Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Nuclear IranI give a lot of grief to the left all the time, so let me comment on something my side got wrong.

Forty-seven Senators, led by Senator Tom Cotton, recently sent an open letter to the leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran informing them that any deal they struck with Obama (and not confirmed by the Senate) was only as good as the word of the President and subject to be reascended by the next President with a simple executive order.

Now before I sound too much like a Democrat… I have no problem with the content of the letter. It states as fact how our Constitution works (despite what Obama and the left would like to be true). It also states a message that needed to be sent to our enemies (foreign and domestic).

I have no problem with the Senate trying to influence (or even undermine) what the President is trying to do with Iran. President Obama is trying to make a deal with the devil for political and personal (legacy) reasons at the expense of U.S. interest and our allies (Israel, and “moderate” Muslim nations).

Hillary Clinton (hoping to get the press to concentrate on this issue other than her email) said “There appear to be two logical answers. Either these senators were trying to be helpful to the Iranians or harmful to the commander in chief in the midst of high-stakes international diplomacy.”

It’s the latter. In this case (more than most) Obama’s plans NEED to be undermined by good and patriotic men.

OK… So the message needed to be sent. The Iranians needed to get that message. Obama needed to get that message. Where these Senators went wrong was simply the means of delivery they chose for the message. This sets a bad precedent. Public officials should not be sending open letters to our enemies who are negotiating with our commander in chief. Obama is doing his job under the authority of the Constitution no matter how bad he is actually doing that job.

Yes, Obama is incompetent. Yes, Obama should take any agreement of this magnitude to the Senate. Yes, Obama and the Iranians should be thwarted… But there will be other Presidents after this boob; hopefully intelligent, thoughtful, competent Presidents. It’s the office that was damaged when it shouldn’t have been and when it didn’t have to be.

Other means could have been used to accomplish the same thing. The one that immediately comes to mind is that the Senators could have submitted the exact same letter as an Op/Ed to the New York Times. Everyone who needed to get that message would have received it; Iran, the President… All enemies of the Republic after all read the New York Times. :)

Political Cartoon - 2015 03 00 - Obama and Iran

American Movie - SniperSo I got a chance to see American Sniper. And I’ll try to get my thoughts about it down in this posting. Nothing in this original post contains any spoilers. If anything is posted in the comments with spoilers I ask that we add a [Spoiler Alert] warning.

Quality of the Movie:
Mentally for years I’ve ranked movies on a scale of 1-10. For me the scale is probably weighted in the negative end of the scale. Ninety percent of movies ever produced fall in the range of five or less. Five is an average “meh” movie. It was OK but I’ll never see it again. Ten is a phenomenal masterpiece that I have seen many times. There are very few tens (Blade Runner, Brave Heart, 12 Monkeys). One is a movie so boring or stupid or insulting that all involved in it’s production should be flogged (The Neverending Story, Highlander II, The War of the Roses). Hopefully with this explanation you can judge my ranking of American Sniper

The Movie:
American Sniper was a seven… so not bad. It keeps your interest, doesn’t really drag anywhere and it’s easy to become emotionally invested in the characters (especially Chris Kyle). Chris is also not portrayed as one dimensional. Many viewers will see Chris as a hero (some not), but we are exposed to some of his weaknesses and faults as well. Dealing with the war and his job in it; being a brother, husband, and father; and carving out a life of service once he leaves the military. He’s not perfect, and like the rest of us succeeds sometimes and falls short others.

I’m no movie critic nor an expert in theater so my review of the movie is simple as a lay person. The performance by Bradley Cooper, who plays Chris Kyle, is very good and from what I understand he did a good job of capturing the man he portrayed. I can only judge the direction by the fact that I was never in a position of wondering what was going on or wishing that things would move forward or change pace.

I will say that the scenes with the fake baby were noticeable, but I question if they would have been so noticeable had I not been looking for them based on the criticism. It didn’t take away from the movie that much for me. I understand that directors have severely handicapped (due to laws) when it comes to shooting scenes witch children (and especially babies). The complaints were nitpicky and petty (but that could be the politics talking).

I particularly like the ending of the movie [still not a spoiler here unless you are completely uninformed about Chris Kyle] in that it did not go into the details of Chris’s murder. The scenes of tribute from his memorial service put a nice punctuation on the story of his service.

The Story:
It’s hard for me to know how accurate the actual story behind the movie is. What happened, what didn’t, and to what degree were aspects toned down or turned up? For example, I saw Unbroken and then read that the producers greatly toned down the emaciation suffered by the main character (and his friend) after forty days at sea in a raft. They also toned down the abuse suffered at the Japanese prisoner of war camps. They thought the truth would distract from the story they wanted to tell concerning the perseverance.

Assuming the basic premise and scenes in American Sniper realistically depicted what happened in Iraq, I can only conclude that 1) War is hell, 2) There is (and always will be) great evil in the world and 3) that evil will flourish so long as good men do nothing (or allow nothing to be done).

It is terrible that such hatred and evil exists, and it is shame good men must address it; but that is the nature of man. The only greater shame would be… doing nothing.

The Politics (from the Left):
A vast majority of the leftist vitriol over the movie has nothing to do with the movie, it’s merits, or it’s faults and everything to do with the lefts hatred of our role in Iraq, the military, and what they perceive America’s role is in the 21’st century. Their hatred is so consuming that everything having anything to do with American Patriotism (especially in relation to Bush, or Iraq) must be demeaned and torn down. Thus the attacks personal attacks on Chris Kyle (and that is what they were).

The left has basically shown that they can dish it out (and boy can they dish it) but they can’t take it. Every now and then a movie (or TV series) is produced that doesn’t subscribe to their social dogma and they go into hysterics and personal attack mode. Why can be explained by nature of a monopoly; which the left holds on Hollywood. Monopolies by definition can’t stand 1) Competition and (even worse) 2) Successful competition.(1)

American Sniper turned out to be one of those movies. We conservatives have to deal with most movies having leftist slants, digs, or outright propaganda; but we (for the most part) take it stoically (in comparison).

(1)Hollywood monopoly explanation from someone on the O’Reilly Factor (sorry I don’t remember who).

Poltical Cartoon - Michael Moore - American Sniper

The Politics (from the Right):
We on the right have a patriotic reverence for America, her role as a force for good in the world, and her military that makes that role possible. That reverence is instinctively extended to men like Chris Kyle. That reverence may also cause us to instinctively extend a benefit of the doubt to some dubious behavior. (Example: Abu Ghraib was a bad thing and people needed to be held accountable. Does it even come close to the vile actions of those we are fighting? No. Meanwhile the left would assign moral equivalence at best.) This bring up the quest of “Are we conservatives as blinded by our reverence as the left is by their hatred”? I don’t think so (not even close)… but I’m coming from a certain perspective.

The Bottom Line:
American Sniper just surpassed Hunger Games for the top grossing film with a 2014 release date. That’s a good thing. Like most things, a free marketplace is a good test for a good product.

There are two reasons that happened. 1) American Sniper is really a pretty good film telling an intriguing story. 2) Word got out that American Sniper is something completely missing in the products coming out of Hollywood… a film that support traditional American ideals.

Left - Liberal - Rabid - Hate America“My uncle killed by sniper in WW2. We were taught snipers were cowards. Will shoot u in the back. Snipers aren’t heroes.” – Michael Moore (Leftist Filmmaker) on the film American Sniper

“People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.” – George Orwell

Not that Orwell was a bastion of conservatism (far from it), but he did understand evil; especially evil in the form of oppressive government and power.

Today, Michael Moore (and many, many on the left) are hypocrites; enjoying the freedoms this nation bestows upon her citizens while at the same time despising and slandering the men who bought that freedom with their lives. Moore thrives and profits on selling lies and slander (as do many on the left). And then Moore uses his millions in attacks meant to destroy the American freedoms and values that made his success even possible.

When you leftist out there bitch and moan about being labeled as “Hate America Fist”, remember it is the likes of Michael Moore that correctly foster that label… and your silence just adds an “amen”.

Political - Left - Hate America First

Kitchen - Egg Timer - About to Go OffAs we reflect on the (hopefully) final ticking seconds off Wendy Davis’ fifteen minutes of fame; she exposes us to a common but persistent trait of the liberal mindset. Asked if she regrets anything concerning he failed campaign for Texas Governor, Wendy said “There is one thing that I would do differently in that campaign and it relates to the position that I took on open carry… I made a quick decision on that with a very short conversation with my team and it wasn’t really in keeping with what I think is the correct position on that issue… Though I certainly support people’s right to own and to bear arms in appropriate situations, I fear with open carry, having watched that issue unfold during the campaign, that it will be used to intimidate and cause fear. And this was the only time I felt like I’d strayed a bit from that.” Leftist politicians must often lie to hide who they really are in order to be viably electable. But then once the election is over (win or lose) they fret that their progressive credentials may be damaged in the eyes of their comrades. They panic and reveal the lie using the excuses of evolving, or being misunderstood. The really good practitioners of the leftist arts tell us they never changed at all, but rather it was us (the unwashed) who were too stupid to understand what they were really saying. People - Davis, Wendy - Texas Governor Candidate 2013 - 003

In Wendy’s case it was a decision she and (more importantly) her team got wrong. Wendy Davis really didn’t support open carry before or after the “short conversation with [her]team”. She knew it. Her team knew it. In that meeting they didn’t decide after careful consideration that they supported the issue, but rather that they would lie about their support of the issue for political expediency. Now since that lie didn’t pay any dividends and the election is over Wendy feels she can safely take a swipe at the second amendment and it’s supporters (who had the gall to not be fooled by her lie). Her coming clean is also meant to reassure her leftist comrades that she was and is still in their camp. Also notice Wendy’s statement that she supports the second amendment “in appropriate situations”. While this may be true in her mind, she intentionally makes a point to omit the details of “appropriate situations”. It’s another lie wrapped in semantics, and Wendy like much of the left is an artists when it comes to this practice. I assure you that the “appropriate situations” are not the freedoms we enjoy today. Yet she conveniently never found the opportunity to verbalize those situations in the campaign (a lie of omission). Given a chance (the Governorship) Wendy would have moved Texas forward with her un-verbalized appropriate leftist restrictions.

But, alas, this is Texas. Unfortunately not all politicians of Wendy’s sort are limited by Texas’ common sense. Thus… you can keep you doctor, until it’s obvious you can’t; you support the sanctity of marriage, until the polls swing your way; you support the pipeline, as long as you never have to actually vote on it; you want the greatest military in the world, as you gut it behind the scenes…

Sign - Left Turn OnlyThe point is, leftist often support issues key to our Constitution, freedom, and social fabric… until they evolve, or reevaluate, or whatever liberals do. It’s a way of sitting in the middle of the road (with you right-hand blinker on) until circumstances or opportunity compel you to turn left. In truth a progressive never supports these issues from the beginning. They were always going to turn left, but choose to subversively undermine hated issues and polices while misleading the public on their true stance. BUT when the undermining is complete (or in Wendy’s case ineffective), they are free (even compelled) to reveal their true colors. On behalf of those who really do support the Second Amendment (and freedom, and the social fabric, and the rest of the Constitution) I would like to thank Wendy Davis to affirming our suspicions. It’s good to know the leftist bull-sh!t meter is still working just fine. Now, Wendy Davis; please… go away… 14:56… 57… 58… 59… :)

Unimpressed

prc150101
(Click on the cartoon to enlarge)

Looking forward to 2015… :)

Comic - Calvin and Hobbes - 2013 07 16 - Soap Box
(Click on the cartoon to enlarge)

Pope Francis – Not a Fan

People - Prope FrancisI have to admit that I’m no fan of the Pope Francis. I tried to keep an open mind on the man, but I believe he has repeatedly demonstrated he is “of this world” and not the next; concerned with numbers, and politics, and political correctness, at the expense of truth and the way.

These are the reasons WHY I am no fan of this Pope…

Why? Sacrificing Truth:
Francis seems concerned with building membership (numbers) within his (not His) church. That fine, but only when truth is not sacrificed in that endeavor. Pope Francis seems to either not know the truth or is unconcerned with advocating it (Him).

Why? Political Correctness:
Francis seems to bow to political correctness, a very worldly pagan god. In May 2013 he answered the theological question of “If even atheists have been redeemed by Jesus?” by saying “Even them, everyone.” He proceeded to beat around the bush by including. “We all have the duty to do good… Just do good, and we’ll find a meeting point.” (See
Jesus, Redemption, Atheists, Works, and the Pope

Technically his answer is true. Jesus’ blood did redeem everyone. What it did not do was lead to everyone’s salvation. We conservatives have been criticized with equating his remarks concerning redemption with salvation. True… but the world (left) has doubly used this statement to equate the two. And that’s the problem. If my words were misconstrued to advocate such a heretical idea, I would do everything in my power to correct the misconception. Pope Francis has made no such effort; and I now assume this has been his intent all along.

Pope Francis is also correct that “we’ll find a meeting point”; but where he is wrong is that “just do good” will be good enough (for anyone). At the judgment seat no one will be “good” enough by his own merit. It’s a basic tenet of the Christian faith.

Works versus Faith in Christ

A misconception of his original message would have been a perfect opportunity to clarify that key message of our Lord and Savior. It was an opportunity missed. Why? Numbers and political correctness. We can’t go and offend the world. It’s just not done in this day and age.

Moral EquivalenceWhy? Moral Equivalence:
More recently it has been revealed that Pope Francis has been key in pushing the Obama administration to begin normalizing relations with Cuba. Step one was to release five Cuban spies for one American hostage. The leader of the five Cubans released was linked to downing two civilian planes operated by the U.S.-based dissident group Brothers to the Rescue, in which four men died. Thus he was serving TWO life sentences. Today, he is now in Cuba after a heroes welcome home.

Left - Liberal - Rabid - Hate AmericaThis “deal” should be no surprise to anyone. This is the same President and administration that traded five high level terrorists for one deserter; the same administration that is systematically emptying Gitmo even though the terrorists released often return to the battle field intent to kill Americans. And the left is indignant when it is suggested that they hate the United States, or at best see a moral equivalence between us and our enemies?

So why not restore relations with a dictatorship on our front doorstep that almost ushered in nuclear Armageddon half a century ago and continues today to be one of the most ruthless, and oppressive regimes in the world? From the leftist perspective (which seems to include the Pope), the only thing wrong with the Cuban Communist system is that better leftist (such as themselves) are not in control. Then there IS that moral equivalence thing.

Religion - Pagan - GaiaWhy? Embracing the Most Pagan of Today’s False Religions:
Now (late 2014) it has been announced that Pope Francis will issue a lengthy proclamation (to Catholics), address the UN general assembly, and call a summit of the world’s main religions. On what pressing subject is the Pope concerned? Climate Change… Pope Francis hopes to influence next year’s crucial UN Climate Change meeting in Paris.

Why, I ask, does it not surprise me that this Pope would embrace the most fraudulent, snake oil selling, oppressive, pagan, religions of the 21’st century? The god Baal (see the Profit Elijah) had more credibility that these delinquents.

The only logical conclusion I can deduce concerning Pope Francis? He’s just another secular leftist in a dangerous position. How can one tell? Matthew 7:15-20

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 83 other followers