Chasing with a Purpose

Another year, another life.

2012-02-11T20:28:00.000-06:00

It's been a little over a year since I decided that it was time to move on, time to leave Illinois, and restart my life. It's been a difficult 15 months, to be sure. But, through it all, all the anger, shame, pride, and hatred that shadowed my life...there's always been a sense of calm.

I've never understood why that calm was there. Maybe I never will. But it is.

It began with a drunken gamble. Late at night, frustrated over the lack of responses I'd gotten after applying for literally every National Park Service job I could find, frustrated over my inability to find decent employment anywhere outside of Peoria, angered over how truly pathetic my life had become, and under the influence of who knows how many shots of Jack Daniels' shittiest bourbon, I saw an ad for the Coast Guard, and I sent out a couple emails. Over the next few months, as I explored my options, I ended up signing a contract with the Navy, as an air traffic controller.

It was, without a doubt, the best decision I've ever made.

Since that night last February, I've come close to death many times. My anger allowed me to completely disregard whatever self-preservation instinct I've ever had. But, I've lived. And, in the end, what else matters?

I always wanted the kind of life that average people never have. I wanted to be the crazy bastard who somehow, someway, always came through with the most ridiculous stuff imaginable. Harold and Kumar + Bond, as it were. Mostly because I'll never be as sophisticated as Bond, even if I do order the same drinks.

I think I'm there.

I'm on my second career now...as an active duty FAA certified USN Air Traffic Controller. Accountants don't normally inspire legends. I've been able to set up a career that not only is awesome and ridiculously fast-paced/thrilling, but also is a huge stepping-stone to becoming a pilot.

The loss of my self-preservation instinct allowed me to chase tornadoes with absolutely no fear, and thus, get closer to bigger tornadoes than I ever would've imagined.

Sometimes, I guess it takes your life falling apart around you to get back to what's important. To look at your life, realize that it's straying beyond your worst nightmares, and decide to stand up, to be a man, and to change it.

I'm living proof that if your life sucks serious ass, you can change it. Just look out, decide what you want to do, and change it. Don't get me wrong - it's hard. It's hard to turn your back on everyone and everything you know and love, not knowing if you'll ever see them again. But, if you have to do it...it's worth it. You only have one life...make it epic.

Today? I'm 21. The world's at my feet. In the last year, I've gotten to see 25 tornadoes, go deep sea fishing, boat racing, rock climbing, drag racing, scuba diving...I've gone through the toughest technical school the Navy offers, made lifelong friends that I never would've met otherwise...it's been incredible. Looking at it objectively, it's not hard to see that, of the pillars that made up my life 1-2 years ago...they've all been torn down and rebuilt. All but one...

God has a place in all this. As much as in the past I've tried to ignore His work...He's been there all along. It's obvious to see. I came a couple hours from dying in boot camp due to blood vessels bursting internally...and the surgery/recovery time gave me the tools I needed to get promotions/awards/etc. I've come to realize that true faith in God isn't what I thought it was...on the contrary, the "faith" that I had was shallow, and focused on external things.

I missed a head-on collision in Illinois while chasing last year by barely 50 feet. I almost got hit by a semi in St. Louis while stopping traffic just behind a tornado crossing the interstate. I logged many, many hours driving in the worst driving conditions imaginable. And, somehow, through all of that...I'm still here. Figure there's got to be a good reason for that.

So, here I am. Stepping out into a brand new life. A life that's more valuable, even more real now, after seeing what the bottom is like. Time to roll, baby...

Death of a blog...

2011-06-24T20:15:00.002-06:00

Quick announcement - to anyone that still reads this, I'm going to be getting rid of this blog, and funneling all content over to my chase blog - Epic Chasers. Glad to have you aboard for my ranting...and, I hope that you've been enjoying my quest to be as epic as possible.

Nebraska Tornado Outbreak - 6-20-2011

2011-06-22T16:35:00.002-06:00

Intercepted 3 tornadoes in Nebraska Monday, bringing my total for the year to 21! Best one is below...we were only about 100 yards away at one point!

Violent Ellsinore, MO wedge tornado

2011-05-25T23:53:00.001-06:00

Wrapped up our chasing for the week with a 1/2 to 1 mile wide wedge tornado that passed about a mile in front of us on US Highway 60, just west of Ellsinore, MO.

Violent Canton, OK tornado - 5-24-2011

2011-05-25T07:43:00.000-06:00

Captured a large tornado in Canton, OK yesterday...touched down 200 yards in front of us, and transitioned from a multi-vortex into a wedge right in front of us! Absolutely incredible...best chase of my career to date.

St. Louis/Lambert International Airport tornadoes

2011-04-24T16:38:00.002-06:00

Insane day in St. Louis - intercepted a rain-wrapped tornado at about 150-200 yards, saw power flashes as the tornado hit the airport, and documented major damage afterwards.

(Shorter version that we uploaded to news stations)

We were also able to have our live video stream on the Weather Channel several times, conduct interviews while on the road and while documenting damage, and sell video to some major networks, as well. All in all, the most intense chase I've ever been on...absolutely incredible. 2-2.5 inch hail, as well.

Incredible Iowa tornado outbreak...

2011-04-11T17:50:00.002-06:00

Intercepted at least 10 tornadoes over Iowa Saturday night...synopsis at my chase blog.

First Tornado of the year...

2011-03-23T19:17:00.001-06:00

In Creston, Iowa! Details and video at www.epicchasers.blogspot.com

I dunno if anyone still reads this...

2011-03-19T21:00:00.003-06:00

...but, if they do, I figure it's about time for an update.

As things stand now, I've come to the conclusion that life as I'm currently living it/as it currently stands isn't actually worth the work that I'm putting into keeping it going. My solution to that is to change things up...drastically. At this time, I have a few options on the table, but the most likely one at this point is actually joining the Coast Guard.

My life is so bloody ironic.

Anyway, I've passed the ASVAB (with the highest score possible, FWIW), gotten all of my stuff submitted for the background check, and, pending a physical, I'm in. It's a big decision, and it may not be the best decision, but it had to happen. If there's one thing that I never want to be said about my life, it's that I didn't have the guts to make a decision and stick by it. Anyway, I'm actually really looking forward to getting opportunities to put my life on the line for others.

Still working on getting dates/signing papers, but I'm tentatively looking at a boot camp date around the first of June. 2 months in Cape May, NJ, then off to...who knows? I may try and go to Alaska - I've always kinda wanted to go there.

The road goes ever on and on...

Does this hurt your brain as much as it does mine?

2010-10-24T22:39:00.002-06:00

Cause, if not, then I want to know why.

I could be seeing this wrong, but there seems to be a huge battle in reformed Christian circles today over Federal Vision. I've read various papers throughout the last couple of years expounding on both sides, and I never really understood what the issue is. I still might not, but I think I can take a stab at it...

What is the definition of the word "Christian"?

For me, I've always defined "Christian" as "A person who is regenerate". The Federal Vision camp, however, seems to take a different slant on this. They would define "Christian" as "Someone who is a member of an external covenant with the Christian church." or, "Someone who is baptized into Christ, and who is therefore accountable to the church and her ministers." (Unless otherwise noted, all quotes are taken from www.federal-vision.com, "Federal Vision for the average joe")

Oooh! Brain flash!

In other words...according to a Federal Visionist, you can be a Christian, and not be regenerate?

"Now, using this definition, do all “Christians” go to heaven? No. This is because there are faithful Christians and faithless Christians."

Hrrm...

"If a man has been married three years, and he starts lusting after the neighbor's wife or having an affair with the secretary at the office, is he still a husband? Well, he may not be acting like it, but he still has a ring on his finger, and his wife wears one on her finger. He is an unfaithful husband, but a husband nonetheless. His marriage covenant is objective – it exists outside of his mind. The husband's heart and actions do not erase the commitment he made to his wife at the wedding until they have a formal divorce."

Logically, it makes sense. Still goes against the grain, though.

It seems like the Federal Vision view has one huge upside - it makes baptism crucially important, and makes the case for infant baptism even stronger. The Federal Vision view also seems to fit in well with Hebrews 10:29 ("Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?" KJV), as long as you understand the verse to be speaking to those whom are in the Covenant through baptism ("has profaned the blood of the covenant by which *he* was sanctified"), but have spurned it.

Seems to me like the crux of the entire issue isn't actually a matter of life and death, salvation, or heresy. The crux of the issue lies on how we define what a Christian is. And...I'm not actually sure about that. The debate appears to be centuries long, from what I can tell...

I'm writing this more to get my thoughts out on paper, and get some thoughts from people that have thought this through further than I have (Cue Mr Evans). I'm leaning towards thinking that Federal Vision is just taking Covenantal theology and logically extrapolating further...but, I'm still hung up on what the Biblical definition of a Christian is, and I'm thinking that I need to get that figured out before I go any further...And, it's past midnight, so I'll cast my (half-baked) bread upon the waters, and see what happens...

Following up tangentially...

2010-10-19T21:59:00.003-06:00

I've been struggling over the last few days, as I've read my last post over, and tried to figure out a way to put my thoughts more succinctly.

Then, I found this:

http://www.quiveringdaughters.com/2010/10/what-is-authoritarian-parenting.html

The article speaks for itself - I'll pull this out, and be done...

"Exerts extreme levels of control—physical, mental, spiritual, and emotional—over all aspects of life into adulthood...Is highly demanding and proud; more concerned with being “right” than truth; invalidates and disrespects the child’s thoughts and feelings."

"And whosoever shall offend one of [these] little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea." ~ Mark 9:42

Just trying to get some thoughts out of my head...

2010-10-11T20:24:00.004-06:00

Reformed homeschoolers are generally good at the intellectual side of things. They can tell you why they homeschool, and back it up with scripture, various commentaries, quotes from the reformers...all that jazz. They can explain Calvinism in great detail, tell you why they baptize their kids (or don't baptize their kids) in lengthy, sleep-inducing detail. They can teach you 7 different versions of what will happen at the return of Christ, and refute them all.

But, with all of the things that we've figured out, there's still problems that are unsolved. We're imperfect beings, and we'll never get everything perfect this side of heaven. That said, that's no excuse not to try.

One of th issues that has been heavy on my mind of late is that of young men leaving the church. Now, when I say "walk away from the church", this generally doesn't mean to walk away from the faith - they generally leave for different churches.

I've heard many explanations and discussions on why this is so. I've heard people say that we need to train young men better, that we need to not send them to college, that we need to send them to college, that they need to get jobs, that they don't, and so on.

The answer that I've never heard proposed is that there's a fundamental problem with the parenting philosophy, and that that's where it all begins.

Maybe my experience isn't the norm. Maybe I've been jaded, and am just a sad, bitter person. I don't know. But, I think that a lot of this comes down to parents understanding the proper way to raise and train sons.

Throughout my life, one of my parents' goals in raising me was so that I'd be a better person than they were. They wanted me to have a head start on where they were when they got married, and to be better prepared to take on life as a Christian. I think that these goals are admirable, and I know that most parents I know would say the same things.

The point of raising your children is to send them out into the world to be conquerors and evangelists for Christ - not to shelter and hang on to them until they become bitter, and go off to find a life that makes sense.

Young men aren't made to stick around at home and hang on to their mothers' aprons. Young men are made to be adventurous. To be conquerors. To be leaders. Parents, you're going to have problems dealing with this. Every young man that you raise is going to want to start establishing himself in the world as a force to be reckoned with, if he's worth his salt.

I think I'm rambling at this point, but I'm not sure. That's generally a bad sign.

Yes, parents have got down that they need to raise their children better than they were raised. That's why most parents choose to homeschool their kids. But, what I don't see parents getting is this: You *cannot* raise your children to be more mature than you were, and better grounded in their faith, and then expect them to be happy when you delay them doing meaningful things with their lives.

Since I moved out of my parents house, I've learned what real life is all about. I've been through a week-long stretch where I was too sick to make it to my car. I've been through the worry and stress of having a car that has broken down, and wondering how I was going to get to work. I've had times when I realized that I had blown my money on something that I shouldn't have, and now, guess what, I don't have the cash I need to buy dinner. (Whoops.) I've learned that many of the things that my parents told me about life were true, and, some of the things that they said weren't true. I've had to realize that, without my parents, I have to be responsible for my walk with God. I've had to show up at work whether I felt like it or not, and whether I was sick or not (with some exceptions - Vacation days are beautiful things).

Real life is about establishing yourself as a force for Christ in a world that has turned their back on Him.

Young men don't have to move out on their own to learn these things. But, their parents have to be willing to trust them and let them make mistakes, and get them out there to make these types of discoveries. And, their parents have to be willing to let them start becoming men - even if it's before the world would say that they're ready.

Again, maybe this is just my experience, and the world isn't really like this. But, when I look around, and hear about situations where young men leave the church, I can't help but see that, in many cases, it's partially due to their parents' inability to let go. To let them engage the world. To let them be men.

Part of this may be due to fathers not being the leaders they should be. I was talking with a friend of mine last week, and he told me that he had heard a pastor once say "When I'm counseling young men, I ask them who the more dominant parent in the house is. If it's the woman, that's an automatic strike against a marriage." Hard to argue.

But, what it all comes down to, ultimately, is that we have to understand that the world has a certain timing scheme - and that it's wrong. Homeschoolers can tell you that public schools are horrible institutions, but they can't seem to grasp this facet of that - great, we've rebelled against the government, but we're still letting culture dictate these ages of 18 and 21 as the normal ages to get done with school, get a job, go to college, even get married.

It didn't use to be this way.

I'm not suggesting a return to Puritanism, but, they did make sure that their kids were grown up, and grown up quickly. For them, it was a matter of life and death. They didn't care about age - they cared about maturity. We should do the same.

We'll always have problems with people falling away from the church. But, if parents would realize that, if they decide to be dictators, and incite their children to wrath, their kids will walk away, and make changes based on that...things might be different. Who knows. I'm not a parent - these are just the ramblings of a man that had to break out of the house to really understand and live life to the fullest, for the glory of God.

Chasing Blog....

2010-09-17T11:36:00.001-06:00

David Price and I have set up a new website for our stormchasing exploits - check out www.epicchasers.blogspot.com!

Generalities on Life, Liberty, and my continuing pursuit to find a hugemungous tornado...

2010-07-14T10:38:00.003-06:00

It's July.

Dang.

It's amazing, looking back over the last 6 months of my life. So much has happened - so much has changed, but, through it all, I can see God leading me through life, and helping me to grow and mature. At times, life has been dark, but...having gone through what I have, and coming out to where I am now, I think that I am starting to see why I've been lead this way, why God has put me through the trials that I've been through, and where I'm supposed to go from here.

I've moved twice. Found my first tornado. Dislocated my knee. Been through another car, and another couple of minor car accidents (neither of which were my fault). It's been a crazy year already, but, I wouldn't trade my life for the world. This is the first summer that I've been out on my own, and I'm living life to the fullest.

Probably won't be posting much at all, but figured I'd put some kind of update up...Next on the agenda is a canoe trip out in Missouri, hopefully in early August!

Hakuna Matata.

2012 – An Epic Tale of Man’s Inner Goodness

2009-11-30T19:20:00.001-06:00

Those of you that know me even slightly well know that my penchant for living life on the edge/danger/excitement is rather…well developed. Thus, it should come as small surprise that, as soon as I saw the first preview for 2012, I felt that I had to go see it. In my estimation, if a filmmaker can pull off destroying the White House with the USS John F Kennedy, I owe him eight bucks.

I ended up seeing the film twice, and, while I left both times feeling awed at how completely cool the movie was, I still had a rather significant bone to pick with Roland Emmerich. Not concerning the at times epically unbelievable CGI-aided, and completely unrealistic moments, not concerning the statements that the “Mayans knew this all along, and the Christians were…kinda right”, but concerning the overall theme of the film.

As one of the main characters puts it, in an impassioned speech on a ship’s bridge, “If we start our new country with an act of cruelty towards our fellow man, then every person in this world has died in vain. We cannot lose our humanity to save our civilization.” (Slightly paraphrased, I believe.)

Humanity. What is humanity? I was under the impression that to be human was to be desperately wicked, and wicked beyond help or imagination, except by the saving grace of Jesus Christ? Not according to Roland Emmerich.

The overarching theme of 2012 is that, even facing their deaths, man will ultimately choose to do that which is righteous, not that which is evil.

Another main character, an author named Jackson Curtis, had written a book years before that had done very poorly. We learn through the film that his book, Farewell Atlantis, had opened to sour reviews from its critics, and had sold only 422 copies. Why? Because the critics said that Curtis was “too naive”; that, because he believed that man would behave morally (according to what system of morality? I won’t go there now…) in the face of death.

At this point, I have to ask – what is Roland Emmerich smoking?

Have the epic lessons of the depravity of man provided by such recent events as Hurricane Katrina really proved this easy to forget? Why must the world at large fight so hard to believe in humankinds’ innate goodness? What are the stakes lost if those that do not believe the Gospel admit that man is evil?

Everything.

The religion of humanism rests on the foundation that man is good; that man is the only source of law, order, and societal norms – and, since man is the only source of law, order, and societal norms, man must be innately good, otherwise…the foundation of humanism crumbles to the ground like a heap of sand in front of the shining light of the Bible, and Jesus Christ.

All this to say that, although I was irritated enough to rant for 500 words, I did really like the movie…

Stormchasing Tomorrow!

2009-06-18T18:38:00.004-06:00

Going stormchasing tomorrow, heading to Rockford to pick up at least one good friend at 2 PM. Current indications are that a "significant tornado outbreak" (to quote a forecaster from NWS in Indy) could occur over the northern half of Illinois tomorrow afternoon/evening.

I'm stoked.

And, for everyone else....

2009-06-09T17:55:00.002-06:00

Here is a different (meaning actually interesting and readable) take on our adventures, written by Raquel. Enjoy!

http://sharppointythings.blogpeoria.com/2009/05/22/the-duct-tape-valkyrie-goes-storm-chasing-raquel/

May 13th, 2009/ Car Accident

2009-06-07T06:34:00.005-06:00

May 13th, 2009. For me, this day stands out as one of the greatest days of my life. I proved that all of the study, the obsession, all the crazyness of being a "stormchaser" had paid off. I proved that I had not wasted my time, but had learned everything, from visual storm features to radar interpretation to weather data analysis, well enough to successfully stormchase.

May 9th, 2009 - The Storm Prediction Center (SPC) places most of IL in an areal outlook, forecasting the possibility of an "outbreak of severe weather, with all modes possible." This is enough for me to start getting interested, and start preliminary planning.

May 11th, 2009 - The SPC issues its day 3 outlook, placing most of IL and MO in a moderate risk for severe thunderstorms. The possibility of a "significant severe weather outbreak, with some strong tornadoes" was first broached here.

May 12th, 2009 - Day two outlooks. Moderate risk upheld for IL and MO. Planning kicks into high gear. The SPC declares that an "outbreak of tornadoes, some strong, appears likely over portions of IL and MO."

May 13th, 2009 - The day arrives. Having made plans to get off work at 3 PM CDT, I began my day by packing all of my ham radio equipment into my van, as well as picking up an antenna from a friend of mine. The day was overcast, and rain was moving into the area as I made my way to work. I kept an eye on the outlooks, and, after the 0600 UTC outlook, I had all but decided to head south towards Springfield. However, over lunch break, I took a look at the latest atmospheric soundings. The noon soundings showed that the mixed-level Convective Available Potential Energy (ML CAPE) was at 3500 J/KG in northern/central MO. This, combined with the Significant Tornado parameter readings in the 2-3 range, as well as the Supercell parameter reading of 12, the Craven/Brooks Sig/SVR of 70, high dewpoints, clearing skies, and rising temperatures brought me close to making a decision to start WSW from Peoria. The biggest decision that I had to make came next. Should I attack south, targeting a small mesoscale convective system that was currently moving ENE over southern MO, or should I move westerly, targeting the conjunction of the cold and warm front? The question about moving west was that the environment was under the effects of a capping temperature inversion that threatened to keep thunderstorm development at a minimum for the afternoon. I decided to make tentative plans to head SW towards Rushville, IL, then make my decision when I could see radar again. At 2 PM, the SPC made my mind up for me. A Mesoscale Discussion was issued, saying that the issuance of a tornado watch would "soon be necessary". I then made my final decision - start out by heading towards Macomb, IL. At 2:40 PM CDT, the SPC issued Tornado Watch 293, covering portions of IA, MO and IL. In this watch, a 40% chance of a strong tornado (EF2 and up) was defined over the entire watch area. Waiting to pick up the 2000 UTC outlook (which defined the greatest risk for tornadoes as over northern MO, southern IA, and western IL), I headed to southern Peoria, picking up my chase partners for the day - Raquel and Samuel.

Something that interested me - at this point, I was incredibly nervous, and actually slightly nauseous. I felt like I had to be a success my first time out, to find something that would make this trip worthwhile. I felt like I had to do something that would make the scoffers around me look at stormchasing differently after I got through - not as a teenaged-thrillseeking-adventure, but as a public service that is vital to organizations such as the National Weather Service, and is also reasonably safe if directed by someone who knows what they are doing.

We headed WSW towards Macomb, IL. My plan was to stop in Macomb, get a Wi-Fi hotspot, get the latest radar data, grab dinner at a drive-through, and head out to wherever the biggest storms were developing. Now, here's the thing - Macomb is a beautiful town to go for some kind of romantic getaway, when you have a lot of time to burn. However, a town that is a maze of one-way streets and cutsie-little shops is the last thing that you want when you are trying to perform a hit-and-run operation on a Wi-Fi enabled coffee shop and McDonalds. We eventually got to a coffee shop, and, after checking radar, and calling a chaser friend of mine (Mike, WX9MDT) I decided to target Keokuk, IA. Extricating myself from the clutches of Macomb, we started to head towards Keokuk. As we got close to Keokuk, Raquel and Samuel got my radio equipment set up in between the front seats. This was harder than it sounds, and they did a very nice, quick job. The first tornado warning that I heard mentioned that there was a "large, destructive tornado that was currently between one-quarter and one-half mile wide." This was where I wanted to be. The problem was, this was in MO. I was in IL, going into IA. Now, I had not planned on going out of state, so, while I had a beautifully detailed map of IL, I had neother a map of IA or MO. Fail. As my Official Navigator (Raquel) informed me that I was an idiot (in much nicer terms), I made an emergency trip to Casey's in Keokuk. Racing in, I almost yelled at the cashier "Got any maps?" She looked at me for a second, then pointed to the map section. As quickly as I could, I was out, and headed to MO. After getting lost, then back on track again, I called Mike, who counseled me to conduct a strategic retreat back to the IL side of the Mississippi River, thus catching the storm as it crossed the river.

Once back across the river, we followed Route 136 down the east side of the Mississippi. While trying to get data from Mike, and failing because of terrible cell phone coverage, I saw a group of chasers parked on the side of the road. I pulled over, and, telling Raquel that I would be right back, jumped out of my van and started jogging up the road. After a few steps, I saw something move out of the corner of my eye, and sudden;y realized that my van was not in park, and was merrily rolling down the road, free as a bird. I raced up the road, opened the door, jumped in, and slammed on the brakes. Total Indiana Jones moment. Raquel and Samuel took it pretty well, somehow... :)

We proceeded down the road a couple of miles, hooking up with Mike on a gravel area outside of Marcelline, IL. After watching the storm for a couple of minutes, a large, rotating wall cloud became apparent, and a couple of funnel clouds formed. After taking some pictures, and realizing that we were too far away, we decided to get closer. Unfortunately, gravel roads never go where you want them to. We ended up getting pretty close, but had to stay on the move, as at one point we were only about a mile away from the wall cloud. I really wish that we could've stopped and gotten pictures at this point, as it really was amazing. However, we were just trying to stay ahead of the storm, and you can't really negotiate with a supercell when you're only a mile or two in front of a wall cloud.

The tornado that touched down was an EF2 that hit Kirksville, MO. It was, at points, 3/4 of a mile wide, and caused extensive damage in the town of Kirksville. This was a bit before we intercepted it, but those were the reports we were getting as the storm rolled in, which definitely intensified the atmosphere... :)

Then, as darkness fell, we made a strategic retreat, down I-172, to I-72, then came home through Springfield, IL. I got home after midnight, but I didn't care. Sure, the next morning I would get a speeding ticket for going 78 in a 55. Sure, I had spent almost $40 in gas, as well as blown out the front brakes on my van. It didn't matter. Fulfilling a life-long dream is an amazing moment on your life. For one night, I was on top of the world.

As far as my car accident, I was on University in Peoria, heading to pick up my bosses' dry cleaning. I wasa bit lost, and, when I saw my turn, I quickly flipped a U-turn. Problem - I was in the right-hand lane, and forgot about the guy in the big red truck in my blind spot. He hit me, spun me partially into oncoming traffic, and landed on the other side of the road. My rear bumper got knocked off, and his front bumper got driven into his tire, but we were both fine. Thank God!

FYI

2009-05-17T16:39:00.001-06:00

I am not dead, or pregnant.

New post will be forthcoming on my stormchasing adventures last week, as well as getting in a car accident, and getting a speeding ticket.... It was an eventful two weeks.

Laters.

FYI: Avoiding Strep Throat is not a bad idea

2009-04-07T10:11:00.002-06:00

After having the worst sore throat I've ever had for three days straight, my Mom and I were convinced that I had strep throat. It's horrible, and I don't recommend it. After finally figuring out what we thought it was, and taking steady doses of Tylenol, the pain had subsided to a dull ache, and I was watching Jurassic Park, when my Dad came in the room with a styrofoam cup. In the soft light of my laptop, the contents of the cup looked somewhat akin to urine, with a smell not unlike that of the dessicated carcasse of a 3 weeks dead muskrat. I blanched, then asked what it was. "Water and apple cider vinegar!" my dad responded, rather cheerily. "Mom said to sip it slowly, and there's a whole pitcher out in the hallway!" As he saw my wry face, he was reduced to giggling like a fourth-grade schoolgirl who had worn a more expensive dress than her best friend. He proceeded to leave, still giggling, and I studied the cup. After thinking about it for awhile, and watching a T-Rex eat an electric fence, a lawyer, and portions of two Goodyear tires, I, singlehandedly, in an unselfish, heroic, and barely-believable act of unmatched courage (that, at the very least, should win me the "Blog and Blogger of the 18th Century" award), took a swig. I was surprised to find that, although it smelled horrible, and looked just as bad, it was truly awful. I honestly would have preferred the muskrat.

Epilogue, I don't think it was strep, as, if it was, I wouldn't have recovered over the last two days.

Bernie Madoff can singlehandedly save America!

2009-03-27T09:18:00.002-06:00

Or, at least the IRS. For 13 years, Bernie Madoff told his victims that they were making money, when, in fact, they weren't. However, being the normal, law-abiding citizens that they were, his victims all paid taxes on their illusionary gains. The moral of the story? The way to save the economy is to encourage Ponzi schemes! All we need is a few smart people, and a sufficient supply of suckers. It's the American way.

Truth be told, the IRS is allowing those burned by Madoff to recover the taxes they paid in quicker than normal, but it still seems pretty humorous to me.

Is anyone still fooled by Sarah Palin?

2009-03-25T10:44:00.005-06:00

It's funny, one of the huge reasons that we were supposed to vote for the McCain/Palin ticket was because they would appoint conservative, Biblical Supreme Court justices. Still think so? Palin has thrown away her allegiance to the conservative side of the Republican party by appointing to the Alaskan Supreme court a pro-choice judge with a long history of supporting abortion. The opposing candidate, Eric Smith, was the obviously more conservative choice, and was rated by the Alaska Family Council as being more likely to stand up to the pro-choice and more liberal members of the court.

Can we dispose of the indefensible idea that we can trust Sarah Palin? Can we get past the $15,000 wardrobe and the Vogue covers and see her for what she really is - a politician? Christians are disgusted by the "Obama love" going around, but fail to see that they are doing the same thing to Sarah Palin, almost to the point, in some cases, of deifying her.

True, both candidates were liberal. However, Palin could have rejected both of them, or picked the more conservative one. Instead, she appears to have turned this into a political stunt for the 2012 election, trying to appear more "moderate", as well as appointing a woman to appeal to the feminist movement.

The following is an article from www.rightwingwatch.org titled "Palin Bucks Right, Appoints Former Planned Parenthood Board Member to Supreme Court."

"Last week we noted that Sarah Palin was facing a dilemma rooted in her state's "Missouri Plan"-like structure for appointing state Supreme Court justices because the list of candidates she was required to choose from did not necessarily reflect her views.
This issue didn't seem to be generating all that much coverage but it did generate interest from the state's Alaska Family Council, which urged its activists to contact Palin and pressure her to choose Eric Smith over Morgan Christen, saying that Smith was "more conservative" than Christen, who was, among other things, on the board of Planned Parenthood in the mid-1990s.
But Palin was apparently not swayed by the AFC's efforts and went ahead and appointed Christen:
Governor Sarah Palin selected Anchorage Superior Court Judge Morgan Christen to the Alaska Supreme Court. Christen is the 20th justice appointed to the Court.
“Alaska’s Supreme Court bears the awesome responsibility of ensuring that our court system administers justice in firm accordance with the principles laid down in our state Constitution,” said Governor Palin. “I have every confidence that Judge Christen has the experience, intellect, wisdom and character to be an outstanding Supreme Court justice.”
The Alaska Daily News reports that AFC president Jim Minnery is not happy and says that Palin will be getting a good talking to when they see each other at an upcoming benefit:
The head of the Alaska Family Council -- a Christian pro-family, anti-abortion group -- on Wednesday sent an e-mail to thousands of people asking them to urge Palin to pick Smith, not Christen.
The governor's office received about 100 letters, e-mails and faxes from the public about the Supreme Court appointment, including some from the family council, Palin's spokeswoman, Sharon Leighow, said in an e-mail. That was not an unusual number, Leighow said.
The family council plea, from group president Jim Minnery, said Smith was "more conservative" and that Christen would be "another activist on the Court." In an interview, Minnery said that was the "general consensus" but he had no specifics.
"I'll be seeing the governor tomorrow. We'll have a good chat," Minnery said after Christen's appointment was announced. He said that Palin is introducing the speaker Thursday evening at a benefit lecture in Anchorage for the family council.
As we noted last time, when Missouri's Republican Governor Matt Blunt faced this sort of situation back in 2007, right-wing groups savaged him, saying "too many politicians have suffered the fate of trying to have issues both ways, and this may be the final strike for Gov. Blunt."
Will Palin face the same sort of outrage?"
Unfortunately, not in most Christian circles.

Football

2009-03-23T10:31:00.003-06:00

I know many of you have always wanted to see me in certain situations-namely, being yanked backward while in a headlock and playing running back. Well, your dreams have come true.

I am glad, however, that this had a better ending than my famous Reformation Day activities, as I had the game-clinching interception return to win, 42-28. (No touchdown on the return.) It was a great game, and I got to meet Joshua up close and personal... :-) Can't wait til next time!

Rethinking the Dark Knight

2009-03-23T10:23:00.008-06:00

Spring break was this week, and, among numerous other things, I’ve been reading J. F. Baldwin’s book The Deadliest Monster: An Introduction to Worldviews. To this point, the book has been excellent, and I’d highly recommend it. The book takes the stories of Frankenstein and Mr. Hyde, and contrasts the main difference in their worldviews, namely, is man naturally good, or evil?

Page 139 really stood out to me. Baldwin writes: "Once you accept relativism, you can no longer be outraged by people contradicting what you consider to be moral…If man doesn’t have an absolute standard to which he may refer, then he can expect to find himself locked in an ethical “survival of the fittest”, where the ethical opinions with the most support kill off all other opinions.”

The first thing I thought of when I read this was The Dark Knight. Remember? In The Dark Knight, the screenwriters wrote such a convoluted situation that it seemed as if immoral activities such as spying and torture were “morally right”. How about National Treasure? The “good guys” are forced to steal the Declaration of Independence because, if they don’t, the “bad guys” will get it, which means:

A. Losing the treasure

B. Possible destruction of the document

C. A really short, stupid, boring movie

So, stealing is wrong, unless there’s a huge treasure at the end of the road. Torture is fine, as long as we carefully craft a situation where torture is the only option. No way should you steal someone’s parking space—unless you’re late for work on your first day. Instead of looking at these as difficult situations in which the “good guys” did what they thought was right, we should see them for what they are—situations carefully crafted by liberal Atheists who are attempting to (somewhat) subtly chip away at the foundations of Christianity. Nor is this limited to a movie, it has taken over America. One instance of this is evidenced by the Republican Party (the so-called “good guys”), attempting to change their stance on abortion away from “Abortion is wrong—period” to “There are some cases in which abortion is the morally right thing to do”.

Baldwin continues:

"Once you accept relativism, you can no longer be outraged by people contradicting what you consider to be moral…If man doesn’t have an absolute standard to which he may refer, then he can expect to find himself locked in an ethical “survival of the fittest”, where the ethical opinions with the most support kill off all other opinions.”

I recently had a lengthy argument with my business law professor at ICC who stated that “Law and morality is practically the same thing.” While we may laugh at the absurdity of this statement, it is a telling insight into the average American’s, and, sadly, many average Christian’s worldviews. I did finally get him to admit that there are, in his words, “a few areas” where law and morality differ. Big whoop. (He did, however, clarify this by saying that he thought that in the few areas that the law and morality differed, the law would soon catch up.)

Californians can personally attest to this mindset in their fight against gay marriage, which has become a subject viewed by so many people as morally acceptable that it is left up to a popular vote.

Morality via popular vote. What a smashing idea.

This should be my motto!

2009-03-04T15:28:00.002-06:00

Do I have to like Democrats?

2009-02-13T16:58:00.003-06:00

This is only 36 seconds, but it really drives home my little-known fact of the day. Democrats are...uhh....never mind.

What's the difference between Satan and a Democrat? Satan has horns.

Ross v. Hovind

2009-02-11T07:54:00.004-06:00

This is long, but definitely worth the time. It sucked me in fairly quickly, and is a great example of both how to, and how not to debate. Ross raises a lot of interesting points that Hovind never was able to answer, and so falls back to his catch-all defense, namely, "You're a heretic!" I don't pretend to even fractionally understand Ross's thermodynamic arguments, but he has made me reopen Genesis to see what it is that the verses say. When it's all said and done, however, no matter what Kent Hovind was trying to say, he made no sense whatsoever, changed the subject numerous times, and really came across as pretty ignorant. Hovind was also torn apart in a 1999 debate with Hugh Ross, and he tried to pull the same tricks there, calling Ross a "heretic" and ignoring his arguments as "Atheistic theology."

Here is my legal disclaimer: This video is intended solely for the pleasure/boredom of my extremely small and largely disinterested audience, and any and/or all views expressed by speakers and/or audience members in the aforementioned video are neither condoned nor rejected, in whole or in part or at face value by The Same Anonymous Dude. Copyright 2009 The Same Anonymous Dude Incorporated.

(That's just so I don't get some crazies on here that yell and scream "You beleive in a billion year old earth, you heretic, you're going to hell!" No, I don't. I merely thought that this was one of the most interesting things that I've seen in a while, so I figured I'd post it. Enjoy!)

If you want shorter excerpts, check YouTube.

Liberty Day 09!

2009-02-10T06:50:00.002-06:00

Lo peoples!

Liberty Day will be held on March 21st ths year, in Medinah, IL. Paul Jehle will be speaking, and Charlie Zahm will be the featured musician. For more info go to www.libertyday.blogspot.com.

It's well worth the drive!

A new post

2009-02-02T10:56:00.002-06:00

I was talking to Seth, and he suggested that I post the paper that I wrote for my English Comp class, since I don't have any time to actually write stuff solely for my blog. I accquiesed. Here is the paper that I wrote, as a "remembered event paper", but please realize a couple of things:

A. This IS fiction, with enough truth to make it beleivable and sound really authentic.

B. This reference to "Jenny" was totally made up, as I felt that I needed to have some sort of emotional attachment to this area, and I wasn't getting that from other "events" that I made reference to.

Enjoy!

Leaving Home

The summer I was 14, my parents tasked me with tearing out all of the old landscaping and shrubbery. This was a job that I attacked with all of my youthful, fourteen year-old vigor. To me, it was the perfect job. I got paid a bit, got to use tools like a mattock and an axe, got dirtier than a coal miner every night, and got a few war wounds in the process. One time, I had a long, drawn out battle with a hibiscus tree. It took me two days to rip out that bush, but when I got done, I felt a sense of respect, a fleeting sense of sadness, as if it had been a person, that had fought for so long, and so hard, only to lose.

I can still remember the moment he said it. It was right before my 15^th birthday, and I was really excited. I had asked for my ham radio antenna to be installed on the roof, the original Batman movie, and a Charlie Daniels CD, among other things. I was getting ready for bed, tired after a long day of school and homework, when my Dad walked in. He seemed excited, like he had when he had gotten the job offer from Boeing, or when he passed the CPA. “We think we found a new house, down by Peoria” he said, “We’re going down to look at it next week!” I acted excited, happy, faked all the obligatory emotions, then, after he left, sat on the edge of my bed. This would be our 16^th move in the 15 years since I had been born. When we had moved to this house, I had been assured that we would stay here for 5 years, at the least. It had been two and a half years since then. I had finally been able to make friends, to feel safe opening myself up to people, to feel like a person, not a piece of baggage. I stood up and walked to the window, looked out through the tall trees outside my window, devoid of leaves, and tried to think about what he had said, tried to think of what this meant, tried to think about what I could do, what I could say, but I couldn’t.

Everything I had done, everyone I had known, was wrapped up in this small town. I had won the library contest, worked my first job, crashed the dirt bike, and met Jenny… How could I just walk away? How could I just leave this behind, discarding my life like a worn-out pair of socks, or a empty candy bar wrapper? How could I bear the pain of being ripped and uprooted, like the hibiscus bush I had torn out the year before? I thought of its struggle, its pain, and suddenly I felt a sense of guilt, like I understood what it had gone through, and wished that I had left it alone. I felt like I had brought this on myself, like I had doomed myself to a lifetime of hell. I lay awake for hours, an overwhelming sense of guilt and sadness over my head. I tried not to let the tears come to my eyes, to be a man, but it didn’t work. I couldn’t stand myself. I felt like Hitler, Stalin, and Satan, all rolled into one. I had killed what my tortured brain conceived as a person, and thus, had brought judgment on myself.

I finally fell asleep, but even sleep couldn’t give my tortured brain a rest. I dreamed that I was back in the pit I had dug, chopping at the roots of the tree. I could see the blood on the roots, taste the sweat in my mouth, smell the acrid scent of hibiscus, and I couldn’t stop. I felt like I was hitting my best friend, killing him, and I was out of control. When I woke up, I was sweating, my heart racing. I couldn’t sleep the entire night.

The next morning, my Mom commented on how tired I looked. I smiled, and tried to act normal, like I wasn’t a murderer. I thought for the entire day how I could make amends to nature, to God, to the tree. I dropped by the greenhouse on my way home, and bought a packet of hibiscus seeds. When I got home, I dug down through the snow and planted them all, figuring that one would probably survive. I said a little prayer, asking forgiveness, and then went inside, washed the dirt off my hands, and asked what was for dinner. While my life was going to be uprooted, I felt like I had payed my dues, like I was clean, and that there was light ahead. I felt like I had one more chance. I was leaving home.

Friends.....or Burgers?

2009-01-19T07:06:00.003-06:00

No more burgers-before-bros on Facebook

Tech writer totally pwned by social networking site's 'Whopper Sacrifice'

Whopper lovers and Facebook freeloaders alike are mad as heck … and well, I am too (though for slightly different reasons). Just eight days into the blogosphere-infamous "Whopper Sacrifice" campaign — in which Facebookers were encouraged to dump 10 "friends" for a free-Whopper coupon — the Burger King application unceremoniously ceased to function. Bing bang boom, no free Whoppers for anyone.
"NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!! I had one sacrafice to go!!!!" lamented another upon learning the news. “Now i gotta spend $2.19.....stupid."
"Whopper Sacrifice" is the one and only reason I made the decision to shed myself of the social stigma I’ve carried for years, and join the rest of the humanity on Facebook. I mean, join Facebook as myself, using the name that actually appears on my birth certificate, instead of accessing the social networking site via the many nom de plume profiles I maintain for strictly lurking purposes.
It’s not that I actually wanted a Whopper. I was more excited by the social experiment of building a profile, accepting 10 friends (including two hardcore vegans and my boss), and summarily dumping them in such a way that they’d receive an official notice via the "Whopper Sacrifice" Facebook application informing them that their friendship to me was worth roughly 1/10th of a fast food hamburger coupon (each). Because dude, that’s hilarious.
Alas, it was a message none of the 10 prospective recipients of my premeditated hilarity ever received. Within the 24 hours I executed my friendship-for-burger bait and switch — 24 hours I will never get back — Facebook modified the "Whopper Sacrifice" application so that the dropped friends no longer received the memo that they’d been axed from a friend hoard in favor of fast food, leading Burger King to stop the app altogether.
In its brief existence, "Whopper Sacrifice" collected 82,771 people who dumped 233,906 friends, each of which received a memo that only advanced the viral campaign.
Now I'm writing....
I thought that this just captured the spirit of the American people. Many people proved that they WOULD sell their friends for a free burger--at least, 1/10 of one.
You can't make this stuff up.

Peter Shiff was right....

2009-01-15T14:23:00.002-06:00

This is pretty funny, but sad, in a way. It's amazing seeing this now, after the people that laughed at him are choking on the fact that they were not just wrong, but unbelievably wrong. Take a good look at the stocks that are reccomended by the "experts"...

Anyway, I've had a lot going on, including a DSST, work, not learning to drive, college planning,

violin practice, studying for two more DSST's, and getting textbooks for this semester. Right now, my mind is a blank, so I'll

go back to freezing in peace... Windchill has been in the -25-(-35) degree range for a looooonnng time...

Frisbee, anyone?

You won't believe this...

2008-12-19T16:53:00.001-06:00

15 things about me that will probably bore you to death...

2008-12-19T15:32:00.002-06:00

1. The batch of gravy I made the other night...well, when I dumped a cup and a half (literally) of pepper into it....Delmonico's it was not.

2. I wish that I was more austere.

3. I really, really like improveverywhere.com

4. Ditto to Dave Barry, Mark O'Connor, Ron Paul, and the Emperor Caligula.

5. I think that texting is underated.

6. My callsign is KC9JVG

7. Football is my favorite sport to play, period. (Note: Some girls have stated that I hate football, and I must say, to say that I hate football is akin to saying that Adolf Hitler was dragged, kicking and screaming, into World War II…)

8. My nicknames at the herb farm I work at have ranged from “Mr. Lilac”, to “Gilligan”, to “Cute Boy”…Don’t even ask.

9. Now that I think about him, Caligula wasn't that great.

10. I really despise winter

11. I suffer from a mild addiction to Powerade.

12. I am a true Southerner, as evidenced by the facts that I was born and raised in the South, and I also bleed red…

13. I really want a moofa. (Better known as a loofa, but a “loofa” is actually an abbreviation of “Ladies oofa”, so if a man uses an oofa, it becomes a moofa….Or so the legend goes.)

14. I have a serious problem resisting the urge to play every bowed string instrument I lay eyes on.

15. I am a Christian. I would've put this first, but then read a very thought-provoking post by Gabrielle, which follows: " I know most people put this one at the top of the list. I considered that, but the more I thought about it the more I realized that this is not a big one in my life. In most of the circles I run in being a Christian is normal. I don’t think it even occurs to me to be ashamed of being a Christian. I’ve been doing it my entire life and it’s not something that has ever been called into question. It’s like being ashamed of wearing blue when I’m in a room full of people wearing blue. And outside of Christian circles I am not on the front lines in dealing with people who would think me strange for following Jesus. I run the support game in that fight right now. I can only point to a small handful of people who have ever tried to make me ashamed. So I guess I need to take this time to bolster up my unashamedness and make it strong to weather any storms that might come my way. "

I couldn't have put it better myself.

Have a great week, and I'll try to post more often.

The way I feel...

2008-12-02T20:08:00.006-06:00

In case you're wondering, this picture proves that even my beautiful violin has deserted me.... Look closely.

That sums it up pretty well, especially for me as a stormchaser...

One of the Funniest things I've ever seen...

2008-12-02T16:12:00.002-06:00

This is a classic! (Note: You will only get this if you are both a Star Wars fan, and enjoy John Williams movie soundtracks!)

Life...

2008-11-29T19:08:00.003-06:00

So, I'm at Garrison's going-away party right now, and not in a particularly chirpy mood. It always stinks when your friends leave, but this... rather sudden. Oh well, I won't let myself drivel, I'll just post a few pictures of me and Garr, that should sum it up.

YO!!

2008-11-26T18:45:00.000-06:00

For EB, Primarily

2008-11-11T20:47:00.002-06:00

EB, here ya go, one of the best treatments of the Fed. It's long, but well worth it.

Also from the same site, www.lewrockwell.com, is this debate...

I. Prof. Eric Posner comments on the Block-Caplan debate on fractional reserve banking, which can be found here.

I ran across this odd debate between Bryan Caplan and Walter Block. Here is Block’s argument ("frb" means fractional reserve banking):

Consider this: A deposits 10 ounces of gold in B's bank; B gives A a demand deposit for these 10 ounces. B turns around and lends C 9 of these ounces, giving C a demand deposit for these 9 ounces. Thus, A and C both own full rights to these 9 ounces.

There is now a problem of over-determination or conflict in rights. A and C both have a FULL right to these selfsame 9 ounces of gold. They are both FULL owners of these 9 ounces.

But, one of the essences of the libertarian philosophy we share is that there CANNOT be a conflict in rights. Any seeming conflict is due to a misspecification of one or the other right. Yet, here, with frb, we have a GENUINE conflict in rights. Thus, frb is incompatible with libertarianism.

Note, I am NOT talking about practicality. It might well be (given no bank run) that A and C will not ACT incompatibly with one another; that is, both will not demand that B pay them these 9 ounces, an utter impossibility. No, I am talking about RIGHTS. Right now, before any bank run, there is STILL a rights contradiction.

Caplan just sputters. Here is the problem with Block’s argument, as I think any lawyer would immediately recognize.

Block confuses property rights and contract rights. If I give the bank some cash and pay it to put this cash in a safety deposit box, then the bank can’t use that cash. It can’t lend it out to someone else; it can’t list it as an asset on its balance sheet; it can’t touch it without my permission. If the bank were to do so, then it would have engaged in theft, and the relevant employees would go to jail. Lawyers call this transaction a bailment.

But if I deposit some cash with the bank, I don’t retain my property interest. Instead, I’m making a loan to the bank and I obtain a contractual right to repayment on demand. If I demand my cash (plus interest, if any) and the bank fails to pay me, then I can sue it for breach of contract and demand expectation damages. If the bank were not a bank but just an ordinary borrower, and it was insolvent, then I have to race other creditors for its assets; otherwise, my contract right is converted into a claim in bankruptcy, and I have to share with other creditors. (Since it is a bank, I may well obtain full compensation from the government, but that is not relevant to the debate.)

If you asked the bank whether it might lend out your money, it would most certainly tell you that it would. So it is not lying to you, and there can’t be fraud. Nor is there any other contradiction, incompatibility, or problem with the arrangement. Depositors take a risk that the bank will breach the contract but anyone who enters a contract takes the same risk.

Block doesn’t seem to have any problem with contract rights per se, but he does have a problem with a person entering a contract that gives another person the right to demand assets that the first person might not have. But all contracts are like this. People enter contracts expecting that they will be able to transfer money, goods, or services when they are due, but everyone understands that intervening events might make the transfer impossible, impractical, or unwise. The other party obtains a right to obtain damages for breach of contract, but if every contract where the probability of nonperformance is greater than zero were considered fraudulent, we would have no economy.

The above material constitutes a statement of Professor Eric Posner's, and can be found here.

II. Walter Block replies to Eric Posner

There is so much about which I disagree with Prof. Posner. Perhaps it would be best to consider Posner's views one bit at a time, and subject them to scrutiny. He offers four different paragraphs of criticism of my anti-frb argument, and I will consider them each, in order.

1."Block confuses property rights and contract rights. If I give the bank some cash and pay it to put this cash in a safety deposit box, then the bank can’t use that cash. It can’t lend it out to someone else; it can’t list it as an asset on its balance sheet; it can’t touch it without my permission. If the bank were to do so, then it would have engaged in theft, and the relevant employees would go to jail. Lawyers call this transaction a bailment."

I agree with this statement entirely, and enthusiastically. This is precisely the claim of those of us who would legally ban fractional reserve banking. However, as can be seen below, we apply this not only to cash in a safety deposit box, but to ALL deposits with a bank.

2. "But if I deposit some cash with the bank, I don’t retain my property interest. Instead, I’m making a loan to the bank and I obtain a contractual right to repayment on demand. If I demand my cash (plus interest, if any) and the bank fails to pay me, then I can sue it for breach of contract and demand expectation damages. If the bank were not a bank but just an ordinary borrower, and it was insolvent, then I have to race other creditors for its assets; otherwise, my contract right is converted into a claim in bankruptcy, and I have to share with other creditors. (Since it is a bank, I may well obtain full compensation from the government, but that is not relevant to the debate.)"

Here, I sharply disagree. A major matter of contention between the defenders and opponents of the legality of frb revolves, precisely, around the issue of whether or not a depositor, call him A, with some cash with the bank (in the form of a demand deposit), retains his property interest in those funds. I say No, and offer some reasons. One, if this is true, then, when the bank lends out money to a borrower, C, and gives him a demand deposit for (a fraction of) the amount deposited, there are not one but TWO people each of whom has a FULL ownership right in the SAME amount of money. This is a logical impossibility. Two, another way of putting the matter is that there are now more titles to property than there is property. In the numerical example mentioned above, there are now only 10 gold ounces, and there are two people, A (10) and C (9) with rights to 19 gold ounces. A manifest impossibility.

Posner, in contrast, says Yes. That is, he claims that A no longer has a right to the money he has deposited. But he offers no REASON in support of this contention. Reading in between the lines, it is easy to see what is going on here: Posner is relying on PRESENT LAW, according to which he is entirely correct. This, indeed, is the exact manner that the courts have interpreted demand deposits. However, Posner, sadly, is missing out on the context of the debate between me and Caplan. We were debating, not, what the law IS, but, rather, in sharp contrast, what the law SHOULD BE. Posner mistakenly interprets the Block-Caplan debate as over a POSITIVE statement of law, when it really involves NORMATIVE claims about the law. Yes, yes, Professor Posner's views of bankruptcy law are entirely correct as regards which creditors are first in line, but they are equally IRRELEVANT to the debate between me and Caplan.

3. "If you asked the bank whether it might lend out your money, it would most certainly tell you that it would. So it is not lying to you, and there can’t be fraud. Nor is there any other contradiction, incompatibility, or problem with the arrangement. Depositors take a risk that the bank will breach the contract but anyone who enters a contract takes the same risk."

True, again, true; all too true. The bank would indeed NOT lie to a depositor about any such thing. But, lying is only sufficient for fraud, not necessary. There are other ways to commit fraud besides an outright lie. For example, it is fraudulent for a bank or anyone else to try to sell you a square circle, even if they do not lie about it. Why? Because there is no such thing as a square circle, and, in order to a contract to be a valid one, not only must both parties agree to it (neither lies to the other), but, also, the contract must be in accordance with REALITY, and "sales" of square circles clearly are not compatible with that consideration. But, neither are frb contracts! They, too, are incompatible with the reality of property rights, according to which there cannot be more titles to property than there is property; there cannot be an A and a C, with rights that are incompatible with those of each other.

For our friends on the left, there are numerous and myriad contradictions of rights. For example, X's right to "public" accommodation in Y's home conflicts with the latter's right to privacy. E.g., X is a homosexual would-be renter, and Y is a Christian landlord, looking for a roommate. For the interventionists, the courts must "balance" these rights. But such rights conflicts are anathema to the libertarian. For us, if there is a seeming rights conflict, one or the other (or both) of the putative rights are not rights at all. Yet, in the case of frb, there are two people, A and C, each with rights to money of 19 units, and the bank, B, cannot possibly satisfy both. So, A and C have incompatible or conflicting rights.

4."Block doesn’t seem to have any problem with contract rights per se, but he does have a problem with a person entering a contract that gives another person the right to demand assets that the first person might not have. But all contracts are like this. People enter contracts expecting that they will be able to transfer money, goods, or services when they are due, but everyone understands that intervening events might make the transfer impossible, impractical, or unwise. The other party obtains a right to obtain damages for breach of contract, but if every contract where the probability of nonperformance is greater than zero were considered fraudulent, we would have no economy."

No, not at all. I have no "problem" with contract rights. I am a warm supporter of them. Provided, that is, that they do not constitute a logical contradiction, and are compatible with reality, e.g., underlying property rights. However, ALL contracts are certainly NOT "like this." Under frb, it is a logical impossibility for B to make good his obligations to both A and C, on demand. Now, it is entirely possible that A and C will not call upon B to do so. But, IF they do, that is, constitute a "bank run" B will then be exposed as being unable to meet his financial obligations. In very sharp contrast, there are NO OTHER contracts quite like this in the economy. Yes, I buy 10 widgets from you for delivery today, in consideration for my promise to pay you $10, tomorrow. A day passes, and I am unable to carry out my part of the bargain. But, it is not a LOGICAL CONTRADICTION to suppose I am unable to do so, as in the case of frb. There is all the difference in the world between being unable to fulfill a contract due to contingent circumstances, as in the widget example, and it being IMPOSSIBLE to do so, as in the case of frb. It is not merely "intervening events" that make it a violation of the laws of logic for B, the Bank, to uphold contracts with lender A and borrower C. It is IMPOSSIBLE for B to do so, given frb.

Posner is to be congratulated for this little gem: "if every contract where the probability of nonperformance is greater than zero were considered fraudulent, we would have no economy." Beautiful. I wish I had said this. The man, truly, has a way with a word. But it is not merely, that in the case of frb, "the probability of nonperformance is greater than zero," as in the case of pretty much ALL commercial agreements. Rather it is that even before performance or non-performance becomes an issue (this issue only arises if a bank run occurs), the bank engaged in frb is legally dead in the water. Its instantaneous debts are greater than its instantaneous assets. That is, it is bankrupt from the get-go. Under libertarian law (not, I hasten to add, present statist law), it would immediately be declared bankrupt, and forced to disgorge its property. It would not be allowed to operate for one second. The distinction between frb failure and ordinary business failure rests on the difference between a logical impossibility and a contingent failure, which need not have happened.

All if this is spelled out, clearly, in my part of the debate with Caplan. It is elaborated upon, in great detail, in the bibliography appended to that debate. Yet, more than passing curious, Posner chooses to pretty much ignore all of it in his criticisms of my anti-frb position. A strange way to come to grips with the arguments of an intellectual opponent. Hopefully, if there is to be any future round in this correspondence between me and Posner, he will attempt to come to grips with what I actually say.

November 6, 2008

Dr. Block [send him mail] is a professor of economics at Loyola University New Orleans, and a senior fellow of the Ludwig von Mises Institute. He is the author of Defending the Undefendable and the newly released Labor Economics From A Free Market Perspective.

Excellent, and unarguable!

Random Thoughts on the Election

2008-11-11T19:14:00.002-06:00

I have seen a lot of outrage on the election results lately, and one recurring theme seems to be "How could this happen? I thought America would choose right!"

The answer? Sin.

America is a sinful nation, and is being judged by God for its apostasy. It's ironic that the majority of people in America actually voted for what I believe to be one of God's instruments of judgment. It surprises me that people are surprised that this happened. America is a shadow of what it once was. Even the so-called "conservatives" (a.k.a Republicans) are arguing over issues like "When should abortion be legal? In what cases should we allow embryos to be used for Stem-Cell research?” This is the so-called "stalwart right", and if the conservatives are falling off the table and becoming pseudo-Democrats, why are we surprised that America is being judged?

Look at America. Abortion is legal. Pornography is legal. Sodomy is legal. Guns are fast becoming illegal. Most churches cannot speak truth, as they have been seduced by the promises of tax cuts if they become vassals of the government. Feminism is rampant. In some states, it is becoming illegal to homeschool. People are not “naturally good”. They are evil. Apart from God, we cannot do a single good act.

America is primarily made up of either non-Christians, or weak Christians. The fact that many in the "Christian" camp voted for Obama should not surprise us. It was inevitable. When the Church becomes watered-down, and refuses to stand up to open, blatant, and nauseating sin, when the Church takes a "We preach the Gospel glad, not sad" approach, when major branches of the Church supports the ordination of gay and lesbian MINISTERS, when many churches are choosing sin and hell, why are we surprised that America is also choosing sin and hell?

The responsibility lies on us.

God has made it clear; Christians are the ones responsible for the government and well-being of our country, and are the ones that must act. This country is our country, it’s time we took a stand and fought for it.

Too long has the Church sent a message of meekness to Christians. Too long has the Church stayed away from political matters. Too long has the Church been enticed by the promises of a lesser tax burden, thus keeping them from standing up to the government. Enough is enough.

I know I am wasting my time writing most of this, as the majority of the people that will read this are people that, and as such, have heard Pastors that DO stand up for what they believe in, Pastors that DO believe that Christians have a place in shaping the world, Pastors that DON’T sell the Church into slavery to the government in exchange for a tax break, and Pastors that are not afraid to denounce sin. However, this is a message that, believe it or not, many Christians in this day and age would take issue with.

May God help us, and may God bless America.

“I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!!” – Patrick Henry

“As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord!” – Joshua 24:15

I'm good....

2008-10-27T11:17:00.002-06:00

Well, saw this and couldn't pass it up. This was my wimpy attempt in the "everyone laugh as some dweeb grabs the big stinkin log and runs and screams and throws it as far as he can towards the covey of girls that are taking ridiculously cool pictures of you so you can get your cell phone back from the guy who stole it from you and held it as blackmail and is the tall guy standing to the right with his head just above the log" competition.
I lost.

Sometimes, the Obvious Can Disappear

2008-10-26T10:33:00.002-06:00

Our Pastor was speaking the other night, and said this: "No matter who is elected, God is in control."

Amazing. It's so simple, but profound.

This entire time I've been debating politics, I have overlooked that. It's so easy to be focused on an area, and lose my overall vision. No matter what happens, God is in control. No matter who is elected, God is in control. In the midst of everything, God is in control. As Christians, we need not be afraid! God is on our side! We serve an awesome God, and He WILL take care of us! Take comfort in the thought that God has us in his hand, and whatever happens, God is with us, and will protect us. All we have to do is follow Him, and He will lead us, and He will never forsake us.

Sola Deo Gloria!!!

For Every Thing There Is a Season

2008-10-26T10:04:00.004-06:00

I have worked for most of the year at an herb and vegetable farm. I was one of only four regular workers, and this week was the last week that we did our regular Friday routine. We picked the tomatoes, the peppers, the tomatillos, the eggplant, the beets, and the squash. We cut the gladiolus, the dahlias, the salvia, the amaranth, and the celosia. We sorted vegetables, cleaned them off, packed them in the truck, got the flowers in the truck, and then we were done. The frost will come tonight and finish what it has started. It wasn't a normal day. There was a sense of sorrow, of letting go, and of moving on. We have put 6 months of our lives into making all of these plants grow and produce, and now, it's gone. As I walked around the farm one last time, I thought about the summer, about the friends I have made, the relationships I have strengthened, the fun, the irritations, the bugs, the farm pets, the broken hayracks, the potting, the planting, the watering, the weeding, the harvesting, the markets... It seemed so unreal. It seems like just a few weeks ago that I was planting thousands of tomato plants, griping about the heat, crashing the mower, and cutting the lilac down on accident. I never knew my Great-Aunt and her sister before I worked here, and now I have forged a relationship with them that is fantastic! I looked at the fields, still green and alive, at the cherry tomatoes we hated picking, at the broom corn that wasn't big enough to cut, at the brussels sprouts that never produced, and realized that when I came back, it would all be gone. As I walked out to the road, I smiled as I watched a large flock of birds pass overhead, heading south for the winter. It is over. God has decreed that there is a time to die, and for the farm, that time is now. It's time to rest, to think on the good, to learn from the year, and to get ready for the next. And next year, we'll do the same stupid things, tell the same stupid jokes, laugh at the same people, and we'll gripe about the heat, the bugs, the cherry tomatoes, and the boss on the golf cart telling us how to weed.

I can't wait.

"God's in His heaven, all's well with the world."

In Response to Those Who Had a Problem With My Chuck Baldwin Post...

2008-10-23T11:54:00.003-06:00

After my post endorsing Chuck Baldwin for President, I have had quite a few comments, both pro- and anti- Third Party. At first, it looked like I would just have to write a post on the inherent problems associated with fiat currency, but then was promptly, as a friend of mine texted me, "slapped in the face"! I now plan to make two blog posts, one dealing with Third Party voting, and a now famous article some people in my church found and quoted from in one of the comments, and the other dealing with the biblical and common-sense problems surrounding fiat currency and the Federal Reserve. I will note that I am a full time college student, and work part time, so I do not have the time that I would like to devote to getting these up quickly.

This article amazed me in its blatant disrespect and rudeness. There are many other ways to get your message across other than calling others' Christianity into question, as well as the myriad of other insults bandied in the body of the paper. It's funny that one of the writer's major points is that we cannot judge a candidates personal decisions, when in the course of the paper she describes those that would vote against him as ignorant, spiritually weak, disrespectful, and shirking their Biblical duties…

I will also note to those that disagree with me, that my purpose in writing this is not necessarily to convince you that I am right. The purpose for writing this is twofold: To point out the obvious and hidden fallacies contained in the following article, and to lay out my reasoning behind both voting Third-party, and supporting others who do. I do believe that the decision on who to vote for is a personal decision, to be prayed and studied, and that it is not necessarily wrong to vote for McCain. It would be wrong for me to vote for McCain, as after much prayer, research and meditation, I have decided that God would want me to vote Constitution Party. (Note that this is somewhat irrelevant, as I will not be able to vote this year anyway!)

As a future Third-party voter, I will attempt to lay out my rationale so that ya'lls can see the way I approach this important decision. In the Bible, it is clearly laid out that we should do the right thing (obeying God), no matter what the cost (1 Peter 2:19-21, among others). After much prayer, meditation, and research, I have come to the conclusion that John McCain is unworthy of my support for the office of President. There are many factors that go into this decision, many of which I speak on in the comments to the following article, but what it comes down to, for me, in the end, is that I believe that we serve an awesome God, and that he can do anything! I believe that God wants me to choose the candidate that best exemplifies Christ, and I trust in Him to do the rest!

John McCain's political career has been inconsistent, to say the least. He has been a major compromiser during his political career, many times "bridging the gap" between Democrats and Republicans. During his long political career, he has done many things that I would consider to be unChristian and evil. He has:

· Voted to confirm blatantly liberal Supreme Court Justices Steven Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg

· Voted to confirm so-called "conservative" Justice David Souter, who has expressed irritation at being asked to vote to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

· Voted AGAINST Ron Paul's Sanctity of Life act, which defines the human life as from conception onward.

· Voted FOR the bills that allowed stem cell research using human embryos (babies) that are "left over" from fertility treatments.

· Was one of the principle leaders in trying to change the Republican Party's stance on abortion, saying that abortion should be allowed in cases of rape, incest, and danger to the mother.

· Has supported the use of torture against prisoners.

James 1:8: "A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways."

Let's just look at a couple of the above points a little more in-depth. John McCain refused TWICE to support the Sanctity of Life bill. This was a very simple bill, short and to the point. It defined life as sacred, and from the time of conception onward. This is the ultimate litmus test. If John McCain really is a Christian, why didn't he support this bill? If John McCain really was pro-life, he would have supported this bill. I cannot take his campaign statements at face value when he has a horrendous political career behind him. Should we just believe everything he says now, when he is losing ground to Obama and desperate for votes? I think not.

He also said, in response to being asked why he supported liberal Supreme Court Justices Breyer and Ginsburg, he said that it is wrong to impose a litmus test when voting for a Justice. I would disagree. That is why you are elected a Senator. You need to stand up for what is right, and impose litmus tests such as; "Does this person believe that abortion is wrong?", and "Is this person going to uphold the Law of God while in office?" The answer to these, in respect to Justices Breyer and Ginsburg, is a very easy to answer, straightforward NO!

I will also note that another factor in my writing against McCain is his platform on continuing the Iraq war. I am personally against the Iraq war in general, but would like to make it clear that if a young man feels that God has called him into the Armed Forces, especially guys in my church that have been so called and that I personally know very well, who am I to judge them, especially at the ripe old age of 17 (and 9 months)? If you truly believe that you have been called by God to serve, and bring the Gospel into the Armed Forces, Godspeed to you, and may God bless you with safety, strength, and guidance.

The article is named "The Suitor Evaluation", and I most heartily do not agree with nearly all of the points outlined. The author raises a few interesting points, but overall, the writing style is so rude that it really does nothing to convince me that she is right. The link is www.thecrusadingchemist.com/amandaread, for those of you that would like to read it without my comments interspersed.

"The Suitor Evaluation

There are many fine Christians that have taken opposite sides in this Presidential Election. I have no desire to drive a wedge between myself and them because of politics, seeing that they may very well be right on other issues and valuable allies in the faith. However, there comes a time in some debates when cause and effect facts come into play and opinions and intentions no longer matter. I cannot bear the guilt of not issuing some sort of warning that certain applications of other voters' "rightness" are very far off target when I have evidence to prove it."

In other words, "You are all ignorant, and I will enlighten you"

To illustrate how serious this Presidential Election is to me, I have decided to put my personal future on the line.

A few years ago Doug Phillips released a popular seminar on "How To Evaluate A Suitor" (I found that interesting when I first heard about it, considering that his eldest daughter and son are both quite a bit younger than me). Well, I believe I have found an extremely simple pass-or-fail exam for that evaluation.

I would never marry a man who refuses to vote for McCain-Palin in this Presidential Election.

Wow, at this point you just said that most of the fathers at my church are unfit to marry.

Why? Because of the following sad deductions:

1. It reveals a fatal flaw in leadership and common sense judgment.

For all perfections and good intentions he might have, this makes the gentleman untrustworthy. It is a sign of blind surrender that is hidden under a cosmetic guise of principle. The devil has you right where he wants you: blind-folded, tied up with silly hang ups and in a tiny out-of-the-way corner in the national scene.

"And do not give the devil an opportunity." - Ephesians 4:27

Not voting for McCain reveals a lack of common sense? The fathers at my church that are not voting for McCain don't seem to be having problems. They are upright, honest Christian men, with well-established Christian families, and have studied through this issue prayerfully and thoughtfully.

2. It reveals that he is more interested in himself, his personal desires, his appearance of "integrity" and theological "reputation" rather than the well being of his family and country.

"He who separates himself seeks his own desire, he quarrels against all sound wisdom. A fool does not delight in understanding, but only in revealing his own mind." - Proverbs 18:1-2

Third-party voters are suffering from what I refer to as Candidate Loser Over Winner Narcissistic Syndrome (CLOWNS). The symptoms are an extreme irascible desire to see one's own beautiful philosophical reflection in a Presidential candidate; which becomes a lust so overwhelming that they would rather vote for a loser over one that could conceivably be an actual winner. I would like to hope that most voters contemplating joining the CLOWNS vote are just misinformed and will change their minds before fully sinking to that level.

This is the part that started to raise my blood pressure. Here is a great principle in action! Start by offending those people that you wish to convince you are right! Call them CLOWNS!

Most Third-party voters are those that have thoroughly researched the candidates, and believe that they are led by God to vote for whomever they choose. Saying that Third-party voters are the "Holier-than-thou Pharisee type" is just downright insulting and ignorant. I hope that this will become clearer as this paper progresses.

3. It reveals a profound disrespect for the office of President of the United States of America and the lives that were lost throughout the nation's history to secure your right to vote through the unique Electorate system, as well as an ignorance of government.

So, now we are disrespectful and ignorant as well as CLOWNS?

"Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of GOD; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves." - Romans 13:2

I would make it clear here that Christians have a duty to obey God rather than man, in cases where the government directly contradicts the Word of God.

Because of man's sinful nature, government is YAHWEH's idea, not man's. We have a responsibility to ensure that we do everything in our power to uphold the unique structure of American government and not let it get taken over by Socialist doctrine. At this moment the only thing standing between the Obama-Biden Socialist doctrine is McCain-Palin.

And Chuck Baldwin.

The Third-party candidates aren't even present in the debates this year, so they are essentially jokers in a deck of playing cards. The idea of an Independent film industry is wonderful, providing you have the money and skills to do it the right way. But the idea of an Independent political industry is absurd. Sorry, it just doesn't work that way. As my father says,

"Political scientists say that for the Presidential system to work out (all things being equal), there must only be a two-party system. This is so in view of the fact that, unlike in Parliamentary where the Parliament is supreme, the President wields tremendous political power. He should be elected by the majority and not mere plurality.

On another point, what the political scientists say is that an ideal situation that is fertile for the presidential system is a two party system in view of the fact that under the presidential set up the locus of political power lies in the office of the president. With a multi party system, he would have "enormous" difficulty passing administration bills because he has no political control of the members of the legislative department (having so many political parties with diverse party agenda). India is currently considering moving to a 2 party presidential system like the US because of the growing size of the population."

Ok, no matter how the political system is set up, or how we think it will work the best, we still have a duty to obey God! How about this quote from the Declaration of Independence: "That whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government…." I am NOT advocating a revolution, but I am advocating voting for the person best suited to uphold the Law of God, which appears to be the last thing on John McCain's mind!

The John Quincy Adams quote ("Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." ) only applies to the unique American 2-party Presidential Electorate system and is thus irrelevant to the CLOWNS vote.

I'm really not sure how she came to this conclusion. It seems like a very straightforward quote, and I think that this girl is twisting this pretty massively. If anyone has another angle on this, let me know…

You must be hardworking and get to the top through the primaries in one of the two major parties to have any positive government influence. By the way, you might find it interesting to note that John Quincy Adams actually lost his second Presidential Election to Andrew Jackson. I wonder why…

Third-parties have always been damaging in the U.S. They only contribute to the adversary's divide-and-conquer strategy against righteous leaders. Evidence of CLOWNS vote damage is apparent in history. Perhaps Theodore Roosevelt's greatest political blunder was the Progressive Party, which split the Republican vote and put Democrat Woodrow Wilson in office (who introduced terrible economic baggage that we are still suffering from). Don't forget about Ross Perot's miserable contribution of dividing Republicans and getting Democrat Bill Clinton in office (need I say more?).

Ummm, the Republican Party began as a third party, and this girl doesn't seem to have a problem voting for them now! Have faith in what God can do!

Why do I appear anti-Democrat and pro-Republican when some think them indistinguishable? Though there are a few exceptions in each party, liberals are the majority of the Democratic Party while conservatives are the majority of the Republican Party (speaking of, the Republican Party platform is no different from the Constitution Party platform, with the possible exception of the Constitution Party's protectionist stance, which I, coming from a military family, understand to be unfounded and dangerous).

OK, I don't think many people will disagree with me that the Constitution Party's platform and the GOP's platform are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT! Even if they have similarities, the Republicans, with minor exceptions (Ron Paul) make no efforts to uphold the good things about their platform. I would also like someone to elaborate on this "protectionist stance".

On the record, the Democrats have caused the worst problems in American government while the Republicans' worst flaw is in letting the Democrats get away with it at times.

WHAT?!? I'd say the Republican's have had lots worse flaws than that!!! Illegal wiretapping, lying about the so-called "War on Terror", the Patriot Act, the increased funding to Planned Parenthood, torture of prisoners, need I go further??? These are things that happened in the last 8 years, with Republican (and professing Christian) President George W. Bush!

However, allowing a liberal Democrat President to get in office now will not make things better nor "teach anyone a lesson".

YOU DO NOT VOTE IN A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION TO MAKE A STATEMENT OR VOICE AN OPINION. YOU VOTE TO CHOOSE A PRESIDENT.

This statement is downright wrong. Thanks to my good friend Ashton Bandy (who is studying Government and Public Policy at Patrick Henry College) for writing up a critique of this point, which follows: "If I want to make a statement in the political arena, I vote for a particular person. If I want to voice an opinion, I vote for a particular person. You can't separate the points from one another. If I didn't want to express an opinion or make a statement, then why vote? It's like saying I voted for someone because...well...I don't really know. A mechanical system, in other words. The beauty of being a republic is that we're able to install officers through a system that enable its citizens to vote persons into office that they believe should be there. But why? The key word in the afore statement is "believe." If we believe something, there is an explanation behind that belief. Under the above quote, you can't explain why, because the support system is suddenly dashed away..." Thanks a lot for letting me use this, Ashton! You make several excellent points!

4. It reveals the flimsy character of a sore loser who refuses to continue servanthood because his chosen candidate didn't win the primary.

Continuing with the insulting of the fathers at my church.

Most football coaches are more gracious than that. Being a gracious loser comes from having the humility to realize that your loss was a fault of your own strategy, not a fault of the system and rule books. Holding up a whiny attitude is not classy and extremely unbecoming. The very action conjures up images of a pouty little child stamping off saying, "I don't like this game anymore. I'm going to go play by myself…" This is exactly what the CLOWNS vote has done.

Then CLOWNS have the gall to play sour grapes and smear John McCain's record in ways contrary to fact (even stooping so low as to call him "the lesser of two evils"), as if it is OK to call a professing Christian "evil." How judgemental. How silly. It is worth pondering, I might add, the amazing grace shown this man, and the depth of character and substance of soul he displayed in enduring being tortured in a prison camp for five years. People posessing the gall to sling reckless terms like "evil" at John McCain really would be better served by silencing themselves, or perhaps using the term rather to describe liberal political ideals such as abortion and same-sex marriage or maybe terrorist activities.

Considering that John McCain has voted yes to the Stem-Cell research bills that legalized the use of embryos (babies) that were left over from fertility treatments, and that he led the charge trying to get the GOP to change its stance on abortion to allowing abortions for rape, incest, and danger of the mother, I think we as Christians should stand up for what is evil, and can call John McCain evil without a problem. At this point I start to wonder if the writer has researched McCain's voting history, or just taken everything that he has said at face value.

I will note that I do not want to get into the debate over abortion for the danger of the mother. I am sure that this is a very difficult decision, and I pray that I am never put into a position where I have to make that choice. However, the debate over abortion in cases of rape and incest depends on your view of the sovereignty of God. If you truly believe that God is completely sovereign over all things, then the argument against abortion in these cases becomes clear.

"A false witness will not go unpunished, and he who tells lies will not escape." - Proverbs 19:5

"A worthless man digs up evil, while his words are like scorching fire." - Proverbs 16:27

If I were a recently arriving immigrant to this country, I would conclude from observable evidence that the CLOWNS and the liberals both do not think very highly of their country, or have somewhere been misinformed of how truly good they have it in the U.S.A. As a naturally born American and as a Christian, I actually am nearly convinced that many hate this country because it isn't the utopia that liberal intellectuals dreamed of after the French Englightenment.

Surprised at my conclusion? Well, explain this: CLOWNS talk about how wonderful America once was and how wonderful they hope it will be through their own power, but right now they are willing to condemn the only Constitutionally valid Conservative Party that is holding it together - The Republican Party - because some how that party is beneath them and deserves their rejection.

Uhh, the Republican Party, as a whole, is both sinful and rotten to the core. Not to say that Third-parties are not sinful, we are all sinners, but the Republican Party is sickening in its corruption. And why is it the only Constitutionally valid conservative party??? Last I checked, Third-parties weren't unconstitutional, they were the right of the people.

They even bash George W. Bush like he is a criminal.

George W. Bush should have been impeached for lying to Congress and to the American people about Iraq, not to mention all the other things I mentioned above. He did not come to Justice Roy Moore's defense, and as a professing "Christian", why wouldn't you? Should I name more? How about the border agents Ramos and Compean who are in jail for doing their jobs? He could pardon them, why doesn't he?

I have invested so many prayers in President Bush since I was a 10 year old child that it deeply hurts me to hear people condemn him. They have lost all ability to respectfully and constructively criticize - so much so that they have organized the CLOWNS vote out of protest.

Umm, Third-parties were around long before President Bush.

There is nothing Biblical about that, so it is thus something entirely built up out of extreme confidence in their own human reason, which is a pattern of thinking that came out of the "Enlightenment".

There is nothing Biblical about trying to support a truly Christian candidate to run the government?

If I have misspoken here, then somebody prove it. Prove to me that America is some sort of failing country destined to be a fascist global regime (can anyone spell B-O-G-U-S?). Prove to me that voting third party is truly a responsible, politically sound avenue to bringing about godliness in this nation.

It worked with the Republican Party, and I have faith that God can and will bring true Christianity to the government again.

Prove to me that you honor the ONE TRUE GOD, YAHWEH who commands you to "Do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly with thy God" (Micah 6:8) and HIS decision to place you in this nation at this time in history. Bring forth your arguments, and let us see who has more facts in their favor.

YOU DO NOT VOTE IN A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION TO MAKE A STATEMENT OR VOICE AN OPINION. YOU VOTE TO CHOOSE A PRESIDENT.

See above for critique on this statement.

5. It reveals a shirking of and misunderstanding of Biblical responsibility and authority.

OH, MY GIDDY AUNT!!

This one especially addresses men that have ridiculed Sarah Palin. I have heard some say that they think that Christians voting for McCain-Palin will win an election but "lose a culture war" because we would have a woman Vice President. Lose a CULTURE WAR???? I'll tell you how to lose a culture war! Allow the most liberal, socialist, pro-choice, naïve man in the Senate (Barack Hussein Obama II) into the most powerful office in America and you've sold your nation's soul to the devil in one fell swoop, Mister!

The CLOWNS vote may have a familiar knowledge of the way the American government could have functioned ideally 200 years ago, but the time has come to get your heads out of the clouds and see reality. WHETHER OR NOT SARAH PALIN IS VICE PRESIDENT WILL MAKE NO DIFFERENCE REGARDING WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP POSITIONS. She would still end up returning to her position as Governor of Alaska anyway. Ultimately, while the rest of us are voting on principle and values, you are voting on sex, and that is completely ridiculous. This is significant coming from me, since I am a lady against feminism. However, I think feminism is the liberal-socialist-Marxist misogynist movement that abuses the womanly nature, and Sarah Palin has not appealed to that movement at all. In fact, feminists hate her! Rather than appeal to that crowd, she is filling a governmental void. How do you think she got to such a high rank in Alaska in the first place? There was a void made by principled men avoiding public duty. I have heard stay-at-home mothers say that they wouldn't even want their husbands to be VP. Well, there you have it. The "good men" sit around coaching from the bleachers, causing more unruly argument than anything else, yet they think a woman stepping up in place of them is such a travesty. "Good men" better not say anything against a godly woman public servant unless they themselves will serve.

Like it or not, women are not a minority, but rather the majority of the population and thus the majority of the vote - at least 51% of the Electorate in fact - and last year a figure said that 9 (18%) of the 50 State Governors are women and 11 (22%) of the Lt. Governors are women. Rightfully or wrongfully, you're stuck with it. Women's status in government will not change overnight or be somehow protected in any way if McCain-Palin lose or win. The role of women in politics can only be influenced generationally, not via contemporary administrating. Do you think that Sarah Palin is promoting a false "women-can-do-it-all" image? In your dreams! Whatever happened to THROUGH GOD ALL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE?

Exactly what I am asking!

Remember that very few people could hold such a high office as Governor of a State. A person has to be called to be a leader in that way, and fortunately there are people called by God to serve in such a way.

The Biblical account of Deborah is no excuse for feminism, but rather is an explanation that sometimes when the car swerves off the lane, you shouldn't be surprised if a woman happens to grab the wheel. It further indicates that when a woman does grab the wheel, she is not sinning. A woman in a political leadership position is not a sin. It is a result of the failure of men leaders. In this case, men can rightly blame themselves. Things were going very badly in Israel when the glory of saving the nation was put into the hands of women (Deborah and Jael). Wouldn't you agree that things are going very badly in the United States of America, largely because liberal politicians wield way too much power, and have for too many decades now, and no godly men have tried or been able to stop them?

Well, no wonder, you spend your time trashing the ones who are trying!

May we ask why this is? The New Testament also chronicles powerful women and their influence:

"And some of them were persuaded and joined Paul and Silas, along with a large number of the GOD-fearing Greeks and a number of the leading women." - Acts 17:4

"Now [Philip the evangelist] had four virgin daughters who were prophetesses." - Acts 21:9

We have the opportunity to prepare great men leaders for future generations of political power so that the Conservative women won't have to step up to bat in their stead, but until then, be gracious. If you have a bone to pick with women leaders, Nancy Pelosi should be your target. She's the grueling leader of the "monstrous regiment" that people keep heralding, not Sarah Palin.

Sarah Palin is not your wife or daughter, and thus you have no authority to judge her personal decisions. As a voter you may judge her ideology, World View and political decisions, but not personal ones.

If you run for any office, it is the duty of the voters to judge every facet of the candidates' life before giving them your support and voting for them.

Phony personal judgments undeniably entered into this Presidential Election; i.e., the comments regarding her eldest daughter. On this train of thought, Bristol Palin is neither your daughter nor your betrothed, so you have no authority to judge her life either. I am not saying that immoral decisions should be accepted as OK or repeated - no, not at all. But you must remember where your authority lies regarding the judgment of someone else's personal life. It isn't our job to condemn souls.

Personally, my greatest problem with Sarah Palin is the fact that she has 6 kids, all at home, ranging from the ages of 17 to under 1 year old. The youngest is mentally retarded. I think that Sarah Palin has a biblical call and duty to take care of her family first, not run off to try and run the country. Take a look at Proverbs 31, the woman described therein takes care of her family before things outside the home. I have seen a lot of debate over Mrs. Palin, ranging from the position that she is a modern-day Deborah/Esther, to the position that I outlined above, to totally trashing her. I would consider her more seriously if she had already raised her children, but running off to run the country when you have a higher call to raise your children first is, in my opinion, a very valid point not to vote for McCain/Palin. It would also be a different case if her children were at least all in their teen years, but when you have children under the age of 10, especially one that will require more care than a non-mentally disabled child would, I view this as another valid reason that I would not vote for McCain. I am not saying that a woman can never hold a public office; I am saying that she has a Higher calling to her family first.

6. It reveals a Spiritual and mental weakness of discernment in the fields of political judgment and investing time and money; naïvete regarding world events; along with an idle ego.

A Third-party candidate may be wonderful in his own way, but if he is bearing no political and governmental fruit, what value is he as a leader and why do you waste your time supporting him?

Well then, show me what fruit, political or otherwise, that President Bush has produced, especially with a Republican Congress? NOTHING!

That is idleness and wasteful spending. Furthermore, it is damaging to the results of the Presidential Election. You know that your vote bears weight, and a CLOWNS vote will only benefit Obama/Biden. You and your agenda will be forgotten about and you will gradually become irrelevant. Once again, that's exactly what the enemy wants to happen to you, and you are letting him have his way.

"And do not give the devil an opportunity." - Ephesians 4:27

A President must be selected based on his political fruit. Senator John McCain has showed positive political fruit. He is pro-life and he is a Constitutionalist.

John McCain is neither pro-life or a constitutionalist. See the facts outlined in my opening statements.

CLOWNS vote candidates have displayed very little - if any - positive political fruit (and the same can be said about the Liberal Democrat opponents). The CLOWNS vote is idle, and idleness is the devil's workshop. The CLOWNS vote has done as little work as possible to avoid "tainting" themselves and have thus attempted to prove by a meager wink and a promise that they are the ones for the job. The jib-jab type satirical ads mocking Bush, Clinton, McCain and Obama on The Constitution Party candidates' website are very unprofessional and unpresidential for serious Presidential and Vice Presidential contenders to flaunt, which further exposes their illegitimacy. They claim to be like one of the Founding Fathers running for President and boast about having no flip-flopping record (*ahem* they barely have any - if they do have any - political record at all). That is even worse than the windy naïve Obama! Now that's something to be very embarrassed about. Be ashamed. Be very ashamed.

"In all labor there is profit, but mere talk leads only to poverty." - Proverbs 14:23

"The naïve believes everything, but the sensible man considers his steps." - Proverbs 14:15

The CLOWNS are obviously just as confused as the Socialists. They do not understand the high stakes of appointing Supreme Court Justices (need I remind you that they are appointed for life?).

John McCain voted yes to Justices' Ginsburg, Breyer, and Souter's appointments, who are all liberals. Souter is termed a conservative, but has voted no to overturning abortion laws consistently. I am well aware of the fact that Supreme Court Justices are appointed for life, and that is one of the reasons I would not vote for McCain!

They do not understand the high stakes of the Economy and the cause of the financial crisis.

If you'd like, you could look at the blog post that I wrote on McCain's woeful lack of understanding on the economy, and the cause of the financial crises. It was the third post that I wrote, and was titled "What?!?"

They do not understand the high stakes of the War on Terrorism and the enemies that have their hearts and minds set on slaughtering us…and how jubilant they would be to see a Socialist President of the United States of America.

The idea of keeping yourself untainted by avoiding voting for McCain-Palin is akin to the following parable written by my mother:

"Folks, this is like knowing that a murder or robbery is going to take place, and instead of calling the police to stop it, you go to your church and start a petition all agreeing that it is a bad thing to murder or rob a bank, and coming back a week later to present your petition from the godly people condemning murder and robbery to the community, after the death and destruction has taken place. You take the "high road" without getting your hands dirty because you didn't want to get involved in the process that could have stopped the evil deeds. And thus, the mis-directed action results in more evil abounding."

"There is a way which seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." - Proverbs 14:12

Ultimately, while the rest of us are voting on principle, CLOWNS are voting on liberal propaganda ("John McCain did…blahblahblah!"). While the rest of us are voting on values, CLOWNS are voting on sex ("Sarah Palin is blasphemous!"). While the rest of us are voting on common sense, CLOWNS are voting on conspiracy ("Republicans and Democrats want to take over the world! We're all gonna die!"). CLOWNS may very well be doing it with hearty intentions out of conscience and in faith, but to actually accomplish anything, you need to get a reality check and vote sensibly.

So now we must answer honestly: Regardless of which candidate you will vote for, which candidate do you want to see as your President for the next four years - McCain or Obama? The result will only be one or the other of those two. Now, CLOWNS, since you still have time to influence who that President will be, toss aside your self-righteousness, your idle ego, and all things silly. Find some real principles to vote on!

YOU DO NOT VOTE IN A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION TO MAKE A STATEMENT OR VOICE AN OPINION. YOU VOTE TO CHOOSE A PRESIDENT."

You keep on saying that. I do not think that means what you think it means…

Now, after this article, I would like to issue a statement. I believe that it is time that we as Christians stand up to the Republican Party, and issue a statement by voting against them. This statement is as follows: We, Christians of the United States of America, are sick and tired of the unChristian shlock that the Republican Party gives us to vote for every year. Furthermore, we are committed to NOT supporting said party until they decide to turn their hearts to the Lord, and show true Christianity, not just in lip service, as President Bush and John McCain do, but in their political history and careers, as well as in their personal lives. May God help us and these men, and may God bless America.

Unbelievable!!!

2008-10-21T19:35:00.002-06:00

Hey all, should have my rebuttal of the famous article done by thursday night, but in lieu, here is an amazing video of the Bears kick returner in college. Oh, my giddy aunt...

The lesser of two evils??

2008-10-16T09:55:00.002-06:00

I was researching presidential candidates, and found this article by Chuck Baldwin, who, in my opinion, is by far the only candidate worth a vote in the upcoming election. First are some quotes from Mr. Baldwin on controversial and key issues, and then this article, which is the best I have found in dealing with the "Lesser of two evils" vote theory. Enjoy.

"If I were President, I would disband the Department of Education."

"To help keep your family safe and your country free, go buy a gun."

"I will use the bully pulpit of the Presidency to demand that Congress enact Dr. Ron Paul's Sanctity of Life Act which would set forth that every unborn child is a 'person' under the Constitution, entitled to equal protection of the law and therefore, no unborn child could be killed without due process of law."

"When I am President of these United States all funding for the United Nations stops!"

"The first day Chuck Baldwin is in office as President is the last day Ramos and Compean spend in jail!"

A Wasted Vote
by Chuck Baldwin
October 10, 2008

When asked why they will not vote for a third party candidate, many people will respond by saying something like, "He cannot win." Or, "I don't want to waste my vote." It is true: America has not elected a third party candidate since 1860. Does that automatically mean, however, that every vote cast for one of the two major party candidates is not a wasted vote? I don't think so.

In the first place, a wasted vote is a vote for someone you know does not represent your own beliefs and principles. A wasted vote is a vote for someone you know will not lead the country in the way it should go. A wasted vote is a vote for the "lesser of two evils." Or, in the case of John McCain and Barack Obama, what we have is a choice between the "evil of two lessers."

Albert Einstein is credited with saying that insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different result. For years now, Republicans and Democrats have been leading the country in the same basic direction: toward bigger and bigger government; more and more socialism, globalism, corporatism, and foreign interventionism; and the dismantling of constitutional liberties. Yet, voters continue to think that they are voting for "change" when they vote for a Republican or Democrat. This is truly insane!

Take a look at the recent $700 billion Wall Street bailout: both John McCain and Barack Obama endorsed and lobbied for it. Both McCain and Obama will continue to bail out these international banksters on the backs of the American taxpayers. Both McCain and Obama support giving illegal aliens amnesty and a path to citizenship. In the debate this past Tuesday night, both McCain and Obama expressed support for sending U.S. forces around the world for "peacekeeping" purposes. They also expressed support for sending combat forces against foreign countries even if those countries do not pose a threat to the United States. Neither Obama nor McCain will do anything to stem the tide of a burgeoning police state or a mushrooming New World Order. Both Obama and McCain support NAFTA and similar "free trade" deals. Neither candidate will do anything to rid America of the Federal Reserve, or work to eliminate the personal income tax, or disband the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Both Obama and McCain support the United Nations. So, pray tell, how is a vote for either McCain or Obama not a wasted vote?

But, back to the "he cannot win" argument: to vote for John McCain is to vote for a man who cannot win. Yes, I am saying it here and now: John McCain cannot win this election. The handwriting is on the wall. The Fat Lady is singing. It is all over. Finished. John McCain cannot win.

With only three weeks before the election, Barack Obama is pulling away. McCain has already pulled his campaign out of Michigan. In other key battleground states, McCain is slipping fast. He was ahead in Missouri; now it is a toss-up or leaning to Obama. A couple of weeks ago, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida were all leaning towards McCain, or at least toss-up states. Now, they are all leaning to Obama. Even the longtime GOP bellwether state of Indiana is moving toward Obama. In addition, new voter registrations are at an all-time high, and few of them are registering as Republicans. In fact, the Republican Party now claims only around 25% of the electorate, and Independents are increasingly leaning toward Obama.

Ladies and gentlemen, Barack Obama is headed for an electoral landslide victory over John McCain. John McCain can no more beat Barack Obama than Bob Dole could beat Bill Clinton.

I ask, therefore, Are not conservatives and Christians who vote for John McCain guilty of the same thing that they accuse people who vote for third party candidates of doing? Are they not voting for someone who cannot win? Indeed, they are. In fact, conservatives and Christians who vote for John McCain are not only voting for a man who cannot win, they are voting for a man who does not share their own beliefs and principles. If this is not insanity, nothing is!

So, why not (for once in your life, perhaps) cast a vote purely for principle! Vote for someone who is truly pro-life. Someone who would quickly secure our nation's borders, and end the invasion of our country by illegal aliens. Someone who would, on his first day in office, release Border Patrol agents Ramos and Compean and fire U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton. Someone who would immediately, upon assuming office, begin leading the charge to dismantle the Federal Reserve, overturn the 16th Amendment, expunge the IRS, and return America to sound money principles. Someone who would get the US out of the UN. Someone who would stop spending billions and trillions of dollars for foreign aid. Someone who would prosecute the Wall Street bankers who defrauded the American people out of billions of dollars. Someone who would work to repeal NAFTA, CAFTA, GATT, the WTO, and stop the NAFTA superhighway. Someone who would say a resounding "No" to the New World Order. Someone who would stop using our brave men and women in uniform as global cops for the United Nations. Someone who would stop America's global adventurism and interventionism. Someone who would steadfastly support and defend the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

"Who is this person?" you ask. Go here to find out:

http://www.baldwin08.com/

VOTE FOR CHUCK BALDWIN!!!!

Oh, My Giddy Aunt

2008-10-16T08:55:00.003-06:00

You have got to be kidding me. I was reading the text of President Bush's speech on the economy, and noticed eerie similarities to a series of movies that I watched... Star Wars. Yeah. Here is the text, notice the bold (inserted by me). Enjoy...

Good morning. I just completed a meeting with my working group on financial markets. We discussed the unprecedented and aggressive steps the federal government is taking to address the financial crisis. Over the past few weeks, my administration has worked with both parties in Congress to pass a financial rescue plan. Federal agencies have moved decisively to shore up struggling institutions and stabilize our markets. And the United States has worked with partners around the world to coordinate our actions to get our economies back on track.

This weekend, I met with finance ministers from the G-7 and the G-20 - organizations representing some of the world's largest and fastest-growing economies. We agreed on a coordinated plan for action to provide new liquidity, strengthen financial institutions, protect our citizens' savings and ensure fairness and integrity in the markets. Yesterday, leaders in Europe moved forward with this plan. They announced significant steps to inject capital into their financial systems by purchasing equity in major banks. And they announced a new effort to jump-start lending by providing temporary government guarantees for bank loans. These are wise and timely actions, and they have the full support of the United States.

Today, I am announcing new measures America is taking to implement the G-7 action plan and strengthen banks across our country.

First, the federal government will use a portion of the $700 billion financial rescue plan to inject capital into banks by purchasing equity shares. This new capital will help healthy banks continue making loans to businesses and consumers. And this new capital will help struggling banks fill the hole created by losses during the financial crisis, so they can resume lending and help spur job creation and economic growth. This is an essential short-term measure to ensure the viability of America's banking system. And the program is carefully designed to encourage banks to buy these shares back from the government when the markets stabilize and they can raise capital from private investors.

Second, and effective immediately, the FDIC will temporarily guarantee most new debt issued by insured banks. This will address one of the central problems plaguing our financial system - banks have been unable to borrow money, and that has restricted their ability to lend to consumers and businesses. When money flows more freely between banks, it will make it easier for Americans to borrow for cars, and homes, and for small businesses to expand.

Third, the FDIC will immediately and temporarily expand government insurance to cover all non-interest-bearing transaction accounts. These accounts are used primarily by small businesses to cover day-to-day operations. By insuring every dollar in these accounts, we will give small business owners peace of mind and bring stability to the - and bring greater stability to the banking system.

Fourth, the Federal Reserve will soon finalize work on a new program to serve as a buyer of last resort for commercial paper. This is a key source of short-term financing for American businesses and financial institutions. And by unfreezing the market for commercial paper, the Federal Reserve will help American businesses meet payroll, and purchase inventory, and invest to create jobs.

In a few moments, Secretary Paulson and other members of my Working Group on Financial Markets will explain these steps in greater detail. They will make clear that each of these new programs contains safeguards to protect the taxpayers. They will make clear that the government's role will be limited and temporary. And they will make clear that these measures are not intended to take over the free market, but to preserve it.

The measures I have announced today are the latest steps in this systematic approach to address the crisis. I know Americans are deeply concerned about the stress in our financial markets, and the impact it is having on their retirement accounts, and 401(k)s, and college savings, and other investments. I recognize that the action leaders are taking here in Washington and in European capitals can seem distant from those concerns. But these efforts are designed to directly benefit the American people by stabilizing our overall financial system and helping our economy recover.

It will take time for our efforts to have their full impact, but the American people can have confidence about our long-term economic future. We have a strategy that is broad, that is flexible, and that is aimed at the root cause of our problem. Nations around the world are working together to overcome this challenge. And with confidence and determination, we will return our economies to the path of growth and prosperity.

JAR JAR: In response to the direct threat to the Republic mesa propose that the Senate give immediately emergency powers to the Supreme Chancellor.  Uproar. JAR JAR looks a little sheepish.  Brief silence, then a rolling wave of APPLAUSE. JAR JAR beams and bows.  PALPATINE rises.  PALPATINE: It is with great reluctance that I have agreed to this calling. I love democracy... I love the Republic. But I am mild by nature, and I do not desire to see the destruction of democracy. The power you give me I will lay down when this crisis has abated, I promise you. And as my first act with this new authority, I will create a grand army of the Republic to counter the increasing threats of the separatists.

PALPATINE: I understand your reservations completely, Senator, and I assure you the appointment of Governors will in no way compete with the duties of the Senate.

PADME: May I take it then, that there will be no further amendments to the Constitution?

PALPATINE: I want this terrible conflict to end as much as you do, My Lady, and when it does I guarantee an immediate return to democracy . . .

PADME: You are pursuing a diplomatic solution to the war, then.

PALPATINE: You must trust me to do the right things, Senator. That is why I am here.

FANGZAR: But surely . . .

The Chancellor turns on FANG ZAR.

PALPATINE: I have said I will do what is right, that should be enough for your . . . committee.

PALPATINE continues his speech at the podium.

PALPATINE: The war is over. (applause) The Separatists have been defeated, (applause) and the Jedi rebellion has been foiled. We stand on the threshold of a new beginning.

There is a long period of APPLAUSE.

PADME: Well, this is the moment we discover if he intends to return the Republic to a democracy.

PALPATINE: In order to ensure our security and continuing stability, the Republic will be reorganized into the first Galactic Empire, for a safe and secure society which I assure you will last for ten thousand years.

There is a loud, sustained CHEER from the Senate. BAIL ORGANA and PADME sit, dumbfounded.

PALPATINE: (continuing) An empire that will continue to be ruled by this august body, and a sovereign ruler chosen for life . . .

The Senate CHEERS again. BAIL and PADME are devastated. PADME begins to cry.

PALPATINE: (continuing) An empire ruled by the majority . . . Ruled by a new constitution . . .

The Senate APPLAUDS.

PADME: So this is how liberty dies, with thunderous applause . . .

The Tagged Strikes Back...

2008-10-16T08:38:00.002-06:00

I hereby tag:

Garrison S.

Ethan W.

Luke VH.

Megan G.

Megan C. (HAHAHA, maniacal laugh)

David P.

Tagged!

2008-10-15T12:30:00.000-06:00

I got tagged by Emil Z. Bandy. I must now name 6 things that I have learned in the last month, or Google, Ebay, and Amazon.com will all crash... Here goes

1. How to "do" a blog

2. How to correctly account for extraordinary items

3. How to not tear down after church

4. How to correctly punch Sierra (at a conference)

5. How to ask a guy out on a date

6. How to depreciate 5 and 7 year items under the Internal Revenue Code's section 179

I'll be back...

Funny...

2008-10-09T13:54:00.000-06:00

This is about as funny as it gets... Check out www.weeklyradioaddress.com. Parodies of George Bush's weekly radio addresses. I have heard 1 that I would rate at PG or PG-13, so I'll just throw a disclaimer that I do not support all the addresses on the site. Most, however, are just hilarious.

On other notes, I had a brutal test week, so thats why I've been rather spotty on attendance. Sorry. Anyway, I did notice that my blog was listed as a potentially dangerous or offensive material carrier, and as such should have been avoided. I think that's because all my posts started with a "W"... Anyway, I would like to quickly point out that the economy stinks, and that the Fed is starting to run out of cards up it's sleeve. I'll try to get a decent post up soon. The worst thing is this-today is the one year anniversary of the Dow Jones Industrial Average's all time high-14,164 points. Today's close was 8579 points-a drop of 5,585 points, or 39.43%. Wow. Just remember, have faith in Uncles Ben Bernanke and Henry Paulson, not to mention Barack, and the economy will make an unbelievable comeback...

I'll be back...

Who Are You, Elissa Pickle???

2008-10-06T09:10:00.000-06:00

Yes, I mean you. I checked my blog last night, and lo and behold, some girl who I've never heard of is following my blog. Who are you? Why are you here? Is it because of church? Mutual friends? Handsome face? Just a random idea? Maybe you have me confused with someone else? Maybe you got here from (insert name from my church)'s blog? I know you follow Jessica's blog, and she said something about killing me if I actually wrote this, but I am just wondering who you are? Most of my friends probably have never been here, so it's odd for someone I don't know to show up. I don't want to come across as unkind, I would just honestly like to know who you are, and why?

What?!?

2008-10-02T13:15:00.000-06:00

John McCain was being interviewed a week or two ago when the question was posed "Do you think that the economy is in a recession?" His answer "Sure, uhh.. technically, I don't know." What?!? You want to be the President of the United States, the leader of the free world, the Commander in Chief, and you either don't have the moral fortitude to talk straight, or honestly don't know anything about the economy? In other words, unless McCain gets educated on the economy rather quickly, the President's economic policy will most likely be formed by his economic advisors? The economy is in a massive mess. This is an indisputable fact. AIG has melted, Lehman Bros. has melted, Bear Stearns has melted, Fannie and Freddie Mac are in serious trouble, the Dow Jones Industrial average set a record for losing 778 points in a single day, do I need to mention more? He has also repeatedly said that the "Foundation of the economy is strong." The foundation of the economy is a mess of debased fiat currency and a 10.615 TRILLION dollar national debt, only kept alive by the smoke and mirrors of Ben Bernanke and the Federal Reserve, and the misguided and blind trust that the American people put in them! I do not purport to be an economic expert, but in my humble opinion, it does not take an economist to look at the economy and say "We are in a recession." I do not want to get into the whole mess of "If you don't vote for McCain, you are anti-USA and anti troops", but I do want to pose the question: Is it a good idea to elect a leader that has proved over and again that he has no idea on a subject as important as the United States Economy?

Thanks to the 21st Century Caveman for first linking to this video.

Welcome

2008-10-02T12:44:00.001-06:00

I set this blog up last week, but didn't have time to post anything. I then checked it yesterday, and noticed I had 2 followers already!!? Wow. Either you really like me, or you think I'm too dangerous to be ignored... Whatever your reason, I now feel obligated to post and at least let you know whats going on.

I am currently working on an Accounting degree, full time (12 hrs.) at ICC. I am also working part time at Green Acres Herb Farm, where we are currently finding portions of the house that we didn't know existed. I'm not kidding, We are cutting down trees so my great-uncle can do the roof, and there are parts of the house that I have never seen before. Talk about weird. Anyway, we're getting ready for winter, and it's about time. I am also getting prepared to play violin for church full time, which I expect to be a really enjoyable task. It's been too long, and I need an excuse to practice anyway.

I my as well confess, I do not have a whole lot of spare time to contribute to this blog, so I wouldn't be surprised if I only post once or twice a week. Don't say I didn't warn you...

Don't worry, the Cubs will recover, and beat Tampa in the World Series!! GO CUBS GO!!!!