Author Archive

Well folks, it’s once again that time when I prayerfully consider the opportunities available to share the love of Jesus Christ with the people of the United States and the World. As children of God, we are all called to minister to our neighborhoods, our cities, our nations, etc. And, my home church, Englewood Baptist Church, has been a long supporter of stateside and international mission trips.

In the past, there have been many opportunities for me to serve, but the timing was never right. However, I now find myself with ample time and freedom. But this opportunity, while coming with a blessing, also came with a henderance – an unfortunate lack of funds. So, I am doing something I have never done before: appealing to you, the great readership of Desperate State for a little help.

The first trip, Toledo, OH , is relatively inexpensive by trip standards, only $210, but it’s $210 I don’t have.  I started a “Chip-In” on the right side on this page. If you want to share a little love, please click on “Chip-In” and donate what you can.

If you would like more information about what our team will be doing in the Toledo area, email me, and I’ll be glad to fill you in.

Thank you in advance for your help.

Several weeks ago, while waiting for my lovely wife, I was listening to talk radio. I am always good for that. Anyway… up came the subject of compromise.

Compromise – it’s a word we’ve all heard our whole adult lives. The secret to a good marriage is compromise… politicians should be willing to compromise… we should all be willing to give and take – compromise… the world would be a better place if we could all just compromise; all ideally valid points, ideally. And all wrong in reality.

Compromise is nothing more than giving away something. Give me your wallet! No? Okay, let’s compromise; just give me your cash; okay, just the credit cards. That’s fair; I’ll buy you lunch. Still no? Okay, I’ll shoot you. Again, let’s compromise; I’ll just shoot you in the toe – how about the little toe? Either way, you’re losing money or blood.

Consider our lawmakers. We all have principals, and we all have ideas that we feel represent the best interest for our state and America. Conservatives have certain ideas (or at least they did): limited government, lower taxes, strong military, etc. If we compromise our fiscal principals in a “Compassionate Conservative” way, we have giving away our livelihoods. If we compromise our advocacy for the unborn simply because the best choice happens to be pro-choice, we compromised our morals. And if we weaken our military to gain popularity in the world, we compromised our sovereignty and freedom. Compromise is what brought us the McCain-Kennedy Education Bill, aka No Child Left Behind, the McCain-Feingold  Elections Ethics Bill; how has that worked for curbing the money problem in politics. Compromise brought us Medicare Part B, the auto industry bailout, and countless other boondoggles at Americans’ expense.

Why must we compromise to select or elect the lesser of two unfit candidates? The national Republican Party has been losing popularity, because it’s been losing its soul compromising on the issues and moving slowly to the left. Whereas we conservatives have been firmly planted on the right, unwilling to compromise, unwilling to give up on our values, our principles, and our foundation.

I agree with Elbert Hubbard, “It is the weak man who urges compromise – never the strong man.”

Most of you who were around during the Vietnam War error probably remember that famous line, “What if they gave a war and nobody came?” When Carl Sandburg made those comments, it became a cultural motto. Charlotte Keyes wrote a poem, the Monkeys recorded a song, and countless others used it in media.

So, what if they gave an election and nobody came? Those of us on the right are fed up with those on the right – a great deal of words and not enough action, too much spending, and not enough discretion, and the list goes on. And interestingly those on the left are fed up with those on the left. There hasn’t been a legitimate conservative representative in 30 years. Yes, there have been a few candidates of late who have shown some promise, Doug Hoffman, Sarah Palin, Marco Rubio, and couple others. But, every time someone shows potential the media lights them up or they fall on their face, a la Governor Mark Sanford. The mainstream GOPers are entrenched in beltway politics, the almighty dollar, and never-ending GOTV efforts.  The national Republican Party has promoted liberal candidates like Dede Scozzafava and Charlie Chris, and quietly tossed away the Tea Party as nothing more than a temporary uprising. After last week’s CPAC conference last week, the closing straw poll showed Ron Paul as the front-running conservative candidate. Yes, the same Ron Paul who drew a whopping 3.5% of the required delegates in the ’08 primaries. To us, that was significant; we are craving a conservative candidate. To the mainstream party reps, “it was a straw poll.” Go figure…

Here’s the problem I see with November, and why, I think, there may be an election where nobody shows up; at least no one on the right. In most states, there are two recognizable parties – Republican and Democrat. Some states have other parties, but the ballot requirements are outdated, unfair, and frankly, un-American. In my home state of NC for example, primaries are closed to unaffiliated voters, and this year independent candidates will likely have to have 90,000 signatures to make it on the ballot anyway. So, if those of us who are generally supportive of the GOP aren’t impressed with the GOP’s representative, we’ll likely go third party, or stay home. There are some things where you just can’t compromise.

Hmmm… compromise; there’s a post for a later day.

To everyone who has supported me through this endeavor, to Bryan Calvert my blogging partner, and to my beautiful wife Renae (shameless plug for her blog), I say thank you!  I wish you all love, happiness, and health in this new year.

May God bless each of you.

With the words of the great James Madison, we look forward to November.

What is to be the consequence, in case the Congress shall misconstrue this part [the necessary and proper clause] of the Constitution and exercise powers not warranted by its true meaning, I answer the same as if they should misconstrue or enlarge any other power vested in them…the success of the usurpation will depend on the executive and judiciary departments, which are to expound and give effect to the legislative acts; and in a last resort a remedy must be obtained from the people, who can by the elections of more faithful representatives, annul the acts of the usurpers. – Federalist No. 44, January 25, 1788

Photo credit: Selva Ganapathy

Last week our friends over at All American Blogger pointed out that Google missed the importance of December 7. Duane posted pictures of the Google logo versus the Bing.com homepage.

Well, they missed it again today.

Here’s today’s logo:

The logo depicts the banner of Esparanto, an artificial language developed by LL Zamenhof. Who would have been 150 today.

Here’s a better inspiration for Google’s logo:

Today the Bill of Rights turns 218. Ironic, considering without the latter, there would be no former – Google, that is.

Three weeks ago I posted a story about three Navy SEALs who were charged with assault in the daring nighttime raid and capture of Ahmed Hashim Abed, the suspected mastermind of the March 2004 attack that killed four Blackwater employees. Two of those sailors were arraigned this week, the third scheduled next week. See an interview with one of them here.

The folks over at Human Events have posted a petition to send to Defense Secretary Robert Gates to intervene. You can sign the petition here. Congressman Duncan Hunter (CA-52) and several other members of Congress have also asked the SecDef to step up.

Here’s a copy of the petition:

Hon. Robert M. Gates
Secretary of Defense
The Pentagon
Washington, DC

Dear Secretary Gates:

We, the editors and staff of HUMAN EVENTS, and the many Americans who have attached their signatures to this petition, hereby request your personal intervention to dismiss the charges against Navy SEAL operators SO2 Jonathan Keefe, SO1 Julio Huertas and SO2 Matthew McCabe.

These three men are charged with abusing a terrorist they captured in a daring nighttime raid on or about 1 September 2009. On that night, they — as part of a platoon from SEAL Team 10 — captured and detained Ahmed Hashim Abed, one of the most barbaric and dangerous terrorists in Iraq. The terrorist — in a move that is literally right out of the al-Queda training manual — complained of abuse, apparently alleging he was struck in the stomach.

We had hoped that the SEALs’ commanders would dispose of this matter at the lowest level — with a scolding and perhaps a few hundred pushups — for anyone actually guilty of inflicting an inconvenience on this bloody-handed barbarian. But on 29 September 2009, Gen. David H. Petraeus signed a letter authorizing MGen. Charles T. Cleveland to dispose of the allegations of misconduct. In that letter, Gen. Petraeus said that MGen. Cleveland could, “…dispose of these matters in any manner you deem appropriate. This includes the authority to convene courts-martial at any level up to and including General Courts-Martial and to refer charges concerning these individuals to any court-martial.”

The three now face special courts-martial next month. We believe their commanders — including General Petraeus — have failed you, the SEALs and the American people by not preventing the matter from going this far.

You are the person next in line above General Petraeus in the chain of command. You can, legally under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, intervene to dismiss the charges against the three SEALs and direct that they be restored to duty.

We respectfully request that you do so forthwith. For this matter to continue — and to place the honor and fighting future of these three men at stake — is manifestly a gross injustice.

It’s ridiculous to think these three could be demoted or discharged for their heroic efforts.

Two years ago my sister and her husband adopted my nephew from Guatemala. While there were, and frankly still are, legitimate means to rescue Guatemalan orphans, the international adoption process was riddled with fraud, trafficking, and outright kidnapping. On December 31, 2007, at the request of the US and several other countries, Guatemala chose to stop all international adoptions to overall the system and establish a process compliant with the Hague Adoption Convention.

Two weeks ago, the Guatemalan authority (CNA) released a statement saying they would start opening international adoptions, with several conditions. Most importantly, only those children most in need in need of adoption will be available first, the process will be closely scrutinized, and countries must make application to the CNA before the process begins.

It is the last condition where I am asking for your help. The United States through the State Department, Department of Health and Human Services, or some other recognizable “corresponding Central Authority of their country” must contact the Guatemalan authority and ask that the US be part of this project, and the deadline is tomorrow!

Please call, write, email, or tweet your Congresspeople and Senators today and ask they press the State Department or DHHS to contact the Guatemalan authority.

To find your Congressperson or Senator, click here.

To contact the State Department, click here.

To contact the Department of Health and Human Services, click here.

According to UNICEF, in 2007 there were 360,000 orphans in Guatemala, and we simply want the opportunity to give them a home.

I haven’t commented on the “Climategate” investigation because I’ve been waiting to see how far it would go. And, unfortunately it seems to be going about as far as Obama’s birth certificate investigation.

Here’s the latest from the White House Press Secretary:

“In the order of several thousand scientists have come to the conclusion that climate change is happening… I don’t think that any of that is, quite frankly among most people, in dispute.”

Here’s the problem I see with this whole thing; we (meaning those pushing 40 and younger) have been force fed this malarkey for 30 years or more. We all remember pictures of the Statue of Liberty obscured by scaffolding; we all remember Ying and Yang, Ping and Pong, or whatever those panda’s names were; we’ve heard about the ozone hole; we’ve all done crafts in 3rd grade about that particular species of lizard that’s now extinct because of deforestation; we’ve all been forced to read Walden, participate in recycling activities, or take part in some 10th grade fuel experiment; we’ve all watched The Day After Tomorrow, and had it explained to us three ways to Sunday how global warming can cause the next ice age. The environmental movement, with the aid of Congress, Hollywood, the NEA, Greenpeace, The Sierra Club, and many others have propagated information to the point where now it is settled science.

Disagree? Is Roe v. Wade settled law?

The WSJ can publish another 3,000 or 50,000 emails detailing how science has been manipulated, misconstrued, or even made up, and it’s not going to change one thing; Obama will still go to Copenhagen, the UN will pass it’s climate change initiative, and Congress will pass cap and trade, and other legislation will follow. These organizations seized long ago on an opportunity to rob us of our money and our freedom, and it’s going to take a lot more than an email scandal to turn the tides.

Harry Truman once said, “Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.”

Mark Hyman over at the Spectator had a great piece this morning on how the White House has started down that path.

The Obama Administration declared war on the minority of media outlets that do not worship the political left’s newest false idol immediately after Obama was sworn in. Three days into his presidency Obama warned Congressional Republicans against listening to radio host Rush Limbaugh. Amazingly, the president who offered to sit down with the thug leaders of rogue nations, such as Iran’s Holocaust denier Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, without any preconditions believed an immense threat was posed by a radio talk show host originally from southeastern Missouri.

Then the White House launched a jihad against Fox News Channel and its hosts by first boycotting appearances on the cable channel and then second, by engaging in name-calling and leveling baseless allegations.

Thankfully defeated, there was also the Fairness Doctrine, which promoted fairness like the Taliban promotes womans’ rights. Since none of those efforts have worked, there is this.

The FCC is contemplating the notion that some or all of the electromagnetic spectrum occupied by radio and TV broadcasters is the perfect real estate to launch a national wireless broadband service. The price tag is $350 billion. That is as much as nearly $120,000 per person to be connected. Apparently, the FCC has not heard of the “$99 Triple Play.”

Evicted broadcasters would no longer offer free, over-the-air radio and TV, but would instead be confined to subscription platforms such as cable and satellite or the Internet. This aspect of the plan is indeed troubling. The public would be required to pay for their news, information and entertainment services and there would be no free option.

Elimination of free private media. Maybe I should ask a North Korean where that leads?

Two weeks ago tomorrow was Veteran’s Day, and I missed this from the Boston Globe.

On Veterans Day, Christine Devlin stood in the cold in Westwood for the unveiling of a new memorial to local soldiers lost overseas, including her son Michael, one of the 241 servicemen killed in the bombing of the US Marine barracks in Lebanon in 1983.

Devlin is among 30 Massachusetts relatives of victims of the Beirut attack who have been fighting for more than a decade to get compensation for what many consider the first major terrorist attack against the United States. After a federal judge ruled in 2007 that Iran was liable for $2.65 billion in damages to be shared by 150 families seeking restitution, they believed they were on the cusp of victory.

But now, the Obama administration is going to court to try to block payments from Iranian assets that the families’ lawyers want seized, contending that it would jeopardize sensitive negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program and establish a potentially damaging precedent.

Yeah, he’s right. It would definitely “jeopardize sensitive negotiations,” and those negotiations might actually stall. Or even worse, we might actually have to start enforcing UN resolutions.

The Justice Department declined to comment further on the administration’s position, but as the congressional analysis stated, “The issue has pitted the compensation of victims of terrorism against US foreign policy goals and some business interests.’’