AIRLINE PRACTICES GROSS DISCRIMINATION AGAINST TALL PEOPLE: DON'T FLY THE CRAMPED AND CROWDED SKIES OF UNITED!

At 6'4" and with a 36" inseam, airline travel has always been a challenge for me.  Nevertheless, 30 or 40 years ago, flying wasn't such an unbearable chore.  I well remember traveling on Delta when the steward or stewardess - the neutered term "flight attendant" was not in vogue at that time - would take one's suit coat on entering the plane and stow it in the closet, cheerily assuring the passenger that it would be brought to one upon landing.  Now, given the cattle-car nature of airline seating, one would have to be addled to even think of flying in a suit and tie.

There was a time, too, when flight crews went out of their way to enhance passenger comfort.  It happened frequently that I was asked if I would like to move to a more comfortable location.  Occasionally, a stewardess would take one look at my long legs and even ask if I would care to be upgraded - at no additional charge - to first class.

For several years I flew Continental's 50-passenger jets from Brownsville to Leon in Mexico.  The Mexican leg from Houston to Leon in Mexico was a decent flight, and it was possible for tall people to sit at the emergency exits without paying a surcharge. Continental made the flights somewhat enjoyable, with box lunches served to all passengers.  But no more!  Since United took over, the flights are cramped, crowded and often staffed by discourteous stewards and stewardesses who are anything but attentive to their passengers' comfort.  On a recent Brownsville to Houston flight I was treated with disdain by perhaps the most rude stewardess encountered over 50 years of flying.

The robber barons who now control United Airlines seek to turn profit at every corner.  If you are tall, suck it up and endure your knees practically sticking up to your ears;  or, you can lay out some extra dollars to gain a few extra inches at the emergency exits.  And don't even think about pretzels or peanuts any more. They departed soon after the box lunches.

United has already decreased leg-room from 33" to 31"  on their 50-passenger jets.  And they are considering means to further decrease the space, in order to squeeze in a few more seats for increased profits.  And so it goes:  airlines charge for whatever they can rationalize and do virtually whatever it takes for a few more bucks.  And passengers get squeezed in more ways than one.

As I write this post, I am lecturing in Mexico's beautiful Bajio region.  I am enjoying my stay; but, at the same time, am more than a little apprehensive over the prospect of my return flight to Texas.  After United had unloaded me at the Leon Airport last Monday it took me all of another day to get myself back on track.  With United Airlines, what once was almost an enjoyable experience with Continental now fills my mind with dread.  The skies of United are no longer so friendly, and their flights have become arduous events to avoid if at all possible.

Deo Vindice!

God bless Texas, and may the Lone Star State remain forever red!

LET US NOT FORGET ASIA BIBI AND THE HEINOUS PERSECUTION OF CHRISTIANS BY ISLAM!

It will soon be going on five years that Asia Bibi has been incarcerated in the Muslim nation of Pakistan, awaiting her fate after having been convicted in a Pakstani court for the crime of "blasphemy."  If you feel that the word blasphemy has an antiquated ring to it, you may not be far off the mark.

It was during 1983, while walking down a street in downtown Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, that it dawned on me that I was living in a 15th century environment.  Indeed, to give the reader an idea as we start off the year 2014, the corresponding date by the Islamic calendar would be the year 1435.  If we compare the Christian world view of 2014 to the Muslim world of 1435, archaic is another word which would likely come to mind.

While doing farm work in 2009, Asia Bibi was set upon by fellow workers, who claimed that she insulted the Prophet Mohamed.  Asia was dragged through the streets of her village by fanatical Muslims and ultimately charged with blasphemy.

The governor of Punjab province in Pakistan took a calculated risk when he spoke out against religious intolerance and opined that Asia should be freed from prison and that the charges against her should be

ASIA'S FAMILY

discarded.  Symptomatic of the Islamic bigotry that prevails in Pakistan, the outspoken governor, Salman Taseer, was assassinated by his own security detail.

Even Pakistan's minority affairs minister, Shabaz Bhatti, was shot down and killed by Muslim thugs determined to silence anyone speaking out for toleration in Pakistan.

In the meantime, Asia Bibi languishes in a squalid prison cell, subject to the barbarities of her Muslim captors.  A mother of 5 under sentence of death, Asia has kept up a strong affirmation of her faith while proclaiming that in no way did she blaspheme Mohamed.  Her family, which had frequently visited her, has now reportedly gone into hiding.  In prison, Asia has been assaulted by the police and is very much aware that other Christians  imprisoned for their beliefs in Pakistan have mysteriously died.

Christians in Pakistan, as is true for Christians in other Muslim countries, are openly discriminated against, denied decent employment opportunities and risk death for merely worshiping together.  Muslim clerics in Pakistan frequently place bounties on the heads of Christians who, for one reason or another, are considered to have disrespected Islam.

During 2013, more than 2,200 Christians were martyred, most of them at the hands of Muslim persecutors.  The persecution continues throughout the world, and Christians continue to suffer on many fronts.  Despite that, our own government continues in actively supporting authoritarian Muslim regimes.  Pakistan, for example, received more than 1.6 billion in aid during 2013 from the U.S., most of it in the form of military aid.  U.S. Christians should be asking just how much of that sum is going to support the persecution of their coreligionists.

Asia Bibi is a symbol of Christian fortitude and devotion, and we must nor forget her.  The least we can do is continue to call her plight to the attention of our own government and to bring pressure on the renegade Muslim government of Pakistan.

The email address of the Pakistani embassy in Washington is:  info@embassyofpakistanusa.org

Let us pray for Asia!

Deo Vindice!

God bless Texas and may the Lone Star State remain forever red!

posts

OF COURSE, IT MUST BE TRUE, JEWISH HISTORY AND THE NATION OF ISRAEL ONLY BEGAN IN THE MID-TWENTIETH CENTURY!

The widespread ignorance of history is appalling; but, even more deplorable, are efforts to rewrite history in pursuit of political goals, seeking to prey upon that ignorance

A prime example of such endeavors occurred last week, when the Arab League threw its considerable weight around to  suppress a UNESCO-sanctioned exhibit in Los Angeles.  The display, "People, Book, Land - The 3,500 Year Relationship of the Jewish People and the Land of Israel,"  was set to open tomorrow, January 20.  The Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles partnered with UNESCO to make the event possible. Israel, Canada and Montenegro had signed on as co-sponsors.  However, at the last minute, the Arab League used its influence in the U.N. to nix the exhibit, loudly proclaiming that it was a travesty of history.

That the Jewish exodus from Egypt began in the 14th century B.C. is usually not contested by sane people. Running on through history, the long-running process of the diaspora is generally viewed as beginning with the Babylonian Captivity in the 6th century B.C. , with the Jewish people being dispersed throughout the Middle East, Judea and Babylon.  By 63 B.C., Israel had become a Roman protectorate.  The revolt against Rome in 66 A.D. resulted in the destruction of Jerusalem. which eventually led to the Emperor Hadrian declaring Israel to be part of "Syria-Palestine" in 135 A.D..

Despite the diaspora, there continued to be a Jewish presence from the time of the Crusader states, running through centuries of Turkish rule, which ended with the First World War, when the Jewish population amounted to approximately 100,000.  The Jewish population was augmented during the British mandate (1917 - 1947) and after World War II, when Jewish refugees arrived from Europe and other war-torn areas of the world.  By 1947, the United Nations had given its approval to the nation of Israel, which was recognized by the U.S. in 1948.  Thus, to deny a Jewish presence in the area which comprises the nation of Israel in 2014 for a space of 3,500 years is nothing short of unhistorical.

The revision of history for political purposes is nothing new.  Not only have crank historians sought to deny the Jewish Holocaust, similar efforts, with the sanction of law, have been undertaken to blot from memory the slaughter of Christian Armenians in Turkey.  In Turkey, journalists and historians who have sought to raise the national consciousness of the Armenian holocaust  have fallen upon Turkish law, which bans any public mention of officially carried out atrocities against Armenians as an "insult against Turkishness."

Efforts to falsify history were well known in the former Soviet Union; and, today, Muslim nations such as Pakistan go all out to "Islamify" history while reviling perceived enemies such as India.  And even in 21st century France, official history is not without an effort to put a positive spin on French colonialism.

It goes without saying that George Orwell had it right:  "The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history."  Given the authoritarian nature of the regimes making up the Arab League, I am not surprised that this group would seek to quash any attempt of expression contrary to their official line.  What is surprising, though, is that there has been nary a peep of official disgust from our own government in the U.S.  Servants of Clio must redouble their efforts in serving their mistress.

Deo Vindice!

May God less Texas, and may the Lone Star State remain forever red!

AMERICA: IS OUR COLLAPSE IMMINENT?

BENEDETTO CROCE

All history is contemporary history.
         Benedetto Croce

The debt owed by the United States to China has now topped 1.3 trillion dollars. Money to service that debt amounts to tens of billions each year. That money, if left in the American economy, could be used to spur growth.  If China even hints at a lack of confidence in the ability of the U.S. to pay what is owed, interest rates rise and all Americans are affected.  Predictions are that the Chinese economy will surpass the American economy within a generation, and history shows that economic strength begets political power.

Perhaps the Chinese are much more patient in playing their waiting game than Americans would be; after all, Chinese history is replete with at least 24 dynasties dating back to before 2,000 B.C.  And, if history is a cyclical process, then the U.S. is very much a johnny-come-lately.

Just 4 years ago, Russian economist Igor Panarin was predicting the approaching fragmentation and break-up of the U.S.  The dollar, said Panarin, was based on nothing of substance.  Furthermore, American debt was picking up speed like an avalanche.  Such insane policies would see the demise of America as a great power, whose portion of time wielding global strength represents merely a tiny blip on the continuum of history

Benedetto Croce (1866 - 1952) was an Italian philosopher of the first-rank.  Croce proffered that all history was dependent on previous history; and, drawing on the 16th and 17th century historian Gianbattista Vico, concluded that human history was cyclical in nature.  That is to say that all of the major impulses that influence human endeavors run and return in inevitable cycles.

JARED DIAMOND

Examining failed societies in his COLLAPSE:  HOW SOCIETIES CHOOSE TO FAIL OR SUCCEED, UCLA professor Jared Diamond (1937 - ) looks at environmental factors, including environmental problems that are affecting present day human beings.  But, underlying all of the negative elements affecting societies, there is the human factor and how humans choose to address the problems they face.  For, when all is said and done, decisions determine outcomes and, ultimately, survival.

ARNOLD TOYNBEE

Much earlier, British historian Arnold Toynbee (1889 - 1975) published a multi-volume work, A STUDY OF HISTORY.  In arriving at his thesis, Toynbee expanded on the premises of German historian Otto Spengler, which saw history as a stair-step process, where progress is based on innovation and struggle. In this light, societies are like human organisms.  They go through life processes that may be likened to birth, childhood, adolescence, maturity, decline and obsolescence or death.  The key to remaining vibrant is the ability to meet new challenges with new solutions.  When societies habitually offer up old solutions to new challenges, then the road to ultimate  decline is embarked upon.

As we consider the present American state of affairs, it might be well to ponder as well our present leadership and in what direction our nation is going.  Are we truly being innovative in dealing with the challenges with which we are faced?  Is it true that innovation may delay any cyclical process leading to decline?  Are the decisions being made in our behalf arrived at after due consideration of all factors and undertaken with the best possible outcomes in mind?

Regrettably, I must conclude that those who now plot our course do so with old, drab and failed solutions and schemes.  Wherever we look in Europe, statism has failed.  Those societies which have limited freedom and liberty in behalf of bogus equality now reside in the dustbin of history.  We are the solution.  If we settle for leadership selling the snake-oil of failure, then we, in turn, receive the government and the leadership we deserve.  Is it possible for us  to determine to reverse our present disastrous course?  Or shall we conclude, as did Will and Ariel Durant, that the main thing we learn from history is that we don't learn very much from history?

Deo Vindice!

May God bless Texas, and may the Lone Star State remain forever red!

THE FRENCH TRIANGLE: IS IT REALLY SUCH A BIG DEAL?

THE FRENCH TRIANGLE

It sounds as though French president Francois Hollande has gotten himself between the proverbial rock and a hard place.  With a pregnant girlfriend and a hospitalized mistress., it is said that Monsieur Hollande will soon be making a decision as to which of the two ladies his heart belongs.

The interesting thing about the situation is that it is not getting that much attention on Hollande's home front, as the French are somewhat more casual about such circumstances.  Generally not known for prudishness, the French do have an established reputation for sexual laissez-faire. 

When I read of President Hollande's dilemma, I could not help but think there would be far more curiosity in the U.S. concerning the story.  Somehow, in the U.S., our so-called public-servants can remain credible despite serious shortcomings in all areas of life except marital and sexual fidelity.

Certainly, Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky  come to mind.  Their sad affair of infidelity had such a paralyzing effect that it succeeded in totally diverting attention from what should have been the great issues of the day and resulted in a disproportionate amount of time and energy being invested in the impeachment process. Could it be that our traditional Anglo-Saxon primness has led us to judge politicians based on fidelity, or the lack thereof?

Any number of completely incompetent buffoons may be singled out in Washington.  They are essentially do-nothings who enrich themselves at the cost of the taxpayers, while picking the pockets of various interest groups.  But they are not known to be philanderers, or, at least, they have yet to be caught in the act.

Oh, the marvelous things that our public servants in Congress can do with their PAC's!  All sorts of personal expenses may be written off to a PAC, and there are always official junkets and also special goodies and hand-outs from the lobbyists to be looked forward to.  Then one can always craft bills that will keep those funds flowing from all sorts of interest groups and lobbies.

When it comes to family, life in D.C. is nothing if it is not a family affair.  There are always the ways and means of getting parents, spouses, siblings, children and even cousins on any number of payrolls, if not directly paid for by the public servant, then paid by campaign committees and from family services rendered to special interests.

It must be admitted that, if a politician cannot keep his pants zippered, then that politician should not be applauded; however, I am of the opinion that genuine service and commitment to constituents and to the country should be judged as far more important than personal shortcomings, flings and pecodillos.

If impeachment proceedings were to be considered against a public figure, surely it would make better sense to base any such charges on actions that unreasonably endangered the lives of one's countrymen, that abused  power by unleashing the divisions of government against its citizens, that lessened the ability of the nation to defend itself and that permanently bound future generations to debt and national penury.  As citizens, let's focus on the real essence of public service and leave the other matters to the cerebrally-challenged who are drawn to the pages of National Enquirer and The Globe.

Deo Vindice!

God bless Texas, and may the Lone Star State remain forever red!

DECEPTION, INVEIGLING AND OBFUSCATION CONTINUE

Despite an anemic public opinion standing and growing distrust of presidential "promises," the administration in Washington continues on its merry way,  doing its best to ensnare as many Americans as possible in a growing web of government control.

Concerning the grotesquely  named Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the anticipated numbers of young people signing up have not materialized.  With the whole apparatus of O'Care hinging on legions of young and healthy people paying the way for the old and sick, the program is looking shakier and shakier.  Then, too, those who have enrolled are reportedly slow on the draw with payments.  But maybe that's the way this monstrosity was designed in the first place.

If insurance companies are left holding the bag on this scam, certain events will surely follow:

1.  The government will have to bail out the insurance companies.

2.  Taxes will be raised to facilitate the bailout.

3.  The cost of insurance will rise.

4.  Government, through another executive decree, will convert O'Care to a single-payer, government system, and our dear old government will just keep growing.  And, possibly, that was the desired outcome all along.

That's a scary outcome to ponder, isn't it?

From the Department of Justice comes word that a "non-partisan" investigator is set to dig into the IRS efforts to undermine conservative political groups.  The person chosen to carry out the inquiry is Ms. Barbara Bosserman, a DOJ trial attorney.  In addition to working at the DOJ, Ms. Bosserman is well known as an active Democrat, in fact one who has donated $6,500 to the campaigns of one Barack Hussein Obama.

Talk about the foxes guarding the hen-house, this must stand as a prime example.  If the stink of Washington corruption was not strong enough to be detected beyond the Potomac River, the Bosserman appointment will surely succeed in spreading the odor.

News has also finally gotten out that the president knew at the same time as the attack at Benghazi was taking place that the violent action which  was raging was, indeed,  an instance of well-planned terrorism.  Instead of authorizing immediate retaliatory action which might have saved the ill-fated Americans who would die there, the canard of an out-of-control demonstration was conceived. and a cover-up that included the American ambassador to the United Nations spreading the lie on national TV was commenced.  For sure, we have not seen the last of this deceptive episode; and, hopefully, if Congress can resurrect its intestinal fortitude and oppose the presidential assault on its prerogatives, we might have a chance of finally seeing the blame for this tragedy satisfactorily appropriated.

And, finally, as all of the propaganda about income inequality gets going, it might be well to remind our 44th president that a blow against the crony-capitalism that has spread throughout his administration would be a great equalizer as far as income is concerned.  But, apparently, that is not a part of the presidential plan.  A look backward in history reveals that, of those ideologies basing their actions on equalizing social and income status, there were always elites whose standing was in no way affected downward, while the great mass of the population experienced an equality of poverty, drabness, misery and fear.  As Will and Ariel Durant noted in THE STORY OF CIVILIZATION, the main thing that we learn from history is that we do not learn very much from history.

Deo Vindice!

God bless Texas, and may the Lone Star State remain forever red!

IN THE NAME OF ALL THAT IS RIGHT AND REASONABLE, TO WHAT SORT OF "LEADERSHIP" HAVE WE ENTRUSTED OUR COUNTRY?

AL-QAEDA ENTERS FALLUJAH

With the number of American dead and wounded in the Iraq and Afghan wars now numbering over 60,000, America has paid a terrible blood price in these two conflicts. Their cost in dollars has now topped 2 trillion, with 238 billion added in to service the resulting debt.  That cost will continue to rise precipitately to more than 4 trillion, owing to medical treatment for the wounded and replacement of war materiel.

And what, pray tell, has our nation gained from the sacrifice?  What do we say to the families who have lost their sons, daughters, fathers and mothers?  When all is said and done, why were these sacrifices made?  

SYRIAN CHRISTIAN MARTYRS TO AL-QAEDA 

As our valiant troops return to a country seemingly preoccupied with issues as to how our society will order itself and what lifestyles will be acceptable, the enemies they fought, despite presidential assurances to the contrary, now appear to be resurgent  in both Iraq and Afghanistan.  In Afghanistan, the Taliban has bided its time and now appears poised to topple the America- supported corrupt Karzai regime, while in Iraq al-Qaeda is gobbling up territory that once had been liberated by American forces.  And, in Syria al-Qaeda, leading rebel forces, is on the verge of  defeating the Assad regime.

On the home front, an inordinate amount of energy now goes into what are considered the overriding questions of the day, which at one time would have been considered peculiar and even absurd. Shall we institute gender-neutral restrooms?  Should the compulsion of the state be resorted to in insuring that same-sex marriage becomes the law of the land?  Is it correct to compel Americans to participate in a government-run health insurance scheme which is making medical care less affordable and less available, and, for all practical purposes, is a blow against the religious scruples of certain faiths and individuals?  Is it proper for the state to participate in aborting the unwanted children of its citizens?  Shall all references to God be removed in all areas in which the state interacts with the people?  Must we insure that incomes considered inequitable by the state be subsidized by the minority of citizens who work and are productive?  Does our southern border exist solely to be violated by those who desire to illegally enter our country, and must we accommodate those individuals with amnesty once they have settled in?  That these 

OBSESSION ON THE HOME-FRONT

questions result in such division and discord is symptomatic of both the lack of leadership and the grave malady of cerebral paralysis affecting American society today.

That a great nation should indefinitely squander its vitality in the consideration of inane issues while recklessly wasting its blood and treasure in conflicts in which no benefits rebound to its citizens is untenable.  That we have become a laughing stock on the international scene, owing to policies of ignorance and accommodation that reflect the twin poisons of domestic political correctness and multiculturalism, is something that has cost us friends and bolstered our enemies.  Simply put, a great power cannot long sustain its standing and distinction with leadership that seems bound and determined to bring societal decline and chaos crashing down on the heads of  those it is charged to defend.

The disintegration of America seems well underway.  Rather than a people with a common culture, we are fast becoming a melange of competing bantustans, with little or no ability to articulate commonalities.  No matter our finances being in tatters, we drearily proceed down the path of class warfare and envy, with even more division, seemingly oblivious to the eventual downfall that our actions could cause.  As John Adams said, "...democracy soon wastes and murders itself.  There never was a democracy  that did not commit suicide."   And, as we fret and fray, those who seek our demise become even bolder in their denunciations.

Recently, abu-Mohamed al-Joulhani, al-Qaeda's leader in Syria, boasted that not only were his jihadis about to conclude their campaign in Syria that would bring them to power in Damascus,  but that  they were also engaging in directly exporting their terror tactics to America.  And that might not have been an idle boast, as numerous American Muslims have been known to come and go and participate in the Syrian war.  What better time could there be for more terror attacks in America?  With an obvious leadership vacuum and a growing tendency toward societal fragmentation, jihadis likely see a great opportunity to speed the process.   May we be awake to the challenge!

Deo Vindice!

God bless Texas, and may the Lone Star State remain forever red!

THE AMERICAN STUDIES ASSOCIATION AND THE TRENDY ANTI-SEMITISM OF THE LEFT

Although I spent many years laboring in the vineyards of Academe, I had never heard of something called the American Studies Association until recently, although it bills itself as "...the largest and oldest organization devoted to the interdisciplinary study of American history and culture." I suppose that's just as well, because, from recent actions, it would appear that the group is composed of individuals who appear intent on following the latest rash and injudicious trends in what passes as higher education in America.

In its recent national convocation, the American Studies Organization called for an academic boycott of Israeli Universities, supposedly because of discrimination against Palestinians.  I find that more than a little odd, as Israeli universities admit students without reference to race, gender, ethnicity or creed.  With an Israeli-Arab population amounting to approximately 20% of the whole, Israeli universities have an Arab enrollment of around 14%.  In addition, official policies call for efforts to bring into the university fold more Israelis of Arab ethnicity.  

Any criticism of percentages of ethnic groups represented in Israeli higher education should take note of a cultural disparity which, perhaps, affects numbers attracted to higher education.  A most striking contrast is that, as Nobel Prize laureates, Jews have claimed 193 of the prizes, while Arabs have received 9.  Historically, Arab scholarship tended to lag after a high point in the Middle Ages, and it has only been since the 1960's that Arab oil states began to pour petrodollars into higher education.  

Having spent a number of years living in the Middle East in a country controlled by an absolute monarch, I am well aware that, of all the countries of the region, Israel possesses the only governing structure in which democratic institutions prevail.  If one seeks an open and free press in the area, only Israel can come close to this type of free expression.  If one looks for a land where basic rights for women are honored and enshrined in law, only Israel can qualify.  To bring the point home further, it was only in 1962, for example, that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia abolished slavery.   To generalize, those states surrounding Israel are not noted for promoting liberty and freedom. On the contrary, they are, for the most part, despotisms, theocracies, dictatorships and absolute monarchies, which have purged themselves of their Jewish populations.  In contrast, 59 Israeli- Arabs  have occupied seats in the Knesset, the Israeli parliament.

Looked at in comparison with surrounding Arab states, Israeli-Arabs fare much better than their neighbors.  Since Israel became an independent state in 1948, the lifespan for Israeli-Arabs has increased by 27%.  Recent studies show that Israeli-Arabs have improved their pass rate on exams qualifying them to enter universities from 26% in 2001 to 31% in 2012.  From 1990 to 2013, the percentage of Arab Israeli men having 13 or more years of education rose from 14% to 24%, a gain of 10%.  Arab-Israeli men, aged 25 to 64, show an employment rate of 71%, despite a drastic drop after age 45.  Lastly, the infant mortality rate for Israeli Arabs is 6.8 per 1,000, as compared to 3 for the Jewish population; however the Israeli-Arab figure surpasses that of rates in surrounding Arab countries.

As scholars with  what possibly could be construed as enlightened minds, it would appear that a far better strategy for the American Studies Association would be one of engagement.  If the ladies and gentlemen of the group are so convinced that Israel is the major  transgressor of peace and freedom in the Middle East, then it would seem that traditional American academic freedom would lead to a forum of open inquiry and dialogue.  Hopefully, the members of the association are aware that academic freedom was once the sine qua non of intellectual life in our nation.  However, given the dominance that the left now wields in higher education, any such assumption may not be accurate.

Finally, hypocrisy - at least in this instance - seems to have overcome good judgement in the American Studies Association.  I would hazard a guess that most ASA members have never traveled, much less lived, in the Middle East.  For most of them, too, their discipline of American studies would connote little academic familiarity with the region.  For starters, it might be a good idea for these savants to use some of their extended sabbatical time for some Middle Eastern studies and travel.  What the research from such efforts, honestly undertaken, could reveal might possibly serve to open certain minds.

Deo Vindice!

May God bless Texas, and may the Lone Star State remain forever red!

LIFT HIGH THE CROSS!

Lift high the cross,
The love of Christ proclaim,
Till all the world,
Adore his sacred name.

Oh, Lord, once lifted,
On the glorious tree.
As thou hast promised,
Draw the world to thee!

Driving through the town in which I live, I have often thought it would be a tremendous task to count the multitude of churches that one encounters.  There are Roman Catholic churches by the dozens and all sorts of mainline Protestant churches and innumerable churches readily identifiable as fundamentalist or evangelical.  Thus far, I have sighted only one structure bearing a crescent moon, which, by all indications, is a mosque.

By any gauge, America must still be deemed a Christian nation.  The Judeo-Christian tradition was planted early and deeply in the nation's consciousness, and it still resonates profoundly with the great mass of Americans.  Yet, one would never imagine that by virtue of what is encountered in American popular culture, the media and the nation's intellectual life.  

I once heard a sermon by a Catholic priest who opined that Christians should welcome the ridicule and opprobrium heaped upon them by hostile sources, for the Church has had its finest hours in environments considered  unfavorable to it.  Accordingly, I often think these days of the words of that priest; and, as one who worships in the Anglican tradition, I often think, too, of a recessional hymn heard often in that tradition, "Lift High the Cross."

If there was ever a time when Christians should be lifting high the cross, it is now.  Throughout the world, Christians are subjected to the worst sorts of persecutions, daily suffering pain and death for their faith.  Yet, in my own country and despite the denigration of a largely pagan popular culture,  American Christians continue unthinkingly to accept implicitly that religious freedom may be taken for granted.  At the same time, their incomprehension that the religion they profess is the most widely persecuted faith in the world is abetted by clergy so afraid of controversy that they fail to even mention the cataclysm of persecution in their sermons.

Although reluctant to be mistaken for a broken record, I have written time and time again from a perspective shaped by several years of residing in the Middle East, for it was there that I came face to face with the type of  rigidity and intolerance that can make an openly-lived Christian life a dangerous proposition.  Yet, despite the danger, persecuted Christians around the world continue to lift high the cross.

It is ironic that those entering the U.S., hailing from traditions of a monolithic/ideological framework and presumably immigrating in order to benefit from American freedoms and economic opportunity, do not deign to speak out when their coreligionists in other lands openly persecute individuals aligned with other religious traditions.     However, I remember well when Christians and other non-Muslims spoke out vigorously in objecting to Serbs who called themselves Christians persecuted Muslims in Bosnia.  As a Christian who objects to religious persecution regardless against whom it is exercised, I deplore the Islamic double-standard.

In contrast to the message of Christian love and forgiveness, wherever Islam prevails, it does so with compulsion and brute-force.  In place of viewing Islam as a religion, in many ways it is more proper  to see it as an ideological system, which has as its nucleus the audacity to claim that it should determine how life in its totality should be lived, prescribing  principles to be followed in economics, politics, hygiene, sex, law, family life, worship and and in virtually all areas of objective human reality.

Although it is out of keeping with the new orthodoxy of political-correctness to say it, it cannot be disputed that Christians, throughout their history, have taken the lead in fighting against human bondage, wage-slavery, child abuse and other forms of inequality and oppression.  No, America, those evils were not overcome in any setting by "progressives," leftists, communists, fascists and any other political extremists being in the forefront of opposition.  

Too often, I find that Christians in America, perhaps because of an unfettered popular culture of atheism and agnosticism which specializes in sensational attacks on the Church, seem embarrassed to acknowledge their faith.  Not only does this "head-in-the-sand" attitude lend a degree of legitimacy to those who would like nothing better than to see the ruin of Christianity, it also affects how we order our political life and conduct ourselves on the international stage.

That we have a president who cannot or will not speak out against the persecution of Christians speaks volumes about what we have allowed to transpire in a nation that has traditionally prided itself as being the leading defender of the world's oppressed people.  To prefer to court favor with Muslim tyrants and despots, rather than to decry the persecution of religious minorities in their beknighted  lands, smacks of moral and intellectual cowardice unbecoming  of our great Republic. As an American, I am very much ashamed.

Those of us who are Americans and call ourselves Christians must not be fearful.  If we believe in a risen Lord and Savior, we have nothing to fear.  We must not be apologetic.  And, if we are to honor the almost 2,200 Christian martyrs who gave up their lives throughout the world in 2013, mostly at the hands of Muslim persecutors, we must LIFT HIGH THE CROSS.

Deo Vindice!

God bless Texas, and may the Lone Star State remain forever red!

WHITHER THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS?

With much fanfare in the offing concerning "promise zones" as a solution to the lingering problem of poverty in America, it is to be hoped that, somehow, the challenges facing the great American middle class do not get lost in the shuffle.

It was no so long ago that a common assumption was that one could gain employment with a corporation and, after a career of 35 or 40 years, receive an adequate pension, complemented by Social Security, and be set for life.  Such expectations, except perhaps for government workers, are no longer valid.

American society is unique in its trust in the principle that a growing middle class will sustain its dominant position in the world; however, 21st century America is vastly different from its historical counterpart of 50 years ago, and American dominance, along with middle class standing, is no longer to be taken for granted.  In fact, a continuing decline of middle class standards of living may very well presage a parallel decline of American global prestige and power.

In terms of dollars adjusted for inflation, the average middle class family of 2013 was $4,000 poorer than its equivalent in 2000.  And this is a trend that has been building since the 1980's.  With the advent of emphasis on a global economy and a redirection toward service and knowledge-based industries, American corporations have been restructuring in various ways to promote efficiency.  And, quite frequently, the restructuring has adversely affected the middle class.  In re-engineering corporate structure, value has increased; but, to be sure, that value did not benefit a slimmed-down workforce, which, more often than not, was now expected to reinvent itself periodically in order to remain competitive and employed.

The theoretical basis of American capitalism has seen a sea-change from the 1950's and 60's to the 21st century.  This transformation of thought has moved from a time in which prominence was given to the maintenance of a loyal, long-standing workforce to one in which dividends for stockholders and the availability of more stock options for management became overriding concerns.  In the process, management began a sharp reversal in what tenure, benefits and remuneration could be expected by its employees.

Consequently, the middle class has been squeezed by traditional pension funds being replaced by IRAs and 401(k)s, while shouldering  increasingly heavy tax burdens.  Concurrently, with government schemes driving up the cost of health care and employers jettisoning employer-provided health insurance, the future for the American middle class does not appear to be appreciably brighter.

The assumption that there would be continuous upward mobility in America came crashing down with the housing bubble preceding the great recession.  To suppose that those who were significantly below the median could be expected to maintain even sub-prime mortgages and somehow be elevated into the middle class proved to be a disastrous fallacy and an even greater economic blunder, inasmuch as it would be the middle class that would suffer the greatest consequences of resulting economic decline.

America is now at a crossroads.  It is obvious that our society is much the worse for moving in a direction in which there are two segments of America, one thriving  while the other falters.  On one hand, we have a government which places great store in an ideology of redistribution.  But a study of the outcomes of redistributionist efforts throughout history is far from encouraging, as they invariably waste  resources and remove assets from economies  On the other hand, those who are considered to be of a more economically conservative bent would favor free-market solutions.  And, indeed, capitalism does grow economies and promote efficiency, but clearly, under the current circumstances, there are no guarantees that a rising economic tide will lift all of our societal boats.

As a nation, we have a history of performing best when we are challenged.  At present, all too many of us seem not to recognize the seriousness of the economic challenges facing us.  In short, we are distracted by the false rhetoric of elements that would seek to disunite us with flawed cries for the equality of first one cause or segment of our population and then another.  Somehow, anger has superseded reason and common sense, bringing on an even larger sense of frustration.  Only when our challenges become apparent to the greater part of the whole, will we have the potential to recognize the necessity of undertaking innovative measures to preserve our middle class and, thus, to preserve a dominant role for America in the world. In the meantime, we cannot afford the luxury of unlimited concessions and expenditures to assuage shortcomings perceived by disparate parties.  Our future is too important to be lost and sacrificed on an altar of political correctness and multiculturalism. 

Deo Vindice!

God bless Texas, and may the Lone Star State remain forever red!

THE 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE "WAR ON POVERTY:" ENOUGH BANG FOR THE BUCKS?

LBJ UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL WITH APPALACHIAN POVERTY

The great promise-breaker who famously pledged that if Americans liked their health plans and doctors they would be free to keep them under Obamacare, is now ironically touting "Promise Zones," or economic incentive areas within regions of the U.S. marked by poverty and income inequality.

Along with tax breaks for job-producing businesses willing to locate in the proposed zones, new training programs would also be developed to turn out workers capable of staffing new enterprises.

It so happens that today marks the 50th anniversary of the initiation of President Lyndon B. Johnson's "Great Society" programs, in which the Johnson administration committed itself to waging an all-out war on poverty in the U.S.

In 1964, with the commencement of Johnson's anti-poverty efforts, there were 350,000 Americans receiving food-stamps.  Today the number of recipients has risen to 46 million.  Government statisticians in 1964 reckoned that 15% of Americans fell below the poverty line.  In 2013 the same percentage still holds true.

Each year approximately 900 billion dollars is budgeted for programs associated with the Great Society. Despite that expenditure, poverty has not been eradicated, and the war to rid our country of indigence continues unabated.

One of the most highly vaunted of Great Society programs is Head Start, which got underway in 1965.  Since that time, the kindergarten-readiness efforts for at-risk children have cost tax-payers somewhere in the neighborhood of 180 billion dollars.  During the last fiscal year alone, Head Start was budgeted at 8 billion.

The Department of Health and Human Services undertook a study on the effectiveness of Head Start, which was finally released at the end of 2012.  What the report had to say was not especially encouraging.  The follow-up of a cohort of third-graders who had gone through Head Start did not reveal any appreciable gains in cognitive ability associated with math, reading and language.   In terms of social skills, the group was not as advanced as their peers who had not experienced Head Start.  If this portion of the HHS study is any indication, the billions that have been spent on Head Start do not appear to have been a good investment. Nevertheless, our representatives in Congress who hoped to improve the program felt that the best way to do so was to appropriate more money for fiscal year 2013.

As is too often the case, money does not serve as a cure-all for societal ills, which in many cases are deeply-rooted in long-standing cultural factors.  Daniel Patrick Moynihan's seminal study in the 1960's, which accurately predicted that government programs not well thought out would serve as wrecking-balls for the family unit, should be required reading for our representatives in Congress.  And, without intact families, the pathology of poverty cannot do other than to become firmly implanted in segments of American society that have been thought to make up a permanent dependent class for at least 3 generation.

Before any further increase of expenditures for poverty-fighting programs occurs, perhaps sustained efforts to curtail abuse of the system should be considered.  For a start, here are just a few suggestions:

1.  Government benefits must be limited to American citizens and legal residents.

2.  Illegal immigration must be totally curtailed.

3.  Efforts to establish eligibility for those who have felony drug convictions must be tightened, and drug testing should be undertaken for all recipients.

4.  More "workfare" must be injected in the system, and minimal public service should be expected of recipients able to work.

5.  Minimal co-payments should be a part of subsidized childcare in order to engender a sense of  responsibility and involvement on the part of recipients.

6.  It should in all cases be determined if applicants are carried as dependents on the tax returns of others.

All in all, the success rate of government poverty programs has not been a good one.  In a time of increasing federal deficits, it should be expected that our "public servants" should move with extreme caution in committing taxpayers to further expenditures to combat poverty without due consideration of the factors involved in explaining why those mired in poverty in 2013 account for basically the same percentage of the population as those Americans similarly affected in 1964.  If growing the government and producing more and more bureaucratic plans would provide all the answers for a successful war on poverty, doesn't it stand to reason that the poverty rate of 15%, which has remained constant since 1964, should have moved downward over 50 years?

Deo Vindice!

God bless Texas, and may the Lone Star State remain forever red!

A NEW PURITANISM ARISES: THE HYPOCRITICAL MORAL INDIGNATION OF THE LEFT

My ancestor, Captain Charles Barham, fled Puritanism in the 1650's.  Settling in Virginia, Charles became a sheriff and an Anglican vestryman in Surrey County. As a former officer in the King's Horse who had served Charles I, it can well be imagined that it was the intention of Charles Barham to keep as much distance as possible between himself and the Puritans of New England.

Establishing a "dominion of righteousness," the Puritans of New England engaged in hypocrisy of the worst sort.  A society which sought to correct supposed moral deficiencies by the means of the dunking-stool and the whipping post, New England divines presided over their communities in much the same way as those who had authority over the Inquisition in Spain.  Determining what was good and what was evil, the power of the state was coopted to enforce correctness in conduct, expression and feelings.  And lest we forget, Puritan captains led the way in the trade that established slavery in the colonies. In effect, the establishment of an authoritarianism of hypocrisy negatively affected every corner of life, resulting in an aggregate of human beings existing in officially- sanctioned drabness and monotony.

As I consider the Puritan excesses which ended up driving my ancestor from southeastern England in the 17th century, my mind runs to the political correctness which has taken hold in the America of the 21st century.  Nearly everywhere one turns, conformity is demanded by the proponents of a new form of Puritanism, which labels nonconformists as "racists," "homophobes" and "ignoramuses."  Just as Charles Barham sought to avoid 17th century Puritans, so I seek to avoid the new Puritans.   Avoidance, however, is becoming more difficult, as the orthodoxy of the new Puritanism is prevalent throughout the worlds of art, entertainment  and education, and has even spread throughout the 3 branches of our government.

The hypocrisy of the new Puritanism is easily perceived from many views.  Most recently, it was on full display through a cable TV network which  sees itself as a voice of "progressivism,"but for the life of me I cannot imagine what might be progressive about the inanity of the chatter which proceeds from this channel's programming.  However, I fear that I digress.

The network in question is MSNBC, and in the instance to which I m referring a panel of so-called progressives was presided over by a young lady named Melissa Harris-Perry, who purportedly occupies a chair in the Department of Government at Tulane University, which is located in New Orleans.

Led by Professor Harris- Perry, the panel began in most indelicate ways to ridicule the fact that former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has an African-American grandchild. Seeking to follow Professor Harris-Perry's lead and to engage in anti-Republican tirades,  the panelists used a Romney family photograph to lambast the paucity of blacks in Republican ranks. That such racialist diatribes spewed forth is bad enough, but even more peculiar is  that, with a black father and a white Mormon mother, Professor Harris- Perry herself comes from a racially-mixed family.

With a professional background of several decades of experience in the halls of Academe, I remember a time not so long ago when academicians expressed themselves in much more polite terms.  In fact, one of the pleasures of my student days was to engage in dialogue with those of differing persuasions until the wee hours.  We did not cast aspersions on each other, neither did we consider it appropriate to malign competing ideological or philosophical points of view with racist appeals or epithets.  Professor Harris-Perry's presence on a network known for such bad taste merely serves to illustrate the sad state of affairs characterizing too much of higher education in 21st century America.

A CLASS ACT AND ONE NOT SO CLASSY

Hopefully, Ms. Harris-Perry will have learned something from this experience.  She has publicly apologized, and Governor Romney graciously accepted the apology.  Hopefully, too, Ms. Harris-Perry will not be fired for her lack of propriety and good manners.  To lead a crusade to crucify her would smack too much of the recent GLAAD effort to silence Duck Dynasty Patriarch Phil Robertson.  Although, Robertson's words could be considered crude, his remarks were solicited by a progressive journalist, who should have known from what direction Robertson would be coming.  Besides, MSNBC has stated that it has a review board which examines content before airings.  If this is true, then the network was very much aware of how the dialogue with Ms. Harris-Perry and her panelists would flow.

With a stable of talking-heads on the order of Chris Matthews, nothing proceeding from MSNBC should be shocking.  Just a few weeks ago, after Sarah Palin figuratively compared our growing national debt to a form of slavery, Palin was verbally savaged by an MSNBC talk-show personality by the name of Martin Bashir.  For rational human beings, Palin's point that future generations of Americans would find themselves in a type of  debt slavery to China and other nations which have facilitated our government's spendthrift ways was a point well-taken.  However,  attempting to link any "non-progressive" view to racism, Mr. Bashir began to forge a link between Governor Palin's comments and the antebellum variety of the peculiar institution, going so far as to recommend that someone, following an antebellum punishment visited upon uncooperative slaves, should defecate and urinate in the former Alaska governor's mouth.  This was too much even for the MSNBC management staff, as Mr. Bashir was subsequently relieved of his responsibilities at the network.

It is a fact, I am afraid, that racism - or, I  should say bogus charges of racism - drives too many agendas in the U.S. these days.  In effect, "racism" has entered into a politically-correct tandem with "homophobia" to distort, distract and otherwise to drown out alternative points of view.  In quashing legitimate opposition, political-correctness has created an illegitimate orthodoxy which is highly reminiscent  of the doublespeak which has prevailed under communist and fascist dictatorships.  It is all about how one applies certain words.  For example, we hear such words as "multiculturalism" and "diversity" these days; and, to the unthinking individual, they may sound commendable and grand.  But, within the context of 21st century political-correctness, such language may very well connote a Puritan-like exclusion of differing ideas and opinions.  It is more than a little sobering to think that the land to which my 17th century ancestor fled is today succumbing to a mindset similar to that from which he took flight.

Deo Vindice!

God bless Texas, and may the Lone Star State remain forever red!

INCOME INEQUALITY AS AN ISSUE? DON'T MAKE ME LAUGH!

As a diversionary tactic, the failure-plagued administration now in power in Washington appears to be cranking up the faux-issue of income inequality.  However,  let us not forget what happens when government attempts to make individuals equal.  We don't have to go back too far to recall the abortive effort to put people into mortgages that they obviously could not afford.  Consequently, the bursting housing bubble was one gigantic factor in the onset of the Great Recession.  And, more recently, government schemes to facilitate access to health insurance give every appearance of continuing to drive up the costs of health care while compounding unemployment.  If O' Care is allowed to stand, its disastrous effects will continue to be felt for generations.

As for income equality, there are no finer models than North Korea and Cuba.  But, of course, while nearly everybody in those countries shares the misery of deprivation, the political elites live lives of luxury and indulgence.

In one way, it was welcome news that  socialist Bill "Lefty"de Blasio won the recent mayoral election in New York City.  If the new mayor puts his leftist ideology into play, it is practically guaranteed that, within 3 years, New York will be rotting away at its core, serving as an example of how not to govern a city.  Incredibly, New York could be on the way to joining Detroit, where the push for equality totally overwhelmed opportunity, consequently producing an urban basket- case of the first magnitude.

Doctrinaire "progressives"  just seem never to learn.  A case in point is Texas, where the state economy, based on a low-tax, moderate regulation concept,  has led the national economy for the last decade.  Would Andrew Cuomo or Jerry Brown ever be so bold as to  look to Rick Perry and his state government for pointers?  You can bet your bottom dollar that they would never stoop so low, preferring to wallow in the leftist marinades that have cost their states their once elevated positions of financial, commercial and manufacturing dominance.  For most reasonable human beings, it would stand to reason that, if out of the top six cities in which to do business in America  five of the cities are in Texas, then something of value might be learned from the Lone Star State.  But, to reiterate, those calling themselves progressives are usually downright lacking when it comes to giving up ideology for practicality.

As for Americans and income, the average annual household income in the U.S. has been dropping for the last 10 years.  In that regard, we hit our peak in 2007, when the figure reached $55,400; but, since that time the number has dropped to slightly more than $50,000.  Given the economy of the last 6 years, it is quite understandable how that decline took place.

If we look at the U.S. from a global perspective, the U.S. would be almost in the middle of any spectrum of income inequality.  Those nations where income inequality is greatest are leftist paradises in the Southern Hemisphere, Muslim despotisms, Third World dictatorships and emerging economies.  In terms of countries where incomes would be judged to be most equitable, such are more likely to be found in homogeneous, socialist countries in northern Europe. However, on both extremes of such an income continuum, opportunity for economic advancement would be lagging badly.

It should be kept in mind, too, that income inequality in the U.S. is a cultural thing.  Asian-Americans, for example, lead Americans of all ethnic stripes, with an average household income of more than $65,000, while the African-American average comes in at $32,000.

It should be pointed out that, during the last 45 years, only the top 5% of income earners in America have shown real growth in average incomes.  However keep in mind too, that the top 10% of earners pay 71% of all income taxes.  Looked at more broadly, 32% of our population - and that segment is laboring in the private sector - supports 68%  of the total population, which would include salaries for government workers and benefits for those who cannot work because of handicaps, the unemployed and the increasing numbers of individuals who do not wish to work. Stated succinctly, too few in our society are already paying the way for too many.

 An average household income of around $50,000 would work out to a rate of around $137 for every day of the year.  But, from the standpoint of welfare, a recent U.S. Senate budget report informs us that the total of welfare benefits received during the last fiscal year - composed of cash benefits, food stamps, housing assistance, children's benefits and medical care, along with the cost of administration - works out to an average daily expenditure of 168.00 for 352 days a year, or a per-hour average of nearly $30.

In terms of expenditures to hold up the bottom sector of society, the U.S. should not be expected to do more.  In fact, there is much fat to be cut.  Where we are failing is in producing equality of opportunity.  Clearly, the present system fails badly in that regard.  In many ways, the work ethic that built our country is being abandoned in favor of socialist strategies that inevitably lead to penury and ruin, and the issue of income inequality is no different in that regard.  To pile on the cost of further bolstering the incomes of non-productive elements would surely further the damage that has already been done to a country that, from its inception, has been seen as the land offering the most opportunity in the history of the world.  Let us not talk of income inequality, but, instead, let us consider how equality of opportunity may be advanced.

Deo Vindice!

May God bless Texas, and may the Lone Star State remain forever red!

THE WASHINGTON MONEY GAME: THE ONGOING WHEEL OF FORTUNE

Several years ago, while flying to an interview, I had the occasion to sit in economy class next to an Iowa congressman.  Having recognized the congressman from TV interviews relating to the Clinton impeachment, I struck up a conversation, saying that somehow I did not expect to find a congressman in economy class.  The gentleman's reply was more than a little surprising, as he stated that he felt it would be inappropriate, representing a middle class district, to travel first class.  Later in the flight, he revealed that he was leaving Congress, declining to run for another term.

When I asked the congressman why he did not choose to stand for re-election, he further astonished me by saying that he, in essence,  had had his fill of Washington, its lobbyists, its  money-grubbing, its bureaucrats and his unprincipled colleagues.  To say that this man's failure to return to  Congress was a great loss is an understatement.

For income and education levels, the D.C. area has now surpassed Silicon Valley and 5th Avenue.  If you want to follow the money, there are no better trails than those that lead to Great Falls, Virginia; Chevy Chase, Maryland; Fairfax Station, Virginia; Potomac, Maryland; McLean, Virginia and Georgetown, D.C. That these areas should stand out as abundantly affluent is easy to understand:  With a constantly expanding federal government,  your tax monies flow continuously to the nation's capital; and, consequently, the flow has created a gold rush of individuals, in one way or another, seeking to cash in.

Such a state of affairs would seem to be a cogent argument for term-limits.  But, somehow, any efforts to limit congressional longevity always seem to get derailed.  Instead, business goes on as usual.  Lobbyists persist in gaining favors with their enticements, backs habitually are scratched, and bureaucrats carry on with undecipherable regulations, obscuring the intent of laws passed by Congress.

It has always seemed peculiar that Tea Partiers have been wildly maligned and castigated, and some of the worst of aspersions have been cast by numerous congressional stalwarts, who have branded the Tea Party as a hot-bed of bigotry and racism.  Strangely, the Tea Party sympathizers that I have encountered have been anything but racists and bigots.  For the most part, they have been Americans who love their country and wish to contain unrestrained government spending and the resulting deficits.

It is also easy to understand why members of Congress have not been effective in whittling down spending and, with it, our national debt.  After all, if the spigot is turned back, money will not continue to flow in such copious amounts. Retired bureaucrats will not be able to engage in side businesses that specialize in interpreting and facilitating compliance to the law for business and industry, and law-makers will miss out on opportunities coming their way via lobbyists.

Yes, dear readers, for many in our Congress, life in D.C. has become one big family affair.  A quick check of who is on whose payroll in Washington is astounding.  A plethora of sons, daughters, siblings and cousins, all very well compensated, extends from congressional offices through lobbying firms and campaign committees.  Thus, political alliances are cemented, dynasties are perpetuated and families enriched.

Two of the most powerful families in Washington are the Reids of Nevada and the Blunts of Missouri. Each of these families, one Democrat and the other Republican, has prospered beyond the wildest dreams of most Americans.

Senate Majority leader Reid has parlayed his alliances in Reno and Las Vegas into a family business based on influence and contacts.  All three of the Reid sons are experienced lobbyists, who are known in Washington as "go-to guys" when it comes to  cutting the red-tape of government.  In many ways, Majority Leader Reid presides over the family and its concerns like an oriental potentate, accepting the plaudits of high-rollers wanting to do business the Nevada way.  The Reid progeny have scored millions of dollars in retainers in catering to the requirements of land-development, gaming and mining.  Fund-raising has also revolved around these activities, and Senator Harry Reid, literally coming up from abject poverty, is one of the richest Washingtonians.     

On the other side of the aisle sits Senator Roy Blunt of Missouri.  Originally from southwest Missouri,  Blunt has been a county clerk, a Missouri secretary of state, a majority-whip congressman, a U.S. senator and even the president of a small Baptist college.  One of Blunt's sons, Matt, was a one-term Missouri governor.  Roy Blunt learned fast and well the political skills which have established his family as a power to be reckoned with in Missouri.  A master of the use of Political Action Committees (PACs), Blunt was able to spread money throughout Missouri Republican organizations, which in turn  did much to fuel Matt Blunt's campaign for governor.  Although younger brother Andy Blunt and sister Amy Blunt were registered lobbyists, they played key roles in Matt's campaign.  All three, Matt, Andy and Amy, are now working the D.C. corridors of power as lobbyists.  In his senatorial campaign of 2009, Roy Blunt was adamant that Thompson Communications should have a healthy chunk of his advertising budget, despite son Andy being a senior adviser to Thompson, Nevertheless, Andy  served as campaign manager for his dad, and Thompson Communications got almost 7 million dollars of advertising revenues.

The two foregoing examples will give the reader an approximation of what goes on in D.C.  They represent, however, only the smallest of parts of how the money game is played.  For an in-depth look at how money affects our Congress, there is no better source than Peter Schweizer's new book, Extortion:  How Politicians Extract Your Money, Buy Votes and Line Their Own Pockets: Houghton Mifflin, 2013.  I am certain that Schweizer would agree with Lou Dobbs, who used to say, "We have the best government that money can buy."

As for us, the constituents, we must be eternally vigilant, determined to rid our institutions of "public servants" who wish only to serve themselves.  We must be well informed, qualified to make good decisions, and  we must return worthy representatives to the deliberative bodies of OUR government.  To do otherwise would be to shortchange the ideals of the founders of the American Republic.

Deo Vindice!

God bless Texas, and may the Lone Star State remain forever red!

VLADIMIR ANNOUNCES HIS INTENTION TO "ANNIHILATE" MUSLIM BOMBERS: WILL RUSSIA SERVE AS AN EXAMPLE FOR THE REST OF EUROPE?

THE VOLGOGRAD TRAIN STATION

Just in time to instill fear for the 2014 Winter Games in Russia, Muslim suicide bombers went to work in Volgograd on December 29th & 30th, killing at least 34 individuals in attacks on a train station and a trolley car.

Speaking in Volgograd, Russian president Vladimir Putin stated he was certain that his government would "..fiercely and consistently fight the terrorists until their complete annihilation."

From the early 8th century incursion into Iberia by Tariq al-Ziyad, Muslims have fancied that one day Europe would be theirs.  Despite military setbacks at Tours in 732 and Vienna in 1683, the dream of Islamic domination of Europe did not cease to tantalize the followers of Prophet Mohammed.

FRANKISH MAYOR OF THE PALACE CHARLES MARTEL AT TOURS

Just as the likes of Charles Martel at Tours and Polish king John Sobieski at Vienna turned back  Muslim invasions, 20th century Muslim armies, determined to eradicate the Jewish state of Israel, found themselves checkmated by the Western-backed Israeli Defense Forces and the daring leadership of officers like Moshe Dayan. Thus, with experience as a hard task-master, radical Islam eventually fell into a 3-pronged strategy that may be likened to cradles, bombs and oil.

In 1990, there were 30 million Muslims in Europe.  By 2011, that number had swelled to 44 million. Current demographic projections have it  that there will be 60 million Muslims in Europe by 2030.

Samuel Huntington's Clash of Civilizations (1993)  traced for readers how, in abutting European regions, Islam has, from its origins, been belligerent and conquest- oriented.  And now, with millions of Muslims on-site in the cradle of Western civilization, the Islamic cradle appears poised to overwhelm the West.

The late Libyan dictator Muarmar Ghadafi once opined that Islam would eventually prevail in Europe, but not by the sword.  A burgeoning Muslim population would overwhelm Western governments and traditions, and Islamic law and government would be instituted.

Despite his reputation of being somewhat unstable, Ghadafi might not have been far off the mark with his prediction.  With Muslim women in Europe bearing an average of 2.3 children and non-Muslim women bearing 1.5 offspring, it is clear that the Muslim population, especially when augmented by European conversions to Islam and continuing immigration, will outstrip non-Muslim population.  Converts to Islam in France, the U.K. and Germany are presently in the range of 300,000, while Muslim "political refugees" are still finding European havens.

The experience of most European nations with their Muslim populations is that assimilation has failed.  In France, for example, Muslims tend to congregate in ghettos where all the strictures of Islam are rigidly enforced.  As was the case last summer, violence is prone to erupt; and European governments, in the dotage of their declining socialist systems, are more and more inclined to placate would be wielders of bombs and incendiary devices with more and more concessions.  Most Europeans - unlike Israelis and, perhaps, Russians - are loath to meet the challenges of bombings with harsh resolve and retaliation.

With prices for gasoline in Europe averaging the equivalent of more than $8.00 a barrel, the oil-producing countries literally have Europeans over a barrel.  Consequently, European economies are hyper-sensitive to each and every minor gyration emanating from the Middle East.

Ever visited Edgeware Road in London? That neighborhood, better known as"Little Arabia,"  is typical of the growing Muslim influence in Europe.  And, for heaven's sake, one just cannot afford to give offense to Muslims!

We in America might benefit by taking a closer look at what has transpired in Europe.  In effect, Europeans are succeeding in cutting their own throats.  Anesthetized by economies that produced copious amounts of consumer goods, Europeans felt that the socialist gravy train could be perpetuated indefinitely. Selfishness and materialism led to complacency, and a graying population required immigrant labor to prop up socialist economies to insure continuing benefits, never mind that the immigrants were Muslims.  And, now, Muslims are so numerous in certain European cities that they literally block the streets during their prayer times, and more and more structures that once were churches find themselves converted into mosques.

DOES PUTIN SEE HIMSELF AS A MODERN DAY
KING JOHN SOBIESKI?

And here we return to Vladimir Putin, who, if past experience may be relied upon, gives every indication of having the strength of character to deal with insurgent radical Islam in Russia.  How can we forget Putin's bravado matched against a feckless Obama in Syria?  And, certainly, Chechnya and Dagestan have felt Putin's iron fist.  As a result of the war against the Chechen Muslim separatist  movement, Russia laid waste to the capital of Grozny and decimated the ranks of those who who chose to challenge Moscow's rule.  Keeping this in mind and with the Winter Olympics only a few weeks away, those Islamic separatists who would challenge Vladimir Putin could very well be in for a perilous time.

Deo Vindice!

God bless Texas and may the Lone Star State remain forever red!

MORE WISHES FOR 2014: THE FINAL SIX!

MAY THE HOLE GROW DEEPER!

Moving forward with yesterday's wish list, here are 6 more, all of which are premised on the hope that Democrats will continue where they left off in 2013, namely in digging a deep, dark hole for themselves:

1.  Hopefully, the 2014 mid-term elections will see a wholesale elimination of leftists from Congress.  This is one wish which has a realistic chance of coming true.  It should be remembered that incumbent presidents in their last term, more often than not, witness a winnowing down of their Congressional support.  Furthermore, Republican voters, owing to their economic and educational backgrounds, are far more regular in their voting habits than are Democrats. Then, too, with more Obamacare woes lurking around the corner, many erstwhile young Democrats just might sit this one out.  In any case, preliminary developments suggest that this may be a very bad year for Democrats.

2.  The U.S. was badly embarrassed internationally in 2013, especially in the Middle East, where phantom red lines gave an impression of impotence and a chance for Vladimir Putin to scoop up Obama's fumble and run for a touchdown.  As a result, countries like Israel and Saudi Arabia were left scratching their heads and considering diplomatic alternatives that did not include the United States.  A return to a sane foreign policy position is certainly to be wished for.  And such a position would obviously not include the likes of John Kerry, Samantha Power and Susan Rice.

3.  Living as we at Two for Texas do along the southern border of the U.S., an obvious wish is one for instituting effective control on who enters our country.  As it exists now, and despite Homeland Security assurances to the contrary, our border with Mexico is nothing short of a farce.  If a nation is incapable of controlling its own borders, it is difficult to imagine how it will provide security for its citizens.  With what for all practical purposes is now an open-border, it is obvious what the leftists are up to.  By failing to secure the border, more and more potential Democrats will enter the country, hungering for government benefits and hand-outs to cement their bonds with a national political machine intent on retaining power indefinitely.   Immigration reform must not go forward until our border with Mexico is made secure.  If this is not a no-brainer, then it escapes us what is!

4.  It is also wished that more people wake up to the fact that a constant diet of progressive pablum makes for a dreary intellectual landscape.  Somehow, the idea of liberals being individuals of the first order has made its way into the national consciousness, when nothing could be further from the truth.  If you want to view conformity at its blatant worst, visit a college campus.  Thought control is very much evident, and those who represent the Academy these days are quick to squelch non-compliance to what are considered acceptable notions.  Coupled with popular obsession with cerebrally-challenged celebrities who spout the leftist mantra, our nation is increasingly populated by human automatons whose limited thought patterns would seem to qualify them for bit-parts in a cinematic production of George Orwell's 1984.  Really, when you get right down to it, the true non-conformists in 2014 may be found within the ranks of conservatives, libertarians and Christians.

5.  This is a tough one, given the fact that the one who was to bring us all together did anything and everything but that.  Nevertheless, it is to be hoped that, eventually, our country will get over the divisiveness of race, gender, creed and false demands for "equality."  When equality is prized over liberty,  the result is invariably despotism.  And despotism thrives when disunity prevails.  How strange it is that strident calls for gender identification and orientation - even for elementary school children - are more frequently heard.  How peculiar it is that even the unity of the Boy Scouts of America has been eclipsed by the issue of homosexuality.  As a Boy Scout, I cannot remember any of us in our troop worrying about sexual identification!  And, as for "racism,"  that tired, old canard has assumed a banality unmatched in our nation's history.  Despite all of the above, Two for Texas wishes fervently that the fallacious and distorted barriers to unity will cease being used as political stratagems to divide Americans.

6.  One final wish is for Texas, and this is one HOPE requiring no CHANGE,  that Republicans will continue their dominant role in the Lone Star State. For 20 years now, Democrats have been locked out of state-wide office, and they have also had few successes in the legislature.  The result has been an economic success that has astounded the rest of the country.  The story of Texas has been so singular in the midst of an ongoing recession, that thousands of denizens of the Rust Belt and the West Coast have packed their bags and, by any transportation available, joined a monumental trek to Houston, San Antonio, Midland, Austin and points in between.  The influx to Austin now accounts for more than 1,000 refugees from Democrat-controlled states arriving each week.  It is hoped, too, that former Californians, for example, will remember why they fled the formerly Golden State and that they will swear off any tendency to import the pathology of leftism, which caused their exodus in the first place.  Finally, we are also expecting that Texas State Senator Wendy Davis will crash and burn in her quest for the Governorship of Texas.

So, dear readers, this concludes the two-part Two for Texas wish list for 2014.  To be sure, we will be keeping score throughout 2014, in an effort to determine which wishes actually come to fruition. Stay tuned!


Deo Vindice!

God bless Texas, and may the Lone Star State remain forever red!