The Definition of Treason

How far would a media personality have to go to be considered an enemy of the United States? What if one of them dedicated a primetime spot to a terrorist propaganda film? Wait…CNN already did that.

OK. What if one of them granted an interview to one of America’s most dangerous enemies? What if during that interview, this media personality broadcast American war strategies to the enemy, providing them with aid and comfort? Would that do the trick?

You say, “Certainly that would never happen. Certainly a member of the US media would never broadcast war strategies on enemy radio.” Well, it HAS happened.

Seymour Hersh, a journalist with The New Yorker, granted an interview to the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting. During that interview, Hersh felt compelled to share with the Iranians what he believes America’s plans are in attacking Iran. Here is a portion of the interview:

Question: Mr. Hersh there is so many people who predict that there would be a US military strike on Iran, most of them to say this is going to be an air strike. According to Iran's geo- strategic position which is mountainous and the US air strike could not be followed by ground strike, what could the US military do in order to be successful and does the US have the ability to launch a ground strike on Iran or not?

Hersh: I am somebody who has an opposition to the government and so I do not sit down at the table with people in the White House and the Pentagon officially and discuss these things. The best I can tell you is nobody knows for sure what is going to happen. It is very possible that President Bush and Vice President Cheney, all their language is just a bluff and it is designed to make Iran give up and stop its nuclear fuel cycle research. I don't think so, but it is possible. I do know there is an intensive planning for an air strike and one of the problems you have when you start the process is if the air strike isn't successful or it doesn't lead to what they want, I mean a capitulation by Iran. The next step would be they are considered some sort of on the ground operation. All of this has to be considered in the planning but this is just planning. What I have been writing about for over year is still planning. It is going to be planning until the president wakes up one morning and says I want to strike Iran and then it happens. That order so far has not come.

Question: As our supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei has stated in case of any attack upon us we have got the right to retaliate against American interests and bases at any place of our choice. So doesn't US administration fear about targeting its bases around our country and its establishments or killing its forces and etc?

Hersh: You know I can just tell you it should and again as I wrote in the New Yorker magazine we are doing more than targeting Iran. We’re inside your country. There are a lot of aggressive activities by the United States. I think we and the Israelis, I have written this, have contacts with Baluchis and the Iranian Kurds all of whom in some cases are happy with the government or in opposition to the government and we are also setting our troops across the border. So there is a lot of aggression by the United States right now on Iran and what happens next nobody knows. So far, Iran has been very quiet.

Question: Most international analysts believe that the US ultimate goal is to fight against revolutionary Islam and to dominate of the region's energy and oil. But Mr. Jimmy Carter stated that the overthrow of Saddam did not have anything do with energy and oil. So what is the real goal of the US administration in the Middle East?

Hersh: Nobody knows what is in the president mind and Mr. Cheney. We don't know what they think. He attacked Iraq in 2003 in response to the Sunni Al- Qaeda in America. Why he would attack Iraq have never been clear because Saddam Hussein was secular. He was a Sunni but he did not like Jihadists. So it is unclear to me what Bush was doing. You could argue that the neo-cons want to get rid of any threat. They never liked Saddam. He was a threat to the other countries in the Middle East, to Israel. Perhaps what we are doing is for Israel and oil but I don’t think this president believes that he really thinks his mission is to spread democracy in the Middle East, even though, you could argue that Iran is probably the most democratic country. The elections there certainly indicate people vote what the way they believe but he believes to spreading democracy and right now we are working with some of the most undemocratic countries in the Middle East, you know Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia that do so. It is very strange.

So, Seymour Hersh, an American citizen and journalist, goes on Iranian radio and tells them what he believes are the United States attack strategies for a war with Iran. Bear in mind that Iran is supplying terrorists with weapons, money, equipment, and safe-haven. They are actively engaged against the United States in the War against Islamic Fascism. They are clearly, an enemy of the United States. Yet, Hersh has no problem giving them aid and comfort, or even complimenting their oppressive Government as being “the most democratic country.”

To be fair, Hersh did admit that most of the information he was giving did not come directly from the President. He stated that “I do not sit down at the table with people in the White House and the Pentagon officially and discuss these things.” Most of the information he gave to the Iranians was pure speculation. Point taken.

However, he also stated that he KNEW “there is an intensive planning for an air strike…. The next step would be they are considered some sort of on the ground operation.” He also stated as FACT, “We’re inside your country. There are a lot of aggressive activities by the United States. I think we and the Israelis, I have written this, have contacts with Baluchis and the Iranian Kurds all of whom in some cases are happy with the government or in opposition to the government and we are also setting our troops across the border.”

The fact is that this is a clear case of giving aid and comfort to the enemy during a time of war. It is undeniable. Hersh has committed treason.


NASA's Global Warming Study

Well, well, well.

NASA has confirmed what many of us have known for a long-time. Climate change on Earth can be attributed to changes in the enormous ball of raging fire, which we call the Sun.

Go figure.

Those Poor Polar Bears

This picture has been floating around the Internet for some time now. Global Warming nuts love to use it as evidence that Man's careless poisoning of the planet with CO2 is killing the Polar Bears. Just look at those poor Polar Bears stranded on a melting ice cap in the middle of the freezing water. Before too long, that ice will be gone, the bears will fall into the water, and drown.

The tears begin to flow.

Oh, it’s a very effective tool to scare children and very stupid adults. But, there’s a problem. It isn’t true. This picture is a classic example of people intentionally taking something out of context and distorting the facts to fit their argument. Global Warming alarmists have perfected that art.

So, what does this picture show? The Daily Telegraph and the Daily Mail use this caption for the picture:

THEY cling precariously to the top of what is left of the ice floe, their fragile grip the perfect symbol of the tragedy of global warming.
(That's your cue to begin weeping.)

News outlets have attributed this picture being taken in 2004 by Dan Crosbie, a Canadian environmentalist, highlighting the plight of an endangered species. But the truth is nothing of the sort.

First of all, the picture wasn’t taken by Dan Crosbie. It was taken by Amanda Byrd, an Australian graduate student from the University of Alaska Fairbanks. She took it during a SUMMER field trip with her school.

Oh, it gets better.

This picture isn't even of “stranded" polar bears on a melting ice cap. It is of a mother and her Bear Cub PLAYING on an ice sculpture that has been carved out by WAVES. (Follow this link and scroll to the bottom of the page.) Gee, I didn't know waves were caused by Global Warming.

The bears swam out to this ice sculpture (Yes, Polar bears are quite avid swimmers) to have fun. They were there because they wanted to be there. They can come and go as they please.

Exploiting Animals? Check.
Playing on People’s emotions? Check.
Lying to the general public in order to accomplish both of these things? Check.

Here is your Church of Global Warming. Alarmists who distort reality and invent facts to fit their twisted Apocalyptic theories.


The Media Jihad

I’ve mentioned the Media Jihad that our enemy is engaged in. They are trying to use the US media against us, to break our will and turn us against the War on Islamic Extremism (aka The War on Terror). Unfortunately, the leftist US media is all to willing to comply. After all, CNN thinks nothing about giving a prime-time spot to a Terrorist propaganda film.

The media’s constant hammering of the War and the Administration has swayed weak-kneed Americans toward the path of appeasement. It seems that this is exactly what the Islamic Extremists had in mind. A recent post on an Islamic website, exposed their mission to infiltrate Internet forums. Here is a portion of the post:

"There is no doubt, my brothers, that raiding American forums is among the most important means of obtaining victory in the fierce media war... and of influencing the views of the weak-minded American who pays his taxes so they will go to the infidel American army. This American is an idiot and does not [even] know where Iraq is... [It is therefore] mandatory for every electronic mujahid [to engage in this raiding]."

"It is better that you raid non-political forums such as music forums and trivia forums... which American people... favor... Define your target[ed forum]... and get to know it well... Post your contribution and do not get into... futile arguments..."

"Obviously, you have to register yourself using a purely American name... Choose an icon that indicates that you are an American, and place it next to your nickname [in the forum]."

"In my experience, the areas most visited in American forums... [are titled] 'Random Thoughts' and 'What's going on in your mind?'... [The former] takes priority in the American forums, and is highly popular. You should post your contribution there... This should include films of the mujahideen in Iraq, mujahideen publications in English, and images and films of the Americans' crimes, [such as] killing unarmed civilians in Iraq... etc."

"Obviously, you should post your contribution... as an American... You should correspond with visitors to this forum, [bringing to their attention] the frustrating situation of their troops in Iraq... You should invent stories about American soldiers you have [allegedly] personally known (as classmates... or members in a club who played baseball and tennis with you) who were drafted to Iraq and then committed suicide while in service by hanging or shooting themselves..."

"Also, write using a sad tone, and tell them that you feel sorry for your [female] neighbor or co-worker who became addicted to alcohol or drugs... because her poor fiancé, a former soldier in Iraq, was paralyzed or [because] his legs were amputated... [Use any story] which will break their spirits, oh brave fighter for the sake of God..."

"You should enter into debate or respond only if it is extremely necessary... Your concern should [only] be introducing topics which... will cause [them to feel] frustration and anger towards their government..., which will... render them hostile to Bush... and his Republican Party and make them feel they must vote ton bring the troops back from Iraq as soon as possible."

"Do not... discuss issues pertaining to Arabs or Muslims at all, whether negatively or positively... because this could be a trap for you... In addition, do not ask people to circulate the material [you have posted] in other forums... as these types of requests will expose you..."

It’s a Terrorist instruction manual. And, it just so happens to be directly in sync with the Liberal plan of attack against the War.

The goal of this Media Jihad is to undermine support for the war by highlighting the tragedies of War or simply making stuff up. We know that the media is guilty of both of these things. I’m looking at you Reuters.

If their Jihad succeeds, people will turn against the Administration and against the war. They will demonize the President, and claim that we can’t win in Iraq.

Wait…isn’t that happening now? I guess their ruse is working.



At this weekends anti-war rally in Washington (Yes, the nuts had yet another protest), Cindy Sheehan made a grand appearance. This poor woman just can't seem to get herself out of the public eye. What a shame. I guess it has something to do with the fact that she jumps in front of the cameras every time she hears about a publicity opportunity. But, whatever.

At this latest protest, she made the same tired argument about the war that so many before have made.

"Do you know why our countries get into these bullshit wars all of the time? It's for the corporations!

It's for the corporations like Halliburton and Exxon and Blackwater and to make them rich.

It's to line the pockets of George Bush and Dick Cheney and all the war criminals."

Yes, yes. It's all about the Evil Corporations. We've heard it all before. Not that I care about a damn thing that Sheehan has to say. But, this argument has been made time and time again. Is it true?

Saying that we go to war so that corporations can make profits is about the same as saying that we use the Death Penalty for population control. It doesn't make sense. Let me explain.

In many states, our judicial system is given the power to execute the worst criminal offenders. This punishment is not widely used, and it is reserved for the most heinous of criminals.

There is also a lengthy legal process that must take place before it can be used. Using the power of Government to take someone's life is a harsh thing. Yet, it is a necessary evil. These offenders must pay the ultimate price for their awful crimes. And, they can not be given the opportunity to escape justice.

One of the side-effects of the death penalty is indeed a lower prison population. However, as anyone with half a brain can see, this is a completely useless form of population control. If that were really the intent, we would simply lighten the restrictions we put on using the death penalty or we would apply it much more broadly. The current process is a completely inefficient and failed method of population control.

The same analogy can be drawn with war profits.

When we make the decision to go to war, a long legal process must take place. For the Iraq War, that process was increased EXPONENTIALLY. In order to gain multi-national support, we made our case before the U.N. With any other war, we have the right to defend our country with or without the approval of the U.N. However, since Bush wanted their support, he sought it.

Also, the Congress must sign off on the war. They are the only Governmental body that can do that. I know that people like Sheehan refer to it as Bush's war. But, the truth is that he relies on Congressional approval. And, in 2003, he had it. They signed off on the Iraq War (Democrats and Republicans alike).

War is an ugly thing. But, again, it is a necessary evil. We use it as a last resort. For instance, we use it after 12 failed years of diplomacy and 17 UN resolutions violated by a terrorist-harboring dictator. That was the case in Iraq.

One side-effect of war is that private companies can be awarded contracts to do work for the Government. In essence, these companies will make money off the war. But just as the Death Penalty is an inefficient method of population control, war contracts are, generally, an inefficient method for making profit.

Take for instance the Halliburton profit margins. In 2003, Halliburton's profit margin was at 2.4 percent. In 2004, that dropped to 1.4 percent. These are no where near the margins they can make with the commercial work they do around the world. These poor profit margins are probably why Halliburton wanted to sell KBR, its division that ran rebuilding operations in Iraq.

But, maybe I'm misreading the situation. What do experts have to say about Halliburton's "cushy" Iraq deals?

"[Halliburton's War Profiteering] is somewhere between highly improbable and utterly absurd...Many people are also under the impression that contractors take the government to the cleaners. In fact, government keeps a watchful eye on contractor profits - and government work has low profit margins compared with the commercial work the same companies perform. ... As for the much-maligned Halliburton, a few days ago the company disclosed, as part of its third-quarter earnings report, operating income from its Iraq contracts of $34 million on revenue of $900 million - a return on sales of 3.7 percent, hardly the stuff of plunder."

Who said this? Certainly it was one of Bush' cronies in Washington. Think again. This statement was made by Steven Kelman, Procurement Official for the Clinton Administration.

"The truth is that the conspiracy theories about the vice president's involvement in Halliburton's Iraq contracts are either unproven or flat-out wrong. And while the company's Middle East operation is the subject of scathing audits and investigations, it's hardly raking in scandalous profits. Indeed, Kellogg, Brown & Root, the part of Halliburton's business that America seemed to hate because it was raking in far too much, is the part of the business Wall Street hates because it is making far too little."

This is a statement made by Peter Elkind, a writer for Fortune magazine. In his article titled "The Truth About Halliburton," Elkind also quotes a former Halliburton executive concerning LOGCAP, the "Super Contract" that Halliburton is working on in Iraq. This former executive said the following:

"LOGCAP could be the first cost-plus contract in history that's lost money."

But, how can this be? This doesn't make any sense. Certainly, the cost-plus nature of the contract would mean that Halliburton can't lose money in Iraq.

That's not necessarily true. Although, the contract does cover Halliburton's cost for most of their essentials, it does not cover the cost of "unforeseen cost" such as extra security or higher "hazardous duty" employee payouts. In an area like Iraq, these costs are certain to sky-rocket. And, the "Super Contract" doesn't cover them.

So, what about the idea that the war is "lining the pockets of George Bush and Dick Cheney and all the war criminals?"

Well, the main argument is that, because Dick Cheney served as Halliburton's CEO, he is getting a kickback from Halliburton's war profits. John Kerry made this charge during the 2004 elections. And, he was proved wrong. did a little…well…Fact Checking (hence, the name). Here is what they found:

"A Kerry ad implies Cheney has a financial interest in Halliburton and is profiting from the company's contracts in Iraq. The fact is, Cheney doesn't gain a penny from Halliburton's contracts, and almost certainly won't lose even if Halliburton goes bankrupt.

The ad claims Cheney got $2 million from Halliburton "as vice president," which is false. Actually, nearly $1.6 million of that was paid before Cheney took office. More importantly, all of it was earned before he was a candidate, when he was the company's chief executive."

So, once again, Sheehan doesn't know what she is talking about. People like her demonize "Evil Corporations" like Halliburton, and then they whine when Halliburton moves their headquarters overseas. If Bush and Cheney really wanted to use their political positions to gain financial spoils for Halliburton, they would manipulate the tax laws to entice Halliburton to stay on US shores. Halliburton is a global company. They will go, where it makes the most financial sense.

But, sadly, they are demonized by the media and the left in this country. So, they have decided to pack up and move. I can't say that I blame them.


Couric Rewrites Our History

Katie Couric is an idiot. Can I state that any clearer?

On last night’s CBS Evening News, she proved the level of her intellect, or her dishonesty. She went on yet another campaign for the socialist idea of Universal Health Care. This time she tried to tie the rejection of Universal Health Care to the violation of man’s “inalienable rights” described in the Declaration of Independence. Here is what she said:

“More than 46 million Americans have no health insurance. So when it comes to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and good health, all men are not created equal.”

First of all, this isn’t a report. It’s an editorial. Katie is using her news chair as a platform to interject her commentary on current events. She is not presenting objective stories. But, a liberal media bias is far beyond denial at this point.

So, let’s get to the heart of the statement.

“When it comes to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and good health, all men are not created equal.”

Do you see something strange about that statement? Let’s go the original context…The Declaration of Independence.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Let’s see. What could be different about these two statements? Hmmm…Oh yeah.

“…the pursuit of happiness AND GOOD HEALTH

Apparently, Katie felt that the Founding Fathers just didn’t have enough time to write down all of our inalienable rights. So, she had to make a small addition that’s she sure the Founding Fathers intended to throw in. They must have just forgotten.

Or, maybe those evil Corporations used a special type of White Out and removed it from the original. Certainly the right to Government-provided and regulated Health Care is among our most basic rights!

Umm…no. It is not. It isn't in the Declaration and it isn’t in the Constitution, no matter how much Liberals like Katie wish that it were.

Some of you may be asking yourself, “What about the right to life? Certainly, Universal Health Care is covered under that.”

If you believe that Universal Health Care only refers to life-saving medical care, then you have not been paying attention. If you want to have the debate about life-saving medical treatment, we can. But, that is a debate for another time. My point is that the proponents of Universal Health Care (life-saving or not) view it as a right. It is not. Never has been.

But, those like Mrs. Couric will continue to rewrite our history.


The Great Global Warming Swindle

I know that many of you do not have an hour and fifteen minutes to sit in front of your computers and watch a documentary. But, if you do have a chance, you have to watch this.

The documentary is called “The Great Global Warming Swindle.” It was produced by Martin Durkin. He brings together scientists from a number of environmental sciences to explore the “science” behind the Global Warming scam.

If you have ever wanted to hear the other side of the debate, which people like Al Gore are trying to silence, then check it out. In case, you don’t have the time to watch the full documentary, you can visit the website for the film here.


Bias worth noting

The AP and others in the media will go to many lengths to whitewash Muslim extremists. They don’t call them terrorists. They call them insurgents. They refer to Islamic terrorists rioting in the streets of Europe as “youths.”

Now, the AP has posted an image on Yahoo News which was taken during a Muslim protest rally. Look at the image:

The writing on that sign looks strangely familiar doesn’t it? We’ve seen it before:

“Behead those who insult Islam.” That is the message they have for us. But, the AP didn’t want to communicate their extremist views and murderous rage to us in the West. So, they did a little cropping of the photo. Notice, it only reads “Behead those.” The original caption for the image completely ignored the murderous intent of the protestors. Here is the original caption. The bias is real. They try to keep it under the radar. But, they failed.

Several Conservative bloggers took note, and the AP quickly changed the caption. Here is the new one.

Whitewashing the enemy? Why would they do that? Why would the AP be apologists for Islamic extremists?

I think you know the answer.

The Truth About Gas Prices

Have you noticed? The last few weeks we’ve seen a little something happening with the gas prices. They’ve gone up! Uh oh. Here it comes! Brace yourself! Any minute now the mainstream media will be storming to the airwaves to blame the evil rich oil companies for their record profits and their price gouging. Wait for it…wait for it…

Hey, what happened? There are no stories about record high profits or price gouging. That doesn’t make sense at all. For the past six years, every time there was a slight shift in the price of gasoline, all we ever heard from the media is how evil the oil companies are. And, now? Nothing.

Why the change? Bush is still the President. He’s still in charge of the grand conspiracy to take over the world, torture and murder his detractors, and give away huge windfall profits to his other rich oil tycoon buddies. And, he can do this all with his Republican cronies who control the Congr………Oh………..I see.

The Republicans don’t have control over the Congress anymore. The Democrats do. Trying to demagogue the oil companies and the evil rich congressmen who line their pockets would only serve to make the Democrats look bad. And, the mainstream media would never do a thing like that (bias?). So, you are not likely to see any stories coming out the media about oil profits. Instead, they will finally look at the reality of the situation. Supply and Demand.

And, the first up to bat is MSNBC. They ran a story on Sunday about gas prices in Oregon. How did they explain the dramatic rise in prices?

When refineries switching from making winter-grade fuels to cleaner-burning summer-grade gas, things get more expensive because summer gas costs more to make.

And, yesterday, MSNBC ran a story about gas prices in California. Certainly, they would blame the gouging oil profits this time.

A spokesman for the oil industry and a state energy official blamed the spike on a combination of factors: higher oil prices, two major refinery fires, and the disruption from refiners converting from one state-mandated blend of gasoline to another.

Wait…what? It’s not that oil companies are gouging us? It’s the productivity and efficiency of the refineries? Both articles refer to the switch from one blend of gasoline to another. Exactly who came up with these different blends? It had to have been the oil companies. They would develop any excuse to get a few more dollars out of us.

Think again. You can thank your local environmentalist for this little gem. Environmental groups have lobbied the Federal Government for years to require oil companies to manufacture different blends of gasoline to cut down on smog.

Maybe, this is a good thing. After all, we’re cutting down on atmospheric pollution. But, the fact remains, it costs money. It is not the fault of the “evil oil companies” or “Bush’s cronies.” They are abiding by the mandates that the environmentalists have lobbied for. Who can you thank for $3.00/gallon gasoline? I think you know who.

Still, there are many out there who believe that the Government should have the power to steal profits from oil companies. Enter Hillary Clinton:

“The other day the oil companies reported the highest profits in the history of the world. I want to TAKE those profits and I want to put them into a strategic energy fund that will begin to find alternative smart energy, alternatives and technologies that will begin to actually move us toward the direction of independence!”

Yes, she really said this. Her socialist mind believes that those profits belong to the Federal Government.

But, why do the oil companies make such high profits? What do they do with them? I’m glad you asked:

Exxon Mobil plans 20 new global projects
Investments expected to grow oil giant’s daily oil production level

This is the headline from another MSNBC story. It tells of new projects that Exxon is embarking on to improve their supply and productivity. What happens when supply catches up with demand? Prices go…….DOWN!

So, they are spending those “record profits” trying to improve their business and provide cheaper fuels. What evil people! Of course, if Hillary got her way, oil companies wouldn’t be allowed to embark on such business ventures. They couldn’t afford to.

Are you starting to see the big picture?


Good news in Iraq!

Well, wonders never cease. I rag on the mainstream media…a lot. And, I do it for good reason. Their liberal tilt has passed a breaking point. What we currently have is news commentating and agenda-driven broadcasts. It is NOT objective journalism.

But, I will give credit where credit is due. Every now and then one of the mainstream outlets will surprise me with honest reporting. NBC did just that last night. They ran a report from Baghdad about the successes in Iraq. Their report focused on the outstanding progress being made by our troops in the field and on the gratefulness of the Iraqi people, who do not want to see our troops leave.

NBC anchor Brian Williams was on the ground in Baghdad, and here is a small portion of his report:

Brian Williams: “This is what the General heard today about how warmly the locals now view the Americans.”

Colonel John Charlton: "They do not want us to leave. They want to see the police come through.”

Lt. Colonel Charles Ferry: “The people here are very glad to see us. They are very hesitant still because they're not sure if we're going to stay. They want us to stay…That's the whole deal. If we stay down here and to keep beating down the insurgents."

Brian Williams, to the officers: “You just said, 'They don't want us to leave.' That's the tenth time today I've heard that. I've got to go back to the States and do a newscast that every night has another politician or 12 of them saying, 'We have got to get out of that godforsaken place.'”

General Odierno: "They can talk about policy, okay, and that's what they have to do back there. My mission right now is to provide protection for the Iraqi people so this government can grow."

Brian Williams: “And General, you and I heard sentiments we don't often hear today, the U.S. commanders quoting the Iraqis: 'please don't leave us.' And a lot of the U.S. fighters there today said they didn't want to leave this fight, they are dedicated to it.”

General Wayne Downing: “Brian, every single one of them, I ran into a lot of officers and NCOs that I served with -- every soldier that I ran across today I asked him: 'How do you feel about what's going on, what do you know about what is going on back in the states?' And without exception -- this was spontaneous, especially when you start talking to PFCs and Spec 4s, they're going to tell you the truth, no party line. Very proud of what they're doing. Very, very dedicated. Many of these guys, Brian, are back here on their second and third tours. These are one-year tours. Extremely well trained and very professional.”

Fellow NBC reporter, Richard Engel, even took the time to mention the drastic decrease in violence in Sadr City, a city considered a hotbed for terrorist activity.

In December of 2006, there were 254 murders and 440 attacks. In February of 2007, there were 19 murders and 91 attacks.

We are winning in Iraq. And, NBC finally reported on it. Better late than never, I guess.


Alcohol on Sunday

There are a lot of times that I am ashamed to be from the south. There are times that I am saddened to be labeled as one of the “Religious Right.” This is one of those times.

Yes, I am a born-again Christian. Yes, I try to live my life according to Biblical principles and the teachings of Christ. Like Christ, I am also a believer in Freedom. I see no evidence that Jesus wanted to use the police power of Caesar to force the public to live by his teachings. He allowed individuals to choose.

Many of the “religious right” don’t see it this way. They see it as their duty to use the police power of Government to enforce Biblical teachings. Thus, I am ashamed to be lumped together with these individuals.

Christian groups in Georgia have recently lobbied Georgia legislators to block a bill concerning the sale of liquor on Sundays. The State bill will allow the voters of Georgia to decide whether or not private businesses will be allowed to sell Alcohol on Sundays.

First of all, the very idea of this bill is absurd. It will allow the voters to use the Government to tell private businesses what they can and can not sell. Who the hell gave them that authority? Unless the voters own some sort of stock in those businesses, they have NO say in the decisions of that business. Absolutely none.

If I have the financial resources to start my own business, and I choose to do so, that business belongs to me. The decision-making power for that business belongs to me….No one else. That’s how a free society works.

But, the reason that these Christian groups want to block the bill is because they don’t want the sale of alcohol allowed on Sundays. Hey, morons…THAT’S NOT FOR YOU TO DECIDE.

Do I drink alcohol? No. Never have. Do I approve of it? Ideally, I wish people would abstain from it. But, do I think the Government should enforce my wish for people to abstain? ABSOLUTLEY NOT!

Now, if individual consumers decide that they will not give their business to restaurants that serve alcohol on Sundays, more power to them. The free market will do its job, and the owner of that restaurant may decide to change his policy.

But, the Government has no place forcing him to do so.

Unfortunately, many in the “Bible Belt” disagree. They will continue on their mission to use Caesar to enforce Christianity. And, I will continue being ashamed to be associated with them.