Oh, The HORROR! KKK Resurgance!

Eh, probably not – the story here.

I’m guessing that those bozos are actively using the media to help hype their group.  The gathering is planned for August 9 in Davidson County – in the town of WELCOME, NC (LOVE that irony!).

I imagine there will be a few (considerably less than 100) bozos, a WHOLE lot of protesters, and media up the whazoo.

Lots of video, the potential of some injuries (remember the media slogan – “If it bleeds, it leads”), and no ultimate effect on life whatsoever.

Posted in Old Media, Politics | Leave a comment

In a Temporary Lull

The Battle of the Border is at a temporary standstill.

Congress continues to struggle to investigate:

  • Benghazi
  • IRS
  • Fast & Furious
  • VA scandal

Elections are months away, and most Democrats are running for cover, and hoping to survive.

Republicans may have their own scandal in MS, with the Senate primary.  Pity – they should fully cooperate, and let the chips fall where they may.

I’ve an uneasy feeling – no particular reason – one of those “just before the storm” feelings.  I hope it’s not justified.

Posted in Benghazi, Election, Fast & Furious, Immigration, Politics, Voter Fraud | Leave a comment

Down Time

My summer has been split just about in half – the first part:

  • One week babysitting grandchildren
  • 2 weeks at a workshop
  • 1 week in Cleveland, organizing and cleaning
  • 2 weeks at home, organizing and cleaning

And, now, back in Cleveland for a few days.  Followed by:

  • 2 day STEM conference
  • 3 days learning how to be a mentor (with a few days of nothing scheduled in between)
  • Last 2 weeks of vacay

It all seems to go so fast.  One VERY positive part of this summer has been my commitment to exercising – I’ve been at the pool every day for the last few weeks.  Haven’t seen much progress on the scale, but I’m moving more easily, and my clothes are fitting better.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Lord Acton’s Famous Saying

Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

That’s what he is best known for.

And, now we have a President and his administration that are living proof of that dictum.

Posted in Politics | Leave a comment

Why Surrogacy is Wrong

I do get that, for some women, infertility is a major sorrow in their lives.  They want to be mothers, but, physically, it just isn’t possible.

For those women, and their husband, adoption is also not possible.  Unless they have a LOT of money to spend, legally adopting a child is hard.  It’s made harder by social workers who oppose adoption if a parent is living, however ill-suited they are to raise that child.  Too often, that opposition keeps children in foster care for years.  Some have accused agencies of keeping kids in foster care for the money it brings in – I can’t believe that.  I think it’s an ideological position that is to blame.

For those reasons, some women feel that they have no alternative to surrogacy.  Today’s surrogacy has evolved into a multi-partner process, that splits the pregnancy action into parts:

  • The male contribution – sometimes from the prospective adoptive father, other times from donors (the men are generally paid for their sperm).  Sometimes, the sperm samples are mixed, so the father-to-be can assume a biological connection.
  • The egg contribution – an egg donor is paid far more than the sperm donor.  That’s because she is pumped full of drugs to stimulate release of multiple eggs.  Research on the dangers has not fully explored the long-term damage to the egg donor’s system.  See information about Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome, which is just ONE of the problems that can arise.  For this part, younger, more educated women are preferred; often, these egg SELLERS are recruited via ads in college newspapers.  The high cost of college makes them a vulnerable population.
  • The Surrogate – that’s the woman who actually carries the child to term.  Since there is no genetic connection, she may be of any race or background.  Previous mothers are preferred for this part of the “job”.  Third-World women are often recruited for this.  India is one of the countries that have taken over this “job that Americans won’t do”.  Since the surrogate has to be pumped full of hormones to carry the pregnancy, it may well have a lifelong effect on that woman’s health.

Breaking the motherhood part into 2 separate parts (it can be more, if the egg of one woman is used, but the DNA of another woman) virtually eliminates the problem of the “Baby M” case, where the genetic mother carried the baby, and bonded with it, leading her to challenge giving the child up after birth.

Older would-be mothers are often encouraged to use eggs from another woman, as their own might be old enough to have potential damage.  For very busy women, or those who don’t want to “ruin” their figures, the surrogate option is preferred.

The whole process is expensive, involves multiple payments to the various people in the process, and legally severs the connection to original mothers and fathers.  For that reason, it is strongly promoted by well-off older partners, straight and gay.  They are the core group that has the financial resources to engage in the practice, and the ones that cannot, or would prefer to not, biologically create the child the natural way.

Who loses in this?

  • The sperm seller, who has left pieces of himself spread around the country.  In some cases, donors have been forced to contribute to the support of children they helped create.  The secrecy of the system can lead to unaware grown children becoming involved with their genetic brothers and sisters.
  • The egg seller, who, for a substantial amount of money, risks her health and future fertility.  Like the sperm seller, she has unknown numbers of potential children.
  • The surrogate, who takes some of the largest risks (pregnancy is still a risky proposition, especially when assisted with extra, injected chemicals).  During the pregnancy, both the hormonal changes, and the natural emotions of a mother contribute to a wrenching separation at birth.  Some husbands may resent the intrusion of the infant.  Children may have trouble understanding how mother could give away a child; lifelong insecurity may result.
  • The buyers, who are benefiting from many people’s loss.  They have to know that only their money made this possible; the ethics of it all are questionable, at best.  At the worst, it is exploitation of vulnerable and poor people.  The surrogacy is a form of temporary slavery-for-hire.

As Pope Paul VI made clear in his encyclical, the conception process is a holistic endeavor.  To divorce one part from another, or to mechanize part of the process, is wrong.  He wrote that modern man had:

…a new understanding of the dignity of woman and her place in society, of the value of conjugal love in marriage and the relationship of conjugal acts to this love.

I do realize that Pope Paul VI was widely disparaged for his encyclical.  Few were the clergy that actually taught their congregations about the thinking behind it.  It was reported in the press and on TV as the anti-sex preaching of an out-of-touch papacy.

The encyclical warned of four resulting trends: a general lowering of moral standards throughout society; a rise in infidelity; a lessening of respect for women by men; and the coercive use of reproductive technologies by governments.

Fast forward almost 50 years, and we have:

It is, in part, because surrogacy does not respect the dignity of women, that I am opposed to it.  It isn’t that I don’t understand (as far as I am able) the torment of a woman and a man that cannot conceive naturally.  The Biblical story of Abraham and Sarah is filled with that pain.

But, it is also filled with the consequences of going outside of natural marriage means to solve that problem.  Sarah insisted that Abraham impregnate a slave, Hagar.  After the child was born, Sarah did NOT bond with it, but resented both the child, and his mother.  She eventually insisted on banishing Abraham’s son and his mother.

Why might Sarah have been infertile?  Well, Abraham had to labor 7 years, only to be tricked into marrying the wrong daughter.  He then had to labor another 7 years – 14 in all.  Let’s assume that Sarah was 16 when Abraham first proposed.  Add 14 years to that age, and she would have been 30 when finally married.  By 27, women have lost 10% of their fertility.  By 30, women have lost 90% of their eggs.

That story is an object lesson in the perils of waiting to start your family.

Posted in Catholic, Culture, Liberal Thought, Life Issues, Technology, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

A Link to a FREE Book That Has Ideas for Improving the Nation

From young conservatives.

Posted in Conservative Self-Education | Leave a comment

The Campaign to Foist Biased “Economics” on the Public

I have to believe that it started with Thomas Sowell’s Basic Economics.  If you have NOT read it, I beg you, get a copy.  I absolutely HATED Economics in college, found it boring (it takes a special talent to make money – something we all want – boring).  Sowell’s special talent is to make his explanation of the basic mechanisms of economics READABLE, entertaining, and fun.  When you finish this book, you will be well qualified to follow the public debate on taxes, business, government spending, and policy.

There’s a new campaign to “explain” economics to the average person – look for distillations of this wretched thinking – which thinks lack of a large social state that controls everything – is the cause of all the ills of the USA.  I’m REAL sure that teachers will be indoctrinated with this at workshops, given curriculum that draws upon it, and encouraged to be “socially responsible”, and teach it to their kids (in this context, “teaching” means pushing kids to agree with the outcome, if not the thinking).

I haven’t the time to wade through all of Thomas Picketty’s book; but I don’t have to.  The blogger on An American Manifesto has, and it covers the topic throughly enough for you to understand what’s at stake.

So, how DO we solve the debt problem of the USA?

One way to do so is to sell off unnecessary land and buildings.

Some of that land is owned by the states.  And, as this article about SC’s state-owned land shows, government may be overleveraged with property.

But, that’s just one state.  How much land/property/buildings does the Federal government own, and what does it cost us?  Approximately 1/2 the land in Western states is “owned” by the Federal government (BTW, the land in dispute by Bundy is just such land).

According to Wikipedia,

As of March 2012, out of the 2.27 billion acres in the country, about 28% of the total was owned by the Federal government according to the Interior Department.

Here’s a report of SOME of the land managed by the Federal government.  Although it’s long, it isn’t that difficult to follow.  One of my arguments for reducing the size of federal lands is that they do such a poor job of it.  MANY of the western forest fires begin on Federally-owned land, and is a direct result of policy decisions - AND the continued holding of land in public trust.

My position:  if the property is so extensive that it cannot be maintained without risk of fire, it’s too big a holding.

Does that mean that the Feds should look to reduce the size of some of the parks?  Yep.  The public doesn’t benefit if the park is in flames; better to have a smaller park, and fewer fires.

Here’s a link to a map showing excess federal property (not being used).  See how many are in your state.

BTW, that link was from the White House – NOT a partisan site.

2 problems with holding so much land and property:

  1. The land and property costs the taxpayer – if not in use, it deteriorates.  A lot of money has to be spent to patrol it, keep it up, and provide basic maintenance.  See the NPR (Yes, THAT NPR!) report at the link.
  2. That land is NOT taxable property – as it would be in private hands.  Each acre/building is removed from the local tax rolls, and that state is poorer for that.



Posted in America, Conservative Self-Education, National Debt, Politics | Leave a comment

Political Opponents are NOT Klingons

…who must be CRUSHED if they cross the line.

He/she is a HUMAN BEING – made in the image of God.  They are not perfect; some may use sharp language in arguing their beliefs.  They may delight in the foibles of their political opponents – laugh at their pratfalls, enjoy the scandals, and gloat over their defeat.

That doesn’t excuse you from doing the same.

We’re SUPPOSED to follow the Christian example – turn the other cheek, return abuse with a gentle smile, act decently, even when reviled.

Yeah.  That’s NOT easy.  For me, I have to work – HARD – to avoid using intemperate language when insulted.  My natural inclination is to give it back – with some extra spin on the ball.  Particularly aiming at the face.

Sometimes, you might argue, it’s not possible to respond without some venom.  That opponent, you say, has EARNED the biting retort through their nasty speech.


Let’s examine one such case, and consider the FULL story.

Forbes Magazine had a recent look at Sarah Palin’s bringing up the Ukraine in the 2008 debates.  The first line reads:  Sarah Palin may not have been able to see Russia from her house, but she might have been right about Russia invading Ukraine.

BTW, Palin NEVER said she could see Russia from her house – that was Tina Fey.  She DID say, correctly, that from some parts of Alaska, you could see the shores of Russia.

“After the Russian Army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama’s reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence, the kind of response that would only encourage Russia’s Putin to invade Ukraine next,” Palin claimed in 2008, during her vice-presidential bid alongside John McCain.

Are the Liberal media falling over themselves to apologize for mocking her earlier words?

Don’t be ridiculous!

Has Sarah gone a little over-the-top in crowing about her prediction coming true?

Well, yeah, she has rubbed it in.

Can you blame her?

Posted in Election, Leftists, Politics, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

What Would YOU Do? What WILL You Do?

She’s being called “the bravest woman in the world”.

She is Meriam Yahia Ibrahim, a Sudanese Christian who refuses to convert to Islam.

Her father was Muslim; he abandoned the family when she was 6, and her Ethiopean Christian mother raised her.  She married a Christian in her church, gave birth to one child, and is currently pregnant with another – in jail.

Her brother brought the attention of the authorities to the “problem” (guess holiday dinners will be strained).  If your father is/was Muslim, ALL his children HAVE to be, as well.  And, for women, there’s another trial – they CANNOT marry a Christian, as Meriam has.

She has been sentenced to flogging, then execution.

She could stop it – IF she converted.

This, she refuses to do.

Let me see – the media is FILLED with “scandals”:

  • An elderly owner of a sports team made disparaging remarks about Blacks – no one’s life is in jeopardy
  • An athlete made mild remarks about a public, STAGED kiss between 2 men – no one’s life is in jeopardy, although the athlete is being fined, and will be sent to re-education camp (Gee, shades of the totalitarian Communist regimes!)
  • Sundry other “scandals” are hitting the headlines

But, not this.  It’s right out of the New Testament – where are the preachers, priests, and rabbis?  Why are none of the sermons asking for help for this woman – contacting our own government – at the White House, reaching the Dept. of State, writing a letter to the legislators (if your Senator/representative is running for office, it may be most effective), reaching Amnesty International?


We don’t even have to make that decision NOT to convert; although many of the songs we sing on Sunday claim that we would bravely resist, even to the point of death.

We just have to take a few SAFE actions, to try to persuade our government to get involved.

For most Americans, not happening.  Not as important as sports, entertainment, or otherwise goofing off.

And we CALL ourselves Christians.

Posted in America, Catholic, Culture, Islamicist, Politics | Leave a comment

Liberalism as Myth

There is a thread that looks at the Power of Myths – it started with an article on Why Myth Matters.

To the scientific man a myth is a curious but valueless cultural artifact from a superstitious age. The worthlessness of myth is rooted in the work of several academics from the turn of the twentieth century.

I tried to snip excerpts from the article, but couldn’t without ruthlessly violating copyright - I strongly suggest you read the whole thing. 

I grew up on myths – as a kid, Superman was almost as real to me as my neighbors.  It wasn’t just the popular TV show of the time – the costumes were cheesy, even to my eyes, the plots weren’t as well-crafted as the comics, and the lack of color made it, in retrospect, as exciting as a Soviet documentary.

But the comics!

They engaged me.  They guided my developing sense of right and wrong, instilled my belief that the weak and poor were to be protected (which later led me to youthful Liberal ideas), and were a powerful source of moral certainty.

I don’t mean to ignore other influences – my mother and father did their part, and not only sent me to Sunday School, but discussed current issues at the dinner table, allowing me to apply what I’d learned to real life.  Schools openly supported the values of the time – patriotism, belief in God, responsibility, obeying the law – all were grounded in what we now call “Juedo-Christian” values.

My influences extended beyond my neighborhood.  I went to school with children whose families had fled Nazi horrors, Soviet oppression, and the Holocaust.  I learned from them of the power of the State to cause great evil, as well as good.

And, not only that, but I imbibed the fashion sense of super-heroes, which might explain some of my more questionable clothing choices.

I read widely.  At around 12, I had finished all the books in the Children’s section of my local library (I may have missed a few, but not many), and wandered into the adult section.  When I realized that no one was going to chase me out, I started taking out books from there, starting in the Z’s (that section abutted the Children’s section).  For a while, I worked alphabetically – wonder if I was slightly OCD?

Eventually, I would find an author I’d hear about, and read everything that person had available on the shelves.  Hemingway, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Austen, whatever.  Fortunately, the fad for filling shelves with popular bestsellers, rather than classic literature, had not started, so I got a wide smattering of modern, and past, literature.  Some junk, too, but trying to check out a quasi-smutty or more adult book got you the fish-eye from the librarians.  They exercised their authority by suggesting that you wait a few years to read that one.

Imagine that!  A non-related adult exercising moral guidance!  Without being sued by the parents!

At home, my parents didn’t censor my reading choices – they figured that if I could read it, I must be old enough to absorb the lessons within.  For the most part, it worked.

I liked mythic novels, which is why I’ve read ALL of Sherlock Holmes (the literary character, not the insipid TV character),  From that, and similar works, I absorbed the concept that even deeply flawed people could be capable of great things.

Today, Liberals sneer at myths – IF those myths are Conservative ones.  They have, however, imposed their own myths:

More Later.

Posted in Conservative Self-Education, Leftists, Liberal Thought, Politics, Uncategorized | Leave a comment