section 245(i) Extension Amnesty, 1997: An extension of the rolling amnesty created in 1994
4. Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA) Amnesty, 1997: An amnesty for close to one million illegal aliens from Central America
5. Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act Amnesty (HRIFA), 1998: An amnesty for 125,000 illegal aliens from Haiti
6. Late Amnesty, 2000: An amnesty for some illegal aliens who claim they should have been amnestied under the 1986 IRCA amnesty, an estimated 400,000 illegal aliens
7. LIFE Act Amnesty, 2000: A reinstatement of the rolling Section 245(i) amnesty, an estimated 900,000 illegal aliens
In short, the federal answer to the flood of illigal immigrants has been to offer amnesty. They have abused the word by using more acceptable euphamisms such as: comprehensive immigration reform, earned legalization, temporary workers, undocumented immigrants, and pathway to citizenship. All of this while refusing to enforce existing law. The “virtual fence” to turn away the univited along our southern border has turned into little more than a farce.
Years ago, when I lived in Cochise County, AZ, there was already a problem and a drive from Sierra Vista on the backroads to Nogales was instructive. There are several spots on that sixty mile drive which have intersections which present unmarked alternatives which take you directly into Mexico and vice versa for opposing traffic. I am informed by old friends that little has changed since. That high plateau has long been a gateway for illicit traffic.
The current weeping and wailing about the recent Arizona actions have brought out the usual arguments about the fairness of enforcement and possible civil rights violations. Few citizens in that area are inconvenienced by showing proper ID to law enforcement to verify their citizenship. That is a minor inconvenience compared to being a victim of theft, vandalism, kidnapping and murder. Please note that the complaints from locals who have been interviewed are rarely mentioned. Beside which, they pale to insignificance when compared to the methods currently employed by TSA and other government agencies.
It is a rarity in the country these days but the legislators and the governor working in concert actually listened to their constituents and took the action which the people were demanding. This is how a republic of the people is supposed to work. To subject them to criticism is to include the founders of the nation as subjects of disdain as well.
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
Some of the material in this piece may be found here in longer form.
The US Constitution is very clear on the issue:
Article IV, Section. 6 states:
"The United States shall guarantee to every State in the Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on the Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence." (Color highlighting for emphasis.)
The “invasion” and “domestic violence” which has occurred in Arizona and the other Border States adjacent to Mexico has resulted from an influx of illegal aliens numbering from 10 to 20 million. Like it or not, each and every one of those persons who have crossed the border illegally can only be defined as having committed a criminal act. Our federal law is clear on the matter and appropriate penalties are available for those who chose to violate our statutes. There are no exceptions for gender, age, or any other criteria. In response to the demands of the citizens, the state of Arizona has elected to enforce the laws which the federal government has chosen to ignore.
The history of the issue takes us back to 1875 and the prohibition of convicts and prostitutes entering the US. Under Chester A. Arthur, in 1882, nearly all Chinese, paupers, criminals, and mentally ill were also banned thus establishing a criteria of legal and illegal immigrants.
During the 39 years between 1881 and 1920, 23,500,000 from the rest of the world, came to America legally. Thereafter, Congress continued to pass reduced quotas, based on the ethnic mix of the country, and the flow diminished. Even then, the traffic in immigration from Mexico—largely illegal—was swept under the rug. Since that time, the problem has only accelerated along with the need for lower paid workers.
Over history, the only times which have seen a drop in illegal immigration are those of economic distress in our country. This of course, puts the lie to the observation; “they are doing the jobs which Americans won’t do.” For all the criticisms of Americans, we will work when the cupboard is bare. Once Hoover left office, Roosevelt also limited immigration but omitted Mexicans and Canadians and the pattern continued culminating in the “bracero” program in WWII to supply workers in food production. These “undocumented” led the way to tidal wave of illegals which the new Arizona law addresses.
During the administration of Eisenhower, the problem was recognized and the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS, now ICE) launched the politically incorrectly named “Operation Wetback” and violators by the tens of thousands were deported. In 1965, the Immigration and Nationality Act was passed and led the way to a series of amnesties. Here are seven:
1. Immigration and Reform Control Act (IRCA), 1986: A blanket amnesty for over 2.7 million illegal aliens
2. Section 245(i) Amnesty, 1994: A temporary rolling amnesty for 578,000 illegal aliens
3. Section 245(i) Extension Amnesty, 1997: An extension of the rolling amnesty created in 1994
4. Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA) Amnesty, 1997: An amnesty for close to one million illegal aliens from Central America
5. Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act Amnesty (HRIFA), 1998: An amnesty for 125,000 illegal aliens from Haiti
6. Late Amnesty, 2000: An amnesty for some illegal aliens who claim they should have been amnestied under the 1986 IRCA amnesty, an estimated 400,000 illegal aliens
7. LIFE Act Amnesty, 2000: A reinstatement of the rolling Section 245(i) amnesty, an estimated 900,000 illegal aliens
In short, the federal answer to the flood of illigal immigrants has been to offer amnesty. They have abused the word by using more acceptable euphamisms such as: comprehensive immigration reform, earned legalization, temporary workers, undocumented immigrants, and pathway to citizenship. All of this while refusing to enforce existing law. The “virtual fence” to turn away the univited along our southern border has turned into little more than a farce.
Years ago, when I lived in Cochise County, AZ, there was already a problem and a drive from Sierra Vista on the backroads to Nogales was instructive. There are several spots on that sixty mile drive which have intersections which present unmarked alternatives which take you directly into Mexico and vice versa for opposing traffic. I am informed by old friends that little has changed since. That high plateau has long been a gateway for illicit traffic.
The current weeping and wailing about the recent Arizona actions have brought out the usual arguments about the fairness of enforcement and possible civil rights violations. Few citizens in that area are inconvenienced by showing proper ID to law enforcement to verify their citizenship. That is a minor inconvenience compared to being a victim of theft, vandalism, kidnapping and murder. Please note that the complaints from locals who have been interviewed are rarely mentioned. Beside which, they pale to insignificance when compared to the methods currently employed by TSA and other government agencies.
It is a rarity in the country these days but the legislators and the governor working in concert actually listened to their constituents and took the action which the people were demanding. This is how a republic of the people is supposed to work. To subject them to criticism is to include the founders of the nation as subjects of disdain as well.
In His abiding love,
Cecil Moon
Some of the material in this piece may be found here in longer form.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
