Monday, December 25, 2006

Merry Frickin' Christmas

Odd title, you note.

These are odd times we live in. This post is intended to specifically address the Marines who face courtmartial for their involvement in civilian deaths at Haditha.

This used to be a country that stood behind its armed forces. This used to be a country that understood the nature of war. This used to be a country that accepted civilian deaths and casualties as a factual albeit horrific side effect of an activity whose primary purpose is to kill people. Hell, this used to be a country that bombed civilian cities when it was necessary to win a war.

Today this is a country chock-full of people who shout down the opposition with "We support the troops!" when their treasonous support of the enemy is called in to question. And yet, at the first real opportunity to support the troops, they seek to crucify them instead.

We send young men to war to kill the enemy. In a war as muddled and difficult to fight as this one is, we place on their shoulders the additional burden of entering every building with the possibility of finding either terrorists or innocent children. Inevitably, some of those children are killed, and so our warriors return bearing scars more horrible than any of us can imagine.

So naturally, at the first snippet of hearsay suggesting the ROE were not strictly followed, our gallant "troop supporters" lynch a few United States Marines in the gallows of public opinion. Worse yet, these young men possibly face an all-too-similar literal fate.

The left hates our military, they hate our troops and they hate our country. What's happening to these poor guys is no different than the peaceniks calling Nam vets "babykillers."

I can't imagine how awfully alone and deserted these few good men feel today. All for risking their lives, serving their country, and protecting the freedom of the same dirtbags that seek to do them in.

Merry frickin' Christmas.

Saturday, December 23, 2006

"Learn your lesson"

I know, I know. Four posts in a single day? So I'm on a roll...

In any case, this story is yet another heinous example of the Youth Reclamation Project's furious and ceaseless efforts to turn your kids and mine into mindless goose-stepping robots.

The short version:
- Kids make parody movie about teddy bears trying to kill a teacher (on their own time from the looks of it.)
- YRP expels students.
- ACLU, exercising its able understanding of one of the two Amendments it will acknowledge, steps in.
- Kids are reinstated.

But the judge wants them to be sure they've learned their lesson.

Free speech will not be tolerated.

Lesson learned.

Burn, baby, BURN!

Too bad they put this guy out.

I'm not an evolutionist, but I do believe that there is something best described as "The Cruel Darwinian Process," and this story is a shining (or should I say blazing) example of it.

If your understanding of the First Amendment is so fundamentally twisted and evil as to buy into the claptrap that extrapolates, "Congress shall make no law establishing..." into, "Public schools shall make no reference to..." lighting yourself on fire is by far the best use of your time as far as I'm concerned.

The Problem With America... that a vocal segment of our population sympathizes with our enemies.

It should be no surprise to me when the MSM refers to them as "Resistance Fighters" and parrots such mantras as, "One man's terrorist is another man's hero." (Those were both from a Barbara Walters special last night. Why in the heck did I waste my time watching that???)

If I want to live past 40, I'm going to have to just start expecting this sort of treasonous garbage and stop letting it rile me up.

The Right of the Who?

The Bush administration has apparently reversed course on the famous Ashcroft position from a couple years ago. Their official position is now that the Second Amendment is a collective right, rather than an individual right.

This is one of those under-the-radar stories that the media will never report on, despite the fact that it has tremendous (negative) significance.

David Codrea, over at the War On Guns is doing his best to raise the flag. Here's my little effort (for what it's worth) to help him.

Saturday, December 16, 2006

Be a good little sheep and DIE

Sometimes I'll paraphrase a story for your reading ease. Not this one. You'll have to follow the link and read it. (Don't worry, it's short.)

Sickening, huh? So a school district actually comes up with a response to school shootings that will actually stop or lessen the blow of a school shooting, and some pantywaist gets upset and gets the program canned. Stuff like this makes my blood boil.

First the YRP (see last post) teaches our kids that self defense in non-lethal combat is unacceptable. Now they are officially recommending that the students sit there and die.

This training program is/was the only thing I've ever heard of a school district doing that makes any sense and stands any hope of actually stopping a school shooting...and they put an end to it! Let's reexamine some of the YRP's attempted solutions to potential school shootings, shall we?

First on the list, is of course, metal detectors. Everyone knows that if Columbine High had had a metal detector those 10 victims would still be alive today. Why what suicidal homocidal maniac would dare think of continuing with his murderous plot when he knows that there is a metal detector that is going to beep at him when he presents his blazing muzzle to the hallways? Goodness, someone might actually hear the beeping over the sound of the gunfire and become even more alarmed!!! What a great, effective, surefire idea.

Next we can address the feel-good lockdown. They instituted this one at my high school not long after I graduated. In the morning before classes begin, kids are not allowed to go into the classrooms. They have to sit in the hallway...all in one place, lined up like ducks waiting to be shot. I'm addressing a very specific policy, but we've all seen and heard of things that reek of this idiotic "at least they're doing something" mindset. No one seems to care that what they're doing might actually result in more deaths. Everyone just knows that today they're a little less free and a little more Nannied than they were yesterday. Somehow they conclude from this that they must be safer, right?

Enter the fight-back idea. Someone finally addresses the issue. Gone are the feel-good-do-nothing solutions. Gone are the notions that a man with a gun is an unstoppable god. Finally someone asks - "What can you do when a wacko walks through the metal detector and shoots the teacher that asks to look in his bag?" And *BAM* the answer is as plain and as loud as the sound of gunfire:


Someone in Fort Worth remembered that we're Americans and that Americans don't historically cotton to the idea of forced victimhood. We don't take that kind of crap sitting down. We didn't in 1776 and we didn't in 1941.

But I'll be damned if we don't today! Someone finally institutes an idea that works and the YRP stifles it. Then they apologize to the parents for suggesting the ridiculous notion that their kids should do anything but die . What the hell has happened to this country?

I'll tell you what's happened: an active and vocal contingent of Nanny-staters has stepped up to the plate and started dictating policy. They would actually prefer that your kids sit quietly in their desks and take a round in the head rather than actually do something to try and stay alive.

And as usual, they try to hide their true colors behind meaningless and nonsensical excuses, stating that fighting back would result in more deaths. I guess I should just amend my mindset and start expecting this kind of head-up-the-butt stupidity from the public school system. "You stand a higher chance of dying when you fight your attacker than when you openly let him shoot you." I'm shocked to my core that this story didn't include the typical weak-kneed limp-wristed phrase, "engage in a meaningful dialogue..." I guess some people are just too thick-heaed to understand that when the enemy has opened fire, diplomacy has failed.

In my attempts to understand this vile and evil mindset I have reached the only conclusion that makes any sense: These people are cowards. They would rather bow to the will of evil than gut out the fight to suppress it. And when someone else stands up and says, "To hell with that! I'd rather die fighting than die crying!" they tell him to sit down, shut up, and take the bullet like a good little sheep.

I think I need to throw up.

Monday, December 11, 2006

Zero Tolerance (for Common Sense)

Here's a good one from Rhode Island. Unfortunately, stories like this are all too common anymore.

The short version is that a high school senior was disallowed from having his senior picture put in the year book because he is posing with a broadsword. It violates the school's zero tolerance policy on weapons.

Just one more piece of evidence that the Youth Reclamation Program (public school system) has sunk so low in the muck that to try and unbury it would be a futile effort. We'd lose the excavation equipment in the mire. We need to just dynam---scratch that, nuke the whole works and start all over again.

This is so deplorable and low that I'm having trouble mustering adequate verbage without resorting to profanity. "Zero tolerance" is perhaps one of the most deceptive, agenda-serving, truth-denying, evil concepts we've ever allowed in the schools. Why?

Well, zero tolerance equates the kid from FFA who accidentally brought his knife to school with the gangbanger who's packing heat and has the intent to do violence. Worse yet, it means that the kid who gets bullied and gang-beaten receives the same treatment as his aggressor(s) if he fights back. And woe to the hero who would rescue the 90lb victim from the agony of oppression, for they will be prosecuted all the same.

Zero tolerance is one of the many tools of Satan that serves to emasculate our youth. It's a wonder anyone joins the military anymore since they're trained from the earliest of ages that fighting under any circumstance is simply unacceptable. Why even if you're throwing a punch to stop someone from raping your sister, that's fighting and it will not be tolerated.

I really wonder about the intelligence of anyone who would push or uphold such an idiotic, ridiculous policy. If their intelligence is above that of an ape, their attitude certainly must be "eyes wrenched shut."

Sure, nobody wants a kid shooting up a school. But damn it, no one's willing to admit that the only thing that's going to stop him is, by necessity, someone else with a gun.

I guess the gritty reality of defending one's own life is just too much for some people to stomach. They'd rather write feel-good rules that bind the power of good and be raped by the powers of evil, all the while telling themselves that it's consensual.

Which makes me it?