Crowds and unbelievable beauty: Yosemite lives up to its reputation

I must admit, I was not looking forward to going to Yosemite National Park during our just-finished vacation. While it has a reputation for being beautiful, Yosemite is also known for huge crowds, waiting in line, and vehicle-choked roads leading in to the place. In all categories, Yosemite lived up to its reputation.

I detest crowds, so hiking in the Yosemite area will never be my first choice; I know of so many wilderness areas where you will see nary a soul during your entire hike. However, there is a reason there are such crowds in Yosemite: It is breathtakingly gorgeous!

While our home base during our vacation was a house near Bass Lake directly to the south, our whole group of ten family members ventured into Yosemite last Tuesday. Here are some of the photographic highlights I took during that day, and remember, you can click on any of the images for better detail:




At the end of the day, I wasn't satisfied with the views we saw, so I resolved to return the next day, and take the road to Glacier Point, which overlooks much of Yosemite Valley from about 3,500 feet up. Everyone else wanted to go to the beach at Bass Lake, so I went solo. Here is what awaited me when I got to the top:








Rather than a wilderness destination, I felt more like I was at some sort of living, interactive art gallery. I can tolerate crowds for something like that!

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

On to my next vacation

Not that I have blogged much this summer, but my paucity of postings may get more meager yet.

The family and I have already spent a week enjoying the zoo and beaches in San Diego this summer. Now, we leave tomorrow for a week of swimming and sightseeing at Bass Lake, which is about a half-hour south of Yosemite.

We have never been to this lake before, but we have seen it quite extensively on celluloid, as it was the location filming spot for the 1988 comedy The Great Outdoors, starring Dan Aykroyd and the the late, great John Candy. Let's hope I have a better time than John Candy's character. My brother-in-law will even be there at the lake with me, but he is nothing like Aykroyd's character!

During one of the days next week, we will be driving up to Yosemite. The last time I was there, I was too young to remember, so it will essentially be a first for me. I hope to take some amazing photos. I'm no Ansel Adams, but I figure you can't go wrong snapping Yosemite.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

What goes up, must come down: The United States ends its Space Shuttle program. Now what?

The Space Shuttle Atlantis took off today on the final mission of the Space Shuttle program, which has been launching the Columbia, Challenger, Discovery, Endeavour, and Atlantis into orbit since April of 1981.

I marginally remember watching the launch of the first space shuttle - the Columbia - when I was 8 years old, but for some reason, I never forgot the names of the two astronauts who flew that mission: John Young and Robert Crippen. Since that time, 355 astronauts have flown on 135 missions, with two of those missions ending in the destruction of the Challenger and Columbia, at the cost of 14 lives.

I am torn regarding the conclusion of the Space Shuttle missions. Being the free market guy I am, I believe that the private sector should be leading the way to space. There are still satellites to send up and, maybe someday, passengers to carry and asteroid minerals to mine... who knows what the possibilities are? But with the possibility to make a substantial profit, entrepreneurial men and women will figure it out. With NASA dominating the space race for the last 50 or so years, with its access to an almost endless supply of taxpayer largess, private enterprise couldn't quite compete against the U.S. government. Now that NASA is out of a job - save raising the self-esteem of Muslims - perhaps all these soon-to-be-out-of-work NASA engineers will find new life in the private sector.

What it boils down to is that while I am always uncomfortable with the government performing extra-constitutional functions that the private sector can and should perform, I do admit to harboring a special nostalgia and pride for our government space programs: Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, Skylab, the Space Shuttle, Hubble Telescope, Mars Missions, solar system probes, and the International Space Station. For goodness sake, we put men on the moon! Yet, the Obama administration seems to have brought a glorious government program to an inglorious end. I feel like our space program deserves a more respectful conclusion. Instead, there is nothing in the hopper, nothing planned for the future (that I know of). The Obama administration comes off like a little kid who has had his fun with his space toy and just tosses it off to the side before moving on to something else.

On the other hand, I am feeling rather queasy thinking about a spacecraft plastered with sponsor stickers like some stock car at Daytona. I'll get used to it.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

Don't forget our Founders' sacrifices

As we celebrate the 235th birthday of the united States of America, please be sure to pause and contemplate the sacrifices made by our Founding Fathers in their efforts to make our country a reality. While liars like the late Howard Zinn would have you believe that the Founders only wanted independence in order to make money and exploit people, the reality is that many of the men who signed the Declaration of Independence lost everything they had.

One such example is signer Richard Stockton. After returning from Philadelphia after signing the Declaration, here is what happened as he returned to his home state of New Jersey:

As he returned from Philadelphia to his home in New Jersey, Judge Stockton was warned that British troops were coming to arrest him. He fled to a neighbor’s house with his wife and children. But a Loyalist, a supporter of the British cause, betrayed the family’s hiding place. Here is what happened next, as described in a wonderful little book Personal Liberty has made available in PDF form:

The judge was dragged from bed and beaten, then thrown into prison. This distinguished jurist, who had worn the handsome robes of a colonial court, now shivered in a common jail, abused and all but starved.

A shocked Congress arranged for his parole. Invalided by the harsh treatment he had received, he returned to (his home at) Morven to find his furniture and clothing burned, his fine horses stolen, and his library — one of the finest private collections in the country — completely destroyed. The hiding place of exquisite family silver, hastily buried, had been betrayed by a servant.

The Stocktons were so destitute that they had to accept charity. For the judge’s fortune was gone, too. He had pledged it and his life to his country. He lost both. He did not live to see the Revolution won.

For more information on the fate of the signers of the Declaration, please finish the article.

Happy Independence Day, and God Bless America.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

Jeremiah Wright proves who the racist is

As you listen to this toxic racist give an extended discourse about how all white people are liars, remember that our Dear Leader, Barack Obama, spent 20 years sitting in this man's pews and considered Wright to be his mentor:



I think what bothers me most of all is the overwhelmingly positive response that Wright receives from his enthusiastic audience at the African Baptist Church of Savannah, Georgia.

God save us.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

The War Between the States was deadlier than previously thought

The oft-agreed upon and repeated number of Americans - North and South - who were killed in the U.S. Civil War/War Between the States/War for Southern Independence is 620,000. That is the number I have always seen, and that is the number I have always taught my students.

However, historian J. David Hacker will soon release an article in which he pegs that number as at least 20% higher than previously thought. Hacker believes that the number of Americans killed during the War Between the States could be as high as 850,000, but is definitely about 750,000.

With the U.S. only containing a population of 31 million at the time, this number of dead is mindboggling. 620,000 was bad enough.

Hacker's numbers find most of the increase in the number of Confederate dead. Historians have always conceded that record keeping was never as complete on the Confederate side, and their casualties were notoriously undercounted.

If this new estimated number of 750,000 holds water, that would put the number of Americans killed in the War Between the States as about 50,000 more than the number killed in the American Revolution, War of 1812, Mexican War, Indian Wars, Spanish-American War, World War I, World War II, Korean War, Vietnam War, Persian Gulf War, and the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Do the math yourself, and keep in mind that these numbers include deaths from all causes; not just combat. In fact, I will provide two numbers for each war, with the second number being the approximate number of actual combat deaths:

American Revolution: 25,000/4,400

War of 1812: 20,000/2,200

Mexican War: 13,000/1,700

Indian Wars: 2,000/1,000

Spanish-American War: 2,000/385

World War I: 116,000/53,000

World War II: 408,000/292,000

Korean War: 54,000/33,000

Vietnam War: 58,000/47,000

Persian Gulf War: 363/148

Iraq/Afghanistan: 5,000+/???

As if the War Between the States wasn't horrific enough...

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

The needle on Obama's gaffe meter hits a new low

This one is not just embarrassing, it is tragic. The other day, our Dear Leader was speaking to the 10th Mountain Division at Fort Drum in upstate New York. In what seemed to me as a cheap way to try to endear himself to his military audience, Obama name-dropped one Sergeant First Class Jared Monti of the 10th Mountain Division, to whom Obama presented the Medal of Honor early in his presidency.

Obama told the soldiers in the audience:

“First time I saw the 10th Mountain Division, you guys were in southern Iraq,” Obama said on Thursday. “When I went back to visit Afghanistan, you guys were the first ones there.

“I had the great honor of seeing some of you because a comrade of yours, Jared Monti, was the first person who I was able to award the Medal of Honor to who actually came back and wasn’t receiving it posthumously.”

One problem there genius: you cited the wrong friggin' soldier. SFC Monti did receive his award posthumously - he was killed in Afghanistan in 2006 while peforming the heroic act for which he received the award. Obama presented the posthumous Medal of Honor to Monti's parents at a White House ceremony in September, 2009. You can read SFC Monti's MoH citation here.

The name Obama was trying to recall was Army Staff Sergeant Salvatore Giunta of the 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team, which is based out of Vicenza, Italy. SSG Giunta did survive to receive his Medal of Honor from President Obama in November, 2010. You can read SSG Giunta's MoH citation here.

It gets better though folks. When the White House was queried as to how Obama could have made such an egregious error, the White House spokesmouth said that Obama had "no prepared remarks" during his Fort Drum speech. You know what that is code for right? NO TELEPROMPTER!

Are politicians - presidents included - going to make verbal gaffes? Of course. What continues to bother me and many others is the continuing double standard whereby conservative politicians are never allowed to live down their gaffes, but statist politicians are forgiven theirs. When the life story of President Obama is recounted in later years, do you think this horrific speaking error will be part of the narrative?

On the other side of the political aisle, the leftist dead tree media have never let us forget that Vice President Dan Quayle misspelled potato as "potatoe."

Which gaffe do you think is worse?

Since Quayle is rather old news, let's focus on a more current conservative that the Left loves to lampoon, and that is Sarah Palin. All we hear from the media is how stupid Palin is, but those same media morons look right past the many stupid statements made by that brilliant, god-like Obama.

Here then is a brilliant compilation of clips showing these media types railing on about Palin while, in juxtaposition, playing the many verbal missteps of Barack Obama. If you want to listen how truly mediocre this supposedly brilliant man is, just watch and listen for yourself. There are a few bad words from Bill Maher, so turn down the volume a bit:



The man is an embarrassment to the office.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

Local Republican who is black demonstrates selective outrage

Local political activist Ken Barnes was, until recently, a Republican who is also a black man. Notice I do not say "Black Republican" because making someone's race their primary identifier has never sat well with me. I have kept track of Barnes's doings, such as his unsuccessful 2010 run for a spot on the Los Rios College board (I voted for him). Though I don't know him personally, Barnes is one of my Facebook friends, where I always read his posts that show up on my Wall.

In the most recent edition of the Sunday Sacramento Bee, Barnes announced in an special editorial that he was leaving the Republican Party, mostly because of the fallout over a racially offensive cartoon that an Orange County Republican official named Marilyn Davenport sent to her friends by email. The cartoon insults President Obama thus:

Yes, I agree; this is extremely offensive, and Davenport ought to be ashamed of herself. She apologized, but for the good of the party, she would be better off resigning her position. She was rebuked by just about everybody around her, however, this is not enough for Mr. Barnes:

While the Orange County GOP chairman and a number of other committee members were quick to condemn the image and Davenport, what's disturbing is the incredible number of people who continue to defend Davenport's actions as well as the cartoon itself.

Had this been an isolated event, it could be set aside as a mere aberration. However, when placed in the context of similar offenses by the same self-identified tea party-conservative Republicans, there emerges a disturbing pattern of extreme intolerance.

Over the past two years, we have seen Republicans use long-held racist imagery in portrayals of Obama. The president has been depicted as a communist witch doctor, a man inclined to plant watermelons on the White House lawn, and we watched in disbelief as his face was placed on an "Obama Buck Food Stamp" along with stereotyped pictures of fried chicken, barbecue ribs, Kool-Aid and the obligatory watermelon.

Again, Mr. Barnes, you are right - there are idiots on the right side of the aisle who do themselves or the conservative side no favors by engaging in this kind of rotten behavior. However, I would venture to say that people who are supposedly defending what Marilyn Davenport did are not so much saying that is OK what she did as they are pointing out the hypocrisy of the political Left who get the vapors about images such as the Obama/Chimpanzee family cartoon, but have no problem with images like this:

For cripes sake, there is even an anti-George W. Bush/anti-Republican website called The Smirking Chimp that still operates as we speak. Its byline says "In Dishonor of the Worst President in U.S. History, 2001-2009."

Ah, but I know what the argument will be next: But George W. Bush is a white guy! It doesn't matter as much if he is made to look like a chimpanzee. OK, then let's take a look at what Democrats and the Left have done to Republican political figures who happen to be black:

First, there is this political cartoon from a leftist black website that performs a two-fer by insulting jurists Janice Rogers Brown and Clarence Thomas:

Black Commentator online magazine, which ran this cartoon, tried to defend it by saying they were just trying to make Rogers-Brown look like Clarence Thomas, but I'm not buying it. Last I checked, Clarence Thomas does not have a towering crop of nappy hair or a mammy-esque physique. Neither does Janice Rogers-Brown.

Then, there was the big-lipped image of Bush's National Security Adviser and Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, drawn by leftist political cartoonist Pat Oliphant:

Did this get you worked up Mr. Barnes? Or do you even know it exists?

The Left wasn't done with Condoleezza Rice. How about when leftist cartoonist Ted Rall called her a "House Nigga" and accused her of wanting to be white?

Did this get you worked up, Mr. Barnes? Or did you even know it exists?

Remember, far from being condemned or repudiated, Black Commentator, Pat Oliphant, and Ted Rall continue to be celebrated by their leftist peers. It is this double standard that is being brought up by people who are "defending" Marilyn Davenport.

Ken Barnes either does not care, or is not aware of the rampant racism that is being practiced by the political Left. The difference is that missteps like that done by Republican Marilyn Davenport are blasted all over the newspapers, while racism exhibited by leftists in the media gets a pass.

I wish Ken Barnes had studied this issue more thoroughly before making his decision to leave the Republican Party.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

Sarah Palin wins another U.S. History contest against the smug morons in the media

Since I have not been blogging much of late, I haven't had the chance to throw in my two bits about Sarah Palin's awkward explanation of a little-known aspect of Paul Revere's famous Ride of April 18, 1775.

While visiting Boston, Palin had this to say about Revere's famous feat:

"He who warned uh, the British that they weren't gonna be takin' away our arms, uh by ringing those bells, and um, makin' sure as he's riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed."

Was Palin's explanation awkward? Yes. Giving answers off-the-cuff can be a bit scatterbrained sometimes; just ask our Teleprompter-in-Chief who "Uhh's" and "Ahh's" his way through statements that are not scrolling before him on little glass screens. However, despite her tortured syntax, Palin was historically correct in her statement. While Revere's main purpose that night was to warn the militia scattered throughout the countryside between Boston and Lexington/Concord, he did have opportunity to tell some of the British soldiers that night exactly what was awaiting them.

Even the Vicar of the Old North Church (from which hung the "one if by land" lantern) says that Palin not only got her statement correct, she got much of the information from him!

But the lesser-known tale of Revere warning the British of the American response to the march from Boston to Concord is nothing new. I just happened to find out just how not new the story is, and I found it purely by chance.

As I mentioned in my previous post, my family and I are currently staying with my wife's sister and her family in San Diego. I was perusing their bookshelf and came across a rather old-looking book that was given to my brother-in-law from his mother. The book is called Paul Revere and the Minute Men, by Dorothy Canfield Fisher. It was published in 1950 by Random House - New York. I flipped through the book to see if it mentioned anything about Revere warning the British, and lo and behold, starting on page 162, I found the following passage (emphasis mine):

Paul and [William] Dawes turned their horses towards Concord, and a young Dr. Prescott rode along with them. He lived in the district, knew everyone and all the lanes and byroads.

This time, halfway to Concord, there were not two, but four British officers suddenly blocking the way. the Americans were forced into a field where six more British were waiting. In the darkness and confusion Dawes slid off his horse and managed to hide in the bushes. Prescott jumped a stone wall and rode off. But Paul was squarely cornered with a pistol cold against his forehead.

"Who are you? Where did you come from?"

Paul thought quickly. Someone might recognize him. Boldness was his only hope. "My name's Revere," he said. "I left Boston about ten o'clock...."

Then a bell, quite near, started ringing. The British looked at one another, worried. they quieted down and one of them, remembering orders, tried to explain why they were here. "We're only out after deserters," he said.

Paul saw his chance. "I know better. I know what you're after. But you won't get it. The alarm has been given everywhere. And it's spreading."

The British put their heads together and talked in tones too low for Paul Revere to hear. Then they took the reins out of his hands and led his horse in their midst back along the road to Lexington. the major waved his pistol and said, "As for you, Paul Revere, don't try to escape or I'll blow your brains out. You go back with us. We'll send you to England to be tried and hanged for treason."

Paul answered briefly. "Do as you like about that. But what chance have you to get to Boston? There are only ten of you. Your troops are hours away. There are at least five hundred Minute Men heading here at this minute. In an hour, there will be thousands more."

It was slow work leading Revere's horse. the road was dark and lonely. The Englishmen got uneasy and alarmed. With good reason. what chance did they have against a whole countryside swarming with armed men who hated them?

All at once a gun was fired. In the darkness, it rang out very loud. The officers drew their horses sharply to a halt.

"What was that?" the British major snapped out.
"Only another alarm gun. They're being fired like that everywhere from here to Connecticut. You've a mighty slim chance of getting back to Boston with whole skins." Revere spoke out boldly though he knew he was still in mortal danger.

The British officers had another short whispered talk. "Dismount," they told him. As Revere had hoped, they began to see that they had a better chance to escape without being burdened with a prisoner.

They mounted one of their sergeants on Paul's horse and, spurring their mounts to a run, vanished down the road.

So what do you think? Did Revere also warn the British about anything that night, as Palin said? Remember, this book from which I just quoted was published in 1950. Palin's assertion is not some new knowledge. Instead, people have just remembered what they want to remember, and then in their ignorance, belittle anyone who mentions something not commonly known.

Speaking of which, a classic case of the media morons who displayed their own ignorance in their attempt to showcase Palin's can be summed up by Daniel Kurtzman, who writes for About.com. Kurtzman had this to say about Palin's statement:

As any elementary school student can probably tell you, Paul Revere was not attempting to warn the British when he rode around crying, "The British are coming." Nor was he ringing bells and trying to protect gun rights.

Looks like you need to go back to elementary school Mr. Kurtzman, because in your attempt to show us how brilliant you are compared to Sarah Palin, you got at least four historical facts wrong in that one short little missive.

First, we have already established that Revere did warn the British (some, not all, obviously) about what they were facing that night. Second, Revere did not yell, "The British are coming!" as Kurtzman states. That little canard was put to pasture a long, long time ago, yet Kurtzman still clings to it. Revere yelled, "The Regulars are coming!" or "The Regulars are out!" Third, Revere wasn't ringing bells, but as his warnings and those of the other riders blanketed the countryside, church bells did begin to ring as a signal for the militia to grab their weapons, as did warning shots being fired, as is mentioned in the book excerpt above. And fourth, the Battles of Lexington and Concord were all about gun rights. One of the primary missions of the British that day was to seize and/or destroy the militia's munitions caches which had been hidden in Concord. Yes, that is correct: The very first battle of the American Revolution was about gun control, and it was Paul Revere who is the most famous of the messengers who warned the militia about the British soldiers who were were on the way to seize that militia's means of defending itself and the colonies. Even the textbooks from which I teach my 8th graders do not shy away from explaining this. Yet, the smug (and very wrong) Mr. Kurtzman somehow missed something that elementary and middle school students are taught every year.

You know, the funny thing is that Sarah Palin is not even my first choice for the Republican presidential nomination, nor my second choice. Heck, she is not even running for President right now! Yet, I cannot help but chuckle in amusement at this obsession the lamestream media have with Palin. What is it about this woman that causes these media morons to make themselves look like utter fools in their vain efforts to discredit her? Remember when Palin rightly referenced that the Boston Tea Party took place in 1773? The media morons got that wrong too, even though they were convinced that they finally nailed her.

Right now, they are still poring over the 24,000 emails from her time as Alaska governor that were recently released. If only Barack Obama had received just one-quarter of the scrutiny that Sarah Palin has received from the lamestream media.

And Mr. Kurtzman, my sign-off quote is written especially for you:

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

Kickin' it in San Diego

Sorry for the dearth of posts during this month so far. This typically happens in June. My school year ends, and I go into shutdown where I don't feel like doing much of anything. Then, on Friday afternoon, we departed for the always-lovely city of San Diego, so blogging on the road is never easy; especially when I am doing the driving. My wife's sister and her family live there, and there are always beaches to visit, zoos to enjoy, and so on.

Yesterday, we enjoyed a day at the world-famous San Diego Zoo, and while I took many obligatory photographs of the animals and the scenery, nothing compares to the shot I took on Monday morning when I went with my brother-in-law to Dog Beach, which is a small area near the mouth of the San Diego River where dog owners are allowed to let their dogs run off their leash.

As I was walking along the sandy riverbank, I noticed a ripply formation of sand that had been exposed by the low tide. I was so intrigued, I made the image the wallpaper for my iPhone:


It looks so beautiful, but the reality is that the location of this particular spit of sand was rather nasty.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

The Golden State... soon to be sans "Golden"

The lunacy continues unabated in California. Pop quiz everyone, what was the primary motivator for thousands of Americans risking their lives to come to California in the late 1840s and early 1850s? DING DING DING - If you said "Gold," you are correct.

Next question: The dredge mining of what substance is about to be outlawed in California if the state's Democrat-controlled government has its way? DING DING DING - If you said "Gold," you are correct.

Can you even fathom this? The mining of the very metal that put California on the map, is about to be, for all intents and purposes, outlawed within the state.

I grew up in a tiny town in the northwestern corner of California called Happy Camp. Yeah, yeah, it's a funny name, but there is a story behind that name. You see, Happy Camp is located in a small valley within the Klamath River canyon where Indian Creek empties into the Klamath River. Originally the area was called Murderers Bar. Yikes. However, in 1851 or so, a bunch of gold miners discovered copious amounts of the yellow stuff in the area, and not surprisingly, they celebrated their new-found fortune in their mining camp. It sure was a happy camp.. Aha!

After the easy-to-find gold petered out in the Happy Camp area, the residents moved on to other endeavors; especially logging. However, in the 1980s, the Spotted Owl was used by those same environmentalist wackos to shut down the logging industry in the Happy Camp area. Around the same time, gold mining returned in a big way to the area, especially when an organized group called The New 49ers set up shop in town. After the logging industry went belly-up, these gold miners were a welcome addition to the struggling local economy, along with any tourism that happened along (especially river rafters using Happy Camp as a taking-off point).

With gold mining now about to take a huge hit from our statist legislature who are in the pocket of environmentalist groups who want to control every aspect of our lives, I don't see how the economies of little towns like Happy Camp - already on the ropes as it is - can survive much longer.

It is that kind of history and heritage that has defined our Golden State, and now, in the name of appeasing the environmentalists out there who don't want the little people defiling the forests, a large piece of our state's past is about to be thrown on the dust heap of history.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

Eat as I say, not as I do

First Lady, Michelle Obama, seems to have a serious obsession with trying to control what we eat. Too bad that doesn't carry over to her own family.

First, chuck the ol' food pyramid folks and check out what's on your plate now:

Seems healthy enough (too much grain perhaps?), but tell me where this meal fits on the plate:

There is your president, yesterday in Toledo, Ohio, scarfing down two chili dogs and french fries. Do the fries count as a vegetable?

Remember folks, the rules only apply to little people like us, not the royal couple in the White House.

Then of course, there is my oft-repeated inquiry. Where in the Constitution does the Executive Branch (through the USDA, which produced the plate chart with over $2 million of our tax dollars) get the Constitutional authority to even deign to tell me or my family how we should eat? C'mon now, cite me the Article, Section, and Clause.

This imperial federal government of ours, and the hypocritical elitist prigs who run it, make me sick to my stomach.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

Is it illegal to be an a**hole?

In Vernal, Utah, apparently it is. When a man was forced to pay a disputed $25 medical bill, he paid it with 2,500 pennies.

I don't see what the problem is; the medical clinic accepts cash, and pennies are legal tender - good for all debts, public and private.

Nevertheless, the man was cited by local law enforcement for disorderly conduct and he could possibly be fined $140.

If the guy has any balls, he should pay the fine with 14,000 pennies!

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

Victor Davis Hanson seconds my opinion

In his latest column, Victor Davis Hanson (one of my favorites!) lays out the three-prong strategy that Obama and his minions are going to unleash during the 2012 election campaign, and what we can do to stop them. First, the strategy:

Whether always officially sanctioned or not, Obama’s campaign will focus on three general themes: a) the 2008 meltdown of the economy on Bush’s watch; b) conservative heartlessness in gutting cherished entitlement programs; and c) racial bias behind any criticism of Barack Obama.

After going into detail on each of these strategies, VDH has a suggestion for those quivering and quaking Republicans/conservatives out there who are perpetually terrified about what the Democrats/statists think and say about them:

So will this tripartite strategy work? Only if the president’s opponents allow themselves to be caricatured as greedy Wall Street profiteers who want to punish the elderly and are prejudiced against blacks. And if they can’t answer back defiantly to that nonsense, then they really do deserve to lose.

"Answer back defiantly." In my previous post, what did I say about how to counter the slanderous bile of people like Representative James Clyburn?

The whole premise of blaming criticism of Obama on racism is absolutely absurd, but you know how this story goes. If the charges are not answered, no matter how stupid the charges are, then the meme is cemented in people's minds. You cannot let these slimy lowlifes like Jim Clyburn control the narrative. Remember the concept of "The Big Lie"? The bigger it is, the more likely people are willing to believe it. Calling me, and others like me, a racist because I disagree with Obama is a pretty big lie, wouldn't you say? All the more reason to call people out when they accuse you of it.

Victor Davis Hanson agrees. Don't back down to these soulless liars. Call them out every time.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

Representative James Clyburn: Obama is only criticized because of racism

It seems that the desperation strategy for the Democrats/Kleptocrats/Statists going into the 2012 election cycle is to paint all critics and criticism of President Obama as being racist.

This is no better clearly illustrated than by the verbal vomit uttered by Democrat Congressional Representative James Clyburn of South Carolina. In an interview with McClatchy News Service, Clyburn had this to say:

"You know, I'm 70 years old," he said. "And I can tell you; people don't like to deal with it, but the fact of the matter is, the president's problems are in large measure because of the color of his skin."

OK, I'll bite. Tell me Rep. Clyburn, how it is that Obama's approval rating could have gone from around 65-70% at the beginning of his presidency down to 45-50% now, without some of that disapproval coming from many of the people who voted for him? Are those people racist now, but were not racist in November, 2008? The same people who don't like Obama's politics (including me), don't like the politics of Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter very much either (including me). I am white; am I a racist for not liking Clinton or Carter either? The whole premise of blaming criticism of Obama on racism is absolutely absurd, but you know how this story goes. If the charges are not answered, no matter how stupid the charges are, then the meme is cemented in people's minds. You cannot let these slimy lowlifes like Jim Clyburn control the narrative. Remember the concept of "The Big Lie"? The bigger it is, the more likely people are willing to believe it. Calling me, and others like me, a racist because I disagree with Obama is a pretty big lie, wouldn't you say? All the more reason to call people out when they accuse you of it.

Clyburn then delved into the birth certificate controversy in an attempt to prove that the people who insisted that Obama release his birth certificate were/are motivated by racism:

Clyburn suggested that the "birther" movement of Americans who say Obama wasn't born in the United States is fueled by racism.

"I don't know why anybody didn't ask for John McCain's" birth certificate, Clyburn said. "He wasn't even born in this country."

Is Clyburn trying to purposefully deceive the unknowing out there, or is he really that stupid that he doesn't know that McCain's birth status was investigated by the New York Times and a Senate hearing was ultimately held on the subject? In fact, a member of the Senate committee that found that John McCain was indeed a natural-born citizen was none other than Barack Obama; the same Barack Obama who took three years to finally release a PDF file of his long-form birth certificate only after countless pundits, lawsuits, authors, and millions of Americans urged him to do so.

Fight the "Big Lie" folks. Unfortunately, there are way too many people out there who are ready and willing to believe it. The least you can do is stand up for yourself.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

Injured in the line of duty: Teacher Edition

I was slightly injured yesterday breaking up a fight between two male eighth graders. When it was all over, I had to report to the health office and turn in an incident report. I was once again left wondering if my actions were worth it.

It doesn't happen very often, but every couple of years I happen to be not only present when a fight breaks out, but close enough to the epicenter where I have time to take action before it is all over. This time, I was doing bus duty yesterday afternoon. The buses were all lined up on the blacktop behind the school and I was in the process of shepherding the students toward their respective lines. I happened to look to my right and saw two male students walking toward each other across the blacktop, their respective entourage and onlookers in tow behind them.

I and another male teacher began quickly moving in the direction of the impending ruckus, but I was still about 15 or 20 feet away when the fists between the two boys started flying. It was at this point that I froze for a split second as I assessed the situation. I took stock of the size of the two combatants, their level of violence, and the mood of the crowd surrounding them. During that split second of decision-making that I endure every couple years, I wonder to myself whether I should just stand there and let these two bozos beat each other black and blue, or should I risk my own health by getting in between the two combatants, flying fists and all.

In the end, I cannot in good conscience let two boys beat the hell out of each other while I stand there and watch, so I waited for them to momentarily disengage to spar a bit, and in that split second where there was space in between them, I pounced. It just so happened that the other male teacher who had descended upon the scene made his decision to intervene at the very moment I did. I ran in between the two boys and grabbed the one who was facing me. I clotheslined my right arm around his chest and let my forward momentum take him away from the fight. I then twisted my body so that I was directly behind him, and then I put both my arms around him, pinning his arms against his sides. The boy continued to lunge toward his nemesis, who had been similarly restrained by the other teacher. As I held on to this struggling boy for dear life, I could feel his heart beating a mile a minute. As he yelled at me to let go of him, I yelled back, "Are you going to try and fight him again? I won't let go until you promise not to continue this!"

He finally relented and I escorted him to the office. After I deposited him outside the VP's office door, that is when I noticed that something was amiss. I ran my tongue against the inside of my bottom lip and could feel a fresh contusion from which seeped the coppery taste of blood.

Sometime during the melee', when I had thrust myself between the two combatants, I had been hit in the mouth by a glancing blow from one of them; probably a forearm, probably from the boy I had ended up restraining.

I have been injured one other time while breaking up a fight. It was about five years ago, and of all things, it was between two girls. I stepped in between them, thinking that would stop it cold. Nuh uh. They simply began reaching around me to continue punching each other. They finally grappled, with me still in between them, and all three of us ended up hurtling toward the pavement. My right knee was the first thing to impact the ground. The two girls got up and began chasing each other while punching at the same time. I got up to pursue, but fell right back to ground with my injured knee. That was definitely the worse of two injuries I have now received breaking up fights, but it is still enough to give me pause before getting between two aggressive, irrational, flailing students.

However, standing by and doing nothing does not sit well with me either. Quite a dilemma.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

I support free speech... except for those nasty conservatives!

I am becoming quite the fan of the folks at exposingleftists.com, who go around college campuses with a petition and a camera and show typical leftist hypocrisy in all its glory.

In this case, people gladly sign a petition that calls for the banning from airwaves of broadcasters like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. While these people are signing the petition, they are asked if they support free speech and the First Amendment. At this point, their words and their actions don't quite mesh.

Check it out:



Just think, in their hands lies our future.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

Arnold "Schwarzenkennedy" now truly lives up to his nickname

I am proud to say that I did not vote for Arnold Schwarzenegger either time he ran for governor of California. I voted for former California State Senator and current California Congressional Representative Tom McClintock in 2003, and in 2006, I voted for the Libertarian candidate; I think his last name was Olivier. So why did I twice vote for someone other than the Republican Schwarzenegger? Because he wasn't a Republican, although he called himself one. I can call myself a Chinese jet pilot, but that doesn't make it so. Schwarzenegger was known for some rather left-of-center stances from the get-go, and he did nothing but go further left as his governorship went on. We conservatives didn't call him Arnold "Schwarzenkennedy" just because he married into that famous family; his politics fit in quite nicely as well. Now that we know about his extra child that he fathered with his maid, I would confidently contend that Arnold is now officially a true Kennedy!

And now that we know that the entire time he was governor, he was hiding a rather illicit part of his life from not only his family, but the voters, I have to wonder about something: Were any of Schwarzenegger's decisions as governor influenced by this delicate situation? What if someone who had his ear to the political landscape had knowledge of this "love child" and used the information to blackmail favors from the governor? Like for instance, what if a prison sentence for a convicted voluntary manslaughterer came up for review, and the governor inexplicably lopped off almost half of that 16-year sentence? What if that man slaughterer was the son of a former speaker of the California State Assembly?

Am I saying that is the reason Schwarzenegger commuted the sentence of Estaban Nunez, son of former Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez? Of course not. However, when politicians do things of questionable morality that open them up to possible exploitation, blackmail, and extortion, then every act or decision that politician makes is open to suspicion.

Of course on the other hand, the Jesuit monk currently sitting in California's governor's seat is making some rather questionable decisions as well. What's his excuse?

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

A more simple and easy-to-understand reason why no Conservative/Republican should ever support Newt Gingrich for President

Forget Newt's reign as Speaker during the 1995 government shutdown for which he let the Republicans get the blame.

Forget Newt's abandonment of his cancer-stricken wife.

Forget Newt's criticism of Rep. Paul Ryan's economic plan.

Forget Newt's enthusiasm for socialized health care.

Here is all you need to see and hear to convince you to never support this RINO for president.

Remember this?



My work here is done.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

CTA/SEIU members make fools of themselves at the California State Capitol

The "California State of Emergency" activities planned by the California Teachers Association (CTA) took place all week at the California State Capitol in Sacramento, with several dozen CTA members even being arrested for trespassing after refusing to leave the Capitol after closing hours.

Another teacher I want to see arrested is the dunce who made and carried this misspelled sign and put it out there for all the world to see. The sign had the same thing written on both sides, and the word "Crisis" was misspelled on both sides!

All the week's events, however, were just filler for the big event to come, and that was yesterday's rally on the south steps of the Capitol. Thousands of union members arrived to demand that the California legislature and Governor Brown raise taxes on Californians so that teachers can keep their jobs.

This is all great stuff, right? Wrong! And remember, I am a California public school teacher.

As it is, approximately 40% of all tax revenues in California currently go toward our bloated education system, and over the past seven years, education budgets have seen a healthy net increase, to the tune of just under 26% between 2003 and 2009. Ask a typical CTA member however, and they will swear that there is no money for education in California. To that I say, there is plenty of money alright, they are just horrifically mis-spending it on things like increased administrator salaries and Taj Mahal high schools that cost over a half-billion dollars. How many teacher jobs might that money have saved?

Let's take a look at some of the attendees of yesterday's rally.

The majority of the attendees were CTA members and members of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Then of course, there were also the school students who were brought to the Capitol as human shields for the wage and benefit demands of the teachers. Seeing these gullible, ignorant students being used as props by these petulant childish teachers frankly creeped me out:

If you weren't aware, the song they were singing - "Solidarity Forever" - is a radical piece of fluff that was written for the far-left International Workers of the World (IWW, or "Wobblies" as they are known). The song was later made even more famous by communist singer/songwriter, and long-time Stalinist, Pete Seeger.

As a matter of fact, there was quite a bit of eyelash batting at the idea of socialism and communism at this shindig. First, I was handed this flyer:

Then, a few steps later, I looked up and saw this:



Well, Hola Che! Fancy seeing you here! Not surprising, though.

Adding to the partisan flavor of the rally, there were scenes like this:

And this:

Then we had the "Education is a Right!" crowd:



Sorry folks; it isn't a right, no matter how much you may want it to be. Education can only be provided by taking time and money from someone else. You have the right to seek education, but you do not have the right to have it provided for you by the taxpayer.

There weren't just teachers at this rally. Very soon after I arrived, I found my first SEIU member:

And where there is one, there are many more. The thugs of the Purple Ocean always travel together in packs:

I couldn't stay long, as the batteries on my FLIP Camera were failing me (oops.), and I had a dinner date scheduled with my wife (Cafe Bernardo at 28th and Capitol is always a hit!). As I was getting ready to head out, that is when I heard it: the pounding feet, the wimpy voices, the indecipherable chant. OH NO! IT'S CORNY STREET THEATER!!!



I think they are saying, "We left our classrooms and came to the Capitol to make sure our students aren't left behind...." The first lesson on chants is that you don't make them too verbose. I give these teachers an F.

As I headed back toward my car, I turned and took a long shot of the event:

Most of the people there seemed nice enough. I'm sure they believed in their cause; the question I was left with was what that cause was. While they were quick to push the kids out in front of them and say it was all for them, it was quite easy to tell that these teachers were here to save their own skin, and not the skin of their students. And that's fine, the CTA is a labor union. The job of a labor union is maximize the number of employees in its profession, and get for them the highest pay and benefits possible. But see, the CTA didn't do that. They couch it as being all about "the kids."

The amusing part is that the whole reason for this event had already been solved by the time it happened. An unexpected $2.5 billion dollar rise in incoming tax revenues enabled the Republican minority in the state legislature to offer a budget that fully funded Prop 98, which mandates a certain percentage of the state budget go toward education. Of course, the Republican-hating attendees of this rally didn't want to hear that. I'm sure the thought of the Republican Party saving their bacon is a horror they wish not to contemplate. But then, that wasn't the main motivation for this whole affair in the first place. This sign gives a better summation:

I give this teacher an A for honesty.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

A deserving suspension courtesy of the Eye in the Sky

On principle, I am opposed to laws such as those that ban smoking in private establishments... even though I love frequenting a restaurant or bar without coming home smelling like an ashtray.

I am also opposed to the idea of cameras watching us all hours of the day, everywhere we go. I don't like how our younger generation, especially, is growing up in a world where they are accustomed to accepting this situation as normal.

On the other hand, when behavior in our society takes a sharp turn downward, as it has done in the last several decades, measures must be taken. It comes back to the old adage that when we can't control ourselves, others must do it for us. When this happens, I am glad there was a camera in our school hallway to back me up when I caught a student doing something she should not have, and she probably would have gotten away with it were it not for the fact that we got it on video.

First of all, important to this story is the fact that my classroom door has a narrow window in it that is about 8 inches wide and about 2 feet tall. It is situated right above the doorknob. Because students passing in the hallway can look right in to my classroom as they walk by, I have blocked off the bottom portion of the window by taping some construction paper over it. The top half of the window is still unobstructed. At 6 feet 2 inches tall, I can look over the construction paper and through the window, but your average middle schooler cannot.

During second period yesterday, I was giving my lesson at the front of the classroom and just happened to look to my right toward the classroom door. I don't know what prompted me to do so; maybe I picked up some of my students subtly looking towards the door? When I looked at the door, I saw an arm visible outside the unobstructed portion of the window, and the hand attached to the arm had its middle finger extended toward the class and me. Whoever this person was, he or she was standing outside my classroom door flipping us all the bird.

As soon as I saw this, I sprinted to my classroom door and flung it open. I quickly looked left; I saw nothing. I quickly looked to the right, and saw something; movement, a shadow. I moved toward the classroom next door to mine to just see a student entering that classroom. The student turned out to be "Mariah," who I have in another period later in the day, and she is often quite disrespectful and disruptive.

I entered the other classroom and told Mariah to come back outside with me. With a sheepish grin on her face, she immediately began saying, "I didn't do anything, oh my Gawwwd!" Once out in the hallway, I asked her what the heck she was thinking, and she again said she didn't do anything. I told her fine, if she didn't do anything, then she had to see who the person was who was standing in my doorway flipping off my class through the window. She said, "I don't know, I didn't do anything."

Fine, whatever. I took Mariah into my classroom, wrote her a pass to the Vice Principal and sent her on her way. As she walked out, she said to herself, "There goes graduation." I then phoned the VP and told him Mariah was on her way to him and why. The VP asked me, "How long ago did this happen." I told him that about two minutes had passed. He then said, "I'll check the hallway cameras and see exactly what happened."

Right after 2nd period ended, I logged onto PowerSchool and checked Mariah's referral log report. The VP had suspended her, and here was the reason why:

Mariah is suspended for violating education code 48900k-Disruption of school activities. As she was sent back to class she walked by a teacher's classroom and flipped him off through window. This was also seen on the school cameras. She will return 5-16-11. Parent was notified.

So, it turns out that she did do something, oh my Gawwwwwd! And the cameras confirmed it. My question is, what if we didn't have cameras? Would she have gotten away with it? Would it have been her word versus a teacher's, even though I am a teacher with an exemplary record and she is a repeat offender? Would I have had to endure a whole bunch of meetings where her parent(s) would have sat across from me and tell me that their daughter would never do such a thing and that I am just a racist teacher who is out to get her?

The camera shut down all those possibilities, and showed that Mariah did exactly what I said she did. And now because of that little stunt, and the two-day (too short in my opinion) suspension from school that goes with it, Mariah is now barred from walking at 8th grade graduation in two weeks. I would like to think she will learn something from this incident, but I have a bad feeling that it will just make her feel like that much more of a victim who has been wronged. Not a productive way to go through life.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

Blogger where art thou?

Just had to vent: Blogger, the site that hosts this, and millions of other blogs, had been down for almost 24 hours. Now that it is back online, my most recent post on what it takes to be a Navy SEAL has disappeared.

They must have had a heck of a crash.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

What makes a Navy SEAL... and what doesn't

The U.S. Navy SEALs have been getting quite a bit of publicity lately in the wake of the Osama bin Laden affair (You know: the one where there are no photos of the body that has conveniently been thrown in the ocean).

Nevertheless, the training that goes into making a SEAL is the toughest military training in the world.I came across this rather interesting article that ran in the Wall Street Journal that was written by a former Navy SEAL. The writer did a nice job of summing up who makes it through this training and who typically doesn't:

What kind of man makes it through Hell Week? That's hard to say. But I do know—generally—who won't make it. There are a dozen types that fail: the weight-lifting meatheads who think that the size of their biceps is an indication of their strength, the kids covered in tattoos announcing to the world how tough they are, the preening leaders who don't want to get dirty, and the look-at-me former athletes who have always been told they are stars but have never have been pushed beyond the envelope of their talent to the core of their character. In short, those who fail are the ones who focus on show. The vicious beauty of Hell Week is that you either survive or fail, you endure or you quit, you do—or you do not.

Some men who seemed impossibly weak at the beginning of SEAL training—men who puked on runs and had trouble with pull-ups—made it. Some men who were skinny and short and whose teeth chattered just looking at the ocean also made it. Some men who were visibly afraid, sometimes to the point of shaking, made it too.

Almost all the men who survived possessed one common quality. Even in great pain, faced with the test of their lives, they had the ability to step outside of their own pain, put aside their own fear and ask: How can I help the guy next to me? They had more than the "fist" of courage and physical strength. They also had a heart large enough to think about others, to dedicate themselves to a higher purpose.

I remember reading an entire book on SEAL training, and just reading the detailed description of Hell Week left me feeling exhausted. The hardships of Army basic training and advanced individual training were enough for me. Hell Week during SEAL training would do me in right quick, as I get quite punchy and admittedly a little panicky when I am forcefully deprived of sleep. Believe me, there were times during my years in the Army when I caught very few Zzzz's, but it was nothing like Hell Week, where you maybe get 2 hours total over a five day period. Kudos to the hard-charging men out there who are willing to put themselves through the kind of punishment that is SEAL training.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

Watch a slimy class-action lawyer have a meltdown

This is video gold right here folks! John Stossel brought on a walking cliche' of class-action lawyer named Al Pires to ask him about the alleged massive fraud going on with the Pigford case in which some black farmers were truly discriminated against by the USDA in getting loans, but tens of thousands of others have signed up to receive $50,000, even though they never farmed.

Al Pires didn't much like being called out on this by Stossel, and he especially didn't like it when Andrew Breibart was brought on to make specific allegations including names and dates.

What was Pires' response? Ridicule, name-calling, and flat out lying. It was really embarrassing to watch. Therefore, I think you should watch Stossel and Breitbart take down this slimeball. It is 11 minutes of pure bliss:



For a lawyer, this guy doesn't argue very well, does he?

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

First 2012 Republican debate has a "surprise" winner

I put "surprise" in quotes because if you know anything about the man who overwhelmingly carried the debate last night, you wouldn't be surprised. I have been excited about this man's candidacy since the moment he announced.

Watch this short video of pollster Frank Luntz - who has never seen this overwhelming of a reaction in all the focus group polling he has ever done - as his focus group of South Carolina Republicans show how racist they are with their pick of the winner:



What? How could they have picked him? I thought people who don't support Obama only do so because he is black! How can this be? /sarc

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

Obama won't release Osama death photo

Our Dear Leader says that releasing any photos of a dead Osama bin Laden would be "an incitement to additional violence."

Ah, I see. OK.

Releasing some other photos however, didn't seem to bother the conscience of our delicate president. Remember this from early 2009?

Barack Obama to release up to 2,000 photographs of prisoner abuse

President Barack Obama is to release up to 2,000 photographs of alleged abuse at American prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan in a move which will reignite the scandal surrounding Abu Ghraib prison in 2004...

This man is a disgrace.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

Beware the bounce

The chattering hens on The View said in the wake of Osama bin Laden being killed that they might as well not even hold the 2012 election, because after taking down bin Laden, Obama guaranteed his reelection then and there.

Not so fast. I guess one of the easier things about being a leftist is that history always begins today. How quickly these ladies forget that high approval ratings now, can mean jack-diddly a year later.

Just ask George H.W. Bush. In March 1991, after an overwhelming U.S. victory in the Persian Gulf War, President Bush enjoyed an approval rating pegged at right around 90%. By November 1992, George H.W. Bush received only 38% of the popular vote and lost his reelection bid to Billy Jeff Clinton. This is because GHW Bush may have had his shining moment during the Gulf War, but too many other issues, such as going back on his "read my lips" no-tax pledge, sank him in the end.

I haven't studiously checked to see what kind of bounce in the polls Obama has received in the wake of bin Laden's killing, but from what I have read, it isn't much. Whatever bounce he does receive, keep in mind that just a few days ago, his poll numbers were not dropping like a rock because he had not yet found Osama bin Laden. Gas prices still stink and are getting stinkier, unemployment is still tragically high, ObamaCare is still wildly unpopular, and Obama seems to be fulfilling his promise to make sure that "electricity rates will necessarily skyrocket."

Put all that together, and I can easily surmise that by November 2012, Osama bin Laden will be way off people's radar screens, but the hits to their pocketbook - courtesy of our fascist-leaning president - will not be.

On the other hand, the Republicans need to field a candidate who can actually win. Good luck with that one.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

What does Nancy Pelosi think about taking out Osama bin Laden?

Well, I guess that depends on who the President of the United States happens to be at the time. I saw this incredible piece of juxtaposition on the website of Commentary Magazine, and I had to run it here, because this woman has some chutzpah.

Here is what Nancy Pelosi said during a press conference on September 7, 2006:

[E]ven if [Osama bin Laden] is caught tomorrow, it is five years too late. He has done more damage the longer he has been out there. But, in fact, the damage that he has done . . . is done. And even to capture him now I don’t think makes us any safer.

Hmm, let's take a look at what Pelosi said just the other day in the aftermath of Osama's killing, and with her fellow Democrat Obama at the helm:

The death of Osama bin Laden marks the most significant development in our fight against al-Qaida. . . . I salute President Obama, his national security team, Director Panetta, our men and women in the intelligence community and military, and other nations who supported this effort for their leadership in achieving this major accomplishment. . . . [T]he death of Osama bin Laden is historic. . . .

And then the little two-faced backstabber called former-President Bush and congratulated him on his role in getting bin Laden:

Pelosi said she thought Bush appreciated the call.

“I wanted him to know the appreciation that many of us have in a bipartisan way ... that his role was important," she said.

The woman is just unbelievable. How can she stand to look at herself in the mirror?

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson

American women are giving it the old college try

In the United States, there are now more women attaining college degrees than men.

According to figures from the Associated Press, American women hold 10.6 million Masters Degrees to the mens' 10.5 million. For Bachelors Degrees, it stands at women: 20.1 million versus men: 18.7 million.

With that in mind, the hysteric questions always seem to immediately get thrown out there, asking why women make less than men if women are going to college more, receiving, on average, 77 cents for every one dollar earned by a man.

The important piece of the puzzle that the article does not address however is what those degrees are in. Reason Magazine has a wonderfully succinct article that fills in the holes and explains why men earn more average pay than women.

For instance:

But read more, and you learn things that don't get much notice on Equal Pay Day. As the report acknowledges, women with college degrees tend to go into fields like education, psychology and the humanities, which typically pay less than the sectors preferred by men, such as engineering, math and business. They are also more likely than men to work for nonprofit groups and local governments, which do not offer salaries that Alex Rodriguez would envy.

As they get older, many women elect to work less so they can spend time with their children. A decade after graduation, 39 percent of women are out of the work force or working part time -- compared with only 3 percent of men. When these mothers return to full-time jobs, they naturally earn less than they would have if they had never left.

My wife is a prime example of this. She is an elementary school teacher, and has been employed in that capacity since 1995. However, she does not get paid for that many years of teaching because she took a few years off to stay home with our children during their infant and toddler years. I, on the other hand, haven't taught as many years as she, but I continue to accrue seniority at an unbroken pace because I never took any years off after our kids were born.

In the meantime, the males of this country need to get their act together and start going to college again.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free... it expects what never was, and never will be." -Thomas Jefferson