My Friend I Love

I have a friend that I love.

She's awesome, really. She's beautiful, smart, devoted, spiritual, honest, funny, trustworthy, and compassionate. And I love her.

We're not dating, and we probably never will. It's not about that.

When I hang out with her, there is never enough time. When she leaves, I miss her immediately. I know that, even if we spent hour upon countless hour together talking, and laughing, and arguing, and debating, and telling stories and trading insults, it would never be long enough.

She's that sort of friend. And I love her for it.

poor planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine

those brilliant, immortal words are those of my father. he deals with people who live in boxes, and their world consists exclusively of their issues and their timelines. when their world intersects with reality, they run to him for moral support and legal advice. so my dad has implemented that phrase to explain his position towards their "emergencies".

my job is not anywhere as near as important as my father's, but i find myself thinking these words often as i deal with what might be the dumbest collection of people known to man - retail customers.

customer: "if i lose my phone, is that covered under the manufacturer's warranty?"
me: "no."
customer: visibly upset, as if this answer were both unexpected and unreasonable "why not?"
me: "the fact that you've even asked that question means that you're too dumb to shop here. i'm canceling your contract. go to verizon. i'd like to help you, but i'm afraid the icky goo leaking out of your woefully underpowered brain might cause my computer to short circuit."

i only thought that last part. the rest of it is true. he really asked that. next encounter.

customer, a large, bearded redneck smelling slightly of sheep enters store, upset.
customer: "my phone ain't werked fer three days!"
me: "what is your phone number, sir?"
customer: "i dunno. lemme look here in my day time folder book. ok. it's 555 ....."
me: "well, it looks as though your service has been temporarily suspended for non-payment. if you'll make your account current by paying $109.43 today, i'll be happy to restore your service."
customer: "i don't have that money right now! you need to turn this phone back on 'cause i'm a business man and i gotta have that number so my clients can reach me. yer gonna drive me out of business."
me: "sir, the fact that you drove here today under your own power amazes me. i'm impressed at the valiant effort your mind is making as it attempts to grasp the very vague concept of paying your bills on time. i understand how that is a foreign idea, given that you grew up in hendrick's county, but you really do need to make these payment arrangements before i can restore your service. and as far as your clients and your business go, poor planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine."

subject change - can anyone explain to me why my boss would say that i need to display more empathy?

Ezekiel Chapter Three

16 At the end of seven days the word of the LORD came to me, saying, 17 "Son of man, I have appointed you a watchman to the house of Israel; whenever you hear a word from My mouth, warn them from Me. 18 "When I say to the wicked, 'You will surely die,' and you do not warn him or speak out to warn the wicked from his wicked way that he may live, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood I will require at your hand. 19 "Yet if you have warned the wicked and he does not turn from his wickedness or from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but you have delivered yourself. 20 "Again, when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness and commits iniquity, and I place an obstacle before him, he will die; since you have not warned him, he shall die in his sin, and his righteous deeds which he has done shall not be remembered; but his blood I will require at your hand.

you have to achieve the possible before you can achieve the impossible

pastor was preaching last night ... he does that on sundays ... and was pulling concepts out of ezekiel 3. his title was the title of this blog - you must achieve the possible before you can achieve the impossible.

so what does that mean?

i get tired of hearing the people i'm working with talk about how they can't overcome their lust or porn addiction - "i just don't know why God won't deliver me."

quit looking at porn online. next question.

see, you aren't going to overcome that sort of addiction right away. sure, God can just *bam* transform you, but when you keep exposing yourself to those stimuli, you're going to continue to struggle with it.

you want to be happier? quit hanging out with bitter, unhappy people. you want to be blessed financially? get a job and pay your tithes. you want to overcome your tendencies towards drinking? don't drive by the bars. don't eat in bars.

you gotta take steps.

god is not Great

Perhaps the most popular condemnation of religious faith of any sort is the inhumane acts of violence committed in the name of one deity or another. Indeed, history is replete with examples of breathtaking atrocities in the name of God or Allah or any other collective title for the many deified ideas worshiped by one group or another. The most immediate examples vilify Islam; but the pedophilic Catholic hierarchy makes many of the Christian community blush. Even Protestant Christianity has its own set of crosses to bear, having long-perpetuated cultures of anti-Semitism and racial- and gender-discrimination. In light of the many moral failures of proponents of the plethora of religious organizations, non-belief seems valid, and faith can seem downright foolish.

But dismissing a philosophy because of the shortcomings of its adherents is naïve at best. In evaluating a philosophy, one must consider it theoretically. Consider a doctrine based on its hypothetical principles completely fulfilled, not on the failure of any individual(s) to adhere to its tenets. It is a devilishly brilliant scheme to dismiss an unpleasant or undesired dogma on account of a poor representation of it in practice, but it is intellectually lazy and dishonest. Validity of dogma does not rely on the adherents. A dogma is true or false on its own merit.

How relieving is that? Speaking as an utter failure as a Christian, I'm sustained by knowing that God's existence and truth is not determined by my ability to live according to Christian principles. If it were, if the Christian doctrine required adherents to be perfect in order to be valid, then who would need the Christian doctrine? Unfortunately for critics, Truth is Truth, regardless and independent of humanity.

And that is Great.

The Fairness Doctrine

bah. blanket ignorance, that's what it is.

here's what they say - that the conservatives have a corner on the market, and that they're indoctrinating the world through evil talk radio. in order to make things more fair, the opposing viewpoint should be given equal time to present their views, in order to create a better-informed electorate.

they say, and i quote, "The issue is liberal talkers haven't even been given a market opportunity in many markets across the country." okay, fundamentally, this guy's dumb. ever heard of NPR? it's a publicly funded liberally biased radio show. and don't forget air america, which was such a bad business model that they went bankrupt. so you can't say that the liberals haven't been given a chance - the government freaking pays for their station!! tavis smiley, diane rehm, terry gross, christopher o'reilly (not bill), michael krasny, maria hinojosa ... these are not unbiased commentators. they're liberal. so don't try and pretend to be victimized.

"but the american people deserve a voice." they have a voice. it's called a free market economy. if the conservative talk shows didn't reflect a significant view of the american public, the public wouldn't tune in, ratings would drop advertising dollars would vanish, and then the shows would quickly follow. why did air america fail? because the liberal ideology can't stand in a forum faced with logic and rational thought. consistently and constantly, the libs were getting their collective arses handed to them by conservative listeners itching for a fight (i only did it once; it's not all my fault), and the fan base got sick of hearing their viewpoints successfully discredited and bashed and ripped to shreds. so they stopped listening. then the ratings dropped. thent he advertising dollars vanished. and then the shows quickly followed (boy, ain't capitalism grand?).

the fairness doctrine is a fix-all for cry-baby libs. they lack the testicular fortitude to last in the beautiful forum of free speech, so they have to get the government to force those big bad conservatives to share and share alike. seriously, every american should be offended at the concept of the fairness doctrine. it's anything but fair.

watch yourself, customers ....

New York's lead consumer advocate is asking Sprint Nextel Corp. to pay a penalty to wireless customers it is terminating because they called customer service too often.

Reacting to news that Sprint has told about 1,000 customers they will lose their wireless service on July 30, the New York State Consumer Protection Board suggested the carrier pay those customers $200 each - the amount the customers would have had to pay if they had prematurely ended their two-year contracts with the company.

The Reston, Va.-based company, with operational headquarters in Overland Park, Kan., said it will zero out the customers' accounts and not charge any termination fees. But Mindy Bockstein, the board's chairwoman and executive director, said that's not enough.

"These former Sprint customers will have to purchase new phones and incur other expenses and inconveniences if they want to continue receiving wireless service," Bockstein said. "Sprint Nextel (nyse: S - news - people ) should do more to improve the quality of its customer service and this is a good place to start."

It's not known how many of the roughly 1,000 customers flagged by the wireless carrier for termination live in New York.

Sprint Nextel spokeswoman Roni Singleton said she had not seen the request from the New York agency and couldn't immediately comment.

Bockstein said her agency would send a letter to Sprint Nextel formally requesting the payments. If the company refuses, she said her board may take the issue to state lawmakers.

Bockstein said the Legislature has considered a wireless customer bill of rights that would place additional requirements on roaming fees, cancellation policies and other terms of service.

Sprint Nextel, the nation's third-largest wireless provider with 53 million customers, mailed out letters June 29 telling the customers that their frequent calling to customer service led the company to believe they would be better off with another carrier.

The company said an internal review over the past year identified customers who called an average of 40 to 50 times a month with questions about billing and other terms of their service. They said the repeated calls were interfering with the company's ability to serve other customers.

2001

-2001-

she's five years my junior.
young, innocent, awkward as she comes in to her own
beautiful little girl ... young lady.

naive to the depth and troubles of the world;
she steps into the double-entente with eyes wide shut
clueless even to what she had said.

i'm the experienced one.
the college freshman who has "seen it all" and
lived on the edge. dangerous.

six years later ...

-2007-

she deals with stresses
i have never even dreamed about
in six years, she's matured ten.

"is it the right decision?"
"what if i make a mistake?"
"my actions don't affect just me anymore."

now i'm naive; she's experienced
and for the first time in my life
i'm speechless.

A Time to Talk, a Time to Bite One's Tongue Until it Bleeds

for those of you that know me, i have a tendency to speak my mind. to really get sarcastic and short and, dare i say, downright patronizing when someone crosses me or frustrates me or tries to assert some sort of intellectual superiority over me. this is a definite flaw in my personality, and while i could write pages and many blogs about the reasons and causes of my behavior, but the bottom line is that i know better, and that this sort of short, vengeful speech makes for a terrible witness. i have friends that have talked to me about it, and i've started trying to do better, and prayed that God would help me.

so, anyway, i'm taking a class this summer with a dead-head hippie who is working on his twelve steps, and he lacks real mental cohesion or even comprehensive verbal syntax from decades of dropping acid, smoking weed, and drinking himself into oblivion (his words, not mine). listening to him speak is an adventure in the linguistic arts. somehow, this guy has a real beef with me (honestly, he has it with anyone who disagrees with him. i made that mistake the first day of class, and now i'm a target).

this morning, i specifically prayed that God would help me to control my tongue and not snap back at this guy, and that i'd be able to be a witness to others as i turned the other cheek and stayed calm. today, i was put to the test. this guy (his name is Shack), was talking about something, analyzing the social and prison system in indiana compared to some of the surrounding, more liberal states. indiana is not known to be forward thinking or progressive in really any arena, particularly in the realm of criminal justice. when i expressed this position, he went off on me in a bout of verbal diarrhea. i immediately hushed, and let him finish his tirade. the class ended, and Shack promptly fled the room. the rest of the guys in the class thanked me for being a good sport and not escalating the situation, because no one wanted to listen to him yell and scream.

it felt good to not be the blowhard. i might keep this up for a while.

Further Issues with Don Miller and Blue Like Jazz

"I love Blue Like Jazz because it's, like, a Christian book, but it doesn't make you feel bad about yourself."

A 40-something woman approaches Miller with two plastic grocery bags filled with copies of his books. "I've already bought Blue Like Jazz 13 times," she gushes. "But I gotta have all these to give to people. I'm a Jesus girl, but I also like to go out and do tequila shots with my friends. This is a book I can give to those friends."

Really? A book about Christ that doesn't convict you, make you feel inadequate in light of His holiness, or make you realize how desperately you need Him and how far you are from Him without the cross and His grace? A book that you can give to people you get drunk with? It's a good thing you don't give them the Bible; they might read something like "Be not drunk with wine." (Ephesians 5:18) Or something like, "Come out from the world and be separate." (2 Corinthians 6:17) Yeah, that'd be bad. Then you wouldn't have a drinking buddy.

Sorry, Donny. You're not preaching Christianity. If the story you tell doesn't make people want to change and repent and prick their hearts, leaving them asking "What shall we do?", then you aren't preaching Bible.

When Random Stuff Happens

So I messed up a little over a month ago. Rather, I confessed that I messed up a little over a month ago to some close friends who have been praying with me and counseling and whatnot. But since then, I've decided that I wanted to be a better Christian, a better witness. I've done everything I know to do, but mostly I started praying more.

I changed the way I talked, and I work in a retail environment, so I've worked very hard at being kinder and nicer and less rude and sarcastic with customers. I was talking to a group of customers, and we got on the topic of church, and they asked me where I went to church. I told them, and they asked me what my denomination was. I told them I was Pentecostal ... Apostolic.

Then the girl's face drops. She says, "I used to be Apostolic."

So I prayed that God would have her call me, because I couldn't call her. I wanted to find out why she used to be Apostolic. I wanted to know what happened that she was no longer Apostolic. Then she called me. We talked, and then I invited her to church. She said she wasn't really ready for the whole "laying hands on my head thing" so I invited her to a party at one of my friend's house. She agreed, and we went. By the time we got there, she was so nervous to be around other Apostolics that she was actually shaking. When we left, she wanted to know when we would hang out with everyone again.

What would've happened if I hadn't been a good witness at work?

I just found out that the new guy at work is also Apostolic. What would he have thought of my church if I hadn't been a good witness? "Oh, you know, those Calvary kids."

I am finding more and more that I never know when I'll run into someone who is watching me, who is hungry, who is curious. I am trying to not just act like a Christian, but to actually live the dogma. I want it to be internalized, so that it is the definition of who I am. To repeat the words of Jars of Clay,

We are one in the Spirit, we are one in the Lord
We are one in the Spirit, we are one in the Lord
And we pray that our unity will one day be restored
And they'll know we are Christians by our love, by our love
Yeah they'll know we are Christians by our love
We will work with each other, we will work side by side
We will work with each other, we will work side by side
And we'll guard each man's dignity and save each man's pride
And they'll know we are Christians by our love, by our love
Yeah, they'll know we are Christians by our love.

"Some days you eat the bear ..."

"... and some days the bear eats you."

My dad says that. I'm pretty sure his grandpa said that to him.

I never met my great-grandfather; I knew my great-grandmother, and she was one of the most stubborn, ornery, hard-headed women you'd ever meet. I loved her.

But I digress. Lately, I've been eating bear. Life has been great. God has opened doors for me to witness to a lot of people, and tonight after church, I had a great big party with a ton of people sitting all over the place, eating pizza, listening to Delirious? and other great bands while playing spoons and Phase 10 and eating cake in celebration of our friend who is starting her program in radiation therapy tomorrow (any excuse for cake, right?). It was great.

Maybe the bear will eat me next week; I dunno. The iPhone releases on Friday, and it's going to be ridiculously crazy. Seriously, I love gadgets, but I'm not as nuts as some of these people. You don't even know if the phone is going to work! Only the most blind fan would buy first edition anything. I'm waiting for the second wave to come out so that the bugs get worked out first.

Little brother is getting married in 11 days ...

A First Time Experience

A couple of months ago, I was asked to participate in an Altar Workers Class at church to sort of equip and direct us on what is expected and how to approach people in the altar, so they aren't getting lost in the shuffle. I took what I learned, and I've been trying to apply it, but I've never really connected.

Until tonight.

Tonight was a first time for me. I connected with someone in the altar. I was praying with a friend who has been tarrying for the Holy Ghost when I turned around and saw a guy that I knew was a visitor approaching the altar. I shook his hand, introduced myself, and asked him what he was praying for. He told me what was going on, and we started praying. He raised his hands, started crying, and really opened up to me as I prayed for him. I asked him if I could follow up with him (he's having surgery this week), and he gave me his number. We're going to get together for Bible studies, and he came and found me later to make sure that I had his number down right.

It was awesome.

blue like jazz ... musings and a review

i talked to several people who told me it was a great book, and a really really smart friend who told me that it was a shallow book for shallow christians. as i read it, i found that i identified with a lot of aspects of it, but i could understand how someone could say it was shallow. when i told my really really smart friend that i was enjoying it and was identifying with many of the issues addressed in the book, he told me not to worry; even deep pools had a shallow end. i think i might be shallow, but i'm not losing sleep. if you're shallow, do you even know you're shallow?

anyway, back to the book. i enjoyed it. granted, i enjoy most books, but i did especially enjoy this one. it was nice to read, and offered me several things, i think, that i need to think about. plus, he went camping, and i love to camp. i think i want to find a bunch of hippies in the woods to live with for a month.

there were some issues in the book that bothered me, though. first of all, he drank a lot and smoked a pipe and i think used weed, too. or else he hung out with people who professed christianity and smoked weed. i understand arguments about drinking being okay so long as one doesn't get drunk (heck, i've made those arguments), but i think that, on a grand scale, there's no real reason for a christian to drink alcohol or smoke cigarettes or especially use any sort of recreational drug if, for no other reason, so as not to give offense to a brother or sister in christ.

but there were some really good things addressed. like, for instance, his discussion about the struggles he had when he got roommates. i never thought about how i struggle with relationships because i want to be the star. i think that miller had a really good point when he talked about a one man show, and how he always wanted to be the star, and didn't want to share the stage with anyone else in the show. yeah, so i'm a bit greedy with the spotlight.

so maybe that's why i struggle with relationships with, well, everyone. i want to be the star. the only time i'm willing to give up the central role is when someone else interests me more than myself (and i do find myself incredibly interesting). so, when i'm in a relationship, and i cease to find the other person interesting, i become disengaged and, ultimately, i bring the relationship to an end.

but i digress. see? even when i blog, i talk about me and not the topic. this is about don miller and "blue like jazz". it was interesting, really. i disagree with a lot of his doctrinal positions (but i knew i would), but it did put a desire in my heart for something more, something different. i want to be part of a group that reaches out, embracing all of the wonderful components of the emerging church, but doesn't let doctrine slide. i want to have a place to go where people can come, where people would want to come, even people who aren't christians, a place where there is coffee and big comfy chairs and a stage and live bands and jars of clay or anberlin or seventh day slumber playing on the PA and pool tables and ping pong tables and foosball and just a mellow environment that people can come to and read and socialize and hang out, sort of a super starbucks, that is christian based. i want to learn to spend time with people, not just because they're christian or of the same theological ideology, but because they're people, and they matter, and they're created in god's image. that's what i want.

so the book was, ultimately, good for me. i want to develop an orthodoxy based on the bible, not on tradition. and i don't want to think about it as an orthodoxy, but i want to live it, to internalize it.

everyone should read it, and be careful, because he's wrong about a lot of stuff (trinity, anyone?). but read it, because miller offers some great perspectives and great ideas. plus, he goes camping.

All I Asked Him To Do Was Read

Matthew 10:34-36
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.

so i was at starbucks last night after prayer, feeling a little bold. this happens from time to time, so it wasn't a real surprise to me that, when i saw a guy walk in with a bible under his arm, i thought to myself, "self, let's go talk to him". i went over, introduced myself, and played dumb (a relatively familiar role for myself). i asked questions and pretended to not really be sure what i believed, and got him talking to me about salvation and what it takes to be saved. he told me about the necessity of repentence, acknowledgement, and baptism, but totally left me hanging on anything with the spirit. i started asking questions about the holy spirit, and asked about acts 8 (where the people of samaria received the word and believed and were baptized, but had not yet received the spirit. if belief and baptism are enough, then why tarry for the spirit?) anyway, he's not really able to answer this or the issues of mark 16 (these signs shall follow them that believe ... they shall speak with new tongues). it was an interesting discussion, but then his friend showed up.

all i asked him to do was read. he read the passage, and said, "so are you telling me that i'm not saved because i've not spoken in tongues?" i asked him, "after reading these scriptures, what do you think?" he then told me that (a) tongues were only for the apostles, and (b) healings don't occur any more. i told him that i had spoken in tongues, then asked if this made me an apostle (after all, i AM an apostolic). the guy became downright violent. he clenched his fists, set his jaw, and i watched veins bulge out in his neck and forehead. he was ready to go. he then informed me that he knew he was saved because he had accepted christ and been baptized, and that he wasn't going to sit any longer and listen to me tell him that he was not saved. again, i'll point out that i never mentioned that he wasn't saved. i just asked him to read the bible.

for the first time last night, i realized how divisive the truth really is.

The Problem With Diversity

Diversity.

What an amazing buzzword. To argue for diversity, to stand for diversity, you become forward-thinking, relevant, thoughtful, sensitive, concerned, loving, caring, tolerant, and admirable. It is a good thing to support and advocate diversity.

The concept of diversity is a key aspect of the liberal agenda. Entire of liberal organizations - the most ominous being the NAACP - are founded on "promoting diversity". The liberal agenda has programs and ideas based on the concept of furthering diversity, programs that have infiltrated our universities and workforce. You know these programs - Affirmative Action.

I've long stood against Affirmative Action, but it wasn't until reading a bit by the great Neal Boortz (http://www.boortz.com) that discussed the farce of "diversity" that I realized where the real problem lay - groupthink.

The left stands for group rights. The Libertarian/Conservative side stands for individual rights. The left has, for years, successfully spun the facts, making those who support individual rights, and dismiss groupthink as backwards, racist, or prejudiced. Here is the real problem with diversity, or Affirmative Action, or groupthink.

What diversity says is that a person of a certain group, whether it be ethnic, racial, sexual orientation, or gender, is valuable because of their association with that group. It says that a gay man or a black woman is valuable because he is gay, or she is black or is a woman. The individualist says that people are valuable because of their intrinsic worth (this is almost always directly related to the concept of God, and that we are all created by Him and in His image).

Here is the problem with the liberal view - people have value because of their association, but not because of themselves. The value, for liberals, is in the group. Someone is relevant because they are gay, or black, or a woman. Should a person cease to be gay, he would lose his identity with the group, and lose the privileges granted to him under the liberal programs. Of course, a person can't cease to be black or cease to be a woman, but under the liberal programs, they are granted special privileges because of their association with these groups.

Take, for example, Affirmative Action (AA). AA in college education programs says that a person of minority status (usually individuals that are black or of Mexican heritage) should be given special consideration and merit for admission into college and for financial aid and scholarships. Now, I understand that, generally, members of these groups tend to be in lower income classes, so they may require financial consideration in the form of scholarships or financial aid (though this should be based on need, not on race or ethnicity). That being said, the notion that blacks or Hispanics require special consideration for admission to college (or for being awarded a position with a company) solely on the merit of their race, and not for their talents, should be positively insulting to the individuals that qualify for the programs.

Liberal Idiot: AA is necessary because, otherwise, there would be an underrepresentation of minority groups in college classes.

Me: So, does that mean that members of the minority groups are somehow less intelligent or talented than whites?

Liberal Idiot: No, members of minority groups are every bit as qualified and talented and whites.

Me: Then why do we need a special system to artificially inflate the number of minority groups represented? If members of said groups are just as talented, do they really need special consideration? According to your premise, these individuals are somehow less intelligent and, therefore, unable to compete without artificially "leveling the playing field."

Liberal Idiot: Why are you racist?

Diversity isn't a solution - it's a problem. It renders people helpless and without individual identity. This liberalization of America has resulted in a frightening turn from personal responsibility and accountability. Because individuals have lost their sense of self, they have lost their sense of duty. And this is caused by a buzzword and sheer ignorance.

Farenheit 2007

Did you hear what Paris Hilton did? Poor girl, she's going to spend six weeks in jail. Who can I fixate on while she's gone? Recently, she was photographed carrying the Bible; clearly, she's learned her lesson. We should forgive her so she can return to her senseless, worthless life of partying and debauchery.

Can you believe Rosie's latest personality war? I don't know anything she's talking about, but I'm sure that she's right. After all, she's on TV! If she didn't know what she was talking about, why would they give her a television show?

Oh, my, God. Can you BELIEVE that Sanjaya got kicked off American Idol? And Dancing With The Stars was more popular! That doesn't surprise me. I mean, really, with Blake and Jordin, who's going to watch? Bring back Sanjaya.

Did you hear that Anna Nicole Smith died? First her husband, then her son, and now her. Why didn't the news cover anything about this? THIS IS IMPORTANT. Anna Nicole was such a vital part of the American social fabric. I don't care about that pesky war in Iraq or Afghanistan. I want to know about Anna Nicole. Who did she sleep with? What kind of eggs did she eat? What was her opinion on President Bush's foreign policy? Did she like Justin Timberlake's new album?

***********************************
1 - Name two presidential candidates from each party.
2 - Name the Vice President, Secretary of State, and Secretary of Defense.
3 - Name your 2 US Senators and your Representative.
4 - Name your Governor.
5 - Name the Speaker of the House.
Chances are, many Americans know more about my first few paragraphs than the answers to those five questions. It's a shame, and it's what's wrong with our country. We're more interested in being entertained and disctracted than in facing real issues that confront our country.
Do you realize that the new immigration legislation that will likely get passed by the House and Senate (and will get signed into law by the most radical conservative President in history) grants amnesty to somewhere in the neighborhood of 10-12 million illegal residents presently in the United States? Visit http://www.senate.gov/ or http://www.house.gov/writerep/ to contact your Senator or Representative and tell them that you oppose this legislation.
No one cares about this, though. We're all more interested in being "informed" by Entertainment Tonight or E! Entertainment. When was the last time that you read the news? When was the last time that you were challenged to look and think beyond your traditional point of view? What were you last forced to look introspectively and think, "I'm wrong"?
Read a book. Turn off the TV. Make a new friend. Sign off Instant Messenger. And make the blasted celebrities shut up.

What I Love About George Bush

Politicians these days .... What do they care about? Ratings. They keep watching the polls, seeing what is popular. They're vote whores, all of them.

The new legislation that was passed, or that is being discussed, rather, the amnesty bill for the illegal immigrants .... They don't care about rule of law anymore - they care about votes. The left supports it because they are wooing the Mexican vote; the right because they are wooing Big Business. It's all about power. And I hate it.

See, there was a time in these United States when politicians had a platform, when they took a position, when they believed what they believed and they stood for what they believed, even in the face of adversity. That doesn't happen today. Look at the candidates for the GOP - Romney, Giuliani, and McCain. McCain is the only one who has stood against abortion and gay marriage consistently. Romney suddenly flipped on the abortion issue, saying that he realized that Roe v. Wade had cheapened human life. Now, I agree with him - I'm against abortion - but it's awfully convenient that he changed his views as he makes his bid for the candidacy. The same with Giuliani. Personally, I love Giuliani. It's probably a bit of hero worship, but I've met the guy, and I like him a lot. He's charming, he's forceful, and he's smart. But he changed his position on both gay marriage AND abortion as he has begun to vie for the nomination.

Here's the problem. I would have supported Giuliani no matter what. He's a good candidate, and he can win. He'll bring fiscal conservatism back to Washington, and he's got a strong, proven record on crime. He's got balls (he took on the mob as prosecutor of NYC) and he is polished. His flaws make him real.

And that's why I love George Bush. He has continually held strong on every position he holds, regardless of popular opinion. He is more interested in doing what he believes is right than in what the media portrays as public opinion. When Bush takes a position, you know he'll stand by it. You can count on him to be faithful to it. Flip-flopping cost John Kerry the election in 2004. Can you count on Shrillary to hold the same idealogical position that she holds now? No. That's why the debates (on both sides, mind you) are so empty - it's all hollow rhetoric.

Give me a candidate with a platform and a backbone. I'll vote for him.