DADvocate

Dick Durbin's attacks on Judge Roberts religious beliefs, ACLU fighting Boy Scouts of Fort A.P. Hill for jamborees and questioning of Milt Romney's Mormonism shows further the lefts hatred of religion.

Although not asked, Ted Kennedy made a special effort to point out Milt Romney's membership in the Mormon church, "downplaying" it while making it an issue. More here.

"American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois contends that the Defense Department's sponsorship violates the First Amendment because the Scouts require members to swear an oath of duty to God." From a Foxnews article reporting the death of four adult Scout leaders at the National Jamboree.

First a shor refresher: The First Amendment - Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Not allowing use of Fort A.P. Hill due to religious beliefs would be prohibiting the free exercise thereof as well as preventing the right of the people peaceablly to assemble. Of course when you hate religion, especially Christianity, you will twist anything to meet your purposes.

Dick Durbin and other liberals are beginning to make an issue of the religious beliefs of John Roberts and whether or not his beliefs will effect his decisions on the Supreme Court bench. Of course, everyone's beliefs effect their judgement and decision making. The liberal want to be sure the beliefs are inline with theirs and are showing their customary intolerance and bigotry towards anyone holding strong Judeo-Christian beliefs.

From this NY Sun editorial - must read:
Senator Durbin of Illinois, fresh from slandering American GIs by comparing them to Nazis, introduced a new slander into the public debate after meeting on Friday with President Bush's nominee to the Supreme Court, Judge John Roberts. Mr. Durbin....

Mr. Durbin and his Democratic colleagues, moreover, have a track record in this regard. Two years ago, they launched a filibuster against Judge William Pryor because of Judge Pryor's "deeply held personal beliefs" regarding abortion. In other words, it was Judge Pryor's Catholicism that disqualified him. Before the confirmation of Attorney General Ashcroft, Senator Reid announced, "I think that we have a right to look at John Ashcroft's religion."

Durbin professes to be a Catholic himself. Perhaps he is of the nature of one who believes he can attain the benefits of a religion while not practicing the values and beliefs it professes. Or he puts on the wrappings of a religion because it looks good. Or maybe he's just terribly misguided. What's more important, going to church on Sunday or practicng the tenets of your religion in your everyday life? It appears that liberals think that anyone who actually practices the teachings of traditional Christianity should not be allowed to serve in a jucicial post or maybe in any public offce. Are not religious people deserving of a voice in all branches of our government?

A few months ago accusations were flying from the Democratic side of torture and mis-treatment of prisoners (suspected terrorists) in Guantanamo, Cuba. More recently we hear constant accusations from many of the same people that Karl Rove illegally outed Valerie Plame. The liberals claim to be concerned about human rights, national security and every thing related.

One thing is certain, the Democrats want to make the Bush administration look as bad as possible with little regard of the cost to our nation. The Dems have reserved the "right" to sit back and criticize while contributing very little to resolve the problems of international terrorism.

During all to this I think of this quote from Theordore Roosevelt:

"It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat."

"Citizenship in a Republic,"
Speech at the Sorbonne, Paris, April 23, 1910

President Bush has made plenty of mistakes and I'm not sure he is on the right path. But his overly loud critics are worse and have only one true goal - to grab power away from Bush and the Republicans and take if for themselves. Rove and Gitmo are red herrings to try to fool the public into turing against Bush, et al. Given the lack of leadership and constructive ideas from the left, power in their hands holds more dangers for the future of our country than it does where the powere is now.

Following a recent interaction on another blog concerning the blogger criticizing President Bush for his relationship with the Saudis, I began thinking about enviromental, ecological, and energy concerns the USA faces. The challenges seem daunting. Observing the individual choices we make, we are not meeting these challenges.

The price of gasoline, diesel fuel and natural gas climbs nearly everyday. Finding new sources for these fuels appears to be a long shot. For most of my driving life I have driven/owned cars that got 30 mpg or better, not necessarily due to any altruisic reasons, but due to personal economics and hating to pay gas companies any more than I have to.

Currently in America, bigger houses are becoming more common. More people drive SUVs and light trucks than ever. Both of these facts lead to increased energy consumption which leads to increased dependence for foreign sources of sources of fuel plus the greater risk of major energy crises in the future.

Without getting into great detail, we seem to be on a path of self-destruction led by those who should be showing the way to greater ecological and energy concern. The larger homes and bigger cars are primarily affordable to the upper-middle class and higher economic classes, i.e. those who can afford to make a choice. The economic classes below these pretty much reside in and drive what they can afford.

The choices of the higher economic classes show an unwillingness to make personal sacrifices for the good of the environment or the future of our country. The blogger mentioned above had just completed a lengthy trip after which he mentioned in his blog that his SUV (that I could tell by his pictures) got 18 mpg. Rather pitiful. However, SUVs are very popular and the larger ones get even worse milage.

Commonly, people criticize automakers for not making enough fuel efficient vehicles. Automakers make what the public buys. To do otherwise would be corporate suicide. Yet, many of these same people buy vehicles that drink gas.

In much the same manner, larger houses consume more energy also. Since larger houses require more materials for construction, the increased energy use actually begins before construction starts. Regardless of how energy efficient the house, a smaller house using the same technology and construction will be more efficient, at least in any case I know.

Until enough individuals who actually have a choice are willing to buy energy efficient cars and homes, significant improvements in environment and energy costs will be slow, painful and probably government mandated, Very likely this means further erosion of our personal freedoms (because we didn't practice our freedom responsibly).

Some relevant links:
US vs European Vehicle Fuel Efficiency
Fuel Efficient Car Info
Blames government but interesting info
40 MPG SUV within easy reach!!??
Fuel Mileage Tables
DOE Home Info
Interesting comparisons
Contains some energy use/income comparisons
Home size and energy use trends

Tonight I saw a Hanes underwear commercial Damon Wayans. Watching the commercial, I had two thoughts: 1) Damon Wayans, a black man, replaced Michael Jordan, also a black man. Duh. 2) Since whites make up the overwhelming majoritiy of underwear purchasers in the USA, Hanes must believe that a black spokesperson will appeal to whites as well as blacks.

The commercial ran during "Myth Busters" which in no way appears to be aimed at a "black" market. Knowing that corporations spend millions on marketing research, marketing and advertising, Hanes must feel confident whites customers will not be alienated and will be attracted to their product by a black spokesperson, given the spokesperson is not radical, racially charges figure such as Al Sharpton.

I wonder if any white spokesperson would appeal to the black population as strongly as Damon Wayons appeals to the white population. Apparently, someone approving Hanes commercials thinks not. This is OK by me, but seems to be telling as to the willingness of certain racial groups to accept persons from other racial groups.

During the week of July 3 to July 9 I attended Boy Scout with my son and his troop. As a committee member of the troop I participate in as many of the troop activities as I can. I focus on the activities in which the troop needs adults for supervision, safety, and to meet Boy Scout regulations.

This was the first time I had been to Boy Scout camp since I attended Camp Buck Toms in Tennessee in 1963 or so. Interestingly, little had changed since then, except for the quality of the leadership. Superficially, my son's troop may not appear to be any better or much different than most other troops. Hopefully, every troop is as good as my son's. But I doubt it.

Ranging in ages from 12 to 17 years old, the Scouts worked on varying skills from basketry, astronomy, and geology to wilderness survival earning many merit badges and other Scout honors. However, their camaraderie proved to be their most outstanding quality. The older boys readily embraced and supported the younger Scouts. The younger Scouts looked up to the older boys with admiration and sought to emulate them.

Typical good nature joking and banter passed between the boys. By the end of the week everyone had some sort of a nickname given in good humor. At the final chapel service before the closing campfire, the boys, unprompted by any adult, put their arms around each other's shoulders and swayed side to side in unison as they sang each song.

Surely these occasions bring forth the fond, warm memories that create movies and novels, except no tragedies only friendship and warmth. I feel privileged to have witnessed and been a small part of this group during this week.

Rapper Kanye West at the Live 8 concert:

"The concept of AIDS alone - my parents always told me, who are activists - that it's a man-made disease in the first place that was placed in Africa just like crack was placed in the black community to break up the Black Panther (black activists) party."

Does this guy really believe this or is he a paranoid schizophrenic (which means he really believes it, I guess)?

More here.

---

This portion will be updated as more anecdotes become available

July 27 Randi Rhodes and the "Struggle" against terrorism
Air America talk show host seems to think that using the word "struggle" makes you a Hitler wanta be. On her show today she pointed out that "struggle" in German is "kampf" as in "Mein Kampf" by Adolf Hitler. Thus President Bush's use of the term "struggle", as in "a global struggle against the enemies of freedom" makes Bush the equivalent of Hitler.
Put "struggle" on your list of words forbidden by the left. This brings out the truth of Godwin's Law.

July 20 Blog Closes Unexpectedly - The blog referred to below unexpectedly closed down yesterday. No explanation was given other than it was "too much like work and not so much fun." As he had recently done interviews with local politicians and just two days before he had posted and lengthy post critizing President Bush and virtually anyone associated with him, the closing of the blog was a surprise!!

I am actually sad to see this blog close. Open discussion of ideas and the possibilty of converting a liberal or two is important. The blogger had operated under "psuedo-anonymity" for several years until he recently outed himself after threats to be outed by a local tabloid publisher.

"Psuedo-anonymity" is used because at times he included pictures of his wife in the galleries. Excellent photography by the way. Other writings, comments and photography would have allowed someone who knew him fairly well or maybe gone to high school with him to ascertain his identity. Maybe he didn't really want to be anonymous but wanted some recognition for his efforts and it all backfired on him. We'll probably never know for sure.

---

July 13 Concerning religious freedom and separation of church and state - Here is a moderately liberal blog that interests me because of the comments people post there. The liberals are almost always angry and vehement. Their disdain of almost anything resembling Christianity is obvious as can be seen in the comments for the "How to get tax exempt status for your theme park" post.

The story is that of a religious run theme park in Florida won a court fight to have tax-exempt status. Considering that the blogger is in Tennessee and even bothered to post this indicates his disdain. The blogger also states the theme park was given "exempt status as a church" but leaves out the full story. The referenced story ran in the Chicago Tribune newspaper and state the theme park was given "same tax-exempt status given to churches and museums."

It appears they are all for separation of church and state as long as it means limiting church. Additionally, it appears the libs only support religious freedom if it fits into their definition of what religion should be which, in my observation, is practiced only in private and forbidden from almost any form of public expression nor should one actually practice their religious precepts in everyday life.

BTW - post a comment disagreeing with the blogger and see if it gets removed.

---

Based on personal experience, this little story gives some insight into the perception of a liberal as tainted by her erroneous beliefs.

The setting is a Thanksgiving dinner for the extended at the house of a childless liberal couple who have done quite well financially, i.e. nice house. We'll call them Ralph and Mary. This gathering is for Mary's side of the family.

Mary's two brothers show up with offspring: 11 year old nephew, adult nephew, 18 year old neice and her boyfriend, and the 4 year old grandson of one of the brothers. Mary's unmarried sister attends plus her elderly parents.

The two brothers bring several dishes a piece that they prepared. The adult son had also helped prepare some of the dishes. The 11 year old boy brought "Little Smokies" and Pillsbury crescent roll dough. At the house he fixes his brand of Pigs in a Blanket. The kitchen is part of great room that includes the living room area.

At a moment when most of the food was ready but the group wasn't quite ready to sit at the table, the males migrate to the couch and chairs to relax. The women continue to stand in the kitchen area and chat, all the preparation is done except for some warming up of items. Mary then gathers eveyone's attention to make an announcement which goes something like this: "Eveybody look! Everybody look! Look how sexist this is! All the men are in the living room and all the women are in the kitchen. Isn't that sexist?"

Using the tunnel vision that enables one to only see what one wants to see, Mary managed to ignore the shared food preparation efforts and other efforts by the males and sieze upon the 3-5 minute span that appearred sexist of a 3-4 hour gathering. Too bad she missed the rest of the fun but when you are focused on one thing you miss out on the other stuff.

---

During his anti-medication rant, Tom Cruise's message was lost due to his "eccentric" style. (Eccentric means whacko.) American society probably has the highest level of legal mood altering drug use in history. The number of children taking psychotropic medications is extremely high.

Here

DAN BURTON (R-IN): "There has been over a 500 percent increase in the use of Ritalin in the United States since 1990. It's estimated that 4 to 6 million children in the United States take Ritalin every single day." Congressional Testimony

About six years ago, I was involved in circumstances in which my ex-wife, a social worker and a child psychiatrist wanted my 6 year old son to take Zoloft because he was having behavior problems. I strongly objected because he only had problems when with her, i.e. situation specific misbehavior; Zoloft had not been approved for use with children by the FDA; and in every other setting my son behaved and performed superbly. He was and still is an honor student who has never misbehaved at school. An good athlete and extremely gregarious.

The psychiatrist and social worker persisted because they were the "experts;" there must be some sort of mental illness; children were given Zoloft all the time; and the psychiatrist's son took medication so it would be OK for mine. Although my son ending up having to take some Zoloft for a 2-3 months I was able to get the medication stopped and the social worker halted from treating my son due to ethical violations on her part.

Do not forget that psychiatrist, social workers and other mental health professionals can be just as whacky as the rest of us. Here is an example. I wouldn't want him treating my children.

It appears that no one is exempt from the threat of overmedication.