Senator Boxer, Let's call her Ma'am Again.

Call Me Senator from RightChange on Vimeo.

Al and Jesse

I got this from an old high school friend.

Yes, A Period of Consequences

Yes, A Period of Consequences
Check out this editorial from the current issue of The Weekly Standard.

Catholic Thoughts on Erosion of Religious Freedom in The US

Eau de Obama

Hurry up 2012!!

European Economies

As some of the folks who've seen this have said: This would be really funny, except it's the truth!

Immigration, Illegal

Jeanette Moll for 18th Ohio District

Jeanette is getting my vote!!

Hope Springs Eternal

One can only hope!! (cartoon from The Weekly Standard)

Interesting Comments (Author? No one seems to know for sure.)

A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage.

Seems to me like were headed back into bondage. Vote 2010

ObamaCare -- Is it Constitutional??

Here's what Wiki has to say about David Rivkin

Republican Candidates for Ohio's 18th Congressional District

Here are the candidates for Ohio's 18th Congressional District. My choice is Jeanette Moll. I'm not sure which of these candidates also ran in the 2008 primary election, but I know Jeanette and Fred Dailey did. Fred won the primary and then lost the general election to Zack Space. Bob Gibbs has now thrown his hat into the ring. Senator (State) Gibbs has the endorsement of the NRCC. That alone is enough to insure I won't support him in the primary. The NRCC is not listening to the grassroots people. Ever since the Republicans didn't force the corrupt Bob Ney from office, I've stopped contributing to the national party. I only contribute to individuals. I've ruled Fred Dailey out because he has had a long career in Ohio's state bureaucracy.

My reasons for supporting Jeanette are pretty straight forward. She is pro-life, pro traditional marriage, for reducing taxes, for controlling spending, opposed to a federal takeover of health care, and for enforcing our immigration laws. Plus, she is a new face. She is not a member of "the old boys club." I want someone who has not been involved in government at the state or national level. I want fresh ideas and a different approach to solving problems. For that matter, I want a different approach to deciding what is and what is not a problem. For example, education is not a problem that needs a Federal solution. Leave it to the states. As some wise man once said: "Insanity is continuing to do the same thing and expecting different results." If we keep sending knowledgeable bureaucrats and folks who have turned into professional politicians to Washington we will just get more of what we've gotten in the past.

Candidate In State Out of State
Zachary T Space (D) $141,950 (39%) $218,500 (61%)
Bob Gibbs (R) $88,410 (95%) $4,900 (5%)
Jeanette M Moll (R) $59,140 (95%) $3,150 (5%)
Fred L Dailey (R) $37,200 (97%) $1,250 (3%)
Pat Carlisle (R) $0 (0%) $0 (0%)
Hombre Liggett (R) $0 (0%) $0 (0%)

I tried to straighten up the chart above, but can't figure out how to do it. The bottom line is Jeanette is in the number 2 spot in raising Republican money. I'm not sure how long Bob Gibbs has been raising money, but Jeanette has been working on it since the last election, at least as far as I know. Guess I'll contribute a few more bucks to Jeanette and hope she wins the primary. However all that said, I suspect that whomever wins the Republican primary will be able to defeat Mr. Space. I think it's going to be a bad year for incumbents of either party.

C.S. Lewis on the Existence of God

The "Moral Argument" for C. S. Lewis is as follows:

1. If God does not exist, objective moral values & duties do not exist.

2.) Objective moral values & duties do exist.

3.) Therefore, God exists.

There's that pesky word "objective" again. That seems to be the key to most arguments, doesn't it? If there is no such thing as objective truth or absolute truth, you can't really have an argument, can you? The argument turns into a discussion (quarrel ?) of opinions, and by definition opinions are subjective, not objective.

Fresh Faces May Have a Chance in November 2010

An article from the March 1 edition of The Weekly Standard.

The Manhattan Declaration, Again, and Words from Chuck Colson

Chuck Colson on The Manhattan Declaration:

What we are witnessing today in America is a titanic struggle between two antithetical worldviews: Secular naturalism and Christianity. The one side holds there is no God, that we humans are nothing but a complex amalgamation of atoms—glorified germs whose ancestors arose from the primordial soup. The other holds that God created the universe, His physical and moral laws are observable and knowable, and that He created man in His image—endowing man with a sacred dignity and free will.

We see this struggle all around us. In the classroom, the courtroom, and on Capitol Hill. If man is nothing special, then why not abortion, why not cloning, why not experiment with human embryos? If there is no moral law, no ultimate truth, why not same-sex marriage, why not enshrine individual preference as the ultimate arbiter of human conduct, why not borrow money you can’t repay—who cares how it might affect others?

Check out The Manhattan Declaration today and sign it!

Balsamic Vinegar and the 20th Anniversary Issue of First Things

The March Edition of First Things, published by the Institute on Religion and Public Life, is the 20th Anniversary Issue. What a treasure. Like aged balsamic vinegar, this latest issue is a distillation; a distillation of 20years of articles. This anniversary issue begins with the editorial from the magazine's premier edition. Here are two paragraphs from that editorial:

The first meaning of First Things is that, for the sake of both religion and public life, religion must be given priority. While religion informs, enriches, and provides a moral foundation for public life, the chief purpose of religion is not to serve public life. Here we discover a necessary paradox. Religion that is captive to public life is of little public use. Indeed, such captivity produces politicized religion and religionized politics, and the result, as we know from bitter historical experience, is tragedy for both religion an public life.

Religion best serves public life by relativizing the importance of public life, especially of public life understood as politics. Authentic religion keeps the political enterprise humble by reminding it that it is not the first thing. By directing us to the ultimate, religion defines the limits of the penultimate. By illumining our highest purpose, all lesser purposes are brought under transcendent judgement.

While the author of the editorial is not given, I'd assume it was a joint effort of the magazine's founding editors, Richard John Neuhaus and James Nuechterlein.

The remainder of the issue contains "Snapshots" from selected articles published over the years, from over 200 authors. The Snapshots are punctuated by seven articles which are republished in full.

Finally, since I have an affinity for Joseph Pearce, having heard him speak at a couple of Chesterton Conferences, I generally read anything published about him. In this issue of First Things, there is a one page ad for Joseph Pearce's two recent books on Shakespeare: The Quest for Shakespeare and Through Shakespeare's Eyes. The ad was placed by Ignatius Press. All the comments are quite laudatory. As I continued to read the Snapshots, I came upon one taken from the August/September 2008 issue. In an article entitled Thy Canonized Bones by Robert Miola. The article was his review of The Quest for Shakespeare. Here's what Professor Miola had to say about the book: "Unfortunately, The Quest for Shakespeare proves to be a patchwork of other people's work indiscriminately selected, hastily stitched together, and served up with self-congratulatory fanfare. Seldom has such a slight book managed to combine ignorance and arrogance on such a grand scale." I've not read either of the books, so I don't know what to think of the reviewer's comments. However, I love the way he expressed himself. What a sentence: "Seldom has such a slight book managed to combine ignorance and arrogance on such a grand scale." I'll have to keep my eye out for other books that that sentence could be applied to, with attribution, of course.

Absolute Truth, Again

I keep looking for ways to explain absolute truth. See, if you can't convince someone that there is such a thing as Absolute Truth, then everything is relative and there's no way to have an argument. Here I mean argument in a philosophical sense. According to The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: "In philosophy, “arguments” are those statements a person makes in the attempt to convince someone of something, or present reasons for accepting a given conclusion." It doesn't mean quarrel. As G.K. Chesterton said: "Never let a quarrel get in the way of a good argument."

Interesting Video on "The Spending Freeze"

Pro Life Support

More Big Brother in the UK

UK police plan to use spy drones like the one in the picture above. Will the US be next? From the UK Guardian:

Police in the UK are planning to use unmanned spy drones, controversially deployed in Afghanistan, for the ­"routine" monitoring of antisocial motorists, ­protesters, agricultural thieves and fly-tippers, in a significant expansion of covert state surveillance.

"Fly-Tippers"? British for people who dump ilegally.

America The Beautiful

I received this link from a friend. Beautiful scenery and sentiment.

So, We Want to be More Like Europe?

The latest case of Big Brother activism comes from France. A bill may soon be passed by the French parliament criminalising “psychological violence” in marriage or de facto relationships. Here's how a BBC report covers the story.

“If you insult your wife or husband repeatedly, you could soon find yourself in court if you live in France. The charge? Psychological violence. That's what the new offence will be called if a bill backed by the government is passed by parliament. Once considered a purely private domain, rows between married or cohabiting couples could now prompt intervention from the state.”

While I deplore domestic violence, France is carrying things a bit too far. A court case could easily turn into a "He said, She said" event. Of course the state could rely on the kids wearing blue shorts, grey shirts, and red neckerchiefs or The Youth League for testimony!

How has this situation developed? Is it possible that since we have fewer and fewer strong families, and people turning away from churches and religion, those sources of emotional support to help in dealing with psychological and emotional problems are disappearing? With those sources gone, who can you turn to? The ever present state.

The Manhattan Declaration

The purpose of this letter is to introduce the Manhattan Declaration to those readers who may not have heard of it.

The Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience. If you think our nation is heading in the wrong direction, you might want to read, and sign, the Manhattan Declaration. By the wrong direction I mean continuing down the road of secularism and relativism. If you’re a supporter of “separation of church and state”, and by that I mean banning any mention of religion in the public square, and failing to consider the Judeo-Christian moral code when developing legislation, this Declaration is not for you. The Declaration was developed in November of 2009 by a group of Orthodox, Catholic and Evangelical Christians who have united to reaffirm fundamental truths about justice and the common good, and to call upon their fellow citizens to join them in defending them. These truths are: the sanctity of human life; the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife; and the right of conscience and religious liberty. Finally, as we approach Martin Luther King Day, we need to consider the eloquent defense of rights and duties of religious conscience offered by Dr. King in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail. Citing Christian writes such as Augustine and Aquinas, Dr. King taught that just laws elevate and ennoble human beings because they are rooted in the moral law whose ultimate source is God Himself. Unjust laws degrade human beings. Since they can claim no authority beyond sheer human will. They lack any power to bind in conscience. Dr. King’s willingness to go to jail rather than comply with legal injustice, was an example all Christians should consider following.