Friday, December 31, 2004

It’s Our Shame to bear.

By T. J. Willms

While sitting down to write, I caught the reflection of my un-shaven face in my monitor without being able to turn away. I simply could not face myself in the mirror for long enough this morning thinking about the miserly amount my government has pledged to the relief effort in southern Asia. If only I were forced to pay higher taxes, there would be more money for the United States Government to funnel into the effort. All of the death and destruction surely underscores the guilt we should all be feeling just thinking about the squandering of our recourses having just celebrated the most offensive of Christian holy days. Thank goodness for the mass media to remind us all of our good fortune to be living in the richest nation on the earth. Our President embarrassingly, is staying in his Crawford Texas ranch on vacation. Even though he is, surely in constant contact with all of the necessary government agencies he should be rushing back to Washington for appearance sake. The shame of it all is almost too much to bear. I think I may need to take a pill…...

All right, that will be entirely enough self-flagellation. I think the proper emotional response at this point would be irritation, consternation, or perhaps even outrage. I am referring of course to the remarks of that snotty Euro-punk Jan Egeland the U.N. Emergency Relief Coordinator. The U. S. contribution has escalated each day since those ruinous waves smashed ashore into some of the poorest and most vulnerable regions of the world. It began as an instantaneous offer of $4 million in emergency aid. It increased shortly thereafter to $15 million and when we better understood the scope of the destruction it more than doubled to a total of $35 million dollars. Today the President, having had the opportunity to fully evaluate the awesome entirety of the damage and human toll of the disaster has increased that amount ten-fold. U.S. disaster relief workers, soldiers, sailors are rushing into the area to help those most in need. An entire aircraft carrier battle group of a dozen ships is heading into the area to lend what aid they are able. Twenty heavy airlift C-130 aircraft complete with aircrews have been dispatched courtesy of the U. S. taxpayers.

It is not my purpose here to crow at the generosity of the country in which I live. I would however like to refute the arrogant statement of a minor Norwegian government functionary via the auspices of the U.N. telling me I am not doing enough and I should be paying more in taxes. My government spends the money I do send in to their tender care quite freely enough thank you Mr. Egeland. I would also like to point out that through corporations and privately the United States last year alone has given some $29 million dollars in charitable donations to overseas aid. I would be very surprised indeed if the overall U. S. contribution to the relief and rebuilding effort does not exceed $1 billion I suspect it will be considerably more than that amount. Yet, criticism of the U. S. efforts to be of service to the Tsunami victims crashes forward like an angry sea.

Former U. N. International Development Secretary Clare Short has made the accusation that President Bush’s “working group” of nations in the region is a direct attempt to circumvent the U. N. which is the proper organization to co-ordinate the aid recourses pouring into the region. The same U. N. that so smoothly administered the Iraqi “oil for food” program. It should be more accurately described as “Money for Kofi and Saddam” program and makes the U. N. the very last place anyone could confidently send relief funds expecting them to arrive where they are needed. Ms Short went on to state that the coalition countries (the U. S., Australia, Japan, and India) did not have good records on responding to international disasters. Additionally she accused the U. S. of being “very bad at coordinating with anyone.” "These nations are launching a separate operation unwilling to work with the rest of the world through the UN system," which she states is the only agency with the proper “moral authority” to handle this crisis.

The morality of the U. N. is legendary and is likely the very reason President Bush has wisely chosen a different avenue to deliver the response of the American people to the heart wrenching devastation we witness on our televisions every evening. Mr. Bush is in fact the first U. S. President to hold a Masters degree in business administration. Is it so very surprising that he would want to analyze the situation and then develop a plan of action to deal with both the immediate as well as the long term needs of these devastated people. Further is there any mystery that he should upon careful consideration, find the U. N.’s track record of administering aid resources to the needy wanting?

It should also be noted that the entire world is responding with tremendous generosity to this unprecedented crisis. The citizens of the United Kingdom have been donating funds at the astonishing rate of 1 million British pounds per hour for the past day. The website of The Swiss-based International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRCS) has crashed under the weight of donations and inquiries coming through their doors. Governments everywhere are adding their willing contributions to help and most of them are choosing not the U. N. but the International Committee of the Red Cross and Red Crescent.

None of these various nations have drawn the public ire of the U.N. I suspect that is primarily and specifically because they do not have “a Bush to Bash.” It seems that only the tiny nation of Israel is more hated than President Bush, having their offer of 150 experienced doctors and rescue workers flatly rejected by Sri-Lanka due to the complaints of the Muslim community on that ravaged island nation.

The contributors to this massive aid effort are numerous and diverse, and United States will be as forthcoming as any. We will be there in the long term and that fact will go largely unreported. The United States is neither trying to curry favor within the region nor are we attempting to appear benevolent before the world press. We will do it because it’s the right thing to do and that, quite frankly is not arguable. We will be there well into the future to help rebuild the infrastructure, hospitals, and schools destroyed by this horrific natural disaster. When the job is finished, we will leave when asked to do so. The U.N. however, via their numerous commissions and agencies will surely remain behind to help these developing nations remain impoverished while publicly and thoroughly criticizing our efforts.

A brief list of Governments contributing to the Tsunami aid effort as of Wednesday, 29 December.

FRANCE: 100,000 euros, 16 rescuers sent to Thailand and 10 tons of aid to Sri Lanka.

GERMANY: 2 million euros. Three German planes to be dispatched to Thailand.

INDIA: $23 million in aid ,warships and aircraft to distribute food, medicines and blankets to Sri Lanka and the Maldives.

JAPAN: $40 million pledged and three navy vessels sent to Thailand.

KUWAIT: $2 million

QATAR: $10 million

SAUDI ARABIA: $10, half via the Saudi Red Crescent, and half for international aid groups.

SOUTH KOREA: $2 million.

TAIWAN: $5.1 million.


UNITED STATES: $35 million and 12 naval vessels to the region, 20 transport aircraft.

AUSTRALIA: $27 million, five transport planes with supplies and medical teams as well as teams of police officers.

BRITAIN: 15 million pounds ($29 million).

CAMBODIA: $40,000.

CHINA: $2.6 million.

CZECH REPUBLIC: A plane sent to Sri Lanka with drinking water. Officials said aid worth $444,400 would be sent.

EUROPEAN UNION: $41 million 3 million euros already allocated to IFRC.

FINLAND: 500,000 euros to the IFRC. Local aid organizations have contributed another 75,000 euros.
The Finnish Red Cross has dispatched a full field hospital with 15 staff to Sri Lanka.

(list compiled by Al-Jezzera12/29/04)

Thursday, December 23, 2004

So this is Christmas...

...let's hope it's a good one

Well, it's that time of year again and I'd like to say have a very Merry Christmas to you all. We should all set aside our petty squabbles and irritations for a couple of days - relax and enjoy family, friends and food. (Drinks are OK too)

As we age, and those of us over 40 know of what I speak, Christmas is always just around the corner. When we were little kids it just couldn't get here soon enough. My 12-year old has been saying "I can't wait for Christmas" multiple times and hour for 3 weeks straight. For me, it's already soon enough. The old saying "time flies when you're having fun" should really be changed to "time flies when you get old". The time difference between that day in early April when you know the snow and cold are gone for good and the day in November when you know the cold and snow are here to stay is increasingly compressed. Bam, zoom, zip - it's Christmas time again.

I have been slightly aware of the annual assault on Christmas within the mass culture, frankly it bores me to no end - both sides of it. Part of me does get riled by the constant debassing of the traditional aspects of Christmas. Yet, another part of me knows that what has become tradition is so far removed from the significance of the holiday that we don't have a "biblical" leg to stand on. Should we Christians really get all bent out of shape that Macy's or [insert name of store here] won't allow Merry Christmas to be dispalyed in favor of some generic happy holidays signage? If we succumb to our outrage and boycott these stores we would probably do more harm than good. Presumably many Christmas loving Christians work at these stores and could possibly lose their jobs if the business is crippled. On the other hand we have watched the media and Hollywood in particular do everything in their power to reflect Christians, evengelicals and catholics alike, in the worst possible light. All I have to say is we (Christians) do a good enough job of it ourselves that we don't need pop culture helping us out so much.

I guess we can let popular culture pretend that this society is evolving into a loving, compassionate and caring secular utopia. We know in our hearts where these attributes stem from. Most of the people I know and associate with are the salt of the earth. They are kind and helpful in so many ways that you start to wonder who are all these bad people you hear about. Yet, we are all fallen men on this earth. We are all sinners. We are imperfect, all of us. Our human nature tells us to be selfish and self important and our Godly nature compells us to be helpful and loving to those in need. This is the eternal struggle the rages in all of us. Amazingly, for most of us our Godly nature wins out much of the time. Even those among us who profess no particular Christian affiliation have been enlightened by the holy spirit whether they would ever admit it or not. All Jesus Christ wanted for us is to find our way to God and he offered us a portal. I, for one, accept his guidance directly and willingly, many others will get caught up in the current. It's all good.

Happy Birthday Jesus and God bless us all!

Saturday, December 18, 2004

More Prisons, Less Crime: UPDATE

I am pleased to annouce that my submisson to the St. Paul Pioneer Press was published on December 17th 2004. I am also pleased to see that it was printed unedited. Sadly, I don't believe the paper's website provides access to letters to the editor beyond the date they were published. It will be interesting to see if my piece generates the usual response from the hand-wringers out there. Check back for more updates.


Thursday, December 16, 2004

Victim of Success

Are we a victim of our own success in this terror war?

I 've heard secretary Rumsfeld refer to the fall of Baghdad as a "catastrophic success". As incredible as it seems the quick victory in Iraq left a huge whole in the war plan. There were problems with the support troops catching up with the front line. Sites that should have been secured were not. By the time the support personel arrived looting and other detrimental activities contributed to some of the chaos we still see today more than a year and a half later. Some would argue that what was a hole in our war plan was the effect of Saddam's war plan. I don't know if I'd go that far. I think Saddam's troops high-tailed it out of there shortly after they filled their underpants. Clearly some of the Iraqi weapons stockpiles fell into the insurgen... Um, I mean, terrorists hands. America, President Bush and the average Iraqi citizen have been paying the price ever since.

There has been no shortage of critics of the President's "Iraqi Adventure" here and abroad. Some criticism is valid and even warranted, war is a dirty unpredictable business, even a just war. By watching the nightly news or following the recent election you'd think that Iraq is one big chaotic mess. Even top secret CIA memos circulated by the New York Times claim that civil war is inevitable. That may be true, however, it may be fought with ballots and not bullets.

I have heard the liberals (who, by the way, are all for compassion and democracy and human rights unless it's on George W. Bushs' agenda)attempt to minimize any good news coming out of Iraq. They like to pooh pooh military personel who send e-mails or post blogs on the Internet claiming that we ARE being misled. They are not talking about Bush mis-leading the country into war, rather, we are being misled by the naysayers and the Bush-haters. I implore you to go to this website and read the good news - it's truly incredible. Chrenkoff has been regularly published on, the op/ed arm of the Wall Street Journal. The detail and the optimism is stunning. So too is the blog known as Iraq The Model found here Again, these guys, these Iraqi's are absolutely giddy about the prospect of an election.

Still, the gloom and doomers and the pesimists won't relent. As a famous Senator from Kansas once said: you know it, I know it and the American people know it. These Bush-haters, these Cheney-haters, these Haliburton-haters will only find joy in America's defeat. They will not even admit that Afghanistan is a smashing success. They try to claim that al Qaeda is stronger than ever??? They try to poison the cooperation we have with Pakistan and all of our real allies in this war. They stand squarely beside the very nations and entities (read the UN) that propped up Saddam, thwarting the internationally imposed sanctions designed to rid Iraq of this sadistic dictator. And they try to claim the mantle of compassion and human rights advocacy. What poppycock.

This brings me, finally, to the point of my comments today. Are we the victim of our success? The answer is clearly, yes. I recently read that the democracy movement in the terrorist supporting nation of Iran is stalling. It's stalling because they are waiting for us. They figure: why should they stand up and be counted (and shot... er beheaded) when all they have to do is wait for the Americans to invade and throw out their repressors. They saw what we did in Afghanistan to right of them and Iraq to left of them. The Iraqi's did the same thing, enduring years of barbary and repression waiting for GI Joe. This is a problem. It was America, despite having no army, no navy, and no government declared independence from the most powerful nation on earth some 200 years ago. It's not that we didn't need or want help - it's that we did something about it. We didn't wait for France to do our bidding. I am positive that if the Iranian people confidently declared a split with the mullahs that nations like America and Britian, Austrailia and Poland, Italy and Japan would step up and help.

I recently saw a bumper sticker that dispalyed an American flag with the caption: "These colors don't run" and then right below that in smaller print "the world". I laughed, and said to myself, but someones got to do it. Volunteers, anyone? I thought so.

Friday, December 10, 2004

Values My Butt....

Why the “Media” will never understand how George W. Bush won re-election.

By T. J. Willms

I do not accept the widely reported premise that the single most important “issue” for the majority of voters on Election Day was moral values. All of the major news organizations have been blathering about this ad nauseam for weeks, even though their own exit-polling data (flawed as it was) doesn’t support that conclusion. Terrorism and the war in Iraq were treated as two separate entities within every exit poll I have read or heard about since November 2nd, when they are inextricably linked. Those “insurgents” our brave Marines are battling in places like Baghdad and Fallujah are not disaffected Iraqi green grocers. They are fanatic, Islamic, fascists, simply put they are TERRORISTS.

As separate categories terrorism ranked 2nd in most voter’s minds with 19%, and the war in Iraq fell well below Jobs and the Economy at 15%. These two “issues” however, cannot be held apart they are the same. Same enemy, same objective, same tactics, and in most cases the same soviet made weapons. Only the location varies, but it is undeniably the same war. A war against extremist Islamic terrorists hell bent on killing Americans and ranked overwhelmingly as the number one issue with American voters at 34%. Moral values are and were very important to voters regardless of party affiliation, religion, or the economic circumstances of the individual voter. It was important enough to the vast majority of the voting public to rank resoundingly second at 22%.

The media would also have you and I believe that the “moral values” encompasses a wide variety of unrelated viewpoints such as abortion, gay marriage, the inexorable creep of cultural profanity, capital punishment, and for many the morality of the preemptive aspects of the Bush Doctrine. When I consider the phrase "moral values" it brings to my mind words like Leadership, Judgment, Character, and Responsibility. I decided to consult my aging American Heritage Dictionary to settle this apparent ideological dispute. I did have to scan past the first three definitions of the word all regarding monetary worth to find what I was looking for. A glance toward my thesaurus’ list of synonyms also showed a closer alignment with my interpretation than say… Dan Rather’s.

Values: 4. A principle, standard, or quality considered worthwhile or desirable.

Thesaurus: 1. (n.) Rules of right or good conduct:
• Ethics
• Principles
• Standards
• Ideals
• Morals

It has always been the case that by casting our vote, we are searching for a leader with moral values similar to our own. It is my belief that the founders of this “Greatest Nation on Gods Green Earth” would be amazed and pleased that the experiment they began over 200 years ago is alive and well despite the insightful-illogic leaping forth from nearly all of our news sources. When considering this past election using the definition above as a guideline, it became obvious that our entire election process relies on these kinds of values in order to function properly.

First we must all TRUST that our constitution has set the stage for our nation to flourish despite whoever takes up temporary residence in the white house. We also need to have confidence in the INTEGRITY of our electoral system. It requires candidates with the COURAGE to stand up to everything from microscopic media scrutiny to forgery and outright scurrilous lies about who they are and what they stand for. The people have to have FAITH that our votes will be fairly counted and that a peaceful transition of power will result from their efforts. The process relies upon the WISDOM of the American people who take the RESPONSIBILITY for choosing the right person to lead their government.

All of these “Values” are so tightly interwoven within our election process that the very idea of “moral values” as a separate campaign issue seems seem to me to be slightly moronic. While my dictionary was still open I flipped through it to the definition of “journalism” to find out what kind of people would be foolhardy enough to try and winnow it out as a different issue. The third entry caught my eye because it is the basic standard with which they wish us to view them while each day they march to the tune of an entirely different and very partisan drum.

JOURNALISM: 3. The style of writing characteristic of material in newspapers and magazines, consisting of direct presentation of facts or occurrences with little attempt at analysis or interpretation.

National security and defeating TERRORISM was the primary factor in deciding who won in November. This requires no analysis or interpretation. Let the “NEWSIES” and the Democratic Pundits along with the DNC believe it was something different and they will continue to be wrong, and lose elections.

Now for the good news:
Today it was gleefully reported that the unhinged leadership at has claimed ownership of the DNC party chair and is throwing their support behind Vermont Governor Howard “EEAAAARRRGH!” Dean. Well good for them! This should help the Democratic Party fragment further into oblivion as a major political force in American politics. Perhaps in the next election they will garner the same kind of support as the Libertarian Party did in this one. Their “Moral-Values” have already moved so far left as to be virtually unrecognizable as the same party that brought us J. F. K. in 1960. Good Luck Democrats, and when you finally reach the same conclusion as Ronald Reagan did that "their party has left them" we will have room in our big inclusive tent for many of you.

Wednesday, December 08, 2004

More Prisons, Less Crime?

Why is it some people just can't accept success? Take for instance the current spate of articles making the rounds now that say abstinence programs are not working and are dangerous. How do these people reconcile this notion with the fact that since the focus on teaching abstinence over teaching promiscuity we have seen out of wedlock births for the youngest of our teenage girls at the lowest level since 1948. Out of wedlock births and abortions for all age groups are down, down substantially. This is the definition of success, isn't it?

Well now, today I read in the St. Paul Pioneer Press a letter to the editor that claims... oh hell, read it for yourself:

(article reprinted here solely for the point of discussion)
More prisons won't reduce crime

The Pioneer Press' call for more prisons rings very hollow. The United States incarcerates more people than any other country in the world. Among these are hundreds of thousands of nonviolent offenders, many of them for minor crimes like petty theft and marijuana possession.

In addition, there is the startling fact that one in four African-American males will find themselves behind bars at some point during their lives.

Building more prisons is like putting a large Band-Aid around a gashed heart. The blood will be hidden, but the dying person won't be healed. We have to look deeper. We have to look at the long entrenched patterns of poverty, addiction, racism and powerlessness that are hidden beneath. These are the true causes of crime, and these are the things we must address. Putting more people behind bars does nothing, except create an illusion that we are safe.

St. Paul

Well Nathan, that's some flowery rhetoric. Too bad it's pure rubbish. I just had to send a response in the form of a letter to the editor, whether it is ever published in the Pioneer Press or not I'll put it here for your perusal:

Dear Editor,

In response to letter writer Nathan G. Thompson (More prisons won't reduce crime, 12/8/04) he misses the simple fact that crime and especially violent crime has been going down in a substantial way since society has demanded tougher penalties for criminals. If it means more prisons then so be it. The fact the America jails more people per capita than other country is a sign of a more just society. Crime victims deserve to see their perpetrators behind bars.

I might be inclined to agree with Mr. Thompson on the petty drug possession cases, but I frankly tire of the constant refrain that poverty is root cause of crime. The root cause of criminal behavior from the street punk to the corporate embezzler is lack of moral values and self restraint. A friend of mine once asked his teenage son why it is wrong to steal and was, sadly, not at all shocked to hear him say – because you might get caught. By the way the correct answer is – because it is wrong.

Craig Willms
St Paul

So there it is, another example of refusing to see success for what it is. If the point of putting people in jail is to make it safer for the law abiding then more prisons are what is called for.

Monday, December 06, 2004

A Small Life: Part I

(…or the big space inside my head)

Have you heard of the expression "Living Large"? As a young man, I just took for granted I would be living large by now. There wasn't a doubt in my mind that I would live a consequential life. Hell, I was going to be a rock star. From the first time we pounded out Deep Purple's Smoke on the Water in Greg Saylor's basement I knew this is what I wanted to do. For a few years it seemed inevitable, people really dug the band. We had some natural talent and a pretty tight sound, and if we played our cards right we just might have impressed the right people at the right time. But even then real life was creeping into our little party, threatening to derail the rock and roll train. This nagging thing, this real life, sapped the energy and the soul of the band. By the summer of '83 it was over, the band was done.

The dream didn't die that summer it just scattered like a dandelion in the wind. I went on to be a letter sweater-wearing member of the classic and classy "Rocka-fellas". It was a great band and to my delight people really loved our shows. We played in some of the ritziest clubs and events in the Twin Towns. I wouldn't trade those nights under the lights for all the brass in the world. It was loads of fun and we actually made some money too. All the while, riding roughshod over the whole experience was this damnation called real life.

The years passed but the dream of living large still smoldered. After a series of undistinguished recording projects of original material under different pseudonyms and a multitude of personnel changes, even a venerable institution like the Rocka-fellas succumbed to real life. As it happened my day job went belly up around the same time and I found myself crawling up from the forsaken depths of an unrealized dream. Still, there was a spark, an ember rather, of this large life I had planned on living. History will know who I was…

A Small Life: Part II

(...or the big space inside my head)

I think deep down I honestly knew I was never going to make it in the music biz. For one, I didn't really put in the effort it truly required, and number two, I have come to realize I don't quite have the talent to pull it off. As a safety valve, I had turned to writing during the long years waiting for my rock and roll ship to come in. Writing, unlike painting, which I had left behind because, again, there was talent there - but just not enough, required little in the way of materials or hard labor. I started by writing letters to the editor to local newspapers. I quickly learned to be provocative with my prose, just a touch this side of inflammatory without being kooky. I delighted in the way I could get other readers to chime in on the subject of my choosing. Mostly they thought I was a moron or at least woefully misguided. Before long I had been published a dozen times in both the local dailies. The St. Paul paper had a dozen open spots every year for community-based writers. Every December the editors picked the twelve from hundreds of wannabes like me. Every year I was snubbed, turned down cold. The op-ed editor and I maintained a cordial e-mail correspondence for years and still I was never given a shot. There were a couple of times I made the cut and was even asked to submit a second sample column, yet the call never came.

I tried my hand at the great American novel too. I did it; I have a manuscript in my hand ready to be critically edited. I have no idea what to do with it. What little I really knew about the music industry I knew even less about the publishing world. Besides, there are a million good writers out there, way more than there are good musicians. What chance do I really have? What could I possibly write than hasn't already been written? And who really gives a damn?

(…or the big space inside my head)

In order to keep real life at bay, like I have been doing all my life I find my self living in the big space inside my head. It's roomy, that's for sure. It's safe, tidy, comforting and dull, but here I am finally living large. Instead of being dragged down by the minutiae of daily life I keep my head in clouds and think heavy philosophical thoughts. I study history and dream of future to come instead of living in the here and now. And by dissecting this fact I realize what living large really means. It means living every moment like it's your last. Wow, just like that, huh. So, that's what it is… Life is a cliché.

I will make it my mission to live large. The future is now. Today is the first day of the rest of my life. Amen brother!

Thursday, December 02, 2004

Staunch Partisan or Thoughtful Ideological Belief System: You Decide

The building of the entitlement/victim society has diluted justifiable social concerns with frivolity

Believe it or not I get a lot of teasing from my friends, family and colleagues at work for my staunch support for the Republican Party. Yes, indeed, I do identify myself as a Republican, I do so with pride. I do not, however, consider myself a transparent cheerleader for the party; I just tend toward the American conservative view which is far more at home in the GOP than it is in the party of the donkey. I could go through a whole list of things that bother me about the national party, but I won’t because that’s not the focus of my comments today.

Years of studying the politics of ideology have led me to the American conservative movement as an antidote to socialism. It is my belief, and I am not alone, that socialism – yes, including social democracy is one the greatest threats to freedom and individual liberty the world faces. Now before anyone gets the notion that I am a hard hearted – mean spirited – nasty ole Republican, I contend that the term social safety net and socialism are not one in the same. They are a thousand reasons for society to come to aid and comfort of those who are truly needy. There should be no reason a rich and dynamic society like the one that exists in the United States can’t afford to care for the least of us. This should not, however, lead us to a socialist society. There is enough money that spills and splashes out of the capitalistic bucket to pay for all of our reasonable social responsibilities. The fact that it doesn’t in all cases is more the fault of the “do gooders” than it is the mean spirited conservatives. The process of building the entitlement/victim society has diluted justifiable social concerns with frivolity. Just because you are born does not entitle one to an easy, carefree life.

I think a lot of Americans look upon certain social democracies in Europe with longing and envy. This is misguided and dangerous. We can not compare the United States with Sweden or Netherlands, two countries often held up by American socialists as model societies. Its apples and oranges, my friends, Sweden is a tiny, homogeneous state with almost none of the challenges that face a large and unique nation like America. That being said, it goes much deeper than that. The secular hostility toward religiosity in Europe is really at the root of dividing line between americanism and socialism. It can be frankly demonstrated by Netherland’s indefensible position on the death penalty for criminals and babies. The Dutch are aghast at the idea that America (Texas, in particular) executes murderers. And many Americans are sickened by the practice of executing the sick, elderly and the unwanted under the guise of mercy. This week we learned that the Dutch have been euthenizing babies with birth defects or serious health conditions. In America there are hospitals and nurseries that specialize in keeping babies alive – sometimes to the tune of millions of dollars per baby. This is a huge cultural division between Americans and many Europeans.

We yankees scratch our heads trying to figure out the mentality that calls the execution of a stone cold killer barbaric and the poisoning of an innocent baby mercy. In all honesty I do not support the death penalty at all. There are exceptions, of course, but I think the possibility of wrongly executing an innocent person outweighs the perceived cost of housing a murderer in prison for life. I also believe this is a debatable subject, whereas the wanton killing of an innocent baby inside or outside the womb is simply reprehensible. The former being a position the Democrats could embrace, the latter a notion the liberals will not consider. The conservative circle, often portrayed as backward and rigid is actually considerate of both debates.

There is no perfect system this side of heaven for governing humanity – humans are imperfect. Democracy, where individuals have a say in their governments seems to be the most fair and workable governing solution devised to date. It is also the form of government that is most compatible with human nature. I think it is important for society to be compatible with human nature. Human nature is at the same time driven by the needs and desires of the individual and the requirements of the community. Socialism is government by the group for the group which often tramples the individual in the process. Americanism, often called rugged individualism, puts the individual first, leaving the community at the mercy of the few standouts among us. Is there a third way? I don’t know. There are plenty of isms that have fallen by the wayside leaving us with, for all intents and purposes, these two. In life it often comes down to two choices and history (the unrevised edition) will record which will lead to a better more prosperous life for individual humans that make up the this community we call humanity.

Monday, November 22, 2004

A Hollywood Prophecy?

Demolition Man
Warner Bros. (1993)

By T. J. Willms

Try, as it will to distort our history and influence American society at large Hollywood only rarely hits the mark with the bone chilling precision of this frivolously amusing and mildly entertaining motion picture. The most disturbing quality of the film is that the more palpably prophetic events depicted are ancillary to the main plotline. When I first viewed it some eleven years ago I got the shivers over those peripheral details thrown upon the screen in an attempt at tongue in cheek mockery of a potential (if unlikely) future America.
Even though comparatively, a great deal more of the stark vision in George Orwell’s 1984 has come to fruition it did not paint the bloodcurdling image of the future of America in such a graphic way. Setting aside all of the gratuitous violence, and the captivating vision of a young Sandra Bullock clad in Spandex britches and a leather jacket. You need only to have a cursory knowledge of some recent news events, and this movie will leave you feeling afraid, very afraid. Why you ask? Because day by day, inch by inch it is becoming true before our very eyes.

It’s not the settings; the “San-Angeles metroplex” doesn’t quite exist. It’s not the time frame or even the story line, as we don’t yet freeze prisoners for their crimes. It is the people and their behavior that I recognized as alarmingly familiar in the world I find myself living in. For example while I don’t entirely disagree, the F. C. C. is currently going bonkers regulating and fining people for saying “bad words.” Feminist organizations in concert with a willing media and our public school systems are engaging in an active campaign of “feminizing” our boys and young men. I’m sure some of you have noticed in the recent past many pundits and commentators advocating licensing parents when something awful happens to a child due to astoundingly stupid parents. Reproduction is more and more frequently handled through a medical procedure rather than the “horizontal mamba”, or the “Hunka Chunka.” Need I mention the advent of advent of “cyber-sex” via the Internet and the clever inventors attempting to bring to life technology in an the attempt to make it more real. I have even caught myself singing in the car the so-called “mini-tunes” from this movie to my then infant daughter, all together now “My dog’s better than your dog, my dog’s better than yours…”

Ah...never mind.

The most accurate vision within this movie with the most alarming consequences for the America we all live in is contained in the fairly innocuous scene when Stallone and Bullock are on their way to dinner. Bullock’s character is chattering about doing some research at the Schwarzenegger library and has to explain to a thoroughly incredulous Stallone that it’s “the Arnold Schwarzenegger Presidential Library.” She goes on to explain how after his popularity as California’s Governor the constitution was amended to allow foreign-born citizens to run for president. In the scene Stallone shook his head in abject bewilderment, as I watched it my blood ran cold.

I have in recent weeks witnessed a growing movement of misguided people in California try to bring to life the very circumstance inserted into this near “B” movie to add a bit of comic relief. It was considered so far-fetched eleven years ago as to be an enormous joke to introduce it into a script for his long time box-office rival. I wonder if the writers are now shaking their own heads in abject bewilderment at the prescience of this tiny episode in their screenplay. At first I discounted the reports of these few individuals as perhaps being overzealous campaign workers seeing more in their candidate than is actually there. I did visit their website at and was still unconcerned.

Imagine my stunned consternation upon reading a news report a few days later that a former Secretary of State of the United States has now publicly endorsed such a foolhardy idea. It should surprise no one that it was none other than Madeleine Korbel Albright! She is at best perhaps one of the least effective Secretary’s of State in recent memory, presiding over our State Department during some of its worst failures in our history as a nation. Oh and by the way, was born in Prague, Czechoslovakia.

Her wisdom and tireless efforts helped bring us the wildly successful peacekeeping mission in Kosavo, the failed Camp David accords leading to Arafat’s most recent intifada, a completely revitalized North Korean nuclear program, Genocide in Rwanda, and did I forget to mention her involvement in bringing us that spiffy “Oil for Food” program through the U. N. Her tenure at the State Department is not even slightly reminiscent of the images of “statesmanship” I can summon forth from my own memory of previous or even the current occupant of that office. Yet she is touted as being nothing short of brilliant as a former diplomat by academia and those wearing their DNC tinted glasses. She is extremely well read and educated, and an able linguist in several languages. She not wise in any way and fortunately for now she is ineligible to run for the office of the President of the United States of America.

Unfortunately her stature as a former Secretary of State may lend some impetus to this movement, which would be dire indeed for our nation. Our founding fathers had some very sound reasoning behind writing the following passage into our constitution.

Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the United States Constitution:

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

The person inhabiting the “Highest office” of our nation, and now the most powerful office in the world cannot possess divided loyalties to or harbor undue prior resentment for any other nation. Considering only the position as “Commander and Chief” of the most powerful military the world has ever seen, it would be unconscionable for us as a nation to allow it. There are even more opportunities for wide-scale economic chicanery. I will accede the point that many supporters of this movement make that most immigrants have to work far harder to attain their citizenship than many of those born here. That is clearly a failing of our educational system not our constitution.

We have an obligation to our nation, our children and those that will come after, and the world at large, to heed the wisdom of those long dead who thought it was important enough to clearly specify this condition in the founding document of our nation. It was not included by accident. The world has indeed changed in the 228 years since those words were added to the constitution, but the wisdom included within them is timeless. There are many scenarios that lead to a happy and benign ending in this endeavor to welcome and embrace those who have made America their home and have come to love this “Nation of immigrants.” Imagine if you will a naturalized citizen Kofi Annan or Jacques Chirac perhaps worse yet President of the United States Madame Madeleine Korbel Albright! There would always be questions looming about where their hearts, loyalty and judgment truly lie. Those who gave life to this truly Great Nation considered an un-fragmented allegiance to our nation a paramount requirement for attaining the topmost position of our government.

It would be irresponsible in the extreme for us to fall prey to a “cult of personality” contained within a charismatic and popular figure and discard the guidance and wise council of our forefathers. Little good can come from it and the potential for great harm would be lurking forever in our future.

Have a Joy, Joy Day!

P. S. I still have no earthly idea what the three seashells are for

Wednesday, November 17, 2004

Welcome to Chicken Littleville, USA

Oh My God, the Sky is Falling! We're Doomed!

For goodness sakes, will the chicken littles out there ever shut up? By listening to and reading the hand-wringers out there in mainstream media land you would think the reelection of George W. Bush was akin to the birth of the anti-Christ. Sure there were insane utterings from ultra-slob Michael Moore and amateur psychologist Maureen Dowd before the election about the coming doom if Bush was retained, but the refrain from the luxury boxes is near deafening.

Today I read this:

Former Clinton economist: Bush tax cuts will threaten economy
Lancaster New Era, by Patricia A. Poist

A former Clinton administration economist predicted here Monday that the gap between rich and poor will widen and budget deficits will escalate if President Bush fulfills some of his economic goals. “From my perspective, this is a cause for concern,’’ said Alan Krueger, who is now Princeton University’s Bendheim professor of economics and public policy, as well as a frequent contributor to the New York Times...

No need to read the rest of the article, it's pointless. It seems that now after 3 years of Bush economic stewardship (you really can't count year one since it takes time for policies to be ratified and put into practice) we have seen an economy blossom up from the depths a recession, a dotcom/new economy bubble burst, massive corporate scandals, and a devastating terrorist attack on the heart of our financial system. This current economy is growing steadily, inflation and interest rates are relatively low and unemploment figures are going down as job creation goes up. This is all good news, right? Not if you listen to the "experts". These are the same experts, by the way, that said Reagan was going to destroy the American and therefore the world economy with his tax policies. Instead, of course, the exact opposite happened. While nothing is ever perfect, I think we would be better off following the Reagan and Bush approaches than say, the Jimmy Carter approach, but that's just me.

The other day I read this:

Bush threatens mankind, says Caldicott
By David Williams November 16, 2004

Nobel Peace Prize nominee Dr Helen Caldicott fears US President George Bush's re-election will lead to Armageddon and she isn't sure if mankind would survive another four years.
"This is the most serious election that has ever occurred in the history of the human race, without a scrag of doubt," she told

"I don't know if we'll survive the next four years ... I don't think the Americans have, on the whole, the faintest idea - and I have to say also I don't think most Australians do either. But it's not just the threat from nuclear war. It's the threat of what's happening to the environment, the global warming which is occurring rapidly now, to ozone depletion, to species extinction, to deforestation - it's the whole thing."

Goodness gracious, pack your ass and head for the hills! We're all gonna die! Can these people be serious? I know GWB has a secret laboratory under Dick Cheney's residence where they are making the poisoness gas that will kill everything on the planet except evangelicals and oil company executives, but for pete's sake this lunitic raving by the leftists has gone too far.

These are just a few of the doom and gloom articles diguised as news stories I've read since the election. Nearly every interest group has weighed in now on how the war-mongering evengelical red state Christians will destroy the world. This while the media is deflecting Islamic atrocities as desperate acts of desperate people only trying to get from under the American fascist boot.

Whether these imbeciles want to believe it or not we ARE at war, it IS a world war and the cultural liberals will be the first to be beheaded if we lose. Geez, why is this so hard to see? Radical Islam is the enemy - not George W. Bush. Just a week ago a prominent dutchman, Theo Van Gogh was brutally murdered by muslims because he dared to criticize Danish muslims. He was not American, he was not a Bush supporter per se, he was a liberal artist with something to say and they killed him for it. Europe is under siege from within because they refuse to see the truth of what we are fighting.

The economy and the environment will survive if western civilization survives. If we don't aggressively fight this war then we will see the end of all things we hold dear, including liberal sensibilities.

Friday, November 12, 2004

Cry me a river

Election analysis you won’t see on your MSM evening news.

By T. J. Willms

Having heard, read, and watched reports about Democrats across the nation lamenting the outcome of the recent presidential election I have more than once caught myself screaming at my television, radio, or newspaper, “Grow-up you @#$%! - &&#@%* Cry-babies!” The NBC Nightly news felt the need to try and legitimize the ludicrous claim that the election was “stolen” by airing a report about Internet rumors that the election was stolen through massive voter fraud. What Tom Brokejaw failed to add to this supposed “news” story is that the websites sited as sources for the story were each and every one at the extreme left fringe of the left wing. The chief source of teen-like anxt for these nut cakes is the fraudulent exit-polling broadcast early on Election Day which in the end bore no resemblance to the actual numbers once the ballots were counted.

By every measure known to modern politics George W. Bush won re-election on November 2nd 2004 regardless of the non-sense spewing forth from disaffected democrats. The numbers speak for themselves, in the Electoral College George W. Bush won with 286 and John Kerry with 252. George W. Bush won 31 states to John Kerry’s 19 and the District of Columbia. George W. Bush won with 51% of the popular vote to John Kerry’s 48% a solid margin of 3%. Looking further into the “Real numbers”, the margin of the President’s victory is even more stunning. Those red states (god bless‘em) won by the President were won by average margin of 17.16%. John Kerry’s blue states could only muster an average of 9% setting aside the aberrant totals from the District of Columbia. Even factoring in the bizarre 81% differential from our nations capital John Kerry won in his 19.5 loyal states by only 12.6%.

Little noted by the losing party so loudly crowing foul is the fact that no less than 5 of the states carried by their candidate were won by margins of less than 3%. Each of them, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Oregon, and Wisconsin has been considered “forever blue” for the democrats. The President had but three of these squeakers in his column, each of those had been for many years Democrat havens as well. It was announced today that with 99% of all precincts reporting George W. Bush in fact has a total popular vote of well over 60 million votes, nearly 3.5 million more than John Kerry’s total of 56,938,907.

In the final analysis all of us must come to accept the fact that George W. Bush has won a second term by a convincing margin and will be our President for the next four years. He will also enjoy the support of a larger majority in the senate (despite Arlen Spector) and a larger majority in the House of Representatives.

Let’s review some basic truths about the world so that all of us can move on shall we?

1.) Elvis is dead.
2.) There are way too many lawyers in the world.
3.) The French think they are better than everybody, not just us.
4.) The main stream media is biased against conservatives, Catholics, Israel, oh hell just about anyone who believes in God.
5.) Michael Moore is a fat stupid white guy with a camera and hates America.

Now dry your eyes, go and get a fresh pull-ups from the cupboard and get on with the rest of your lives. For goodness sake if I and those other 59,999,999 people could survive the Clinton era, four years more of Dubya should be a walk in the park.

Thursday, November 11, 2004

Arafat is Dead!

My Inner-Child is Smiling

The good news just keeps on coming! George W. Bush wins reelection, the price of a barrel of oil keeps dropping, there are more jobs for Americans, the snotty Europeans are beside themselves with grief for the failed John Kerry presidential bid and Yasser Arafat is dead. What did we do to deserve this good fortune?

Arafat, as noted in an earlier piece on this blog, was a vile little man. He pioneered the all the modern terrorist tactics we are fighting today. This putrid excuse for a man was obviously a coward, for only a coward would send children into the streets of Israel with bombs strapped to themselves to kill other innocent children. This alone should reserve a special place in hell for him. He alone is responsible for the plight of Palestinians today. Arafat, not Israel, destroyed Palestinian hopes and dreams. He deserves no praise and will get none from me.

It is painful to watch the establishment media in this country and across Europe wallow in the glory of this wicked man. How can they casually treat him like just any other head of state? With all the glowing commentary of his life and times you'd think he accomplished great things for mankind. In reality, nothing could be further from the truth.

I will not seek council to determine whether it is right and just to celebrate the death of evil, of course it is.

Monday, November 08, 2004

Observations: Election Wrap Up

Random Thoughts ala Thomas Sowell

point 1.
Did you notice the price of oil dropped immediately after the election. I mean the next day... Yes, under $50 a barrel with prices going down at the pump. Why do you suppose there was suddenly a rise in supply on Nov 3rd? High oil prices should have hurt the President so why would the mean 'ol nasty oil companies keep the squeeze on during the run up to the election. Well, they didn't, in fact, American oil companies did what they could to keep prices down at the pump despite a huge increase in the price of a barrel. Me thinks the Saudis and their OPEC friends didn't want to see Bush re-elected.

point 2.
Did you see that the new jobs number for October was over 300,000. Retailers had a great month. Employment want ads are increasing in newspapers all over the country. The forecast is looking very good for the 4th quarter.

point 3.
Did you watch the huge stock market gains in the 3 days that followed the election? Over 300 points added to the DOW by Friday. Yes, the business world loves Dubya! Business is good.

point 4.
Did you see that the NewYork Times Dynamic Duo has completely lost it. Maureen Dowd and Paul Krugman - Bush HATERS both - are stark raving mad. Dowd has some delusion that she is the Presidents personal psychologist. She sees only the coming of another dark age in the form of George W . Bush the Fundamentalist. She's one sick puppy. Krugman is so distraught, particularly after the latest job numbers, he's taking a sabatical. He claims he'll be writing a book, boy can't wait to read that... Not.

point 5.
Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post wrote perhaps the most delusional sentance of the post election analysis. He said the the President and the Republicans did a better job at manipulating the media than Kerry and the Democrats did. Howie, Howie, you're joking right? If it wasn't for the bloggers and talk radio the President would've gotten no positive coverage, none, nada, zero. John Kerry received tens of millions of dollars in free coverage and all of it in a positive light. Don't give me any bull about FOX news either. FOX, in the effort to be "fair and balanced" and stinging from all the criticism they take for being "right-wing" went out of their way to be critical of Bush. It was a shame to see the one and only major TV network conservatives can watch without constantly being put down, crap on their viewing base. Nice going FOX, now you're in the big leagues. In all my years following presidential politics I have never seen such an all out blitz for one candidate and a total blitzkrieg against the other. And the remarkable thing is that George W. Bush took it and only subtly lamented the fact in one of the debates. He took it like a man like it was nothing personal, just politics. If the hatred they slung at Dubya wasn't personal I don't know what personal is.

Point 6.
Cmon, lets hear it one more time... "I'm StaticNoise and I approve this message."

Manning the Post

T. J. Willms November 4th, 2004

"This is the Man I voted for..."

Throughout the campaign when the "polls" looked bleak, I waited. When during the debates he looked to be letting the "ball" slip through his fingers, I waited. (As a lifelong Minnesota Vikings fan I have experienced this phenomenon all too often.) Upon seeing the early and now discredited exit poll numbers on Election Day, I waited. Even after the concession and victory speeches had been given and broadcast to the nation I still had not seen the guy who had won my confidence in 2000.

I watched and listened in astonished amazement to the President speak at his first press conference as the president-elect for the second time and my heart swelled with pride as I shouted Yes to my T.V.! This is the Man I voted for, not the candidate struggling for a response in the first debate. This is the Man I was waiting to emerge during the campaign but never really saw during the nightly news coverage regardless of where I searched. This is the Man who lead our country decisively through those darkest days after September 11th, and the outset of the war on terror. This is the Man I told my family, friends, and coworkers, was Leading our country and needed to remain in that post, not some indecisive "Metrosexual" who tipped his sinuses to the winds to consult their position before making even the simplest policy decision.

The fiery communicator who entered that room with a "feisty" swagger took the time to thank the very reporters who had done everything within their power to influence the public falsely and help unseat him. In that press conference November 3rd I finally saw the President my vote helped send to Washington way back in 2000. He exuded confidence, spoke with clarity, and authoritatively answered some rather twisted questions from the press corps. While laying out his agenda for the next four years I didn’t once have to consult a dictionary to seek out some possible nuance beyond what he said. It is my sincerest hope that he will hold that tone throughout his time in office even beyond the midterms.

Wednesday, November 03, 2004

That Values Thing

Will the Establishment Media Ever Get It?

President Bush has won his re-election bid leaving the leftists in the media scratching their pointy little heads

Watching Chris (let me shout you down) Matthews of MSNBC crinkle his brow over "that values thing" just has to make you laugh. Matthews may be a lost cause but fortunately the majority of America is not.

We are not France, we are not Europe, we are Americans and moral relativism doesn't fly here. We can't say, as John Kerry has, the we believe life begins at conception but then do everything in our power to destroy what is concieved when it becomes inconvienient or a handy research tool. We can't say, as John Kerry has, I don't support non-traditional definitions of marriage then do everything in our power to thwart traditional definitions. We can't say, as John Kerry has, that we will hunt down terrorists and kill them where ever they are and then call for terrorism to be reduced to a mere criminal nuisance and fight back with sensitivity and diplomacy.

We, most of us anyway, do not believe that the country is going to hell in a handbasket. Considering where we were in late 2001, reeling from a vicious attack, reeling from a stock market collapse, reeling from massive corporate scandals, and, of course, a hotly disputed presidential election we are in remarkable good shape. That being said, you wouldn't know it by the cachaphony of doom and gloomers here and abroad. Serious people can talk to the finer points of economic and social issues without resorting to hate filled rhetoric, but serious people rarely get the chance in this sound-bite world.

The American stock markets have rebounded nicely since 2001 to a point where most valuations are sound. Inflation is relativily low as are interests rates and unemployment. We are, whether people want to believe it or not, at war with terrorists and terrorist supporting regimes, and we are winning. There is all kinds of good news about the state of the human condition in the year 2004 if one were willing to look for it - you certainly won't find it on the evening news. If there is one thing that bothers me the most about the state of things is the notion that every thing wrong with America, and around the world for that matter, is some how George W. Bushs' fault. It patently preposterous to lay it all at the feet of one man.

So what is "that values thing" that supposedly swung the election the President's way? His personal integrity, maybe... A leader who believes in God and speaks optomistically about our great nation, maybe... A stand against the redefinition marriage, maybe... A rejection of "celebrity" value systems, maybe... A rejection of self loathing Americans, maybe... Or just maybe all of the above. Chris Matthews may never figure it out, but thank God a majority of American voters did.

Saturday, October 30, 2004

News Flash! Blogger calls out bin Laden

dateline St. Paul MN

In an incredible turn of events a little known Internet blogger (a term short for Web log writer) has called Osama bin Laden out of hiding.

The blog known as Protohuman posted a piece by blogger StaticNoise on Tuesday, October 26th that speculated that bin Laden was probably dead because the terrorist had not been seen since 2001. Proof of life, the blogger contended, "was not that difficult".

On Friday October 29th a video tape of Osama bin Laden was aired around the globe surprising everyone and ended the speculation the mastermind behind the September the 11th attacks was dead. "I guess I'm as surprised as anyone," StaticNoise said Friday night, "I had no idea my blog was read in the caves of Afghanistan."

In the speech given by bin Laden gone was the firey rhetoric and direct threats against the so-called Great Satan. In stark contrast to all his other public pronoucements bin Laden sounded a conciliatory tone. Absent from the picture was the trademark assault rifle bin Laden is fond of carrying. The speech basically said "if you leave us alone, we'll leave you alone". As if reading out of the playbook of the DNC or a script by ultra slob Michael Moore, bin Laden touched on every point made by the anti-war/anti-Bush movement. What is the American electorate to make of this October surprise? Tuesday's election will tell the tale as to whether America will accept his terms... Both candidates said they will not let Osama bin Laden dictate American policy, but it seemed perfectly clear who master terrorist Osama bin Laden wants to see sitting in the oval office come January.

Thursday, October 28, 2004

Will the Curse be Lifted?

The World Should be so Lucky...

When I heard the news my heart jumped. Could it be possible? Will the curse be lifted? The Red Sox you say? No, Arafat on his death bed!

It's being reported that master terrorist and all around evil guy, Yasser Arafat is very, very ill and I couldn't be more tickled. Now, I have always been taught to have compassion for those who suffer. Honestly, does that apply to Satan's right hand man? This miserable excuse for a human being doesn't deserve and will not receive even an ounce of compassion from me.

One only has to follow the bouncing Arafat to witness the path of destruction and mayhem this vile creature has visited on this Earth. From Egypt to Jordan to Lebanon to the West Bank and to Gaza there is a trail of blood and misery that ends at his doorstep. The real tragedy is that during the late '80s Arafat was marginalized and living in exile. There was relative peace, and the Palestinians living in and around Israel saw their plight improve greatly. That was before President Clinton brought Arafat out of exile plopped him down in the Gaza strip, gave him money and weapons (and a farcical Nobel Peace Prize). The Palestinians and the Israelis have suffered ever since. Nice going, President Clinton.

Join me in prayer that the world will finally be rid of this beast. Amen

Tuesday, October 26, 2004

Osama, Osama where for art thou, Osama?

Proof of Life is Not that Difficult

After listening to John Kerry repeat his ridiculous charge that George W Bush "outsourced" the capture of Osama bin Laden to Afghan warlords I've been thinking about the bearded one and his disposition. Personally, I think he's dead. Just stop to think about it, proof of life is not that difficult. A photogragher and a daily newspaper is all one needs to show proof of life. Yet since December of 2001 we have not seen hide nor hair of Mr. bin Laden. Prior to that he seemed to have no problem with video cameras or photographers. There are hours of video tape and hundreds of photos of Osama - but none since 2001.

Now, if he is dead, buried under tons of rubble in Tora Bora, or killed in any number of ways by special forces and having assumed room temperature, why wouldn't the Bush Administration be holding it up as a trump card against the naysayers? Perhaps the President and his advisors are wise beyond their desire to score political points. What would it serve to create a martyr out of him? A body would bring instant martyrdom. A captured bin Laden and a trial would only rally a world full of virgin seekers to a massive call to arms. But a master terrorist that is missing in action creates nothing but speculation.

There have been a number of tapes reportedly of bin Laden's voice submitted to arab news agencies and eventually to CIA types who have proclaimed that the voice is likely to be bin Laden. This is not proof of life and besides, the CIA, like any good spy agency, uses misinformation as a weapon.

In all honesty, I hope we never know what has happened to Osama. The mystery serves America and the civilized world far better than knowing one way or another where he is. Only the worms know for sure.

Monday, October 18, 2004

Racism and the Drumbeat

When is enough enough? After listening to the local sports station over the weekend I have to wonder if there will ever come a day when race won't be used to make us - all of us - feel bad about ourselves.

You see, there is a quaterback for the local NFL team, the Minnesota Vikings, who is a black man. He is also one of the very best quaterbacks in the league this season. Daunte Culpepper has wowed the sports community with MVP-like performances all season long. In years past he has shown flashes of this ability but has he never put it altogether like he has this year. Still, he has his detractors. To this I say - so what. Just because there are people out there who will never be satisfied with Culpepper's performance does not imply they are racist. For the local sportscasters on KFAN to state categorically that Culpepper will never be universally loved because he is black is offensive to me. The truth is, until he wins the Vikings a Superbowl ring he will never be given his proper due.

These sportscasters forget about another local hero who has been celebrated lavishly for his ability and his contribution to the game and the community. He name is Kirby Puckett. Puckett was loved by everyone - black and white - because he was very, very good on and off the field regardless of his race. Kids loved him, little old ladies loved him, heck, I loved him! Puckett helped his team (in fact, in 1991 he carried it on his back) secure a World Series championship. For Puckett and the Twins it was the 2nd time in five years. The difference between Culpepper and Puckett is the rings they wear on their fingers.

When will the day come when a black man can be legitimately or illegitmately critisized without the race card being played? Perhaps, as I have said throughout my life, it will take one or two more generations. My Dad was a bigot as were many men from his generation. Somehow I have "seen the light" and have not passed that on to my son. My son has never heard me say one word that can be construed as derogatory toward anyone of another race because of their race. I have rightly critisized the behavior of people of color when they deserved it. I have stopped my son from using negative characterizations of Hmongs in our city because he needs to know that Hmongs act as individuals just as we do.

To ignore the history of this melting pot and the unique circumstances for our racial diversity is folly, bigots will always be with us. But to constantly use it as a club to make one group feel bad about themselves is disgusting.

Wednesday, October 13, 2004

Debate III: It's Bush!

It's all over but the crying...

The President was very good tonight. John Kerry was John Kerry. If there is one thing that sets these men apart it's the realness of George W. Bush. He is no idiot and despite what the Bush haters think this is a man with a great big heart. John Kerry may have a human heart (and he almost showed it tonight) but he so damn full of himself (and his "plans") that he is really not a likable person; you might say he comes off as a know-it-all.

On the substance, I think Bush really scored big on the more personal questions. One can credit Senator Kerry with having all those facts and figures at his fingertips but we are not just judging the man on his command of statistics we are trying to see what kind of man he is on the inside. President Bush is actually quite humble and suprizingly optomistic. Deep inside Kerry is a know-it-all... Did I say that already?

Senator Kerry really struggled on the "man of faith question" which was a gift to President Bush from Bob Schieffer, the moderator. Bush literally ducked the question on the assault weapons ban and the minimum wage. Clearly these were the low points for the President. One, raising the minimum wage question, is a complicated issue that while seeming only fair actually backfires on the people it's supposed to help out there in the real world. Everyone who knows anything about Washington economics knows it's bone for the labor unions who use it as the base for their contracts. Still, that being said, the President should have said something. On the assult weapons ban he gave a weak answer - something about "it wasn't going anywhere in congress".

Senator Kerry threw a really uncalled for jab at the Vice President regarding the fact that Cheney's daughter is homosexual. Ms. Cheney never made her sexual orientation an issue in this campaign and it was shameful the way both John Edwards and John Kerry used it to perhaps try to hurt the President with the far right of the party. Senator Kerry, again failed to answer how his health care "plan" could be anything other than a govenment run health plan. Bush hammered him on the very real fact that when the government starts offering plans more and more employers will stop offering healthcare coverage. Bush also correctly pointed out that with the government funding for healthcare that government control will not be far behind. He made references to how other nations with governement controlled healthcare offered poor quality and eventually rationing. Kerry was on the defensive more than once, assuring the American people it wasn't a government takeover of healthcare. Bush asked, why after 20 years in the Senate that Kerry never put up a bill on the healthcare issue, not one. Kerry had no answer. The President, again offered some real ideas on how to lower healthcare costs.

Bob Schieffer held Kerry to account on the Social Security reform question. The Senator said he wouldn't touch it (he actually said taxing the rich would take care of it) while the President emphatically said that the cost of doing nothing would be far greater. The President said it would be a major focus in his second term and that he is willing to take on the issue.

I realize as a Bush supporter I have a biased take on the debate, but honestly I don't see how it could be anything less than a draw if not a clear Bush win. Whatever... November 2nd is the only poll that will matter. The next few weeks should very interesting.

Monday, October 11, 2004


I'm going out on limb here... Having perused the usual newspapers and the blogs today and having seen in the headlines things such as "...GOP Dirty Tricks" I think we can expect a very sensational allegation against Bush on or about the Thursday before the election. Like the decades old DUI thing thrown out on... What? ...the Thursday before the 2000 election!

What strikes me as odd is Dan Rather and 60 Minutes could've waited a few weeks with their little mocked up memo. Makes you wonder...

Democracy In Action - Afghanistan and Australia

But I don't hear the democrats cheering...

It's amazing to witness this thing called democracy in action. With a sense of excitement and a deep desire to participate in something historic some voters walked for miles to get to the polling place. Some dressed in their best clothes while braving potential attacks by the terrorists in their midst. Yes, indeed, it was a big day... Oh, I'll bet you think I'm talking about the election that took place in Afghanistan this past weekend? Actually, I'm talking about the elections that took place over a decade ago in a country called Nicaragua. I say this is to illustrate a point that will be lost on the Bush haters. The point is, back in the 1980's the very same people who called Ronald Reagan all the nasty things they now call George W. Bush opposed every effort America made to run the communists out and usher in free elections. In fact, it was John Kerry and his soul mate, Ted Kennedy among others who stood in the way of democracy coming to Central America. The elections were first of many that finds us in a place where now democracy rules in Central America and communism is nowhere to be found. And what if John Kerry had his way back then?

Central America is an American success story, a Reagan success story. He believed in opposing communism every where it reared its ugly head. The truly amazing thing that happened after those elections was how the leftists gave up and for all intents and purposes, the war was over. The overwhelming turn out and the enthusiasm of the voters knocked the wind out of the communists. This past weekend, in war torn Afghanistan we saw exactly the same thing. The future for Afghanistan got so much brighter in just one day - one magical day. Maybe this is the silver lining in the tragic attacks of September the 11th. Think about how amazing it is for a country that has been battered around for the better part of five thousand years to have chosen its government for the first time ever. Afghanistan may not have"turned the corner" yet, but the wheels are cranking. Bully for them.

In an another amazing turn of events, the stalwart Bush ally Australian Prime Minister John Howard has won a historic fourth term. There were those who thought his close association with President Bush and his support for the Iraq war of liberation was going to be the nail that sealed his political coffin. Australia and Great Britain are surely two of America's closest allies and we are so very grateful to them.

Elections are set for January in Iraq and come hell or high water it is imperative they take place on schedule. Nothing will deflate the old Baathists and the foreign terrorists like a gleeful electorate. Eventually peace will come to a free Iraq and peace starts with free elections. Like I said come hell or John Kerry the Iraqi elections must take place!

Saturday, October 09, 2004

Debate II: Advantage Bush

The President redeemed himself nicely Friday night in a spirited and scrappy debate. The audience driven questions were hard-hitting and without pretense. It was without a doubt one of the best debates I've ever seen. The town hall format seemed to be a more comfortable fit for the President than the first one. Senator Kerry did not appear as sure-footed when speaking directly to the public represented here by the questioners. He often used that semi-condescending tone when asked a direct question that clearly put them on the opposite sides of an issue. Kerry felt it necessary to empathize with the questioner, citing his "enormous" respect for their point of view. The President, when presented a question that didn't square with his policies simply said "that's a great question, I'm glad you asked" and proceeded to lay out his position without a hint of condescension.

On the substance of the debate - was it me or did John Kerry simply repeat verbatim the things he said in the first debate? This is not to say the President didn't repeat himself ad nauseum as well, but honestly Kerry sounded like a broken record. Senator Kerry spent most of his time repeating the same laundry list of sins committed by the President rather than giving us details of these "plans" he has to solve everything that's wrong under the sun. In fact, my dear wife, who was listening to the debate as background noise, left the room to escape the drone of Kerry's negativism. The Senator did, however, score a direct hit when he rebutted the notion that the UN imposed sanctions on Iraq didn't work. He stated unequivocally that the goal of the sanctions was the elimination of Iraq's WMD's. By any and all accounts there were no stockpiles of WMD's in Iraq. However, this, again, is with the benefit of hindsight - John Kerry was not saying loudly and clearly that the sanctions were working two years ago, quite the opposite actually.

The President scored several important points as well. To the delight of his base he finally hit Kerry on his less than distinguished record in the senate over the past 20 years. He also showed Senator Kerry's inconsistency with regards to the multi-lateral talks over North Korea that the Senator insists should be one on one talks between Kim Jung Il and the United States. This strategy is exactly what he condemns the President for doing in Iraq. Bush jumped all over Kerry's non-answer answer regarding Iran's nuclear ambitions. Personally I think that having the U.S. military surrounding Iran with a huge presence in Afghanistan and in Iraq (not to mention American nuclear armed subs in the Persian Gulf) is an aggressive policy where Iran is concerned.

The domestic policy questions shed no new light on the debate with both candidates offering party line sound bites. Once again Senator Kerry promised a magical plan to solve the health care problem, and again offered no details. Here the President actually laid out specifics by citing medical liability tort reform and the push for medical savings accounts and insurance pools for small businesses. Bush also found the opportunity to paste the liberal label on John Kerry. Like all liberals, the Senator treated it as a dirty word. Apparently liberal is a code word for socialist, which is, of course, what John Kerry is.

In the end, professional debate analysts will probably score this one a draw, but on substance and on the tone President Bush helped himself greatly. Senator Kerry did not. Advantage Bush…

Some Things Never Change

Politicians kissing babies... The time honored tradition of politicians hugging and kissing the next generation is alive and well in 2004. I think it's kinda' sweet.

Thursday, October 07, 2004

Election 2004: A Time for Soul Searching

Concerning the election of 2004 – it’s soul searching time. We have a stark choice this time and there is much at stake. There is the economy and jobs, the future of the Supreme Court and, of course there is the war against the terror masters. In all honesty the first two won’t matter a hill of beans for our long term future if the third fails. Unlike all the other wars America has fought this one is unique in that far too many people won’t accept that it is a “real” war. It’s real enough alright, and it didn’t start with 9/11 and it won’t end in Baghdad.

One man is preaching peace through strength, peace through war – preemptive war – and the aggressive use of offensive American military power. The other man is urging peace through diplomacy, peace through international bonding and consensus building. You almost have to suspend your disbelief. Peace through war? That hardly makes sense. Isn’t that like offering a drowning man a glass of water? Doesn’t peace through consensus sound so much better? Who doesn’t endorse international bonding? Well, for one, our enemies, the enemies of western civilization, don’t do international bonding and they certainly don’t waste time consensus building. They are a death cult. They offer no alternative ideology for the living. They don’t negotiate and they don’t attend diplomatic conferences (summits, if you will). So the question one needs to ask themselves is which of these strategies is likely to work in the long run?

Analogies can be very instructive. The President’s actions can be likened to a strategy employed by firefighters battling wild fires in the western United States. They set fires. That’s right; the firefighters set fires to fight fires. They are called firebreaks. More often than not they work and thousands of acres are spared. Sometimes things go wrong – the wind shifts, firefighters are pre-positioned in the wrong place, or maybe the rain that was expected never materializes. There are naysayers who will say that firebreaks are dangerous and therefore should never be used. Fires should be contained and if innocents lose their homes and property it’s tragic, but at least the fire department didn’t start the fire.

War is not always the wrong answer despite what the bumper stickers may say. The use of American military power has freed millions of people from invaders and brutal dictators. Hope, freedom and even prosperity has risen from the rubble in Germany, Italy, Japan, France, South Korea, Central America, Kuwait, Kosovo and Afghanistan. It will happen for Iraq too, if we persevere. By standing fast against Soviet expansionism the United States succeeded in the Cold War as well. In the one place we as a nation gave up millions of Vietnamese lost their lives when the U.S. military pulled out for good. It was John Kerry who was one of the loudest voices against America then. He should be made to answer for what happened in Southeast Asia after we left.

George W. Bush has answer for Iraq and the war on terror – take the fight to them and spread democracy and liberty as the best antidote to the death wish that fuels Islamic terrorism. John Kerry’s doesn’t have an answer except to say that what ever Bush does is wrong.

Friday, October 01, 2004

Debate: Round 1 goes to Kerry

John Kerry did well. He had to. The President did not.

The President seemed to run out of gas toward the end of the debate. Kerry could have gone on for another 90 minutes. While this debate may not affect the eventual outcome of this election, it did put John Kerry in a new light. President Bush consistently hammered home his main campaign points but failed to rebut some of Kerry's inflated rhetoric.

The dilemma for the President is that he has a track record in office, and John Kerry has the benefit of hindsight. This is not to excuse the President's lackluster debating skills. I imagine it is difficult to take the carping from the cheap seats that has gone on for over a year only to have your rival pound you once again without the benefit of an on/off switch. Whereas in the year 2000 it was Al Gore who had the air of incumbency and George Bush played the fresh faced challenger. Kerry's "commanding" performance with facts and figures (many demonstrably wrong, by the way) contrasted sharply with the President's reflexive defenses and visable exasperation. Kerry's very good debating skills papered over the fact that he was not saying much of anything. His reference to a "Global Test" America would have to pass before commiting our military and a promise to halt any advanced nuclear testing should call into question his ability perform as commander in chief.

There is some light here for the President. I get the feeling that there is a bit of Bush Hatred Fatigue Syndrome falling over the land. Just as many, many people who thought Bill Clinton's affair with a young White House intern was despicable; they also grew weary of the pounding the man took over it. September the 11th did change the world; Bush gets it and has acted decisively. I still don't think Kerry gets it.

Tuesday, September 28, 2004

The Bumper Sticker Game

Here's a fun little game to play when on a road trip during this political season. The Bumper Sticker Game! This non-scientific poll can be fun for the whole family. The scoring goes like this:

1 point for the generic Kerry-Edwards
1 point for the generic Bush-Cheney
2 points for the W '04 ("because its cool" bonus)
2 points for the crossed out Bush-Cheney replaced by a Kerry-Edwards ("creativity" bonus)
-1 point for a Kerry-Edwards on a large SUV ("hypocrite" penalty)
-1 point for a Bush-Cheney on an oil company truck ("special interest" penalty)
-5 points for a Kerry-Edwards accompanied by activism stickers ("nut burger" penalty)
-5 points for a Bush-Cheney on a Hummer ("conspicuous consumption" penalty)
25 points for a Bush-Cheney on a hybrid car ("hell freezes over" bonus)

Now get out there and have fun, and remember to buckle-up. We want you around on election day!

Monday, September 27, 2004

Full scale assault on President Bush has begun

It has been predicted and widely anticipated and it has begun. Watch closely as the national media goes to bat for John Kerry as it has for no other candidate. Why? Well, because Kerry is such a lousy candidate and campaigner. Prepare the Kool-aid.

The American media and the socialist causes they prefer may not withstand another Bush term. Socialism is melting down in Europe in real terms, although none will forthrightly admit it, and a successful 2nd term for Bush will set the stage for the inevitable correction in European socialist institutions. A Kerry administration would likely result in the U.S. joining Europe in a stagnant pool of economic malaise that would find the economy treading water until it finally collapses . If and when that happens the Peoples Republic of China, fresh off a world showcase of an Olympic Games, could well be poised to dominate the globe for the greater part of the century. Again the fly in the ointment for Chinese world domination will be Islamic terrorism. China will need oil in great quantities in order to compete with the U.S. They have a limited capacity to supply their own. Is there a chance this would result in an unholy Sino-U.S. alliance? I doubt it, but nothing is impossible.

Saturday, September 25, 2004

Compare these two men - these sportsmen...

I just have to share this with you. I about fell out of my chair laughing when I saw it. Is it just me or does the word dork come to mind whenever you see John Kerry engaged in anything other than arrogant rhetoric?

Friday, September 24, 2004

Please Welcome the ProtoHuman!

Today starts a new journey for me, and you for that matter. I am looking forward to "expressing" myself in this exciting forum called the blogosphere. Since this is the campaign season I can think of nothing that needs commenting on more than the upcoming Presidential Sweepstakes (you can never get enough punditry now can you?).

To strive to be perflectly clear about my objectivity - I have none. I am largely a conservative and vote largely for Republicans... I am by all accounts an opinionated blowhard. Well, I try not to be the blowhard part, but opinionated absolutely.

Today I like to kick off the fun with a little comment on... ta da! John Kerry.

Kerry Insults Allawi

John Kerry tells us that by the sheer power of his personality he can sway world leaders into cooperating with the U.S. in Iraq. If yesterday’s insulting, pessimistic response to the newest world leader, Iraq’s Prime Minister Allawi, is any indication of how Kerry will do the job then Heaven help us all. Mr. Allawi is an incredibly courageous man who came to America to personally thank us for what we’ve done for Iraq. Mr. Kerry, instead of attending the joint session of Congress to hear Prime Minister Allawi and cheer him on, decided to demean and dismiss him. What a slap in the face. It seems clear to me that John Kerry does not wish for the success of this difficult transition from dictatorship to democracy in Iraq. It also seems clear that the terrorists will take John Kerry’s words to heart as they target yet another group of brave Iraqis lining up to sign on to the new security force in the new Iraq. Whose side is Mr. Kerry on anyway?

StaticNoise (aka Craig Willms)