If you would like to add a comment to any of the threads here on AADB, registration with blogspot.com is not required. Simply click on the ‘comments’ link at the bottom of an essay, and either enter a nickname under ‘choose an identity’ or post your comment anonymously. Serious comments are always welcome.

REQUIEM

Below are the two final essays to be posted on Allegiance and Duty Betrayed. The first one is written by a friend -- screen name 'Euro-American Scum' -- who, over the past four years, has been the most faithful essayist here. He has written about everything from his pilgrimage to Normandy in 2004 to take part in the 60th–year commemoration of the invasion, to his memories of his tour in Vietnam. His dedication to America’s founding principles ... and those who have sacrificed to preserve them over the past 200+ years ... is unequaled. Thank you, E-A-S. It has been a privilege to include your writing here, and it is a privilege to call you my friend.

The second essay is my own farewell. And with it I thank all of the many regular visitors, and those who may have only dropped in occasionally, for coming here. I hope you learned something. I hope a seed or two was planted. But, even if not, I thank you for stopping by ... 25 March, 2010

11/08/2006

The Day After ...


More than two centuries ago, Thomas Jefferson observed, ‘Yes, we did produce a near-perfect republic. But will they keep it? Or will they, in the enjoyment of plenty, lose the memory of freedom? Material abundance without character is the path of destruction.’ Jefferson believed that America's survival lay primarily in the character of her people.

Likewise, Samuel Adams warned future generations by referring to ‘good manners’ as the vital ingredient a free society needs to survive. Adams said, ‘Neither the wisest Constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt.’

As many of you know, I spent a lot of time over the past three weeks speaking to people about the need to re-elect Rick Santorum. While I was uplifted by the average person’s willingness to listen and comprehend -- and by the number who seemed to be swayed toward voting republican after listening and questioning -- it is still very disturbing to be personal witness to the number of voters who had intended to vote based on superficial perceptions resulting from snippets of campaign advertising, much of which was sheer distortion or out and out fabrication. For every one voter whose door was approached by a conservative intent on informing him, I am sure there were a thousand who entered the voting booth yesterday never having been ‘set straight’. It is beyond disheartening.

So, while I returned home every night uplifted by the fact that people are very one-on-one receptive, the ‘bigger picture’ is pretty grim.

With each succeeding year, the American populace becomes less informed and more special-interest oriented. Combining the ongoing illegal alien problem (whose solution is nowhere in sight) with the ‘education’ that our children are receiving in our public schools (placing less emphasis on our proud heritage, and civics in general, every year – focusing instead on phony, leftist multicultural philosophies), and the Marxist influence in virtually every institution of higher education, exactly what kind of optimistic view can we embrace of the intelligence/knowledge/allegiance of the new (both alien and youth) voters coming down the pike? Where is there a reason to believe that future disingenuous, un-American, anti-liberty candidates and programs will be held accountable by a citizenry that is even more apathetic, disinterested, special-interest-oriented, or leftist-indoctrinated than today’s voters?

Patriotism requires allegiance, education, strength, endurance, courage, resolve, and action. But it does not require the wearing of rose-colored glasses. Until our leadership addresses the illegal alien problem, until the number of voters who feed at the government socialist welfare/entitlement trough (as forewarned by deTocqueville) can be dramatically reduced, and until we determine to educate our children as to their proud heritage and the dangers posed by relinquishing it, election results will continue to fall in favor of powerful liars who can voice the biggest promises to the host of least informed minds.

I believe we are fighting a losing battle. But, unless and until the battle is lost, we are called to continue to do our part to keep the enemies (both foreign and domestic) at bay. To do any less would hold us just as accountable as those passive, 'sideline Americans' who choose not to be a part of the crusade to reclaim this republic from the scoundrels who call themselves leaders, but who bear no allegiance to our Founders and their vision.

I believe the results of yesterday’s election will have strong and insistent implications for the future of our republic. Barring a miracle of God, or a personal/spiritual epiphany on the part of the generally apathetic and/or ignorant-by-choice citizenry (the former is always possible; the latter grows more unlikely with each passing day), I believe that the following events are very likely to occur over the next few years.

Prepare for a dramatic increase in the invasion of America by an irresponsible, parasitic, malevolent army which chooses to thumb its nose at the critical concepts of the rule of law/national sovereignty by illegally crossing our southern border with the over-riding purpose of reaping the benefits of two-plus centuries of courage, moral sacrifice, work, excellence, and unprecedented prosperity … without any intention of contributing their own. In the process, and under the governance of left-leaning American ‘leadership’, they will play an integral role in the realization of the socialization of America. Even worse, we will witness the complete erasure of our borders, and the establishment of a North American Union, in knee-jerk deference to the eventual vision of one-world governance, under which our Constitution will become increasingly ridiculed, mocked, and eventually declared entirely irrelevant, and the vagaries of Marxist/socialist-authored and implemented international law will take precedence.

Personal and corporate industry will find themselves under relentless attack, with government, academia and media working feverishly to revoke the citizens’ right to keep the fruits of their labor, and replace it with a monstrous entitlement state which will ensure a massive, far-reaching, involuntary redistribution of wealth – aimed at punishing personal and business excellence and ambition and promoting personal and business mediocrity, with the end result being a dramatic increase in the power of the state and complete dependence on state largesse for our existence.

There will be continued erosion in respect for, and protection of, the institution of marriage and the nuclear family. Government will become even more of an advocate for homosexual rights, abortion rights, and laws which will continue to attack and destroy any notion of the importance personal responsibility for one’s own actions. Families will find themselves under relentless attack, with the government usurping increasing power over the lives and minds of the children of America, and with parents finding themselves serving simply as biological creators and temporary physical custodians of wards of the state.

Government intrusion into the education of our children will escalate. Despite the unconstitutionality of the federal government dictating education policy, it will continue its aims at leftist indoctrination of the generations to come through the political power implicit in loans, grants, regulations, activist court decisions, and curriculum manipulation. Government-controlled curricula will continue to downplay, if not eradicate, the importance of our constitutional heritage while indoctrinating our children in environmental mythology, globalist doctrine, and sexual liberation. As a result, future generations will not understand their proud roots, nor be willing to defend the noble society which emerged from them.

The federal government will continue to pass laws focused on driving up the cost of medical care, so as to eventually allow the government takeover of that all-important industry. The direct takeover of medical care in programs like Medicare and Medicaid, as well as the free hand that trial lawyers have obtained in dictating the terms of care (while coincidentally lining their own pockets, and those of the politicians to whom they choose to contribute) have played a major role in the destruction of what was once the most excellent health care system in the history of the human race. The government’s interference in the healthcare free market through ERISA mandates related to HMOs and other managed-care organizations, and the medical aspects of our tax code, will continue to undermine healthcare in America, while lining the pockets of the privileged few, driving good doctors out of business, and eventually placing the government in complete control of our health and well-being. When medical care is forced to circumvent government rules and bureaucratic management, it will not be long before the quality of each and every American’s life will be profoundly and inalterably affected.

The left will eventually impose its own brand of ‘faith’ on the American culture – a secular humanist ‘faith’ in which man and his needs and follies are the focus of ‘worship’, and the mention in the public square of the name of the one and true God becomes legally and politically verboten … there will arise an incrementally, governmentally-imposed ‘faith’ in which moral absolutes are deemed criminally intolerant and situational ethics are raised to the level of holy sanctimony.

The war on Islamic fascism will be transformed into a series of compromises with evil, including the retreat of American forces from the Middle East, which will result in brutality against liberty-oriented Middle Easterners that will rival the bloodshed that occurred in the killing fields of Cambodia. Our enemies, in the Middle East and the Far East especially, will become dramatically emboldened, and our genuine allies, Israel and Taiwan especially, will find themselves looking down the barrels of vicious, barbaric, unyielding guns … and, when they turn around to see who is watching their backs, they will see nothing but darkness.

There will be another terrorist attack (if not a simultaneous series of attacks) on America, made possible by a deadly combination of open borders and failed paper-tiger policies, which will make the holocaust of 9/11 seem like a walk in the park. The increased demands for vigilance, defense of sovereignty, and sense of nationalism that occurred five years ago have all but evaporated into the political ether, and the after-effects of what was surely our final wake-up call have fallen by the wayside. There will be no more wake-up calls. There will be death blows, after which America will be brought to her knees, pleading for mercy with barbaric madmen, and no longer capable of even whispering the word ‘freedom’, let alone defending that noble, precious, God-given gift.

The democrats controlled congress for forty years, from 1954 through 1994. Ronald Reagan was entirely responsible for paving the way for the Republican Revolution. The miraculous and providential accomplishments of the Reagan Revolution are now nothing but a fond memory. And, to those who believe that the pendulum will eventually swing back, and that conservatism will regain the prominence and power necessary to reclaim our beloved republic from the scoundrels, I say there is no time to wait to reclaim her again. We have run out of options and wiggle room. The hot breath of a mad and unprecedentedly barbaric and determined adversary, bent on our annihilation, is breathing down our necks now. They will not be denied ... nor does our current leadership – especially after yesterday’s election results – appear to have what it takes to hold them at bay.

The majority of Americans cannot continue to accept, at face value, leadership which says what we want to hear, and then proceeds to do as they wish (which, in the case of the current, and now future, leftist leadership on the Hill, requires the eventual subjugation of American citizens to the state, and the eventual subjugation of the American state to globalist governance). Simply put, the future of our republic will lie in the willingness of her people to take the time, and expend the effort, to look beneath the surface. Believing the words from the mouth of a leader is a conscious choice that must be made by every concerned citizen. As with any choice, it cannot be made without critical thought. Believing their words was okay when our leaders in Washington were virtuous. It is a deadly practice when they are anything less.

Over the last twenty-four hours, I have heard countless references to the need for bipartisanship and building bridges. Bridges are only as desirable and powerful as the relevance of what lies at the other end. I, for one, want no part of bridge-building, when doing so means creating a meandering, but single-minded, path to self-destruction.

Adieu, for now.

71 comments:

lori_gmeiner said...

I prayer that you're wrong about a lot of this, but I fear that you're not.

daveburkett said...

Ditto lori. Thank you Joanie---powerful and eloquent, but I won't sleep well tonight.

Anonymous said...

Commiserations Joanie.

A disappointing result for Pennsylvania especially. But such is life.

I didn't know Congress was Democrat controlled all the way from 1954 to 1994. In other words President Reagan had to deal with that as a full time situation ?

There is always hope. Keep fighting for what you believe is right.

John Cooper said...

Joanie, you mentioned the Reagan years. I didn't like the man at the time, having been young, foolish, and Californian. But in thinking back, I now remember that the years he served as our president were the best years of my life, economicly speaking. America was *building things*, and returning to space. Jobs were plentiful and high-paying in my disciplines of engineering and construction.

But it took a Carter (mal-)administration to wake people up to how bad things could get with Democrats in charge and get Reagan elected. Twenty-one percent annual inflation, massive unemployment, buying gasoline on odd or even days, wearing sweaters in our homes, humiliation in foreign affairs, etc.

The modern Democrats have run on a single plank: "We Hate Bush". Well, now it appears they will be "in charge", and actually have to come up with a plan. That should be fun to watch, since that party is totally devoid of ideas.

As life goes on for the rest of us, the Pelosi/Reid circus will only focus the conservative base on the real issues (and be fun to watch, besides).

The voters adopted many conservative issues this time around, and only voted Democrat because in many cases (not Santorum), the Republicans didn't act like conservatives.

My main concern is that the new "leadership" don't sell out our troops in Iraq.

Anonymous said...

This is a masterpiece. Kudos to you.

sandra said...

Would Ronald Reagan have ever done

what Santorum did when he caved in to President Bush's directions to betray Toomey and help put cockroach Spector in?

I don't think so.

sandra said...

This is a victory for HAMAS, HIZBOLLAH, the US State Department, IRAN, NORTH KOREA, SOROS, the ACLU, MOVEon.org, Noam Chomsky, CAIR, US Academia, The NEW YORK TIMES, Michael Schiavo, NAMBLA, Hollywood, Cindy Sheehan, and Opera Winfrey.

joanie said...

'Sandra', You asked me that same question, with different wording, in one of your first posts here. I answered you then, and, since then, I have posted probably thousands of words on the positive policy decisions in which Santorum has been intimately involved. Positions that have been tirelessly focused on preserving our national sovereignty and security, protecting the rights of the unborn, addressing the need to close our southern border, confronting the real and deadly nature of the Islamic threat, and countless other threats to our republic that most other ‘leaders’ in Washington either refuse to address, or are covertly supporting.

You also now state that yesterday was a victory for a long list of leftist people and organizations. Why was it a victory for them? Because the democrats took control of congress? From whom did they take control? Were the republicans who lost their seats, or did not win election, without fault? Do you suppose even one of those people whose losses you indirectly lament has not made a major error in judgment, or not bowed to political pressure, in his past? And if they have, do they also have an endless list of positive accomplishments that render that error forgivable? I assure you that Rick Santorum deserved to sit at or near the top of that list of yesterday’s hopefuls, in terms of character and service to his country. You might be well advised to think about what you are doing while allowing yourself to be saddened that some purported conservatives did not win election, while simultaneously throwing stones at the best of them.

Santorum’s loss has resulted in the seating of a man who was far and away the prime focus of George Soros’ senate race contributions. That dubious distinction represents only one of Casey’s long list of behind-the-scenes leftist, power-hungry, one-world, North American Union puppeteers. If you believe that the seating of such a man represents ‘just desserts’ for Rick Santorum’s 2004 endorsement of Arlen Specter then your conservatism hints at being dangerously self-defeating and one-dimensional.

joanie said...

Thank you, Luis, for the ‘commiseration’. :)

At the rate this country is deteriorating, I am starting to re-think my desire to accept that offer to live for a thousand years. Watching the decline is just too painful. :)

joanie said...

Your awakening to Reagan’s greatness may have come belatedly, but welcome to the RR fan club. :)

(BTW, he used to enjoy early-morning wood chopping, too, when he was out at the ranch, so it would appear that you are kindred spirits.)

joanie said...

Thanks for the kind comments, Dave, Lori, and 'anonymous'.

alexib said...

Thank you SO MUCH for such a well written, beautifully stated post.

stonemason said...

Joanie always delivers.

The problem is that the various clocks keep ticking.

Take the open borders. The bodies aren't cold yet and GWB is already speaking of his 'comprehensive immiration reform'.

That's a local demoraphic time bomb.

The really big one is the growing birthrate of the Islamic population globally. Europe is already dead, they just don't know it. Mark Steyn presents his case very well in "America Alone". I highly recommend it.

The resumption of the fifth column work of the Clintonistas who were never purged from the body politic Those that started in the Clinton years are well entrenched in senior policy making positions. I could go on and on, but I'm preaching to the choir.

Fact is I think we just might have run out of time.

Anonymous said...

BRILLIANT!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

It was a sunny day in Philadelphia in 1787, and the Constitutional convention had just finished its work. A woman, watching the esteemed gentlemen congratulate themselves, approached one of the young nation's leading statesmen, Ben Franklin. "Mr. Franklin, what kind of government have you given us?" she asked. "A Republic, madam," Franklin quickly answered. "If you can keep it."

Well, it looks like we cannot.

sandra said...

'joanie',

Santorum lost some of his most devoted base when he betrayed them in the last election.

That is obvious from the result of this election.

He lost people who were not just voters---but people who spent their time, their money, and their very sweat to get him elected.

You never answered my question----

so I will repeat it:

Could Ronald Reagan have done what Santorum did in going against every principle he supposedly stood for and betraying Toomey and backing Spector?

The answer is NO in my opinion.

And you will not address that.

THAT is what killed Santorum this time.

Some, like you, reasoned as you did and put out energy and time to back Santorum despite what he did then.

But he lost too many others of his absolutely needed base who looked at what he did and said to heck with him.

Pennsylvania is obviously a cesspool when it comes to voters.

With Casey, Murtha, Spector, etc elected there it offers the nation the absolute worst that the "electorate" can put in office.

sandra said...

Santorum’s loss has resulted in the seating of a man who was far and away the prime focus of George Soros’ senate race contributions. That dubious distinction represents only one of Casey’s long list of behind-the-scenes leftist, power-hungry, one-world, North American Union puppeteers.

Now tell me about Spector, joanie.

Santorum helped seat him.

If you believe that the seating of such a man represents ‘just desserts’ for Rick Santorum’s 2004 endorsement of Arlen Specter then your conservatism hints at being dangerously self-defeating and one-dimensional.

Read what I wrote again. I never said anything about ‘just desserts.’

I stated a FACT----that Santorum disillusioned and lost vital members of his most needed voting base with his actions in that previous election.

KathyMlynczak said...

I haven't read a better description of what lies ahead by any PROFESSIONAL political pundit. I've copied this and mailed it to almost everyone I know.

Thank you!

K

P.S. Just a piece of friendly advice: stop debating with Sandra. She's a nit-picker.

joanie said...

Demographics, and pre- and exit-poll results have always showed that Rick Santorum’s ‘base’ has been a tenuous one for all twenty-five years of his political career. The deciding members of his ‘base’ were always temporary by nature, at best, because they were comprised of mutinous democrats.

In 1990, Santorum was elected to the house from the heavily-democrat 18th district, after running an energetic grassroots campaign against a seven-term incumbent. The RNC didn’t even really know his name or offer much support for his candidacy. In order to win that seat, and his two successive senate terms, he had to obtain support from huge numbers of democrats, both in his 18th district, and across the state later on. He was able to do so because (1) his democrat opponents were weak and ineffective campaigners, and (2) a very significant number of Pennsylvania democrats are pro-life.

… which is why the democrat party nominated Bob Casey, Jr. this time ‘round. The DNC’s (and moveon.org’s, and just about every other left-leaning organization involved in the campaign) primary senate objective was to unseat Santorum. Nominating a pro-life (at least in public) candidate, who is the son of an extraordinarily popular governor (from 1987-1995) proved to be a leftist’s dream come true. Pennsylvania Democrats simply adored Robert Casey, Sr. Thus, an empty suit, with the sense of public service of a weasel, became the darling of the democrat machine.

Casey’s election to the senate on Monday represented nothing more than a return to the fold by those democrats who had abandoned ship during Santorum’s terms in both the house and senate (and, coincidentally, yet another example of voter fraud success). They saw Casey as an opportunity to return their vote to its party of origin – and what better way to do so than to vote for a democrat who is (purports to be, for public consumption) pro-life, and the son of the sainted Casey, Sr. (Man, junior has surely done a suburb job of concealing his ability to walk on water.)

I spoke to probably between two and three hundred registered republicans in my efforts to bring out the vote over the past few weeks, and, while a significant number of them expressed disappointment (and even disdain) regarding Santorum’s ill-fated decision of two years ago, not one of them was withholding his vote for that reason. Many republicans were considering staying home, because of a general feeling of malaise and hopelessness, but none because of an unwillingness to forgive.

On the other hand, the democrats with whom I spoke were very open-minded about the differences between the two candidates, and I believe some of them may have voted right after listening to reason.

In answer to your question regarding whether Reagan would have endorsed Arlen Specter … there is no doubt in my mind that he would have thrown all of his weight and influence behind Pat Toomey.

However, if I were to require every candidate who claims to be conservative to meet or exceed the example set by the greatest president with which our republic has ever been blessed, I would never walk through the doors of my polling place again.

… an idea that has begun to cross my mind of late, for very different reasons.

End of debate (for my part anyway).

joanie said...

Stonemason, you make some excellent points, most of which we don't take time to consider.

Your comment on the birthrate in Islamic countries brings to mind another threatening birthrate issue.

A friend of mine recently wrote on another forum:

Had a conversation at work yesterday along the same lines. Given the rate that liberals are reproducing vs the rate that conservatives reproduce, there is no way the country will stay 50/50 red/blue. (by the time conservatives have their first child, liberals have produced a generation and a half to two generations - if only half of those people vote conservatives will be outnumbered very quickly)

2006 will be seen in retrospect as the beginning of the end of conservatism as a viable political voting block - there simply won't be enough of us to win an election. Add to that the fact that the Federal Gov wouldn't let us take a state or two and leave the sinking ship of liberal socialism and we're screwed.


... to which I replied:

Add to that the fact that illegal aliens, and their offspring, will eventually represent one of the largest American voting blocks (and, make no mistake about it, the leftists among us see this as one of the major goals of their open-door policy), and your argument is even more powerful.

In this extremely disturbing video ( http://tinyurl.com/pqzpe ), Jose Angel Gutierrez, a professor at the University of Texas at Arlington, speaking to an enormous throng of illegal immigrants (tens of thousands) last year somewhere in the southwest, advises, ‘We are millions! We just have to survive! We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. It’s a matter of time. The explosion is in our population!’

His views are seconded by Art Torres, Chairman of the California Democrat Party, who observes, ‘When I hear the question, ‘Why do you fight so hard for Affirmative Action?’ I tell my white colleagues, ‘You’re gonna need it!’ (Translation: it won’t be long before his ‘white colleagues’ are a minority in America).

Anonymous said...

You should try to get this published where it will be read by more people. It needs to be read far and wide.

Baynative said...

Acknowledging the HUGE population of government workers, teachers and social dependents who will readily endanger the republic for some pieces of silver, the added impact of looming amnesty is daunting.

This sad disadvantage is compounded by the fact that almost every day there is a new democrat lie put out by the media and of the 275 or so republicans representing us in congress there is never even one who steps right up to the podium to offer the truth in rebuttal. (i.e.; for the most part we are forced to put our faith in cowards and charlatans.)

Consequently, we are stuck with the conservative blogs and sites such as this that give us shelter by preaching to the choir, but do little to change the course of events.

John Cooper said...

Joanie--

I passed by the Reagan Ranch on that beautiful ridge overlooking the Pacific once - in a Cessna-182 from 2000 feet above (grin). I got a pretty good view of the place. It was a humble, single story working ranch with a shake roof IIRC. There was only the main house and a couple of out-buildings. It was thanks to Ronald Reagan that I was earning enough money to learn how to fly. But I digress...

I have a song here by Nicollette Larson that explains why things are going to have to get worse before they get better. But they will get better.

She sings of a father who drinks, neglects his family, and stays out late at night gambling. The mother and children all pray for him and beg him to go to church with them, but he curses loudly and refuses...

Then one day the mother passes away, and the children find the father on his knees praying, "Lord, make it right" and promising to turn his life around.

The song is called, "The Angels Rejoiced".

The moral of this so-called story is that if America is to be saved, it may have to hit rock bottom first. With the Democrats we now have "in charge", we're well on the way.

All the things on your list will no doubt come to pass; We conservatives are now powerless to prevent it. But out of the ashes (we may well see one or more major American cities turn *into* ashes before this is over) will come the determination to rebuild the New America based upon the principles that our founders knew but the modern American voter has forgotten.

I know right now you are focused on the "worse", but - call me Pollyanna - I am trying to think ahead to the "better".

sandra said...

"In answer to your question regarding whether Reagan would have endorsed Arlen Specter … there is no doubt in my mind that he would have thrown all of his weight and influence behind Pat Toomey."

Exactly.

KathyMlynczak said...

You are a world class nit picker. Joannie has written over and over again here about Santorum's qualifications and patriotism and you pick a point about his past (that she has already discussed many times) and just won't let it alone. Talk about not seeing the forest for the trees!

KathyMlynczak said...

PS. Did you bother to read what she wrote after the sentence you pulled out? What do you have to say about THAT?

John Cooper said...

I remember the post-Vietnam Nixon-Ford-Carter years when American had become a "pitiful, helpless, [to which I would add: 'impotent'] giant."

Then along came Ronald Reagan and there was once again Morning in America. As recently re-elected Congressman Gary Miller of California wrote:

"President Reagan had the ability to create optimism in people. He made them optimistic about the future. I think he completely changed the direction of this nation at the time that we really needed it." Here's what others have said about Mr. Reagan:

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich: "All free people stand on Reagan's shoulders. His principled policies proved that free markets create wealth, that the rule of law sustains freedom, and that all people everywhere deserve the right to dream, to pursue their dreams, and to govern themselves."

For everyone reading this thread, your mission is to go out and find another Ronald Reagan to run for president in 2008. (Hint: John McCain is not that man.)

Time is short, folks. Who's it gonna' be? The country-club republicans in Virginia are not going to find him. It's up to us. Let's stop whining and get busy, OK?

freedomson said...

Brilliant, Joanie, brilliant.

2K2B4G said...

This is a more intelligent analysis of the election than I have read anywhere else.

The population has been sufficiently dumbed down by too much JonBenetNatlieHollowayNancyGrace to where most folks haven't a clue as to what's really going on.

Anonymous said...

Bush needs a new speechwriter and you need to apply.

Danthemangottschall said...

Sandra, you're a numbskull. It's nice to know that you spread your "nik picking" (thanks, Kathy) around and don't just do it with me.

Joanie, your idea that the average voter is uninformed showed itself on the Glenn Beck show this morning. A caller called in to answer trivia questions and these were the 4 questions he asked her:

1. What is a TVO?

Her answer: A machine that records TV shows.

2. Who is Britney Spears divorcing?

She got the answer right. I don't even know who the hell it is and can't remember his name.

3. What will Harry Reid soon be the head of?

Her answer: Uh ... the Steelers?

4. What do you call the imaginary line that separates the northern and southern hemispheres?

She didn't know.

Bet I know which way she voted on Tuesday, if she voted at all.

LouBarakos said...

I know you like Krauthammer. Here's part of his take:

The public's views on what we ought to do with the war remain mixed, as do its general ideological inclinations. What happened on Tuesday? The electorate threw the bums out in disgust with corruption and in deep dissatisfaction with Iraq policy. Reading much more into this election is a symptom of either Republican depression or Democratic wishful thinking.

olc said...

Beautifully said. Terrible read.
God bless.

Anonymous said...

Generally speaking, the Right cannot win by virtue of its goodness, its truth, or its values, because it cannot enthrall the masses……Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn

Anonymous said...

'Politics is like the Sphinx: It devours all those who cannot solve its riddles.'

Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn

stonemason said...

Joanie- that video is horrifying! Why in hell is that professor teaching at an AMERICAN college? We have to be the dumbest country on earth.

Thanks for the info. I intend to share it within my small circle of influence.

AMurphy said...

Awesome site! I'll be a regular here.

trustbutverify said...

Simply put, the future of our republic will lie in the willingness of her people to take the time, and expend the effort, to look beneath the surface. Believing the words from the mouth of a leader is a conscious choice that must be made by every concerned citizen. As with any choice, it cannot be made without critical thought. Believing their words was okay when our leaders in Washington were virtuous. It is a deadly practice when they are anything less.

You said a mouthful, all of it true.

ohiowfan said...

Respectfully..........and I mean that......
Tuesday's election is not as significant as the implications in your post, joanie.

God is still at work, and so is the Enemy, who is not going to roll over and give up on his desire to strangle this country. But God hasn't given up on us either.

There are signs of spiritual revival in America, and there were encouraging things that happened on Tuesday as well, so that your despair and defeatism, I believe, are not from the Lord.

He has not given us a spirit of fear, but one of confidence in His power and strength.

Tuesday's election was a big wake-up call if anyone was getting complacent, but it is not a sign that the battle is over.

Rather than causing us to throw up our hands in defeat, it should motivate us to renewed prayer and purpose and political involvement, and that is what I am doing.

God is faithful, and as long as the remnant in America is faithful to Him, He will not abandon us.

On the other hand, what Satan wants us to do is to be discouraged. Don't let him win, joanie.

a california girl said...

It really got to me when I saw Santorum's concession speech, and his son was so emotional on camera. His wife and other children were trying their best to put on a happy face and not cry.

PA voters booting a good, decent and principled man like Rick Santorum out of the Senate for and empty suit like Bob Casey. It's sick.

Anonymous said...

Let's hope Santorum's future is like Lincoln's:
1832 Ran for state legislature and lost.
1838 Sought to become speaker of the state legislature but was defeated.
1840 Sought to become elector but was defeated.
1843 Ran for Congress and lost.
1846 Ran for Congress again and this time he won
1848 Ran for re-election to Congress and lost.
1849 Sought the job of land officer in his home state but was rejected
1854 Ran for Senate of the United States and lost.
1856 Sought the vice presidential nomination at his party's national convention and got less than 100 votes.
1858 Ran for U.S. Senate again and lost.
1860 Elected president of the United States.

Anonymous said...

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. When you give up that force, you are ruined."

Patrick Henry

d_o'connor said...

Here's an interesting quiz:

http://www.quiz2d.com

(I am a libertarian, to no one's surprise.) :-)

robmaroni said...

From your link here to "American Minute":

This day, November 12, 1620, was the Pilgrims’ first full day in America. It took over two months for the one hundred and three of them, cramped between decks on the tiny Mayflower, to cross the freezing North Atlantic. They had intended to sail to Jamestown, but were blown off course by violent storms and landed at Plymouth Rock instead. Governor William Bradford wrote: “Being thus arrived... they fell upon their knees and blessed the God of Heaven who had brought them over the vast and furious ocean, and delivered them from all the perils... again to set their feet on the firm and stable earth.”


Permission to use with acknowledgment: American Minute with Bill Federer. (Amerisearch, Inc., P.O. Box 20163, St. Louis, MO 63123, 1-888-USA-WORD, www.amerisearch.net)

Bradford, William. November 12, 1620, in recounting the Pilgrims’ first full day in Cape Cod, Massachusetts, in his work entitled, The History of Plymouth Plantation 16081650 (Boston, Massachusetts: Massachusetts Historical Society, 1856; Boston, Massachusetts: Wright and Potter Printing Company, 1898, 1901, from the Original Manuscript, Library of Congress Rare Book Collection, Washington, D.C.; rendered in Modern English, Harold Paget, 1909; NY: Russell and Russell, 1968; NY: Random House, Inc., Modern Library College edition, 1981; San Antonio, TX: American Heritage Classics, Mantle Ministries, 228 Still Ridge, Bulverde, Texas, 1988), ch. 9, p. 64. John Bartlett, Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1855, 1980), p. 265.

The D. James Kennedy Center for Christian Statesmanship
214 Massachusetts Avenue NE, Washington, D.C.
Copyright 2002

Anonymous said...

If only the rest of the party had been as up front as Santorum. We're going to need him and others like him in '08 if we're going to survive.

Anonymous said...

"We're going to need him and others like him in '08 if we're going to survive."

Things are going to be a lot different in 2008, because odds are pretty good that we'll be hit with another terrorist attack before then. So nobody can predict what the voters will do. Terrorist attacks change everybody's ideas and everybody's rules.

Anonymous said...

You probably aren't aware, but the economy got better the night of November 8th. The MSM are happy campers; the tone of the news will lighten, and the world is a far, far better place.

Just don't say "praise the Lord!"

John Cooper said...

Danthemangottschall:

Until my wife made me stop doing it, whenever we would go out to eat, I would tell the waiter(ess), "I'll give you a really good tip if you can tell me what the speed of light is."

None of them ever could, but hey, many congresspeople couldn't either, no doubt.

danthemangottschall said...

John Cooper,

Did you ever see Jay Leno's "man on the street" interviews? If you want to try to hang on to at least a partial idea that Americans are intelligent and informed, don't! The stupidity out there is staggering.

I remember watching "Celebrity Jeopardy" a few years ago when Maria Bartoromo was a celebrity contestant. In case you don't know, she is a real babe who is a powerful financial commentator on one of the major cable networks ---I don'd know which one these days.

Her "Daily Double" answer was "Tienamin Square, where a major massacre of students occured in 1989."

She just had to name the country, and she couldn't. I've never looked at her the same since.

I think most celebrities are no more intelligent or informed than the waitresses you questioned, and probably less.

proudchauvinist said...

I voted, even though in my state I had no national election to vote in.

I think history will show that the conservatives showed up, it was the moderates who jumped to the dems, and a lot of dems went back to their home turf, like in the Santorum race.

proudchauvinist said...

Anonymous-

I didn't know Lincoln was such a big loser until he became Prez!

sandra said...

Rancher who detained immigrants on trial
Flagstaff Arizona Sun ^ | November 14, 2006 | A.P.

http://www.azdailysun.com/articles/2006/11/14/news/20061114_local_news_4.prt

TUCSON (AP) -- Immigrant rights advocates who have campaigned against abuses of migrants hope a civil trial starting Tuesday in Bisbee will hit the pocketbook of a man who is accused of threatening Mexican-Americans on his ranch.

A lawsuit against rancher Roger Barnett alleges that he threatened a hunting party of Mexican-Americans from Douglas with an assault rifle after Barnett accused them of trespassing on his Douglas ranch on Oct. 30, 2004.

Barnett, who has said he has detained more 10,000 illegal immigrants in the last 10 year, has denied threatening the hunting party. He said he only took out his gun because the adults in the hunting party were carrying rifles.

Barnett has been targeted for lawsuits because of his activities in apprehending illegal immigrants.

Most have been caught on ranch land that he owns or leases and patrols with his wife and brother, then turned over to the Border Patrol for removal to Mexico.

Groups including the Border Action Network, the Mexican-American Legal Defense Fund and the Southern Poverty Law Center have encouraged immigrants and Mexican-American citizens alike to come forth to document alleged abuses by Barnett and others that could lead to lawsuits.

Two other lawsuits against Barnett, also with the assistance of the Border Action Network, have been dismissed, while one filed by MALDEF is pending.

That lawsuit names Barnett, his wife and brother, and Cochise County Sheriff Larry Dever, alleging conspiracy to violate migrants' civil rights.

In the latter case, Barnett was accused of kicking a woman lying on the ground and of threatening to have his dog attack anyone in a group of immigrants that he stopped who tried to leave.

In 2003, the Border Action Network said that it was looking for migrants victimized by armed individuals or civilian groups who were patrolling the border, and began investigating for records and interviewing people.

The lawsuit going to trial on Tuesday claims that Barnett's actions during the 2004 confrontation constituted assault, false imprisonment, negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

A claim of battery was dismissed in April, and earlier this month a judge dropped charges against Barnett's wife and brother. The lawsuit seeks more than $200,000 and punitive damages.

Superior Court Judge James Conlogue in Cochise County denied additional defense motions for dismissal and noted that hunters have rights to cross a property as long as no signs are posted prohibiting hunting.

But John Kelliher, Barnett's lawyer, said Conlogue ruled in Barnett's favor on several pretrial motions to limit the scope of testimony and evidence.

Among material precluded will be hundreds of pages of Border Patrol and Cochise County sheriff's reports dealing with Barnett's apprehensions of illegal immigrants on his property, Kelliher said.

Barnett is being sued by Ronald Morales of Douglas, claiming that Barnett pointed an AR-15 assault rifle at him, his father, two young daughters and one of the girls' friends while on an outing to hunt deer.

Barnett has denied threatening Morales and the others, and said he drew his weapon only because Morales and his father were holding rifles.

The lawsuit contends that the Morales party was legally crossing land near Douglas -- which Barnett leases from the state -- when he allegedly threatened them and used abusive, racist language.

At the time the lawsuit was filed, Morales said, "I didn't serve six years in the United States Navy so that my family's civil rights could be violated."

In 2003, the Border Action Network said that it was looking for migrants victimized by armed individuals or civilian groups who were patrolling the border, and began investigating for records and interviewing people.

"In some ways, all these suits come from that campaign, that initiative to put the word out that these people are committing crimes, that these abuses need to be reported and documented," said Jennifer Allen, director of the Border Action Network.

Allen said there have been other incidents involving local ranchers firing weapons in the air to scare migrants, but no other cases have been developed to the point of trying to present charges against anyone.

Anonymous said...

This was ONE election. Your gloom and doom is unwarranted.

jim said...

"Anonymous"----

You got to be kidding. Do you pay attention to the news? Have you heard what the dems are planning? Do you know what will happen if we cut and run in Iraq? Do you know what illegal aliens are doing to this country?

DonaldBarlow said...

I'm sorry for the off topic remark but I have been checking in here for 2 or 3 months and I remember you talking about giving musci lessons.

My wife and I just moved to Oklahoma a very rural area and our daughter wants to take lessons. The only teacher near us uses the "Suzuki" method and I wondered since it sounds like you've been teaching a long time what you're opinion of it is. We could take her to another teacher but the other teacher is about 35 miles away.

I would appreciate some advice when you have time if you know anything about "Suzuki."

Thanks, and great blog!

robmaroni said...

I didn't know Linclon "was such a big loser until he became Prez" either.

Hell, maybe Al Gore will make a comeback after all. :>)

Anonymous said...

What's Wrong with Cutting and Running? That's the question asked by retired Army general William Odom about the continued US military presence in Iraq.

Odom served as director of the National Security Agency under President Reagan. Prior to that, he served as Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence, the Army's senior intelligence officer. He is now a Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute in Washington.

He recently said, "The invasion of Iraq I believe will turn out to be the greatest strategic disaster in U.S. history."

In his article Odom writes, "The wisest course for journalists might be to begin sustained investigations of why leading Democrats have failed so miserably to challenge the U.S. occupation of Iraq. The first step, of course, is to establish as conventional wisdom the fact that the war was never in the U.S. interests and has not become so."

• Lt. Gen. William Odom, served as director of the National Security Agency under President Reagan from 1985 to 1988. From 1981 to 1985, he served as Assistant Chief of Staff for Intelligence, the Army's senior intelligence officer. He is now a Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute in Washington.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/04/144240

Chew on that!

sandra said...

anonymous---

Go chew on your tired, left wing democracynow talking points somewhere else.

.

sandra said...

.
To anonymous from democracynow

I see your "democracy now" website features the following leftwing, Hate-America winners :

Communist dupe Lori Berenson — arrested and imprisoned in Peru in 1995 for collaborating with the Túpac Amaru Revolutionary Movement, a Peruvian communist "guerrilla" organization.

Hugo Chávez, mentally ill communist President of Venezuela —

Noam Chomsky —Hate-America writer (and renowned "linguist" who speaks only English).

Norman G. Finkelstein Jew-Hate agitator

Robert Fisk "journalist" (?) for the UK Independent who is obviously on the take from the muslims

Scott Ritter —US traitor (and pedophile on the side).

US communist Howard Zinn

Quite a crew you feature at your "democracynow".

LOL

.

GiveMeLiberty said...

Bravo, cw-patriot! This is an excellent, well researched, well organized conservative site. Good luck to you.

brice said...

Good work. Keep on keepin' on.

Anonymous said...

Try reading this book, Sandy:

https://store.democracynow.org/?pid=52

And then come back and tell me how wrong the contributors to democracynow are!

The REAL bias and treason is on sites like this one where right wing wackos sift information to find the parts that suit them.

Anonymous said...

Kudos on a great blog. I've only read a dozen or so of the artticles, but I agree with every one! Keep up the good work!

John Cooper said...

danthemangottschall said...

Did you ever see Jay Leno's "man on the street" interviews?

No, but keep in mind that he was only interviewing city folks (who were most likely Democrats).

Us country folks have the sh*t on the outside of our boots, not under our hats.

sandra said...

.

"anonymous"


Ask your handlers at your sicko "democracy now"" to find you another site to post your pathetic democracynow leftwing, Hate-America crap.

.

Anonymous said...

Sandy, I wasn't aware that the manager of this site named you moderator. LOL!

I'll listen to your rants about democracynow after you read the book I recommended. Until then you're criticizing something you don't know anything about. Then again, you're a right winger so that's par for the course. LOL!

sandra said...

"anonymous"

You are an "anonymous" leftwinger posting from sicko Hate-America democracynow.

On how many sites do you post your "anonymous" democracynow lefty crap in the course of a day?

joanie said...

'anonymous' said ...

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/04/144240

Chew on that!

_____________________________

Anon, I assume that your conception of ‘chewing’ was obtained vicariously?

From what I understand, those of your political bent don’t even require teeth in order to swallow the leftist pablum that is the staple of your diet.

joanie said...

donaldbarlow,

No need to apologize for your question! I'm honored that you would ask for such advice.

If you'll send me your e-mail address (to the e-mail addy provided here for submission of essays), I'll send you a host of links on the subject (my own, and many other critiques of the Suzuki method).

Best to your daughter in her study!

~ joanie

joanie said...

John, your boots/hats quote is priceless! :)

Anonymous said...

On how many sites do you post your "anonymous" democracynow lefty crap in the course of a day?

Why? Are you planning to follow me around, yipping at my heels? LOL!

I'm outta here. There's nothing worth reading here anyway.