Going the Direction of Our Focus

I was going to present a Timeline for the Iraq War and what has transpired in Iraq, since the 2003 invasion by the United States, but basically we already know. First it was "necessary" to find WMD, then our mission was accomplished, then we found Saddam, and up until six months ago, it was stay the course, we were doing great, although the group of Americans that were questioning all of this continued to get larger. Then we were told the situation was grave and desperate, as though that suddenly happened over night. Well, actually, it kind of did. Once the republicans were out of the House and Senate control, I'm guessing the truth of the matter became apparent. Then Mr. Rumsfeld resigned, Saddam was killed, and there was a big shuffle, then we were told, a troop surge would resolve this horrible mess and that the old strategy wasn't so good after all. It really does seem like the news leans toward whatever decision the politicians want us to live with. I noticed the month before the State of Union address when our President said he was sending more troops, the reported death toll and insurgency attacks seemed quite high. It was as if the information was to set the stage. And now that Saddam has been removed, we find ourselves facing a no longer intimidated Iran. Well I remember that factor from the 80's. We needed Saddam in Iraq to keep Iran at bay, and now that he's gone and Iran, and well you know this story. We've heard it before, just a few name changes, but same basic scenario and spin. What I'm noticing here is what's happened on the home front. I guess there are a few die hard Bushites, but for the most part, the majority of America is beginning to really notice the problems of a bad foreign policy and an even worse domestic one. America is so divided and the economy is unstable, regardless of what they tell us, we are paying bills and watching the job situation. The political atmosphere is horrendous and our choice in '08 doesn't seem terribly promising from any party, so what are we doing here? Here in America, while we're keeping "them" over there, what is happening here? Since the invasion of Iraq, with the exception of more Talk/Radio shows and hosts; have any other good paying jobs increased? Now, I realize we have many more bureaucrats employed and airport security has increased. Oh, that's right, we have more prison guards than we've ever had. And everybody with a political opinion has written a book. At first, I compared this to Viet Nam, but I was wrong, four years in Iraq has had a much larger detrimental impact on our nation and our economy that all those years in Viet Nam, and certainly caused a breach that would seem nearly irreparable. It would almost seem as if the Democrats and Republicans have followed the lead of the Sunnis and Shiites, although in a more civilized manner, of course . . . Someone else is doing the dying and living in the poverty. We call it polarized, but America is divided, and it really isn't between the parties. We can use all the euphemism we choose, but the bottom line is, fighting "them" over "there" has caused the greatest division this nation has known since our own civil war. Only this time, the division doesn't actually lie between the parties, or even a belief or lifestyle, this time the division lies between the citizens that love freedom and the government that loves control.
And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand.

A Different Perspective of George

I must admit, I'm frequently critical of the decisions made by the present administration. And then, the media shows us the other side of our President and I just think he's got a wonderful sense of humor. I don't agree with most of his politics and I certainly don't agree with his aggressive war tactics, but I think he's a hoot, when he shows up to those roasts and toasts that politicians are now attending. I don't know when it became trendy for politicians to have an evening of "stand-up" but I really think George has found his niche, if only he were a regular guy, living the life that the rest of us are living. His approval rating as president may be in the low 30's, but I, personally, would just love to see him coming into the break room at work or heading into the cul de sac for the neighborhood barbeque. Perhaps he doesn't write his material, but his delivery is just a scream! He really is a funny guy. I just wish he wasn't making so many life and death decisions for so many of us. I really don't want to trust the future of our country and my grandchildren to a comedian. I realize the line seems to be blurred between politics and entertainment and news and editorializing, and I know there must be a purpose for this practice at this time, but it escapes me. So, I'm just going focus on this different perspective I have, for this moment. When he mentioned his approval rating in the 30's, the withdrawal of his Supreme Court nomination, and his Vice President had just shot someone and those were the good ol' days. As I read, I thought. What if he was in the break room telling us all, in the same humorous presentation, similar information only on a personal level? Like his approval rating with the in-laws and his opinion of his brother's new girl friend or his own hunting and fishing stories or perhaps his woes of being in the doghouse at home. I really think our President has a delightful sense of humor when he isn't making decisions and I must comment favorably when there is a favorable comment to be made.
A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver.

War on Drugs, War on Terror, the Answer . . .

Wow! It hit me like a ton of bricks this morning as Dr. Bill Bennett referred to his days of being "the Drug Czar." No kidding, that's what he called himself. I realize many of us disgruntled citizens do have a few pet names for those in power, but I feel very free to use this one, as it was the term he used. Now, here's where the idea really starts to gel. A writer that interviewed several of the former "Drug Czars" actually claims the "mission was accomplished." Doesn't that sound familiar? He really promoted the concept that the war on drugs was won, to the disagreement of most of the Drug Czars that commented, but I saw where he claimed victory. First, what began as a domestic policy soon became "license" to invade other countries and hold their leaders in account. Again, do we recognize "deja vu?" And on the home front, we can just look around to see how many prisons have now been built and how many guards are now employed because half of all crime in America is "drug related." And how many heroine pushers have been put out of business by the methadone programs? Now, instead of a pusher, we have prescriptions and rather than a hit or a toke, or a snort or a needle, we have a dose or a pill or a patch. See how this is working now? So, obviously we need a Terror Czar . . . but I think some of the other countries have thought of a "kinder, gentler approach," and already applied the rudiments of our Drug War to our War on Terror. Some have simply elected terrorists to the parliament or made the terrorist organization a political party, to be elected. Now the terrorists have a "new and improved" identity. They are politicians! So, all America needs; is a way for the entire world to realize the control of terrorism truly should be entrusted to us, and make another Cabinet Post. Don't you think it's time the present administration tries to convince us, and the rest of the world that we simply need a Terror Czar? Or perhaps the present plan is working fine, to have the former Drug Czars, just rally the troops for the "War on Terror."

Is not wisdom crying out, and the voice of knowledge sounding? I am crying out to you, O men . . . Become expert in reason, O you simple ones . . .

Bullying, Barbarism, and Belligerence

The news is really getting hard to read. I think it's becoming more difficult, because it is not easy to discern the extremists from the liberators, or their barbarians from our criminals, or threats from ultimatums.

I just read that America has made a very forceful presence off the coast of Iran to do "warship testing." As so many have "predicted" the first week of April or the middle of April for the war with Iran, I'm thinking this bully method is going to "accidently" start the whole mess and then say it was only an accident. Considering how volatile things are right now, war tests and games that close to the trouble is nothing but trouble. G.W. is making me think of the thing kids do fighting in the back seat with their finger just an inch out of a sibling's face, all the while saying "I'm not touching her!" Then there's a bump and somebody's got somebody else's finger up their nose and the fight and the crying is ON! Then the child whom I perceived to be the perpetrator of that situation then becomes the self-proclaimed helpless "victim." It appears that G.W. is attempting to have happen. Somehow, in the perception of an experienced mom, I see the American administration and the Iranian administration at the same juncture, except at global proportion.

And our news is horrendous, right here at home. I realize that reading about or hearing about innocent people being beheaded in another land is horrifying, but so is reading about a guy in Texas that killed his ex-girlfriend, then dismembered her, then cremated her body parts on a barbeque grill. And the woman in Georgia that was sentenced to yet another life sentence for killing her boyfriend the same way she killed her husband a few years ago. Perhaps Americans don't realize this, but our headlines make the foreign papers. I remember hearing about the reactions of the man that killed all of his daughters because he didn't want them to grow up and dishonor the family. I can't remember what country he was in, I think maybe Pakistan. What he did was horrible, and certainly I don't understand how he rationalized, that by murder, he was protecting the family honor. But then I don't understand the logic of the Georgia couple that "disciplined" their son to death; or the Ohio couple that confined their young son in a closet, to go to a "family reunion" in Kentucky and came home to find him dead, so they also attempted to cremate his body, but only after making a false report of a missing child.

We are not the world's monitor. We are not the best example of civility and we do not have half the history of the countries that we are telling what to do. We really are looking just pretty belligerent in our aggression and demands, while we are doing the same and worse than those we are attempting to correct. We have nuclear power and we've declared war on a country that didn't attack us and was not an imminent threat. What would we do if the tables suddenly turned? What if other nations decided we needed to be corrected and curtailed? I dare say the Patriots would react as strongly as Iraqi insurgents. Now, let's think this over. Do we really think we will have the right to claim innocence with Iran and deny provocation? Do we truly believe the world should behave as we do? There are more grisly bizarre murders in America in a month, than reported beheadings in Iraq. And I dare say, there would have been no Americans decapitated in Iraq, had we not started the war there.

He who gets mixed up in a fight which is not his business, is like one who takes a dog by the ears while it is going by.

In the News

What a day for news.

Dr. Rice is back in the Middle East, telling the world, progress will be slow. Really, still? What kind of a statement is this by now? Is there anybody in the whole world that truly believes the American administration is going to do what Scripture said the Messiah would do? How many trips has she made to the Middle East to discuss peace, only to say, things will move slowly and America isn't going to take sides or arbitrate this matter? Even though it was her boss that authored this grand plan, Israel is virtually on their own with Hamas. If America isn't going to take sides or truly get involved, why does Dr. Rice keep going to the Middle East?

Meanwhile back here at the ranch, Monica Goodling is pleading the fifth and taking a leave of absense. Monica Goodling is is a senior counsel and White House liaison to Alberto Gonzales. So when "the going gets tough, the tough get going," and that apparently means out of accountable reach. This whole attorney firing deal seemed simple at first, but it's really getting deep and there is a question of ethics and credibility, now. Don't you just wonder what Kenneth Starr would do with this plot and these participants? It does concern me that our Attorney General doesn't "remember" discussing the firing of 7 or 8 people. So if he's being truthful about "not remembering" then I think the position of Attorney General of the United States should be held by someone that is keeping track of his meetings and discussions, especially since he is going to hold the rest of us to account regarding all the new rules that are being made. If he can't remember this discussion, how can he keep track of all the Patriot Act rules and questions for terrorists? Now, if this is a matter of just changing the story after the situation came to light, then his credibility is no better than the average person trying to lie their way out of a situation, and that should not be acceptable in the highest postition of law enforcement in our land. So, his liaison gets a leave of absence and the protection of the fifth amendment. Good for her! Any of the rest of us trying to take the fifth would probably find ourselves facing contempt of court charges. I am glad the Bill of Rights still works for someone.

The coroner report became official today in the death of Anna Nicole Smith. And he came up with this in just 6 1/2 weeks??? Was he hoping to become famous for not doing his job efficiently? As a Funeral Director, I saw many questionable circumstances of death. A good coroner would have an idea of the cause of death before the autopsy, just by the appearance of the body. Not that any of us jumped to conclusions, but simply the fact that professionals, through the course of experience become aware of details that were indicative of causation. Wasn't it bizarre that everyone that became involved in this case suddenly seemed to be unable to do their job efficiently, yet seemed to desire to remain in the limelight? As I read the headlines about Anna Nicole Smith that became famous simply for insisting upon the fame, it was as if there was "spirit" over her, that came over everyone that became involved in this case. The dramatic judge, the coroner that clutched the headlines for over six weeks plus a court ordered trip to the Bahamas, the current boyfriend, the former boyfriend, someone else's husband, her estranged mother, all; suddenly had to be in the headlines or in front of the camera.

It's as if the Enquirer is now the national newspaper, while our current events read like a cheap novel, and the average citizen seems to believe that talk radio will change world direction for the better.

Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

How Did Choice and Life Get Separated in These United States?

This question actually covers a number of rights and issues these days, but I am going to discuss the age old, time honored, vehement debate of Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice. Let's face it, this is a partisan issue. If it were an actual righteous issue, life and choice would not be divided. I realize this country does not use the Bible for it's laws, but if it did, the pro-life people would know that G~d does not equate the loss of a pregnancy with murder. Exodus 21:22 has specific instruction regarding what is to be done if someone causes a woman to lose a pregnancy, and it isn't the punishment for murder, and it also isn't about women's rights. So, the real issue here for the pro-lifers is not life, but everyone else's morality and so, the cost of fornication is parenthood? Just how does that figure to be life, for the parent or the child, if it is perceived by the pro-life agenda as a sentence and punishment? And I know the pro-life folks, I've been one, and I've been a single mom. The young women that have their babies and try to be a mother without trapping a man, live with judgment and their babies get called names, and that's by the pro-lifers. Some young women, carry the babies, and give them up for adoption into homes that may or may not treat them well, but in all probability will always acknowledge the differential fact that they are adopted. And that is life? The older I get and the meaner the world gets, I've often thought of what is best for a child and what a woman might or might not be able to live with. G~d is so much more forgiving than the religious right, which has probably served to make abortion more of an option to be considered. I am what society calls a bereaved parent, due to birth complications, and I know those children are in paradise and I know this world is not paradise, and I am quite certain, if G~d considers unborn children, people, and I believe He does, then that's where the issues of pro-choice are, as well. Only I imagine, none of the people in paradise are discussing who was an abortion and who was premature and whose parents were married and who . . . blah, blah, blah, like is done here. What I have come to know, as the years have passed is that very few women that are faced with an unwanted or unexpected pregnancy really know what it is to give life. Many woman that plan a pregnancy have no idea what life is truly about, for that matter. Now, I hear the pro-choice side avoid terms like baby and unborn and birth, which is of course, their choice, but the long term emotional results of abortion aren't readily acknowledged. For those that have had them, they don't tend to verbally dwell on the subject, but I have noticed the number of D and C's has diminished greatly since the legalization of abortion. I don't know whether the two facts are related or other procedures have replaced the D and C. Another odd thing I've noticed. Not only did I lose children in infancy, I had miscarriages and I am and was surrounded by pro-lifers. My miscarriages don't count to anyone but G~d and me, but I'm absolutely certain; had a loss occurred by my choice at 10-12 weeks, these same folks would call them babies, so . . . I've come to realize the people that are pro-life don't seem to actually value life per se, but rather insist that everyone exists and exist within their paradigm, without choice. When I thought I was pro-life, I didn't really understand G~d's definition of life. And I can't really call myself pro-choice, because I don't believe life and death should be in the hands of humans, as they just aren't smart enough. Actually this debate only exists because humans aren't smart enough to count the proper three days in any given month or appropropriately utilize birth control, so clearly life and death need not be in the hands of humans. But since humanity has assumed that power, I cannot stand staunchly against choice and for life. I find the pro-life stand actually boils down to anti-choice, and the pro-choice has refused to acknowledge life in the womb. So where do we go from here? The subject itself is going nowhere, it's too good of a topic for the politicians every time they want to divert the public's attention. As for me, if a woman knows she can't give a life and sustain a life and care for a child or for that matter doesn't want to, then paradise sounds better for the child, and eternally speaking that would be life. As I read about medicated children, and abused children, and institutionalized children, and all the children in the system, one way or another, I'm wondering just how many children actually get life when they are born, or simply exist at the mercy of other's choices.

I can tell you, if this were a G~dly nation, there would be no pro-life and no pro-choice, because we would know that Scripture doesn't define loss of life in the womb as murder and we would also know that true freedom of choice is a gift from G~d, not legislators and physicians. When asked if I believe in abortion, I simply state, I don't believe in doctors . . . As for life, I have a much different understanding of what it is to give life to someone than I did 30 years ago when I gave birth. I can clearly say it was the pro-life advocates that use their religion to condemn that persuaded me away from that stand. Even though our nation is devout in the concept that life and choice are opposed, G~d has stated otherwise.

. . . therefore choose life . . . - Deuteronomy

Nothing To Hide . . .

I don't know if I should admit this or not, but here goes. It just really does my heart good to watch those that set the rules get faced with having to abide by them. As the Patriot Act unfolded, and I called it "invasive," the conservative mantra became "it isn't a problem if you have nothing to hide." Then whenever they get called into account, they cry partisan politics. I've seen it on a small scale and now we are watching it on a national level. I'm truly amazed at the chutzpah of these people. They take it upon themselves to demand accountability and invade privacy of others, yet defy and deny any accountability on their part. Well, isn't that just interesting . . . Perhaps the mantra of the conservatives needs to change to "I can and you can't!" What's with this latest nonsense from the White House? Congress can ask questions off the record, the answers are not under oath, and no transcripts, and they call that cooperation. Are they kidding? These same people that authorized the Patriot Act to require the law abiding citizens to "give" everything short of blood to open a bank account, want their answers "OFF THE RECORD." I realize there is still a choice for us, we can choose to have no bank account. Now, I also know, we recently elected an impotent Congress that will get nothing accomplished and simply spend their time legislating non-binding bills. But you know, if they are going to waste their time and our money, anyway, they might as well stand their ground with these authors of accountability. When I signed my personal property statement for 2007, my signature went right below the sentence. "I swear this to be the truth, so help me God." I'm under the impression that is under oath and certainly "on the record" and we're just talking about a couple of old vehicles, not matters of national concern. It's almost TAX day. What would our compassionate conservative administration do, if we all chose to treat our tax forms with the same protocol that they are proposing. Can you imagine telling an IRS auditor what George W. has told Congress? And you know, the crazy thing is, it was the President's choice to fire these guys, so why didn't he, in the beginning like all the other Presidents do, or why didn't he simply say, "Alberto and I decided . . ." We're just not buying this national security and executive privilege any more. The signing statements and executive orders by the hundreds have just kind of worn thin as the war debt mounts, our rights are diminished and the current events read like a bad fiction novel. So, I would say to the administration the same thing we've been hearing from the administration for the past 5 years. "You shouldn't have a problem with this, if you have nothing to hide."

But let every man prove his own work . . .

From the Wheel to the Internet

Wednesday, all ready! I've spent the better part of this day attempting to install the software for the digital camera my granddaughter received for her 8th birthday. Now, there are so many factors in that sentence that boggle my mind, it's just difficult to compute. Pardon the pun. Let's start with the obvious fact, this generation that is growing up now, will have no idea what life is like without all this technological gadgetry. I realize, since the beginning of man, each generation has had a techonological advancement of sorts. I would imagine the first "old timer" to see the grandson build a fire was just as impressed as I was to see microwave cuisine, probably actually, more so. And the guy that invented the wheel? Certainly the rocket scientist of his era. The century that began with horse drawn buggies and wood burning cook and heat stoves ended with the Internet in a major percentage of American homes and so much computerized power, that the turn of the century was a major issue of potential fear. That doesn't begin to address the telephone, radio, television, and all the rest of the "stuff" that most American households don't remember life without and can't imagine life any other way. I remember when a calculator was a major investment for high level math classes and business bookkeeping. Now, the solar power ones are impulse items at the various "dollar" stores. Although, we've seen so many dramatic additions to our culture in the past 50 years, we know that every generation advanced and made "improvements" or at least changes that were readily accepted as betterment. Now that I am approaching the half century mark, I find myself wondering just how many of these advancements were actually for the better. I don't have a television, so I don't have cable and I don't have DVD's, but I do have a computer with internet access. I have a telephone, but no caller ID or call waiting or any of the package promotions. I've tried the various things that come along from the phone company, but Caller ID was the big red flag that I didn't want, and from that point, I began to back away. The phone line is my internet access, and I manage to answer the phone without first identifying the caller, as I simply rely on voice recognition or phone manners. But back to an eight year old with a digital camera. I mean that's just one year past tattling about everything. So, as the technology becomes available for younger and younger kids, will they simply photograph and tape record each other and everyone around them? As these children incorporate hi-tech into childhood where does it go from there? And as I think of hi-tech childhood, what about the baby boomer's golden years? But then, I still remember my Great Grandmother talking about the days of horses and wagons as she made observation of man walking on the moon. I'm just sure every generation since Adam, and certainly since Noah has made the observation that there is no going back.

There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come with those that shall come after.

Four Years Later, We've Missed the Reward and Don't Look So Good

The headlines aren't looking so good, of late, as in the last 4 years. The detainee in Guantanamo that has claimed credit for every American calamity and attack since the Reagan years is really believable, huh? Well, if we've got the mastermind in Gitmo, let's get our military troops home, as they are just fighting the "wanna be's." We've had "Numero Uno" detained at Gitmo, and according to my research, we've had him in custody since before the Iraq War began, or at least he was not captured in Iraq. Wow, so just one more confirmation that we've got no business in Iraq and never did. Then there is the AbuGhraib situation that left us looking less than "liberators." The solution presented by our Secretary of Defense was to forbid cameras in the Abu Ghraib prison. (No cameras certainly eliminates the evidence of abuse) As the world has watched America set up a puppet government in Iraq and Afghanistan and Palestine, the world wants to hold America in account and some Americans would like to hold the administration in account. America has politicized life and death, and attempted to take this perspective world wide, but much of the world doesn't seem terribly receptive and can we blame them? Now our President and the Attorney General are trying to make a democratic Congress appear unreasonable. Our President doesn't want confrontation!!!!!!!! Since when? The American people recognized the run away train of our administration and voted in some accountablility and there is now an administrative resistance. I know I'm not surprised. Our President has offered "answers" off the record, without oath and without transcript. So where is the transperency? We are living in captivity, calling it security and there are at last conservative report, 14 million illegal immigrants who are apparently the only ones living free in this country. So, here it is 2007 . . . what is better and who is safer?
If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink: For thou shalt heap coals of fire upon his head, and YHVH shall reward thee.

Royal Respect

As you know, I really aim for an uplifting heartwarming blog topic for Monday, and G~d certainly blessed me with one, last night. Our grandchildren are visiting and if that weren't delightful enough, they have given inspiration to this blog. These are pretty sharp kids, now, and I'm not just saying that because they are my grandchildren. One of our second graders was reciting for us, the states in alphabetical order by memory. With this list, came encouragement from her sibblings and fascination from her grandparents, which led to the next associative topic of travel and visiting. How many states have we been to? Then there was the fun memory of their accidental visit to Oklahoma when their mom got lost on their way to our house last year. Well, as conversations do, it wandered around awhile and then back to the list, because I just wanted to hear it again. After the exquisite recitation, my husband couldn't resist dazzling them with a bit of "old timer" trivia, as we were born before Alaska and Hawaii were admitted into the Union. He leaned back in his chair and proudly shared with them that when he was a boy, there weren't fifty states. To which, our other granddaughter responded without even missing a beat. "That's right, there used to be 13!"

Children's children are the crown of old men

G~D and Country, Patriotism and All That Jazz . . .

I've seen signs that read: "God bless America," and I've seen signs that read: "America bless God." But I have never heard such blatant disrespectful celebration in the face of G~d, as when I heard about my grandchildren's school program, and it's subtle, just like the crafty serpent in the Garden of Eden. My grandchildren are participating in a program or pageant of Patriotism. I am not saying we shouldn't love our country or teach our children to, but we need to stop when it crosses the line and becomes idolatry, which is what this timing indicates. This is the last day of school for a week of spring break. As most anyone can see on the calendar, it isn't yet spring and this break time allows a total disregard of Passover or the Crucifixion. The only month they attend without vacation days is April. The Resurrection was on a Sunday, and for now, that isn't an issue. So, have we replaced Biblical observance with Yankee Doodle? And all the while, not expecting calamity of Biblical proportion? . . . Now, I have never seen the connection with rabbits, colored eggs and The Resurrection of Messiah, so I'm not defending or suggesting that we honor a pagan tradition, but if anybody does holler about this, it will be the pagans. It sure won't be the American religious, as they're too busy hollering about what they don't believe in. I don't understand why the Jews and the Christians have chosen to just sit down and be quiet about the omission of the observance of Passover or the Crucifixion. Actually, Passover and/or the Crucifixion are fundamental in both religions and according to Scripture, one in the same day. I wasn't going to say much about this, since we live too far away to attend the program, until my daughter informed me that she was glad I wasn't going to protest in person, as they were just kids and didn't understand what they were doing. Well, what better time to teach them the truth? With all this patriotism, I noticed a big red flag! This was geared to grandparents, and it was requested, although not required, more subtlty, that the children wear something red, white and blue, so . . . that means all the hard working, two income households, or even worse, the hard working single parents felt the peer pressure to go buy an outfit just for this occasion. What a lovely way to give the economy just a little shot in the arm! I guess the magnetic bumper sticker sales have dropped. Now, these hard working young families in their twenties and thirties are going out and spending money they don't have so the grandparents who are collecting money they don't earn, can beam proudly as their little descendants demonstrate their unquestioning loyalty for yet another generation. Just when I thought I had heard enough, there was more. Seems Wal-Mart is carrying a huge inventory of red, white, and blue, country style clothing this spring. Usually the red, white and blue comes out for the 4th of July and this time of year, the stores are all filled with fluffy pastels and adorable suits for little boys . . . ah, but that was a time when religious holidays, regardless of truth vs. tradition, was regarded with more value in our society than blind, loyal furor, economic acquisition, and time to be idle.

Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto G~d the things that are G~d's.

Too Much Information?

The information in our media is so relative, isn't it? Immediately, we determine how reliable the information is by which source it is given and of which political leaning they have. Yet, all the news stories are, of course, not political, but there is a slant if you will, obviously aimed at their target audience. Why does news and information have to be aimed? Why can't we just hear the information? With many people, the perception of the outcome is determined before they even have the information. This fact, unfortunately is easily categorized by political leanings, as well. Our government has had several situations, of late, in which the administration and their pundits seem to think we should not have certain information, all in the name of security, and so the conservatives blame the media and call it "leaks" rather than freedom of the press. But on the flip side of this silliness, there are the liberals that believe "information" is the solution, insisting that free speech and free press are the answer. Well, both sides are wrong. Information is not a solution, it is information, and the filtration of such should not be left to a government that finds accountability inconvenient.

What I am finding difficult to deal with is the information about the information, which used to be recognized as editorializing. I don't need Rush Limbaugh to take 3 hours of my life to tell me that Al Gore is not a scientist. On the other hand, I would find Al Gore more beleivable if he were actually setting the example of energy preservation. Let's face it, the common denominator is not solutions, it's power and capital . . . And the deal, well media is a power and has capital of it's own. As a matter of a fact, without the media, the pundits and the commentators would just be talking to thin air. I'm beginning to see that truly these commentators and news analysts are simply lobbyists for a specific topic, agenda, party, or politician. I think someone came up with a brilliant idea and I would like to give Bush 41 the credit. Someone realized the powerful influence of lobbyists and simply reversed the procedure, and it's just so much tidier and economical than all those pesky regulations monitoring favors and gifts on the Hill. This way, we don't need lobbyists to influence legislation, just elections. Maintaining the usual American protocol, there are a select few that maintain the power and the high pay to persuade and influence thinking, decisions, and ultimately outcome. The conservatives really do have the advantage, here, as they represent big business, power and wealth. These poor liberal commentators and authors that are talking about equality and ecology and sharing are kind of left to appear to be the hypocrites they become accused of being. We, as Americans truly aren't receiving too much information, what is made available is an abundance of persuasive opinions about the information released after the filtering.

He that pleadeth his cause first [seemeth] just;

What Do They Mean, Mistakes Were Made?

Have you noticed how many "mistakes" have been owned up to lately? It started with Rush owning up to his drug dependency and the followers . . . "bought that." Our administration has admitted that "mistakes" have been made in the Iraqi War and now we have a "new strategy." And we are to accept this, after four years of catastrophe without direction or strategy . . . Then we have had a plethera of "leaks" that have revealed other "mistakes." Remember hearing about the warrantless wiretapping? What became of the issue? Who leaked this information, became the focus, rather than the fact that wiretapping was happening outside of the legal parameters. So, if it's outside the legal criteria, why isn't it called "illegal" and why isn't that the focus, rather than the source of the "leak?" Of late, we now hear that the FBI has "overstepped" the bounds of legal spying on innocent citizens, as defined by the Patriot Act. Now, if the FBI doesn't know the difference between enemy combatants and innocent citizens, what good is this agency? And if the FBI doesn't know how to stay within the laws of the Patriot Act, how can they bring others to justice by those same laws? And just who holds the FBI in account? Why is this agency allowed to police itself, when there is obviously a lack of "understanding" or respect, pertaining to the laws that govern this sort of spy activity? What's up with this new firing of federal attorneys? Who knows . . . but the President and the Attorney General are going to cover each other and as usual for the conservatives, attempt change the focus to former President Clinton. You'd think, by now, somebody in this entire vast administration could at least come up with something more credible and less juvenile. What amazes me, is the fact that all of these entities do what they do, do what they want to do, and then just "step up to the plate" and say, I/We did it and we admit the error. "Mistakes have been made." Well, how would that work if I, a US citizen tried that after wreaking even 1/10 of the havoc?

Let's consider, for a moment . . . it's tax season. What if I filed my 1040, creatively? Then, when caught, said, "Yes I did it, but there should be no penalty . . . as I openly admitted this." Just what do you think would happen? I read about a woman that happens to live in a state in which medical marijuana is legal, but the feds are overriding the state laws and maintaining their power in the situation. Now, she is sick, very sick, admitted she needed the medical marijuana, and she doesn't have the same privilege that Rush has enjoyed. Why not?

I happen to live in an area that has many NO TRESPASSING signs posted. I would be breaking the law if I crossed the fences where those signs are posted, so why is the FBI exempt?

I don't even have an example to compare to the Iraq War. I just can't imagine any situation that compares with putting young people in harm's way and they saying "OOPS, you're going to keep doing the same thing, while we say we are trying something else . . ."

A fool's wrath is presently known: but a prudent man covereth shame.

We Need to Speak the Same Language

Vice President Cheney has been pretty vocal about those of us that disagree with this war-mongering administration. As a matter of fact the comparisons got pretty severe yesterday, and as a citizen that does support our troops but disagrees with the Iraq War and this aggressive agenda, I was offended. Using the words alQaida to compare with those that disagree with the current "direction" [or lack thereof] just demonstrates, once again, the pugnacity the rest of the world is tiring of, and the new Congress needs to stand up to. Congress is making many more cowaring concessions that were promised just four short months ago. Maybe there is a communication problem between the two parties and the citizens. Let's start simply. We, the people are not in favor of the Iraq War, that's why the election went the way it did, in November. Now, we expect the new Congress to remember that and the established administration to recognize and realize that. Second, the established administration has already declared victory in Iraq with the famous MISSION ACCOMPLISHED banner and also claimed victory in Afghanistan by stating the Taliban had been eradicated. Both of these countries have had "free elections," new leaders, and the three 9/11 detainees at Gitmo with hearings this week, are not from either of these countries, so, it's well past time to wind up both these wars. Mr. Cheney is concerned that those of us that are against the war are hard on the morale of the military. I have an idea for a real morale booster for the troops. Let's have our brave service men and women come home, in the same victory that was claimed by their Commander in Chief! - MISSION ACCOMPLISHED
Now, lets' talk money for a minute. Mr. Cheney is making it sound like this new Congress is going to leave our military in the harm's way that this administration placed them, without ammunition and supplies. That isn't what I understand Congress to be saying, but we do have many domestic issues that are going very much unchecked and underfunded so our President can leave his legacy. And this underfunding doesn't begin to describe the debt that is mounting and will continue to mount. Mr. Cheney said of our enemies "They dwell in the shadows, wear no uniform, have no regard for the laws of warfare, and feel unconstrained by any standard of morality. We've never had a fight like this . . ." And to that I would ask, then why we have continued to engage in traditional warfare and how we will ever know that there is not one more dwelling the shadows, not wearing a uniform? His own speech tells me there is no end to this mess. I think I'm understanding his language. Mr. Cheney is exceptional in his style. He is blunt about his agenda for the rest of us, but he draws many interesting arbitrary lines around himself and his family. He doesn't want his daughter's "lifestyle discussed" calling that offlimits, yet he cleared up a headline with this statement - "What is not legitimate -- and what I will again say is dishonest and reprehensible -- is the suggestion by some U. S. senators that the President of the United States or any member of his administration purposely misled the American people on pre-war intelligence." I happen to be one of those people that believe we were mislead intentionally and I do not appreciate being called dishonest and reprehensible, anymore than he wants anyone discussing his openly gay daughter. I think I can actually sum up the feelings of the majority of America, as well as the intentions of Congress by sharing another quote from Mr. Cheney. I believe our Congress could best express their stand and that of their constituents with the same answer he gave a reporter who asked why he had not served in Viet Nam. His response was . . . "other priorities."
For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.

Age Discrimination

I was in the License Office today and through the extended wait that we experienced, I read the new laws regarding the requirements for a Driver's License in the state of Missouri. Now, I could blog on and on about the new laws that inconvenience the law abiding citizens and invade our privacy, but I have a different topic to address. As I read all this new security nonsense, and that's exactly what it is, I noticed that there is an exemption to the requirements of a birth certificate or a passport. If you are over 65 years old, you don't have to go through what the rest of us have to. The "seniors" don't have to bring in a passport or certified birth certificate, all they have to bring is the signed note from the eye doctor saying they don't have to take the eye exam! Well, you know what . . . there is an incredible amount of age discrimination against those of us who are under 65. The fact is, that this senior generation is exhausting social security while still passing judgment upon and inconveniencing those that are contributors. This is the only age group that gets to live off of the government while having the choice to work, but few of them have the time to do that, as they are much more consumed with trips on OATS buses and bank luncheons for the "silver" accounts. The senior citizens of this country have the privilege of reduced prices for dinners and for drugs. The seniors have the grand privilege of an income far above that of minimum wage, while also receiving medical treatment, special banking privileges and are certainly the only generation able to reap the benefits of larger bank accounts. And it's so funny to listen to them. They worked for it! Well, their children and grandchildren are working for what they will never see, and it amazes me that these people that think the whole world should accomodate them, truly don't mind taking the food out of their own grandchildren's mouth. Just more age discrimination against those of us that are under the age of 65. Banks do attempt to lessen the discrimination. Many banks offer privileged accounts over the age of 50 and some restaurants draw the line of reduced cost at 55. But that is still age discrimination. The senior citizens have done what every other "group" has done. They have hollered discrimination until the scale of justice has shifted, not balanced, just shifted until it is heavy in their favor. There is a difference, though, in this shift brought about under the guise of age discrimination. As people stand up against racial discrimination or for those with disabilities or for gender equality, it benefits the generations that will come after. But the trumped up charge of "age discrimination" has truly made life more difficult and resulted in discrimination against the future generations.

and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation

What Time Is It and What Are We Saving?

Well, we are going to start "saving daylight" earlier this year. Do you ever wonder if all this daylight that we save in the summer months could be causing the global warming? But seriously, what are we accomplishing with this daylight saving time? A gentlemen on the radio gave the best analogy I think I've ever heard. He said DST is like cutting a foot of fabric off the top of a blanket and sewing it on the bottom. A day is 24 hours and there is only so much of it that is going to be illuminated by the sun. So, the '05 Congress decided we would save electricity by extending DST. I noticed this morning when the alarm came on, that I do turn on the lights and it isn't yet daylight, and after Sunday morning, the people getting ready for work and the children getting ready for school will be getting up to the same "sky" as the farmer. They'll turn on the lights! And then at night, it will still be light while it's time for the children to go bed, so they won't need lights while they sleep??? What significant savings are they talking about, an hour less of the 4 watt night lights? Who are they kidding? Everyone will be getting up in the dark and driving to work in the dark. And playing later in the evening and spending more for the recreation. This is really about keeping the economy going and the people in a continuous state of flux and adjustment. Does the present administration really think 3 weeks of an hour jump on the global market will give us the financial edge that our economy needs? Some of the things I have noticed that will change, though, is computers are programmed to automatically change the first week-end of April and the last week-end of October, so that may change many things. Perhaps there will be savings of electricity if all the computers cease to function between now and April 1st. Then there is the fact that we will be out of sync with the rest of the world that participates in this charade of lengthening the day. So, how will the international flights work for the next three weeks as, once again, the rest of the world attempts to accomodate the American's insistence to be in the lead, even when changing the clocks? I've read a couple of places where it is being compared to the potential of Y2K. Did the former Congress realize we finally have the proper administration in power for the actual event of a Y2K crisis?
And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.

Advice for Mr. Libby

I've been following this situation as best I can, but frankly, it bears a striking resemblance to a maze made of rabbit trails. Now, Mr. Libby, I'm not going to call you Scooter, because I just think I'd rather not. I personally think they owe you a pardon. I think you did it, but I think you were doing it for "the greater cause." Say, where are all these guys that used to pat you on the back and call you Scooter? You obviously have the dubious honor of "fall guy" and I want you to know, most of the country does recognize this. I wasn't sure if the conservatives would admit it or not, but I've noticed even on 'Morning in America with Bill Bennett,' they know you're the patsy. Dr. Bill wouldn't keep bringing up Clinton, if they didn't know the rest of the country was wise to this mess. I really can't figure out why the grand jury decided the original inquest they were supposedly investigating was not a crime, when they determined you had allegedly obstructed justice and lied. Now if you had lied and obstructed the justice they claim, how do they know the original inquest and investigation that led to their conclusion of no crime was concluded properly? How can they be certain they arrived at the truth, since you supposedly clouded the issues? I do think you messed up here and I do think you did your best to lead the grand jury on some pretty wild tangents, but I do believe you were following orders. Just for future reference, when warmongers start using the word "covert," a general rule of thumb is: somebody is going to fall, and the fact that the term is covert, means it's not going to happen where everyone is looking! Of course, I realize you also know this, now. I happen to believe you were doing exactly what your boss told you to do. I also think you had advisors that continued to point out the fact that Bill Clinton got away with it. Well, here's a few facts that apparently you overlooked. Starting a war over "bad intelligence," which by the way that "bad intelligence" excuse should have been a big red flag to you as to what you were listening to. Now, back to the "similar differences." Everyone knows or assumes that politicians lie. It's called campaigning and once in office, executive privilege. The entire country was sure Bill Clinton had a tryst with Monica, and most married men, when discovered will lie and deny, job not withstanding. The difference here; spies identities were revealed internationally and we have wars going on. Nobody really cares "who did the do, with who" in the 90's, well I guess there are a select few that are obsessed with sexual matters and the morality of others that could hear about it over and over and over again. But the sad, current fact is, spying and wars get people killed. Do you see the difference? Now, I realize Dr. Bill wants to draw parallels, but I have a question for Dr. Bill. As an educator, say he caught someone cheating on a test . . . would he even listen to their response, if the best they could manage, was someone else did it 8 years ago! See, even Dr. Bill is trying to give you some cover here, with diversion. Ok, Mr. Libby, you have been found guilty regarding a leak and lying. Why don't you just face the real fact and realize you are the patsy and simply embrace the concept of truth. You need to realize there's no going back. Most of us just think you were doing what you were told. You are going to pay the price of leaking, so leak! And while you are at it, let's clear up this lying business and tell the truth. Hey, what a concept! Leaking the TRUTH out of Washington. Please, Mr. Libby, give it a try. We citizens know, to obtain the truth out of Washington, it will have to be leaked.

Discretion shall preserve thee, understanding shall keep thee: To deliver thee from the way of the evil man,

Views, Opinions and Noise

I was hoping to make Wednesday a day for a short blog about non-essential nonsense in the news and I was all ready to blog about Ann Coulter, when I awoke this morning to the grating sound of Steve Malzberg sitting in for Dr. Bill. It was then, that I realized just how similar I find Ann and Steve to be. Steve Malzberg makes no bones about his views, and neither does Ann. I can't say that I find either of them truly conservative, but they are vocally and vehemently, anti-liberal. What I find the most outstanding about both of them is their willingness to say anything to hear themselves make noise! Some of the things I hear Steve say, I just think "Oy Vey!" And Ann speaking for the religious right? In what church are the deaconnesses and Sunday School teachers dressing like she does? And what a pretty vocabulary she possesses. But enough about the two of them. I'm just not going to give them any more attention. I would like to, however; address another concern of the religious right. They have spoken out against Rudy G. Specifically, I read the Southern Baptists have taken issue with his number of marriages and his divorce, and they are, of course, entitled to their views. Even John McCain has been married more than once, but he's a veteran, and somehow, his divorce is not as offensive to them. I don't know if one has anything to do with the other, but . . . Well, at any rate, Rudy just wants to be president, he's not seeking admission to a Southern Baptist seminary. Say, Hillary has only been married once and we know how she strongly she clings to her vows even with an unfaithful husband, so perhaps they will have a candidate with their values, and I think the Clintons are Baptist.

A fool hath no delight in understanding, But only that his heart may reveal itself.

Support Our Troops

First, I would like to mention the fact that weekly on his show, Alan Colmes names the fallen soldier by name and rank, while being diametrically opposed to the war itself. Now that is the perfect example of what it is, to acknowledge this war as ridiculous politics, but to support the troops. Thank you Alan Colmes. I, personally, have had it with four years worth of political propaganda that infers any connection with 9/11 to Iraq. I have had it with four years of magnetic bumper stickers that say "Support Our Troops" and I have had it with four years of pressure on those of us who disagree with the Iraq War being accused of everything from "killing morale" to being unpatriotic. And frankly, I am just really embarrassed for the people that are buying into the message that, "we have to keep fighting these terrorists over there!" Well the latest piece of propaganda that I have heard enough of, is this message in reference to the troops that they are"over in Iraq fighting for our freedom." Let me tell those that don't know the difference between Iraq and Saudi that the passport that was supposedly "discovered" near the WTC was not from Iraq, there were none, that is zero from Iraq involved in 9/11. The majority of the passports were from Saudi. So just quit the banter because the ones that believe this outrage already do, and the rest of us are not convinced, and just for the record, it would seem that more of those that once believed it, have seen what the rest of us already knew. So, in reality, to continue to support the war that is getting our troops killed, doesn't really sound like supporting the troops at all, now does it . . . Now, back to the propaganda that must be addressed.

What's with the magnetic bumper stickers? Do you really think the troops know about this major war effort sold in the impulse section of every discount store in America? And if they do, how does that make a day under fire in Iraq a better experience? And where is that money going when people do buy those? Is there some sort of special charity that oversees the proceeds to the tune of about 85% administration expenses? I have stated and I have written exactly the way I want to support our troops. I want to bring them home or at least have them risking their lives on the real battle front. I saw Iraq for the quagmire it was before it began and I really did try to warn people, but then, I'm just a nobody taxpaying citizen of a world super power. Let's talk about fighting the terrorists "over there," shall we? The so called eradicated Taliban is gaining ground in Afghanistan and we are too entrenched in Iraq to do very much about it. Israel, our ally that should have been able to count on us, battled Hezbollah alone this summer, because we didn't have the manpower to help, but we apparently have enough military power behind our "mouth" to keep threatening Iran and North Korea! So, please tell me how this "over there" mantra is making sense, because I just can't follow the inconsistency. And nobody is in Iraq fighting for American's freedom. That was the Revolutionary War. That was the war in which the military was comprised of those that were making the decisions. My last concern about supporting the troops is this latest thing about Walter Reed Hospital. I thought there were always dignitaries visiting our troops there. I thought the President and the first Lady made some visits there. How is it, that everyone in administration has missed the condition of the place? I read right after the war began, that the injured and recovering soldiers were actually billed for their meals, because their combat pay included meals and so, to maintain proper military protocol and have no double dipping the soldiers were supposed to pay. Where was the "support our troops" slogan there? I wrote an e-mail and personally asked to pay for some of those meals. I was trying to support our troops. Now back to this current diversion at hand. Turns out, that the VA just isn't up to more wounded veterans right now, so this war is really bad timing. President Bush has organized a "committee" to investigate the poor care and conditions. I have a much simpler solution than submitting this problem to the scrutiny of former Senator Gridlock, himself, because that just makes me think nothing is supposed to happen. Our President is the Commander in Chief of the military, and that would make our VP the second in line of that same position and we know that wives receive benefits when their husbands are in active duty, so . . . In the last couple of months Laura Bush has had a procedure, President Bush has had some sort of test and Dick Cheney has a blood clot. Why didn't these three individuals just receive care at these facilities and determine what improvements should be made? Perhaps they just need a different perspective of this facility, than that of visiting dignitaries. While they are telling us to support our troops, would they want the same treatment their decisions are causing our troops to receive?

And one of you says to them, Go in peace, be warm and full of food; but you do not give them the things of which their bodies have need, what profit is there in this?

Thomas Eagleton, One of The Good Guys

Thomas Eagleton died this week-end and I just happen to have admired him greatly. I never met the man, but I remember very clearly seeing the kind of man that he was. He was the 1972 VP candidate for the Democratic party, when dirty politics openly rared it's ugly head in American Presidential campaigning. It was discovered that Senator Eagleton had sought treatment for depression, and of course the opposing party was certainly not above capitalizing on that fact. I, was not of voting age at the time, but we were having a "mock" election in our American history class and we were following these current events, diligently. First, I wondered, that since psychiatry was supposed to be a recognized branch of medicine, why it was treated differently than say any other problem for which one might seek a medical professional. So, were these so called professionals, really just charlatans that couldn't claim a clean bill of health for their patients? And what about the intrusion into this man's personal life? Oh, that's right it was America's business to know this. Does anyone know if any of Mr. Cheney's heart problems have been stress related? But back to Mr. Eagleton, who truly was a class act far above those that were dealing against him. Remember the "break-in" at the Democratic headquarters in Washington D.C., through that same time frame? Of course, Mr. Eagleton's mental health grabbed the head lines at the time, and he withdrew from the race. He continued, however; to serve in Senate until the late 1980's and then returned to St. Louis, where he taught and remained a political commentator until his death. I can't say that I agreed with all of his policies and ideas, but I did agree with many of them, particularly his comment regarding the Attorney General appointment in 2001. But as far as I'm concerned, this man completely proved that his mental state was stable, as he continued to serve in Senate and teach for the next 35 years, unlike the careers of the "stable politicians" that attempted to destroy him. And what became of the people that tried to ruin him, politically? Remember Watergate?

and be sure your sin will find you out.

It's Not What They Say . . .

I just have to tell you, I think Talk News radio could be addictive. I find myself picking and choosing the hosts that I want to hear, based not upon their opinions or style, but based upon what is not the issue in any given show. It's not what they say, or even how they say it, it's all of the commentary and side information that really sheds light on the direction and agenda that is being set forth. Let me give just a few examples. There is one host that I just can't listen to because he adds or changes names to sound derogatory and I just think that is evidence of a very small mind, so I don't listen. Perhaps I'm missing something, perhaps he'd have a "special something" to add to or change my name. But it's funny, I can't ever remember his. I know it's a mental block and somehow I just don't care. I can't hear any of his points around the obvious belittling of individuals and companies he is discussing, so I don't listen. I try to listen to the liberal view offered by FOXNews Radio, but I can only handle so much of what I call, intolerant tolerance. That program seems to raise many issues that I just don't believe are pertinent to world events, right now, so I'm disappointed with that because it allows the "neocons" to run away with the air time discussing politics and current events. I really don't feel that an hour discussion about Hugh Hefner's marriage plans or the psychic readings give me a fair and balanced view, when Sean and Rush and countless others spend hour after hour harping on the current political hot potatoes. Although in defense of the liberal host, he doesn't need hours and hours to yammer about his view. He makes his point quickly and concisely in a matter of seconds. I've been enjoying Dr. Bill, lately, primarily because he is back and he is the one doing his show. And he is up front about his purpose, and he doesn't sound like a mean 3rd grader on the playground. He indicates that the country should feel strongly about more war in the Middle East and he is giving all of the republican candidates for 2008, adequate coverage. And although I don't agree with him, I appreciate his civility and his forthrightness. I was truly surprised this past month when I found myself leaning to the right toward Rudy G. for president. I thought this guy is a real "get things done" kind of man and he's worked his way up, but I knew with his liberal social views, he had to have some very staunch views in some areas, to even be a republican. I learned this morning that he is truly a technocrat. He does think we should all be under surveillance and you know, that's just more big brother than I care to experience, at least in my face and openly. So, the man of the people will be keeping track of all the people if he is elected, and that was all it took for me, to not be leaning that way, any longer. Something else I've been hearing lately is all this illegal imigrant debate, while nobody does anything, to stop it, that is, if they really want to. But please remember, our President made a deal with Mexico and Canada when all of the News/Talk and media kept America entrenched in the Schaivo case. Anyone who doesn't think our government and the media are orchestrating the maneuvers on the American public, is just not the brightest crayon in the box. Now back to illegals. A couple of months ago, we had 11 million illegal imigrants in this country and men were being tried and convicted for driving them across the borders in big trucks, so . . . now we have an open highway policy for these big trucks from Mexico. And I heard this morning we've got 14 million illegal imigrants now. If we can count them, why can't we find them? So, here's what I think is going on. Are the American people hearing what I'm hearing? Are we still able to filter any truth from this filtered, agenda oriented information? Do most Americans recognize when the News is actually presented and when the Talk Radio is just blaring and bantering? It just seems the real point of all this information is to keep the citizens riled and rallied in opposition and uninformed aggression, either way.

The way of a fool is right in his own eyes; but the wise man gives ear to suggestions.

Now Let's Consider What We Have Gained

In any equation or investment, one must consider the cost against the gain. Has the price been worth it? What I am referring to, is the war on terror. It would seem that the war on terror is basically the same premise and foundation as the war on drugs. We already know there will be no end, but what Americans seem to not understand is the cost to those that are law abiding, in both manufactured "wars." So, what have we gained? In the war on drugs, we have gained jobs with contracts to build more prisons, prison guards to manage the prisoners that reside in the new prisons, many more degrees in criminal justice, and more women in the "professional" work force as parole and probation officers. The women have been able to take their pseudo ERA out of the factories and move their cause into criminal justice. And as the factories have shut down, the men have been able to move into the prison system, on one side of the bars or the other. So . . . Are we winning the war on drugs? And don't forget, the police officers have gained a new title, "peace officers" and community partners in D.A.R.E. and they don't actually have to solve crime any more, they simply have gained more access into homes and of course, been given the "right" to knock down doors without notice and shoot 92 year old women. And as America would have it, we have the same partisan mentality for the war on terror. In this war on terror, let me tell you what we've gained. We've gained global disdain for our arrogance. We have gained the privilege of having our government in every aspect of our business. If you think I am over dramatizing, let me tell you, first hand. I have a staunch republican mother who claims this is all good, because she has nothing to hide. Well, when I open a bank account, the bank employee can run me through the wringer because of the USPatriot Act. Therefore, I know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales know more about my parents than I do. I don't know anything about their banking or their business. But to protect our country from so called money laundering and would be terrorist funding, the government is in everyone's bank account, so for those that have nothing to hide . . . How nice for you. Some of the rest of us who used to think freedom included privacy have a different perspective. What else have we gained? We now have the right to be groped and violated publicly and it is called airport security. Let's see . . . if we should ever be viewed and subjectively defined as combative, we have the option to get into the same program as those that have been conquered in the war on drugs and all of this "war business" has no end and no real day in court because "combative" doesn't have to have actual charges for the reason to be held as long as this nation is at war, and those that get nailed in the war on drugs, that is an "addiction and illness," therefore there is no end in sight with the help and counseling one will receive. The war on drugs that was implemented in the 80's and the war on terror, twenty years later, will never be resolved, they will only continue to make more criminals and terrorists. As the standard continues to be modified and our government continues to be unaccountable, these "wars" will continue to escalate and most will ultimately discover, what some of us already know. Even if thesse people think they are being protected, they are really being controlled, manipulated and contained.

Why are the nations so violently moved, and why are the thoughts of the people so foolish?