President Bush is at it again. Immigration Reform on Bush Agenda.

The Administration is again systematically stealing issues and votes from the Democrats. President Bush and his team are performing accomplishments in areas that Democrats have promised movement on for 40 years. In the process of actually addressing these problems, he is converting these single issue voters from Democrat to Republican. And he doesn't have to convert that many. A simple five to ten percent swing in multiple issues translates to an overall big swing that steals states. Barring a major catastrophe in the next year, Bush is looking at a landslide of Reagan-sized proportions.

The Democrat Party is in serious trouble. They are at significant risk of being declared a minor party because they are so fractured and there is no one on the stage that stands as a unifier. Instead, they are engaging in large-scale cannibalism. All 9 dwarfs are all busy attacking the leader, each other and President Bush that they have no time left to say what they will actually do if they win. The few plans that have been talked about are easily picked apart and seem to be made off-the-cuff than by think tanks.

The Democrat ship never made it away from pier side. They have so many candidates that no one will be happy (except the winners camp) by the time a winner is chosen. The spectrum of these candidates are so wide that some supporters might actually support Bush over the Democrat candidate. There needed to be a guiding hand at the helm of the Democrat party that would have culled the herd before things got too far along. Too many choices confuse the voters. In all of the elections I have paid attention to, Republicans have put forward two candidates, while the Democrat side looks like the Boston Marathon.

I'm glad there's no one on that side of the aisle to hold things together and make the incoherent understandable. The Democrats are self-destructing and the 2004 election cycle will put a stake in the heart of this monster.

Hopefully then the Democrats will regroup, be reborn and come back a stronger party, interested in the things that appeal to the majority of American citizens. I'd hate for this country to become a one party state.

Remember Mrs. Kravitz, the nosy neighbor across the street in Bewitched ? Now, it seems, she's running things in South Florida.

Abuse of power? Homeowners group tells woman to remove Virgin Mary. It details the case against an old lady who wants to display her faith, as she has for the last 19 years.

The Mote Ranch covenant doesn't mention statues. But it does make two association committees "the ultimate deciding'' bodies in what a person can do to his home and property.

I could never live in such a place. I would not sign such a covenant. That would be a deal breaker for me. I am the one paying the mortgage, I should be the one in control of the property. These "homeowners associations" go so far as to decree what colors to use on the interior of your house. I understand the want to keep property values up, but this kind of stuff goes way too far.

Thankfully case law in Florida is on this woman's side. There is an elderly man who put up a flag pole to display the Stars and Stripes and got put through the wringer for it. Governor Jeb Bush came to this mans rescue by pushing a bill through the Legislature making things like this legal. The homeowners association then went so far as to put a lien on this mans house for legal expenses the association ran up bringing the case against him. Thankfully there was a drive by Sean Hannity and others to raise the cash to let this man keep his home.

Hopefully this lady won't have to go through the same hell.

From Mother Goose & Grimm:

I found something that the Liberal media won't say anything about, because a) it's a followup, b) it makes fools of those who yell the original claims. Halliburton's "Gouging": What Really Happened

The obvious question raised by the discrepancy was: Why would Halliburton deliver high-priced fuel from Kuwait when it could be obtained at a much lower price from Turkey?

The company says it did so because the Army demanded that it deliver fuel from Kuwait...It turns out that Halliburton did exactly what the Army wanted. Unless stupidity on the Army's part is a crime, there is nothing here to yell about.

But you'll never see Brokaw, Jennings or Rather talk about this.

I found this article, AFSCME Official Endorses Socialism After Union Backed Dean and it reminded me that I owe Spike Magazine's blog Splinters and article on Socialism.

Let's start off with the comments:

"The first thing we have to do is remind ourselves that we are fighting for socialism," said District Council 1707 President Brenda Stokeley of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME).

Stokeley's remarks were made during the Workers World Party's national conference in New York on Dec. 6 and 7. The conference was entitled, "Reviving the Worldwide Struggle for Socialism." First of all, there are three types of social structure for this discussion: Capitalist, Socialist and Communist.

Capitalist is the one most free. You are allowed to start whatever business you want (within some very wide parameters) and go for it until you succeed or go broke. You are allowed to go where and when you want, and it is the government that is limited in their powers rather than you.

Communist is best described as governmentless. After all of the people have been properly and completely indoctrinated, the government would just "fade away" and be no more. Everybody would be equal and everybody would work for the common good.

Now let's talk about exactly who is/was Socialist.

Socialist can be best described as either "hard" or "soft." Countries such as the UK, France, Germany, et.al. are best described as soft socialists.

Soft Socialist societies still have a large contingent of capitalistic entrepreneurship, while the government is heavily invested in social programs and controls major industries. Freedoms exist, but at the pleasure of the government. In the UK, the press is nominally free, but can be gagged at the governments leisure if "official secrets" comes out.

Now the hard socialists, they are another ball of wax. The former Soviet Union, China, North Korea, Cuba. No freedoms, the State controls everything, constant indoctrination, "re-education" camps for those who don't conform, the list goes on and on. Imagine having to get permission from the State to leave the county where you live. Imagine the only freedom of speech you have is what the government tells you what to say. If you were accused of a crime, you had to prove your innocence. It's very hard to prove a negative under those conditions.

Everything is controlled by the State. Where you work, how much you get paid, where you live, etc. And we all know how well this system works. In the Soviet Union, the small privatized plots for the farmers outperformed the collective farms. You had to stand in three lines to buy anything. Stand in line to see what is for sale, stand in another line to get a ticket for it, and hopefully you get what it is you were looking for in the third line. Military units had a Zamploit or political officer to make sure the troops were properly indoctrinated and they had the power to overturn a commanders decisions if they went against the party interests.

Socialism works somewhat in China because of their culture. The Chinese have pigeonholed everybody for thousands of years. You stayed where you were, you do what you're told and you don't complain. Even so, China is beginning to see Capitalistic overtones. It will be a long time, however, before those who control China give up the reins of power. Constant indoctrination of the people still goes on, and dissent is still ruthlessly crushed as Tienanmen Square plainly showed.

People no matter where they are have pretty good BS detectors. When they live in squalor and under a ruthless government, there comes a point where people realize that they are being told a crock of shit, however they also see the point of the gun being pointed at them if they aren't sufficiently enthusiastic enough about being in a workers paradise. Why do you think people from these countries defect every chance they get? Why do you think dozens died trying to cross the Berlin Wall? Why do you think it was put up in the first place? It certainly wasn't to keep us out.

Cuba and South Korea are hard Socialist dictatorships. You can tell that it's a dictatorship because there is one guy in power and that is all that matters. Unless the succession is to a son, there is no "line of succession." Nobody is given enough power to threaten the dictator, there is no orderly transfer of power upon his death.

The situation in North Korea can be summed up in one word: Cannibalism. Some workers paradise that is.

Cuba depends on trade with Europe, because it can't survive on its own. It was being heavily subsidized by the Soviet Union, but that came to a halt when the SU collapsed. They still have thousands of people a year fleeing from this 'paradise,' only to die on the way or be executed upon their return. Dissidents are routinely jailed for years or executed if they get too loud.

And this is the kind of world Ms. Brenda Stokeley wants us to live in. Never forget that. There is no such thing as a benign government, even our own. It takes the power of the people to keep the government in check, not the other way around.

I found two related stories on The Drudge Report. Lost? Hiding? Your Cellphone Is Keeping Tabs obviously talks about how GPS technology in your cell phone that can instantly locate you. The other story is from the UK, Police call for remote button to stop cars talks about remotely stopping cars who are evading police.

These two related technologies show the best and worst side effects of technology. Jeff Goldblum in Jurassic Park asked, "Just because we can do something, does that mean we must do it?" Movies such as Enemy of the State and Changing Lanes show just exactly what can happen to a person if they become the target of anybody with such resources, and the capabilities of these people grow every day.

Identity theft is a prime example of a nefarious use of our interlinked society, where a couple of words and numbers in the right order spell disaster for thousands of people every day.

I don't like the technologies described in these stories, especially the "mandatory in the future" part of it. Every good reason you can come up with I can come up with two bad reasons, things that bad people can do to you.

I've asked this before, and it bears repeating: If I know everywhere you go, and you know I know, are you truly free? Can you honestly say your decisions on where and when you go are untainted by the knowledge that someone could be watching you? I spend great amounts of time online, and I do so with the knowledge that I am watched. Every website I visit, every email I send and receive is logged somewhere, ready at a moments notice for someone to look at. This knowledge does affect where I go and what I say. And I don't like it. It isn't for my protection, it isn't in my best interests at all, but it happens nonetheless.

These are the last days that we are truly free, if they are already not passed. Remember them well. They will not come again.

I just got back from a MechWarrior tournament and saw the terror alert level raised.

Hat tip to Mike Hollihan for having this on his blog for me to see. Click on the Sesame Street icon to the right to see the entire spectrum. Hope it never gets to Elmo.

President Bush's long range plans are bearing fruit. Despite the lack of positive press coverage, things are getting better every day in Iraq. The capture of Saddam has put a large stake into the heart of despotism. Countries in the region are seeing that is far better to have us as a friend rather than an enemy.

Iran is screaming for nuclear inspectors to prove that they are not developing a nuclear weapons program. Time will tell. The mullahs have had to put down several pro-democracy movements, and the internal pressure is still building. External pressure via Iraq is also beginning to show in the fact that they are willing to have international inspections concerning their nuclear program.

Libya is begging us to take away their WMD and promising that they won't do it again. The history of Libya took a hard right turn back in the 80's thanks to Ronald Reagan. Qaddafi was making a lot of big noises, especially about his "line of death." A carrier group brushed his defenses aside and an F-111 dropped a bomb into the tent next to his. He was down right quiet after that.

I don't know if Qaddafi was directly responsible (ordered) the bombing of Pan-Am Flight 103, but he certainly is paying for it and a similar French aircraft bombing. He has been moving toward civility for some time, this WMD step is just the latest step. While the timeline is not exact, it indicates that the negotiations to get rid of Qaddafi's WMD started about the time we rolled into Iraq. I'm sure Qaddafi saw his own future in that attack.

The United States has played softball far too long. The world is a dangerous place, and we as a people need to realize that. Thank God that there is a man in the White House who is willing to play hardball with those who wish to do us harm. 9/11 came about because we were seen as soft. We must be seen as swift, unequivocal and fatal in our responses to keep us safe. Trying to be nice and being ambivalent with our military strength caused two towers to fall.

The most dangerous time of the world is yet to come. Terrorists must have nations as sponsors. That is how they get most of their money, their training bases and a pool of potential recruits. We need to convince (and I am sure we are doing so) these states that an NBC (nuclear, biological or chemical) attack on the US will result in at least a limited nuclear strike against those countries deemed responsible.

Retribution would likely come in the form of a Trident D-5 SLBM. Unclassified capacity is 12 warheads per missile, but I have heard that we only have 8 warheads each. Each of the 8 is a W-88 thermonuclear warhead, with a 475 KT yield, equal to 31 Hiroshimas for a total of 248 times the devastation. I hope the terrorist sponsoring countries do the math and realize it is not in their best interest to be on the wrong side of the US.

The Bush Administration has weighed in on the "Under God" case before the SCOUTS. Administration Asks Supreme Court to Support Pledge.

"The reference to a 'nation under God' in the Pledge of Allegiance is an official and patriotic acknowledgment of what all students - Jewish, Christian, Muslim or atheist - may properly be taught in the public schools," the administration argued in its 63-page filing.

I agree. "God" can equally mean Jehovah, Yahweh, Allah, and so on. While God names the One True God, there are many ways and Names to worship Him. Under God means that we recognize that our rights and power as a people come from Him. The rights and power granted by God do not go only toward Americans, but to all who recognize that fact. Too bad there are no other governments that derive their power from the people.

I talked about P E T A in this post, along with the front cover of their "comic." Well, I had heard some extra gross things today about the inside that I wanted to check out.

It turns out that URL to it is now dead. You come up with a placeholder search page. It seems that these people have discovered they bit off more than they could chew. Rather let the world see how truly radical their tactics are, they took it down. Remember, they want to tug on your heartstrings, and they can't do that while showing graphic images to young children.

Too bad. I think everybody should see what they want to show young children.

UPDATE: It was either unrelated down time or a denial of service attack, but it's back up. You can find it through P E T A's website, the obvious page. Sorry but I won't link to them.

This article, Living Wage Law Is Blocked in N.M. City is a sign that reasonable people are trying to stop a stupid law.

Earlier this year, the Santa Fe City Council set a local minimum wage of $8.50 for all businesses with at least 25 employees. The law was scheduled to take effect Jan. 1.

This is plain bad law, and the people who passed it know nothing about economics.

This is a wonderful Liberal idea, to make sure everybody is paid "a living wage" but as always, the reality sharply interferes with the ideal. Why did they stop at $8.50? Why not $10 or $12? When does the number become ludicrous? And why is that number so unreasonable? Why not just pay everybody $17 an hour, which translates out to the average income for the US? Any argument you can make for $8.50 I can make for $17.

I have already written that businesses don't pay taxes, they pass the costs along to the consumers in the price of the product. The same applies here. If these companies are forced to raise their pay level, they will have to either a) cut back on employees to save payroll, b) increase prices, or c) a combination of both.

Wages do not exist in a vacuum. Raising wages via legislative fiat translates into people losing their jobs and price increases somewhere else. It happens every time it's done. Every time the minimum wage goes up, the price of everything goes up a little to reflect the increased cost of doing business.

When will they learn?

From inside the ring:

History lesson House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, in a statement in December 1998 supporting President Clinton's four-day bombing of Iraq:
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process. The responsibility of the United States in this conflict is to eliminate weapons of mass destruction, to minimize the danger to our troops and to diminish the suffering of the Iraqi people."

This just shows how two-faced she is. She can support long-range bombing of targets that in the end do nothing, but when it comes time to actually do something about it, she is against it because a Republican is the one doing it.

She can say with certainty in 1998 that Hussein is a direct threat because he is developing WMD, but when President Bush says, "Let's not wait until he actually has them" Pelosi starts crying about where the WMD are. This is standard Democrat rhetoric, against anything Bush is for, just because he is for it.

Just for one day, I would like to see President Bush come out for gay marriage, just to see the Democrats come out against it. It will never happen, but it is a dream I have.

I saw this on Drudge this morning, but he took the link down before I could get around to it. Here it is: Jacko Finds Islam

High-ranking members of the Nation of Islam have been working to bring Jackson into Rev. Louis Farrakhan's flock - and Jackson's conversion is now well-known in the NOI [Nation of Islam] community.

And we all know how reasonable and peaceful Rev. Farrakhan is. I think Jacko is clutching at straws to get him out of the hole he has dug for himself, and this is one more play on the public relations scene.

But then again, there is an old Arab adage that I heard years ago, "A woman for sons, a goat for pleasure, a boy for ecstasy." Maybe Jacko heard of it.

And these guys are planning on handing this out to children going to a Nutcracker performance. Fur flies over flier: P E T A targets "Nutcracker" kids

"And the sooner she stops wearing fur, the sooner the animals will be safe. Until then, keep your doggie or kitty friends away from mommy - she's an animal killer.''

I will be the first to admit that the conditions that these animals are kept under and killed are deplorable. I commend P E T A for wanting to improve the conditions of these animals. But inflicting such propaganda on children is beyond horrendous. It shows that these people have no boundaries at all. This would severely and permanently traumatize a child who is supposedly going to have a fun evening with their parents. It is these kind of people who make me wish that Klingon pain sticks were real. I'd declare open season on these people. The sad thing about it is you can't change the mind of anybody who would hand one of these to a child. These people are sickos and there is very little you can do to them.

On a side note, I'm sure you know these "people" will spray paint anybody who wears fur, destroying the clothing. Well, some people got the bright idea to "go right to the source" so to speak. They decided to start spray painting the baby seals directly, so the seal hunters wouldn't go after them. They got that part of the plan right. The bad news is a baby seal needs that white coat to make it invisible to polar bears. They become easy to see with a large stripe of bright red paint on them, and polar bears know how tasty baby seal is. So the animal is directly doomed to death by their actions instead of having a fighting chance to grow up. So much for well thought out plans.

A while back, I handed out a reading assignment, This Perfect Day by Ira Levin. It was a world where you wore a bracelet with your nameber (Mark GH 7246931) and every time you passed a station, you stuck the bracelet in to have it scanned, so UniComp knew exactly where you were at any given moment.

Of course, back in the 70's when the book was written there was even no concept of Wi-Fi, the Internet, RFID tags or any of the technology that surrounds us today.

This article, Summit group confirms use of ID chip talks about having RFID tags in the security badges used by the attendees.

The technology exists today to track your every movement. The only hurdle is the individualistic notions of the American people. Once that is out of the way, it would be a relatively minor cost to install RFID scanners throughout the country. Then the only thing left is to install the chips in every person. Mark of the devil anyone?

Oops, there goes your freedom. Because if I can track everywhere you go, are you truly free?

Of course, this will start small. Chips in sex offenders and scanners nearby schools to keep them out. Then all criminals and prisons, then in kids (because you've already got the scanners in the schools). Once you get them into the kids, that is the point where everything is lost. Because if you can get the kids to grow up and think nothing is wrong with it, then all the fighting is over. Adults can wail all they want, but if the younger kids accept it, there is no younger generation to carry on the fight.

When missionaries invaded (correct word) foreign lands, the first step to converting the local populace was to teach the missionaries language to the local children. This drove a wedge between the children and the older generations, with their customs. Once that wedge was in place, it was relatively easy to destroy the old culture and replace it with the missionaries culture. It took 20-30 years, but it happened.

That is where a lot of people learned incrementalism. Take small steps when possible, don't give up ground and hope the other side doesn't catch on to what you are doing. That is what Liberals have been doing for the last 40 years and they have been good at it. The bad news is the people of the US is starting to catch on to what the Liberals have been doing.

Let's hope they wake up all the way and combat this incrementalism.

This is shocking. You can read the whole thing here: Gen. Wesley Clark The piece before the transcript is total gushing cotton-candy fluff. Yecch.

General Wesley Clark was on Hardball December 8th and had this to say:

Well, if I were president right now, I would be doing things that George Bush can't do right now, because he's already compromised those international bridges. I would go to Europe and I would build a new Atlantic charter. I would say to the Europeans, you know, we've had our differences over the years, but we need you. The real foundation for peace and stability in the world is the transatlantic alliance. And I would say to the Europeans, I pledge to you as the American president that we'll consult with you first. You get the right of first refusal on the security concerns that we have. We'll bring you in.

"You get the right of first refusal on the security concerns that we have." Wow. If he was in charge, he would surrender the security of this country to other countries that have had a vested interest that is in opposition to our own security.

Let me say that again: He would give the power of deciding what is in the best interests of our country to those countries that have interests in conflict with ours. Countries that would never allow us to respond to attacks upon the US in such a manner so as to make sure they won't happen again.

On 9/11, the terrorists took this fight to a new level. No longer were they concerned about getting the infidels out of their territories, but rather the destruction of as many infidels as possible in their home country. These fanatics will not rest until either they or America is dead. We didn't start this war, and the only way to finish it is to kill all of the terrorists, because surrender is not part of our vocabulary. And Clark is willing to prevent us from doing that because he wants to make nice with France and Germany.

France and Germany are not against us just because they had interests in Iraq, but because they view themselves as being a counterbalance to us. Just like the Democrats are against anything President Bush is for, just because he is for it, so are France and Germany against anything the US is for.

To surrender control of our security to those who work against us is ludicrous. I'm glad he doesn't have a snowballs chance.

These "conservative bake sales" where you are charged according to your sex and skin color are really offensive. To the Liberals. The one thing they can't stand is being made fun of while strictly adhering to the principles they hold dear. Liberals hold disdain, and hatred of them as badges of honor. It (to them) reinforces that they are right. What they can't stand is laughter. Being laughed at offends their sensibilities.

Orwell would be proud, because Liberals believe that some people are more equal than others, namely themselves. In order to assuage their guilt of being more equal, they want minorities to have two bites at the apple to make up for past injustices. So instead of picking the best qualified candidate regardless of skin color for any position, they force unqualified candidates, primarily minorities, into positions where they have little real chance to hold onto what they have been given a shot at.

To put a person, regardless of color, into college when they struggled through high school is an injustice to that person. The chances of them surviving four years in college is very slim. I myself was in a similar situation. When I joined the Navy, I aced the entrance exams. A recruiter looked at me and asked, "How would you like to go to Annapolis?" That is the Naval Academy where you go to become an officer. I turned it down. I knew I would have never made it. I had a 2.8 GPA in high school and someone with that level of studying skills has no place in a high pressure situation like a military academy. Hell, I almost flunked out of my Electronics Technician school twice. If I would have accepted and had been admitted, I would have flunked out quickly and had denied a more qualified person their slot. That should not happen.

In the business world, putting an unqualified person into a position in a company is a dangerous proposition. A company depends on every person doing their job, and if someone slacks off, things don't get done and the company suffers. Normally that person is fired for not doing their job. But if that unqualified person is a minority who was specifically hired to promote "racial diversity," then you're stuck with a big hole that you can't do anything about. You're damned if you keep them, you're doubly damned if you get rid of him.

I'm not saying that you can't take a chance on a person. One of the major things that businesses hire on is potential. But I am saying that if it doesn't work out, then the company should be able to let him go without recriminations.

Terry McAuliffe has gone and been a poster boy for the GOP again, making himself and his party look petty, hateful and spiteful. DNC chairman's school visit sparks anger among Portsmouth city officials.

He was supposed to give a class on democracy and the political process to some social studies classes. The remarks he made were outrageous, silly and just plain stupid.

During the presentation, McAuliffe told students that due to Bush's mismanagement of the country, 70 percent of college graduates will not be able to find a job upon graduation. He also told students that if the war in Iraq continues as it has, there could be a reinstatement of the draft.

The sickening thing of it is, this very stuff is being taught as gospel at a thousand other schools by teachers and is going unchallenged.

The unmitigated and outright lies on our Constitution, our way of life and our president goes on every day, in almost every grade. Get involved with your child's school, learn what the teacher is teaching and refute it with the truth.

"Bill Clinton's dimwitted former secretary of state Madeleine Albright" (FOX words, but I like them) suggested that Bush already had bin Laden and was going to spring him as an "October surprise."

Believe me, dimwitted is a compliment for her. She tries to swim with cement shoes. But she has backtracked, saying she was only joking.

It was a "tongue-in-cheek comment and was not intended in any other way," Albright told Fox News Channel.

"But witnesses to Albright's comment said the ambassador did not appear to be joking Tuesday when she suggested President Bush may reveal bin Laden's capture as an "October surprise" before next November's presidential election," FNC reported. Do you think if everybody ignores her, she will go away? I guess the problem is some news show will ask her opinion, and she will always stick her foot in her mouth doing it.

The Loony Left strikes again. Wash. Congressman Questions Saddam Timing

This sums it up rather well:

Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., told a Seattle radio station Monday the U.S. military could have found Saddam "a long time ago if they wanted." Asked if he thought the weekend capture was timed to help Bush, McDermott chuckled and said: "Yeah. Oh, yeah."

The Democratic congressman went on to say, "There's too much by happenstance for it to be just a coincidental thing." I think we should have held onto the news for a couple of days. Intelligence recovered with Saddam is bearing fruit, but the roaches are scuttling for cover. If we had sat on him for a couple of days, we would have had a better chance of getting some of these insurgents. Then again, hindsight is always 20/20.

It has already been expressed that if we hand control of the Iraq government to local control on June 30 as promised, Saddam will be executed on the 1st of July. I'm sure he will get a fair trial. Just as fair as the ones he gave to his people.

Of course, his family wants an international court. That alone is reason enough not to do it.

I'm not for torturing the man, but I hope the method of execution is feet first into the wood chipper. A close second would be a firing squad. On live TV of course. We want to make it clear that he is not coming back.

Saddam Hussein has been captured! The news programs are full of wall-to-wall coverage over this.

The democracy of Iraq just got pulled off the respirator. He can no longer come back to threaten his former subjects.

The chance of the Ba'athists coming back to power after (if) the US leaves has dropped by 50-70%, and I am glad.

The only work left to do is wipe out the cockroaches that still survive. That is all we can do, they will not surrender or go away.

Good news today, all-in-all.

This article isn't outrageous, it's plain stupid. Nursery rhymes put kids 'at risk', where it talks about 'first responders' to Humpty Dumpty. Indeed.

These "Canadian Researchers" need to go and find something better to do. These nursery rhymes were written several hundred years ago and reflected contemporary themes. Humpty Dumpty referred to a king who had fallen from power. I don't remember who or when. The part about the kings men and horses meant they couldn't return him to power. "Ring around the rosie"? That referred to bubonic plague. And so on.

To try and bring a modern context to these tales is ridiculous. They are historical similes to talk about terrible events and nothing more. They are songs or short stories that have lost their meaning in the sands of time and it should stay that way. If a child is very inquisitive on the subject, look it up together on the internet. I'm sure the answers are easily Googled.

Of course, I have my browsers home page set to my blog. Well, this morning I had an interesting link in the ad area that I clicked through on and I'm glad I did. The Black Conservative is a web site of essays by, believe it or not, black conservatives.

I have only had time to read two essays so far, but they were clear, concise and an interesting read. Well worth your time to investigate.

A talk-show host is trying to force-feed Christmas to the ACLU. The Anti-Christmas ACLU has got me fired up.

This is what he wants:

If you agree with me that it's time to stand up to the ACLU, feel free to send me as many Christmas cards as you can. Some listeners have sent me 25 or 50 at a time. Remember, make sure each one is hand-written by you and contains a message to the ACLU. Send your Christmas cards to:

Mike Gallagher's "Merry Christmas, ACLU!" c/o The Mike Gallagher Show 6400 N. Beltline Rd. Irving, Texas 75063

Please donate to this worthy cause, if only to piss the ACLU off. I'm buying a card for them tomorrow when I go shopping.