BEST DESCRIPTION OF OUR PRESENT ECONOMY? HOW ABOUT "CRONY CAPITALISM?"

Should citizens of the United States be treated equally?  Most of us would definitely answer in the affirmative.  However, increasingly, that is simply not the case.

My first inkling that favoritism was becoming a way of life with the Obama administration came early on, when General Motors began to come under federal domination.  For generations, in the small Ozark town of Van Buren, Missouri, my cousins had the local Chevrolet dealership,  Grassham Chevrolet, which provided employment and quality vehicle service throughout that part of the state.  Under government pressure, GM began to eliminate dealerships that supposedly did not generate a significant amount of business.  Grassham Chevrolet was one of the many dealerships notified that their relationship with GM was being severed.

Upon close examination, it became clear that dealerships owned or managed by individuals who were contributors to the Democratic Party were more likely to remain in business with GM.  Those who were identified as Republicans were more likely to be closed.  The Grassham family was decidedly Republican.  Accordingly, after many years as a mainstay in Van Buren, Grassham Chevrolet was to be no more.

In observing developments with the Affordable Care Act,  it is easy to see that the legislation is now riddled with exceptions, waivers and dispensations, all bespeaking of cronyism running rampant.  Big business, big labor and big government have all lined up to exempt themselves from provisions which the rest of us must live with.

I do not anticipate any subsidies coming my way to offset the inconvenience of Obamacare; however, members of Congress and their staffs will have the privilege of being subsidized to cushion the hardship of living with a monstrosity that they themselves passed.  This is, put into simple language, an outrage.  In the spirit of equal treatment, the minimum that we should expect is that those who pass the laws should live under the mandates spawned by their actions.

President Obama was quick to issue an executive order delaying conformity to the employer mandate  for big business.  For Mr. and Mrs. America, however, no such exception was forthcoming. In effect, there is no delay in the individual mandate. If this does not strike one as unfair and discriminatory,  then we have truly lost what America is all about.

The Monsanto Corporation, through its many patents, has a virtual monopoly on the process of  genetic seed modification. Stories of health hazards of genetically produced food are becoming increasingly common. How did Monsanto begin invading our food supply with agricultural products resulting from their patents?  It's simple:  They placed their own man in the government position charged with oversight of this area of agriculture and science.  Now, all of us are consuming food stemming from genetically modified seeds, and Monsanto, the same folks whose carelessness killed hundreds in Bhopal, India, reaps unparalleled profits.

Examined your cell-hone bill lately?  All of us who are self-supporting and own cell-hones are assessed a "universal monthly charge" to provide cell-phones for Medicaid and food-stamp recipients.  A corporation producing TracFones has what amounts to a lock on this business.  Who owns TracFones?  None other than Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim.  Slim, through his American executives, provided very generous donations to the Obama presidential campaign.  Get the idea?  Yes, Mr. and Mrs. America, through the tax you are paying on your cell-phone bill, you are not only providing free cell-phones for the non-working poor, you are also subsidizing the rich and famous lifestyle of a Mexican super-billionaire.

Why does the Obama administration keep its distance from developing our own energy resources in favor of "green energy?"  A good example is that of Solyndra, a green company that went belly-up and, in the process, blew a half-billion of your tax dollars, money which will never be recovered.  The executive at the top of Soyndra's chain-of-command was a heavy contributor to Barack Hussein Obama.  So, there goes the money, and we continue to make ourselves dependent on resources from regions of the world that are not well disposed toward the United States.

Our economy is replete with all sorts of examples of crony capitalism; but, the few we have referred to will, hopefully, serve to get the idea across.  Remember when merit allowed the best to rise to the top in this country? If we continue in our current direction, the possibility of morphing into Third-World status becomes undeniably greater.

Deo vindice!

WHY, OH WHY, ARE LEFTIES SUCH AN ANGRY LOT?

For some reason, all the liberals I seem to encounter are terribly angry.  If it's not one thing, then it's another.  Their ire is so revved up that they are well beyond civil discourse.  It appears that many of these people were terribly damaged in childhood.  Whatever the cause, they are filled with bile.

My wife, Alma, could not even say in the presence of a liberal that she mistakenly thought was a friend that Governor Rick Perry had a nice head of hair.  That banshee lunged for the kill, yelling at poor Alma that she should never, never let it be known in Santa Fe that she was a Republican.  And all that after Alma had invited the lady for dinner and had served her the best wine in the house!

And why is it that most liberals seem to be so down on Israel?   By their words, you would think that Israel was the earthly embodiment of evil.  Somehow, they have missed out on an accurate historical accounting of what has happened in the Middle East since the birth of Israel some 65 years ago. Having lived for 6 years on the Arab street, I can certainly tell you that there is, indeed, a case for Israel.  If you don't think so, just visit the territories adjacent to Israel that are administered by the Palestinian Authority.  But, what can you expect when an Abrahamic Christian such as myself is viewed as racist, bigoted and completely out of the mainstream of Obamic adulation.

 Has higher education in this country become so biased in its ivy-covered halls that students are only exposed to the party line?  Whatever happened to academic freedom?  And why can't we question the party line without being shouted down?  The last time I checked, we still have something called the First Amendment. However, the liberal side of the spectrum is apparently ready to jettison that little constitutional impediment in its quest for an American socialist nirvana

Polling data indicate that new college graduates are more likely to be able to identify Snoop Doggy Dog than James Madison.  Incredible but true, there are students at Ohio University who are convinced that Benghazi is a Mafia don.  Blank slates are pretty easy to fill with liberal snake-oil, but, somehow in the cookie-cutter process, they become angrier and angrier.

And why is it that angry  American feminists  never speak out in defense of their Middle Eastern sisters - and even, for that matter, their American Muslim sisters - who daily suffer oppression, assault and even rape in the name of a perverted ideology masquerading as a religion.  Hey, American feminists, haven't you heard that enfibulation and honor-killing have come to America?

"Racism! Racism!" has become the movement's mantra.  If there is disagreement on the grounds of policy and what one truly believes are truly mistaken courses of action, there is no attempt to probe differences of opinion through logical discourse and reasoned debate.  Rather, opponents are branded by the "madding crowd" in a way as to be reminiscent of those who once held forth in the 17th century at a place called Salem.

Left-heads of the media are especially obnoxious, filing the airwaves with such utter nonsense, so that one is reminded of an author of a famous book who once wrote about the effectiveness of constant repetition of what he called the "big lie."  Formerly, I made a point of exposing myself to differing points of view.  But now the spin-meisters of the left are just too darned hateful to waste my time on, and that especially applies to those such as Chris Matthews.

Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I very much miss the give and take of differing opinions from individuals who could debate while respecting one another.  More and more, we are getting to the point where those who are most effective in shouting down their opponents are adjudged to be the victors.  Could it be that eventually there will be merely a one size-fits-all analysis of public policy?  To our chagrin, will we wake up to find that that the angry leftists have carried out their own version of "kristallnacht?"   If you don't believe it's possible, stranger things have happened in nations that were once thought to be the epitome of stability.

IT'S THE THE HUMAN FACTOR, STUPID!

Once again, the anti-gun lobby is out to make hay from a tragedy that was preventable.  Incredibly, few questions are being asked about security measures in force at the Washington Navy Yard.  Fewer yet are being asked about why military personnel on site were not armed.  Even more incredible is the reluctance to question how and why the Navy did not see all the warning signs displayed by Aaron Alexis.

Just as in the Ft. Hood massacre, in the name of political correctness and multiculturalism, the right questions go unanswered, while the administration and its lackeys, once again, want to go to the mat in an effort to deprive honest citizens of their 2nd Amendment rights.

Sadly, the human element in America has changed drastically in the last couple of generations.  Many families no longer instill discipline in their offspring. Too many children are not challenged to excel physically and intellectually in taxpayer-supported schools.  Society is fed a constant menu of pabulum masquerading as entertainment, much of it cheapening life through gratuitous  violence and sexually demeaning garbage.  At the same time, government further devalues life by peddling a so-called health program which is heavy on abortion and birth-control.  Not surprisingly, the end result is more and more human beings whose concepts of reality are badly flawed, to the point that actions are no longer associated with consequences.

Remember Ft. Hood?  Muslim terrorist Nidal Hassan's shooting spree was officially labeled "work place violence" by the multiculturally-imbued high brass.  What will be the verdict for the Washington Navy Yard?  No doubt finely-tweaked "bureaucratese" will manufacture a label that will avoid a forthright effort at coming to grips with reality.  And we will never know why those who are trained in the use of firearms go unarmed on military installations.

For individuals like myself who took the time and made the effort to become licensed to carry a handgun, such action was not taken lightly.  To be perfectly honest, it was a step that I would wish had not been necessary.  However, given the nature of the society in which I live, the odds of having to defend oneself have risen drastically in a relatively short period of time.  As one who lives in Texas, I am proud to say that the more than 500,000 individuals who carry concealed handgun licenses make up the most law-abiding group in the state.  And virtually every one of us would question the wisdom of curtailing the rights of citizens who adhere to the law because of society's failure to enforce current laws and to deal with those elements that threaten us all.

 Those who wish to disarm this country will not relent in using  tragedy to the advantage of their cause.  In doing so, they will not and cannot answer why it is that cities like Chicago and Washington, D.C., with the toughest anti-gun laws in the country, have the highest rates of gun violence in America.  But the answer is there, and it is all too apparent.  The societal sickness that has, in part, been spawned by the policies of dependence of our federal government and the lax morals of institutions that once were relied upon for imparting stability have unleashed too many individuals who are not accountable for their actions.  No amount of gun banning can reverse that tide, for the virus has imbedded itself deeply in the organism that we call American culture.  Until such time as we rid ourselves of the twin evils of political correctness and multiculturalism, the human factor will continue to deteriorate, and those who are law-abiding will continue to feel the need to protect their families and themselves.

THIS PRESIDENT IS TRULY EXCEPTIONAL!

As exceptionalism has been a hot topic for some time, I thought it might be well to grade the present occupant of the White House. All things considered, I find him to be a truly exceptional president.

Very early in 2009, it was apparent that this was going to be an exceptional presidency.  In public orations in which the new president pontificated on foreign policy, he exceptionally confused Middle Eastern languages and cultures with those of Central Asia.  For example, I thought it was very exceptional to state that Arabic was the language of Iran, not Farsi, and that Arabic was the mother tongue of Afghanistan.  Also, it was exceptionally gratifying to learn that our president did not speak the "Austrian language."

There is no doubt about it that the ACA (Obamacare) is an exceptional piece of work.  For sure, it is exceptional in as much as it is shot full of exceptions, dispensations and waivers of one sort or another.  As legislation fairly conceived, fairly executed and fairly delivered, it is an exceptional abomination, or, perhaps, better put, an "Obamanation."  Even the Congress, which passed it, cannot live under its terms. Exceptional also were the promises of of openness and transparency in the drafting of the legislation; but, in the final analysis, it was even more exceptional that the law had to be passed so that we would know what was in it. With nearly 60% of Americans opposing its implementation, it is shaping up to be a disaster for the Republic.

In a time when jobs are simply not there for many formerly middle class Americans, Obamination is a job-killer.  Many companies simply cannot afford increased costs for insurance and are cutting back on employee hours.  Monies that could have gone into business expansion and job creation will ultimately go to fund Obamanation.  Surely our representatives in Congress will do all in their power to save us from this exceptional brainchild of an exceptional president.

In the field of international affairs and diplomacy we have also been served by an exceptional president.  If Benghazi were not enough, the dithering, indecisiveness and faltering of our president on Syria  has earned him a special place in the hagiography of American presidents.  In recent memory, the only predecessor who could perhaps match him would be Jimmy Carter, but, in tallying up the score card, the laurel leaves must go to Barack H. Obama, for the status of America has never declined to such a low point during any other presidency within the last 65 years.

Exceptional thinking would have us believe that we must be dependent on Middle East oil, rather than to develop our own domestic energy sources.  It has been an exceptional move to forward our treasure to countries which are not fond of us and to shed the  blood of our young people in places like Iraq, whose people will always despise us in spite of our sacrifice.  And, by the way, whatever became of the dividends that were to accrue from the exceptionally large sums that were invested in failed green energy enterprises?

Also, our borders have been exceptionally porous, open to any and all comers, some of whom might have it within their heart of hearts to do us ill.  Now, that's really exceptional!  No wonder we are sitting targets for terrorists.

It has been exceptional, too, that this administration has made it possible for us to be governed more and more by a plethora of bureaucrats, who know very well that Congress passes the laws but that they write the rules and regulations.  Only an exceptional president would have been able to unleash the Internal Revenue Service in an unmatched vendetta against ordinary Americans who happen to disagree with him.  This one for sure tops Nixon.  Lois Lerner should also garner rave reviews for her supporting role in making this administration exceptional.

Presidential interest and involvement on the local level in the adjudication of justice has been characterized by a high degree of exceptionalism.  That the chief executive might have looked like Treyvon Martin 40 years ago is an exceptional issue of the utmost importance to this country, one in which we are all exceptionally united in our concern. And the exceptional "beer summit" was right up there with presidential successes at  G-20 get-togethers.

 Eric the Holder, our exceptional president's man at the Department of Justice, has done an exceptional job of obfuscating what's really going on over there in his ball park.  It was really exceptional how "fast and furious" put American weapons in the hands of the bad fellows in Mexico.  And even more exceptional was that those plans of great genius were responsible for the deaths of Americans.  Too, it has been exceptional how the DOJ has done everything in its power to thwart legitimate efforts on the part of states wishing to insure clean elections by way of photo-IDs.  Of all the exceptional people in the president's cabinet, Eric the Holder is, without doubt, the most exceptional of all.

This litany of exceptionalism could continue indefinitely; however, it has probably sufficiently demonstrated the high degree of exceptionalism that characterizes the Obama presidency.  In the 40 months that remain of this administration's existence, it appears likely that even more exceptional developments await us.  But, in looking back over the past 4 years, it may very well be that we just can't afford any more exceptionalism.

Deo vindice!

LEADERSHIP

THOMAS CARLYLE

Leadership is an intangible quality that we recognize when we see it in others; but, most of the time, we would be hard-pressed to define it.  We can all think of good leaders, and we can also call to mind others who were in positions of authority who failed miserably.  Perhaps comparisons of successful and failed leaders would be helpful in arriving at a possible definition.

As for myself, I was always a much better teacher than a manager.  My skill-set was more appropriate for the classroom than for the boardroom.  Nevertheless, I served as a dean and a provost in collegiate settings, perhaps as  good an  example as  there was of the theory that those in organizations tend to rise to the level of their incompetence.

Looking back over a career of more than 40 years in higher education,  I served a myriad of  college presidents.  Some were wonderful examples of inspirational leadership who led their administrative teams to the heights of success, creating environments of innovation that provided opportunities for students to excel in many ways.  There were others, though, whose tenures were marked by bitter political games, perhaps reflective of their own tortured personalities.

Of the leaders that I admired, all were able to strike a balance between assertiveness and diplomacy. Those who did not have that balance generally failed. There was one president that I recall who was in a state of perpetual warfare with both his college's board and also with the local political leadership.  He was never able to strike a healthy balance; and, the more I think about it, that failing likely  stemmed from a terribly conflicted personality.

One of the most charismatic presidents I served under was always willing to go the distance in whatever there was that needed to be done.  She was a builder, communicator and a leader who expected that her administrators would display the same level of stamina and energy that characterized her leadership style. Under her supervision, the university grew to become the jewel of the community in which it was located. In many ways, she was a female Vince Lombadi; but, alas, over the years, her many successes turned her head, and she became dictatorial and authoritarian.

A perpetual issue for those who study leadership is whether leaders are born or made.  I personally lean toward the view that asserts that leaders are born with certain qualities that, combined with familial nurturing and experience, allow them to emerge and flourish in positions of great responsibility.  Of 3 American presidents within the last 60 or so years whose administrations demonstrated their  capacity to rise to the occasion with innate abilities and skills honed by drive, determination and experience,  Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower and Ronald Reagan come to mind.  All three were accountable and had the strength of character to acknowledge their own failings.  As Truman so eloquently stated, "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen."  These three individuals also had a certain degree of humility, inasmuch as their greatness would not be recognized until they were out of office. They were not known for "beating their own drums." President Eisenhower's background in organizing the great allied effort that defeated Nazi Germany stood him and his country in good stead. And his genial personality led to 2 terms which are now remembered as a remarkable time of peace and stability.  President Reagan was an unflappable leader whose personality radiated trust and confidence.  He oversaw the fall of the Soviet Union and the opening of the Eastern Bloc and was able, in large part,  to accomplish his goals by playing his cards close to his chest. All three of these individuals were products of traditional families which conveyed traditional American values.  In light of what now passes as leadership, Truman, Eisenhower and Reagan seem even heroic.

No, leadership is not just about how one parts his hair, creases his pants and phrases his speeches.  It is not about being admired by movie stars and celebrities. It is about making the hard decisions that determine, for example, if a nation declines or thrives, Sometimes decisions must be painful for all concerned.  And, also, it is about being a good judge of human character and surrounding oneself with staff members possessing the dedication and capability to unselfishly serve their country. It is certainly not about passing the buck!

Thomas Carlyle (1795 - 1881), the Scottish historian, philosopher and essayist, had definite ideas about leadership that might cause us to take pause these days as we contemplate the choices we have made for individuals who supposedly lead us.  Leaders (or, heroes, if you will), in Carlyle's opinion, rise up in a society almost by virtue of a mystical link between themselves and those they lead.  They are individuals who have no fear in believing in themselves and in ideas, but they are realists when it comes to adjusting goals to situations. In common parlance, they are not ideologues. They also possess the sensitivity and depth to establish a "moral culture" for their people. In fact, the very substance of these leaders is a spiritual reflection of the history, character and greatness of the society from which they have sprung. Combined with this is  vision, the ability to see the future and the willingness to sacrifice to make the future reality.  In other words, there would be no doubt in their minds that they themselves are exceptional, as are those whom they lead.

In an age of superficiality and a turning away from traditional mores and values, this may sound more than a little far-fetched to modern day Americans, many of whom seem irredeemably intoxicated by the popular culture.  However, using Carlyle as a base, along with Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower and Ronald Reagan, a comparison may enable us to have a better understanding of where we have been and where we are going.

MY RIVERS, MY LIFE

Perhaps I am at a stage of life in which one tends to spend a bit more time contemplating one's mortality. And that might be especially true for me, as I consider the state of my health over the last year and a half.

 Taking liberties with the book and movie of the same name, "A River Runs Through It," I am inclined to claim it as a most appropriate theme on where I've been and maybe even where I'm going. For I cannot in any way give credence to my life without acknowledging that rivers have and still continue to run through it with great force.

Some would consider that my life has been a meaningful and interesting one. I've managed to travel to various ends of the earth, have encountered some interesting people along the way and, in the process, have managed to keep my head above water, both figuratively and literally.  For some reason, there are those who indulge my vanity by still enjoying  my lectures, and that cheers my soul.

As far as my heritage is concerned, I have two very diverse elements in the mix, one side coming from  low-landers and the other from hill people; or, if you prefer, "swamp angels" and "hillbillies."  Of the two, my inclination has always been for the hills, and especially for clear, fast-flowing, spring-fed rivers that, unimpeded by dams, course their way through the Ozarks, join with sluggish streams which wend their way through the Arkansas delta and eventually reach the Mississippi.

From the age of eight, I never wanted to be far from the Ozarks; and, early on, I was fascinated by the seasonal stages of my rivers and how, in my young mind, they came to mirror the stages of life.  Every season brings with it different facets of a river's personality, just as infancy, childhood, maturity, and decline mark us in distinctive ways as we move toward our ultimate destiny.

After the heavy rains of spring, the rivers are not as they were, and for the avid canoeist, this means learning all over again the the most expeditious ways to navigate shoals, rapids and snags.  If life is a constant learning process, so, too, it is with rivers.

From the moment I first saw old river hands expertly maneuver their canoes and jon-boats down streams that ran deep in my family's historical memory, I was determined to somehow join them; and, through my emulation of their skill, to forge a union with them and  the rivers that would bind us into what, for me, was a sacred fraternity.

Each season on my rivers had its attractions.  Winter saw giant-sized icicles hanging on the cliffs.  Fall was aglow with a brilliant display of colors.  The heat of summer made the cold waters even more refreshing. Spring was a reawakening, with dogwood and redbud heralding the continuation of the primeval forces that had created and sustained my rivers. And there were always the memories of animal life that would indelibly be fixed in my mind.

Now it is enough to paddle to a gravel-bar, unfold a camp chair, sit and contemplate the union of rocks, trees and water that graces the beautiful mistresses of my youth, the Current and the Eleven Point. In many ways, I have failed my mistress Clio (the muse of history), for whom time and distractions have had a way of not allowing me to do for her what I should have. But, despite my own sense of failure in that dimension of life, Clio could never have competed with the depth of emotion that has perpetually resided in my being for the soul-mates of my youth, the wild and untrammeled rivers of the Ozarks

At night, while looking at the heavens from a vantage point beside my rivers, I can hear them sing. Yes, rivers do sing, and their voices are at one and the same harmonically interdependent and rhythmically discordant.  The waters glide over the rocks, strike the gravel-bars and scamper on their way.  Sometimes, I feel compelled to answer their notes with a hymn I recall from early in my life:

Oh, mighty God, when I behold the wonder

Of nature's beauty, wrought by words of thine,

And how thou leadest all from realms up yonder,

Sustaining earthly life with love benign,

And when at last the mists of time have vanished,

And I in truth my faith confirmed shall see,

Upon the shores where earthly ills are banished,

I'll enter, Lord, to dwell in peace with thee.

And, so, I am reminded of what counts in my life:  My God, my family, my country -  and my rivers!

!

,

.

BUT, HONORABLE JUSTICES, WHAT ABOUT THE FIRST AMENDMENT?

NEW MEXICO'S SUPREMES

AMENDMENT I (1791)

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peacably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

In an end of August decision, the New Mexico Supreme Court ruled that Elane Photography, a photography shop owned by a Christian couple (husband and wife), had violated the New Mexico Human Rights Act by refusing to photograph the "commitment ceremony" of a same-sex couple.  The husband-wife team owning the shop was reluctant to provide their services for a lesbian ceremony, owing to their religious convictions.

And, in Gresham, Oregon, another Christian-owned business, a bakery, has closed after enduring gay rights activists carrying out a campaign of threats and intimidation, after the bakery refused to bake a cake for a lesbian wedding ceremony.

An earlier decision by the New Jersey Division of Civil Rights attracted much attention when it ruled that the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association, a Methodist group, had violated the civil rights of Harriet Bernstein and Luisa Paster, when it refused the request of the two women to have a lesbian wedding at the Methodist church camp.

These developments are pointing toward some serious questions pertaining to the First Amendment and religious liberty that will, undoubtedly, have to be resolved at the level of our highest court.

Let's look at some hypothetical situations.One wonders, for example, about Muslims who might want to rent synagogue facilities for a wedding, or about Jews looking to utilize properties associated with mosques for the same purpose.  Then, what about a company engaged principally in the business of providing pork products demanding that an Orthodox Jewish photographer participate in a photo-shoot for the marketing of ham?  As for birth control, what is to be done if a sincerely convinced Roman Catholic is not keen about his public relations firm undertaking a contract for the promotion of prophylactics.

The Elane Photography case has raised some points that will resonate through similar cases. Certainly, these points are unlikely to disappear, as Willock v. Elane Photography wends its way through the appeals process.

Professor Eugene Volokh of the UCLA law faculty pointed out in his amicus brief  that the photographer, Elane Huguenin, in effect was being forced into a situation of "compelled speech,"  which would cause her discomfort in the expressions that are her works of photography.  However, in its ruling, the New Mexico court was of the opinion that individuals of faith must compromise their behavior as "the price of citizenship."  In other words, the court decreed that the photographer's conduct resulting from her faith was a violation of the New Mexico Human Rights Act. Thus, people of faith - at least in this instance - are expected to separate conduct from faith.  Furthermore, the photographer was not allowed an exception under New Mexico's Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Sounds like the old reverse double-standard, doesn't it?

One might ask whatever happened to plain old "live and let live?"  Ms. Willock, one of the lesbians who brought suit, could just as easily have found a photographer who was comfortable with a lesbian commitment ceremony.  Instead, she determined upon a course of action that, come Hell or high water, would make her point. After decades of moving toward acceptance for same-sex relationships, why is it that those who once fought for recognition of the legitimacy of their relationships, now wish to force others to violate their beliefs?

There was once a time when individuals of differing persuasions would not bother each other when it was obvious that their convictions were far apart.  But that time is no more.  We must all have our rights now, and those rights must be acknowledged by all, regardless of faith, regardless of conviction. And, so, full speed ahead, damn those torpedoes, and it's all or nothing for political correctness!

Columnist George Will made an extremely strong point when he noted that we have moved into a strange era of bizarre regulation, to the extent that regulation is now affecting personal liberties that were once thought to be enshrined and protected in the Constitution. How ironic that those who once were pleading for respect for their beliefs and lifestyles are more recently becoming tyrannical in their lack of tolerance of those whose religious beliefs they refuse to honor or respect.  How terribly tangled our politically correct world has become!






.

VLADIMIR CONTINUES TO GET THE BEST OF BARACK! BUT BOTH ARE A BIT DUBIOUS ABOUT EXCEPTIONALISM!

THIS PRESIDENT LOOKS LIKE HE KNOWS
WHAT HE'S DOING!

Yesterday's op-ed piece in the New York Times by the president of Russia was a real eye-opener.  Looking back to the 60s, 70s and 80s, no Soviet leader would have dared do such a thing.  The American public would have been in an uproar, and U.S./Soviet relations would have taken a major setback. However, we must keep reminding ourselves that, for most of the Obama voters who reelected our Nobel Peace Prize president, history prior to 1990 is simply too ancient to bother with.

AS FOR THIS PRESIDENT, NOT SO MUCH!  LOOKS LIKE
HE WOULD PREFER 18 HOLES AT THE VINEYARD!

At least there seems one area on which the American and Russian presidents might have a meeting of the minds, and that is the subject of American exceptionalism.  One recalls that early in his first term, our much heralded president, when asked about the U.S. being an exceptional nation stated that he was convinced that it was, but no more so than a Brit looking at the U.K. or a Greek surveying the historical development of Greece.  So, if Vladimir feels that attitudes of exceptionalism are a bit dangerous, then Barack doesn't appear to be too far from agreement with him, at least on that score.

"Realpolitik" is a rough game, certainly not meant for those who are hesitant and fumbling.  And those who play it masterfully would never join the game by coloring their international moves with domestic pabulum, such as Barack Obama has done. For example, it stretches the imagination to think of a strong national leader beginning his tenure by apologizing to the world for the supposed sins of his country.

If we could resurrect Metternich, Bismarck, Cavour and Napoleon III, they would have more than a few lessons to share with the American president.  But, if Obama missed those lectures in Western Civilization 101, he could look back only so far as the administration of John F. Kennedy and the events of October 1962.

During the Cuban missile crisis, JFK went head to head with Nikita Khrushchev, the Soviet leader.  It was obvious that Kennedy had the strength of his conviction that Soviet missiles should not be aimed at American cities from sites located a mere 90 miles off our shores, hence a naval blockade was put into place.  As an Eastern Bloc ship loaded with the materiel of war steamed for Cuba, the clock seemed to be ticking down to a nuclear exchange between the two countries.  Fortunately, the Russian strong man flinched, the ship turned back, and JFK had prevailed.

Somehow, one simply can't envision a similar scenario playing out in the current situation in the Middle East. If anything, it would seem a much more plausible outcome to assume that the bold deportment of Vladimir Putin would carry the day.   The "B"-team in charge of American foreign policy has demonstrated in no uncertain terms that those who have suited up for the game are not capable of sustaining any strategy that would serve to enhance our strength and insure our security.  John Kerry, Samantha Power, Susan Rice and James Clapper are plainly not up to the challenge.

As leaders go, one is left wondering about an electorate that would, in perilous times, choose to return to power an ideologue who wishes to unilaterally disarm their armed forces.  Far, far better it would be to have a realist in place  at the White House, one who could stand the heat of Harry Truman's kitchen, maintain his nation's strength and go the distance with the petty tyrants of this world.

Going further, Russia's strategic position in the eastern Mediterranean is now at its highest point in recent memory.  It can only be imagined, but I feel certain that our Israeli allies must be shaking their heads and drawing deep breaths, wondering what has possessed the current American administration to paint itself into a corner of  diplomatic foolhardiness and folly.

If the math is correct, we have about 40 more months of enduring the Obama presidency.  This president is going to be faced with not only more challenges on the international scene but with potentially explosive domestic political matters as well.  Let's not forget the IRS, Benghazi, the ACA ("Obamacare") and assorted DOJ matters, such as "Fast and Furious." Sometimes it appears that a parliamentary system might have its attractions, especially when faced with what seems to be a collapsing presidency.

Each Sunday, during divine services and just prior to the Eucharist at the church I attend, we pray for "Barack, our president; Rick, our governor; Tony, our mayor; Katherine, our bishop, et. al."  Without a doubt, this Sunday I'll  really be imploring  divine intervention for the first guy on the list.  It is obvious that he needs all the celestial support he can muster.

LESSONS LEARNED IN EGYPT : WHY CAN'T OBAMA & HIS "B" TEAM LEARN THEM, TOO?

HASSAN AL-BANNA

During the early spring of 2011, as the "Arab Spring" in Egypt got underway and crowds began pouring into Tahrir Square in Cairo, my thoughts turned to a long-ago squash game in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.  I had just begun a quest to learn the game while I was at King Saud University.  On one occasion, I was challenged by a rotund individual wearing  typical Egyptian garb.  Thinking I might be faster on my feet, I accepted his challenge for a game. In short order, he exposed me for what I was - a squash rookie - and totally devastated my hopes of ever reaching squash stardom.

I was informed by a Pakistani friend that my squash opponent was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, who taught Islamic studies at the university.  Furthermore, I was to learn that the fellow was in exile from Egypt, because of his political views.  The encounter raised my curiosity, and I began to bone up on the topic of the Muslim Brotherhood.  Later, when I visited Egypt, I was to learn much more.

My research revealed that the Muslim Brotherhood had its origins in Egypt in 1928, when a young teacher, Hassan al-Banna, began speaking out against Western imperialism, proclaiming that the best way to counter European influence in Egypt - and, specifically British influence - was by adhering to traditional Sunni Islam and to reject all foreign ways that might tempt Muslims to stray from the fold.  Within ten years time, there were more than 500,000 Egyptian members of the Muslim Brotherhood.

TAHRIR SQUARE, CAIRO, 2011

After Banna was assassinated in 1949, the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood passed to Syed al-Qutb, a scholar who had pursued graduate studies in the U.S. at Colorado State and Stanford. Qutub's matriculation  in America had the effect of reinforcing his view that Islam was the only hope for the redemption of Egypt from European colonialism and what he considered the loose lifestyles and "race imperialism" he had observed in the U.S.

By the 1960s, the Muslim Brotherhood had several million members in Egypt and had become so strong that the secular government of Gamal Abdul-Nasser had banned it, and hundreds of its members had been banished from Egypt, just like my squash opponent in Riyadh. By 1966, Syed al-Qutub had been tried by Nasser's government and subsequently hanged.

SADAT IN MIDDLE, WITH MUBARAK ON HIS RIGHT

My first visit to Egypt occurred in 1980, which was, perhaps, the high point of the international attention which was being given to Egypt's president at that time, Awar al-Sadat.  Sadat had become quite popular in Egypt when that country's armed forces acquitted themselves courageously against the Israeli Defense Forces during the 1973 war.  His popularity at home, however, would eventually wane, when he shook hands with Prime Minister Begin of Israel in 1979, thus cementing a peace of sorts during the mediation of President Carter at Camp David.

THE ASSASSINATION OF SADAT

After Camp David, Sadat was the darling of the media in America and throughout Europe.  However, during my stay in Cairo in 1980, one thing stood out:  On almost every street corner throughout the city there were enormous banners with Sadat's image emblazoned on them.  Having seen displays of the sort throughout the world, I quickly got the idea that, contrary to what was being said in the U.S, Sadat was an out and out dictator, a feeling which was confirmed by conversations with Egyptians.  Consequently, when Sadat was gunned down by elements in Egypt tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, I was not surprised.

A former air force general, Hosni Mubarak, followed Sadat and managed to extend his rule for more than 30 years, finally falling victim to the Arab spring movement, when the the long-suffering patience of the Egyptian people came to the breaking point after decades of corruption, cronyism, poverty and human rights abuses.

At long last, in what were called "democratic" elections in 2012, the Brotherhood finally came to power, with Mohammed Morsi assuming the presidency of Egypt.  Those elections, by the way, were characterized by intimidation, particularly against the 10 million Egyptian Christians.  The Morsi government lasted a couple of weeks over a year; and, owing to incompetence and widespread violence directed against non-Islamic enthusiasts, was toppled in July of this year. And so, once again in Egypt, events have come full circle and back to a military government.

TOPPLED ISLAMIST PRESIDENT MORSI

Crane Brinton's classic work, ANATOMY OF REVOLUTION, offers some meaningful insight into what is now playing out in the societal upheaval through which Egypt is passing.  The failure of the Sadat and Mubarak regimes to adjust to the demands of a long-beleaguered population, of which 60% now are less than 30 years of age, obviously led to insupportable pressures that could not be restrained by traditional means of repression.  In the succeeding phases of the upheaval, there are predictable developments, viz. various elements of moderate, radical and military orientation will in turn exercise power.  In due course and leading to a final synthesis, hopefully, there will emerge a regime based on expediency and level-headedness.  However, there is a wild-card ingredient in all of this, and that, of course, is Islam.  Again, hopefully, Islam will not return to power in any way to impose an Islamic state on Egypt.  If it does return to power, the result will be disastrous.  Not only will the Egyptian people continue to suffer, the American position in the Middle East will be outflanked by forces dedicated to the destruction of Israel, resulting in turmoil and economic disruption for years to come.

Less than 2 years ago, Barack Obama's director of national intelligence, General James Clapper, was raving about how the Muslim Brotherhood was a moderate, secular force.  And, now, just where are we?  Apparently, that view was not only Clapper's but reflected the wider thinking of the president's foreign policy "experts," who either were engaging in politically correct wishful thinking or just plain did not do their homework.  Whatever the reason, we now have a Middle East situation, compounded by what is happening in both Egypt and Syria, that points to one of the greatest disasters in all the diplomatic history of the U.S. As Americans, we should be embarrassed that we reelected a  rank amateur to the presidency in 2012.

9/11: WE SHALL NEVER, NEVER FORGET!

From Concordville.org

The morning was bright and crystal clear, blue skies, temperatures forecast for the mid-70s, with low humidity.  I decided to take advantage of the fair weather for a spur-of-the-moment canoe trip down a beautiful, fast-flowing, spring-fed river.  I had not gotten far out of town when my cell-phone rang with a call from my secretary.  She asked if I had seen the morning news or had my radio on.  I replied that no, I was totally absorbed with the prospect of a day on the river.  When she told me that planes had flown into the Twin Towers, my first thought was that there was some sort of coup taking place. But, quickly, I dissuaded myself of that; and, then, news reports began to sort out the situation.  Gradually, it became clear that our country had been brutally attacked by fanatical terrorists whose way of thinking might have come out of the 15th century.  Whether Americans wanted it or not, our country was at war with radical Islam. And it still is!

The spirit of unity was overwhelming.  Americans of all political persuasions and spiritual outlooks wanted to help in any way possible.  In the day after the attack, while we were on the road, it was common to see hill people gathering on court house squares for impromtu prayer meetings.  Every little town had its flags lowered; and, in the days that followed, blood drives seemed to be going on everywhere, although they were largely symbolic, owing to the need for blood being much smaller than the burgeoning supply.

It was one of the most horrific days in our nation's history, but, at least, we were united.  During  the 12 years since that day, we have become fractured as a nation; and, in many ways, we have become a mass of squabbling tribes, each demanding what it sees as its rights.  Sadly, our present leadership has done even more to spread the virus of disunity.

So, on this day of remembrance, let us honor the martyrs of the Twin Towers and the brave souls who "got rolling" to foil the schemes of the demented beings who hijacked flight 93.  To exploit this day for any other cause would be an abomination.

It is my hope that the so-called "Million Muslim March" planned for today in Washington will simply fizzle out.  It is not only a bad idea to schedule such an event on this day, it is also an outrage!  If the organizers of the march wish to choose an occasion to protest what they see as violations of their civil rights, let it not be on 9/11.  Consequently, one questions not only their judgement but also their motivation.  Are Muslims denied their right to vote in this country?  Are they suffering discrimination in housing and public accommodations?  Do they find prejudice in the workplace?  Are they not allowed to build their mosques?  Do they experience bias involving their dietary requirements?  In summary:  Methinks these Muslims doth protest too much!

With that in mind, let's take a look at the other side of the coin.  Daily, throughout the world in Muslim-dominated settings, Christians suffer overt discrimination.  In fact, in places like Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Iran and Pakistan their lives are literally on the line.  Christians, as I write this, are being thrown into prisons, raped, assaulted and murdered, simply because they choose to be true to their faith.  Yet, I hear not a peep of protest from American Muslims about the atrocities that are being visited upon my Christian brothers and sisters by Muslim fanatics in Muslim countries.  Just imagine what would happen in, for example, Islamabad if Christians organized a mass demonstration on Eid-al-Adha to protest their plight in Pakistan.  I can well imagine that there would be a massacre of great proportions.  But, of course, in the world of political correctness and multiculturalism, we are not supposed to think about the double-standard,  and certainly not when it comes to Islam.

9/11 should have been a wake-up call to the declaration of war that was made against Western values by the fanatics and extremists of Islam.  That war continues to this day, but perhaps in stealthier ways.  With that in mind, it appears that the best way that we can remember the souls of the martyrs and heroes of 9/11 is to reawaken our vigilance, realizing that for as long as the threat of terrorism exists, we are truly and unalterably at war.


.

VLADIMIR TOTALLY DEVOURS BARACK'S LUNCH!

VLADIMIR HANGS TOUGH WHILE BARACK HANGS
 IN THE DIPLOMATIC WIND

It was just yesterday that Secretary of State John Kerry, when asked how Syria could avoid an American military strike, replied in a tongue-in -cheek answer that Bashar al-Assad "...could turn over every bit of his chemical weapons to the international community in the next week, turn it over, all of it, without delay, for a full and total accounting."  Obviously, Kerry was assuming that such compliance would never occur. However, Russia's foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, followed up immediately by indicating Russia's willingness to undertake such a mission and to transport (supposedly for disposal) the concerned chemical weapons to Russia.

On Monday, the Syrian foreign minister was in Moscow and followed up with assurances that his country was quite willing to go along with the Russian proposal.  Once again, Vladimir Putin has one-upped the U.S. president, gaining an edge in the game of international credibility, a game in which increasingly the American president appears amateurish.

So now, once again, American diplomacy has painted itself into a corner.  Plainly, Russia would not be one's first choice to dispose of its ally Syria's arsenal of chemical weapons, but now Barack Obama must at least acknowledge this masterful move in a diplomatic chess game with all sorts of strategic implications.

With Obama leading the charge of the boys and girls of what is clearly a diplomatic and foreign affairs "B" team, we have gone from demands for Assad to depart from Syria, to the "phony" red-line, to threats of a military strike, to inability to gain support at the G-20 summit, and now to a national address tonight that is mind-boggling in terms of just what the president can realistically say about his latest blunder.

In terms of a quick review of disasters, let's look back to Libya and Egypt.  In Libya, if you will recall, the words "leading from behind" emerged as questionable verbiage to describe international collaboration in terminating the Ghadafi. regime.  It has been almost 2 years since the Libyan dictator's death in October of 2011, and Libya is now in far worse shape than it was before Ghadafi's demise, continuing to exist as a North African magnet for Islamists of all sorts of radical shades.

As for Egypt, our highly vaunted diplomacy felt that it could dispense with Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian dictator, because the "moderate" Muslim Brotherhood, after all, would be a unifying force for democracy.  After a year of the Brotherhood's incompetence, Egypt was on the verge of imploding.  And now the Foggy Bottom folks can't make up their minds as to whether a military coup has occurred in Egypt; and, if it has, what to do about it.  In the meantime, Egypt's Christian minority of 10 million has become the  focus of the wrath of the Muslim Brotherhood and other religious extremists.

Now, U.S. naval units are in the eastern Mediterranean, in close proximity to Russian war ships.  Also there is a Chinese amphibious war ship the size of two football fields in the general area. Putin has declared that Russia will provide a rocket shield if U.S. missiles are launched against Syria.  Has the possibility of conflict been minimized simply because John Kerry misspoke?  It is a bit frightening to dwell on it, but how can we count on President Obama and his "B" team, given their history of foul-ups, to keep us secure and to heed to a stable course internationally?  And, quite frankly, it is terribly embarrassing to be asking these questions.

Perhaps it's time for a presidential sabbatical.  A few weeks as an understudy to President Putin in Moscow. might just do President Obama a world of good.  We couldn't be in much worse shape with "Uncle Joe" minding the shop in Washington while Barack does some remedial work in Russia.  Maybe Vladimir could begin by demonstrating how his iron-fisted policies have worked with Russia's Muslim population, most of whom have learned by now that Vladimir is not a very politically correct fellow.  In that regard, Barack might benefit from a field trip to Chechnya.  You know, the more I think about this, the better and better the idea seems!  And it also might be a wonderful idea for Barack to return that Nobel  Peace Prize on the way over to  Moscow.

MORE & MORE, IT APPEARS THAT ISRAEL IS SURROUNDED BY SHEER BARBARISM!

If the photographs of Syrian " freedom-fighters"  that appeared a couple of days ago in the pages of Two for Texas did not turn your stomachs, dear readers, then nothing probably will.

Having spent 6 years living in the Middle East, I am often asked about the violence which swirls about that region.  My stock answer, of course, is that by the Muslim calendar this is the 15th century.  To bring home my point a little better, I invariably compare Western civilization in the 15th and 16th centuries to what passes for civilization these days in Europe and America.

SHARIA LAW AT ITS FINEST!

Over minor theological points, 15th and 16th century Christians were drawing and quartering  and burning and hanging each other. Proceeding with this historical train of thought, I came to realize one day while strolling the streets of Riyadh that, for all practical purposes, I could just as well have been in Calvin's Geneva.  In short order, it dawned on me that  Islam had yet to pass through anything like a Renaissance, Reformation or Enlightenment.

Part of my epiphany included eventually understanding enough Arabic to be able to apprehend from sermons blasting from speaker systems  attached to mosques that the sermon-givers were calling for Christians and Jews to be driven into the sea and eradicated - all for the good of the Umma. But, to be sure, not only does Muslim enmity extend to infidels, Shias and Sunnis alike revile each other with a deep religious hatred, compounded by cultural differences, which has extended over centuries.

One need only think of the cauldron of darkness and hatred and the various groups and factions caught up in the eruption of violence that is Syria in 2013. To imagine in any way that Western powers will be able to eventually engage in nation-building to set the Arab states of the Levant on a path of democracy and individual freedom is nothing short of lunacy.

And, in considering all of this, one ultimately comes to reflect on the state of Israel, a tiny country surrounded by ongoing hostility and conflict.  That Israelis must constantly be on guard is a given;  but, somehow, Israel is able to not only survive but also to thrive.

From the moment of Israel's birth more than 65 years ago on May 14, 1948, the country has drawn the ire of Arab states, socialist dictators, the old Eastern Bloc and various and sundry Third World regimes. Consequently, resolutions too numerous to count have been passed against the Jewish state through the U.N. Last year, for example, of 26 U.N. resolutions directed against assorted countries, 22 were directed at Israel.  At the same time, and to question the integrity of its proceedings, the U.N. has been strangely silent on the topic of Syrian air raids on Palestinian mosques.

Israel has been attacked 4 times by Arab armies in its history.  And, constantly, Israel must bear the Arab propaganda machine branding Israelis as practitioners of genocide.  And this smearing goes on despite the 1.2  million Arab citizens of Israel, who are eligible to vote, take part in political life and sit in the Knesset. Indicative, too, of the standing of Israeli Arabs is that more than 20% of those enrolled in Haifa University are of Arab ethnicity, hardly a sign of genocide.

Almost immediately after its independence, Israel was attacked by the Arab League, and Jews from Arab countries throughout the Middle East were expelled from their homelands.  Palestinian Arabs were encouraged by the invading Arabs to flee the new country, which resulted in a permanent refugee class still affecting Middle East politics to this very day.   Israel absorbed the Jewish refugees as well as several thousand Arab emigres. On the other hand, the Arab states gave only lip-service to the cause of Arab refugees, preferring instead to use them as pawns in a continuing campaign of deceit against Israel.

Arab and Muslim violence against Jews is nothing new.  In the post-World War I era, when Palestine was a British-controlled mandate, mosque-incited racist riots directed against sabra communities of Jews who had been resident in the area for 100s of years broke out, resulting in wide-spread death and destruction.  For example, in the riots of 1929, 133 Jews and 119 Arabs were killed, most of the Arabs being shot down by British troops attempting to restore order.

Despite sharing a bloody history with the Palestinians, Israel has shown remarkable restraint.  Enduring daily Hamas attacks on its schools, kindergartens and hospitals, Israel waited eight years to take out Hamas rocket sites.  When faced with the necessity of making retaliatory raids on terrorist forces,  Israel has done all that is possible to attack only the concerned terrorists, avoiding concentrations of civilians and even dropping leaflets in Arab civilian communities to warn of impending attacks.

As for her reputed anti-Muslim policies, when Arab states refused to take Muslim refugees from Darfur during the genocidal civil war in the Sudan, they were taken in by Israel, which proceeded to absorb them into her population.  And now, Israel is in the process of making a Muslim friend in Azerbaijan, which like Israel is concerned about Hezbollah and Iranian schemes to expand Shia influence.

Israel is home to almost 200,000 Christians, most of whom are Arabs.  In contrast, there has been an ongoing ethnic cleansing of Christians in adjacent areas controlled by the Palestinian Authority.  In 1990, Christians constituted 60% of Bethlehem's population.  Today they represent less than 20%.  Even Bethlehem's venerable Church of the Nativity has not been immune to terrorist attacks.  All told, the Christian population has declined to less than 2% in areas administered by the Palestinian Authority, which has made Islam its sanctioned faith.

 Despite Israel's perilous setting, surrounded by extremists, militants and terrorists, the small nation continues to distinguish itself through education and technology, leading the world on a per-capita basis in the publication of scientific publications.  Accordingly, in many quarters, Israel is becoming known as "Silicon Valley East."  All of this draws a definite distinction with Israel's neighbors, most of whom seem set on following a 15th century mindset into a steady descent toward chaos and bloodshed.

In observing the erratic actions of the American president during the last two weeks, I have wondered how those actions are being received in Israel, our dear friend and closest ally in the Middle East. To say  the least, they must be more than a bit unnerving. As one who considers himself an Abrahamic Christian, I cannot help but be concerned; and, in that context, I pray that Israel may continue to survive as a beacon of hope in  the otherwise morally dreary landscape of the Middle East.

THE GREAT ENERGY DECEPTION

Dear readers, are you ready for another ride on the energy roller-coaster?  Unfortunately, we are currently shackled to the vagaries of Middle East politics; and, accordingly, the rise and decline of oil prices for the U.S. is largely dictated by events outside this country.

Sad but true, if you happen to be planning a trip, your plans might be affected by what is about to take place in Syria.  Summer is winding down, and students are back in their classrooms.  However, that post-Labor Day price of $3.25 a gallon just might be on the verge of heading north.

Americans, more than ever, are being affected by the rising costs of energy.  With real wages falling precipitously in comparison with those of a decade ago, family budgets increasingly show greater proportions going to the cost of energy.

In a recent pontification, our president averred that the U.S. possesses only 2% of the world's oil reserves, but consumes 20% of output.  That's nothing short of scary! But it was also dancing around the truth. It might be a good time, then, to ask why our president is not being straight forward with us

It seems that the 2% figure only includes reserves that are presently being exploited.  And that accounts for a mere fraction of total American oil reserves.  For example, although Texas is the number 1 oil-producing state with 7 billion barrels of reserves recognized by the federal government, that doesn't tell the real story.

THE EAGLE FORD FORMATION

Have you been through Carrizo Springs, Kennedy, Karnes or Beeville lately?  These locations were formerly on my list of shortcuts of going and coming in Texas But, no more!  Those formerly sleepy backwaters are now abuzz with all sorts of traffic, owing to the boom coming out of the Eagle Ford Shale Formation, which extends through 24 counties from South Texas into East Texas.  That boom is expected to get larger and larger, further enhancing the output of "Texas tea."

So, let's examine that 2% figure more closely.  The 2% referred to in no way includes the more than 400 billion barrels of technically recoverable crude oil.  Neither does it take in more than 800 billion barrels of oil shale.  Included in these totals would be 86 billion barrels in the outer continental shelf, 48 billion in Alaska's North Slope, 12 billion in ANWR and 19 billion in Utah's tar sands.  It does not include billions of barrels in southwest Wyoming, where the surface management is under the control of our federal government.  When all of these recoverable energy resources are totaled, they come to 60 times more than the numbers recited by the president.  In fact, if we went about developing these reserves, they are more than enough to make this country oil-independent for the next 200 years.  Just imagine what that independence could do for us.  We would be relieved from much of Middle East instability, we would not be sending money to people who hate us, and we could be developing "green" energy sources at the same time.

A good case in point with regard to pursuing energy independence is a quick look at oil prices over the last several decades.  Obviously, the trend is for prices to continue their upward spiral.  Given that fact of life, is it reasonable to continue to subsidize authoritarian regimes which could at any time wreak economic havoc on the U.S. and its citizens?

                                          Furthermore, a perusal of a list of the top 6 foreign oil suppliers to the U.S. reveals 4 that we might very well wish to curtail doing business with. I could do without, for example, forwarding U.S. dollars to further the sybaritic lifestyles of the more than 5,000 royal princes in Saudi Arabia. Then, there is Nigeria, which is subject to all sorts of internal turmoil, which more often than not affects the country's oil fields.  As for Iraq, despite the billions and billions of American dollars wasted, Iraq will eventually slide into a Shia vs. Sunni civil war. Furthermore, Iraqis will never be grateful for the expenditure of American blood and treasure.  Turning to Venezuela, that oil-rich country seems perpetually trapped in the late Hugo Chavez's "Bolivarian Revolution."  Let's stop dealing with that pack of leftist blockheads!  And that would leave us with our neighbors, Mexico and Canada. Surely, between ourselves and the resources coming from our neighbors, we can head toward energy independence. So, let's get on with it!  The security of future generations depends on it!  And, above all, we cannot afford to continue allowing this country's leaders to obscure the total energy reserves that we are blessed with.  And neither can we continue to place ourselves in jeopardy over energy.

I recall a time when presidents were not afraid to reveal the truth, regardless of the political consequences that the truth might portend.  In particular, I recall a man from Missouri who was not afraid to take the heat. His name was Harry S Truman, and he had a saying which every chief executive should keep in mind:  "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen."   In the last 5 years, we have been repeatedly duped by leaders who prefer obfuscation to clarification.  And that is particularly true when it comes to energy.  Let's set about changing that!  And, if they can't stand the heat, then by all means they should vacate that kitchen.

THE SYRIAN OBSESSION: WHEN WILL THEY EVER LEARN! KERRY IS FULL OF HOT AIR, AND MCCAIN MUST BE SENILE!

REBEL MUSLIM "LADIES AUXILIARY" SUPPORTERS DO THE
"JIHAD JIG" WITH AL-QAEDA JIHAD FLAG IN ALEPPO

Two for Texas has consistently counseled against involvement on the part of the U.S. in the Syrian morass. Despite the entreaties of Secretary of State Kerry and the desire of Senator McCain for our country to deliver a retaliatory strike at the gas-wielding Assad dictatorship, there is clearly convincing evidence that al-Qaeda has the support of approximately 50% of the forces in opposition to the Damascus regime.  In effect, Kerry and McCain would have the U.S. acting as the air-arm of al-Qaeda in Syria!  Even incompetent director of national intelligence General James Clapper has acknowledged the preponderance of al-Qaeda forces in the ranks of the Syrian opposition forces.

REBELS FIGHT AND SCREAM "ALLAHHU-AKHBAR"
WITH AL-QAEDA JIHAD FLAG

Just four months ago, the al-Nusra Front, reputed to be the most effective fighting force among the rebel units, openly pledged its undying  loyalty to al-Qaeda.  Al-Nusra, which is made up of veteran jihadis from throughout the Muslim world, has scored numerous successes against the regular army and is known far and wide for inflicting atrocities on Christians and other minority groups.

FOREIGN "OPPOSITION" JIHADIS
ENTER ALEPPO UNDER AL-QAEDA FLAG

Secretary of State Kerry's recent words equating opposition leadership and most rebel units with "moderate" Islam ring hollow in the face of reports from the European press that there is a strong likelihood that the State Department has been ignoring not only intelligence produced by the CIA but also corroborating reports coming from our allies.  Two for Texas is far from being a fan of Vladimir Putin, but perhaps he was not far off the mark on Thursday when he deemed Mr. Kerry a liar.

It makes absolutely no sense to enter a fray in such a way as to support an opposition that unmistakably favors an Islamic state, along with Sharia law.  If Secretary Kerry and Senator McCain wish to find a war in which they could intervene on the side of good facing evil, surely it would not be this one.  Thus far, this conflict features bad guys slaughtering bad guys.  There are no good guys involved in this fight.

The more the Obama administration attempts to articulate a Syrian policy, the more it becomes obvious that not much forethought has been given to possible outcomes of American involvement. For example, next to nothing has been heard about the following:

1.  What happens if an American strike results in widening the conflagration, including the direct participation of Assad's Iranian allies?  Is the U.S. prepared to fight a war which might include efforts to eradicate Iran's nuclear facilities?

2.  How will Israel be affected?  Is Israel being isolated in all of the inane maneuvering now being undertaken by the Obama administration?

3.  What will be the fate of Syria's more than 2 million Christians?  Christianity in America these days is increasingly seen as a scorned relic, but is the Obama administration prepared to see a bloodbath of religious minorities that an opposition victory would bring?

TORTURED SYRIAN SOLDIER AWAITS EXECUTION
BY MUSLIM "FREEDOM FIGHTERS" (YOU-TUBE)

If those in power are capable of making a valid case for any sort of U.S. involvement in Syria, they have much to do in convincing Americans, who are overwhelmingly against any sort of intervention.  This morning, in photographs appearing in the New York Times, more graphic evidence was displayed showing the barbarity of the so-called freedom fighters.  If we take the Muslim calendar as an indicator of  mindset, the Islamist mind is a 15th century mind, and obviously has not been mellowed by the march of time.  There is no plausible basis for American involvement in Syria, but there is a host of reasons to support a sound argument for non-intervention.

MUSLIM "FREEDOM FIGHTERS" CARRY OUT MASS EXECUTION OF
SYRIAN SOLDIERS (YOU-TUBE)

THE SHAME OF THE OBESITY "EPIDEMIC"

FROM STRANGE COSMOS

I began noticing it around 22 years ago. My favorite business suit outlet stopped carrying my size - 44 long, athletic cut.  When asked why my size was no longer available, the manager simply said that Americans were getting "bigger."  What she meant, of course, was that Americans were getting fatter.

2 years later, the suit outlet was having a going-out-of business sale.  I was curious and asked why the outlet was closing.  This time the manager indicated that Americans were becoming more "casual."  A fairly easy translation was that Americans were becoming more sloppy in their appearance.

I was raised in a family in which I was encouraged to look my best and to participate in athletics and physical exercise.  In fact, exercise is a habit that still occupies a significant chunk of my time.  Naturally, I began to take note of the human scenery I encountered over the next couple of decades, and it was clear that Americans were, indeed, getting fatter and sloppier.  I even began to notice a trend in fat people in shorts coming to church.

In many ways, the obesity epidemic goes hand in hand with the overall decline in standards in the U.S.  Not only have we had a decline in academic standards in the public schools, standards have also fallen precipitously in entertainment, at least judging by the product turned out by Hollywood.  Not to be outdone by culture-wide trends, grade inflation in higher education now results in the most common grade given in college-level courses being "A."  But, perhaps, I digress.

"Shame" is something that we seem to be short on these days in the U.S.  Nevertheless, in risking a severe breach of the politically-correct ethic, there will be no hesitation in these pages in using the word.  It is truly a SHAME what obesity is doing to more and more children.  Looked at statistically, obesity in children has more than doubled in the last 30 years, while for adolescents it has had a 300% increase  By 2010, 33% of all children and adolescents were obese or overweight in this country. In terms of an economic cost, almost 200 billion dollars, or 21% of medical costs in the U.S, are related to obesity.  With childhood obesity rates soaring, that figure will grow exponentially; and, along with it, there will be additional costs in unemployment and disability benefits.

In 21st century America, we are now informed that obesity is a disease.  That might be true in 10% of the cases, but, as for the other 90%, the condition would seem to be totally voluntary, the result of caloric imbalance in which the affected party simply does not burn as many calories in energy use as he/she takes in through diet.

In extreme south Texas, where Food Stamps are utilized by at least 1/3 of the population, most of those in grocery store lines using government programs appear grossly overweight.  Invariably, the children who accompany them are also badly overweight.  By acceptable discourse these days, they are no longer "fat people," but should be referred to by the gentler politically-correct words of "plus-sized" or even "metabolic-challenged."  As a courtesy, most large stores provide electrically-charged carts for the handicapped to ambulate and make their purchases.  However, those making the greatest use of these carts are the plus-sized people who, by dint of their dietary habits, have apparently placed great stress on their joints and, in effect, have made cripples of themselves.

Looking back, I cannot recall any childhood friends being fat.  I do recall most women of that era having waist-lines; and, these days, I would imagine that there would be many of the female population who would have a difficult time climbing into vintage clothing from the 50s and 60s.  Just think June Cleaver, and you'll get the idea.

Never in history has there been a society with more information about nutrition and health.  Never has there been a society with as many options for wholesome exercise.  Could it be that, out of sheer sloth and ignorance, we are trading our heritage for a mess of pottage and condemning future generations to painful lives and early death?  For shame!