Atheism, Darwinism, Ray Comfort

No atheist is actually an atheist. Some of the actually recognize this, and call themselves deists, or agnostic. The question in an atheist’s conscience is not truly whether or not there is a God, but whether or not that God is the same as the God represented in Biblical Scriptures.

In politics, this issue rises often, because without a relationship with God the atheist (or deist, or agnostic, or. . . ) has a need to feel the void in their spritual character. When government tries to do this, and be the “god” to all citizens, it comes across a major obstacle. Government can’t be all things to all people when God is already filling that role. Hence, the reason that socialism is a Godless political ideology. To exist it must eliminate the competition.

Interestingly, when the “God Debate” arises in religious or political debates, the self-proclaimed atheist (or deist, or agnostic) often responds angrily, doing all they can to discount the very Creator that believes in them and loves them. Not all non-believers do this, mind you. Some recognize the principles of Judeo-Christian teachings. For a few it is just a matter of whether or not they are ready and willing to allow their “self” to die, and be reborn as a believer.

Pastor Ray Comfort, in his latest book (as well as others he has written) has taken the time to address the atheist’s conscience. Ray Comfort’s book, You Can Lead an Atheist to Evidence but You Can’t Make Him Think (available at, answers actual questions from atheists to Pastor Comfort’s blog at Atheist Central.

The book is a “Darwin Day” gift to those people who reject the notion that there is a God out there that loves them.

Ray Comfort is the co-host with Kirk Cameron of the nationally sydicated TV show “The Way of the Master,” as well as being a leader in the evangelical Christian Community. His ministry, Living Waters Ministries, is active in the evangelical community and hosts conferences and teaches Christians how to evangelize. Ray has been a guest on news shows like ABC’s Nightline debating the existence of God, and now will be on Political Pistachio Radio tonight to do the same.

Come one, come all, atheists, agnostics, deists, and Christians alike. All calls will be accepted, all arguments will be responded to. Join us tonight at 7:00 pm Pacific Time/10:00 pm Eastern on Political Pistachio Radio as we welcome guest Ray Comfort, author of You Can Lead an Atheist to Evidence, But You Can’t Make Him Think.

Listen Live, or Catch The Archive Later HERE.

Published in: on February 28, 2009 at 4:37 pm  Comments (2)  

Are All Babies A Blessing?

Are All Babies A Blessing?

Bristol Palin had a baby out of wedlock, but Sarah Palin’s response was that they were still excited, and that the baby is a blessing.

On the campaign trail Barack Obama stated he didn’t want his daughter, by getting pregnant, to be punished with a mistake.

Are all babies a blessing? If all people thought so, then there wouldn’t be abortion, right?

Last night on Political Pistachio Radio we addressed this very issue. Pastor James Heffington, and listener Nathan from Florida, both called in later in the show to add to the conversation.

If you wish to listen to the archive, you may do so HERE.

And after you finish listening, ask yourself the same question – Are Babies Always A Blessing?

Published in: on February 24, 2009 at 3:49 am  Leave a Comment  

Anti-Socialism Rant

Saturday Night on Political Pistachio Radio, after discussing the birth of my grandson, and the Rick Santelli Chicago Tea Party CNBC audio, I go off on an anti-socialism rant that rocks Blog Talk Radio. Below is the transcript of that rant:

When McCain called Obama a Socialist, and the Conservatives said “redistribution of wealth” means socialism, the Liberal Left said, “Whoa, whoa, whoa, wait a second, you can’t call him a Socialist. That’s conspiracy, that’s crack-pot, right-wing, nutcase talk, you calling him a socialist. What kind of crazies are you?”

Now, the socialism is written on the wall. It’s obvious this is what Obama is all about, and Newsweek proclaims that we are all socialists now. Certainly, it is okay to use this word even though they are not really using the word. They use progressivism, they use liberalism.

Understand this, folks, Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev; they proclaimed they would bury us. That they would take us over from within. When I bring that up, and I tell people in political conversation that that is exactly what is happening.

Loki then adds: Well, hey, let’s bring something else up. Putin is over their sayin “Hey, you guys better calm down here.”

Oh, absolutely. As a matter of fact I am going to bring that up. I am going to bring it up in a second, but I’m. . . and you can bring up the List of 45. You know, Snooper, if he was listening, he’d be calling in the moment I said List of 45, and we’ll discuss that later on in the show. But the Liberals, I mean, here’s how they respond when I talk about, well, you know, that Lenin, Stalin, and Krushchev are taking us over from within, that we are, we are right now, what is happening right now is exactly what the Soviet hardliners predicted. When I say that, the Liberals, do you know what their response is? “Oh, what are you talking about, the Soviet Union doesn’t even exist anymore.”

Loki: Oh, yeah, I mean, come on, now, come on, this is the Soviet Union from the 1940s.

Well, they miss it. When the Communists said, when these Communists, when Lenin, Stalin said they’re going to bury us, they’re going to take us over from within, they weren’t talking about the Soviet Union taking us over. They were talking about their ideology. They were talking about Socialism. Because they were Socialists. They were brothers in arms, and it was all about socialism, even if the Soviet Union were to collapse, and wither away and vanish. That’s what it was about. They knew that the seeds they had planted to lead this nation in the same direction as Russia had been planted. The ideology of socialism they knew would gain control of America from within. And, indeed, they are burying us from within. And, indeed, we are becoming the very socialists that they were.

And you mentioned this a moment ago: Vladimir Putin has even given a warning to the Obama Administration (and I am paraphrasing), “Don’t take the route we took! It destroyed our economy and destroyed us as a nation.”

Communism, or the pursuit of it, was socialism, and it is a bad idea. Period. I don’t care what you call it.

Loki: Well, and people. . . Richard Nixon, and he was in charge of the House of Unamerican Activities Committee, and Joe McCarthy, they were not wrong. There were Soviet spies and Communists infiltrating the United States Government. Those folks were not wrong.

You want me to validate that? One of my good friends, he, uh, we disagree with each other completely politically, we can’t politically argue, we argue like cats and dogs. But he’s a friend of mine, he’s a small publisher, uh, Dan Bessie; his father was one of the ten Hollywood blacklisted. (in lower voice) And of course that was horrible, you know, you can’t go around calling people Communists, and blacklist them. But guess what? His dad was a Communist. Absolutely. So is Dan. Damn near close, anyway. They were exactly right, you know. Now, does that pose something dangerous? Could it be abused? Absolutely. I mean, I don’t agree with lynch mobs. But I do agree with doing what you’ve gotta do to protect your nation against the enemy. But the Liberals say, because of what’s happening now, “Well, it’s not that kind of Marxism, err, uh, socialism, I mean. You can’t call it that. We’re not taking over by some military coup.”

Then what is it?

Loki: You don’t have to take over an individual, or a group, by a military coup, you can sit their and legislate them out. And that was one thing – if you go back and look at the turn of this country there were people that were looking at this fact that, you know, a tyrant three thousand miles away can, you know, is no different than a thousand tyrants three miles away. They knew that. They realized that.

So, what is it? What do you call it? If this is not the, if what Obama is doing right now the socialism that, that, it’s not that kind of socialism, we are heading for, then what do you call it? Because it is not liberty. It is not capitalism.

Loki: It’s Socialism! It’s Socialism! Come on!

Of course it is. Of course it is. Capitalism has become the enemy. Listen to the Liberals! The sound like party members of the Soviet Union during the 50s, and 60s and 70s.

“Those Capitalist Pigs are the enemy!” is essentially what they are saying. “We need more government, and nationalized banks, and the government needs to nationalize oil, and healthcare, and this and that!”

Loki: Energy, oh, yeah. Listen to the infrastructure of what they want to do with the Energy, with the, uh, Power Grid. “We need to nationalize that, we can make it better,” – NO – the people that make it better are the people that produce the power and send it. They need to send it to these different places.

Well, you know, folks, socialism is socialism, whether it is caused by the hand of the military, a great revolution like the Russian Revolution, or if it’s simply – liberty dying amidst thunderous applause as it is happening now – because people are too stupid to realize that the very thing we’ve been fighting against throughout most of the last century is taking us over. I mean, Reagan delivered us from socialism by causing the collapse of the Soviet Union. We were excited about that. And here we are. We are becoming that very same socialism, we are welcoming it with open arms, we are excited!

I had a show, you probably remember this, it was the one when that guy, Ken, called in. I had a show a few months back and I named it “American Socialism,” on purpose. And about every liberal on the Blog Talk Radio wave length was tuned in. I mean, I had huge numbers because of all the extra listeners. All the Liberal listeners. Because they were all excited because of the the words “America” and “socialism” in the same sentence.

If what we are seeing the Obama Administration pushing isn’t the same socialism that Lenin and Stalin and Khrushchev loved so much, and proclaimed would take us over, then you tell me, what is it?

What do you call it, Liberals?

Do you call it liberalism? Do you call it progressivism?

Because, I am going to tell you right now, folks, and I know you’ve heard this before, if it walks like a duck, it quacks like a duck, and has a bill like a duck, guess what? It’s a duck. And no matter what you call this ideology creeping across the American government, and through Hollywood, you can call it as many names as you want. You can call it progressivism, you can call it liberalism, you can call it Obamaism, you can call it “Hope and Change,” you can call it whatever you want – but in reality, this is straight out socialism, and Obama is America’s Lenin.

And here’s something, and I know you are familiar with it, a lot of folks are familiar with it, Obama hates freedom – I believe Obama hates freedom, I believe he hates liberty, I believe he hates the American way – and this is one piece of evidence to support this statement. Obama hates freedom so much that when he got into the White House and he saw a statue, or bust, actually, it was a bust of Winston Churchill in there, a champion for liberty and freedom from Britain, and the bust was loaned to us as a gift from Britain after 9/11 (, Obama wanted it out! He sent it back to the Brits! What a slap in the face of our ally. I thought Obama was supposed to make the world love America. But, boy, he sure sent the Brit’s gift back real quick.

And why was he so appalled by Winston Churchill’s bust being in the White House? He was appalled by Winston Churchill’s bust being in the White House in the same way that you and I would be appalled if Karl Marx’ statue or bust was in the White House. Freedom sickens the man. Capitalism sickens the man. Liberty sickens the man. I believe that.

He’s a Marxist. We’ve called him a Marxist many times, and we laugh it off like it is some sorry joke, but if he isn’t a Marxist, then what is he? Because I guarantee you he’s not the same freedom loving champion of liberty that Ronald Reagan was, that his hero Abraham Lincoln was, or Kennedy was, or that any of our founding fathers were. This guy, just like the rest of the Democratic Party, has fallen prey to the wiles of the enemy. And now speaking to you few liberals, and the one’s listening here later, you people, the folks that voted for Obama, you put him into office. You put an American Lenin, or Stalin, or whatever you want to call this socialist, you made him the most powerful man in the world, and he’s a damn Marxist. You people voted for him because you wanted change – change to what? What did you want it changed to? To socialism? And now some of the people that voted for Obama are actually beginning to have a little buyer’s remorse. “Well, we didn’t realize he was going to do all of these socialist things. . .”

We’ve been telling you all along! What part of “He’s a socialist” did you not understand?! What part of “The man is going to tax you to high heaven and the government is going to take over every aspect of your life under his control” did you not understand?

I don’t believe you people (and I mean the people who voted for Obama), that you were so foolish, and so blind – Can you hear them now? “Oh, but he’s going to make everything so wonderful for us. He’s gonna be there for the workers and the poor and punish big business, and pay our mortgage.” So said Stalin, Lenin, Hitler, Mao tse tung, so said every communist and socialist leader in the history of this world.

As Europe is waking up from their socialist nightmare, and they have begun to vote out the socialist leaders, and they are voting in more conservative leaders, WE are taking a spiraling path into the path of a speeding train. And you people, the liberal Democrats, do you even dare to argue? I am sick and tired of arguing over these little points, like how much the Community Reinvestment Act affected the economic downturn, and which entitlement program needs to be tossed, and how progressive taxes are modeled, are or are not, modeled after Marxist ideals – – – and whether or not we should nationalize the banks, nationalize healthcare, nationalizing oil – Hugo Chavez, is very proud of you, liberals! – And what is going to happen is we are going to become, if we continue down this path, so weakened economically, and with our pluralistic, relativistic morality, also, we are going to be too weak to defend ourselves, too morally weak, too economically weak, the next time Islamic terror comes to the U.S. Because this time they are not going to settle for a single attack. They are not going to settle for downing a couple of towers.

You know, its funny, I popped a cork, was upset when I wrote this, when I originally ranted this. Because, really, I am sick and tired of arguing this point, because it’s so obvious! I don’t understand how people can’t get it. More government causes problems and takes away your freedoms! Government is about power. And when the people in government get that power their concern is not YOU – their concern is not whether you are going to have a better life. Their concern is whether or not they are going to be able to stay in power – period. That is their only concern. That is why there is already talk about doing away with the 22nd Amendment, you know, the one that limits the terms of the President ( Like Hugo Chavez, Obama and the Democrats would like to be the permanent rulers of the United States. That’s why they are discussing eliminating, doing away with the 22nd Amendment. And that’s why the White House has taken over the census bureau (, or that’s part of the reason.

It’s about power – and you’re falling for it, Liberals! Every last one of you that voted for Barack Obama, you’re falling for his deception! You have a power-hungry, socialist, Marxist-style American – well, we’re not even sure he’s an American – in the presidency of the most powerful nation on Earth. And in the first thirty days of his presidency he has done so many radical things that it’s making my head spin! And you are dancing in the streets with excitement! You are condemning capitalism, blaming the free market. What do you think made this nation great the first 233 years? What do you think made this an exceptional nation the first two centuries? It wasn’t socialism! And it damned straight wasn’t government control. It wasn’t an expansion of government so huge that you can’t spit without the government knowing about it.

Now, I am an optimistic person. I believe that the American People will pull out of this. I hope that the American People will realize the damage that this radical Marxist in the presidency is causing. And I pray that we can undo the damage before it’s too late.

Our nation became great under principles not unlike conservatism.

Socialism has failed everywhere it has been tried with no exception. And socialism has been the enemy of the U.S. because it is the opposite of freedom – it is the opposite of liberty – it is the opposite of the American Way – and I am going to add this: It is the opposite of a Godly society. There is no relativism about it.

Nationalizing everything gives the government too much control. Socializing medical care, and so forth, is a one way ticket to this nation becoming a failure – destroying the 233 years of building this nation on a foundation, laid by our founding fathers, that was nothing like what Obama, and these disgusting liberal Democrats, are doing.

This is not the America that Adams and Jefferson and Washington fought for to create.

Published in: on February 23, 2009 at 3:38 pm  Leave a Comment  

Becoming American Socialists Even Has Russia Worried

Even Kremlin Warns U.S. About the Evil Of Too Much Government, and the mind of the liberal American

I never thought I would see it in my lifetime, but Russia, specifically, former Soviet leaders, are warning the United States not to go socialist, especially during tough economic times.

Putin specifically said: “. . . the Soviet Union made the state’s role absolute. In the long run, this made the Soviet economy totally uncompetitive. This lesson cost us dearly. I am sure nobody wants to see it repeated.”

I had a discussion about too much government not too long ago with a friend of mine. I emphasized how important it is that we limit government intrusion into our lives. He responded by saying, if we have no government, we will be an anarchy. And then he said that when the government stops caring, and a good example of that is in Mexico where government doesn’t care so wages are horrible and so on and so forth, the people will suffer.

This is a great example of the Liberal Mind. Sort of like the commenter here that, when I said we need to lower taxes, ranted on a comment about how if there is no taxes we can’t pay for government functions.

I didn’t say we should eliminate taxes, just as I never said that we should eliminate government.

But you see, when you make an argument, the liberal left tend to take it as you saying the extreme. To them, if you want something limited, then you must not want it at all. If you want something enacted, then they think you mean that it then must be applied to every person in every situation. If you disagree with entitlement programs, that must mean every program every person somewhere thinks is an entitlement and that you think that every program must be eliminated right now with no questions asked, or chance to reform them. If you say that generally speaking people using entitlement programs have the means to not be dependent on the government, you must think that all poor people are lazy. The Left fails to take into consideration the nuances and exceptions.

Interesting how people who reject absolutes in morality suddenly demand absolutes in political dialogue.

I think that Social Security, medicare, and other entitlement programs like them are unconstitutional. I believe that the programs put into place by the New Deal (FDR), and the increase of these programs through LBJ’s great society, are a part of the problem, not the solution.

But, imagine the outcry now that the American People are used to depending on the government for such things, if medicare or Social Security or welfare programs were suddenly eliminated. And that is not to say that all of these programs need to be eliminated. Some merely need sticter guidelines, or need to be reformed into a reasonable size and functionality.

Let me give you an example. I don’t necessarily consider disability insurance an entitlement program. In some cases disability and unemployment insurance are beneficial. The programs shouldn’t be the size that they are, and people shouldn’t have such easy access to them without proving hardship. The systems are heavily abused, but that is what human nature does when it has a chance at some “free money” (or at least that is what many of the people using the programs call it).

What interests me is that very thing that Liberals claim they are trying to avoid they are creating. They want to create a great society, but they are creating a society of dependency. They want to formulate a society where everybody gets along, and everybody works together, but with their tactics of progressive taxes, wage increases, and overregulation of business, they are creating a hostile environment between the wealthy and the middle class – and they are destroying the small business sector, the one link between the middle class and the wealthy. This “class warfare” is further seperating and further widening the trench between the wealth, and the not-so-wealthy. Through liberal programs and their heavy taxation and their attacks on the corporate world the Left is creating a gulf between the two – and are ultimately guiding us into becoming a socialist state – a society of the haves and the have-nots, the powerful and the workers, of big government and peasants. They are trying to create the very thing that has failed time and time again – socialism.

Putin of Russia calls it a perfect storm. A crisis that is fueling a rising wave. The root causes are government intrusion. Socialist systems like the one the liberal Democrats are trying to create in America have “left entire regions, including Europe, on the outskirts of global economic processes and has prevented them from adopting key economic and financial decisions.”

No matter what you call it, progressivism, liberalism, Obamaism – Socialism is still socialism – and it is a mistake.

Published in: on February 20, 2009 at 4:59 am  Leave a Comment  

Obama Liar Taliban Pakistan

I seem to remember during the campaign that Obama said something about attacking Pakistan if it failed to act on its own against Islamic extremists. Now, I disagree with his idea of attacking Pakistan, but that is not the point of this article. The point is that Obama is a liar, and once again he has been caught in the act. Pakistan agreed to impose Islamic law in the Swat Valley after reaching a peace accord with local Taliban . . . So, President Obama, can you put your money where your mouth is? Or was that tough talk about Pakistan just a little more typical politician rhetoric to get elected, and in truth you never meant a word of it? And this is change?

Published in: on February 19, 2009 at 3:58 am  Leave a Comment  

Ramos and Compean Come Home

Ramos and Compean Border Patrol Agents Are Home

Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, in 2005, shot drug smuggler Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila as the Mexican National attempted to flee along the Mexican border southeast of El Paso, Texas. Aldrete-Davila later attempted to bring a suit against the U.S. for violating his civil rights, but now is in prison for attempting to smuggle marijuana into the United States.

Ignacio Ramos was sentenced to 11 years for the shooting. Jose Compean was sentenced for 12 years. Originally, the border patrol agents were accused of trying to cover up evidence of the incident, and were thought to have been “out to shoot” some illegals, as well as being fully aware that Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila was unarmed. Ramos and Compean have claimed all along that they were defending themselves in the line of duty.

President Bush commuted their sentences on January 16, but failed to give them a full pardon. As a result, today, Ramos and Compean are finally home, though they remain under federal custody until March 20.

The two border patrol agents will also remain on supervised release for up to three years. Ramos’ lawyer, David Botsford, said it was appropriate to commute the pair’s sentence in light of the onerous conditions they experienced while incarcerated. The conditions he refers to is the regular beatings that Ramos reportedly received from fellow inmates while in the prison.

Now, home with their families, the pair of Border Patrol Agents are on a gag order until March 20.

Welcome home, Ramos and Compean.

Published in: on February 18, 2009 at 4:42 am  Leave a Comment  

Terror Camps In The U.S. Exposed

35 Terrorist Training Camps In The U.S. – Tonight’s Guest on Political Pistachio Radio Discusses the Video That Exposes This Fact!

Nearly three dozen terrorist training camps exist in the United States, and the American Public is not supposed to know. The film, Homegrown Jihad: The Terrorist Camps Around The U.S. exposes this frightening truth. In the film is The Soldiers of Allah video that teaches American students how to operate weapons, kidnap Americans and kill them, sabotage, and how to use mortars and explosives.

The Christian Action Network has gone inside their compounds with video cameras, and questions, in the making of their film.

Tonight’s guest on the Political Pistachio Radio Revolution is Ryan Mauro, founder of, author of Death To America: The Unreported Battle of Iraq, a recent guest on the Dennis Prager Show, Laura Ingraham’s radio program, and the Dennis Miller Show, and the terrorism analyst for the Christian Action Network.

Don’t miss tonight’s very important episode of Political Pistachio Radio at 7pm Pacific, 10pm Eastern.

Catch the live event, and the archive later, HERE

Published in: on February 16, 2009 at 1:49 am  Comments (2)  

Venus, Mars, and Earth – Valentine’s Day 2009

Valentine’s Day – In The Brave New World of 21st Century America

One of us is from Venus, and the other is from Mars, or so I heard, so for today I decided it was time for us to naturalize as citizens of Earth.

I saw a billboard the other day while driving my big rig through West Hollywood, right next to the rainbow flags that the city so proudly flies, that promoted a movie titled “I Love You, Man,” or something, or other, like that. Underneath, I suppose this was supposed to be the “teaser,” it read, “Are you man enough to say it?” The image on the billboard was two men. I believe the men were Paul Rudd and Jason Segel. The movie is something about a bro-mance that grows while one is needing a best man for his wedding, or something like that.

I tell many men “I love them,” and they understand the connotation of the phrase without me having to explain it, or at least I hope so. Some non-Christians seem to think that the only man a Christian believes he can tell he loves is Jesus.

I used to tell my father that I loved him, long ago, before he died in 1999. He would usually just respond, “Mmm, hmmm.” I knew he loved me, in his own way, and I never pressed the issue beyond the words. He had other ways of telling me he loved me. When I was a kid he, and his siblings, took me out to plays and operas, in a gesture of love. My aunt owned an art gallery she loved almost as much as life itself, and I spent some time there as well. She also bought me hundreds of dollars of books every Christmas. I suppose that is the reason I love to read so much. Anyhow, to show their love, without having to say it constantly, my father, and his family, introduced me to “The Arts,” and I have a certain level of “culture” as a result.

Dad, the step-dad that was more of a father than most fathers could ever be, said “I love you,” back when I told him (and tell him), but I was never sure how automatic the response actually was. I am not saying that I doubted his love, but I am not sure he ever initiated the love-fest of verbiage. He didn’t have to say “I love you” often, anyhow. I figured out that it must be true because he worked hard to provide for the family, and he never treated me any different than the children he made with my mom that had his blood running through their veins. He disciplined me in the same manner as my siblings, and he taught me the meaning of principles and values, as well. From him I learned some of the wisdom of the United States Marine Corps. Once you fire your weapon, for example, you can’t take the shot back. No since in worrying about what happened with the shot. If you want to stay alive, your concern has to be getting off the next shot. And so it goes in life. The past is the past, and though we should not forget it for fear of repeating it, the past is not something to be dwelled upon. Look forward, move forward, move ahead.

I enlisted in the United States Navy when I was older, and learned first hand much of the wisdom of the military that many young men have had the honor of acquiring. Some ask me why I didn’t get into the Marines, as my dad had been. I normally just grin, and say, “Because I have already been in the Marine Corps – he raised me.”

My best bud, who I have been friends with since the 1970’s, is like a brother to me. I think I tell him, in fact, that I have love for him more than I actually tell my own brother. Nacho has returned such sentiments often, and we are still on the phone often to talk about the goings-ons in our lives. I don’t think, however, that I have ever referred to our friendship as a “bro-mance” as is being conceptualized by that “I love you, man” movie.

Nacho and I, as friends, have been through a lot together, so I suppose we have earned the right to say to each other, “I love you, man.” We hit it off right off the bat when we met, sitting next to each other in our seventh period Language Arts class in Middle School. I tell people we conversed well immediately. He tells people I began to talk, and he was willing to listen, and listen, and listen, and listen . . . then he says something about becoming my friend because he felt sorry for me – I am sure he is joking when he says that. I think he is. I am pretty sure he is. I hope he is.

Of course, in this world of changing attitudes, a change for the worse, if you ask me, regarding gender roles and relationships, it sure does give that line in that Flinstones cartoon opening song – you know the one – where it says, “We’ll have a gay ol’ time,” – new meaning.

Perhaps I am old fashioned. I have done things the old fashioned way. Few people I know, in fact, have treated love in that old fashioned way that I have.

I know it is strange, but I married my wife because I love her. There was no “convenience” about it. In fact, it was quite inconvenient, considering I set aside athletic and academic scholarships to do so. My aunt set aside money for me, hoping I would go to Occidental College, and she was quite disappointed I chose a different path early on in my life. Instead, I married, had a kid on the way, and enlisted in the U.S. Navy.

Sure, it was difficult. What things in life worth having aren’t? But after a couple dozen years, Mrs. Pistachio and I will be celebrating our 25th Wedding Anniversary this August.

Who does that anymore? What kind of people actually fall in love, marry the one they love, and follow the stipulations of the marriage contract that say, “For better or for worse, in sickness and in health, for richer or for poorer?” As far as I can tell, the moment things get worse, the spouses go packing. A little disability or major health issue, and one of the two are telling their friends they don’t know if they can stay in the marriage. When the wealthy aren’t wealthy anymore, the other member of the couple bails, in search of a new sugar-mama or sugar-daddy. Heck, sometimes they don’t even wait for the monetary riches to subside – and take half on their way out the door.

My mom and dad have been married for forty years. Sure, like any marriage, the road has been rough, but they didn’t part ways after the kids grew up and moved out. The marriage wasn’t about the kids. It was about love.

When Proposition 8 was on the ballot there was a lot of discussion over gay marriage. Some folks were saying, hey, since the heterosexuals can’t seem to get it right with their high divorce rate, let the homosexuals have a crack at it. Another proclaimed that he was in full support of gay marriage because he felt the gays should be just as miserable as the rest of us married slobs. I am in the belief that marriage was given to us by God and that it was designed for a man and a woman – Civil Unions provide everything a married gay couple could ever want, minus the word marriage on the paperwork. But nobody will arrest you if you use the word “married” in conversation.

I remember when my children were younger, and my daughter came to me and said, “Daddy, of all my friends, I am the only one whose parents are still married.”

That statement is more true now, than it was then.

I was speaking with someone at my Credit Union yesterday who was happily proclaiming she had five kids. Two from a previous marriage, two step-kids, and one from her current marriage. The two from the previous marriage, however, were with their “daddy,” to her glee, in another state. They were a handful, and she was glad to dump them off on him somewhere in The South.

Between abortion, and women dumping their kids off, I wonder, sometimes, what happened to the now nearly gone concept of “motherly instinct.”

In this brave new world where gender roles and identities are being neutralized by changing norms perpetuated by a minority of people who have decided that men and women are too alike to be different, even though the differences between the sexes are obvious. I ask myself, sometimes, in light of society’s changing norms, “Isn’t it nice that some folks have stuck with tradition?” After all, isn’t it the strength of the family unit that made this nation great?

So when I take my wife out today to lunch, and dinner, and give her a handful of flowers along with a little gift (sshhhhh – it’s in a little white box – don’t tell her) on Valentine’s Day during this cool year of 2009 (so much for Global Warming), my affection for her signifies more than just a marriage that has lasted a quarter of a century. Our relationship is more than just a successful navigation through the stormy seas of a Godly relationship. We represent something lost and forgotten. We are Americana, and a symbol of the long history of worldwide relationships sealed in marriage – an institution that is on the verge of being washed away down the storm drain of history if we are not careful, and vigilant. We, the families of America, are the strength of this nation, the embodiment of all that is good and moral and just.

Of course, if you ask my wife, she doesn’t necessarily recognize any of those things. She just says that we figured a way out of loving each other for a long time without killing each other. Sometimes, indeed, love conquers all.

Happy Valentine’s Day. May yours be filled with happiness, a joyful date with the love of your life, a lot of chocolate hearts, and a reminder of how important your bond truly is.

And to my wife, Happy Valentine’s Day, Virginia. We do, indeed, have the love of a lifetime.

Published in: on February 14, 2009 at 4:54 pm  Leave a Comment  

Hammer and Sickle in Every Pot

Obama’s Stimulus Package – What is in it?

A Hammer and Sickle in Every Pot———————-
The Great Oz, errr, uh, I mean, Barack Hussein Obama, promised quick resolution to our horrible economic situation that George W. Bush must’ve caused (never mind the fact that the Democrats took over Congress in 2006, or that a lot of what caused this downturn was caused by past Democrat liberal agenda movements like the CRA and handling of the GSEs); oh, and did I say it is the worst recession since The Great Depression (if you set aside half a dozen other valleys in the great rollercoaster of economic history). Government, under his divine hand, was going to give a quick jolt to the economy that would get things moving, help people pay their mortgages, fix our infrastructure, create jobs, give everyone a tax break, provide a living wage, put a chicken in everyone’s pot, invent cars that run on hope and change, align the planets, and hammer those greedy, out-of-control, private airplane riding, wealthy business people into the poor house where those arrogant bastards belong.

Yeah, yeah, you go get ’em, Barry!

Quick as lightning, with a bony finger along the side of his articulate nose, a stimulus package was created by Obama out of thin air. Don’t be so silly, doubters. How could you possibly think it was already essentially written by the hand of the prophetess, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid? It is all of the Messiah’s handiwork. He said so, so it must be true.

What, pray tell, are those magical stimulus items in the stimulus package that is ready to give a quick jolt to our ailing economy?

I can’t wait to read this simple, to the point, easy to understand bill that is only going to spend a measely 800 billion buckaroos (did someone say $900 billion? Wow, it seems to be increasing daily).

Hmmmm, okay, let’s see. Let’s start with infrastructure. That is supposed to be the part that is going to create millions of jobs. After all, we better act quickly. Nancy Pelosi says we are losing 500 million jobs per month!

Ah, here we are. Infrastructure. Title XII, at, $30 billion for actual highway construction. Let’s see here, let me pull out the calculator. Wow, that is a whopping 3.75% of the money going towards. . . huh? Only 3.75%? Well, that is still a lot of money. There must be more important things in the bill that the money is going towards that is keeping the amount for highway construction down.

Obama did promise to make us a more green nation, after all, with the onslaught of man-made global warming where the effects of such a climate disaster – – – wait, this just in, changes in solar cycles are cooling us down. Okay, fine, man-made global warming is a myth, but we still need to be green, right? So let’s see those great, green provisions in Obamas Stimulus Package. Hmmm, I see, we have $4.6 billion for the coal industry, $50 billion or a nuclear bail-out (which has those friends of the earth folks all twisted with anger). Wait, that’s not very green at all, is it? In fact, that isn’t a whole lot of tree huggin’, flowers in the hair, dancing in the meadows green at all!

Hmmm, I will have to talk to my Congresswoman (in my case, Mary Bono Mack) about this. Surely she has the Stimulus Bill and can explain to me what the heck is going on. Oh, wait, that’s right, the Congressional staffers don’t have a copy of the Stimulus Bill. The lobbyists have a copy of it though. Good ‘ol Obama, shaking things up by making sure the lobbyists that were supposed to have no part of his administration populate it, and have all the copies of his Stimulus Bill. Gotta love it.

Why, that lying sack of. . .

Calm down. Surely, the rest of the Stimulus Package has great projects sure to stimulate this economy. Of course, it is not full of pork. Obama said so. He told us straight out that there are no earmarks in this bill. Nevermind the billions of dollars going to pork projects that are there because they were written into the bill! Besides, what do you care? After all, Chuck Schumer says you don’t care if the thing is loaded with pork!

Back to the bill. Let’s see what wonderful things are in there. $30 million for a mouse, $335 Million for Condoms and sex-education Programs (that’ll stimulate somebody, but not the economy), $1 billion for Amtrak (the federal railroad that hasn’t turned a profit in 40 years), and so on and so on. . .

But hey, a whopping 3.3% is going towards agricultural programs!

Is it too late to take Obama back and get a refund?

I wonder how many people that voted for him are having buyer’s remorse?

Unfortunately, I am feeling the socialism spread across America, already. Great Job, Obama. Do you have arm-bands to hand out too?


Also posted on American Daily Review, and Political Pistachio

Published in: on February 13, 2009 at 11:13 pm  Comments (1)  

Junk Food Mama Goes To The Food Mart

Junk Food Mama Visits The Food Mart

Sometimes we take a chance, and it pays off.

Sometimes, taking a risk is a good thing. Sometimes it is not. Sometimes it is downright foolish.

I have no problem with taking chances, considering that they are within reason. I take chances in business all the time. Sometimes they pay off. Sometimes they don’t.

This is part of what makes us free. Liberty is about taking chances. Sometimes we fail.

As Glenn Beck says, I have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, but there is no guarantee of equal results.

Sometimes folks take chances that, however, make us shake our heads.

Last night, after parking my big rig for the evening, I drove around the corner to a gas station to fuel up my little commuter car. I pulled out my credit card, slipped it in and out of the slot, and proceeded to punch in my zip code when prompted.

The final number of my zip code is a three. The three on the number pad was not working, and all of the other pumps were occupied by paying customers slipping their plastic in and out of their designated slots. So, I resigned to go inside and have the woman behind the counter swipe my card and get me set up.

A couple spots in front of me in line was a relatively large woman with a soda, candy, cakes, donuts, and anything else you could think of in the junk-food food-group, wrapped up in her arms. I was amazed that she had not dropped any of the items up to that point, but I wasn’t holding my breath.

When Junk Food Mama reached the front of the line she plopped the items on the counter and the gal behind the counter rang them up, coming up with a grand total of about $14.00.

“All I have is ten dollars,” said Junk Food Mama, waving ten singles.

Now, at this point the typical person would either pull out their credit card, or debit card, and purchase their spoils in that manner, or they would return a couple items to bring the price below ten dollars, and be happy they got what they got. Ahh, but that would be the typical person. This was no typical person.

The large woman said to the cashier, “Honey, could you hold these items for a little bit, and instead I will buy ten lottery scratchers. I should win enough to buy my food.”

Well, I thought, that’ll be the end of her.

Junk Food Mama took her ten one-dollar scratchers out to her gas guzzling SUV to commence the task of scratching off the silver surfaces with a penny she had in her vehicle (apparently not in the ash tray, though, since a pack of smokes sat on the dashboard).

I, at that time, decided a soda would hit the spot, and stepped out of line to walk over to the fridge-case to retrieve a Dr. Pepper.

As I was walking back to get in line, Fast Food Mama came back through the door and hopped in line in front of me, clutching her lottery tickets in her hand, and brandishing a huge grin on her face.

When she stepped triumphantly to the counter she proclaimed, “I have two ten-dollar-winners. I would like to use that to buy my food, please.”

I fought back the laughter to the point that tears were forming in my eyes. This woman had originally arrived with ten bucks in her pocket, and was going to leave with fourteen dollars worth of food, and six singles in her pocket. Talk about taking a chance and it paying off!

Interestingly, as she drove away, I spotted an Obama-Biden bumper sticker in her back window.

This woman might be one of the luckiest people on the planet. Maybe she should be in Vegas, or something.

Anyhow, on the surface, this was a huge gamble she had no business taking. The fact that she took the chance, and pulled it off, is not the point. Gambling with their money like that is normally what puts people into bad situations. But, regardless of the stupidity of it, she had the freedom to do so. It may have been a head-shaker, but big government didn’t come along and say, “No, according to us, that is a bad choice, and we won’t let you make it.” She had the liberty to take the gamble. And then, when she succeeded, as funny as it was, she deserved it without being demonized or ostracized for it. She had the freedom to fail, or pull off a great win.

Did I think what she did was foolish? Sure, I did. But no one, not me, or the government, or anybody out there in the world of elitists, has the right to keep her from doing such foolish things as long as those foolish things are within the law, and is not compromising others. We should be responsible with our freedoms, but nobody should force that responsibility upon anyone.

This is not to say that I don’t have a right to disagree with what she did, or her actions, or to share my personal opinion on such matters. I can, in this nation of free speech, disagree with you all I want, and voice it to my heart’s content. You can do the same as well, on your site, or shout it on a hilltop, or whatever. That is the beauty of this nation.

America, for that reason, is exceptional. Or at least it is for now.

By the way, I don’t play the lottery, normally. I have a funny thing about gambling. Sure, I sometimes buy a ticket, or go to Las Vegas and pull the arms of a few slots, but like any vice, too much of it can be very dangerous.

Published in: on February 13, 2009 at 5:07 pm  Leave a Comment