A panel consisting of 41 members termed the Congressional Black Caucus voted unanimously for Burris to fill the vacant Illinois Senate seat. They plan on sending a letter to congress requesting Burris be seated. Could it be because he is black???

According to wiki: The Congressional Black Caucus is an organization representing the African American members of the United States Congress. Membership is exclusive to African Americans (although not 100% blood quantium)[1] and its chair in the 111th Congress is Representative Barbara Lee of California.

Wonder if they looked at anything else than skin color? Such as the condition in which he was appointed or qualification....

I love this!  Wayne Cauthen (our substandard city manager who is responsible for our whopping deficit) now wants to hire a "Czar" to do the job old Funk knew Cauthen couldn't do in the first place, which is why he wanted to fire him.  The sheep on the city council are going along with his incredibly insightful idea.  

Everyone is soooo worried about Funk and Gloria that they can't see their time would be better spent worrying about the bad shape our city is in due to the incompetence of  #1), The city manager, #2) The entire city council and  #3) former mayor "I-can't-wait-to-spend-all-your-tax-money-for-downtown-
projects-only (and to hell with the decaying outlying areas) Kay Barnes.   How much deeper are we going to have to go in debt to pay this Czar to do the job Cauthen should be doing in the first place? 

While i do not condone the killing of innocent men, women and most important, children, i think hamas, or hezbolah or any extremist organization live to just as much a double standard as their "enemies". Militants have no problem strapping bombs to themselves or even women and children, and in the name of their "god", blow themselves up in an area crowded with women and children, but if they get hit by enemy fire then all of a sudden it's an atrocity. I guess the greater consensus and not mine is that israel is supposed to just sit back and let hamas fire rockets at them

My point is this, if you want to blow your self up all in the name of "God" and take other people with you, don't cry and complain if we get to you first and, lets say, "help you get there quicker"  

I decided that to respond to JohnKJR, I should copy the bulk of his post, and respond to each point.  He writes well, and isn't too far off, except for the obviously biased opinion he has against anyone who can think for themselves.

Liberal also means Progressive.  There are those that take that way too far of course, but I'll get to that shortly.  Progressive's believe that in order for a People to prosper, for a Nation to Prosper, we need to continue to move the Nation forward with new ideas, and remove what doesn't work...

Conservatives tend to believe in the opposite.  New is bad, Change is bad.  If it works, why fix it?  Again, that is an over simplification of what either side is... but that is what JohnKJR believes.  Let's take a moment to poke some holes in his comments.

From here forward, my comments will be in a Red Font.

From John's Blog:

Bonus) Conservatives believe that judges should act like umpires instead of legislating from the bench. That means that judges should determine whether laws are permissible under the Constitution and settle debates about the meaning of laws, not impose their will based on their ideological leanings. Liberals view judges as a backdoor method of getting unpopular left-leaning legislation passed. They don't want umpires, they want political partisans in black robes who will side with them first and then come up with a rationale to explain it.  Reality:   This maybe partially true.  However there are activists on the bench that represent both sides of the issues.   If the Supreme Court rules against Conservatives, or a Conservative Judge rules in favor of a more liberal or moderate issue, then Conservatives scream that they are legislating from the bench.  Judges must interpret the constitution.  Each Judge will look at it in a different way, and the interpretations will differ.  Some of this is due to time, sometimes it's just the nature of the "issue" or law at hand.  Civil Rights are a prime example.  Our rights are protected by the Constitution.  But when they were written... "ALL MEN" meant exactly that.  Yet, because of changes in this country over time, it now means... "ALL PEOPLE", unless you are Homosexual. 

10) Conservatives believe that individual Americans have a right to defend themselves and their families with guns and that right cannot be taken away by any method short of a Constitutional Amendment, which conservatives would oppose. Liberals believe by taking arms away from law abiding citizens, they can prevent criminals, who aren't going to abide by gun control laws, from using guns in the commission of crimes.  Only a few of the Far Left believe that there should be no gun ownership.  Most people, including most liberals believe in the constitution the way it was written.  Which is to say..." A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."  a well regulated militia, does not mean that each individual has the right to own assualt rifles, machine guns, or any thing that shoots.  The interpretation of this Amendment is at issue.  And a true conservative would have to take this to mean exactly what it says.. which wouldn't allow for the ownership of military type weapons in the home.  Yes, you can own guns, but regulation of certain types of weapons, and who can own them is the real issue here.

9) Conservatives believe that we should live in a color blind society where every individual is judged on the content of his character and the merits of his actions. On the other hand, liberals believe that it's ok to discriminate based on race as long as it primarily benefits minority groups.  BS!!!  Many Conservatives believe that anyone other than a white male should have less rights.  And Conservatives tend to believe in Class distinctions... the Wealthy vs. the Poor.  White Conservatives in the South still promote their ideals... such as the recent "Puff the Magic Negro" bit.  Both sides are guilty of discrimination.  Both sides are guilty of Racism... This issue isn't black or white... It's definately something that falls into a grey area. 

8) Conservatives are capitalists and believe that entrepreneurs who amass great wealth through their own efforts are good for the country and shouldn't be punished for being successful. Liberals are socialists who view successful business owners as people who cheated the system somehow or got lucky. That's why they don't respect high achievers and see them as little more than piggy banks for their programs.  Again,  John is a bit off here.. Yes, conservatives believe in capitalism.  It's almost a religion for them.  There are Christian Sects that have formed based on the idea of Prosperity Gospel.  But Liberals are not Socialists... that is over simplifying the issue.  I don't doubt there are socialists in the Liberal Left... but too suggest that Liberals want complete socialism to rule, is BS.   I would gather that most people want something in the middle... Socialism has good things to offer... Good Christians are Socialists.  We care for those in need... and help lift them up.  True Capistalists only care about one thing... and that is wealth... and many of them will destroy others to gain it.  That is not responsible.

7) Conservatives believe that abortion ends the life of an innocent child and since we believe that infanticide is wrong, we oppose abortion. Most liberals, despite what they'll tell you, believe that abortion ends the life of an innocent child, but they prefer killing the baby to inconveniencing the mother.   Boy, I love his wording here... Abortion is a medical procedure that should be used rarely, and only in the situation where the mother's life is in danger.  I would also agree with abortion with regards to the victims of rape or incest.  To use it otherwise is immoral.  Most Pro Choice Liberals would agree with that statement.  Conservatives can't see past their own Moral Values, and care little for the women involved.  This issue should be put to rest... both sides need to come together to pass reasonable laws that protect the rights of the women, and the Doctors who may have to make that decision.  We can go on and on about whether life starts at conception, or by tradition, at Birth... but that is pointless...  

6) Conservatives believe in confronting and defeating enemies of the United States before they can harm American citizens. Liberals believe in using law enforcement measures to deal with terrorism, which means that they feel we should allow terrorists to train, plan, and actually attempt to kill Americans before we try to arrest them -- as if you can just send the police around to pick up a terrorist mastermind hiding in Iran or the wilds of Pakistan.  Liberals don't believe any differently that conservatives.  They just believe in obeying the constitution and the laws of the land.  Most Liberals prefer that we don't interfere in other Nations Governments, while Conservatives like to interfere in other Nations Governments.  Iraq is a prime example.  Conservatives still say we were protecting the United States, when in truth, we attacked a sovereign nation that was NOT harboring our enemy Al-Qaida, nor did they have any WMD's.  Regardless of the outcome of this continuing conflict, John's statements are too vague...

5) Conservatives, but not necessarily Republicans (which is unfortunate), believe it's vitally important to the future of the country to reduce the size of government, keep taxes low, balance the budget, and get this country out of debt. Liberals, and Democrats for that matter, believe in big government, high taxes, and they have never met a new spending program they didn't like, whether we will have to go into debt to pay for it or not.  I don't disagree with John regarding all of this.  Conservatives promote small government, low taxes, a balanced budget, and staying out of debt... however.... Conservatives will do anything to destroy a functioning government.  Using Capitalism to promote outsourcing of Federal Jobs, so that Government workers become lower paid, and obsolete...   Liberals like new programs... but they also want a working functional government, and the real battle in Washington over the past 60 plus years has been in maintaining a functioning government that is not run by private contractors.  

Republicans and Democrats have much to say on the matter of debt... but in recent History, the roles have been reversed.  The Republicans have spent, spent, and spent... with little regard for going into debt... and they have wasted tax dollars for 14 years.  Democrats, however, have fought them on many issues, and the last time a balanced budget was in force, was during Clinton's administration. 

4) Conservatives believe that government, by its very nature, tends to be inefficient, incompetent, wasteful, and power hungry. That's why we believe that the government that governs least, governs best. Liberals think that the solution to every problem is another government program. Even when those new programs create new problems, often worse than the ones that were being fixed in the first place, the solution is always....you guessed it, another government program.  Again, my point about Conservatives destroying government.  They will do anything to make it inefficient, and incapable of functioning properly.  Government Programs aren't the issue, it's the destruction of the foundations of Government and the how the government is run by Conservatives.    Liberals believe in a functioning government that works for the people, run by the people.  A Government that governs least, is a government that isn't paying attention to what's going on... the past 8 years are a prime example of that.

3) Conservatives are patriotic, believe that America is a great nation, and are primarily interested in looking out for the good of the country. That's why we believe in "American exceptionalism" and "America first." Liberals are internationalists who are more concerned about what Europeans think of us and staying in the good graces of the corrupt bureaucrats who control the UN than looking out for the best interests of this nation.  This is also only partially true.  Liberals are Patriotic.  They believe in a FREE Nation where we have FREEDOM of speech.  We have the freedoms to say what we believe.  Liberals may look to European countries for ideas, but most of those countries are older, and sometimes wiser.   Liberals do believe that we need to work with the international community.  Capitalism requires that we have friends in the global market, and if we want to prosper, we need to at least marginally get along with other Nations.  The Conservative idea of bullying other nations has not been an effective way of dealing with World issues.

2) Conservatives, most of them anyway, believe in God and think that the Constitution has been twisted by liberal judges to illegitimately try to purge Christianity from the public square. We also believe, most of us anyway, that this country has been successful in large part because it is a good, Christian nation and if our country ever turns away from the Lord, it will cease to prosper. Liberals, most of them anyway, are hostile to Christianity. That's why, whether you're talking about a school play at Christmas time, a judge putting the Ten Commandments on the wall of his court, or a store employee saying "Merry Christmas" instead of "Happy Holidays," liberals are dedicated to driving reminders of Christianity from polite society.    Most Liberals are actually better educated than those christian conservatives.  Truth.  Liberals are idealists... Conservatives are not.  Many Christian Liberals have a greater understanding of what and how this country was founded, while Christian Conservatives try to rewrite history to suit their own beliefs.  Whether your Christian or not... this country was founded as a Democratic Republic that very clearly states there is a separation of church and state.  This idea was put into our laws, so that those of other beliefs could worship as they please.  NO Government sanctioned religion... Plus, we did not want to be ruled by England's Church or the Vatican.  Idealists from both sides have been having this battle at the local level for years... primarily in school districts.  But we must remember one simple thing... we are a Nation of multiple peoples.  Race, Religion and Creed differ, and we are that magnificent Melting Pot.  Christian Principles are good guidelines, but they are not the only guideline.   Remember, many of our founding fathers were not Christian.  That again... is a fact.

1) Conservatives believe in pursuing policies because they're pragmatic and because they work. Liberals believe in pursuing policies because they're "nice" and make them feel good. Whether the policies they're advocating actually work or not is of secondary importance to them.  Conservatives believe in pursuing policies that benefit capitalism, and not the human condition.  They care little for those in need.  Liberals want to level the playing field for all people in this country.  They want the same opportunities to go to those that are brought up poor, as those that are brought up with wealth.

If you follow the news, then you know that Roland Burris presented his creditials to the Secretary of the Senate, and his creditials were rejected. 

The media is having an orgasm over this, apparently the war in GAZA isn't enough news.  And Obama didn't recently pass wind... so... they must be bored.   Here's the reality of the situation. 

Gov. Rod Blagojevich appointed Burris to the Senate seat that was vacated by Barack Obama.  Gov. Blagojevich is under investigation for attempting to sell Obama's Seat.  He declares he is innocent, and is business as usual.  He does his job by appointing Burris to the seat, and his office fills out all the wonderful paperwork that goes along with such an appointment.  Those "creditials" are given to Roland Burris to present to the Secretary of the Senate. 

Now... yesterday, the media reported that his creditials would be rejected because they were incomplete.  Burris and his attorneys new damn well, when they went to D.C. that his paperwork was not in order.  However, Burris continues to speak to the media, claiming he is the junior senator from Illinois.  The problem is... he isn't.    YET.

I quote from CNN:

"Nancy Erickson, the secretary of the Senate, rejected Burris' appointment on Monday because Burris' certificate of appointment was missing the signature of Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White, an aide to the secretary said.

Rule 2 of the Standing Rules of the Senate states that the secretary of state must sign the certificate of election along with the governor. "

Next of course is a statement from his attorney.  Also from CNN.

Timothy W. Wright III, an attorney for Burris, said the rejection of Burris' credentials was unlawful.

"Our credentials were rejected by the secretary of the Senate. We were not allowed to be placed in the record books. We were not allowed to proceed to the floor for purposes of taking oath, all of which we think was improperly done and it is against the law of this land," Wright said.

Burris' response to the lack of signature is as follows.  Yes, I am quoting CNN:

In an interview Monday with Wolf Blitzer for CNN's "The Situation Room," Burris downplayed the issue of a missing signature on the certificate of appointment.

"We know that under Illinois law and constitutional law that the secretary of state can in no way veto legal action of the governor," Burris said. "So that signature is only perfunctory and ceremonial to put the seal on it for, you know, recording and filing purposes."

Never mind that the fact that Senate Rules have nothing to do with Illinois state law.  See quote regarding Rule 2 .

THE real issue is that the state of Illinois has it's own legal issues.  The Democratic Secretary of State White, has declined to sign the certificate, because Democrats do not want anyone appointed by Blago to take the seat... for obvious reasons.

The pathetic part of all of this is that Burris is absolutely right... it's political theater.  BUT... Burris is contributing to it... he wants this job so bad, that he is making a fool out of himself, and the state of Illinois.  Something he shouldn't be doing.  My opinion of course....

I think he needs a better attorney, because the rules are pretty clear, and unless they can convince, or legally convince the Sec. of State White to sign the appointment... Burris will continue to be denied access to the senate floor. 

From CNN. 

"Senate leaders questioning the appointment cite Article 1, Section 5 of the U.S. Constitution, which states, "Each house shall be the judge of the elections, returns and qualifications of its own members."

This basically states that the Senate has the right to reject Burris with or without the approval of the State of Illinois.

What it comes down to is that the BS in Illinois is now in D.C.  Democrats don't want this guy seated for obvious reasons.  They don't want anyone tainted by Gov. Blago... to be in the running for this seat in 2010. 

It will be interesting to see how this theater plays out....

NOTE:  All CNN quotes are in Bold Itallics.

For many years, those who claim to support the traditional values of America have tried to accuse the liberals of welcoming an invasion that would end freedom. However, when examined closer, it is obvious who is really working for an authoritarian theocracy. Now, I am not saying the people of each side necessarily follow this, but there are enough followers of Bin Laden, Akmadinajad, Jerry Faldwell, Colter and Rush to show that the number of followers on each side is not small. However, the number of peace-makers on each side are even larger, and they should begin to stand up to their conservative oppressors in any land.

1) Those in the Mid-East are blaming America for the wars in the region, although refuse to take responsibility for their own military actions.
America blames the Mid-East countries for the problems in the region yet refuse to stay out of their affairs, even starting an illegal war.
The Truth: Both are at fault for the exact same thing, yet both are immature enough to blame the other while ignoring those who blame their own side, even when it is wrong. Examples: the CIA operations in Iran to remove a democratically elected official and Bin Laden's attacks in America.

2) Many in the US condemn the actions of Mid-East nations for their position on gays.
As a result, many Americans have opted to consider homosexuality a disease and forbid the marriage of consenting adults. If not for the liberals, American Traditionalists may even try an extermination of this group.
The Truth: Certain chemicals have been shown to be similar in the brains of females and gay males, as well as males and lesbian females. It is not a disease, nor is it a choice. It is simply who they are.

3) In the Mid-East, many followers of Islam are against America because it supports Christianity.
In the US, many Christians are against the Mid-East because it supports Islam.
The Truth: Although both sides will say that their religion supports peace and then point to true scripture to show the other as evil, those who advocate violence against any group to promote 'peace' are morons.

4) In the Mid-East, many believe science and religion are one and the same.
In the US, many believe science and religion are one and the same.
The Truth: This is how advancement was halted in the Middle Ages, and we can all see how it harms our schools today. Dinosaur bones do not exist? Really, I can take you to a museum and prove their existence. Just because you may believe education is pointless simply because the world is predicted to end (predictions which have been shot-down one-by-one over the ages) does not mean we should revert to a nomadic society where one religious tribe attacks another to prove their ***** size.

5) Many Mid-East countries base their foreign policy on attacking the infidel to prove their own strength.
The foreign policy in the US is based on YEEEEEE-HAWWWWWWW, but usually ends like Hee-Haw.
The Truth: It is not the place of either group to tell another how to worship or what type of government to utilize.

6) In many Mid-East countries, the government tells the people they are free because they elect their president and live in a democracy.
In the US, the government tells the people they are free because they elect their president and live in a democracy.
The Truth: In each group, someone else elects the president and neither are democracies.

7) Groups on either side will attack someone who brings these similarities up and refer to them as a traitor just to free their own conscience of what they know to be true.
The Truth: The truth is those who support violence and discrimination are traitors to the human race, and those who refuse to admit these similarities exist should be seen as corrupt.

Contrary to the partisan sob story on tonight's broadcast, it's not the dead of winter in Gaza. The KC gentleman whose relatives living in Gaza are suffering under unjust Israeli aggression are not harboring Hamas or lobbing deadly missiles at Israeli schools. And they're not cold, either--it's in the upper 60's this week--perfect temperature for blasting more missiles at Israel.

I think it's unbelievable to see otherwise intelligent, reasonable Americans buying into the LIE that is perpetuated by Hamas sympathizers and apologists. 

Why is it that Muslims can smuggle missiles and weapons into Gaza but not the needed medicine and food that those evil Israelis are blocking?  How can all those able-bodied and angry young men have the intelligence to fire weapons and pray five times per day, but not have enough grit to grow a crop, or construct a decent dwelling?

Why did the Egyptians open fire on the Palestinians who tried to enter Egypt last week?  Where is the international outrage when Egyptians shoot down fleeing women and children?

Why don't the Muslims living in splendor in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt and the United States come to the rescue of their Muslim brothren in Gaza?  Where is the international investment in making a viable community in Gaza?  If Muslim oil money can build the obscenely opulent hotels in Qatar, UAE, and Dubai, then why can't they construct some beachfront property on the Mediterranean in GAZA?  When you answer these questions you will see the ugly underbelly that is Muslim-on-Muslim PREJUDICE.  Muslims detest the Palestinians, but Palestinians do make great martyrs and victims.

Why are Americans condemning Israel's self-defense?  You can bet if Canada fired missiles from Vancouver into Seattle, we would defend ourselves!!  Then again, this country did elect Barack Hussein Obama---so maybe we wouldn't defend ourselves.  Perhaps we'd assume we'd offended Canada and deserve to be bombed.

Obama's employment application list for work in his administration.  The one that was going around that asked all the questions about personal emails to what you might have thought about.

Clearly all a charade because one of the big dogs, Commerce Secretary appointee,Bill Richardson, is under a grand jury investigation on how political donors were awarded state contracts in his home state of New Mexico.

Wouldn't all of this have come out during the application process?   All those invasive illegal questions made for nice window dressing for future applicants and gave the public the charade that only the honest, clean, law abiding, need apply for the Obama Administration. 

And on the other charade, the planned stimulus package that Obama wants on his signing desk Jan. 20 right after the inauguration thing, is going to take a bit longer.   Yes,  House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer says it will take time to "review" it, and the timeline would be delayed till mid-February.  Say it ain't so,  they're going to read this one?  What about the last one.   When asked about the number ($700billion) Paulson said, "we didn't really have any number in mind but we knew it had to be really big.

So now they need more time to review something that doesn't even exist.  But they know there's going to be many pages of ......uh......stuff on them to review.    We know we're going to pass it, but we just need more time to give the illusion that we're working really hard on it. 

It is becoming even more clear as to why I don't vote.  There isn't one that would get my approval to be a part of this charade.  

This inauguration to me means that we have hope for an Honest Government ! That ideas and Facts will be real and not just based on what the highest bidder wants to be fact. That trampling our "lesser" citizens to fill certain pockets with wealth by lies and greed will stop! That ruining our great planet with petroleum products and chemicals only because of bias studies and greed will come to an end! That thousands of Law Enforcement and Border Guards can stop losing their lives over lies and greed! That thousands of Innocent-Honest-Hard Working Americans won't have their Lives and Families ruined by unfair laws funded by lies and greed! That America will be what our Founding Fathers intended it to be, FREE! That our Economy can Flourish with Savings from our bias War on  our own people if it were to stop! That Millions of Jobs can be created and sick could have natural relief! That we can end our current failed wars on our people and stop the injustice! That prohibition on our rights will end! That prohibition will end!  I know we can do it! YES WE CAN!!! We can be back to an America that's government is OF the people, BY the people, FOR the people and not OVER the people! YES WE CAN!!!

Hamas brags about using innocents as human shields:

Hamas - Fathi Hamad
by bivouac-id

"For the Palestinian people, death has become an industry

In which excel the women and all the people of this land:

The older people excel, the jihadists excel

And the children excel

Consequently, [the Palestinians] created a human shield of women, children

Older people and jihadists

Against the Zionist bombing machine

That is telling the Zionist enemy

We want death just as much as you desire life."

"We love death as much as you love life" is an ancient Islamic boast.

And a deeply evil one.

It makes you wonder how exactly Islamists distinguish themselves in their own minds from followers of the devil himself.

If someone deliberately set out to fill the world with the purest evil he could find, wouldn't the effort prominently feature minions who take delight in bringing about the deaths of innocent men, women and children -- including their own?  Wouldn't some of the proudest moments of these soldiers of hell include incidents like "Beslan" and "9/11" and "Mumbai" and "Nicholas Berg" and "heads found in fruit boxes all over Baghdad" and "suicide bomb detonated in pizza parlor" and "Lockerbie," just to name a few of the many?

If Islamists indeed love death as much as humans with common decency love life, I'm thinking we should be able to find some common ground.

All those who desire death can proceed directly to their premature, violent self-destruction.  The rest of us can go with the "life" thing, crazy as that seems.

What Islamists need, of course, is to find redemption. They need a religion of love, not hate. They need a religion of joy and true peace. They literally have no idea of what they are missing.

But where do you even begin, with a culture that firmly believes that a day spent slaughtering innocents is a good day's work?

Cross-posted at GINA COBB

Now Sarah Palin is claiming that her daughter and her boyfriend are not "high school dropouts".  She explained that they are both working their butts off to get their GEDs and now have a baby to take care of.
What part of DROPOUT does she not understand.  That's right up there with not knowing that Africa is a continent.   How dumb can a person be?

The local media covered the Muslim protest on the Plaza (1-1-09) protesting the current conflict/war between Israelis and Hamas occurring along the Gaza-Strip. The protesters (approximately 150) were (according to the report) organized by the Muslim American Society to bring attention to the conflict/war and the alleged disproportionate death toll to Palestinian civilians. Protesters chanted: “Stop the killing, stop the crime, long live Palestine.” From media interviews of a couple of protesters it appears they want the US to intercede and force Israel to stop the aerial bombing. I found this interesting seeing as how similar groups have protested in the past outraged by US involvement in Palestinian affairs when the US has supported Israel. It seems they only want Israel to stop the bombing while Hamas continues its rocket attacks on Israeli civilians.

 

From a political blog titled: Rosco Was Right…Sort Of, by Nemokc, I understand the conflict and how it has been going on for decades and how the Palestinians feel. But Hamas is an internationally recognized terrorist organization that positions itself among the Palestinian civilian population, using them basically as shields to dissuade retaliatory attacks for the rockets it lobs into Israel daily. I really don’t know how these Muslims can expect US support for Hamas. As I recall it has been radical Muslims who have attacked US targets here and around the world killing Americans. I don’t ever recall hearing of an Israeli suicide bomber or of Israelis flying planes into US buildings.

 

This protest on the Plaza, and elsewhere, serves no purpose other than to try to draw the US people into the conflict, and an attempt to stir up emotions in the US and foster hatred toward Israel and Jews in general as if we didn’t have enough hatred already. If these people want to protest, then let them go back to their own country where their voices have a much better chance of being heard and of bring about a cease fire, if that is truly their intent.

 

I find it personally offensive that this Muslim group would have the blatant audacity to ask support from the US for Hamas and other Muslim terrorist groups who have openedly called for the death of Americans, and when Hamas receives military training, weapons and financial support from Iran who has sent weapons and insurgents into Iraq to kill American soldiers. Both Hamas and Iran’s leadership have called for Israel to be wiped off the map. How is anyone expected to rationally negotiate with such irrational people?

I recently read a post on the Israeli-Gaza Strip conflict by Rosco that was entitled LIVING IN A SEWER PIPE.   It hurts a little to say this, but on this particular post he was right as he very accurately conveyed the feelings of the Israeli people regarding the Gaza Strip.    He wrote, "Imagine, your government kicks you out of your home and off your land to give it to terrorists who want to kill you and your family and your people. In return for taking your home, your land, and your livelihood, the Government promises you a new house, and enough land to rebuild your farm, and your life but instead puts you in a temporary house made of what amounts to compacted dust and cardboard and charges you rent while you wait for the promised home and land. And then, when the terrorists bomb your new temporary neighborhood from your old neighborhood, your Government gives you a sewage pipe to protect you and your children."   It is a very accurate description of the average Israeli's fear (of terrorists) and frustration (with thier own government).

The problem with the post is that it only tells one side of the story.   The same description could be used to explain the feelings of the grandparents of today's Hamas terrorists in regards to Israel.  Now, I take no sides on the problems of Israel.   I understand the need to defend yourself from missle attacks.  I can even understand the loss of civilian life in Gaza because it was the civilian population that elected Hamas to a leadership role.   But I also think that is is important that people remember the history of Israel and use that knowledge to try to understand WHY the conflict is so bitter.   Without recognition and  understanding of the feelings of both sides, it becomes impossible to reach any kind of acceptable resolution.  (If one actually exists.)

You see, while it is easy for us to forget that Israel as a modern nation is very young....it is a vivid nighmare to the people of Gaza.   

Between the Biblical times of King Solomon's Israel and the modern re-incarnation of the country in 1948, the land we know as Israel was controlled for over 1200 years by Muslims.   Then in the late 1800's, a large number of Zionists began to immigrate to Palistine.  Zionists at the time, were composed primarily of persecuted Jews from Russia and Europe who immigrated to escape persecution.   For over 50 years; Jews, Muslims & Christians lived together peacefully.  But the goal of the Zionist's was to re-establish a religious state in land promised them by "God".   To this end, they began to plot illegal immigrations to increase the population of Jews in the region.    By the end of WWII, the Jewish population was quite large and vocally demanding self-rule in a country that they had begun immigrating to less than a 100 years earlier.    The decision to grant them self-rule was made by the UN in 1948 and the region has been filled with conflict ever since.  The best land was given to the Jews and the poorer areas of the country were to be the Muslim state.    If you had lived in Palistine in 1945, you would probably be pretty upset by both the UN & the West on New Year's Day 1949.   You would also probably pass that anger and hatred on to your children.  I don't condone the violence, but knowing the history of the region helps to understand the reasons for the violence. 

Here's a hypothetical example for you to ponder on.  The Mormon Church believes that when Christ returns to earth he will establish New Jerusalem in Independence, Missouri.    So how would you feel if the UN decided to give the city of Independence to the Mormon Church?    All Christians within the city limits would have to give up their homes and move to Kansas City's East side.    Fences & walls would be placed to keep the former residents of Independence out of the city.    Promises would be made to make restitution "somehow" and Christians would be expected to sit quitely in thier run down East side apartments while a Mormon family moved into thier home in Independence.   How would you react?   I would be willing to bet that Rosco would be one of the first people on his rooftop with a rocket launcher aimed at Independence.  (And I couldn't blame him for his actions.)   I also would be willing to bet that any children who spent time with Rosco would grow up to HATE Mormons without reservation.   (It would be a natural reaction.)

The Israel-Gaza conflict is a horrible thing.  But the problem is now compounded by the fact that the root of the problem started 60 years ago.  A short time for a country but a lifetime for a person.  An entire generation has grown up in Isreal and it is the only home they have ever  known.   They are as territorial about thier country as the Muslims are certain that it should still be their country.   It is a case of 60 years of personal history versus 12 centuries of tribal history.    So the next time you hear a Christian speak of Israel's rights or you hear a Muslim speak of the evil of the Israeli's perhaps you can stop to remember that there are no easy or right answers to this question anymore.    The only thing left is to find a measure of peace for the region...and that will require both sides to accept something less than they have had in the past.   Never an easy sell for any diplomat.

That's what the Government gives them.

Many of the Jewish residents from Gaza who were removed by the Israeli Government during the "Disengagement" were relocated to temporary housing in Nitzan (3 years in temporary housing with no solution is another issue).

The problem is their temporary housing is made totally of sheetrock, and there are no shelters or concrete walls in case of the falling rockets from Gaza.

Today, the IDF Homefront command brought in concrete sewage pipes as a temporary measure...

I found that at The Muqata, where the Muqata Staff is live blogging the War around the clock.

The picture just hit me hard, after all, this is really the end result of the stupidity of the "disengagement" and that photo really makes the point. Imagine, your government kicks you out of your home and off your land to give it to terrorists who want to kill you and your family and your people. In return for taking your home, your land, and your livelihood, the Government promises you a new house, and enough land to rebuild your farm, and your life but instead puts you in a temporary house made of what amounts to compacted dust and cardboard and charges you rent while you wait for the promised home and land. And then, when the terrorists bomb your new temporary neighborhood from your old neighborhood, your Government gives you a sewage pipe to protect you and your children. And you are, of course, grateful.

When the Israeli Government gave Gaza to the Palestinians, we knew that Gaza would become a terrorist state and it has. The Palestinians are terrorists, with one goal, to destroy Israel, and cleanse the land of Jews. Hamas is no different from Fatah. There is no such thing as a moderate terrorist. No matter which one kills you, you are still dead.

How are you feeling as this New Year 2009 approaches? 
The clock is ticking. 

VP elect Biden said that President elect Obama would be tested by a crisis in the first 6-months of his presidency. What Biden didn’t say was that the crisis would be generated by his own party. It will be interesting to see how the democrats handle the appointment of Ronald Burris by Gov. Ron Blagojevich to Obama’s vacant senate seat. Especially since the democrats told Blagojevich (facing impeachment & federal charges)  that they would not recognize anyone he appointed. In his acceptance speech Burris couldn't help but play the race card.

If this is a sneak preview of the how the democrats are going to run the country, the Bush administration may come off looking good by comparison.

Victimology - Or How The Left Uses "Science" For Its Ideological Agenda

Barack Obama promises that science will no longer be "twisted" to fit an ideology. But of course using "science" to advance their political agenda has been a tool of the left for years. A perfect example can be found with the issue of obesity. Andrew Ferguson provides the anatomy of how a personal failing becomes a disease and those who don't have the self-discipline to resist over-eating become "victims" - all with the aid of "science".

First comes the misappropriation of the language of epidemiology. The terms are liberated from their scientific meaning and then attached to a widely shared activity or condition. The condition, in this case obesity, is renamed a "disease," suggesting that some kind of contagion is making the rounds. Then the disease inflates into an "epidemic," suggesting an urgency that only the foolhardy would ignore. "We find ourselves," says Paterson, "in the midst of a new public health epidemic, childhood obesity." Any libertarian qualms are quickly overridden, since not even the most hollow-eyed anarcho-capitalist would deny that government is obliged to guard against runaway disease.

To intensify the urgency, Paterson deploys neutral statistics from sources that are already on his side. The statistics are always improbably exact. Unnamed public health researchers at Harvard have discovered that obesity is "associated" with 112,000 deaths in the United States every year; not 113,000, and not 111,000. Each can of soda pop "increases the risk" of making a child fat by 60 percent. Not 59 percent. Not 61 percent. An increase of $1.25 in tobacco taxes saves more than 37,000 lives and $5 billion in health care costs. And Paterson's 18 percent tax on sugary soft drinks will reduce consumption by 5 percent. Not four.

From here the rest of the argument tumbles like dominoes, clack clack clack. Fat people are not merely drawn to eating unhealthy food; they are "addicted." As addicts, they are rendered helpless by their addiction. Helpless, they deserve the status of victims. Like all victims, they must be victimized by something. By unhealthy food? No: Not food merely, for food and commercial marketing combine to create the TFE--the "Toxic Food Environment." The TFE is everywhere in today's America; it is today's America. It emanates from the seductive advertising of food, from the media's quasi-pornographic obsession with food, from the scandalously low price of food, from the ubiquitous sale of food in such unlikely places as gas-station minimarts. (In simpler times, Americans got gas when they ate food; now they eat food when they get gas.) Created by cynical corporations, the TFE is the ghastly miasma in which we live and move and have our being, swelling with every Frito.

Thus a private failing becomes a public menace.

 

If you don't believe that's what is happening, consider this statement by NY's governor, David Patterson:

"What smoking was to my parents' generation," Paterson says, "obesity is to my children's generation."

And we all know, given the tobacco outcome, that the target won't be the "victims". You see, they're excused:

"Weight bias exists," they explained, because weightist bigots believe that "the only reason people fail to lose weight is because of [they're not teaching grammar at Yale these days] poor self-discipline or a lack of willpower." This wrongheaded notion "blames the victim rather than addressing environmental conditions that cause obesity."

You pretty much know how the rest of this will go now. Patterson, of course, is proposing a "fat tax" on sugared soft drinks, all bolstered by the "science" above.

[Crossposted at QandO]

A classic picture of numb-skulled hatred from the pro-Palestinian demonstration in Manhattan yesterday. (Larger image here.) I personally wish the IDF well in all of it's efforts against Hamas. A true terrorist organization duly elected by the Peace-Loving Palestinian Squatters.

I'm not sure if I was watching a Saturday Night Live spoof or if it was the real thing. They had a series of Obama coins. Gold or Silver coins at that. One with a profile of Lincoln, I believe, and Obama. But what I noticed was that as they were showing these coins I did not see "In God We Trust". Not trying to stir the religon waters just curious if these coins are really being released and if that is on the coins. Better yet, why? Why have we already made commemorative coins? He hasn't done anything yet. He may turn out to be the worst president ever. At least let him swear in. You think he will use the Bible? O is that gonna cause response!

It's a decision that has created quite a stir across the country.   It's a decision that managed to unite both the right & the left in their anger. Ironically it had nothing to do with policy but with Obama's choice to lead our country in prayer before he takes the oath of office.   The left hates the choice because Rick Warren supported California's Proposition 8.   The right hates the choice because Obama made it and Rick Warren isn't a true conservative!   

But this is what Obama has promised us all along....to find areas that we can agree upon and work together on those issues.  We are all filled with "differences".   We see the world from a different set of life experiences and it gives us each individually a different outlook on what is important.  But while the differences in ideology and social values are important, they are not nearly as important as the fact that we are ALL Americans.   United by our common citizenship.

Recently, I stumbled upon an article written by Melissa Etheridge (a local girl turned musician, Mom & Lesbian).  In it, she details her disagreements, misconceptions of and eventual meeting with Rick Warren.   She also explains why she will be in Washington at the Inauguration in spite of her misgivings on Pastor Warren.

It's an interesting read.   It reaffirmed my belief that there still is hope that we can overcome our cultural differences in honor of our country.    I hope you take the time to follow the link.