The Big Draft...

Well, my fantasy football draft went off yesterday, and today I find I have mixed emotions...Priest Holmes, T.O. and Tom Brady are my core players, with Priest coming off injury and T.O. not talking to D.M., which is N.G. (Not Good). On the other hand, I got 2 of the top 7 or 8 preseason picks in a 12-player league, which can't be a bad thing. I guess I will have to see how it plays out on the field, eh? Anybody else drafting? How are you making out?

Things That Don't Go Together...

I suppose all's fair in commerce and war, but when I see Snoop Dogg and Lee Iacocca walking down the fairway together in the new Chrysler commercial, the words "...Dead Head sticker on a Cadillac..." pop into my head.

Maybe it's just me...

A Shocker By Pat Robertson

In a surprise move, Pat Robertson said he was misquoted (even though his call for the assassination of a foreign leader is on video), that his remarks were taken out of context, and that his statement was being blown out of proportion by the press--I am stunned--oh wait, that's what I said he would do, isn't it...Let's see, does he look like a horse's ass while he's doing it? Yup...Nostradamus, move over...

Pat Robertson Should Just Shut Up

Maybe that's all I need to say, but of course I won't stop there...

Being a pastor, I am about as sick as I can be of Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell and people like Jimmy Swaggart and Jim Bakker being held up as spokesmen for and examples of Christian clergy. They should not represent themselves as leaders of all Christianity (which they are not), nor should the media be so quick to connect the vote of all "white evangelicals" with these jokers.

I am the pastor of an independent Baptist church--that means we are beholden to nobody but God, and nothing speaks for our church but the Bible. Pat Robertson has apparently failed to adopt the adult habit of thinking--and then pausing to consider the effect of his words--before speaking. He regularly comes out with some off the cuff comment that sends the media into a tizzy over supposed extremism by Christians. Then he backs off, apologizes, claims he was misquoted or taken out of context, and once again looks like the horse's ass he is...but that has nothing to do with me or with 99% of Christians in this country.

So Pat--shut your pie hole.

TSA Ready to Go Back to "No-Hassle" Passenger Screening?

According to the Associated Press, the Transportation Security Administration is considering allowing icepicks, knives, razor blades, bows and arrows and other such items on airplanes soon. Not only that, but they would also like to reduce pat-down searches and eliminate shoe checks unless the passenger sets off a metal detector, is flagged by a computer, or looks "reasonably suspicious." This is intended to reduce "hassles" and make the process more "passenger-friendly."

We are approaching the fourth anniversary of 9/11, and apparently we have already forgotten its lessons. The best way to make the process of flying more "friendly" for me is to make sure my plane doesn't fall out of the sky in flames or run into a building, thank you very much. We already know that, if one has to look "reasonably suspicious" in order to have your shoes checked that will eliminate all young arab-looking males from searches, since checking them would be "racial profiling," hence "baaaddd."

I don't need a knife, a razorblade or an icepick while flying (the icecubes are usually small enough), and I haven't seen any target ranges for bows and arrows in flight, either...my advice to the TSA is to keep us safe first, worry about hassles second--or third--or fourth--and if you don't like all the "hassle" associated with flying commercial, get a license and plane and fly yourself or take the train.

More Than a Tad Busy

Sorry my blogging's been off if you have been dropping by to see me...I had a service last night, a funeral today and another Saturday, and a Sunday school class and 2 sermons for Sunday to write...and no secretary this week, so I also have to the bulletins and all the other office stuff...So I stopped in long enough to say howdy, but I don't even know what's going on in the news this week, let alone have time to comment on it...I'll get caught up next week, promise.

Bush Supports Teaching of "Intelligent Design" Alongside Evolution

Not that it will make much difference to the Left, but President Bush came out in favor of teaching "Intelligent Design" in our public schools, in addition to "evolutionary theory," last week. Intelligent design is the theory that says the universe does not display the characteristics we would expect to see if it had occurred by chance, therefore an intelligent creative force must have been at work.

Now, I have a name for this "Intelligent Creative Force," and there's the problem...liberals, secular humanists and atheists don't want to put their theory--that everything in the universe was created from absolutely nothing, and completely by accident (which seems a little silly when it's held up to the light)--up against the theory that there is a Higher Being, namely God, who created everything, and let students judge for themelves. (The fact that these people don't think teens can make a legitimate, informed choice between evolution and intelligent design makes you wonder why they think it's okay to give teens sex ed and condom demonstrations and expect them to make good choices...but I digress.)

If this was any other theory--for instance, if you wanted to teach that space aliens from Alpha Centauri "seeded" the earth with life, the ACLU would be in there punching for your right of free speech and educational freedom. But even though there are holes in the theory of evolution big enough to drive a truck through, and even though evolutionary theorists have been warned by their own scientific leaders not to debate the issue because they always lose, evolutionary theory is treated as sacred...

Indeed, I am sure that once this is posted, someone will come and comment that evolution is a "fact", even though not one example of a transitional evolutionary form has ever been discovered for any species of animal, and even though no viable type of macro-evolution (one species to another species) has ever been demonstrated or can even be forced to occur in laboratory conditions. Evolutionary theorists have never let facts get in the way of their flights of fancy.

So kudos to President Bush for stepping forward on the issue, but until there is a judicial sea-change (another reason to keep praying for soon-to-be Justice Roberts) I am afraid the courts will continue to strike down the teaching of intelligent design, without regard fo the fact that evolution should not even be dignified with the title "theory"--it is entirely a figment of the "scientific" community's imagination.

Interesting Weirdness in Strange Places

Recently I have been spending a bit of time on Blogshares, amassing a fantasy fortune by "trading" in the "blog market"...I'm sure many of you are aware of the game, but you may not be aware that there are lots of opportunities on Blogshares to buy links with the virtual blogdollars ("B$"), or to get people to comment on your site, or write a review of your site on their site, or design your site, or...well, you name it, you can probably find somebody on Blogshares who will take some amount of B$ to do it.

They even have a section of the game called "missions", where you can post a "mission" for other participants to perform, and in return they will receive some reward. Today I found Mission #334, "Fight For Your Constitution"--Those of you who know me know that this was like a magnet to me, so I read it to see what I could do to help. Here are the first two paragraphs of this plea for help--

This mission is unlike any mission ever before posted on blogshares. This is a call to US citizens for help. The first amendment of the united states constitution has, as of today, been deteriorated. They have taken certain peoples constitutional rights away and I am one of those people.

I ask that everyone read my entry on this matter, and stand up and do the right thing. I ask all of you to make a blog entry about this violation of our rights. It is not fair and I hate to have to sit back and watch the fall of america because not enough people care. So I refuse to just sit back and I ask for your help.

Touching, right? The non-capitalization of the proper nouns made me think that this might even be a very young person who was taking up for their rights. So I looked up the offending US Code section cited in the post in order to see what, specifically, was offensive to the First Amendment about it. It's 18 US Code sec. 2257, "Record Keeping Requirements."

"What is the heinous effect of this statute?" you might ask. What chilling effect does it perpetrate on our First Amendment right to free speech? It requires pornographers to ascertain their "performers'" dates of birth and names. In other words, you can't hire "Daisy Mae Lapdance," who "looks 18, anyway, Judge" without finding out that she's really Susie Smith, age 15.

So, according to this moonbat, the First Amendment protects his right to hire people without knowing their actual name or age or keeping any record of it, in order that they can plead ignorance when charged with the production of child pornography. I hope all of you with Blogshares accounts will go to this "mission" on the site and tell this clown exactly how much we think the right to make and disseminate kiddie porn ought to be protected by the First Amendment.

The GOP--Time For Radical Change?

The national committee of the Republican Party is meeting in Pittsburgh today--The theme of the meeting is "Give us a chance, we'll give you a choice: Strengthening Lincoln's legacy."

According to the Pittsburgh Tribune Review, not only is the theme a joke, the members of the committee are "a herd of sheeple." What are the recent accomplishments of the GOP, according to the Trib?

"Federal spending is out of control.
The distribution of pork has reached obscene levels.
The just-passed highways bill is an embarrassment.
The energy bill isn't any better. (To wit, support for ethanol -- which takes more energy to make than it produces -- is idiocy incarnate.)
The Medicare prescription drug plan is a 10-pound sledgehammer driving a finishing nail.
Social Security reform? Rationalized, diluted and largely shelved.
Immigration policy? Confused, misguided and a threat to national security.

"This isn't the work of conservatives; it's the work of a Republican Party that has forgotten what conservatism is."

Imagine this--me agreeing with the editorial board of a newspaper! It's time for the Republican Party to represent the people who voted the Republican leadership into office. While I admire Dubya's wartime leadership in a time of world crisis, our domestic policy look's more like Walter Mondale's than Ronald Reagan's, and it's time to stop "compromising" with the Democrat Party; the reason we're in the majority in both houses of Congress and hold the White House is because people are fed up with liberalism. We need real Social Security reform (and please shut up AARP--nobody plans to starve old people--we just want there to be something left when we retire, too); we need to rollback the prescription plan--the biggest boondoggle in history; we need to stop trying to fix everything by throwing more money at instead of demanding results with what we have.

The Trib comes to the conclusion that the Grand Old Party is just that--OLD. It's time to get rid of the Trent Lott generation and start putting some energetic, young and aggressive leadership in place and take the fight to the Democrats. Before we become indistinguishable from them.

Coulter 100% Correct on Roberts Nomination

Up to now, my takes on the John Roberts SCOTUS nomination have been about his confirmability and the predictable attacks by the Left, as I have been reserving judgment about what kind of a Supreme Court Justice he will actually be...but I think Ann Coulter hits the nail on the head with her July 27 piece on Roberts.

The fact of the matter is, we dont know, we can't know, what kind of Justice Roberts will be. Every time conservatives think "strict constructionism" of the Constitution is gaining a foothold on the Court, we get fooled. As Coulter points out, President George H.W. Bush, Newt Gingrich and John Willke of National Right to Life all thought David Souter was a good choice. No one would have guessed that the appointment of Harry Blackmun would result in Roe v. Wade, or that Sandra Day O'Connor would wind up being the swing vote in many cases favoring the liberal agenda.

So if you want to be happy about the Roberts nomination, fine, but I wouldn't start whistling "Don't Worry, Be Happy" just yet. I would have preferred it if President Bush had really decided to pick a conservative that everybody knew was a conservative and "gone to the mattresses" for him, rather than picking a "stealth" nominee that might backfire on us in five years.

Bush Takes a Stand for Bolton

I'm sure I'm one of the last to comment regarding the recess appointment of John Bolton to the UN--Forgive me, I have been driving since 2:30 am, taking a load of my daughter's belongings to her in her new apartment...it is now 6:34 pm, and I just got to a computer.

The Democrats are in their usual frenzy about the President doing anything without their express consent (I always enjoy a good Democrat frenzy). Harry Reid calls Bolton "a seriously flawed and weakened candidate." The Tedster, never one to use reason when hysteria and hyperbole will do, said "It's a devious maneuver that evades the Constitutional requirement of Senate consent and only further darkens the cloud over Mr. Bolton's credibility at the UN."

First of all, Democrats question Bolton's "demeanor" and his "temper", which I for one think we could use a great deal more of at the UN. Getting angry at the lassitude of the UN could only be an improvement over sitting back and doing nothing while the innocent peoples of the world, that the UN ought to be protecting, die in the millions. President Bush deserves credit for putting someone of passion in the position.

Secondly, far from being an evasion of Constitutional requirements, the Constitution states: "The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the end of their next Session." It is interesting to note that this same objection was raised, incorrectly, by Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma when then-President Clinton appointed James Hormel to the position of Ambassador to Luxembourg in 1999. Michael Brus of Slate pointed out at the time that, while such appointments are not looked on with favor by the Senate, they are Constitutional.

Let the Senate Democrats have their tizzy, they are powerless to do anything about this fait accompli. I would just note that, once again, had the leadership in Congress done its job a recess appointment would not have been necessary, but as usual the Bill ("Limp") Frist Republican leadership has been flowing, not leading...Let's hope the next election brings upheaval to the Republican power structure in the Senate.