Shots Across the Bow

If you haven't noticed yet, I'm posting here now.

I'm not done writing; I'm just not going to be doing it here.

I had my fill of writing about politics about a year before the election, but just when I said I was through, Democrats launched one of the most offensive smear campaigns I have seen in my life, targeting the Palin family for destruction. Democrat campaigners showed no honor, no respect,and no restraint as they attacked each and every member of that family.

It was a disgusting display of partisanship made worse by the fact that so-called moderate liberals did nothing, giving their tacit approval to the process.

And so I go fired up again. I dug into Obama's past political campaigns, his history as an executive, short lived and unsuccessful as it was. I learned that nobody should have been surprised at the treatment the Palin family got because that was the standard M.O. of the Obama political machine. His ascension to power was waged as a scorched earth campaign, regardless of the cost to others. As he said when questioned about the ethics of one of his early campaigns, he simply said,"If you can win, win."

I put that information out, and was met with a collective yawn.

The far left thought Obama's tactics were wonderful, while the moderate left (all two of them) were upset that I and others who were presenting the facts were "muckraking."

But I kept on, thinking in the back of my head that there were liberals out there who were interested in the facts, who could handle a debate, and could put together a sound argument that would explain their position in a rational manner.

I was wrong.

My mistake has been thinking that liberalism,or more properly, progressivism, is an ideology, as is conservatism. That is, an idea, based on facts and reason, useful for describing te behavior of a society, and the best manner of organizing that society. It isn't. It has more in common with religion than anything else, complete with hierarchy, a rigid orthodoxy, excommunication for dissenters,and an intolerance for questioning.

And you can't talk a man out of his religion. All you will do is piss him off.

The Nobel Peace Prize was the final straw. There is no rational way to defend giving it to President Obama. Not without debasing everything the Prize used to stand for. The Committee has said that they wanted to help shape the direction of American policy by giving the award to Obama. Many progressives find nothing wrong with that. But let's think about it for just a minute. Here we have an external group attempting to shift the course of American policy by giving an award to the sitting President.

Is it just me, or did the Nobel committee just try to buy off the US President?

And the progressives are okay with it. Of course, we know buying and paying for politicians is the Chicago way,but even in Chicago they try to be a little bit more subtle about it.

Putting the whole bribery thing aside, the act that many progressives,including people I know and respect, are so caught up in the idea of an Obama Presidency that even this farce, that tops Pia Zadora's Golden Globe and Milli Vanilli's Grammy, must be defended.

It's ludicrous

And then I see CNN running a fact checking story on a Saturday Night Live skit about Obama. Yeah, a real news organization investigating a comedy sketch show for factual references because they dared to poke fun at Obama.

That's scary. It's not surprising; after all, we've seen other news organizations target critics of President Obama, both before and after the election. What makes it scary is how few people seem to mind.

If they don't care, then why should I? As the progressive agenda is crammed down our throats over the next few years, and as people trade away basic rights and liberties in exchange for government supplied security, they will quickly learn that when you put your faith in men, you will always be greatly disappointed. And government is nothing but a group of men.

I'm out of the fight. Not because I somehow think I'm too good to get my hands dirty, or that I'm above the fray, or that I'm debating the issue on a higher plane. All that crap is nothing more than the loathsome lies of a man too cowardly to stand on his principles. Rather than choose to stand, he chooses to abandon principle in favor of a deluded sense of self aggrandizement, based on his supposed ability to stand above it all. To those, I simply leave the words of Rev 3:16;

So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth.

I'm out not because I refuse to commit but because the fight is lost. I used to hope that what I wrote might make a difference,even in a small way. I'm not egotistical enough to believe that I could change the course we're on, but that maybe I could contribute to a flood of writers that could energize people, get them involved, and maybe get this thing called Americaturned aroundand back on the right track. I no longer believe that can happen. I think it's too late.

Over a million people marched on Washington to demonstrate their anger at the course our government is taking. Most of these people had never demonstrated before in their lives. The march was a culmination of months of demonstrations and town hall meetings. meetings where the people spoke to their representatives, and voiced their concerns. And after this unprecedented display of grass roots activism, nothing has changed. The President claimed to be unaware of the march. The media downplayed it. The progressives caricatured the people,using offensive epithets to mock and demean the participants.

It was a shining moment, but it came too late. Most people are too ignorant or too apathetic to realize exactly where we are being taken by our dully elected government. (No, that isn't a misspelling.)

So, I'm not going to fight the tide anymore. We're going to get government health care whether we want it or not. That's the message Washington has sent and I'm getting it loud and clear. Cap and trade will pass as well, and I suspect Obama will then move on to education reform, to make sure he indoctrinates kids as quickly as possible. The world is sensing weakness, not just on the part of our President, although that's bad enough, but on the part of the American people, because we elected him. And folks, there's nothing worse than showing weakness to a pack of wolves. We're about to see the dollar fall like nothing anybody has ever seen before. We're about to see America become a laughingstock as our powerlessness is demonstrated over and over again. We're about to see Israel face extinction as she is hemmed in by enemies on every side, without the strong support of the United States.

We're about to see hard times like we've never seen before, and my efforts are going to be aimed at getting ready for them.

And that is what Stability For Our Time is all about. Isaiah 33:6 says that:

Wisdom and knowledge will be the stability of your times, And the strength of salvation; The fear of the LORD is His treasure.

I don't know about wisdom, but I do have a lot of knowledge. More importantly, I know here to find out things that I don't know, and I have the ability to help people understand these things. While the site is barely built and as ugly as the north end of a south bound mule, it is functional, and it's time I started using it .I'm sure that when she gets time,my lovely wife will drop in and spruce the place up a bit.

I'll still cover a lot of the same topics, but you can expect a lot more posts about what I'm doing, and why, and how, along with posts on natural philosophy, and most importantly, my journey as an awakened Christian. I also hope that as I purge the poison of politics from my veins, my sense of humor will return as well. I've been missing it.

And so, after 7 years, Shots Across the Bow is out of ammunition. The guns are silenced, but the ship is still afloat. I hope you all make the switch over to Stability, but more importantly, I am honored that so many of you have found my ramblings a worthy way to spend a little bit of your time.

Thank you.

Three times this season, the Vols have both shown their potential and fulfilled it. In the first game of the season, the dominated Western Kentucky, a weaker team. In the second, they went toe to toe with the Florida Gators, but losing. But now, the Vols have thoroughly beaten a quality team in the Georgia Bulldogs.

The players have demonstrated they have the talent to play with and beat just about any team in the SEC. Now it's up to the coaches to demonstrate that they have the ability to consistently get this team to perform up to their potential.

They'll have the chance to do just that in 2 weeks.

So, let me get this straight. The Milli Vanilli President was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize after his two weeks in office for his efforts to reach out to America's enemies, who are now blasting the Nobel Prize committee (figuratively,not literally...yet) for giving him the award for reaching out to him. Meanwhile, the DNC is charging anyone who comments on the idiocy of giving him the prize a few months later with being in league with America's enemies.

While it's nice to see the DNC finally recognizing that America has enemies, they are sounding just like the Bush administration. "If you don't honor the President for this empty achievement, then you are aligned with terrorists."

What a bunch of hypocrites.

How is a Nobel Peace Prize like a Grammy?

Apparently you can win either one without actually doing anything as long as you look good while not doing it.

UPDATE: Thanks to the folks who let me know that writing a post at 1AM can lead to mistakes, like misidentifying the offensive coordinator. Obviously, Ed Orgeron is not the offensive coordinator. I've made the appropriate corrections.

No, that wasn't a typo.

After four games, I've seen enough to make this simple declaration. The Vols will never be a top tier team in the SEC with Lane Kiffin as head coach.

Here's why.

The Vols were out coached on both sides of the ball today, but in the end, they played well enough that they had a shot to win. Monte Kiffin's crew gave up big play after big play all night long, but they played well on the goal line, forcing the Tigers to settle for field goals instead of touchdowns. Ed OrgeronJim Chaney's offense, well, let's just say that the only thing Tennessee had fired up on the field was the batons at halftime. Jonathon Crompton was off target for most of the night, and when he chanced to hit a receiver in the hands, they dropped the ball.

Probably from shock.

But the Vols stayed in the game, mainly through the sheer physical talent of Montario Hardesty and Eric Berry.

Tennessee was trailing by 17 with just over 11:00 to go in the 4th quarter when Hardesty caught a Crompton pass and wiggled his way 31 yards into the end zone for a touchdown. The defense forces Auburn into a three and out, and the Vols had the ball and just over nine minutes left in the game. They needed two scores, so clock management was critical. The offense responded, driving the ball methodically up the field, until they had the ball first and goal. The drive had taken 4 minutes off the clock, and the Vols ran three plays but couldn't get the score.

It was 4th and goal from the 10, and there was about four and a half minutes to go in the game. The drive had eaten up over five minutes, meaning that there wasn't enough time left for them to get back into this position again. Kicking a field goal would give all the advantage to Auburn, since all they would have to do is hold the ball for a couple of minutes and then punt, robbing Tennessee of the time needed to score again. Going for it and making it, on the other hand, gave Tennessee more ways to win. If Auburn took the ball on their next possession, and Tennessee held them to a field goal, the Vols would still only need one score to tie or win.

By going for the touchdown, Tennessee would give themselves more chances to win. By kicking the field goal, they would give Auburn more chances to win. This was the call Lane Kiffin had to make, and he blew it. He chose the field goal, conceding the game with over four minute to go. Auburn drove the length of the field, kicking a field goal and putting the game out of reach.

Lane Kiffin didn't give his team a chance to win.

Monte Kiffin adjusted his defense and managed to contain the Tigers as well as could be expected. Ed OrgeronJim Chaney, despite the bad passes and dropped balls, managed to put enough points on the board to keep the Vols in the game. But when the pressure was on, when Lane Kiffin had a choice to either play to win or play not to lose badly, he folded. He opted to play it safe, take the points he could, and try not to lose too badly.

You don't win games in the SEC coaching like that.

Playing to win is not something you can teach a coach. It's a character thing; you either have it or you don't, and Lane Kiffin doesn't. He may be a fine assistant coach, or position coach, but he doesn't have what it takes to be a head coach.

On Friday, Paul borrowed $50 from Stanley and promised to pay him back the next Tuesday. After a crazy weekend, Paul was flat broke, but he knew Stanley would kick the crap out of him if he didn't get his money,so he went to Peter and borrowed $50 to pay Stanley, promising to pay him back on Friday.

Well, Friday rolled around, and Paul was still broke, and being rather fond of knees that bent in only one direction, and knowing that Peter would enjoy altering that natural limitation of motion, Paul went back to Stanley and borrowed $50, promising to pay him back on Tuesday.

This cycle repeated itself for a few weeks, with Paul borrowing from Stanley to pay Peter and vice versa, until they all three met in a bar on Wednesday.

Paul said, "Peter, you know that I'm going to borrow $50 from you on Tuesday so I can pay back Stanley, right?"

Peter said,"Yep." Peter is a man of few words.

Then Paul said,"Stanley, you know that I'm going to borrow $50 from you on Friday so I can pay Peter back, right?"

Stanley merely grunted, being a man of even fewer words than Peter.

Then Paul said, "Well, since you both know that I'm going to be borrowing $50 from you to pay the other, why don't you just trade $50 back and forth between the two of you and leave me out of this?"

That used to be a funny joke until the Obama administration started using that same process to prop up our banking system.

By the way, those of you from Tennessee remember Jake Butcher, who ran a similar scam with his banks. He went to prison, and a lot of people lost their life savings in the ensuing collapse.

But hey, it might work out better this time, right?

Apparently getting called out on national television has caught Obama's attention.

The AP is reporting that the White House is now backing the idea of verification before distributing benefits, an idea rejected by Democrats in the House. He may have been rude, but Joe Wilson's two words are still echoing in the White House.

You know, after watching the speech again, I get the impression that Obama may not actually know much about the legislation his administration is pushing. When Wilson erupted, while Pelosi looked shocked and irritated, and Biden looked, well, like Biden, Obama looked confused, like he really thought that HR 3200 did what he said it did. Given the new direction by the White House, it feels almost as if he read the legislation for the first time, realized that Wilson was right, and moved to correct the oversight. This isn't as far-fetched a supposition as you might think. Remember, this is the president who had to have his own executive orders explained to him as he signed them.

Eight years ago, our nation was attacked in a cowardly act of terrorism.

That attack continues today, but like a magician, our enemy has used the distraction of a physical attack to attempt to distract us from the real one, the attack on our culture, our ideals, and our freedom. Sadly, our enemy has been almost completely successful in this second front. What he could never achieve through military might, he is easily accomplishing using the apathy, lethergy, and weakness of the modern American citizen.

Our president stood before the nation and baldly lied to us, and we save our outrage for the one man brave enough to call him on it. A friend of mine posted all day yesterday about the consequences Wilson faces, and how much money has been donated to his opposition since the speech, yet when called on it, tries to hide behind a sense of humor. "I get amused..." It must be coincidence that all the things that strike him as funny show Joe Wilson in a negative light.

Even worse than his apparent inability to stand squarely behind his beliefs, when presented with hard facts demonstrating that Obama was lying, my fired decides, without doing any research, or looking at anything, that there's more to the story and he fabricates a hypothetical problem. He would rather make things up in his head than look at the facts.

That's why we're losing this battle for our country. Our friends and neighbors would rather believe in warm comfortable fairy tales than the cold hard truth.

I've come slowly and reluctantly to a painful realization about the nature of most people. Given the choice between citizenship with an uncertain future, and subjugation with security, all too many of them are choosing to be servants.

Or slaves.

Most people don't want freedom. It's hard work. It's risky. It's uncomfortable. Instead, they want security, and if having that security means they aren't allowed to choose for themselves, for many of them, that's a bonus. No choice means no responsibility. When things go wrong, they are free to blame somebody else. They want to be taken care of.

That's human nature and our enemy is making great use of that nature.

All of this leads to the very interesting question, "Who is our enemy?"

Without putting on my tin foil hat, Barack Obama received more money through untraceable small contributions than John Kerry spent in his entire presidential campaign. Let that sink in for a moment. Obama spent enough money to fund an entire presidential campaign without anybody knowing where that money came from. Somebody with a tremendous amount of resources, both monetarily and organizationally, may have purchased the White House. Who in the world has that kind of resources? It's a pretty small list. It gets even smaller when you add in the ideological viewpoints that would want an Obama presidency.

But what is really important here is that this tactic fails the very instant that Americans decide to be citizens and not subjects. If enough of my friends and neighbors shake off the lethergy, wean themselves from the government teat, and decide that they will stand on their own as free men, to succeed or fail by their own efforts, then the enemy's strategy fails.

Free men know that the government exists to serve them, not the reverse.
Free men know that they have no right to the labor of another man.
Free men demand honesty from their leaders.
Free men understand that diplomacy is not another word for compromise.
Free men work hard, just for the chance of success, and are willing to make sacrifices and take risks to achieve great things.
Free men stand up for themselves, and encourage those who cannot stand to accomplish all that they can.
Free men know that character is more important than success.

A man or woman who lives by these principles cannot be a tool of our enemy.

But there are too few of us. America is sinking under the weight of its own complacency. We can't reverse the process; there aren't enough of us. All we can do is stand our ground, speak the truth, and see how many of our fellow Americans we can pull to safety before the coming collapse.

This morning, I heard on the radio that the Obama Administration is claiming that their policies have saved or created 1 million jobs. I thought to myself, "Self, that can't be right. I know that unemployment has been going up and that jobs are disappearing right and left. Surely the White House wouldn't be stupid enough to believe that Americans wouldn't notice a lie this big!"

I was wrong. They are that stupid. (Notice I'm linking to NPR, to avoid any claims of right wing bias of my source.)

White House economists said Thursday the Obama administration's recovery efforts have saved or created more than one million jobs so far.

Now this a couple of paragraphs later:

The report is certain to draw criticism because the U.S. economy has actually lost about 2.5 million jobs since the stimulus was signed in February. Because the White House number is based on economic models, it's impossible to say for certain what that number would have been without the stimulus.

We've lost 2.5 million jobs since the stimulus was signed, yet the White House claims that if they hadn't acted, we would have lost another 1 million jobs. NPR says the truth of this claim is hard to judge because it is based on economic models. IN other words, instead of relying on real world fact6ual data, the Obama Administration prefers to guess. So let's see how well they guess. The next graph, from Innocent Bystanders, shows a comparison of the Obama Administration's economic forecasts predicting the effects of their stimulus package to the actual unemployment rate, as published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.



Notice that real unemployment data shows almost no relation to the projections made by the Obama team. Also notice that the point of inflection, where the rate of job losses begins to slow, occurs in the 2nd quarter of 2009, the same time it would have occured in the Obama team's projections if there were no stimulus package. Also notice that the slope of the unemployment data continues to mirror that of the projections without the Stimulus, not the projection of the effects of the stimulus package. Most importantly, notice that the Obama projection has unemployment peaking at just under 8%. According to the BLS, we're at 9.7%

14.9 million people out of work, 2.5 million of them since the stimulus package was signed, and this joker claims to have created a million jobs. He really thinks you are stupid enough to believe this lie.

Is he right?

Just how stupid are you?

What was it President Obama did right before Joe Wilson called him a liar?

Oh yeah, that's right, he called Republicans liars. He just used a lot more words to do so. He's articulate, don't you know.

Yes, that's SC Rep Joe Wilson calling President Obama a liar during his speech to Congress, calling him out specifically on Obama's claim that "The reforms that I am proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally." So who is telling the truth?

Obama supporters point to Section 246 of HB 3200, which says:

H.R. 3200: Sec 246 — NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS: Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.

So Obama was telling the truth, right? Not so fast sparky. All that this section says is that those here illegally will not get Federal subsidies to buy health insureance, but that is only one small part of Obama care. Let's take a closer look, shall we?

CNN noted that HR 3200 requires all individuals carry health insurance, and that there was no system for verification of legal residency built into the bill. Given that millions of illegal immigrants work in the US today using fraudulent documents, it's no stretch to imagine that they could use those same documents to obtain those subsidies. An amendment to add a verification process already in use to prevent those here illegally from enrolling in Medicare was defeated by Democrats. The loophole is there and the Democrats want it to stay there.

Jon Feere notes that illegal aliens are specifically exempted from the requirement to carry insurance and the mandatory fine the rest of us will pay for not carrying insurance. Yep, you heard right. If you or I decide we don't need health insurance, we will be fined by the Federal government. If an illegal alien doesn't want to carry coverage, that's OK with President Obama. And since, as James Edwards writes, those illegal immigrants will still receive medical care at the nation's hospitals and emergency rooms, they are getting a completely free ride at the taxpayer's expense.

Hmm...things are looking a litle dicey for the President. Now throw this inconvenient little fact into the mix: The President and his supporters are quick to claim that there are somewhere around 40 million uninsured people in America.

You hear Pelosi say it.
You hear Reid say it.
You here the New York Times say it.
You hear Bill Maher and Keith Olbermann say it.

What you won't hear them say, is that 10-12 million of that number is comprised of, you guessed it, illegal aliens. If Obama wasn't planning to cover them, why would he include them in that number? To dishonestly inflate the numbers in order to ease the passage of his plan?

Wouldn't that qualify as a lie?

As the refs say, upon further review, the ruling on the field stands. The President was telling a lie.

As somebody who has been known to speak truth to power, usually with a 200w amplifier and a full quiver of sarcasm, I fully empathize with Joe Wilson. I don't like being lied to. I don't like being manipulated by an empty suit bellowing emptier rhetoric. And after I've had a bellyful, polite behavior takes a back seat to integrity. Like the man said, "Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining." I would just as soon the President tell me the truth, that in order to get this thing passed, and to get reelected come 2012, he needs the Latino vote, and that's why he's leaving massive loopholes in this bill and yes, lying about it.

UPDATE: By the way, for all of you hypocrites crying over the disrespect shown to the sitting President, what did you have to say on this day:


Yeah, that's what I thought.

UPDATE II: It's not just me. Wow. When even the Associated Press feels compelled to notice that a democrat is shading the truth, things must be getting pretty bad for President Obama.

Here's how it will work. The people who pay the least into the system but require the most from the system will see their benefits reduced. This will affect two groups.

The first group will be the elderly. As Obama himself has said, we need to decide whether to expend medical resources to help patients who may not have much life left to them. Instead of a hip replacement, they'll get pain meds instead as they wait in a hospice to die. The second group affected will be children with developmental problems, both physical and mental. As Zeke Emanuel, President Obama's Health Care Reform Adviser has written, since their societal usefulness will be limited, it's only fair that their ability to draw on society's resources should also be limited, so that the rest of the public might benefit from a more useful allocation of limited resources.

The irony here is that the group which pays the most into the health care system, young and middle aged adults, also use the least amount of the resources.

And that, my friends, raises a very interesting question. If we're raising all of this money through new taxes and such to fund health care, yet we're eliminating the primary consumers of the health care dollar, where will all of that lovely money go? If I were a cynical man, I'd bet that the insurance companies, the AMA, and the various legal groups who are backing this monstrosity might just be in line to benefit financially from this legislation, which should increase their income while limiting their outlays.

Ok, so I am a little cynical.

So watch out for SEIU thugs. They aren't at work (Are they ever?) so they may be at your tea party, ready to rumble.

Hooray Labor!

I've worked in three places that were unionized. In every one of them, productivity was negatively impacted by the union. I saw workers on probation being told to slow down and work less, because they were making the rest of the employees in their shop look bad. I saw shops file grievance after grievance against other shops in the same plant for doing their work. I saw union workers watch somebody do work, then file a grievance, rather than telling them it wasn't their work. I watched union workers commit major safety breaches, get fired, then rehired on arbitration, with full back pay. I saw union workers go on strike just because it was the third Friday of the quarter. I saw a union organize a hostile takeover of another union, resulting in a loss of pay and benefits for the workers involved. (BTW, that was the SEIU.)

I'm sure there are good unions out there somewhere. I'm sure there are shops where the union works with management for the benefit of all.

Of course, I also believe in the Tooth Fairy.

Funny stuff from Big Hollywood

My favorite: