Happy New Year, Everybody!

(H/T: Marathon Pundit)

A Vision Of Winter Beauty

...with a small political message.

Merry Christmas

The twenty-fifth day of December,
in the five-thousand, one-hundred and ninety-ninth year of the creation of the world, from the time when God in the beginning created the heaven and the earth;
the two-thousand nine-hundred and fifty-seventh year after the flood;
the two-thousand and fifteenth year from the birth of Abraham;
the one- thousand five-hundred and tenth year from Moses and the going forth of the people of Israel from Egypt;
the one-thousand and thirty-second year from David being anointed King;
in the sixty-fifth week according to the prophecy of Daniel;
in the one-hundred and ninety-fourth Olympiad;
the seven-hundred and fifty-second year from the founding of Rome;
the forty-second year of the reign of Octavian Augustus;
in the sixth age of the world,
when the whole world was at peace,
Jesus Christ,
the eternal God and Son of the eternal Father,
desiring to sanctify the world by his most merciful coming,
was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
and nine months having passed since his conception,
was born in Bethlehem of Judah of the Virgin Mary,
AND WAS MADE MAN.

A very merry and blessed Christmas to each of you, and all of yours. May God bless us, every one.

Benedicamus Domino!

Why I Believe In Santa Claus

A regular tradition from all of the staff, cast and crew here at Thoughts of a Regular Guy is the annual re-post of this essay (slightly modified) from 2005:

As a Roman Catholic, I wholeheartedly believe in Santa Claus. Santa is real, and deserves credit for much good in the world.

Now, don't get me wrong. I don't claim that the guy on your Coke can this month is real. Not the secular figure we all know: red suit, north pole, elves, reindeer, makes toys, flies through the world on Christmas Eve to visit all the good children, via their chimneys. Only children really believe in him.

But there is a real St. Nick. And for those who accept a traditional understanding of the communion of saints, this might be a fulfilling way to view him.

In the eighth century, he was a bishop, and liked to bring toys and gifts to needy families in his diocese at Christmas time. His name was Niklaus, or Claus, or Nicholas.

After his death, the Church came to recognize that God had made him a saint. And that's the most important thing to know about Santa Claus:

He is a saint, and lives in glory with God in Heaven.

He doesn't wear a red suit trimmed in fur. He is clothed with the glory of God.

And he doesn't bring presents to children on Christmas eve anymore. But if there is nothing good we can do except by the Grace of God, and if it is the business of saints to intercede before God for us here on Earth, then I believe that St. Nick makes it his business to intercede for children -- and grownups too -- to be given the grace to love one another, and to show that love by gift-giving.

Every child sitting on the lap of a mall Santa is praying to St. Nicholas. Every letter to Santa anyone writes is carried by angels to the great one, who lays it at the feet of our divine Father.

And every person who sees something in the store and thinks, "she would just love that," and buys it in the hope of bringing happiness to a loved one, does so under the prompting of God's grace, gained for him by the prayerful intercession of St. Nicholas.

And the joy of a family gathered on Christmas morning to open their gifts isn't just a materialistic euphoria, but God's grace, filling the home and the hearts of its inhabitants, at least for a little while.

And by being aware of that grace, and being open to it, we can prolong the joy of Christmas. We can recall that love is not an emotion like happiness or fear, but a disposition towards others in our lives, a pattern of behavior, and we can join our prayers with those of St. Nicholas that our lives will be filled with the grace to love each other, and to show that love in obvious ways.

And so, "Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good night."

Joe Walsh Says Merry Christmas!

Dear Santa, all I want for Christmas is for Joe Walsh to be my congressman.

Christmas Message, 2009

Pro-Life Bloggers: Help My Campaign For Free

Add this widget to your own blog or website:

Click the word "share" in the lower right corner.

Thanks!

Why They Support The Regular Guy

Watching this video has been perhaps the most humbling experience of the campaign thus far.

Walsh Picks Up Pro-Life Endorsement

Joe Walsh announces his endorsement by the Illinois Federation for Right to Life (they've also endorsed your favorite state representative candidate):

8th Congressional District Republican Candidate Joe Walsh announces Illinois Federation for Right to Life Endorsement

Lake Zurich: Joe Walsh, candidate for the Republican Nomination to the 8th Congressional District, is pleased to announce the co-endorsement of his candidacy by the Illinois Federation for Right to Life PAC. The IFRL PAC notified candidates December 8th.

“The IFRL PAC endorsement is significant in this race and for me personally. My position on the Right to Life of the unborn is based on a soul searching and intellectual journey. The result of that journey has become a personal, religious and scientific understanding that life begins at the moment of conception,” said Walsh.

“The incumbent, Melissa Bean, has finally shown her true colors on the issue of life when she voted against the Stupak amendment to the Healthcare Reform Bill. Bart Stupak is a Democrat Congressman from Michigan who offered an amendment barring Federal dollars for abortion in the Healthcare Reform Bill. The amendment passed the US House with bi-partisan support. Melissa Bean’s vote puts her at odds with the vast majority of people in the 8th District who oppose their tax dollars being used to pay for abortions,” said Walsh.

“If I am successful in the Primary and General elections of 2010 I will be a strong voice for life in the US House of Representatives. The communities that make up the 8th Congressional District have traditionally been represented by Pro-Life Congressmen. I believe that this district is Pro-Life and I intend to be the candidate who will bring the district home,” said Walsh.

In their endorsement Press Release the IFRL PAC stated: “We are pleased to announce our endorsement of Joe Walsh as Republican Candidate for the Eighth Congressional District. Not only has Mr. Walsh expressed a desire to protect unborn children, but he has also indicated his support for the disabled as well as those who are endangered at the end of life.” [Emphasis added.]

Walsh Really Pro-Life

They're telling lies about my friend Joe Walsh, whom I've endorsed for Congress in the Illinois 8th District. They're saying he's not pro-life. As evidence, they're citing his position when he first ran for office thirteen years ago!

Well, back in 1990, I was pro-choice, too. Read this blog and tell me I'm not pro-life now.

Converts to the pro-life cause are desperately needed, and should be welcomed for their conversion, not punished.

I have no doubt that Joe Walsh is pro-life; there's just no faking the passion that Joe brings to this campaign and these issues.

This video is from my friend Michael Brown; you've probably seen some of his other work without knowing it.



from Joe Walsh:

You may have heard some rumor and innuendo over the past few days, written and spoken, trying to distort my position on the life issue. I would like to set the record straight.

For seven years, I have been pro-life without exception. I believe in the sanctity of all human life from conception to natural death. There is no candidate in this race who is more pro-life than I am.

I grew up pro-life in a conservative Catholic family of nine children in North Barrington. When I first got involved in politics and policy as an adult in my 20s and early 30s, my beliefs on certain issues were different than they are today and in many ways I was a different person than I am today. In 1996, I ran for the United States Congress and in 1998 I ran for the Illinois State House. At the time, I ran as a pro-choice Republican with support for all the reasonable restrictions -- waiting period, parental notification, and ban on partial birth abortions. My position at the time was due to my antipathy toward government intrusion and involvement in both economic and private affairs and reflected my staunch limited-government views.

I began a five-year religious, intellectual, and scientific journey on the life issue after my race in 1998. It was an incredibly deep, long, personal journey of the heart which returned me to my pro-life roots. From that moment in 2003, when I knew in my head and my heart that life began at conception, the pro-life position without exception was where I wanted to be. It was where I had to be.

My conversion took place almost seven years ago.

It came to our attention a week or so ago that there was a whisper campaign going on regarding my political views on life back in 1996 and 1998. Only two days ago, we discovered that someone or some group -- either one of my Republican opponents or a pro-choice/Democrat organization -- sent out a mailing from a fictitious pro-life group with copies of articles from 1996 highlighting my past pro-choice views.

Setting the record straight, because my pro-life conversion took place so many years ago, I did not at all think that the views I held 14 years ago would be relevant in this race. Well, I should have known better and should have been better prepared for such a mean-spirited attack. Since entering this race, I've spoken in front of a number of different groups. I did not typically go into the history of my conversion to a pro-life position when speaking with these groups. I simply talked about where I am on the life issue now and where I’ve been for the past seven years.

Once again, I should have known better. I've discussed the story of my journey in numerous individual conversations since entering the race, and I actually find it to be the most rewarding thing I discuss. But as I stand before the voters of the eighth district today as an unabashed pro-life candidate in this race, I want to be completely candid about my position and the evolution in my mind and my heart that brought me here.

It's become clear from the voter response in the primary so far that I will be a strong general election candidate against Melissa Bean. That’s because it is clear that my passionate message of taking back our country is striking a chord among voters. We’ve certainly made clear as well that I would be a forceful, ardent candidate on life issues during the general election and that it is important that we have a candidate who can win with a pro-family agenda. Apparently, these facts don’t sit well with some.

Somebody doesn't want me to win this primary. They sent out a mailing using the name of a fictitious pro-life group with no return address to mischaracterize my positions and implicate the pro-life movement in this trick. It is tactics like these that keep many good people out of politics.

I've been clear from the start that I won't be at all like a typical politician which is why I want to set the record straight. I'm going to say what I mean and mean what I say and not worry about the political consequences. It's why I publicly criticize Republicans and Democrats alike for increasing the size of government. And it’s why I have not at all been bashful in my public speaking that abortion is the taking of an innocent human life regardless of how that life was begun. I will win or lose standing by this position.

The pro-life movement is about changing minds. They have been spectacularly successful in changing mine. But I have always been a believer in the "inalienable rights" that the founding fathers applied to human beings. The most important of these inalienable rights is the right to life. I believe that life begins at the moment of conception and my belief is based on personal and religious belief, and on the basis of scientific fact. I wish that I had always held these beliefs but I am grateful that I have fully embraced this fundamental issue.

It seems to me that whether it was one of my opponents (Republican or Democrat), whether it was some pro-choice interest group, or whether it was just a random hater behind this mailing, it’s clear that someone doesn't want there to be a strong pro-life candidate taking the fight to Melissa Bean next year.

Well, I'm not going to stop fighting.

George Carlin Offers A Bit Of Perspective

Language warning -- it's Carlin after all!

Regular Guy Paul Endorses A Regular Guy For Congress

Melissa Bean. She voted for TARP. She voted for Obama's stimulus. She voted for Cap & Trade. She opposed the Stupak amendment, and then voted for the healthcare bill. She ran as a social moderate and a fiscal conservative, and voted like a down-the-line liberal. It's time for voters in northern Illinois to bring her home, and to make it up to the rest of the country by sending to Washington a Congressman who understands what makes America strong, and what makes Illinois unique.

I have someone in mind.

In the past few months, during my own campaigning for state representative, I've had the pleasure to meet a man who wants to be my Congressman, and in a field of six Republican primary contenders, I think he stands out.

His name is Joe Walsh.

No, no, not that Joe Walsh, this Joe Walsh.

Joe is a practicing Catholic, a son of a large family, and the father of a large family. He's pro-life without exception. He's a genuinely good guy. He's comfortable talking about his faith, and the importance of morality in politics. But that's just the beginning.

When Joe Walsh, asked why he is running for Congress, says, "because I feel like I'm losing my country," it strikes a chord with me. When asked what he will do as a Congressman when faced with a Democratic majority that wants to shove healthcare "reform" down our throats, he promises that the first thing he will do is "scream."

You may disagree, but I think America needs a few more Republican Congressman who refuse to sit by while the Democrats dismantle our government and our society.

I'll let Joe tell you himself:

My name is Joe Walsh, I’m a Barrington native, I’ve run for Congress before and I intend to beat Melissa Bean next year. Now, pardon me if I skip past any other background and small talk you typically get at the beginning of these things, but I really want to cut right to the chase. This is a very different time we’re living in right now, something profound is going on out there, we’ve seen strong hints of it at the town halls and Tea Party gatherings, and 2010 is going to be a very different election year. If Republicans want to do well next year we had better understand this.

The American people are angry. For a year now, they’ve seen all this spending coming out of Washington, they’ve seen the government gobble up one industry after another, bail out one company after another, pass one huge spending bill after another, and now they’re watching Congress try and rush through a big government health care bill that nobody -- nobody -- understands.

Voters are watching all this, they’re scratching their heads and saying "you know, this just doesn’t feel right", growing numbers of them are getting angry and doing something about it. They are organizing, they’re marching, they’re speaking out at town halls and, I’ll tell you what my Republican friends, it’s not just some fringe movement as the media likes to portray it, it’s a majority of voters and they are going to be voting next year. And they are going to be voting for candidates who understand this anger and can tap into it and help give voice to it.

And we Republicans will make a huge mistake if we don’t nominate candidates who get this. We will make a huge mistake if we don’t nominate candidates who run for office using this anger, and fear, and concern as badges of honor.

... I’ve always thought of myself as a pretty likable guy, but, having run for office before and sometimes, like all politicians, just saying things people want to hear, I’m not going to do that this time around. I’m not going to talk like a politician. This is too important. I’m going to call it like it is and challenge all of us who are angry and afraid to do something about it. Our campaign may be a bit too loud at times and we might not smile as much as some would like. But look, after what President Obama, Pelosi and Reid have done and are going to still try to do, I don’t care if we rub some noses wrong to try and stop it.

I am running because I’ve had enough! Like all of you, I am ticked off with how much money our government is spending and how quickly government is growing and we have to stop it. If Republicans can’t stand loud and clear at a minimum for “keeping our taxes low and our government small” than we don’t deserve to win.

I want to go to Washington for no more than six years and be a loud voice against this growth of government. Our party next year needs to elect a number of men and women who will do the same. That’s the first step toward turning this around. [Emphasis added.]

In many of his appearances, I've heard Joe admit that Republicans have been as much to blame for rising deficits and the growth of government as Democrats. Joe wants to be a different kind of Congressman. He wants to be the kind of Congressman I've been waiting for.

I am delighted to extend to Joe Walsh the official Thoughts of a Regular Guy endorsement for the United States Congress in the Illinois 8th District.

And I'm saying this not because Joe has endorsed my candidacy, but because I'm so excited about his.

Learn more about Joe and his campaign here.

Thoughts On Global Warming

Some of us have known for years that global warming, just like overpopulation before it, was a hoax. Now, new evidence has come to light showing just how carefully and precisely the hoax has been carried out.

We may hope, in the light of this evidence, that one day those who still believe in it will be classed with those who believe the earth is flat, those who insist Elvis lives, and all the other cranks and crackpots who inhabit the political fringes of our society.

As soon as we can vote them out of office, and otherwise push them off our TV and movie screens.

For those who haven't been following this story, here are the basics (H/T: Cao's Blog):

Hacked e-mails from Britain's Climate Research Unit are only the latest evidence of climate fraud. Just ask NASA's James Hansen about the faking of climate data or EPA employees about the suppression of climate fact.

For years, noted scientists and other global warming skeptics have been accused of being on the take, their research tainted and funded by grants from Big Oil and other fossil-fuel interests.

Now, it turns out, it's the warm-mongers who are fudging the numbers and concealing the inconvenient truth.

We don't know who "Deep Throat" is. But according to an interview in Investigate Magazine's TGIF edition with Philip Jones, director of the Hadley Climate Research Unit at Britain's East Anglia University, the incriminating e-mails documenting collusion and fraud among top global warming scientists, including a few from Jones himself, are genuine.

In one e-mail sent to Michael Mann, director of Penn State University's Earth System Science Center, Raymond Bradley, a climatologist at the University of Massachusetts, and Malcolm Hughes, a professor of dendrochronology at the University of Arizona's Laboratory for Tree-Ring Research, Jones speaks of the "trick" of filling in gaps of data in order to hide evidence of temperature decline:

"I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (i.e., from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline." Hide the decline? "Keith" is Keith Briffa of the Climate Research Unit, also involved in the bogus manipulation of data.

An e-mail from scientist Mick Kelly to Jones also speaks of manipulating data to hide the fact that Earth is actually cooling: "I'll maybe cut the last few points off the filtered curve before I give the talk again, as that's trending down as a result of the end effects and the recent coldish years."

In another e-mail to Mann from Kevin Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, copied to Dr. James Hansen of NASA, Trenberth says: "Well, I have my own article on where the heck is global warming. We are asking that here in Boulder where we have broken records the past two days for the coldest days on record. We had 4 inches of snow."

Trenberth also says: "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment, and it is a travesty that we can't." He goes on to say that "the data is surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate." [Emphasis added.]

My bloggin' buddy Cao (pronounced like "key") remarks:

It’s the hysterical climate change fanatics who’ve been caught with their pants down this time.

In a day and age when hackers break into email accounts and wave their findings in the air with sarcastic aplomb, isn’t it ironic that what was exposed was by someone using the same technique the leftists use.

It’s all too familiar… The people who oppose Obamacare are supported by the Insurance companies because of PROFIT…

Those openly skeptical of global warming are in it for the money (what money? just see what writing “global warming” or “climate change” does for your grant application!), or are funded by Big Oil and other fossil-fuel interests.

Illinois Review has more:

...In an even more damning data series, the models were set to run only up to certain years BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN THE DATA STOPPED MATCHING THE TALKING POINTS!!! Click here for a summary. Look for oh so catchy and honest statements like "Hide the decline", and "oh, I can make it up", and my favorite "these can be artificially adjusted". Nothing makes you feel more confident in scientific research when the researchers are smart enough that they can just pull numbers straight out of the air.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has based their conclusions off the data that has come primarily from CRU and other institutions. The United Nations is proposing drastic treaties to curb carbon dioxide emissions. The United States Congress has been trying to pass a Cap and Trade bill. ALL of these efforts are based on the putrefied pile of steaming garbage that is coming out of the computer models at the CRU.

For years, other scientists have been trying to get their hands on the data that has been used at the CRU. The typical scientific method is to come up with a hypothesis based on data and then allow peer review using that data. If others can come to the same conclusion that you have using your data, then the analysis is probably pretty sound. However, the CRU has been doggedly resisting releasing their data as can be seen here. Now we know why the CRU has been resisting the release of their data. If you have based decades of work off of a steaming pile of dung, and now the world praises you, would you want REAL scientists to discover your mistakes?

Too, the inimitable Iowahawk brings his satirical talents to bear:

Our very planet depends on them. Yet they remain nature's most elusive scientific species, inhabiting some of the world's most delicate and daunting academic environments. But thanks to new breakthroughs in high speed cameras and email files, metascientists are finally beginning to understand their mysterious behaviors and complex social interactions. Tonight on Iowahawk Geographic: step inside the Secret Life of the Climate Researchers.

And of course, what's a scandal like this with out a good Downfall parody (H/T: Cartago Delenda Est via Uncommon Descent)?



It frankly makes me mad to realize that this sort of nonsense, despite its obviously fraudulent nature, is still what many politicians, including incumbents, including Republicans, including the incumbent Republican I'm running against, are still running on Anthropogenic Global Warming as if it were proved, when in fact it's obvious to anyone who doesn't have their hand in the cookie jar that there's more truth in the new Star Trek movie and than in Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth. If they had any shame, they would publicly apologize and resign from office and spend the rest of their lives doing silent penance for their fraud.

Thanksgiving Day

Lord, on this day, I pray to offer you my poor gratitude.
Shakespeare's Hamlet said, "beggar that I am, I am even poor in thanks."
Lord, make me in rich in thanks, increase my gratitude
As you have increased my blessings.

Then teach me Lord to render my gratitude back to you
In an abundance that is fitting to the abundance of blessings you have poured out on me.
Help me to remember that Thanksgiving is not an occasion to resent what I lack,
But to appreciate what I have.

Thank you Lord, for all our many blessings,
For warm dry homes, for enough to eat,
For healthy children, and for those who are not healthy,
For our own health, even when it fails.

Lord, thank You for our accomplishments and our successes,
But even more for our failures and our fears,
For it is the times of trial that best make us
Turn again to You.

And thank you, Lord, for loved ones and friends,
Without whose support and encouragement
We could not hope to triumph in your name
Over your enemies.

Lord, send an angel to stand beside me,
And every father,
And give us the grace to be
The men you would have us be.

More On That Candidate Forum

I noticed something yesterday as I listened to twenty-odd political candidates addressing a pro-life audience yesterday.

Almost every candidate began by talking about his religious upbringing.

This one was the son of a pastor, that one was one of nine children of a Catholic family, one was a conservative Jew, another an Indian Hindu, but almost every one, if not in fact every one, started discussing the life issue from a religious perspective.

And, what makes me crazy, some of them use that religious foundation as an excuse to avoid facing the abortion issue in law.

The argument goes something like this:

1. The Catholic Church teaches me that abortion is an intrinsic evil.
2. This is part of my faith.
3. I cannot use the force of law to impose my faith on others.
4. Ergo, I cannot support restricting abortion in law.

This is why, as you saw in the video I posted earlier, I eschewed all discussion of religion to assert the importance of protecting human life in terms that should be equally accessible to anyone.

And they say I'm a religious fanatic.

Adam For Life

My favorite gubernatorial candidate, Adam Andrzejewski, at the same candidate forum yesterday.



Unfortunately, the video picks up after he said that what we need in the fight against abortion is more people like Paul Mitchell. I could barely believe I heard that, and I really wish I had video of that remark.

Regular Guy Speaks To Pro-Life Candidate Forum

The Lake County Right to Life organization hosted a candidate forum yesterday attended by over 20 candidates, including 6 gubernatorial candidates, 4 Senate candidates, several other statewide and judicial candidates, and yours truly:



Unfortunately, I was limited to three minutes; there was so much more I wanted to say.

A Spoonful of Illogic

[guest commentary by Paladin]

With all due apologies to the makers of Mary Poppins (and the song "A Spoonful of Sugar")... I think I've finally placed something.

People who are steeped in our modern culture (at least in the Western world) has damaged spiritual/moral taste buds. For whatever reason, illogic tastes good to them... and they'll swallow most anything, so long as you serve it with several heaping teaspoons of illogic (flashy food colouring is good, too). This explains a great many things:

1) Why is Oprah so rich through such popularity?

2) Why is Dan Brown so rich, and why has he sold so many books which contain provable nonsense, though he bills them as "based on fact"?

3) Why was the President of Death elected to the highest office in the United States, despite his miniscule experience, his open contempt for American patriotism, his radical pro-death stances, and his utter ineptitude with both foreign relations and domestic policy?

Got it. Understood, now! Just prepare with flair, garnish with several delectable spoonfuls of illogic, and serve at whatever temperature you wish... and my, just watch those little mouths gobble up every crumb! Iron chef, eat your heart out!

Case in point (h/t the extraordinary LifeSiteNews.com):

Pro-Abortion Lawmakers Shower Praise on Senate Bill's Phony Abortion Compromise

WASHINGTON, D.C., November 19, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The phony compromise language unveiled in the Senate health care bill Wednseday night has already won high praise from pro-abortion lawmakers on Capitol Hill; yet, it has not fared as well under the scrutiny of the National Right to Life Committee, who slammed the bill's abortion funding as "completely unacceptable."

[...]

Some pro-abortion Senators have already exalted Reid's abortion language, claiming that it accurately reflects the Hyde amendment.

"Senator Reid did an excellent job of crafting language that maintains the decades long compromise of no federal funds for abortion," gushed Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA). Boxer has a consistently 100% pro-abortion rating from NARAL.

Late Wednedsay, Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, who also votes largely pro-abortion, claimed to reporters that Reid's bill "extends the Hyde amendment to these programs so the status quo is maintained." Rep. Capps, another 100% NARAL-approved legislator and author of the House's phony compromise, praised Reid's language and noted that it "closely mirrors my language" in the original House bill.

The same legislators had lambasted the Stupak language as "illogical, discriminatory, and unnecessary" (Capps) and a "very radical amendment which would really tear apart compromise" (Boxer).

Did you follow that? Pro-abort legislators are praising this "new compromise bill" as "accurately reflecting the Hyde Amendment" (which they hate, by the way--Rule #1: if pro-aborts pretend to praise something for reflecting something they hate, look for additional hidden lies).

Perhaps the abortion-tolerant readers of this blog could help me out, here:

If the ersatz "Health Care Reform" bill doesn't fund abortions, then why are the pro-abortion groups (who, along with Moloch-in-Chief, ever insist that the bill has never been about abortion, and doesn't fund abortions in the least) all up in arms over efforts to remove abortion funding (such as the Stupak amendment), and why are they so thrilled with other "compromises"? From here, it seems that they just want to perpetuate abortion, and they'll say and do anything (no matter how dishonest or absurd) to further that goal. This implies that such people are immoral (or amoral, if you like) hacks who shouldn't be trusted with a sharpened pencil, much less domestic policy.

Seriously: aren't they embarrassed to make such obvious lies? I mean, we in the pro-life crowd appreciate the lack of strain in sniffing *out* those lies, but... still. No sense of shame, or at least artistic self-respect?

Why Homeschool, Part 29

So your children won't be recruited to be prostitutes!

A shocking story:

Throw out everything you think you know about prostitutes.
Investigators say a new epidemic is sweeping the local area - and the nation.

Underage prostitutes are being recruited within local high schools and junior highs, and sometimes even "pimped" by their own classmates!

Alexis Del Cid shows us the story through a survivor's eyes. Jessica Richardson lived through the nightmare - a nightmare that's still going on, all around us.

And please, please, when you comment, don't give me that libertarian nonsense about legalizing prostitution.

Some Favorite Moments From My Favorite Movie

Veteran's Day

Veteran's Day is also the anniversary of my Honorable Discharge from the Air Force in 1986. One day, I really must scan some of my pictures from those days and post them.

In the meantime, this video has become something of a tradition here on the blog for Veteran's Day and Memorial Day. It's a favorite of mine, and here it is again:

State of the Union (or: "the FOCA Syndrome")

[guest commentary by Paladin]

At the risk of typecasting myself as "the angry man" (Sorry, John!), or as a paranoiac (those efforts to mandate taxpayer-funded abortion and euthanasia don't really indicate a love of death by the instigators, do they?), I want to make a few things clear. Mind, our esteemed host can and will speak for himself (and BTW: God bless and speed his run into the Illinois’ 62nd (State) District seat, and God speed his pro-abortion RINO opponent, Sandy Cole into a well-needed retirement!), but there are a few rather clear facts which need to be laid out.

1) I strongly suspect that, if I speak out against the current "Health Care Reform" bill (a la Nancy Pelosi) currently chugging its way through Congress--especially after the "modern Holy Grail" called the Stupak Amendment (as good as it is, so far as it goes) was successfully attached--I may get labelled a "mindless conservative" who's "always angry (Sorry, John!)", who "lets the perfect be the enemy of the good", and who's never satisfied with anything. To that, I say: horse puckies! (For those outside of Wisconsin, see here.) The fact that I decry 10 evils a day doesn't mean that the other (x - 10) evils aren't there, or aren't evil, or aren't important. Give it at least a millisecond of critical thought, and you'll see what I mean. Some of us have the tiresome (and un-asked-for) job of perpetually waking up the sleepy ADD sheep around us, whose Mass-Media-drenched attention spans and anemic motivation are about as emphatic as a 5-point [font] period at the end of a 100-point sentence, even if they know what "pro-life" means. (See references to "Faux Catholic", here or on my woefully neglected and inferior blog, for examples/references on that.) If you haven't noticed, the current administration hasn't limited itself to making only one foray into the culture of death at a time; at least a few people in the temple--ahm--I mean, administration of Master Obama, Leader Of Civilized Humanity and his faithful servants seem to be able to multi-task.

2) Aside from the soul-searing moral bankruptcy of the current administration/regime, their transparent hunger for power is outstripping their desire to minimize the damage done to the nation while gaining said power. Case in point: how will spending trillions of dollars that we don't have (yes, that's with a "T"--do you remember the good old days [at least 10 years ago, was it?] when commentators would say, "Yes, that's "billions" with a "B", as if it were still shocking?) get our economy into anything but deeper trouble? It's a bit like saying, "My bank account is empty, but my credit card has graciously agreed to lend me money to deposit into it, and to spend!" Math apparently isn't a strong suit, or a high priority, for The One and company. And that's only on a tactical, economic level, for the sake of easy example...

3) Like most evil actions and movements, the culture of death either doesn't know that it will destroy that which it seeks to control... or else, it doesn't really care (so long as it can fondle it for a while, until it does). At this point, the idea of artificial contraception is held in such reverence by the typical westerner that any challenge to it is viewed as a stupefying challenge to "that which was, is, and should be forever, world without end"... and yet, even from a bone-dry practical level, the engineers of this "social re-programming" have no apparent idea that a lack of children--and a manifold cultural bias against them--will cause any of their droolingly coveted "worldpower-state programs" to implode (think Medicare, Social Security, and the proposed "Universal Health Care"). It's at this point that sane people everywhere--even the most generous and patient--start to question either the liberals' collective sanity, intelligence, and/or self-preservation instinct.

Here just one other instance (off the top of my head--I leave it as an exercise for the reader to find others) of this "suicidal liberal lemming-dance": instill a hatred of pregnancy, monogamy and heterosexuality into westerners, and promote "alternate sexualities" (including pornography in all venues) in all possible forms, while paradoxically instilling into their audiences an irrational sympathy for radical Islam (because they hate Christians, and Christianity is still part-and-parcel to the core of America, and "the enemy of my enemy is my friend, dontcha know..."). That way, if they take over America, Islam will take over America by default (through a surprising tolerance for pregnancy and fertility)... and, after the imposition of Sharia Law, these very same "useful liberal sexual-license-ridden idiots" will be the first buried in the ground up to their necks, and stoned to death. (Logical, huh?)

As anyone who's read my posts for any length of time already knows: Capitulating (i.e. "Faux") Catholics make me see red as quickly--or more quickly--than can the most die-hard, liberal, culture-of-death, atheist/agnostic evangelist of hedonism. Betrayal just hurts worse than a frontal assault, that's all. But one insidious direction by which even otherwise-"solid" Catholics can get "conscripted" into the "Faux Catholic Corps" is what I'll call the FOCA Syndrome.

What's the FOCA Syndrome, you ask?

It's the syndrome by which a typical Catholic (ranging from the modestly devout to the bland pew-potato), who leads an otherwise quiet ("I wish people wouldn't bother me!") life, has been motivated--by some perceived emergency--to some sort of action which is otherwise extraordinary for them. The bishops sound the alarm about FOCA, and this (otherwise bland and conviction-vague) Catholic rouses himself to send in a postcard ("my stars, what *will* they ask me to do NEXT?"), even at the risk of enduring somewhat bemused or cross-eyed stares from those who are even more bland than he! Heroism in action! But after that, he settles back into his quiet, dumpy life of lukewarmness, and breathes a sigh of relief: "Thank God that's over!". Crisis averted, and he feels that he's served his tour of duty--and earned an honourable discharge from the "temporary Catholic military." (Onward, Christian soldiers!)

But a few months later--alas, Obama and Co. are not content to make just one foray into the destruction of society; they wish to pass FOCA by stealth, in pieces--or in different wrapping! They want to institute (wait for it!) Death Panels, by which the elderly and profoundly disabled will be offered "loving care, condolences, and a few aspirin--along with a small pill to end their troubles quietly" in the name of conserving the money for those whose standard of life (as judged by the honourable [sic] Kathleeen Sebelius) is higher! "Not again!", says the weary soldier; "Didn't I just fill out a postcard... and in full sight of at least a dozen parishioners, too?" But somehow, he whips his exhausted spirit into yet another act of heroism, and he--wonder of wonders--actually CALLS his Congressman and leaves a polite message explaining his difference of opinion! Ahh... not only retirement will reward him, but surely an increased pension in Heaven, or even a medal of honour, in the afterlife will await him, will it not?

Repeat this scenario a few more times. You can see where it's going. Eventually (after, say 4-5 such "calls to action"), the "heroic Faux Catholic" will throw up his hands in disgust and refuse, citing his unwillingness to accede to anything so relentless and insatiable as these demands on his time. And so it goes.

(This, by the way, is why RESOLVE, rather than EMOTION, is needed in the heart of a Christian in this battle.)

Look. Christians (the ones who are sane, at any rate) are not trying to run your life. They're not even trying to dictate your preferences. They're trying to stop you from destroying yourselves... and us in the process! Rampant sexuality decays and destroys a culture. A willful disregard/contempt for life (especially the weak and the "inconvenient") destroys it even more quickly (and rampant sexuality seems to lead inexorably toward such disregard/contempt). It's only natural that bystanders, after watching you take out a cultural machine gun and open-fire in all directions, might just try to stop you by some means or another, eh?

From the Land of the Comfortably Insane

[guest commentary by Paladin]

Hi, Kids! Welcome to the

Brave New World(!!)

... where everyone is happy all the time, and where everyone's cares are lovingly and skillfully handled by Big Broth...--(*ahem*)--Dear Earnest Author of Total Healthcare!

Here's what you can look forward to, in your new Healthcare Entitlement for/from Lofty Liberals:

1) Affordable healthcare for everyone... for only $11,000-15,000/year!.

That's for all the good boys and girls, mind you; if anyone doesn't pay their fair share of the plan supported by Master Obama, Leader Of Civilized Humanity and his faithful servants (naughty, naughty!), they'll have to have:

2) 2.5% of their allowance taken away (as a "naughty, naughty fee").

For those who are REALLY naughty, and don't even play nice and say "I'm sorry" by paying their "naughty, naughty" fee (Boo! Hiss! Bad boys and girls!), then Master Obama, Leader Of Civilized Humanity and his faithful servants will have to send them to a little bit of:

3) time out, which good little boys and girls know as "Play Right, I Say, Or No Supper!" (1-5 years).

Happy, happy, joy, joy!! Let's finish our worship session with the refrain from our new National Anthem:

"Barack Hussein Obama... Mmm, Mmm, Mmm!"

Until next time, boys, and girls... be good, and remember: freedom is only freedom if unwanted leech-babies are removed by good doctors (or halfway-reasonable facsimiles with a dose of RU-486), or if you're following Master Obama, Leader Of Civilized Humanity and his faithful servants!

Love,

Paladin
Civilian Re-Education (CaRE) Center #5, Cell Block #3
Exact Whereabouts Withheld for National Security Reasons

Find God In 60 Days

(H/T: Is Anybody There?

(Originally posted to the Thoughts of a Regular Guy blog.)

Wallace Withdraws From Senate Race

I've written before about U.S. Senate candidate Eric Wallace, one of the several conservative candidates seeking to prevent the nomination of liberal Republican congressman Mark Kirk (Kirk has been endorsed by my legislative opponent, Sandy Cole). Kirk was one of only eight Republican Congressmen who voted for Cap & Trade, and is also pro-abortion, pro-gay "marriage", pro gun control, and opposed the surge in Iraq.

The U.S. Senate seat in question is that currently held by Senator Roland Burris, who was appointed by now-impeached Governor Rod Blagojevich, following the election of President Obama. Coincidentally, it is the same seat once held by Democrat Stephen A. Douglas in the 19th century.

But today, the last day for candidates to file their petitions and candidacy paperwork, Eric Wallace has announced that he will not be a candidate:

Eric Wallace, conservative candidate for Il U.S Senate, formally announces today (Monday, November 2, 2009) that despite meeting minimum signature requirements he will not, at this time, seek his party’s (R) nomination. Wallace states, “While the goal continues to be the coalescing of our efforts behind a candidate committed to upholding conservative values—I have decided that it is in the best interest of the conservative movement that I not run at this time. The most important issue here is not my candidacy, but that the conservative principles and values that our campaign has been espousing across the state continue to gain momentum; and that we find a person to consolidate around who will champion this cause.

I know that a lot of people whom I greatly respect have been supporters of Wallace's candidacy, but I'm relieved to see this, because, as Wallace himself states, we have too many conservative candidates to oppose just one well-funded liberal. I salute Dr. Wallace for his decision.

Other conservative candidates include Patrick Hughes, Robert Zadek, and John Arrington. I've had the pleasure of meeting Zadek and Arrington in the course of my own campaigning, including sharing the stage with Arrington at a candidate forum just this past Saturday. I can say that I've been very favorably impressed by both Arrington and Zadek. Hughes comes with a substantial amount of his own money and the endorsements of several high-profile pro-life leaders, so I'm favorably disposed towards him, but I have not yet been impressed by him or by his campaign. I'm still waiting.

(Originally posted to the Thoughts of a Regular Guy blog.)