Wit or Wisdom

The more I hear about John McCain, the more I fear the man. Ann Coulter has said she’d rather have Hillary be president than McCain, because then Republicans would know they were supposed to oppose her. Ann Coulter!!! I’m shocked, but I’m going to have a hard time voting for McCain, or for Romney for that matter, because they both have a tendency to lie.

Perhaps if we’ve reached the point in this party where we’re going to nominate liars and flip-floppers who don’t even believe the same things as we do, the time has come to start a third party. It could be called the Conservative Party, or something far more creative. At first glance, it seems like a terrible idea, but I wonder if it wouldn’t actually work out in the long run. As both the Democratic and the Republican party seem to be moving farther and farther to the left, within probably two elections, the ship would right itself and you’d have the liberals coming from the Democratic side, the “moderates” coming from the Republican side, and the true conservatives party coming from, well, the conservative side. At some point, the conservatives in this country has got to communicate to the Republican party that they don’t own our vote and they can’t count on it if they’re going to nominate men like McCain, whose only real qualification is that he’s a patriot. But he’s also very unconservative in what’s supposed to be a conservative party, which makes him, as Bill O’Reilly likes to say, a “pinhead.”

Yes, my friends, this is Hillary Clinton at her best:

ABC News’ Eloise Harper Reports: Senator Hillary Clinton, in an interview with ABC News’ Cynthia McFadden for ABC News’ Nightline, was asked about President Clinton’s controversial comments about race and Senator Obama in the past weeks. Clinton apologized for her husband.

“I think whatever he said which was certainly never intended to cause any kind of offense to anyone,” Clinton said, “if it did give offenses then I take responsibility and I’m sorry about that.”

“Can you control him?” asked McFadden.

“Oh of course,” Clinton replied.

Now, I don’t know about you, but I go with the old-fashioned way of wives and husbands mutually submitting to each other’s counsel and advice, but apparently Hillary’s book says that “husbands, submit ye to your wives.” Of course, if she really could control him, he wouldn’t have had that little scandal he did during the last quarter of his presidency.

I work for a county public library. *grins*

Great post by Mike Huckabee for Colorado.

I love numbers. As much of a man of words as I am, I still love numbers. I’m not very good with math, especially when it gets complex, but I still love them. Numbers have a factor that nothing else has:

Numbers are objective.

The beauty of math is that it is completely objective. It never give conflicting messages, and it never, EVER is open to interpretation. Even numbers having to do with money are fixed, because all you have to do is adjust them for inflation. English, history, science, reason, and literature are all open to interpretation. They’re subjective. Yes, for the benefit of all you evolutionists out there with your veins popping out of your neck, I’ll say it again. Science is subjective. You can legitimately come to a different conclusion based upon the information you receive from science or any other field than someone else, and have been just as honest as they were. Sure, numbers can be skewed. But to come to a separate answer from another mathematician, you have to have been, well, skewery. You have to have been dishonest. Two plus two will always equal four, but Dickens’s plentiful use of large words can be called genius and beautiful or simple shrewdness, as he was paid by the word. (I prefer the former.)

Having said all that, the left in this country needs acquaint themselves with a certain number. (Come on, you didn’t actually think I was going to write a whole post about math, did you? Oh, you did? Sucker.) But I was saying…

Zero.

I saw a headline on the cover of the “New Republic” stating that if we were to open the illustrious publication, we would learn the secret of “How Bush Lost the War on Terror.”

I find several things objectionable about that headline, not the least of which are the premise that the War on Terror is lost, and that the War on Terror is referred to in the past tense. Also the blatant misstatement of the facts. Basically, what I’m getting at is well… they lied.

Anyways, back to numbers. A very significant number is that aforementioned zero. That is the grand total of terrorist attacks on our soil since September 11, 2001. That is also the grand total of U.S. civilians in the U.S. who have died due to terrorist attacks since that same date. Very profound, is it not?

Another important number is approximately 4,000. That’s about how many U.S. military casualties there have been since September 11, 2001 in Iraq and Afghanistan. A quick calculation reveals to us that this is a death rate, in the six and a half years since the attacks, of about 615 per year. Compare this to the thousands of people lost in a mere one or two days during the most intense battles of American history, adjust that number for the relatively much smaller size of population in the past, and you have an astounding difference. Shocking, isn’t it? To hear the left, you’d think thousands were dying every DAY!!!

Back to that zero. Generally, in history, the way you can tell if a person is winning a war or not is which side’s infrastructure, homeland, money system, and people, are being taken over or destroyed by the opposition. Those guys are generally considered the losers. Sorry, but Alexander the Great, Caesar, and Napoleon were not pondering whether the rest of the world liked them or not to determine whether they were winning, and historians don’t either. Nobody likes the Patriots, least of all the rest of the NFL, but that doesn’t mean the Patriots are losing. The fact is, in all of the crucial categories to determine who wins the war, the U.S. is winning. Notice I say “is winning.” We haven’t won yet. That’s where the left gets it wrong. They want to define the debate in terms of the past, while conservatives understand that this is an ongoing effort to protect freedom.

Wow, that paragraph was a little rambling… but it makes the point. Consider for a moment the absurdity of suggesting that has Hitler conquered the world like he wanted to, he would still have lost WWII because people didn’t like him. Now consider the absurdity of suggesting that a country which has not been attacked at home since the war began is somehow losing. Similar levels of absurdity for sure.

Zero, my friends. Zero. Numbers don’t lie, unless liberals are reading them out loud.

My pocket has sprung a leak. Not really. But I did finally buy myself a laptop. It’s a beauty. A Lenovo IdeaPad furnished with about 124 gigs of hard drive space, 2 gigs of RAM, a dual-core intel processor, and the sleek new Windows Vista. Most people say they don’t like Vista, but I think it’s just a matter of adjusting to something new. You see, where Windoze 95 to 98 to XP was simply a matter of facelifts and rounding sharp edges (literally as well as figuratively), Vista is radically different. But it retains just enough of the features of the original to throw some people off. I know a guy who said he would never buy XP when it first came out. He uses it quite a lot now, though, and vows he will never use Vista. Give ‘im a year.

Other randomness…

Books received over the Christmas season: Sherlock Holmes by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Shower of Gold by Zane Grey, God’s Smuggler about and by Brother Andrew with John and Elizabeth Sherrill, Post Captain by Patrick O’Brian, and a weird book on thought and logic and philosophy entitled “This is Not a Book.” The giver told me that she’d be proud of me if I managed to get through the whole thing. It’s a brain-bender.

I’ve been debating colleges lately. Pensacola Christian College, Bob Jones University, Northland Baptist Bible College, and Oklahoma Baptist University, in reverse order, are on the list at the moment.

Remember how just a few years ago, everybody was calling McCain a RINO and nobody liked him and he didn’t like anybody who was conservative. Well, much like suave and smooth Mitt Romney, he has reinvented himself as somehow a conservative. While Guliani has been asked all the tough questions about issues that matter to social conservatives, McCain has somehow slipped through. The truth is, Guliani would be a far better candidate than McCain or Romney, as well as a better president. I would vote for Guliani where I would in no way consider voting for McCain and would have a struggle with my conscience to vote for Romney. While you might have to hold your nose when voting for Guliani, at least you know where the guy stands and you know that he hasn’t tried to lie about his record and positions on social issues.

But turning our attentions to McCain for a moment, my question is, where is this man a conservative besides foreign policy? He has a mixed record on abortion, no record whatsoever on homosexual “rights,” a somewhat mixed record on gun rights, a bad record on taxes, and a horrid record on free speech. He has routinely tried to pander to the media throughout his career as a Senator. It is beyond me why any conservative would support this man, especially once you consider the fact that he is highly uninspiring and always looks either tired, frustrated, or just plain mad.

Could someone explain this to me?

The headline says it all.

Signature Sound and Ernie Haase, possibly the most awesome Men’s Quartet alive, singing an awesome song.

Men are not mass-produced robots and God is not Henry Ford. Men are individuals, and God hand-crafted each one of them, Special Edition. The price: unmeasurable.

I wrote part of this in a post a while back, and I’ve been thinking about it recently, and recently added the second part of it. So, I thought I’d share it with you.

Remember, you are special in God’s eyes, and the love He has for each one of His Special Editions is immeasurable. Pretty neat, huh?