Archive for July, 2007
Wednesday, July 18th, 2007
I’ve had it up to here! I’ve had enough of it! I can’t stand it any longer, I’m going to have to speak my mind…
President George W. Bush is not Satan. He’s not the Anti-Christ. He’s not the man completely void of all morality that the left-wing nutballs continue to paint him as. The media jumps right on board, and the general public falls in line because they are hammered with the message over and over and over again. Oh and the man is not an idiot either. (Another common message portrayed in pop culture.) I’m going to prove to you that the assumption that Bush is an evil man is absolutely wrong. Get ready, buckle your seat belts!
In order for President Bush to be a hateful man who does not care one iota about our men and women dying in Iraq he’d have to be void of all morality. That’s where that sort of thinking stops dead in its tracks. An evil man without any respect for life would not put pro-life judges on the bench of the Supreme Court. An evil man without morals would not fight for faith based initiatives to help Christian and other religious charities. An evil man would not fight for families as G.W. has done by trying to get Congress to pass a constitutional amendment to define marriage as between one man and one woman. I can come up with plenty of other examples but that should suffice. The man is not completely without morals, and that is what it would take for someone to use the power of commanding our troops as some sort of political game or personal profiteering venture.
Do I agree with everything the man has done? No. I think it’s pretty obvious that he hasn’t gotten the job done with securing our borders and dealing with illegal immigration. Do I think he may be influenced by big business? Yes, and I don’t know to what extent and it is frustrating. Do I think he is the ultimate blood thirsty, super villain, killer that everyone paints him out to be? Absolutely not. As with anyone in office there is good he has done and there is bad.
I’m getting sick of the vitriolic hatred though. It’s unwarranted, and it actually does more harm than good. Have the people that shout this hatred ever thought about the message this sends to our enemies? They eat it up, and not only that, it emboldens them to continue the fight. American need to quit shooting itself in the foot if freedom and democracy are to reign. Does someone like the first Muslim in Congress, Representative Keith Ellison even think before he opens his mouth? Does he think about the kind of clout and influence he has? Does he not realize the responsibility that comes whether he likes it or not by someone in his position? Instead he compares Bush with Hitler. Wake up America, George W. Bush is not the enemy. The terrorists are.
Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments »
Tuesday, July 17th, 2007
To say that a lot of people have been up in arms (myself included) over the idea of giving illegal immigrants a free pass to citizenship in our country, would be an understatement. The outrage by the American public caused an immigration reform bill in the U.S. Senate to die. While illegal immigration is a grave concern for many, what about LEGAL immigrants?
The question that has been on my mind a lot lately is this: Which is actually a greater threat to our national security: legal immigration or illegal immigration?
On the one hand, illegal immigration is wrong for two principle reasons. First it’s breaking the law, and to hand out a reward for breaking the law sets an awful precedent for everyone. Second it’s always been an issue of national security for me. I want our borders protected from those who would try to enter our country illegally and do us harm.
Despite these issues, the more we learn about terrorists around the world, I’m not sure that they would even take the risk of coming in illegally. They’re smarter than that. In the UK we’re talking about a network of medical professionals. The September 11th terrorists were students in the country going to flight school. These are not common, dumb, thugs. They seem to often times come from affluent families with wealthy backgrounds. They are well educated mad men. So while “illegal” immigration is all the hubbub, maybe “legal” immigration deserves more attention.
***
I did some homework and came up with the following statistics based on new immigrants to the state of Minnesota in 2005, and then some rather out of date data from the 2000 U.S. Census that details the number of foreign born people living in the United States. I think you’ll find what I found to be interesting to say the least.
In Minnesota there were 15,456 new immigrants in 2005. That put Minnesota 17th in the nation in new immigrants. The highest amount of immigrants came from Somalia with 2,233 new immigrants. Rounding out the top 3 was Ethiopia (1,303) and India (830).
Let’s look at Somalia where the majority of immigrants in Minnesota are now coming from.
The Somalis are almost entirely Sunni Muslims. The Somali constitution discourages the promotion and propagation of any religion other than Islam.
Now let’s look at the number of foreign born people in the United States that come from Muslim countries as of the year 2000:
Arabic Born Population in the USA (205,822 )
Saudi Arabia: Claims that the Qur’an is the constitution of the country, which is governed on the basis of Islamic law (Sharia)
Egyptian Born Population in the USA (142,832)
Approximately 90% of the population in Egypt adheres to Islam
Iraqi Born Population in the USA (37,714)
Religious composition includes: Muslim, 97%; Christian or other, 3%.
Jordanian Born Population in the USA (39,734)
More than 90 percent of population in Jordan adhered to Sunni Islam in the late 1980s.
Palestinian Born Population in the USA (72,112)
The Palestinian population of the West Bank and Gaza Strip is 97% Muslim.
Syrian Born Population in the USA (142,897)
Syria’s population is approximately 90% Muslim.
Iranian Born Population in the USA (338,266)
Most Iranians are Muslims; 90% belong to the Shi’a branch of Islam, the official state religion, and about 8% belong to the Sunni branch.
Turkish Born Population in the USA (117,575)
94.0% of the Turkish population is Muslim.
***
If radical Islam is so much more dominant than moderate Islam (which one can only assume by the few number of voices speaking up against the violent terrorist acts throughout the world) is there a cause for concern for citizens of the United States? We are living among many followers of Islam and the number continues to grow each year. Should we be more concerned? Should there be a cap on immigration from certain countries?
Many claim that Islam is a religion of peace. Many followers of Islam agree: There will be peace when the world is Islam! That is indeed what many want. You think I’m saying something radical here? Ask France about the intentions of radical Muslims. Ask people in countries throughout Africa including the Darfur region of Sudan what followers of radical Islam have been up to lately. What about in the UK? Did you read about the protest at a mosque in England?
Across town from the site of the recent attempted car-bomb attacks, several thousand Muslims gathered in front of the London Central Mosque to applaud fiery preachers prophesying the overthrow of the British government – a future vision that encompasses an Islamic takeover of the White House and the rule of the Quran over America.
“One day my dear Muslims,” shouted Anjem Choudary, “Islam will govern Britain!”
Choudary was a co-founder of Al Muhajiroun, the now-banned group tied to suspects in the July 7, 2005, London transport bombings and a cheerleader of the 9/11 attacks.
“Democracy, hypocrisy,” Choudary chanted as the crowd echoed him. “Tony Blair, terrorist! Tony Blair, murderer! Queen Elizabeth, go to hell!”
For the full article and audio of the chants click here.
These statistics I dug up don’t even include Muslim immigrants from countries in Europe, other parts of Asia, and Africa which are becoming more and more Muslim. What will it take to get people talking about this? Will it take another terrorist act? Will it be too late then?
Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments »
Tuesday, July 17th, 2007
A Hindu priest presented the morning prayer at the U.S. Senate last week. To view it click here.
Some of you might say to me, “Andy who cares?” I care, and so do a lot of traditional Americans. “But Andy why do you care? Do you have a problem with Americans who practice Hinduism?” No, I believe in the freedom of all Americans to practice whatever religion they want. “Then what’s your problem with this Hindu priest giving the morning prayer at the U.S. Senate?”
I have two major criticisms. As a traditionalist I have a real problem with it because our country was founded by Christians who came to a consensus about the freedoms given to us by God. We have based our laws on Judeo-Christian principles. Our money says “In God we Trust.” Our pledge of allegiance says “One Nation Under God.”
Here’s a small sample of documents talking about God:
The Mayflower Compact (1620)
The Fundamental Orders of Connecticut (1638)
The Declaration of Independence (1776)
The Constitution (1787)
These quotes from great historical figures talk about God’s place in our country:
“The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty… The rights of the colonists as Christians may be best understood by reading and carefully studying the institutes of the great Law Giver which are to be found clearly written and promulgated in the New Testament.”
-Samuel Adams (1772)
“The propitious smiles of heaven cannot be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right, which heaven itself has ordained.”
-George Washington’s Inaugural Address (1787)
“I have lived, Sir, a long time and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth: that God governs in the affairs of man.”
-Benjamin Franklin during an impasse at the Constitutional Convention (1787)
“Whereas, it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits and humbly to implore His protection and favor…”
-George Washington’s Thanksgiving Proclamation (1789)
“God who gave us life, gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that the liberties are a gift of God?”
-Thomas Jefferson on his memorial.
“It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded not by religionists but by Christians, not on religions but on the gospel of Jesus Christ.”
-Patrick Henry
“The government of the United States is acknowledged by the wise and good of other nations, to be the most free, impartial and righteous government of the world; but all agree that for such a government to be sustained many years, the principles of truth and righteousness, taught in the Holy Scriptures, must be practiced. The rulers must govern in the fear of God, and the people obey the laws… A nation cannot exist without religion. France tried that and failed.” -Emma Willard, educator and historian. (1843)
“It is the duty of all nations, as well as of men, to own their dependence upon the overruling power of God and to recognize the sublime truth announced in the Holy Scriptures and proven by all history, that those nations only are blessed whose God is the Lord.”
-Abraham Lincoln (1861)
“That we here highly resolve… that this nation under God shall have a new birth of freedom and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.” -Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg Address (1863)
***
These are the words of our founding fathers and great historical figures. They’re not my words, they’re not the words of conservatives. These are the words from a diverse group that founded our nation with a common principle: the belief in God, and that there is freedom in Christianity.
If you need more recent proof of our nation’s heritage why don’t you look at this Joint Resolution of Congress from 1983:
“Whereas the Bible, the Word of God, has made a unique contribution in shaping the United States as a distinctive and blessed nation of people. Whereas Biblical teachings inspired concepts of civil government that are contained in our Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of The United States. Whereas that renewing our knowledge of, and faith in God through Holy Scriptures can strengthen us as a nation and a people. Now therefore be it resolved… that the President is authorized and requested to designate 1983 as a national “Year of the Bible” in recognition of both the formative influence the Bible has been for our nation, and our national need to study and apply the teachings of the Holy Scriptures.”
***
Is there any doubt that we are a Christian nation? Not a Theocracy mind you, but a nation based on Christianity. The church does not run our country, nor would I ever advocate such a failed system of government. In fact our founding fathers fled from the dictatorship of the Church of England. Ask those who live in Iran what a Theocracy is like. It isn’t pretty. There is no freedom in a Theocracy. We are a Christian Democracy!
***
The second major criticism I have with this Hindu priest offering a prayer in the U.S. Senate is that there is a continued effort to suppress Christian expression in the public arena, and organizations like the ACLU will fight to no end to see the Ten Commandments, or a picture of Jesus removed from a courthouse, but they have no problem with a Hindu prayer being offered in the halls of the U.S. Senate. The hypocrisy is rank. There is a concerted effort to take away the rights of Christians, under the banner of religious tolerance and diversity. The same groups that go after Christians in schools, in the work place, in our government will also go to great lengths to accommodate any other belief system.
It’s time Christians and non-Christians who see this hypocrisy and persecution for what it is stand up and do something about it. If we don’t, how far off will we be from a government run Theocracy (which we are not!) based on the precepts of human secularism or radical Islam, or whatever it is that the “left” deems worthy!
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »
Tuesday, July 17th, 2007
OK, after some response from my review of Transformers I feel the need for this addendum to it.
Andy: “I didn’t care for the over the top sexual innuendos and stuff.”
Anonymous: “Oh you mean the part where they talked about masturbation and called it his ‘fun time,’ that was great!” <laughing>
I went to go see Transformers. Not American Pie! I didn’t pay to go see another teen movie with bad language, crude humor, and the like. Apparently I’m the only one who found it a little disturbing. Check out this review I ran across:
Am I the only one who thinks it’s creepy to make out while a sentient car is watching?
Transformers, directed by Michael Bay. Written by Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman. Produced by Lorenzo di Bonaventura. Executive Producer Steven Spielberg. Starring Shia LeBeouf, Megan Fox, and Josh Duhamel. 2007. Runtime 144 minutes. Rated PG-13.
See the full review click here.
So, I guess I’m not the only one out of touch with modern movies. The part that irks me the most, as previously stated, is the fact that it’s aimed at kids and families. I know it’s not over the top pornography or anything, but it’s the subtle stuff. The slow decay of basic morality that is creeping into any form of entertainment put out by Hollywood is very disheartening.
Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »
Sunday, July 15th, 2007
Excuse me while I let out a depressing sigh. Do you get disappointed with modern remakes of movies and TV shows you grew up with? Recently they’ve been awful. I’m not even talking about the story lines. I’m talking about how crude they are. They’re being bastardized by today’s in your face sexual culture, over the top language, and stupid locker room humor. Let me give you a couple of examples.
I just saw the movie Transformers. I had to see it you know. I grew up in the 80’s watching the cartoon, reading the comics, and playing with the action figures. Suffice it to say, I don’t think I could take my kids to see the modern rendition of Transformers. It was filled with cursing, and talk about masturbation and pornography, and half naked girls. It’s another example of Hollywood ruining something that was originally intended to be family friendly. It makes me sick! (Not to mention the story line sucked, and the Transformers other than Optimus Prime and Bumblebee were mostly unrecognizable, but that’s beside the point!)
Let’s look at another example: The Dukes of Hazard. At the time the TV show existed it was a little edgy sure. You had Daisy Duke with her short shorts but it was nothing compared to the modern day rendition that featured girls making out with other girls (the equivalent of soft-core pornography), Daisy Duke doing a strip tease, and cursing, more locker room humor, and smoking pot. In fact at least one of the original cast members spoke out against the movie.
Ben Jones, who played Cooter Davenport in the original series, criticized the movie for its emphasis on sexual content, suggesting that the original series was more family oriented and not as sexualized. He called for fans of the TV series to boycott the movie “unless they clean it up before the August 5th release date…”
To read his comments in full click here.
I’m getting real sick of the Hollywood elite on the left coast and the mainstream media pushing their values (or lack of values) down the throats of normal Americans like you and I. Our families don’t deserve to be subjected to this especially when it’s packaged in a box intended for children. Don’t even tell me that Transformers isn’t aimed at kids. How does a toy company like Hasbro get away with promoting this stuff? Will consumers please speak up and do something about this? I’m really not trying to overreact, it’s just that this sort of stuff goes over the line. I’ve heard from a lot of parents and families who feel the same way as I do.
It’s really too bad that Transformers had to have this junk in it. The action and special effects were cool and I’m a sci-fi adventure geek. I’m cringing at the fact that one of my all time favorite TV shows (Get Smart) which is due to be made into a movie soon will be just as crude as these others that come out recently. Here’s hoping I’m wrong.
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »
Friday, July 13th, 2007
Michele Bachmann was ripped by the St. Cloud Times yesterday for not supporting college students. Maybe I’m reading into that a bit but that’s how it came across to me. They singled her out for not voting in favor of increasing Pell grant amounts available for students. It sounds like a mean thing to vote against that, but maybe we should take a deeper look at the government and their place in funding a higher education.
Why should government fund higher education?
I went to college. I took out student loans provided by the federal government. I also accepted a Pell grant. I’m not going to hide that I participated in the system in place.
In retrospect I do think I have a problem with the way financial aid is organized though. There is a mentality that the government owes individuals the right to have a college education funded. Is that reasonable? The way federal funding works now, students are evaluated based on what their parents income is. If their parents income is high enough, the federal government will not kick in grant money or certain low interest student loans. This is designed to serve as some sort of social justice to help those who make less money. The problem is kids who have parents who make higher incomes run into problems if their parents don’t decide to contribute any money toward their higher education. These kids get stuck. (You know, I think I’m making an error. I just referred to college students as kids. Most of the time college students are over 18. They are young adults. Which is another reason why I have a problem with the idea that they are “owed something.”)
This system is flawed. Since when is it a guaranteed right that everyone should get a college education funded? It’s not a guaranteed right academically. You have to meet certain academic standards and criteria in order to be accepted into certain institutions. The academic system encourages people to achieve and be rewarded for their achievements.
I’d like to see the same sort of methods used in regard to financial aid. In fact they are in place already to a degree based on academic scholarships. Even if someone comes from a low income home, they can work their way through college. They can also achieve scholarships based on their academic achievements. I think we need to focus on encouraging that sort of aid rather than increasing free money from the government. In a sense how different is the Pell grant system from the welfare system? A free hand out with no responsibility attached to it. No one is guaranteed a free hand out in life and it’s a lesson young adults should learn early on.
So before you start judging Michele Bachmann’s decision to not increase Pell grants for college students as a “heartless thing.” I encourage you to look at the details first and I think you’ll realize the last thing we need is more government hand outs! Instead let’s focus on equal opportunity, and push achievement and personal responsibility!
Posted in Uncategorized | 5 Comments »
Thursday, July 12th, 2007
The war in Iraq continues to be a huge debate in the mainstream media. They, the media, continue to hammer home that the American people are frustrated with the war and want out. I have my doubts about that because I talk to a lot of people and I think it’s a pretty even mix of people who want out now, and others who want to fight the fight. It’s my hope that the American people on both sides of the issue have national security and our troops best interests in mind.
I have my doubts about some of the wackos representing us in Congress, and some of the mainstream media which falls in line with them. There is an awful lot of pandering to the anti-war base. The left wing in Congress either is drinking the Kool-Aid as well or tries to keep them happy so they can remain in power. The anti-war loopy left I’m talking about does not represent the average American. These are the people who spit on our troops when they came back from Vietnam. These are the folks who kick military recruiters out of schools. These people don’t love America, in fact I think some of them hate it. (Why don’t they just leave? I hear Canada and France both have nice open door policies.)
Let’s get back on track here. If, like the mainstream media says, everyone wants out of Iraq what does the Bush administration gain by staying there? Low approval ratings? A poor legacy? A lack of worldwide respect? There isn’t a whole lot of anything to be gained personally by sticking it out in Iraq. So why would you do it? I think it’s because President Bush truly feels that it’s the right thing to do. Sticking to your principles, keeping your word, and doing something you feel is morally right is rarely rewarded in Washington.
The America I know does what it says it’s going to do. The America I love sees the job through. That’s why I have a real problem with the “cut and run” crowd who want to abandon the fight altogether. They live in an unrealistic dream world. The fight will continue against radical Islam whether it’s in Iraq or on our soil. The difference is that by abandoning Iraq altogether we betray those who have stood up for this fledgling democracy in Iraq. (Their numbers may be few, but that’s not the point, it’s the principle.)
U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar was on our program today, and I finally got to ask someone who wants to get our troops out of Iraq the question I’ve been dying to ask, “What is the alternative strategy toward fighting Al Qaeda if we pull out?” She said she wouldn’t advocate a full pull out. I actually wasn’t expecting that answer! She said she’d leave special forces units in Iraq to fight Al Qaeda. So I got to thinking about that strategy and the first thing that came to my mind was the Battle of Mogadishu in Somalia made famous by Blackhawk Down. I’m no expert on the subject, but I believe that was a special forces unit fighting against a rash of Islamic terrorists. It didn’t turn out very pretty. I’m not trying to trash our special forces units, but I think it’s a simple numbers issue. We need a certain amount of forces if we’re going to combat as many terrorists as we’re talking about in Iraq. If we can’t handle the violence with the force we have now, why would you believe that a smaller force could do a better job? That sounds like a slaughter of American forces waiting to happen.
With all of the 24/7 cable news channels, daily print publications, the Internet, and all of the talk from politicians surrounding the war in Iraq you’d think a serious discussion about alternatives would happen. I haven’t heard it. Maybe I’m missing something, but I hear a lot of rhetoric and very few solutions. Before we’re ready to throw up the white flag, and abandon our word, the progress made by our troops, the fight for democracy in Iraq, and this front against radical Islam I’m begging for someone to offer up some strategy to continue the fight in the War on Terror!*
*Contrary to some (who would have us do away with that terminology) it does exist! If you really don’t think it does, I’d kindly ask you to leave our country and endanger the lives of someone else.
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »
