Tuesday, May 29, 2007

America: The Good and the Bad



We are all so lucky to be able to call America home and enjoy the freedoms provided by our dominant military structure and our representative democracy. These heroic men and women fight and spill blood not only for quantified results like the protection of our soil but they also fight for the ideals of freedom and justice. Just remember the next time a soldier falls and a news anchor laments the reasons for a soldier's death and uses the news to make a shameful political point. These men and women are fighting for something they believe is far more important than a single life. Even on foreign soil thousands of miles from the comfort of the home hearth, those ideals make the sacrifice worth the risk in their eyes.

In America we are free to come and go as we please and cross state lines without fear of unwanted interference from rogue police units. We are free to worship in any way we see fit, follow any political persuasion we like, and are able to read or view any of the myriad of free press offerings available to us. In some states like mine the 2nd Amendment allows us to keep and bear arms for the protection of our families and possessions. We are free to engage in commerce and economic capitalism provides us with ample opportunities to earn for our families, acquire wealth, own a home, and live the American Dream. If we work hard and strive to remain educated, the sky is literally the limit.

Yes there is a downside and sadly it seems we are destined to initiate our great country's demise from within. Global Islamic terrorists bent on killing and exterminating Judaeo-Christian governments and societies is played to rank as the single most destructive threat we face. Would you believe me if I told you it ranks maybe a distant third or fourth? You see I think we as a nation are ignorantly attempting to parallel the fall of the Roman Empire. Freedom is no longer an ideal or virtue that each of us has a duty to defend. It's a cliche or a punchline and we ought to be ashamed of ourselves. Since the birth of moral relativism and a shift to secularizing traditions in our country, the very fabric and foundation that made our country and society strong now begins a systematic crumbling.

1. The Congress in the United States no longer maintains the ethical standing to achieve positive results for the betterment of the country and her taxpayers. Politics for the purpose of power destroys the very institution intended to provide the means for well being and security to citizens of the United States. Our entire political system is corrupt, corrupted by the men and women "serving" there intent on furthering objectives for personal gain.

2. Americans no longer feel the need to be personally responsible for decisions and actions in their own lives. We expect a corrupted government to care for us and provide for our needs and at all costs we now have a right to be entertained. We'll spend far more on video games and movies than on family counseling sessions or tithes to a church.

3. The American family's disintegration drives a new generation that views commitment in a relationship as optional and commitment to positive ideals in living a productive life of meaning as optional as well.

4. Political correctness poisons the pool of truth. Homosexuals have gay pride parades. If I legally protest this parade I'm a bigot. If I organize a heterosexual pride parade, I'm a bigot. We're chipping at 200 year old values here to protect the aberrant and the opposites of traditional standards. We've been forced by secularists at mainstream media outlets to accept the religious views of what we may feel are false religions at face value without opportunity for discussion or opposition. That makes us bigots. Allah and our Christian God are in the ring and modern society won't let us cheer for our God under penalty of bigotry but the Muslims can sure cheer for theirs. My money is on our Christian God with a knockout in the first round.

5. We're intent on socializing medicine, redistributing income, and pushing Christianity's founding principles as far from our lives as possible. Do you know that more than one Democratic presidential candidate mentioned getting a hold of "unfettered capitalism?" Let's say I work hard in school and in business and achieve phenomenal success in my work life. What happens? The government takes my money to give to those that are perfectly capable of doing the same thing but don't want to because they're too busy watching Rosie on the View.

6. We're allowing illegal criminals to cross our borders and use our taxpayer services and benefits spitting in the face of our forefathers who entered the country legally, worked for everything they ever got, and damn sure didn't wave a Mexican flag while demanding rights instead of earning them.

Everything regarded as wholesome, traditional, and responsible is under attack because it simply might take too much work to be dedicated to our own productivity in life. The silent majority is too tired to fight and that's a poor excuse. It's a shame and it will get worse. I hope we can change before it's too late.

Saturday, May 26, 2007

Memorial Day - Remembering My Father




Let's take a moment to remember those that were special to us in our lifetime. One of my most special memories is of my father. He and I had a unique relationship. He was old enough to be my grandfather..... Maybe that is why we got along so well. He was my best friend as a child and I spent a lot of time with him while he worked at an elevator in the small town that we lived in.

It was at the elevator that I played for hours and hours. I would climb around on all the box cars that lined the railroad tracks. Most were empty waiting to be loaded with grain from the elevator. My Dad would "cooper" the car. I don't know where that expression came from but I always remember him saying that we had to go and "cooper" the car before we load. He would place 4 X 8 foot heavy planks of wood against the doors so that grain that he loaded wouldn't spill out the doors when they were opened. This was exciting because you had to do it from the inside and then climb out. It was quite an adventure for a child under the age of six. I also would climb up and get myself a sugar beet from the loaded cars that were waiting to move on down the line to "somewhere" that they would be unloaded. That "somewhere" was a long ways away in my mind. I would eat the raw sugar beet and it was very sweet and tasty.

It was also at the grain elevator that I saw the world from way above. My Dad would pull us both up to the top of the elevator on a "man lift". He had to pull his weight plus mine all the way top. He was so strong! Then we would walk along the top of the big huge bins and check them to see how full they were. From there I could see the world! Or at least the little town from way above everyone else. What an adventure!

I would play in the grain trucks that came to unload in the late summer during harvest. As they dumped the box would get higher and higher and the wheat would slide out the back into the pit. One time I got stuck in the gate at the end of the box and my Dad had to hold me until more of the wheat had emptied out. It was very dangerous as I could have been suffocated but it was all in a day with my Dad. He never got excited about anything but always knew where I was and what I was doing.

I also had my own salt block! It was a salt block for cattle but it was my very own. In one of the storage rooms they had a pile of salt blocks ready to be sold but I made my Dad promise not to sell that one. That one was mine! I would go and lick on it every time I was there at the elevator. I hardly made a dent in it as a cow would..... but it was mine!

There are so many memories of my childhood that were with my Dad at the elevator. They will stay with me forever. It was quite an experience for a young girl under the age of six..... Those were the days of me being a "tomboy".

So on this Memorial Day weekend take a moment to remember someone that was special to you in your life as I have. This is my father's military picture that was taken when he was drafted into the war in 1942. He served in the Philippines during WWII and gave 39 months and 9 days of his life to our country for our freedom.

My father will always be close to me in my heart!


Signed..... Mrs. Montana Conservative

Wednesday, May 23, 2007

My Little Soccer Player....

The little guy looks as though he should be playing soccer or some sport that requires helmets. He doesn't seem to mind wearing the helmet but I am sure as the weather gets warmer it won't be as comfortable. There are many choices for colors and designs but that isn't the main objective for this contraption.... Craniosynostosis is common in many children and some require surgery. Ohers are required to wear a helmet to reshape the bones in the head. If this is done the child won't experience problems in the future. It is sad to see but before long it will all be over and many problems will have been avoided in the future. The wonders of modern medicine.... Thank God....

Hugs and Kisses for my little grandson....

Signed..... Mrs. Montana Conservative

http://www.chw.org/display/router.asp?DocID=22502

http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/craniosynostosis/craniosynostosis.htm

Sunday, May 20, 2007

The 2008 Frontrunners, It's Either Fun or Tedious


REPUBLICANS-


Rudolph Giuliani- Rudy leads the pack in the race to romance Republican voters after President Bush and the previous Congress destroyed the opportunity to hold its power base after the 2006 mid-term elections. According to the mainstream media, the Republicans failed to make significant gains against global terror in the great goat paradise known as the Middle East so a power shift ensued. Rudy will not easily sway the "far right" because of his pro-abortion, gay rights, and gun control stances. There is a school of thought that believes his social leanings may bring in some independents and moderate swing voters. The sale of souls to the Devil begins! If Rudy wins the multi-primary race and the nomination one of two things can happen. He will either split the Republican vote and someone like Hillary Clinton and her Socialist agenda take control or conservatives will grudgingly line up behind him and vote because after all he is better than the Antichrist. Rudy will have to grow some extra hair to cover that massive portion of frontal forehead he so prominently displays. On television I can watch the entire political debate on his head and that scares me.


John McCain- I like John McCain but he too read John Kerry's book on how to be a flip-flopper. He is twisting in the wind like a kite in the storm of public opinion and much like Hillary Clinton, doesn't think any of us notice. McCain has long in my estimation supported amnesty for illegal immigrants and that surely chaps a majority of conservative voters. On the other hand and the stronger hand, McCain understands the significance of the fight against warped and murdering fundamentalist Islamic Jihadists (enough adjectives?) and that puts him near the top as far as candidates touting strong national security goes. Sometimes I think he regresses back to the jungles of Vietnam where he so honorably served his country and sacrificed through his suffering as a POW. He is a true American hero but does that forced smile through clenched teeth alarm you like it does me? I can see him as President coming to a press briefing in the Rose Garden dressed in full battle fatigues and carrying an M-16 and a belt full of frag grenades. Couldn't you just see him lobbing a flash-bang in the direction of NBC's David Gregory during one of Gregory's biased and slanted interrogations of McCain at the podium? One word for you. Flashback.


Mitt Romney- Romney looks cast for the role of President straight out of a Hollywood talent agency. He is well spoken and apparently made some great strides as Governor of Massachusetts. A Republican governor in the belly of the liberal beast? He must have won the election on the afternoon of St. Patrick's Day or something. Romney carries two pieces of political baggage that will get heavier as he approaches the modern plethora of early primaries. He will be labeled by social conservatives as a Kerryesque "flip-flopper" on the issue of abortion. I supported it once but saw the light and now dislike it because it is unpopular with my party's base voters and so on and so forth. I think there is some genuine distaste among traditional Christians in that Romney adheres to Mormonism. As the campaign progresses I can bet his polygamy jokes in public will come to an end. Romney is still in the running.


Possibilities- Newt Gingrich (former House Speaker and brilliant man, a lot of trouble with a malfunctioning zipper though. Conservatives may not be able to support him if they practice what they preach).


Fred Thompson- Former Senator and current actor. It worked for Reagan didn't it? Thompson is a popular choice, is intelligent, and has experience. Besides if it got too bad under his rule, we could pretend it was just one of his movies.


DEMOCRATS-


Hillary Clinton- The very image of Hillary Clinton repulses me to the point of developing hives. In the interest of fairness and equality I will put those prejudices aside and report as accurately as I can. Hillary believes in a government so large it outnumbers the country's population. She once mentioned that capitalism cannot run "unfettered". Can anyone else say Karl Marx, Stalin, or Lenin? She wants to tax me more because she believes she can spend my money more wisely on issues she and her cronies deem more appropriate. The Democrats believe in sticking up for the little guy? I think she believes in sticking up the little guy for sure. Hillary like other hippie-era moral relativists believes in gay rights, gun control, and partial birth abortion or in more chic terms "womb vacuuming." I don't wish Hillary ill personally but do hope she develops a case of intestinal diarrhea so severe that she simply must leave the podium during debates to take care of the issue therefore relieving the public of being inundated by her smarmy tones.


Barack Hussein Obama- This is like voting for class president in high school. Barack is wealthy, handsome, and very well-spoken. Isn't it funny that rich nominees and candidates in this party always speak for the poor guy? Is he going to write all of us a check if elected or tax the people even more? Barack has no experience and a laundry list of supporters with questionable backgrounds. I think if Barack won the Presidency it would take him several months to find his way around basic government principles. He promotes dialogue and reactionary defense versus strength and pro action in this modern and very dangerous world. I hope he writes a book called, "My 18 Month Journey of Learning and Rise to the Top."


John Edwards- John looks too perfect to be President. John advocates taxes, cowardice abroad, and supports every abominable secular position on social issues just like the others in his party. John made his millions off the backs of those that make our economy tick and tells us there are two Americas. There is a rich America that he lives in and a poor America that I live in. He wants to help me by taking more of my taxes thus making me poorer and government richer. He will also decide who to forward my tax money to because he believes I am not capable of properly using the money I worked for. I doubt he will invite me to his palatial mansion to prove to me just how much he supports me. I don't think my old pickup with the dents in the side fits very well in the driveway at his home. I think his estate is so big you have to get a helicopter ride from the parking area to the front door. We saw his positions when he ran as Herman Munster's vice presidential candidate in 2004 and we know how that turned out. He is clearly a third place runner right now in George Soros' Democratic Party. Besides, I heard a news crew lost two cameras during an interview with Edwards when his dimples sucked two of the devices and their operators inside.


Sunday, May 13, 2007

My Panic and Dismay, Paris Goes to Jail



Will pictures like this become classics? I mean just look at her. Wholesome, shy, and seemingly innocuous. Can you imagine the parental shock and horror if this was your dining room table and your teenage son brought his girlfriend Paris over for Sunday dinner?

"Willard pass the ham and green beans. Willard I'm talking to you! Oh my! Paris what are you oh my! Junior, HELP!" The line between embarrassing and disgusting thins to an infinitesimal thread in situations such as these. If this steamy photograph originated in the Great Depression and she posed like this simply to provide food for her family maybe I'd feel some compassion. Such is not the case. Paris Hilton survives as a modern and extremely wealthy heir to the Hilton Hotel and real estate fortune. I guess she chose to bypass the responsible route. She and her apparently inattentive parents easily possessed the tools to educate her at elite universities and make her an integral part of at least one of their successful corporations. Instead they acquiesced to her desires for self-consuming and distasteful vanity.

I am so sick of seeing her on television. Photographers follow her like rabid dogs and we all need to get the "inside" story on her whereabouts, sex life, and career objectives. Why do we need the inside scoop on this bimbo? Hollywood mystifies me in how it transforms unattractive and untalented people into successful and wealthy stars. I know two girls within my block that are prettier and in complete command of their syntax and diction. One teaches children and the other takes care of sick folks at a hospital. Hilton can neither speak, write, sing, or babble coherently. She made $7,000,000.00 in 2006. Am I missing something here? Her greatest claim to fame seems to be an amateur sex tape that "found" its way onto the Internet and then the formal marketplace. She once said her graphic exploits and sex acts on the tape "humiliated" her but that was a passing emotion. She titled the tape and now profits from it. It's called "One Night in Paris." Classy isn't she? Maybe we can all watch it at Christmas time right after "Miracle on 34th Street."

Besides being overrated, she embarrasses humanity by constantly disavowing legal and even moderate moral standards. Paris was arrested and charged with DUI, she was driving two days later, violated her probation, and continued partying and acting like a complete moron in public. Her blatant irresponsibility and probation violations force the authorities to revoke said probation and sentence her to 45 days in jail. Now Paris Hilton fans everywhere (yes the idiot has fans) signed a petition destined for the California governor's desk imploring him to free poor Paris. That is a great message. The rich and powerful can simply buy their way out of personal criminality and responsibility. The rich and powerful are above the law.

But if you want to know who really holds the blame we cannot look much past our own noses. We are to blame. Why the American consumer subsidizes lunatics like Paris Hilton (and many others) is simply beyond my limited comprehension. We buy her tapes, records, and buy the tabloids. We are to blame. If it wasn't for us, Paris Hilton would be little more than an insignificant speck on the butt of society. It says a great deal about where we are as a country and culture. Personally I'd rather read a story about the life and deeds of a soldier in Iraq. I guess that is not quite sexy enough to serve our conceited needs.

Friday, May 11, 2007

Glenn Beck Takes a Huge Step Back

I started listening to Glenn Beck a couple of years ago and have to admit I was quite drawn to his rapid-fire style of conservative commentary. His blend of humor and hard-hitting observations about the state of politics seemed refreshing in comparison to stale and slanted network news drivel. About a year ago Glenn became the host of a televised version of the Glenn Beck Show on CNN Headline News. Apparently the show is doing okay because the secularists running that network have not given him the boot yet. Not long ago I learned that Glenn practices Mormonism within the LDS religion. The hair stood at attention on my neck but I pushed that personal prejudice aside because after all President Reagan confided with the Mormons on his staff didn't he?

During last night's show, Glenn began his monologue in an overly melancholy state and seemed consumed with teary-eyed emotion when discussing Al Sharpton's appearance on the program. Beck informed the audience that Sharpton slighted Mormons everywhere by inferring that Mormons and maybe even Presidential candidate Mitt Romney practiced intolerance and bigotry towards African-Americans seeking to establish relevancy within Utah's favorite religion. Glenn Beck subsequently proceeded to cross the line of known historical truths. Glenn informed his television audience that he was a Christian and certainly not a bigot. Glenn, I believe you are not a bigot. Discussing bigotry with Al Sharpton is like fighting the war on drugs with Robert Downey, Jr. as the head of the DEA.

Neither Sharpton nor Jesse Jackson possess the character or intestinal fortitude to offer humble apologies to the Duke University rape suspects or condemn the moral inadequacy of their accuser. Those sanctioned racists absolutely crucified Don Imus but apparently the coin owns only one shiny side. More troubling than the obvious racial double standard surrounding Sharpton like a hail cloud is Glenn Beck's reference to Christianity and Mormonism. Glenn like many others in his "faith base" refuses to accept that the coupling of those terms defines impossibility. Christianity and Mormonism are mutually exclusive terms.

Here's the real story Glenn. You can practice whatever religion you wish as guaranteed in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. You can practice that religion in peace and privacy or among a host of others as guaranteed in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. What you cannot do is insult the intellectual integrity of Christians everywhere by implying that Mormonism and Christianity share the same philosophical tenets.

Mormons believe the Bible is flawed and subject to interpretation from modern day prophets. Christians believe the Bible is the sacred and final word and believe the attempt to intertwine modern texts like the Book of Mormon constitutes nothing short of blaspheme. Mormons believe in a multitude of celestial kingdoms and not only will Mormons sit at the right hand of God but become exalted Gods themselves after a lifetime of performing self-meriting works on Earth. Christians believe in salvation through a baptismal in faith and humbling oneself before the Lord on Earth and in Heaven as a servant and not an equal. Mormons believe Joseph Smith had the "book" divinely revealed to him in the hills in 1829. Christians believe Smith little more than a slick talking used car salesman with a penchant for the company of many women. The Mormons successfully changed their own doctrine more than 150 times since banning plural marriage in the late 1800's. The ban exists because of political pressures and not because of religious belief or the adherence to a Christian moral code.

I could go on and on but won't because if Glenn read this and is truly a practicing Mormon, the same taught response sets in. Deny, label the writer as anti-Mormon, and let the apologists for the religion begin a campaign of rebuttal and refutation. At all costs do not examine the critics and their contentions. For God's sake, don't read what Mormonism's opponents write even if the study of such opposition sheds factual light on the dogma being forced into you on those long Sundays.

Here are some topics of interest for those that follow these issues. The divine "secret" writings of Abraham supposedly possessed by Smith written on ancient Egyptian papyrus simply stands as fraudulent. An interpretation revealed nothing more than Egyptian funerary instructions on the "sacred" parchment. Smith found the papyrus when he bought an Egyptian mummy from a traveling sideshow or circus act. The Mormon texts fail to meet any Christian standards in relation to defining the text as authentic during the period of Apostolic authorship. It is believed by many Christians that the attempt to supersede the Bible with the works of Smith parallel what Catholics call heresy. The Bible is pretty clear about "turning away" from the teachings of Christ as revealed by the apostles in the New Testament. There is no doubt in my mind or the minds of many scholars that Smith's divine revelations as professed in Mormon texts were simply based on his own life and embellished much like a good novelist does. The religion simply bears no semblance to Christianity other than the bits and morsels included to spearhead the religion's recruiting drives.

Of all people, Glenn knows the damage caused by statements like "I'm a Christian." Glenn you are an admitted Mormon so accept it on its own merit and do not dishonor the Holy Bible by referencing Christianity and Mormonism in the same breath. You rail against partisan bickering on Capitol hill and the damage done by disguising truth and progress under a veil of political correctness. Silly Al Sharpton takes a poke at Mormonism and Mitt Romney and the apparent latent dose of political correctness hiding in you spills forth for all to see. Maybe that is a learned and endorsed response to attacks on Mormonism. You can profess to adhere to Mormonism all you want with or without the public emotion and chagrin. You may want to get used to hearing a few candid and plausible refutations from those in the broader Christian community that label the Mormon religion as false and intellectually debilitating. I patiently await the expected barrage from the rabid and misguided attack mongers.

www.glennbeck.com

Saturday, May 05, 2007

One Very Important Whitetail Buck


Do you remember those old clich├ęd phrases that never really meant anything to you until you found a specific cause to relate them to? You know, phrases like “making a mountain out of a mole hill” or “making something out of nothing”? Recently I found the United States Attorney’s Office in the District of Montana plans on convening a grand jury to further substantiate criminal charges stemming from an alleged illegal shooting and subsequent interstate transfer of a whitetail buck from eastern Montana some time ago. To put any animal rights fears to bed, the buck refuses to testify mainly because he finds it difficult to back out of the wall he’s mounted in at some distant fish and game office. Keep in mind this excessive government intervention revolves around one deer, not a moving van full of Montana’s finest ruminant mammal Cervidae.

According to my sources, the following synopsis characterizes the government’s substantial case. A Montana resident with a legal and correct sex /species tag and an out of state acquaintance hike to and fro searching for that perfect specimen. Specimen is found, dispatched, and dressed in the field. (Note to non-hunters, dressed doesn’t mean the hunters outfitted the slain deer in a polo shirt, khakis, and loafers) Out of state acquaintance enters a “Game Check” station before crossing into North Dakota en-route to Minnesota. Wardens find that instead of the out of state acquaintance’s name on the tagged carcass, Montana resident’s name and tag are attached to the animal and the Montana resident is not riding on the trailer with both arms securely hugging the furry quadruped. The Earth then spirals into chaos, lightning flashes, sirens wail, Miranda advisories abound, and for the love of God the federal police wade into the fray. Ballistics tests and fingerprint analysis ensue to determine who fired which weapon when and which tuft of hair landed on which rock and whose orange vest is covered with more blood and so on and so forth. CSI comes to Mayberry and Barney wants some answers.

The purpose of this written diatribe serves not to bemoan the state’s fish and wildlife department or the federal fish and wildlife office either. Both agencies have their place and purposes to serve. The argument symbolizes exactly what most taxpayers unfortunately pay no attention to anymore. This case glorifies the subtle way that government wastes thousands of taxpayer dollars to rationalize their position of power over a taxpaying public. In other words, the government makes quite a show with your money to “show you who maintains the power.” It demonstrates that rather than using common sense and good judgment to handle a rather insignificant situation, the government comes out swinging letting you know in no uncertain terms just how right they are regardless of the cost.

Let me be clear. I’ve hunted since childhood in eastern Montana and for most of us the unique relationship with nature becomes a fundamental part of who we are. I find poaching and antler/head hunting as reprehensible endeavors and contrary to the whole joy and responsibility of the hunting experience. I’ve never poached an animal or associated myself with people that do. However, the presence of a tag implies that one has paid for the privilege of enjoying and relishing in a successful hunt. I’ve even taken the protectionist stance in viewing out of state hunters with distrust and a scathing frown. The only reason they get a pass from me is because they contribute much needed money to the eastern Montana economy and their presence helps keep runaway deer numbers in check.

Apparently much of the malaise in this case could’ve been avoided if the Montana resident scribbled on a cocktail napkin indicating that the out of state friend had his permission to take the deer back home to Minnesota. But because he didn’t, that somehow justifies criminal charges in federal court and a litany of attorneys, briefs, attorney’s briefs or boxers, grand juries, fees, expenses, and in summation a large barrel of paper (both green and white) waste. Hunting privilege cessation, weapons seizures, criminal records, and character assassinations replace what could have been a simple misdemeanor ticket or summons to appear before a local judge to handle the case (if legitimate) with an appropriate fine and hand whacking.

I hope my dad never moves to Minnesota and comes back for a fall hunting trip with me. We’re not very good with checklists and I cannot imagine my nausea and panic when approaching a game check station having to determine if I fired his new .30-06 at the deer or if he did or if the deer committed suicide. Now let me think, did I put dad’s tag on the deer he shot or did he tie my tag on the deer I shot and did I use some of his bullets in my gun and are my fingerprints on his thermos and bologna sandwich bag? You know those bags are perfect for obtaining latent fingerprints for analysis. Should I take my attorney hunting with me and does the retainer apply to each expedition? I thought ammunition made the day expensive, boy was I wrong. What if his doe is hanging in my Montana garage because I already have plenty of meat and my buck travels with him to Minnesota and I forgot to scribble his permission slip to transport the animal on the back of a matchbook? My 61 year old father with no prior criminal history suddenly finds himself detained and charged after being in possession of a buck with his son’s tag on it and a federal case commences? I dread the day I take my wailing mother to the jail only to find Dad in his decorative orange jumpsuit and flip-flops. He does little to console her when he tells her he and cellmate Bubba seem to be hitting it off just fine.

You simply have to be kidding! Why couldn’t the fish and game officials simply call me and fine me $50.00 instead of tearing into the flesh of insignificance with gnashing teeth? Why not just call me to see if Dad’s explanation holds water and leave it at that? The government just crossed the line for the sake of justifying their budgets, quotas, and power base. They just took something from him he can’t get back and for what, a successful conviction and the social lynching of a law abiding citizen sharing a memorable (and legal) day in the great outdoors? I guarantee we no longer can hunt together or even possess the weapons we purchased to hunt with. Do you really want to question how and with what fury the government wields its regulatory authority? You better not if you know what’s good for you. You now fall into a category of active interest and your statements may come back to haunt you. When did the government’s regulatory authority supersede an individual’s Constitutional protections as dictated in the Bill of Rights? Would a reasonable person believe that society is better served by destroying the rights of an individual in relation to the questionable circumstances of one whitetail buck’s interstate transportation?

Is the government really concerned with the death of the animal? I bet insurance analysts everywhere revel every time another deer dies so that their companies save on the rash of car versus deer incidents on the highways directly caused by increased herd numbers. If you don’t believe me, just travel across Montana at night and see for yourself if deer are in short supply. I find deer in places I’d never seen them migrate through before 1995. I’m surprised insurance companies haven’t acquired the services of mafia scoundrels like Nuncio Cappuccino to secretly pay gun enthusiasts to pick off the plethora of deer wading in road ditches just dying to raise heck with car fenders and insurance premiums everywhere.

I am familiar with the mindset involved in cases like this. I am a former POST certified deputy sheriff and coroner in Montana with several licenses and training certificates suitable for framing. I have worked cases with federal agents, state agents, and even insurance agents. What I find most alarming is the “go after them and get them” mentality that exists in these over hyped cases. Lost in the whirlwind of quotas and successful criminal procedure is the idea that investigatory legal success trumps the fundamental tenet of protecting the citizens’ rights. Common sense got on the first train to Baltimore and objective reason finds itself replaced with a subjective and sometimes ego maniacal need to further a career or departmental image. These agencies believe that prosecutions, micromanaged cases, and convictions equate to protection of the public at large but instead amount to something far more damaging, the measured destruction of an individual’s liberties.

I think we all need to step back and question situations that seem absurd rather than buy wholesale doctrine from government representatives assuring you that their actions are for your protection and safety. Are the costs justified in relation to the words, actions, and assurances of those in power? Do the ends truly justify the means? Yes, I am extremely conservative and probably lie somewhere just right of Attila the Hun but too much is too much. I like to think the government’s primary function is to protect the citizens rather than persecute them. How would you feel if you passed a game check station in your pickup and a state game warden sped up to your bumper, followed you onto your property with lights and sirens flashing, and demanded to know about your actions and failure to enter the game check area. I did not go hunting. I was bringing my pickup home from the shop. Is that kind of violation justified, rational, or appropriate? The corruption of power is deadly if allowed to propagate. Just take notice and keep your eyes peeled. Remember to signal and come to a complete stop, you’re only one misstep away from being the proud owner of a criminal history.

Tuesday, May 01, 2007

Shameless San Francisco

This week I simply have to write about the crazy mayor of San Francisco, Gavin Newsom. He talks about being a defender of human rights and the Constitution but he seems more like a spoiled little rich kid used to getting his way because the whole family couldn't believe how cute little Gavin was. "Here little Gavin, take some of daddy's money and go buy a house for you and your friends to play in. Careful honey, don't pull the ruby out of your diaper. Leave the big people alone so we can have martinis and decide how to save the owl and cut down on plastic bag use." Talk about a city and a subculture so far out of touch with decency and common sense.

Not only does the mayor in the gay bay defy the California Supreme Court by allowing and encouraging gay marriage, he openly defies federal immigration laws and states publicly to a news crew that San Francisco is a sanctuary city and does not recognize federal laws regarding illegal or criminal immigration. Oh yeah, he got caught playing touch football with his best friend's wife too. You know, "When I blow the whistle, yell HIKE and move down two chairs." Quite a guy to have in a position of leadership. He must have read the Bill Clinton handbook on how to be a scumbag. At any rate, we'll talk later about San Francisco and its tumultuous spin into an eddying moral cesspool. We can always hope that 8.5 shakes everything loose enough that it drifts out to sea.
In the meantime, lobby your congressman or congresswoman to cut off federal funding for the city until the mayor and leaders in the community can at the very least rise to the level of decency displayed in ancient Babylon? Why should American taxpayers sink money and resources into an area and specifically a city whose most outspoken and powerful mayor is little more than a corrupt example of a political process gone wrong? If San Francisco insists on being the beacon for all things vile and degenerate as lobbied for by those in charge of local government, let them develop a tax base and revenues from an economy of self invention and regeneration.
I mean the possibilities are endless. They could host an adult toy convention, perhaps a fashion show highlighting transvestite fashion trends, and develop a healthy bag manufacturing industry that neither utilizes plastic or paper. They'll be saving the environment and the spotted owl. Maybe San Francisco will become one of the first floating cities. It already seems adrift without direction because of its broken rudder. What a shame indeed.