44,000 Ghosts

Perhaps single-payer health proponents don't think anyone checks their facts. For that matter, democrats in general seem to think the "average American" spends little to no time questioning the "facts" and figures they put forth to bolster their causes. A few cases:

* Is the Earth really warming up at an alarming rate, such that if we don't shoot atmosphere-sustaining gases into space we're all going to die? No, but Al Gore would have you believe it, based on his faulty temperature statistics. In fact, the Earth's temperature is cooling down, which is completely normal, and the heating/cooling process does not necessarily rely on humans to either help or hinder.

* Is welfare a useful, temporary tool for minority and low economic class citizens to utilize while they continue to search for work? No, it actually fosters a mindset of dependence on the government as well as indifference to or defeatism in finding work. Fact is, when President Clinton cut welfare benefits, more people returned to work, including unwed mothers and high-school educated poor, two groups that democrats had long been trying to encourage into the workforce. Who knew that the motivation people needed to work was simply less government assistance and more available employment?


As usual, behind the healthcare debate is another democrat who knows more than you and, under the guise of watching your back, blatantly disregards your ability to think critically about the issue. Instead, he chooses to persuade you with emotional appeals, citing huge numbers and saying that these represent those who die every year without health insurance!

Consider that when the numbers game is played by the other side, it's immediately considered fabrication and unworthy of even checking for validity. For example, one might mention in an article that almost 50 million abortions have been performed between 1973 and 2009 in the United States alone. Worldwide, that number skyrockets to over 960 million since 1973 (and through the end of 2008). Those are guaranteed deaths, nay, murders committed for a vast number of reasons (the least likely being that the life of the mother is in danger). But as soon as you mention that its unborn babies being killed, politicians roll their eyes. "Don't make this a political issue!" someone might even demand.

Unfortunately, health care run by the government by definition IS a political issue, which is precisely why so many people don't like the sound of it. Politics come first over policy, with our increasingly socialistic Obama administration mandating that everyone have health insurance. When the command caused citizens to revolt, Nancy Pelosi and her cronies switched tactics, parading fellow democrats out to repeat emotionally-charged statistics of the "number of Americans that die every year from a lack of health insurance." Tragically, and predictably, this number is completely convoluted, having its origins in a study that the practitioners admitted was wrought with potentially highly inaccurate information.

Below is an excerpt from Michelle Malkin's recent article, "The bogus death statistic that won't die," which you can read completely by clicking on this link. She cites the statements of both Alan Grayson, the representative from Florida who oft quotes the 44,000 figure, as well as the scientists who conducted the research behind the convoluted number:

"Democratic Rep. Alan Grayson of Florida has found his calling: death demagogue. First, he accused Republicans of wanting sick patients to "die quickly." Next, he likened health insurance problems to a "holocaust in America." Now, he's unveiled a new website entitled "namesofthedead.com" in memory of the "more than 44,000 Americans [who] die simply because they have no health insurance."

To boil it all down in plain English: The single-payer scientists had no way of assessing whether the survey participants received insurance coverage between the time they answered the questionnaires and the time they died. They had no way of assessing whether the deaths could have been averted with health insurance coverage. A significant portion of those classified as "uninsured" may not have been uninsured, based on past studies that actually did verify insurance status.

But the Himmelstein team just took the rate of uninsurance from the original study (3.3 percent), applied it to census data and voila: More than 44,000 Americans are dying from lack of insurance."


And, just to give you a glimpse of how desperate Pelosi and co. are in getting their bill to pass, here are a few submissions* to a nationwide video campaign using children for both emotional appeal and to simultaneously educate them to be dependent on big government. Right on?








*Organizing for America, Team Obama & the DNC’s perpetual campaign arm, is holding a health reform video contest.

Breaking: All major networks support FoxNews in White House freeze out

The White House offered an exclusive interview with one of the cabinet's "czars." The only catch? FoxNews isn't allowed to be there.

In a surprise gesture of solidarity, all the other networks invited - NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC - said that they would not participate if Fox was not allowed to along with them.

Giving credit where it is due, the mainstream networks have made the absolute correct move in backing up Fox and denying the White House power over the press. Though they regularly support President Obama's policies, they've proven that at least someone at the msm sites is wholeheartedly opposed to sanctioning one of the integral tenants of democracy, freedom of the press.

Rushing to Destroy a Man

*For those of you who don't use Hot Air (www.hotair.com) as a daily news source, you may be unawares of the superb, anonymous contributor named Doctor Zero. He consistently delivers trenchant analysis of the absurd goings-on we see played out via the White House socialist program, their mainstream media cohorts and big-name/low-class leftist ideology bloggers who love them.

But before you read his, I'd like to unravel the not-so mysterious fears of the media behind the complete shutting down of Rush Limbaugh's prospective bid for partial ownership of the St. Louis Rams. First, Al Sharpton drummed up negative controversy over some racist statements he alleged that Limbaugh made. No one could verify or source the quotes but even so, every major cable outlet (except Fox of course) ran with the white-hot story of an evil white man who got rich of being a bigot only to have his reputation stained by the very divisive remarks he made.

Then a "race studies" junior professor got onto MSNBC and posed the theory that Limbaugh wants ownership of the Rams because it's like "owning slaves." That allegation is so ludicrous and demeaning that the host should have questioned it. Instead, she and everyone else at her white-guilt riddled agency felt the "responsibility" to repeat the theory again and again, in an attempt to rid themselves of the undesired labor involved in actually sticking to a journalistic conviction that people should be given the benefit of the doubt, especially when such a disgusting claim is being made. But again, we live in a time...

Unfortunately the quote allegations turned out to be completely false. The quotes were finally sourced to someone other than Limbaugh; in fact, to an imaginary person. But since we live in a time when a Presidential con-didate does not have to prove he's an American citizen before the media annoints him, no one bothered to see if the quote was real or not before plastering it all over their pathetic "news" channels.

See how ravenous they all were to bring Rush down? Reminds me a little of the Palin debauchle; is being a little "country" really worth discrediting a woman to the point of calling her a "dumb b---ch?" Likewise, Rush Limbaugh never made the comments Al Sharpton alleged, nor would his audience have put up with it if he had. But, again, we live in a time when "conservative values" equals "racist teabaggers" in the minds of so many talking heads on ABC, CNN and MSNBC. It's amazing that on the word of Al Sharpton, himself no stranger to racist comments (or can only white people be racist?), several players from the Rams signed a petition to remove Limbaugh from the bid for ownership of the team. As if they have ever asked who owns the team before first finding out how much they'll be getting paid this season.

So a man's dream has been utterly foiled by incompetancy, irresponsible and irrational accusation. Please, let's remember how many chances Obama got, how many quotes were explained away, how many associations discredited, so that he could achieve his dream. The difference between owning a footbal team and being the director of the free world? Apparently, some dreams are worth lying to save, and some are not.


********************************************************************
Link to Doctor Zero's "Defending the Invincible" on Hot Air
(also will be linked in my side bar Doctor Zero section)

You Don't Want to Work With This Guy

Let's get this straight, just for the record. The Obama administration does not use its own people as a shield.

However, if there's a way to make things happen and somebody needs to take the fall, it may as well be someone whose name will be forgotten. Not Barack Obama; it's practically a brand name. But maybe someone else...

So if you're Yosi Sergeant, you might get the boot after you've successfully drummed up an art campaign for promoting "the President's platform." A campaign that the White House's Office of Public Engagement asked you to coalesce the moronic street art movement to push.

And if you're Anita Dunn, you'd better get your resume in order for when you start sounding a little too confident about the perils of Fox News, and the White House dismisses you in order to "distance themselves" from the stir caused in the general population.

Who can forget Obama's good pal Van Jones, the self-professed communist who wanted to set into action a real distribution of wealth plan - which was inspired by the President, - who got shown the back door when the public outcry against his philosophy rang loudly. Obama said he didn't even know Jones had a real position in the cabinet. Really?

ACORN makes an appearance on the list with several low-level employee firings that took place after the prostitution sting revealed illegal operations in five different offices around the nation. In his usual I-didn't-know-anything-about-that way, our President disloyaled this group faster than the ACORN ladies offered to help the kids evade taxes.

Obama's done that before, of course, with Jeremiah Wright. The man who Obama claimed was like family to him was thrown to the wolves with meat tied around his neck. And by that I mean Wright's own words pouring out of his mouth. Self-indicted, or sacrificed by a candidate hungrier for a famous office than the Reverand was to distort the Gospel?

Last, but really first, to go off the radar was Vice President Joe Biden. He's the foreign policy expert who, when shown not to know his way around the Middle East countries, was relegated to fetching O's morning caffeine and nictotine binge. You can call him VP Cup O' Joe now. Hilary Clinton should thank her lucky stars that she wasn't vetted for VP to the big B.O. Surely political suicide would have been her fate then, too.

Of course, the media would have you believe that Glenn Beck singlehandedly brought these people down, or at least some of them. The others "made mistakes" or "spoke out of turn" or simply proved incompetant. But despite their inadequacies, they all have something in common: they were all appointed to a position of power by President Obama. Whether it was through silent compliance with their rhetoric, or explicit direction, President Obama is responsible for building them up and, likewise, bringing them down.

As Old As You Feel

I didn't really want to write about myself.

On your birthday, people tend to give you a free pass to do whatever you want. You want to eat nothing but cake all day? Do it! Hang out in your pjs watching "Mad Men?" It's your day!
Wait, this is actually sounding like a typical unemployed day for me. Let me begin again.

I didn't really want to write about myself. But the only people who read this blog are, presumably, people who like me, so they'll/you'll do me the service of allowing me my soapbox. Not that you have a choice; it's my blog, nyah nyah!

Did I mention I did not turn six today? Believe it or not, I'm twenty-three birthday wishes past that age. At least, chronologically. But I'll answer the question everyone likes to ask, "So, how do you feel being ___ years old now?" I'd like to answer a couple of ways.

I feel much younger than twenty-nine. I feel as though my whole life is ahead of me. I feel as though the thirties are the time I'm really going to come into my own, stylistically, vocationally, physically. In this way, being twenty-nine feels like an incredible blessing because I have made it this far and, God willing, have so much time left.

I also feel much, much older. I've a lot to be regretful about. Say that's silly or it isn't the cure for heartaches and friendships lost, that's fine. I've done things/been places/met people/neglected people such that I can't be proud. I think this regret has aged me prematurely. I feel the weight of a seventy-four year old woman whose memories of loved ones are tinged with a sincere wish that more care could have been given them. Bittersweet memories because love is still so strongly felt for them, yet they are now lost in time, distance, or mental state and can no longer be reached.

I feel like I grew up too fast and then, as a teenager, just wanted to be a child. Now I just wish I was an adult. I wish I looked like one. I wish more I acted like one.

This is all for naught if I don't mention who I think I should be in God's eyes. I know; the Proverbs 31 woman, right? She carries a weight, too, but at least she knows who she is. That's how I want to be.





This is what twenty-nine looks like for me.

Please Pray for my Aunt Monica

I know that anyone who reads this blog probably does pray, and often. I want to put in a request for the healing of my Aunt Monica's pancreas, which she hurt in an accident several years ago and has had problems with ever since. This summer she was hospitalized twice, and now she is in for a third time. She is very worried that, given the seriousness of her pancreas failing, she may not survive.

Please pray for a possible surgery that would grow liver cells onto her pancreas to restore it, or that she could survive without this organ. People who lose their pancreas usually end up having severe diabetes and sometimes are completely disabled because of the complications. But that would be a blessing considering there is a strong possibility she may not make it through a surgery at all, or the pancreatic failure would mean the end of her life.

She is a young woman - only 45 - and has a wonderful husband (my uncle on my mom's side) and three great kids. Her oldest, Kyle, is my favorite cousin. They are a very close family and would be devastated by losing her. Please pray for her recovery, in some form. Thank you.

Familia de la Hermana Lea

New photos of my sister Lea and her cute little family. Sheesh, even baby Joe is smiling!
P.S. They are die-hard Minnesota Twins fans, though they have lived in Virginia for almost a decade. You can take the girl out of Minnesota...

Epitaph

I don't know how to preface this, so I'll just write as it comes to mind.

Earlier today my Grandpa passed away.

He was 94 years old. He was the only grandparent I was ever close to. My Mom's mother died fairly young, and her father didn't really contact us (or my Mom, for that matter). My Dad's father died at a very young age (around 34) and his mother passed away when I was a young thing (4).

Grandpa Mike was the only grandparent I spent time with, but without that title he'd still be the best one. He was exactly how you'd expect a grandparent to be: encouraging, generous and complimentary to your every whim. Gently chastening, but never pushy.

Random things I remember about him and his life... He was the only member of our family who was utterly non-confrontational. Well, maybe if you tried to assert that any team was better than Chicago. Even then, he'd be happy to settle it with a game of horseshoes in the driveway. His neighbors loved him. His house on the southside was one of those long, one-story brick ones, with a tiny square of yard in the front and back. Their backyard always housed an inflatable pool for us in the summer, and an umbrella table with chairs for the adults to sit and talk. Grandpa enjoyed a vodka martini with two olives which, if you were lucky, he'd let you have one of.

Grandpa's favorite place was the lake cabin, where he was the captain of the iron skillet and pontoon boat. He had old swimming rings and a great inflatable canoe my sisters and I fought over. He was no sidelines guy: he'd help you build a sandcastle, or score your dives, or put you to work if you wanted it. He also "borrowed" wildflowers from the neighbors' yards when we went on long walks.

He always wanted to travel, but never made it outside the United States. But he liked to hear stories about other family members' trips, especially my Dad's. The last time my Dad talked to Grandpa, he perked up when another trip to India was mentioned. He enjoyed living vicariously through his kids and grandkids. He loved that my cousin is spending a semester in Prague.

I don't know what he believed, other than treating people decently and not asking for too many favors out of life. He didn't argue or talk politics, he didn't offend the more liberal of my family by saying things like, "I believe the woman's place is in the home," like my Grandma Lu did once (I got a kick out of that). He didn't take sides. But he desired to join a church, as recently as this past year, and maybe that means something. I think it did to him.

I loved him and am thankful that when people talk about grandpas, I know I had the kind other people wished they did. I prayed for him often, and hope for him what I do for everyone: eternal life through the grace of God. I know my Grandpa was thankful to Him for a long, good life.

Please pray for his wife, Luella; I think she was not ready for him to go yet. She is shaken and, as a result, her faith appears to be. Please pray for her comfort and reassurance of God's providence. Thank you.

That's my Grandpa on the front right, with his wife Luella.
Back row is my Dad and Mom, Uncle Jim and Aunt Nancy, and cousin Sam.

Grandpa Mike, 1915-2009.

Bikes & Blessings; Together at Last!

Found on "The Sarcastic Lutheran" (a.k.a. Pastor Nadia Bolz-Weber, an ELCA Lutheran female pastor):

her "blessing of the bikes"


I have heard of blessings similar to this, most recently a blessing of backpacks for the schoolchildren of a church. It's one thing to symbolically hope the kids have a successful year. But, bikes?

On my second trip to India, I witnessed a "blessing of the motorcycle" ritual. It took place outside a hindu shrine for the bull god, whose name escapes me. First the motorcycle was adorned with garlands of chrysanthemums. Then it was sprinkled with two kinds of liquids, I think the first was coconut milk, but I don't recall the other. Finally, the motorcyclist's owner/rider took hold of the handlebars and moved the bike forward, so that it crushed a lime underneath its wheel. I wish I was making this up.

The owner was thrilled, and breathed a huge sigh when the lime was crushed. It was as if he thought an evil spirit - formerly possessing the motorcycle to drive too fast, or come dangerously close to hitting pedestrians, or simply go so slowly that the owner risked being late to work - had finally been released from the bike.

But... aren't we in charge of our own bikes' handling and execution? Therefore, a bike blessing is silly and pointless. Why not just hand out free helmets?

And on that note, I think I'll go for a bike ride myself.

God Has Done Marvelous Things

All around here it is fall. It is just starting and I love it already. In the gardens you wouldn't know the season had changed but for the produce, squashes and gourdes of all kinds. The birds, butterflies and gardeners are still savoring the full sun and scents of God's bountiful harvest, pretending it's summer yet.

The day changes, the season changes, people change, and God is still providing us with splendor.

Here are my recent photos from the Eagle Heights gardens, with a couple of my tomatoes to start. Enjoy the start of a new week!

Heirloom variety, can't remember which one!

Sweet little cherry tomatoes have been enjoyed for weeks.

Welcome!



Pear-shaped gourds.

An unusual zucchini!

A mountain of squashes.

Bippity, boppity boo!

Sunburst sunflower.





Curly peppers.

Butterflies pollinate the flowers, too. But mostly they sip nectar.


Must...resist urge to...grab handfuls of raspberries...from someone else's garden!



Bright purple beans.

More unusual plants and flowers.

Lovely dahlias (I think).

*All photography by Victoria for Fear and Trembling. Please do not copy. Not that I think you would, but in case you were contemplating it. Thank you!

A Brief Plea

There's always a lot going on in our nation that we don't hear about. How can we digest it all? In this information age, with high-speed internet and zillions of blogs reporting different angles to every story, who can keep up?

I can't, but I offer you my thoughts - some grand, mostly small - about everything that gets "caught in my web." That seems to range from budget beauty tips to politics as usual, with random photography and color culture commentary somewhere in between. I suppose you could say I'm indecisive about what I like, but I rather enjoy being a catalogue of obscure bits of information. The occasions on which I write something trenchant or thoughtful, though rare, bring this blog together into a pretty good summation of who I am.

More often than not, I am drawn to write about "current" issues when they pop up in the media. But they are never "current" to me in the sense of being fashionable to talk about; many of the topics considered "hot" are things I've mused on for awhile. Not to say I've come to any particular conclusions on all of them, but on some my moral meter reads consistently. The importance of allowing children to be children, to not mature them before it's time, is one of those.

This morning I read a story about Dr. Oz, a cardiothoracic surgeon and ingenue from Oprah's show, who has been promoted to a solo gig hawking his "real doctor" tips with a non-clinical approach. So long as he's offering his tips and tricks to age-defying by diet, how to jump start an exercise routine and five common preventable diseases, I'm all for it. As a huge proponent of preventative care, I urge people to maintain healthy diets and exercise. Totally non-controversial.

But what about the topic of sex? Is it still considered taboo to discuss on television, to a general audience and without any pretense of modesty? You can probably guess where I fall on this issue. Frankly, if you're an adult who wants to hear other people talk about genital parts and the "physiology of an orgasm," knock yourself out. I think it's a little twisted and inappropriate, but it's your prerogative, Bobby Brown.

However, if you're a child, the answer is yes - some topics, including sex ed on t.v., are off limits for you. The right time for a kid to be educated about sex is when his/her parents think it is right, and education should be age-appropriate. No, it should not be taught in schools, at any age. Feel free to label me a backwards hick, but my sex education came at a very young age (and not from my parents) and proved to be detrimental to my actual understanding of the content. In fact, I think it messed me up big time for my teenage years and into adulthood, too.

Why am I suddenly mentioning kids you wonder? It's because of the time slot when Dr. Oz's show airs: 3 p.m. Most kids are just getting home from school at that time and many are flipping through the channels. If they flip to CBS, see an anatomical model of sexual organs and two people pointing out the specifics, will it be morbid curiosity or fear that decides whether to watch or not? For many, many kids, the curiosity will outweigh the fear of getting caught watching something they shouldn't be, not in small part due to the fact that Mom and Dad are both at work for a few more hours.

And just what will they see if they decide to chance it? Dr. Oz was thrilled to announce on his debut show, "Today, we're talking sex. I'm excited because for the first time, using cutting edge animation, we can go inside the female body and see what happens during an orgasm."

Stop right there. Do you want this guy teaching our children about orgasms? Notice there is no context to his set-up; no one is told that sex should be between a man and his wife, and between consenting adults, etc. I realize his audience - adults in the studio - presumably know these things, whether they abide by them or not is another thing. But who's in the at-home audience? It could be anyone. Let's go on with a quote from the article I read:

"The 'animation' had outline images of the penis, the vagina, as well as the breasts, and it even showed men and women lying on top of each other as scientists studied computer screens that depicted the participants' sexual arousal."

Again, I don't have a problem with him discussing these topics, with adults. I have a problem with the time of day at which they are broadcast. If they want to air it during prime time, fine. Parents will be home and can monitor what is being watched. However, when it's just kids at home, stuff like this shouldn't be available to them. At the ages kids who are watching might be (elementary school, middle school), they will not comprehend what is being shown to them and might be tempted to discuss it between themselves. I'm not being crude; it's a reasonable suggestion that kids would act inappropriately if influenced to do so.

There has always been an outcry against pornography, and with good reason. It is a complete distortion of what is intended (by God) to be a special event between certain people, who have made commitment to one another. I would argue that, for children, explicit clinical discussion of sexual organs and processes is no different than pornography, because they don't understand what's being said.

All they see is pictures, or models, and actions. They hear a man saying that there is a "sexual famine" going on in America and that orgasms are good, whether they happen with someone else (not specified) or, as his guest doctor friend put it, "...with the person you most love: yourself." There is no discussion of the specialness of sex between married people, or about the guilty horror or despair one feels when they act outside of that.

There will probably never be an afternoon show that depicts sex between married people the way it is supposed to be. We will continue to watch the sexually-deviant be paraded before us: the adulterers, the unwed mothers, the teenage studs. We will never hear a follow-up story that begins with, "I wish I hadn't had sex..." that also ends with, "Thank God I understand how much it means now! I'm saving myself for marriage." Call me a cynic or a realist, but I just don't see it happening. The ratings have proved too high for immodesty to take a backseat to chastity.

But instead of just complaining, I decided to do something about it. I wrote to CBS and asked them to please consider a different time slot for this show. I highlighted that, while it may be merely questionable material for adults, it is certainly inappropriate for children whose parents may not be home to help explain things to them. Nothing too political, just the facts: talking sex to kids = wrong. Please stop it.

I am posting the link here to the CBS feedback site and will continue to send them comments until I receive a response I'm happy with. If you agree with my argument here, please consider also sending them a note to the same tune. Maybe if enough of us respond they will consider moving Dr. Oz to Oz (or at least, somewhere else in the time slot).

CBS viewer feedback link here

I Ain't Gaga for this "Lady"

This will be brief, please just let me vent.

I have wanted for a long time to write about Lady Gaga. Much to her chagrin, it's not because I consider her to be interesting, or edgy, or - her favorite term - avant garde. Despite her best self-promotional intent to convince me otherwise, I do not think she is an artist. Rather, I think she's tacky and contrived.

She says she's an artist. Why? Because she wears shreds of clothing, weird masks and performs bizarre "dances" onstage whilst dousing herself in blood during - I kid you not - a mock crucifixion. That doesn't make you an artist any more than it made Piero Manzoni an artist when he put his own excrement in a jar and sold it in galleries.

She says she's unique and original. Why? Because she has come up with a completely new combination of costumes, face paint and sexual innuendo. Except if you recall that Madonna and David Bowie at all, because if you do you'll notice she has stolen every one of her ideas from one of those two.

She calls herself a lady. This would be laughable if it wasn't so disrespectful to women who cultivate ladyhood. Women who keep their mouths shut when all they have to say is stupid. Women who don't advertise their promiscuity. Women who have something more to offer the world than a long string of expletives.

Posting pictures of this person would be allowing her some amount of credibility, which I assure you she has none of. Just be thankful this may be the first and last time you hear about her. Sorry for the rant.

"There's gotta be a way to embarrass FoxNews on this one..."

Oh, dear. Jon Stewart is no political neutral, but since he's on the liberal side he gets special leeway on calling out his own people. In this case, being the ACORN expose, Stewart is the ONLY one calling them out.

Being bashed by someone other than conservatives... and a comic at that... that's gotta hurt, mainstream media.

But, it's their own fault for sleeping in on the ACORN story and letting two 20-somethings break it to the country via Fox. You snooze, you lose!

Click here for Jon Stewart clip.

Real Journalism

Hannah Giles and James O'Keefe are my new heroes. These two are the brains behind the Acorn exposure videos. Finally, some real journalism. It's refreshing and invigorating to see that Hannah hasn't been deterred by the media's poor handling of the news; she saw a problem and wanted to fix it, not avoid it. I could learn a lesson...

And here are the videos, in the order they've been released:

Baltimore, MD



Washington D.C.



Brooklyn, NY





San Bernadino, CA

Beyond Help

You can't reason with unreasonable people.

In the spirit of this week's awards shows, below is a list of articles highlighting the "best of the worst" in the category of double-standard columnists.

Their academic credentials are of no significance, meaning that any degrees they hold don't amount to a hill of beans as far as common sense goes. If you're a regular Joe, one who hasn't attended academia, you should take comfort in knowing that you are no less an authority on the best direction of our country than any of these writers. In fact, since your mind has not been polluted by racial theory, historical revisionism, or feminist prose, you are probably far ahead of the curve in the most important area we have left to ourselves: thinking our own thoughts.

**********************

Here's the list:

Maureen Dowd, New York Times, "Boy Oh Boy"


Mike Lupica, Daily News, "Shrill shouters betray post9/11 promises to be the best we can be"


E.J. Dionne, Jr., Washington Post, "Joe Wilson and Our Character..."

Domestic Terrorism

Today we are all remembering, for the eighth year in a row, when the Twin Towers came down. Built by American ingenuity, destroyed by hostile self-righteousness, they are now more of a symbol than they were standing in the Manhattan skyline.

I was walking to morning class when I approached the dorm I normally cut through to save time. At a distance I saw several students standing motionless, staring blankly at a t.v. screen. In that moment I thought, "Many people have just died." My whole school shut down so we could watch coverage. A friend of mine said, "You know what this means? We're going to war."

I called my Mom, whose birthday is also September 11th, desperately wanting to know if either of my brothers-in-law would be deployed. As it turns out, they both were; one for six months and the other three years. The latter had only one break, which came when he was struck with shrapnel from a suicide bomber's blast, a bomber who had infiltrated their base and exploded himself in the mess hall.

I can truly say that my life has not been the same since that day in 2001. I was a staunch liberal at the time, but everything started to turn conservative when the issue of homeland protection came into play. I had never thought of it, but when I did my conclusion was "whatever is takes to keep us safe."

Despite his foibles, President Bush did that for us. He kept us safe. According to my bro-in-law (the three year veteran, who is now an Officer in the Army linguistics division), there are terrorists everywhere, so many you can hardly keep track. Part of what he does is help to track them. So he's keeping us safe, too.

Will President Obama keep us safe? I truly do not know. I was struck with anger, then fear at his portrayal of America abroad, his saying over and over again that we have done wrong and are asking for forgiveness. As far as I remember, no one offered an apology for bringing down the Towers. No one who was responsible, I mean. Yet we are now advertising to the world that our involvement in keeping smaller, less armed countries safe was imperialism? Something does not compute.

We have domestic terrorists, too. Just today in Michigan, two men were brutally gunned down by a man with a personal grudge against them. One of the victims was a long-time pro-life supporter, who was simply holding up a sign in front of a high school when shot multiple times. The killer (in custody and has confessed to both murders, as well as the planning of a third) is a domestic terrorist. When murder is the answer for a disagreement of policy or politics, it's terrorism.

There is no telling what tomorrow, or next year, or the next decade will bring. President Obama may have a second term, he may not. We may be attacked again, we may not. One thing will surely come to pass: those who pray for the demise of terrorism and put their faith in a gracious and holy God to accomplish it will not be disappointed. As a citizen and believer, this is your best defense.

Old News

In honor of President Obama not saying anything new in his health care speech last night, here is some old news from our corner of the world.

About two weeks ago, we attended the wedding of Nic's friend Ed and his new wife Sam. The service was in a beautiful spot in downtown Chicago; beautiful both inside and out, as you will see in the photos below. The ceremony took place outside in the courtyard, sheltered by brick buildings covered in, you guessed it, cascading ivy. The weather was great and the thoughtfulness of having a cocktail-refreshment hour prior to the ceremony - which took place at a time most of us would have wanted to be eating dinner - was very much appreciated.

I love hanging out with Julia (of friends Young and Julia), pretending to take professional photos when in fact neither one of us has read our manuals yet! This is a source of guilt for both of us, but we're both self-professed lazy in that area. It's fun to just experiment and see what you come up with, too.

That said, here are some faux professional photos I took that day. Some of them turned out pretty cool; then again, how can you go wrong taking pics of super people and their well-behaved offspring? I think I have more pictures of Caitlyn that Julia does! She's just so darn cute.

****************


Pre-ceremony cocktail hour.

Flower girls, swirling and twirling away in adorable taffeta.

The courtyard decorated for the ceremony.

Ed and his nephews, "best men in waiting."

Caitlyn!

Everybody happy to celebrate with Ed and Sam.

Program for the event.

Sam had three dresses for her weddings - the first ceremony took place traditionally Catholic with only immediate family. She got to wear the other two dresses at this ceremony.

Shadows from the lanterns lining the ballroom at the Ivy.

Nic, Young, Ed and Peter.

FYI : The Truth About "46 Million Uninsured"

From the CATO Institute:

"For the record, according to the latest figures from the Census Bureau, 45.6 million Americans currently lack health insurance. This is actually down slightly from the 47 million that were uninsured in 2006. However, those numbers don’t tell the whole story.

For example, roughly one quarter of those counted as uninsured — 12 million people — are eligible for Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP), but haven’t enrolled. This includes 64 percent of all uninsured children, and 29 percent of parents with children. Since these people would be enrolled in those programs automatically if they went to the hospital for care, calling them uninsured is really a smokescreen.

Another 10 million uninsured “Americans” are, at least technically, not Americans. Approximately 5.6 million are illegal immigrants, and another 4.4 million are legal immigrants but not citizens.

Nor are the uninsured necessarily poor. A new study by June O'Neill, former director of the Congressional Budget Office, found that 43 percent of the uninsured have incomes higher than 250 percent of the poverty level ($55,125 for a family of four). And slightly more than a third have incomes in excess of $66,000. A second study, by Mark Pauly of the University of Pennsylvania and Kate Bundorf of Stanford, concluded that nearly three-quarters of the uninsured could afford coverage but chose not to purchase it. "

The actual bottom line number of people who cannot afford to buy insurance amounts to 14 million, not 46 million. (Hot Air.com)

NEWS FLASH: Van Jones resigns

This morning, citing what he called a "vicious smear campaign" as the catalyst, Energy Czar Van Jones resigned from the position at the White House. *Click here to read his "I'm resigning for you, not for me" explanation.

Think about this for a minute: airing video and audio clips - of Jones saying he's a black nationalist, that he strongly believes radical change is needed for "social justice," that he thinks white environmentalists have essentially "poisoned black communities" because they don't understand black people, calling Republicans names - merely airing these clips is a smear campaign. What about the truth of his statements? There he is, saying these things, and even as they aired recently, not entirely taking them back. You get the feeling Jones reluctantly apologized for his statements, but still internally stands behind them.

The bad side of this resignation: Jones will not likely disappear completely, but will probably play a significant role under the radar that White House "czar" positions are beholden to.

The good side: NBC, CBS, ABC, the Washington Times, the New York Times didn't have a story on this guy until this morning. Keep in mind that the past associations - not to mention his two arrests for riot activity - started to surface late Wednesday of last week. So, the conservative blogs, talk radio and Fox News (practically Glenn Beck singlehandedly!) were able to bring this guy's past into the light.

Makes you rethink the mainstream media's assertions that conservative media is a small, powerless group, doesn't it?

The Indoctrination Wagon

Did you know about the President's plan to speak to public school children about the importance of education and how they can help him achieve our goals?

Hope of all hopes, it looks like the indoctrination wagon has rolled into town!

You may remember that the last time it made a stop, it deposited a large honor on several school children who got to participate in what's sure to be called the music event of the century! No, not Michael Jackson's death. These lovely, innocent children got to sing the "Yes We Can" song of hope and change not only for their teachers and invited parents, but ultimately the whole world gained access to the delightfully hopeful ditty by way of the internet.

And if we got it through the internet, you know it must be quality! Think of all the other great things the internet has brought us in the past: online gaming, thousands of sites only one letter off from what you're actually looking for, giving you a fun game of turkey chase! Not to mention pornography.

But I digress. This post is all about the President looking after his own. His own. Why, surely you must agree that the public schools - run by government grants and filled with teachers union staff - just as much belong to the President. In fact, he's taking the time to directly speak to your children; when's the last time you had a chat with your kiddies about personal responsibility? In that sense, you could argue he has more right to them than you do.

Oh, you did just talk to them about personal responsibility? And it was because they're home with you most of the time, offering you plenty opportunity for meaningful conversations about values? Clearly this post doesn't address everyone; you hundred or so home schooled kids across the country are exempt.

For the rest of you lucky k-6 public scholars, you should consider it a great honor that your President wants to talk to you. Yeah, YOU. It's a great opportunity for you to prove to everyone how loyal you are to the President. And what better way to show your support of him than to do everything he says? Actions speak louder than words. Who needs words when you've got civic responsibility to worry about? You can't be bogged down with learning the complexities of the United States constitution; you've got work to do!

If, due to unforeseen circumstances, you are unable to attend school on the day of the address, don't worry. Your teacher will have individual copies to hand to every student, and your parents are required by law to show it to you every night. Ok, technically, it's not law yet, but they know the consequences of failure in that regard. Plus, you can help them be good citizens - like you want to be - by reporting any suspicious behavior to teachers you trust. You'll know you can trust them if they have the logo shirts with "afl-cio" on them. Those are the good ones. Or, simply write to the White House itself via their website. Now, be a good little comrade!

Kids, remember that no one became an accomplished citizen in one day, and not without really doing the legwork. Well, the President did, but that's not important. Your teachers will chart the personal goals you set for yourself and the progress you are making toward them. If you are not making progress, they will remind you. Don't be afraid of setting the wrong goals, either. Your teacher will help you determine which are acceptable.

Teachers, parents, children: This is the time for robust social action! Some people nowadays seem to be dragging their feet against the change we could be making if we all just did what we were told. A lot has changed since the founding fathers wrote the constitution. We don't have to worry anymore that the President or the Congress will have too much power, now that the good guys are in office! We know that they have our best interests in mind because they tell us they do. What, do you think they would lie to us? I don't think you get voter approval by promising one thing and delivering another!

Let's bring everyone onto the same team in the spirit of hope. Let's rally together to be the change that we seek. Let's remind each other what it really means to be an American:

To serve the government obediently and without question or confrontation.