Ties on Pigs
More on nude chick hunting
It has been revealed that the paintball hunting was a hoax. Check out Kathleen Parker's latest column at Jewish World Review . com.
Treason?
I am beginning to align my sympathies with the spunky
Ann Coulter and her declaration of treason in regards to the behavior of the anti-everything-Bush-does crowd. There is a great piece by Charles Krauthammer that is especially uplifting, and the reports from Andrew Sullivan's page about all of the amazingly good things happening in Afghanistan and Iraq are truly moving. They really instill a sense of pride and gratitude towards our great nation and the heroes that continue to make sacrifices for others around the globe. The cynical can make any aspersions they like about motive, but the bottom line is that a good thing is being done and it should be supported with the full force of American ingenuity and enthusiasm...
But the left is doing their level best to undermine our efforts. Why? Other than selfish, greedy, worldly, and disgusting need for power, what possible motive do they have for undermining the President and the soldiers, airmen, sailors, and marines overseas? That is what they are doing. Undermining. Take a short mental skip and it becomes aiding and abetting the enemy. This is just a nice way of saying treason. These people are actively hoping and working for American failure overseas in order to gain political and personal power at home, however temporary it might be. They don't have any love of this country, that they have exhibited and it makes me sick to my stomach.
I thought Clinton was one of the most damaging Presidents ever to occupy the White House. But I never even thought about undermining his efforts to quell violence around the world or seek to promote peace and stability. And if 9/11 happened on his watch and he took the same steps that Bush has taken, I would back him 100%. I would probably even vote to reelect him to make sure we finished what we started.
Domestic politics will always be trumped by Foreign politics. This is true for several reasons; 1. It is the only specifically enumerated power granted to the Federal government by the Constitution; 2. Mistakes in Foreign policy and diplomacy gets people killed...sometimes thousands of them at a time, while domestic policy blunders just mean the stock market won't go up as much; 3. With foreign policy, the country is viewed as a whole. Everyone gets to say, "Hey, I'm an American". Minor domestic disputes get put into perspective and take a second seat to the unity and beauty of our great nation and its powerful mandate in the world. It's positive, envigorating and uplifting to think of the things that make this country great and be a part of it. People like that; 4. It is the only specifically enumerated power granted to the Federal government by the Constitution; 5. It is the only specifically enumerated power granted to the Federal government by the Constitution; 6. It is the only specifically enumerated power granted to the Federal government by the Constitution;
7. It is the only specifically enumerated power granted to the Federal government by the Constitution.
Sullivan and others on the right have blasted and criticized Coulter for her latest book, but I see it as another version of P.J. O'Rourke's "The Enemies List". It is a serious topic taken with a light air. The problem that people have with it, is that it is largely true. Enabling monsters to wander around torturing and killing people for the sake of some esoteric and shallow political agenda isn't just wrong - its evil. Doing one's level best to hide the positive stories, focus on and eggagerate any negative events and detract from an incredibly delicate and important mission for nothing more than political ends, isn't just "showing one's patriotism by protesting" - its aiding and abetting our nation's enemies. It's treason.
You can dress up the word all you like. You can dance around it and pretend that you respect their point of view. You can even say that you'd fight to defend their right to do and say what they choose to say and do. But at some point a line must be drawn. At some point we have to pull back the facade and see the truth. At some point we must pull the tie off that pig and call it what it is - a traitor.
I honestly believe that if a prominent politician, newsperson, or organization actively attempts to cover up good events, magnifiy bad ones and act to undermine the public's resolve for this conflict, they are traitors. The truth is the truth. If the government is doing something bad, it will come out. It always does. I am a great believer in the truth and I believe in punishing those that deserve it, even if they are on my side of a greater political or philosophical argument. The left is afraid of the treason word because many of them have poisonous feelings and intentions for this nation and they know in their hearts that they are guilty.
The truth will come out. The left will pay a heavy price in the public arena for their efforts and actions during this thing. Wait and see. The truth always comes out.
Media Crimes
by David Z. Dent
I read some disturbing stuff regarding the news business on
AndrewSullivan.com:
a. CNN is sucking up to the Mullahs in Iran now, as if the Iraq debacle wasn't enough.
There was nearly a revolution started on July 9th, a couple of weeks ago by some students. No where in the media. There are some brutal things being done in that country by the powers-that-be and CNN has cameras on it right now. They are not broadcasting. Why? They don't want to lose access to the government.
b. There is apparently a great deal of evidence showing a direct link between Al Quaeda and Iraq.
There are many links found between the terrorists currently attacking US soldiers in Iraq and UBL's Al Quaeda. I haven't examined the evidence yet, but I will be very interested to see how much truth there is to this. If it is true, then the media needs to be chastised about it.
c. There is as outstanding and amazing success story to be told about our efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq...and it isn't being told by anyone.
Kids playing with the Marines. Soldiers and Marines rebuilding zoos, amusement parks. Great stability in most of the country in both countries. There is no health crisis. Let me repeat - There is NO health crisis. The government planned for one and they have averted it completely. All major hospitals in Iraq are open and functioning. There is no food crisis. Food gets to where it is supposed to be. There is Electricity to most of the country. They have just recently surpassed one million barrels of oil pumped per day. The Port of Um Qasr is open for business and very busy. Where are the feel good stories? Where are the reports of the actual events versus what was expected?
d. The loony left is getting worse, not better.
Sullivan had a quote from the "Democratic Underground" website citing a real confusion over whether Bush or the Husseins were the worse evil in this world. Unbelievable...
Race, Color and Democrats
by David Z. Dent
I went to a birthday party on Saturday. It was the second birthday of a little girl in one of my son's "play-groups". "Play-groups" are a modern reaction to the dynamic, and sometimes dangerous world we live in. Because of a need for a safe place for kids to play and interact with other kids, a place to take active children, having a busy life that needs customized convenience, and it being too hot to do anything outside in Arizona during the summer, there is a growing market of play-centers like "Gymboree", and others. Toddler playgrounds in malls are blooming everywhere. At these places, moms meet and decide to form their own "play-group", that doesn't require admission. They shift around from house to house each week and all of the kids get together and play.
Because of the nature of the meeting, there is no neighborhood focus on these groups. The kids in these groups are from all over town, literally an hour away from each other in some cases. Yet each week, the moms and kids get together. The kids play, and the moms talk and become friends. I went to this birthday party and saw a beautiful thing. Every possible ethnicity imaginable was represented at this party. Mixed marriages and mixed ethnic babies all over the place. We were all middle-class Americans enjoying a Saturday afternoon.
I don't live in a racially divided world. I don't want to. Neither does anyone else. That is the problem for the Democratic Party. The ghetto dwellers are a diminishing species as more of the blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and American Indians of this country are realizing that a) they don't have to stay there or, b) they can fix it up into something nicer. No credible group of people in this country is attempting to oppress anyone. Anytime there is a whiff of it, it becomes headline news across the nation. The fight that is still left to fight against the poverty and oppression associated within the ghettos of this country are cultural and character ones, not ethnic. It really doesn't matter what color your skin is in this country if you work hard and play by the rules. It really is that simple. The Democrats don't want that message heard.
In the 1970's, the country made a conscious decision to indoctrinate our children that race doesn't matter. I was a product of that indoctrination. I believed it. I still do. It is not the color of your skin, but the content of your character that counts with me and my entire generation. Shouldn't that be the message of the left? Shouldn't that be everyone's message? I look at the party I just went to and the party I will have at my house this weekend to celebrate my sister's birthday, and I see a very diverse mix of people on the surface, but very similar underneath. We are still a divided society, but it is by values, character, and culture, not the color of our skins.
Now I will admit that there may be places in this country that aren't like that. In fact I am sure that they abound in certain areas. But shouldn't they be marginalized and ignored? Isn't there a power in act of omission? If the country decided to accept Martin Luther King's Dream as the truth of today, wouldn't that be incredibly empowering to people? Wouldn't that shame certain areas of the country into "keeping up" with popular culture a bit?
How about calling things for what they are? Blacks in the inner-cities are poor, uneducated, and more likely to go to jail and prison because they are almost entirely from broken homes and there is a built-in excuse for mediocrity campaigned on and shouted by the left to keep their constituency in their proper place. Drugs are rampant because the criminal element of their society is glamorized by the music and film industry and paid homage by the cultural elites on the left. You can put a tie on a pig, but it's still a pig unfortunately. Sometimes the truth hurts. But acknowledging the truth and owning it will set people free from their self-made prisons.
What happened to Malcom X? What happened to the notion that until the black communities come to the table with their own economic power, they would remain inferior, not just in the perception of whites, but in reality. Black power was not all bad in sentiment, in the sense that blacks need to take control of their own destiny and start placing the race merchants and race-baiters of the left in their proper place next to the Ku Klux Klan and the American Nazi Party. King's Dream was a wonderful thing and we should all reach for it. If you look around, much of it has been accomplished. What is left to remain can't be done by politicians and the ones that try only slow the process and get in the way.
The melting pot is the nature of America, not diversity. We are one nation, under God, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all. We are the Land of the Free and Home of the Brave. Not multi-culturism. All cultures are not equal. All cultures do not deserve to be honored. We all believe in Freedom to pursue one's own happiness in the humility that no man can know God's plan. That is the tie that binds us. That is the golden promise of this great land. The powerful ideas of promise and optimism are what America is all about. That is why skin color doesn't matter. That is why the Democratic Party won't matter anymore either, if they don't change their thinking.
Social change starts on Saturdays, between friends and in play-groups, celebrating the life of a two-year old girl born in the USA; not in the DNC study groups for the next great sound-bite. From the beginning, to the end, the people at the top follow the people at the bottom. The first shall be the last, the least shall be the first. Race, as an issue, will die a well-deserved death in our lifetimes as more beautiful birthday parties on Saturday afternoons make the race-merchants obsolete and ridiculous.
All right. I will up the ante a bit:
Yesterday I came across a news story on the
Fox News web page that instantly sent me to the floor, laughing and got me so excited with mirth that I actually sent copies of the story to some friends.
There is a web page that advertises a service in Las Vegas, Nevada whereby a man (or even presumably a woman), can pay $10,000.00 to hunt a naked woman with a paint ball gun. The women are completely nude except for sneakers and the fine paying customer gets to stalk his prey through the wilderness outside of Las Vegas. If he catches her, he can "mount" her. I didn't make this up. Here's the link:
Hunting for Bambi
The real story here is the reaction from the Dems. Here are some excerpts from the FoxNews story:
Women's groups and legal experts are, not surprisingly, up in arms over the cruel game.
"I couldn't quite believe it. [The site] advertised this as really hurting people," said legal expert Susan Estrich on Fox News. "[They're] violating about 20 criminal laws, including assault."
The National Organization for Women has also spoken out against the game.
"It's appalling, and it's really frightening," Rita Haley, president of NOW's New York City chapter, told the New York Post. "It says something about the men who want to play this game and something about the financial climate that drives women to participate. The big fear is that somebody who plays will eventually want to use real bullets."
Real Bullets?
First of all, ladies, don't get your panties in a bunch. This is a sexual fettish gone awry, that accidentally got exposed to some sunlight. Far worse happens in the dark opium dens and tin pan alleys of this world. This is a fine illustration of the attitude these man-hating socialist lesbians of NOW really possess. If we follow this logic, then we should all be really afraid of all of the paint ball outlets around the country (NOT), and hide in our houses from all of the little boys who play cowboys and indians.
20 criminal laws, including assault?
Susan Estridge has really gone around the bend here. What laws are being broken here? This is the same liberal mindset that bends over backwards (and forwards) to defend what "consenting adults" do on private property...as long as they are gay. I guess other fettishes are not allowed. The main law broken here is that "thou shalt not offend liberal sensibilities" law. I share Ms. Estridge's distaste for this behavior, but I sure would like to know exactly what laws these people could possibly be breeching. Assault? Better round up all those paint ball guys around the country and start arresting people playing football, boxing, or wrestling while your at it. In fact, we could take this sound display of legal brilliance and conclude that testosterone itself was illegal and anyone possessing more than your average nun, should be shackled, and neutered. Distasteful? Yes. Perverted? Yes. Deviant? Definately. Criminal? Not the way the courts have been ruling things lately. You can't have it both ways liberals. You can either outlaw deviant sexual behavior...or you can't. Make up your mind.
The financial climate that drives women to participate?
Again, another display of just how far out on the lunatic fringe NOW has become. These women are getting paid $1000 per hunt if they get caught, and $2500 if they don't. The hunts are only three days long. That's good money for a prostitute (which is what these women are). Hell that's just good money. Work just three days a week and make as much money as an engineer straight out of college. The only talents required are...well there are none. If the women are somewhat athletic (and their boobs aren't too big), they can make $10,000 per month working only three days a week! The arguement that these women are living in squalor, and being paid bread and water, only to be whipped into harsh working conditions is ridiculous. This is a good gig for whores, and probably a lot more interesting than walking the streets.
In the construction business, we run into a lot of dead-enders, male and female. To a person, they are there due to a very long line of consecutive bad decisions. At any point, if they decide to, they can get out of their situation. This is true of prostitutes as well. The Dickensian picture of America's underbelly that the left tries to paint is not very convincing.
Liberia: Part II
I thought of a scenario in which I can understand the logic for going into liberia; The African nations have only the UN as an outlet for influence in the world. There are no success stories on that continent. The US jettisoned the UN in its bid to take out Saddam. This frightened these nations that are literally at the mercy of powerful nations like the US. By taking action to stabilize a portion of the dark continent, perhaps ties outside the UN could be established to enable our run for independence from it. I literally see a world in which the US is on one side of the coin, and the UN is on the other. The US will assemble its allies and friends and either leave or marginalize the UN, and the UN will move to a country like Iceland and continue to thwart the US at every turn. This is perhaps in the mind of the French to are terrified of an independant and powerful US. I think it just reminds them of how impotent they are.
I think the US has relied on the UN as our primary and perhaps only diplomatic ties to African nations. A more serious diplomatic engagement of the continent may be the UN's Waterloo. The US has a much better product to offer in the market of ideas. It has truth on its side, a positive, inspiring, and soul-lifting message to bring, and a whole lot of money. The UN has France...
David Z. Dent
Greetings fellow travelers! I too was one of the "Pigs" I think we actually stumbled on the phrase "You can put a tie on a pig, but it's still a pig." At the time, we thought this was a funny, drunken rejoinder to an uptight girlfriend who thought we were too loud after only four pitchers of Gentle Ben's brew (The original Gentle Ben's at First and Euclid in Tucson). What was the point in trying to be something we were not?
We intend to take issues seriously, but not ourselves too seriously.
Queer Eye-
I'm not quite as aghast as my blog brother Dave at this most recent media offering. From a societal evolution point of view its emergence is not surprising: Homosexuals have gained a level of tolerance unheard of a mere 30 years ago. The premise sounds hilarious to me because I find effeminate gay men so funny (Remember the "Lady Sitters" skit from the Man Show). So in a way, the show will perpetuate a gay stereotype. Imagine the straight guy's reaction when these five girls show up. It will be hilarious as long as they are not showing up at my house. I predict the show will last no more than one season as the novelty will shortly where off. What the show will not accomplish is viewers gaining an understanding of homosexuals. (I'm not actually sure what I just wrote, but it sounded nice and squishy).
Liberia-
I must agree with my blog brother on this one and will add this: We know getting involved is a bad idea when the UN asks us to go in. Don't get me started on this glaring inconsistency. We could fill 5 megabytes just pointing out how the UN has lost all moral authority to be a world organization.
National sovereignty and the UN-
Have you noticed that most extreme leftists detest the idea of the National Sovereignty of the United States? All the far lefties with whom I went to law school are practicing immigration law; not because it is lucrative, but because leftists hate the idea that we can and should exclude some from residing in this country. These same neo-communists will then demand that the US get permission from the UN before we defend ourselves.
It would not surprise me if the argument is made (perhaps it has already been made, please let me know) that the UN should have a voice in US elections because we are the most powerful Nation on Earth, thus our actions affect all the world, so the world should have a voting voice in our affairs. (Remember the EU threatening sanctions against Austria for having the temerity to elect a far-right President/Chancellor?)
We should pull out of the United Nations because there is no benefit for us. Most of the member countries are not liberal democracies. If you lie with pigs, you will start to smell like a pig.
Supreme Court-
I hope to offer commentary on various aspects of the law I find in my sole discretion to be interesting. The decisions from this past term have already been discussed exhaustively in the media I will not add to it unless asked. Generally, our democracy is being undermined by nine unelected oligarcs. Under our national, federal system the states are allowed to determine their own policies, so long as those policies do not violate Article 1 Section 10 of the US Constitution or the 14th Amendment thereto. I recommend you read those provisions. However, the leftist disease has infected the judiciary (as well as the bar) since the early years of the 20th Century. Earl Warren was not a baby boomer; most of the decisions that threw open the flood gates (Griswold v. Connecticut, Roe v. Wade, etc.) were decided when the baby boomers were still burning ROTC buildings.
The practice of law is an intellectual one and many judges are/were former law professors. Paul Johnson in his book "A History of the American People" tracks the leftward tilt of the American Academy, which used to be very conservative. Thus, many judges brought their own crazy leftist theories to the bench from the academy.
This also begs the question as to why the legal profession tilts so profoundly to the left. I believe this is because deep down, leftists do not like democracy because the polity may vote contrary to the leftists wishes. So if you are a leftist with an agenda that 99% of the citizenry abhor, get a law degree because your power will then be disproportionately greater than your vote.
Greetings fellow travelers! I too was one of the "Pigs" I think we actually stumbled on the phrase "You can put a tie on a pig, but it's still a pig." At the time, we thought this was a funny, drunken rejoinder to an uptight girlfriend who thought we were too loud after only four pitchers of Gentle Ben's brew (The original Gentle Ben's at First and Euclid in Tucson). What was the point in trying to be something we were not?
We intend to take issues seriously, but not ourselves too seriously.
Queer Eye-
I'm not quite as aghast as my blog brother Dave at this most recent media offering. From a societal evolution point of view its emergence is not surprising: Homosexuals have gained a level of tolerance unheard of a mere 30 years ago. The premise sounds hilarious to me because I find effeminate gay men so funny (Remember the "Lady Sitters" skit from the Man Show). So in a way, the show will perpetuate a gay stereotype. Imagine the straight guy's reaction when these five girls show up. It will be hilarious as long as they are not showing up at my house. I predict the show will last no more than one season as the novelty will shortly where off. What the show will not accomplish is viewers gaining an understanding of homosexuals. (I'm not actually sure what I just wrote, but it sounded nice and squishy).
Liberia-
I must agree with my blog brother on this one and will add this: We know getting involved is a bad idea when the UN asks us to go in. Don't get me started on this glaring inconsistency. We could fill 5 megabytes just pointing out how the UN has lost all moral authority to be a world organization.
National sovereignty and the UN-
Have you noticed that most extreme leftists detest the idea of the National Sovereignty of the United States? All the far lefties with whom I went to law school are practicing immigration law; not because it is lucrative, but because leftists hate the idea that we can and should exclude some from residing in this country. These same neo-communists will then demand that the US get permission from the UN before we defend ourselves.
It would not surprise me if the argument is made (perhaps it has already been made, please let me know) that the UN should have a voice in US elections because we are the most powerful Nation on Earth, thus our actions affect all the world, so the world should have a voting voice in our affairs. (Remember the EU threatening sanctions against Austria for having the temerity to elect a far-right President/Chancellor?)
We should pull out of the United Nations because there is no benefit for us. Most of the member countries are not liberal democracies. If you lie with pigs, you will start to smell like a pig.
Supreme Court-
I hope to offer commentary on various aspects of the law I find in my sole discretion to be interesting. The decisions from this past term have already been discussed exhaustively in the media I will not add to it unless asked. Generally, our democracy is being undermined by nine unelected oligarcs. Under our national, federal system the states are allowed to determine their own policies, so long as those policies do not violate Article 1 Section 10 of the US Constitution or the 14th Amendment thereto. I recommend you read those provisions. However, the leftist disease has infected the judiciary (as well as the bar) since the early years of the 20th Century. Earl Warren was not a baby boomer; most of the decisions that threw open the flood gates (Griswold v. Connecticut, Roe v. Wade, etc.) were decided when the baby boomers were still burning ROTC buildings.
The practice of law is an intellectual one and many judges are/were former law professors. Paul Johnson in his book "A History of the American People" tracks the leftward tilt of the American Academy, which used to be very conservative. Thus, many judges brought their own crazy leftist theories to the bench from the academy.
This also begs the question as to why the legal profession tilts so profoundly to the left. I believe this is because deep down, leftists do not like democracy because the polity may vote contrary to the leftists wishes. So if you are a leftist with an agenda that 99% of the citizenry abhor, get a law degree because your power will then be disproportionately greater than your vote.
I heard about a new TV show today at work and could hardly believe it; I'll run the piece from the TV station's web site so that the veracity of my claim isn't doubted:
"
Queer Eye for the Straight Guy "
"They are the Fab 5: an elite team of gay men who have dedicated their lives to extolling the simple virtues of style, taste and class.
Each week their mission is to transform a style-deficient and culture-deprived straight man from drab to fab in each of their respective categories: fashion, food and wine, interior design, grooming and culture.
It's a full lifestyle make-over — a make better show where straight guys turn in their pleats for flat fronts, learn about wines that don’t come in a jug and come to understand why hand soap is not a good shampoo (and vice versa). When the journey is done, a freshly scrubbed, newly enlightened, ultra hip man emerges.
Queer Eye for the Straight Guy is produced by Scout Productions. The executive producers are David Collins and Michael Williams for Scout, and Francis Berwick, Amy Introcaso-Davis and Christian Barcellos for Bravo. The co-executive producer is David Metzler. The series was created by David Collins, a gay man, and developed by David Metzler, a straight man — a union of sensibilities that gives the show its depth, humor and edge."
http://www.bravotv.com/Queer_Eye_for_the_Straight_Guy/About.shtml
This discovery falls into the "this is the end of the world", category. I reread Revelation to make sure it wasn't one of the signs of the Apocolypse. Un-be-lieve-able.
I guess to say something intelligent on the subject...ok, I'm not sure that is possible. To make a point instead of flustering about the topic, I would say that I can't imagine a straight, average Joe, sitting around the house saying, "Gosh, I wish five gay men would come into my life and refocus my life on all of the things that I don't give a s**t about." I don't get the marketing draw.
Is this one more piece of evidence to support
Michael Medved's assertion that Hollywood is driven by ideology instead of the bottom line? I can't imagine a large audience wanting to watch this other than fag hags, wives of slobs, and gay men, happy for some attention. Maybe I'm out to sea on this one, but it is just unbelievable. I think the shocking and audacious nature of the show is guaranteed to get it instant ratings, but I can't imagine any staying power.
Enough about that. I've already given it more life than it deserves.
Liberia
What is going on with the Bush Admin? I was with him up until now. I looked away from his border policies to support the others, but now I'm in a quandry; I don't think Liberia is a good play at all. If we are limited to a few hundred cadres, maybe. We don't owe the UN
anything. Why are we eager to go over there? If it is a political ploy to win over the black vote - bad argument for sending our boys. If it is a play to make nice with the UN - better not use a lot of our boys and make the f*****g UN send troops from other countries. What other reason is there to go?
The humanitarian aim, per se, is useless unless it has a real chance for success, or unless a serious national interest is at stake. With Iraq, both of these criteria were met; Iraq is an Arab country with one of the highest literacy rates (the raw material for self-governance), there was an active state-sponsored support of terrorists and terrorism and twelve years of ignoring cease-fire agreements was too long (notice I didn't even mention WMD's?). In addition to that, Iraq has oil reserves second only to Saudi Arabia and it is in the entire world's best interest to introduce a stable, West-friendly competitor to Saudi oil so that we can have a hammer AND a stick when dealing with our two-faced jackal "friends" over there.
Having said all of that, what in it for us in Liberia? Remember, morality of the State or of the elected official is to do what is best for your constituents. One should not confuse the moral teachings of our sacred texts regarding personal behavior with the necessities of realpolitik. What possible chance does Liberia have of stabilizing without colonizing the country? Seriously. The only third-world countries making any headway at all in the last 50 years were those with a successful long-standing colonization from european powers. The unstated possibility, because of a grave fear of PC censorship, is that the only way to stabilize and turn Africa around (and the Mid-East, and Asia, and...), is to colonize it. Split up the world between the UN and US and draw a line like the Pope did with Portugal and Spain. We'll compete with the idiot commies in the UN and turn around any country that wants success...for a price. Fair, free-market business deals. We'll develop a 20 year plan to turn the countries around in return for natural resources. That way we'll conserve our own...
Ok, I was ranting a bit.
That's all for now.
"You can put a tie on a pig, but it's still a pig."
In college, sitting around a bar, consuming too much fermented grain products from the vats in the rear of the establishment, a group of college friends discovered one of the eternal truths in life. You can dress things up any way you like, but it doesn't change what it is. The Democratic Party of this country as well as the mega media outlets and funny money spinsters and bean-counters at Enron and their ilk, have just learned this hard lesson, the hard way in the last couple of years.
Watching the current left-wing faction in our politics and the big-time established media implode upon themselves as their facades of pomp and circumstance show the true yellow underbelly of their nature, has inspired me and my compatriots to jump on this Blogwagon. We desire to add to the maelstrom of opinion that will make it that much more difficult for a small number of unscrupulous and/or ideologically driven people to drive politics and news with an agenda, while pretending and purporting to be objective.
This is the very first post of a new Blog. Inspired by Hugh Hewitt and a general desire by the lot of us to offer our unsolicited and occasionally interesting opinions to the growing Blogosphere, here we are. All of us being in professions other than writing and journalism, it may be a mere drop in the bucket on the web, but perhaps it may do some good and it will give us fellows an outlet to air our opinions and discuss them in a new an dynamic forum.
Today, I have spent most of my time relaxing with my family and ignoring the world around me. I have nothing newsworthy to report today, and no opinions dying to get out at the moment. I feel good just getting the Blog going. I've been talking about it for weeks now.
That's all for now.
Dave
