Coming out of the closet?

Anybody catch GW at the Kennedy center awards?

Here he is in the audience honoring the Hollywood elite. Which he has attacked, demeaned, and held up as the model of what is wrong with the left.

He sat quietly, and clapped as necessary, while a few "alternate lifestyle" entertainers (carefully chosen, mind you), honored Tina, Tony, and Robert.

If the man had even the slightest shred of credibility he would have boycotted the affair. Standing up for your principles? LOL.

Kool Aid

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/6380/589/1600/Hey%20Kool%20Aid!.2.jpg

Gee this administration sure jumped on the NSA leak pretty damn quick. Ever notice the consistency of this leadership?

Did this administration jump on the Plame leak so quickly? Did they jump on the 911 Commission so quickly?

Thought not.

Fool, you got some splainin' to do.

The Constitution? Just a piece of paper, or the Commandments of our Nation?

We have checks and balances for a reason in this Nation. Spouting 911, War on Terror, violating the Constitution in the name of paranoia, and scare tactics ain't going to cut it. Plus, the approach of "trust me" we're only going to use these illegal tactics to spy on the bad guys with no legal oversight at all, just ain't going to fly. The Administration apologists can talk about Roosevelt, and Clinton all you want and it's just a diversion.Let's see where your loyalty lies.

Is the USA, the Constitution of the USA, and the Bill of Rights worth defending?

Or is it more important to prop up this Mama's boy, pretender, gutless, chickenhawk, hardheaded, clueless, parody of a President?

You want an amendment to ban Gay marriage? You want a Supreme Court interpretation of the Constitution to overturn Roe vs Wade? Then get the hell off your ass and get riled up when the very foundation of this Nation, our Constitution, is being shredded by these clowns ruining our Country, and bankrupting it at the same time.

Corporal Punishment for Children

I was visiting a Western Alliance blog, and a poster raised the question of Corporal Punishment? Use it or not use it with children?

I'll tell you what Mr & Mrs Sleep agreed to.

1) With children still in diapers we would spank, or let me say provide one sharp swat. It was enough to get their attention, yet not hard enough to actually hurt them. If they were demonstrating some type of behavior that was unacceptable, like screaming, we would pick them up and carry them to their room, and close the door, and walk away.

2) When the kids got to 3 or so, we no longer would spank, but use words to discipline. We always demanded that they maintain eye contact with us. If particularly piqued, I would point at them and sometimes poke at their chest lightly to reinforce my points. They hated that, and it was something I had to break away from.

3) When the kids got to be 7 or 8 or so, we got tired or repeating ourselves, and/or yelling at the kids. We evolved into being very clear about our expectations/guidelines/parameters. We clearly articulated consequences to misbehavior, and one of those consequences was doing pushups. This proved quite effective. If they were out of line, and they knew it, we would say, drop and give me 10! If they didn't do that immediately then a more severe consequence followed up, ie, loss of some priviledge for some period of time. Once we were out Christmas shopping, and before I finished parking the car, I told all the kids, "do not run to the store, be very careful as too many drivers are in a hurry during the Christmas season, and parking lots can be very dangerous at this time of year." Well one of our kids was not paying attention, and as soon as the car was stopped he bolted out of the car. I opened my car door and yelled "STOP". He did so. I walked up to him, and said "didn't I just say to be careful?". He nodded yes. I said right then and there "drop and give me 10". He did so, right in the middle of the parking lot. I waited until he was done, then we walked safely into the store as a family.

There is one follow up to this story. Later that same Christmas, all the elder siblings and their children were at my Parents house on Christmas Evening. My #2 son Bryan, had fallen asleep by the Fireplace. My wife tapped Bryan on the shoulder, and told him to go to bed. He got up groggy, and headed upstairs, not before my Brother (his Uncle) said "hey Bryan give me 5".
My Brother had his hand up for a high 5. Instead, Bryan dropped to the floor, and pumped out 5 pushups. All the adults in the room broke out laughing. My Brother patted Bryan on the back as he stumbled off to bed, totally confused about what had just transpired.

Conservative Idealogue's

I am suspicious of those people that have all the answers. The more I learn, the more I "think" I know, the more I realize that I am kidding myself. Answers are hard to come by. Yes, we have internal values that provide a foundation for us, but this is just a starting point, it is not the end point. That is where people lose their way. A Conservative would have never crossed the Atlantic in search of a new world, it would be a Liberal who would have believed that the world was not flat, or at least be willing to explore that topic, and would have joined Columbus on that first voyage.

Extreme Conservatives are mostly idealogue's in my view. Many believe the ACLU to be idealogue's as well (extreme Liberals), and I see that point of view more every day. Someone needs to be the watchdog of our Bill of Rights, given that so many of our Freedoms are being given away by our President, and Republican lead Congress (the Patriot Act). The problem is the ACLU hasn't learned you have to pick your battles, and they are picking too many loony battles. I expect someone is going to jump on my use of the word "loony", and yet disregard the core of this post. I want a safe nation, but we cannot give up on our individual rights in order to do so, as it undermines the very foundation on what this Nation was built on. You'll hear lot's of Rationalization though. The Fool finds no fault with torture, as long as it is only used against "the bad guys". The Conservative Right are good soldiers, they loudly embrace that is which they believe, and when their leaders go in a direction they don't like, they turn STONE COLD SILENT. No, you can't use the "I don't like our open borders" example anymore, because that is the ONLY argument I hear. It is the token view paraded out to show their is some balance in the thought processes by the Right.

Extreme Conservatives just pay attention to what they have to say. Smug and self satisfied in their certitudes, their opinions are merely a loose collection of intellectual conceits, and they are genuinely astonished, bewildered and and indignant that their views are not universally embraced as the Truth. They disregard the opposing point of view as a form of brain death whose only cure is relentless propagandizing (Gays, Evolution, Unions, Eco-Nazi's) and browbeating (soft on crime, anti-Military, Tax and Spend). The conservative iteration of Ideologue parades themselves as a logical, clear thinker. When was the last time your heard or read an original thought from a Conservative?

All I hear is new terminology. Intelligent Design instead of Creationism. The story is always the same, it just gets regurgitated and repackaged.

Santa

The original Santa Claus, St. Nicholas, was born in the ancient southeastern Turkish town of Lycia early in the fourth century. His generosity was legend, and he was particularly fond of children. We know this primarily through Roman accounts of his patronage of youth, which eventually led to his becoming the patron saint of children. Throughout the Middle Ages, and well beyond, he was referred to by many names none of them Santa Claus. Children today would not at all recognize the St. Nick who brought gifts to European children hundreds of years ago except perhaps for his cascading white beard. He made his rounds in full red-and-white bishop's robes, complete with twin-peaked miter and crooked crozier. He was pulled by no fleet-footed reindeer, but coaxed in indolent donkey. And he arrived not late on Christmas Eve, but on his Christian feast day, December 6. The gifts he left beside the hearth were usually small: fruit, nuts, hard candies, wood and clay figurines. During the Protestant of the sixteenth century, St. Nicholas was banished from most European countries. Replacing him were more secular figures, who in general were not at center stage at that point in history. The Dutch kept the St. Nicholas tradition alive. As the "protector of sailors," St. Nicholas graced the prow of the first Dutch ship that arrived in America. And the first church built in New York City was named after him. The Dutch brought with them to the New World two Christmas items that were quickly Americanized. In sixteenth-century Holland, children placed wooden shoes by the hearth the night of St. Nicholas's arrival. The shoes were filled with straw, a meal for the saint's gift-laden donkey. In return, Nicholas would insert a small treat into each clog. In America, the shoe was replaced with the stocking, hung by the chimney. Sint Nikolaas's helper, Zwarte Piet (Black Pete) who on the night before Dec 6, would go around town opening doors and throwing handfulls of candy into the rooms. Also in Holland, Sint Nikolaas would arrive on a ship riding a large white horse.
The Dutch spelled St. Nicholas "Sint Nikolass," which in the New World became "Sinterklass". later changed to "Santa Claus". Much of modern-day Santa Claus lore, including the reindeer-drawn sleigh, originated in America. Dr. Clement Clarke Moore composed "The Night Before Christmas" in 1822, to read to his children on Christmas Eve. The poem might have remained privately in the Moore family if a friend had not mailed a copy of it (without authorial attribution) to a newspaper and became part of the Santa legend. It was in America that Santa put on weight. The rosy-cheeked, roly-poly Santa is credited to the influential nineteenth-century cartoonist Thomas Nast. From 1863 until 1886, Nast created a series of Christmas drawings for Harper's Weekly. These drawings, executed over twenty years, exhibit a gradual evolution in Santa from the pudgy, diminutive, elf-like creature of Dr. Moore's immortal poem to the bearded, potbellied, life-size bell ringer familiar on street corners across America today. Nast's cartoons also showed the world how Santa spent his entire year constructing toys, checking on children's behavior, reading their requests for special gifts. His images were incorporated into the Santa lore. Santa is known throughout the world in many different names, such as:

Saint Nikolaas (Sinter Klaas), from the Dutch Father Christmas, from the English Kris Kringle, Christkind from the Germans , Befana from the Italians, Bobouschka, from the Russians (a grand motherly figure instead of a male)

Christmas Tree's

The custom of a Christmas tree, undecorated, is believed to have begun in Germany, in the first half of the 700s. The earliest story relates how British monk and missionary St. Boniface was preaching a sermon on the Nativity to a tribe of Germanic Druids outside the town of Geismar. To convince the idolaters that the oak tree was not sacred and inviolable, the "Apostle of Germany" felled one on the spot. Toppling, it crushed every shrub in its path except for a small fir sapling. A chance event can lend itself to numerous interpretations, and legend has it that Boniface, attempting to win converts, interpreted the fir's survival as a miracle, concluding, "Let this be called the tree of the Christ Child." Subsequent Christmases in Germany were celebrated by planting fir saplings. The history of the modern Christmas tree goes back to 16th century Germany. In Alsace (Elsass), dated 1561, states that "no burgher shall have for Christmas more than one bush of more than eight shoes' length." The decorations hung on a tree in that time, the earliest we have evidence of, were "roses cut of many-colored paper, apples, wafers, gilt, sugar." Around Strasbourg there was a widespread practice of bringing trees (evergreens, not necessarily a fir-tree) into houses for decoration during Christmastide. The modern custom is also connected with the Paradise tree hung with apples, present in the medieval religious plays. The decorations could symbolize the Christian Hosts. Instead of trees, various wooden pyramidal structures were also used. In 17th century the Christmas tree spread through Germany and Scandinavia. Eventually the tree was extensively decorated, first with candles and candies, then with apples and confections, later with anything glittering mass-produced paraphernalia. The success of Christmas tree in Protestant countries was enhanced by the legend which attributed the tradition to Martin Luther himself. It is a widely held belief that Martin Luther first added lighted candles to a tree. Walking toward his home one winter evening, composing a sermon, he was awed by the brilliance of stars twinkling amidst evergreens. To recapture the scene for his family, he erected a tree in the main room and wired its branches with lighted candles. In England the tradition was made popular by the German Prince Albert, husband of Queen Victoria. The German immigrants brought the Christmas tree to America in 17th century. Public outdoors Christmas trees with electric candles were introduced in Finland in 1906, and in USA (New York) in 1912. The claim of the Pennsylvania Germans to have initiated the Christmas tree custom in America is undisputed today. And it's in the diary of Matthew Zahm of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, under the date December 20, 1821, that the Christmas tree and its myriad decorations received their first mention in the New World. It is no surprising that, like many other festive Christmas customs, the tree was adopted so late in America. To the New England Puritans, Christmas was sacred. The Pilgrims' second governor, William Bradford, wrote that he tried hard to stamp out "pagan mockery" of the observance, penalizing any frivolity. The influential Oliver Cromwell preached against "the heathen traditions" of Christmas carols, decorated trees and any joyful expression that desecrated "that sacred event."

Religious Intolerance, and Historical view on torture

Twelve Days of Christmas:

You're all familiar with the Christmas song, "The Twelve Days of Christmas" I think. To most it's a delightful nonsense rhyme set to music. But it had a quite serious purposewhen it was written.It is a good deal more than just a repetitious melody with pretty phrases and a list of strange gifts. Catholics in England during the period 1558 to 1829, when Parliamentfinally emancipated Catholics in England, were prohibited from ANY practice of their faithby law - private OR public. It was a crime to BE a Catholic. "The Twelve Days of Christmas"was written in England as one of the "catechism songs" to help young Catholics learn the tenets of their faith - a memory aid, when to be caught with anything in *writing*indicating adherence to the Catholic faith could not only get you imprisoned, it could get you hanged, or shortened by a head - or hanged, drawn and quartered, a rather peculiar and ghastly punishment I'm not aware was ever practiced anywhere else. Hanging, drawing and quartering involved hanging a person by the neck until they had almost, but not quite, suffocated to death; then the party was taken down from the gallows, and disembowelled while still alive; and while the entrails were still lying on the street, where the executioners stomped all over them, the victim was tied to four large farm horses, and literally torn into five parts - one to each limb and the remaining torso. The songs gifts are hidden meanings to the teachings of the faith. The "true love"mentioned in the song doesn't refer to an earthly suitor, it refers to God Himself. The"me" who receives the presents refers to every baptized person. The partridge in a peartree is Jesus Christ, the Son of God. In the song, Christ is symbolically presented as amother partridge which feigns injury to decoy predators from her helpless nestlings, much in memory of the expression of Christ's sadness over the fate of Jerusalem: "Jerusalem!Jerusalem! How often would I have sheltered thee under my wings, as a hen does her chicks,but thou wouldst not have it so..."The other symbols mean the following:

2 Turtle Doves = The Old and New Testaments
3 French Hens = Faith, Hope and Charity, the Theological Virtues
4 Calling Birds = the Four Gospels and/or the Four Evangelists
5 Golden Rings = The first Five Books of the Old Testament, the "Pentateuch", which gives the history of man's fall from grace.
6 Geese A-laying = the six days of creation
7 Swans A-swimming = the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit, the seven sacraments
8 Maids A-milking = the eight beatitudes
9 Ladies Dancing = the nine Fruits of the Holy Spirit
10 Lords A-leaping = the ten commandments
11 Pipers Piping = the eleven faithful apostles

This may cause all of us to reflect upon religious intolerance, and that our Western Culture has a savage history, not that far removed from today.

speaking out

Think for yourself and try to understand what Theodore Roosevelt had to say:

"The president is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the nation as a whole. To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."

Where is our money going?

The War on Terror a good thing or a bad thing? A good thing for sure. Is this something that America should pay to fight, yes or no? Yes. Should we pay for it today, or mortgage our future, and let our descendants pay for it? We should pay for it today (but that is a whole other discussion topic).

Ok, presuming we all agree we must pay for National Security (Homeland Security), then should we expect a good accounting of how the money is spent, and that balanced decisions are made to ensure the money is spent wisely inside our borders, and abroad (Iraq, Afghanistan), yes or no? Yes, I'm sure we would all agree.

Let's start with Homeland Security. The funding was approved after 9-11. Given the grave threat to our Nation we would hope the money would be primarily directed to our greatest areas of risk, ie, our borders, and our international airports. Logically all states should receive funds, but we should direct funds in proportion to our risk levels. Agree or disagree? I expect you would agree. Guess what? Congress failed us. They took a peanut butter approach. Congress knowingly passed out funds via this fashion to get Pork for States that didn't need as much money at the detriment of States that needed more, and as a result, impeded our Nations ability to defend itself. The White House, and the Homeland Security appointee have been silent on this. We have a failure of leadership.

I'll address funding abroad next, but that will have to be on a continuing post as I'm headed off to work.

Moritorium on Political Threads for awhile

There doesn't appear to be much interest in coming together right now. Too much "my way or the highway", too much finger pointing, too much taking payola from special interests, too much corruption, too much graft, too much pork, too much "what's in it for me?" Too much selling out our Nation's interests in pursuit of lining someone's pocket book. Do we honestly believe the Saudi influence on our current administration is healthy? Do we honestly believe the Saudi investments in American business, and our economy is healthy for our Nation?

Every chance President Bush has to mention 911 he never passes up the opportunity. The majority of the terrorists who piloted and crashed the planes on 911 were Saudi Arabian's. Not Iraqi's, not Afghani's, not Iranian's, not Syrian's, not Libyan's, but Saudi's. What did our Administration do? Got a damn hard on for Afghanistan, and Iraq, that's what they did. Saudi Arabia follow up. Nothing. Frankly it's criminal. Here we have a hot lead. Never has this question been answered. All this Administration has done is give them a get out of jail free card. When it comes to the Saudi's, the White House puts on knee pads. Just follow the money. Terrorist funding? How much comes from Saudi Arabia?

So, I'm asking anyone who swings by this Blog to think this through. If you're not happy with what is happening today, what are you going to do about it? How can we influence change? How can you influence change? If you're Mad as Hell, then how do you direct your anger productively? Take the time for reflection. Enjoy your family, enjoy your friends, participate in building a strong local community, and come back with a well though out plan on what you're going to do in 2006 to make America a better Country.

We have a failure of leadership in this Country. Our leaders cannot lead by looking at the latest Polls, or surveys to determine how to act.

Christmas Traditions???

Ok II, I know you aren't a big fan of traditions, but I'm curious to hear what families do, that is unique or special to their own families in terms of how they celebrate christmas, or if you have a specific cultural, or religious based holiday celebration.

I'll give you a few from the Sleep household:

1) My family is of Western European Heritage. One thing we always have at our Christmas Dinner is Rice Pudding, with one toasted almond hidden in the mix. In Scandanavian households it was believed that the family member that ended up with the single toasted almond would have good luck for the ensuing year.
2) We always place a pair of wooden shoes by the fireplace as my Mothers father was born and raised in Sweden, and they didn't place stocking, they put wooden shoes instead. They actually used the wooden shoes, and often were placed by the fireplace to dry out.
3) We always read aloud the book, "The Polar Express". We also read Christmas stories from other countries.
4) Food. Shellfish on Christmas Eve, Prime Rib on Christmas Day.
5) In recent years, we have adopted one family that is not as fortunate as us, providing them a tree, food for dinner, and one gift for each family member.
6) We always watch "It's a Wonderful Life" and play a verbal game of trivia related to the movie. We have gotten many obscure questions that have come up.
7) My wife hates egg nog, so I try to buy Egg Nog as early as the stores have it, and surprise her with an early November "Egg Nog Kiss".

Thoughts on Walmart?

I'm curious about readers views on Walmart. I know there is a movie out that has raised some hackles with Walmart management, and some media sources (Faux news) and selected Politicians.

I will share my views on Walmart and related topics.

First, cheap prices. I think Americans on the whole are Ostriches. We love things that are inexpensive. The lower the price the better. Basically we are cheapskates. We want something for nothing. As long as we put blinders on, about where the goods come from, the jobs that are lost, the competitive disadvantage this puts our country in, the environmental consequences elsewhere in the world, etc, we don't care.

It's only when we can't ignore the consequences, that we become upset. When our job goes away, we someone in the media draws attention to the fact that Nike runs sweat shops in Vietnam, employing children at pennies a day, making shoes for a few bucks, then selling them North of a $100 that we get upset.

We have a failure of leadership in this country in the pursuit of the almighty dollar.

We HAVE to HAVE a strong job base. We HAVE to HAVE a strong middle class. We HAVE to find a way to keep jobs here, and if we have to on selected products, we will have to pay higher prices in order to keep them here. There may be some strategic areas where we need to keep the capability to manufacture or produce goods on our shores. We can't put ourselves in the position where we can be held hostage by a foreign manufacturing power.

Walmart is but one example of this problem. Look into your crystal ball, and, you can see a point where our country will be at risk.

I am not necessarily saying we should be a protectionist nation. However today, we have policies, special interests, business, and politicians who are happy to export jobs to the long term detriment of our nation.

Christmas Rant

RC may be proud of me, but he won't be proud of my language.

If you don't like Americans saying Merry Christmas to each other, then all I have to say to you, is "TOUGH SHIT". You don't like it, then get the hell out of here. Sheeeeeiiiiiiitttttt.

Just because I happen to say Merry Christmas to you does not mean I am denying you your faith or the relative spiritual or ethnic or whatever practices you endorse. I'm a Christian, and I like Christmas. It makes me feel good. It makes me feel good about myself. For one of the few times during the year, I think about human good will, caring about each other, thinking about the sanctity of family, making this time of year special for those that don't enjoy the benefits of life that I do. It doesn't matter if I have worked my ass off for what I have, or if my parents worked their respective asses off, to make a better life for me. This is a time of year, that I like to make everyone possible feel special, loved, wanted, etc.

If you have different beliefs, that's fine, more power too you. I refuse however to compromise values, or my interests, or my spiritual feelings because it just might rain on your parade.

Get over yourself!!! Because if you endorsed what I truly believe about Christmas, you would forget about your selfish motives.

So all all my fellow Americans, and people worldwide. Merry Christmas to you, or Merry whatever tickles your fancy.