Monday, February 27, 2006

Remembrance Day

The following are excerpts from Almost Like a Day for Peace by Steven Laffoley originally published on on November 9, 2005. Thought this might be of interest...
My wife and I arrived in New York just a couple of hours earlier. We came to New York, in part, to enjoy the city. But I've returned, in part, to stand at the spot where I had stood in March of 2002, looking for some meaning in Ground Zero - only to find none. Two and a half years later - after two wars, tens of thousands of dead, and tens of thousands of words written trying to make some sense of it - I came to look again, to see if I had missed something then or if some kind of meaning had arrived since. Early the next morning we take the subway south to the financial district, and emerge near Ground Zero. The sky is cloudless and the air cool as I take a deep breath and cross the street to the site.

I stand at the new ten-foot-tall, chain-link fence and look at Ground Zero, now devoid of the blackened debris and the acrid smell of burnt paper and metal. The steel girders, in the shape of a cross, are the only familiar point of reference to March 2002. We walk further along the chain-link barrier, stopping every twenty steps or so to look at large wooden billboards affixed to the fence, each telling a different chapter in the history of the New York skyline and the building of the Twin Towers.

We come across some people having their pictures taken with the site as backdrop. One guy in a red windbreaker and blue ball cap with the words "North Carolina" on it stands by the fence, smiling, his arms raised. His wife - holding out the digital camera in front of her - snaps the family photo.

We walk on. At the corner of the fence, attached at the top, is a makeshift memorial - a large plaque of sorts, dedicated to the "fallen heroes." I wonder about the choice of the word "heroes." It wasn't such a leap from "victims" to "heroes," I think. How much longer before "heroes" become "martyrs?"

Or has that already happened?

A young man in a suit disrupts my thoughts. He walks by us, talking business, rapidly and loudly, into a small black cell phone. Though he walks along the length of fence overlooking Ground Zero, he never once looks at it.

Two years earlier, American flags were everywhere and patriotism burned white hot. But now New York seems apolitical. In the course of the morning, we've seen only a few American flags and no one talks of patriotism - or, for that matter, the election that just took place, or even about the Iraq war.

I look again at the Ground Zero site - busily being primed and prepared for new construction - and it occurs to me that Ground Zero is no longer a physical place. It has become a pure idea, to be bought, or sold, or manipulated. Or put another way, Ground Zero no longer resides in New York City. It exists only in the minds of those who give it meaning.

Later that night, we eat at an Italian restaurant. The crowd is well-dressed, eating dinner before taking in the shows along Broadway. We ask the waiter about the menu and decide on a pasta plate. On the walls around us hang dozens of photos of Italian Americans from the late 1890s to the 1950s.

Sharing a bottle of red wine and a plate of pasta, my wife and I talk about the day - Ground Zero, Chinatown, the Lower East Side, the parade on Fifth Avenue. Save for the parade, and a gaudy display of fifty American Flags outside Rockefeller Center, we saw nothing that spoke of patriotism. I keep thinking about the changes at Ground Zero, and about the passage of time.

When we finish eating, I get up to pay the bill. I cross the center of the room and approach two waiters standing at the register. They are talking about the Veterans' Day holiday.

"I remember when this was a day to celebrate peace," says the older waiter to the younger. "It was a day to celebrate the end of World War One."

"Really?" says the younger waiter.

"Yeah, I can't remember the name of the day," said the older waiter as he rings a bill into the register. "But when I was kid - I think it was sometime in the '50s - the politicians didn't want a peace day, so they turned it into a celebration of soldiers."

Perhaps because of the red wine, I feel talkative. So I interject, "It was called Armistice Day."

"Yeah, that's it," said the older waiter, turning in my direction. "It was called Armistice Day, a day for celebrating peace."

"In Canada," I tell them, "they call it Remembrance Day."

"Remembrance Day?" he says. "I like that - Remembrance Day. It's almost like a day for peace." He hesitates and then adds, "Right now, we could use a day like that."

I smile and nod, then hand him my bill. He rings it in, and after I pay, he wishes me well. As we leave the restaurant, and walk to Times Square, I think about what the older waiter said, "Almost like a day for peace."

And I think: He's right. We could use a day like that.
Perhaps we should all take time out of our busy day for our own Rememberance Day for those who have fought for our nation, and those who stand ready to defend our country. Remember especially those who have died, and those they left behind. It does not matter what the cause or circumstances, they deserve our thanks for defending our freedom, our home, our families.

We should also never, ever, forget the victims of September 11. Not as heros, but as our neighbors who perished in a tragedy made worse by deranged terrorists. We must never forget, and never allow this to happen again.

Saturday, February 25, 2006

Random Thoughts & Topics

First off, I need to state that I am needing to take a little time off from blogging. Life and an insane work schedule are catching up to me. The result is that I'm starting to shoot from the hip on my responses to comments on this and other blogs. Not a good thing, to say the least, especially if I can't hold a decent train of thought while I'm typing. I will use this time to put in some decent research on a couple of topics that I believe are important. Hope you will find them as interesting as I do. I do intend on visiting your blogs just to keep up with what your interests are, and commenting if I can do so intelligently.

Dan, your comments are welcome here, even though we may disagree on a variety of topics. Our sparring on this site as well as others helped me realize that I need to pull back, regroup, and get my head back on straight. We all need to be challenged once in a while to keep a sense of reality. Thanks for that. And yes, in the interests of trying to keep a fair & balanced opinion, you have been added to the blogroll for readers of this blog.

Now on to a few random topics inspired by the headlines and other places:

Partial Birth Abortion to be reviewed by the Supreme Court: I don't think there was a single person that followed the Rogers and Alito hearings and didn't know that there would be a case concerning abortion coming up before the Supreme Court. No matter which side you are on, this will be interesting.

Weapons of Mass destruction not found in Iraq: We know that Iraq had WMDs because he used them on his own people (the Kurds) and in the war with Iran. Any explanations of where they are now have simply not held up to scrutiny. So where are they now?

Where is your tax dollar going? How much is being wasted on unnecessary and ineffective programs & services? Waste is present in both military and social programs, and we all would like to know what is being done to cut it out.

What is your take on the state of America? Your opinion, please!

Does the ACLU represent your opinions? Again, your opinion, please! I think I'll stop for now...

Tuesday, February 21, 2006

Andrew Jackson vs. Liberal Democrats

The following is from the DNC:
When Andrew Jackson (a Democrat) ran for president in 1828, his opponents tried to label him a "jackass" for his populist views and his slogan, "Let the people rule." Jackson, however, picked up on their name calling and turned it to his own advantage by using the donkey on his campaign posters. During his presidency, the donkey was used to represent Jackson's stubbornness when he vetoed re-chartering the National Bank. By 1880 the donkey was well established as a mascot for the Democratic party. A cartoon about the Garfield-Hancock campaign in the New York Daily Graphic showed the Democratic candidate mounted on a donkey, leading a procession of crusaders.
I was watching a History Channel while washing dishes the other night (no cat-calls, now...), and there was a little blurb about Andrew Jackson and the Democratic mascot, the donkey. When comparing Andrew Jackson with the Left-leaning Democrat portrayed by Mike over at America Under Attack posted When the Left Left America Behind, it is really depressing how far the Democrats have fallen (Mike - do I get extra credit for using this post twice?)

Stop to think about it - Andrew Jackson fought many battles for this country, and yet the modern Democrat can't stand up to do the right thing for the right reason unless there is some sort of political advantage. Gone are the Democrat leaders with fire in their belly for the cause of freedom, only to be replaced with cream-puff flip-flops (I voted for the war before I voted against it!) Instead of a General Jackson, we seem to be stuck with the likes of Non-Compoop Kerry who would run & hide instead of finishing the job and draft-dodging chumps who don't even want to protect our liberties (you know who I mean!). Even now, I don't hear anyone making the statement that they thought Al-Gore would be doing a better job than Bush.

The Dems are so far out there, I can't believe it. They criticize almost every program & proposal that the Republicans put out there, but they do not have a counter-proposal. It is almost as if they want to return to the days of when they were in power.

Well, I hate to break it to them, but 30+ years of them running the Congress has almost put this country in bankruptcy, and has left a bloated shambles of the Social Security, Welfare, Medicare, and Medicaid programs. And then they have the nerve to state that they would like to run a National Healthcare program!! Would you, the interested reader of this blog, think that is wise? I don't.

A quote attributed to Albert Einstein states, "There is no surer sign of insanity than trying the same thing repeatedly expecting different results." Having the Dems back in charge and expecting them to change things for the better based on their track record is exactly that - insanity.

I've made the statement on a couple of other blogs, and I'll make the statement here: The Democrat Party of today, by and large, resembles the South end of a Northbound jackass, and I can't think of a better mascot for the Democrats. Can you?

OK, rant is over. Flame on!

Sunday, February 19, 2006

NSA Wiretapping Letter

John Eastman, director of the Claremont Institute's Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence and Professor of Law for the Claremont Institute, has written a letter to Chairman Sensenbrenner of the House Judiciary Committee, about the terrorist surveillance by the National Security Agency: "Under the Constitution, confirmed by two centuries of historical practice and ratified by Supreme Court precedent, the President clearly has the authority to conduct surveillance of enemy communications in time of war and of the communications to and from those he reasonably believes are affiliated with our enemies." (link

John Eastman, director of the Claremont Institute's Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence and Professor of Law for the Claremont Institute, has written a letter to Chairman Sensenbrenner of the House Judiciary Committee, about the terrorist surveillance by the National Security Agency: "Under the Constitution, confirmed by two centuries of historical practice and ratified by Supreme Court precedent, the President clearly has the authority to conduct surveillance of enemy communications in time of war and of the communications to and from those he reasonably believes are affiliated with our enemies." (link here)

This letter (with references) reaffirms the Constitutionality of the President's authority to wiretap the communications of foreign nationals that are of interest to the United States. Further reading into this subject by searching on Google & looking at the law libraries of various universities also support this position. Also, please note that the Constitution of the United States did not have rights to privacy nor does it grant rights to foreign nationals.

The furor of the media is nothing more than a smoke screen to continue the harassment of the Bush administration. For those of us with longer memories than the average person, President Clinton used the same arguements for the use of the NSA's Echelon program during his administration. May I ask the media - where was your outrage then?

Other Blog Posts to Read

Life, as usual, has a way of getting in the way of posting topics that are of interest. However, there are many other blogs that are taking up the slack! Posts that have caught my eye are:

When the Real Shooting Starts: Beyond the Cartoon War is a post over at Mike's America which reveals a darker, more sinister view of what is really behind the recent violence over the publication of the infamous Mohammed cartoons. This is a more in-depth view of one of my earlier posts.

America Under Attack has a post titled When The Left Left America Behind. It is a fascinating view of where the Left has come from and where they are headed to. Scary, to say the least.

Whatever Happened Too....? is a look at where we as a nation have come from and what we have become. Hat tip to Patriotic Mom for this link.

The Raving Conservative posted Club Gitmo Oh So Special which reveals the anti-Christian attitude of our "friends" at the ACLU and Americans United for the Separation of Church and State.

Mark Steyn at the Chicago Sun Times has an interesting view of the media at large over the news presented over the past week. Hat tip to Betsy's Page for the link.

Last, Views on World Affairs looks at Russia's "offer" to negotiate the current Iran nuclear problem. Thanks to everyone in advance for your comments here or on the originating blog sites.

Friday, February 17, 2006

Wall Street Journal Opinion on Media OpinionJournal page has a great follow-up to my earlier posts on the media. Thanks to Mike's America for the link.

Thursday, February 16, 2006

Anti-Gun Movement vs. Statistics

Once again, Mike over at America Under Attack has provided a great post titled What's Really Behind The Anti-Gun Agenda. This time, there are stats! Thanks again, Mike!

Tuesday, February 14, 2006

Frenzied Media

As we have all heard by now, VP Cheney peppered one of his long-time friends with birdshot while hunting. The 78-year old is still in the hospital, but in good spirits & condition.

The media is going absolutely bonkers over this. Why weren't they immediately notified as soon as it happened? How did it happen? Was it intentional? Will Cheney resign(!) over this? Was he drunk?

What drivel is this? Must be a real slow day to focus on an accident in which no one was killed. In retrospect, it makes sense.

The media needs to focus every little bit of negativity on the Bush administration. They will not focus on the real issues that matter - protecting the US from terrorism by whatever (legal) means, secrets being leaked by members of Congress and the media (treason!), & Iran's nuclear ambitions (threat to every sane nation). All because they have some agenda to get the Dems back in power. What short-sighted BS is this?

The media is to inform the public on news, weather, and more news. The freedom of the press (or media) is to make sure there is a source of information, good & bad, about the doings of the government. It does not give them license to publish or otherwise make known information which our enemies could use to cause the citizens of this nation harm, nor to compromise intelligence or military operations against those same enemies. Editorials were to be clearly marked (called the editorial page!), and all sides of the news were to be completely disclosed (sound bites not withstanding). Instead, the media has turned into a giant propaganda machine for the out of touch Liberals, and have either made up or skewed information to support their view. But I digress since I have written about this earlier (link here)...

I'm sure we will hear more about this unfortunate event as time goes by. So far, VP Cheney has not spoken publicly about the incident, preferring to have the press secretaries handle it. It will be interesting to see how this all turns out. I personally would love to see the media get smacked down publicly for their idiocy over this entire event. And since Cheney is not a career politician, he just might be the man to do it.

Saturday, February 11, 2006

Post Removed

Please note that the "Andy Rooney Comments" post has been removed. I just found out that the comments that were attributed to Andy Rooney were a hoax. Shame on me for not verifying the information.

To all the other bloggers out there, always verify the information in your posts with a reputable source. Otherwise, you could be perpetuating a lie (and you wouldn't want to be doing that, would you?)

At least I'm big enough to admit I'm wrong...

Thursday, February 09, 2006

Cartoon Violence

No, we are not commenting on Wile E. Coyote's latest plot to do in the Roadrunner...

An analysis of the Islamic Cartoon Riots has been posted over at America Under Attack, which was originally authored by I think it does provide a fair analysis of the situation minus a lot of the emotion that this situation has created.

One of my concerns is that these cartoons were published approximately five months ago, and are now just causing all sorts of trouble. Why now?

President Bush has fingered Iran and Syria for raising the issue to a world-wide level. Why would these countries do that?

My best guess is to focus attention on something relatively trivial rather than Iran building a nuclear weapon and/or Syria having a lot of Saddam's WMDs. But the problem is now that rioting, burning, and even murder have been the result of this escalation. Adding to the furor is Iran's president can't seem to make a speech without making statements that target Israel and other non-Muslim countries with untold violence to hasten the realization of an Islamic-based world.

If we are smart, (and I know the Israelis are doing it), we should be planning on hitting Iran with more than just sanctions and resolutions if they make a nuclear weapon. Same for Syria if they are complicit in this mess. The United Nations, to my surprise, actually voted overwhelmingly to ban Iran from making nuclear weapons. If Iran suceeds in making a nuclear weapon, they will use it with Israel as target number one.

Even without the bomb, what this entire situation is doing is dividing the world into Muslim and non-Muslim factions. The radicals will eventually get their bloody holy war, and lots of innocent people will be hurt or killed by fanatics.

And that will be the real tragedy...

Wednesday, February 08, 2006

Mirror Site

Please note that I have started another blog over at This is due to some strange happenings here on Blogger (losing communication, odd formatting problems, non-access to everyone's blog, unscheduled outages, etc.)

For now, this will be a mirror site, i.e., a backup to this one just in case Blogger accidentally blows away all of the posts (which has been reported by a couple of other bloggers)

The link is here and on the blogroll at the left.

Blog Comment Policy

Updated January 2007

I encourage rational discussion & comments, but not personal character assassination to make your point. If I have made a mistake, fine, point it out & we will go from there. If you agree or disagree, put it down. Add to the discussion if possible, or make your opinion known without resorting to name-calling of the author or others.

If you want to leave anonymous messages, fine, but if you want to flame the positions of the author or the other people who take the time to comment on the material presented, have the decency, courage (or as another blogging friend would put it, the cajones) to put your name/blog/address to your post.

There have also been some abuses of my good nature to sidetrack off of the main topic of the post to discuss related material. That's fine as long as it's relevant and doesn’t detract too much from the topic at hand.

But one of the things that I am beginning to be annoyed with is the incessant nitpicking over isolating one statement in a paragraph and taking it out of context.If you want to make a comment, comment on the entire post or paragraph as it suits you.Again, we’ll go from there.

Otherwise, don't be surprised if it gets blown away into itty-bitty pieces without warning. Or changed to make the comment seem even more ridiculous than what it already says. Continued abuses can and will lead to banning, but only as a last resort. For better or worse, this is my updated policy.

Tuesday, February 07, 2006

Coretta Scott King Funeral

I heard on the radio that various politicians and civic leaders have used the funeral for Coretta Scott King as a podium to bash President Bush, who is in attendance.

Folks, I will say it again - funerals are for remembering the life of the deceased, not to make a grandstanding political speech. This has happened when Rosa Parks died, it has happened during the funerals of fallen soldiers, and it is happening again during this sad event. These actions are totally inappropriate!!

Where is the decency of these speakers? Are they so consumed with hate that they will take each and every opportunity to spew it out? Or are they so insensitive to use these events to further their own agenda?

The more and more that I hear about these insensitive morons, the more I believe that they are not worthy of my attention, support, or votes. I wonder how many other people out there listen to these idiots and think the same thing as I do, or worse, think that this is the right time to voice their opinion.

Monday, February 06, 2006

Superbowl Recap

Well, Pittsburg won as most people thought. It wasn't an exciting game, but it was a lot closer than what I thought.

Seattle made a couple of plays near the end of the first half which didn't make sense to me, and Pittsburgh got that first touchdown on a oh-so-close call that really could have gone either way.

The commercials were average in my opinion. Those that stood out in my mind as being the favorites are:

  1. The Fed-Ex commercial where the caveman was trying to send his "package".
  2. The where the guy is working for monkeys and the gal was working for donkeys.
  3. The Bud Light commercial where the guy was about to be mauled by the bear, only to have his buddy steal the Bud Light (Not cool, Dave!)
  4. The Budwieser commercial where the young Clydesdale started to pull the beer wagon (with some covert assistance).
Let your opinion on the game and/or the commercials be known in the comment section. Thanks!

Sunday, February 05, 2006

Superbowl Predictions

Well, about 8 1/2 hours from this post, Superbowl XL will begin. What are the predictions for this game? Three out of four pundits are calling for a Pittsburg win.

I guess I'm picking Pittsburg to win, but I'm hoping it will be a close game. I still remember Bradshaw winning 4 Superbowls. The only thing that I seem to be able to associate with Seattle is the Brian Bosworth hoopla that turned into a bunch of nothing.

Anyway, if I'm wrong, so be it, and anyone reading this post can flame away! Enjoy the game.

Saturday, February 04, 2006

A Nuclear Iran?

Micheal Stone has a piece on his Blog America Under Attack which is pretty interesting. It does mirror many of the same thoughts that have been posted on other sites and in the comments.

Friday, February 03, 2006

Media for Who?

The mainstream media does not have the well being of the United States in mind when they are reporting stories. In fact, some of their actions could be called treasonous. Take these examples:

The mainstream media does not have the well being of the United States in mind when they are reporting stories. In fact, some of their actions could be called treasonous. Take these examples:

During the first Gulf War, when fighters were taking off from their bases in Saudi Arabia, CNN dutifully reported their take-offs, and made statements that they would know where they were going in about 1 to 2 hours. Of course, this gave Saddam's military time to get ready, and higher losses of aircraft and crews were the result. After the conflict was over, one of the senior Iraqi generals made the statement that CNN was one of their best sources of intelligence.

Also during the same conflict, the media reported in great detail the use of laser guided bombs & missiles and their limitations. Saddam's response was to ignite the Kuwait oil fields, resulting in one of the greatest ecological disasters in the region. All to thwart those lasers.

During the hunt for Bin Laden, the media reported that our forces were closing in on Bin Laden's position. Our forces knew his position because of his use of a satellite cell phone, and were triangulating his position from that source. The day after that report aired, the phone was never used again. I wonder why?

A reported incident at the Guantonimo Bay Detention facility concerning the desecration of prisoner's Korans was reported, and a huge world wide uproar ensued. Later, it was found out that this report was false, but that note got nowhere near the attention that the original report got. One can only wonder how many people were put in danger after this untrue report.

Last and more recent example. The media reported that the FBI, NSA, and other intelligence sources were eavesdropping on known terrorist cell phones to learn of their plans and to locate the terrorist's location. Many of those phones went silent, and there was a run on the purchase of one-time and temporary cell phones that could be purchased in cash. There were reports from a couple of Wal-Mart's in Texas that 6 Middle Eastern men were apprehended when they attempted to buy 60+ of these cell phones, and were wanting to pay cash for them. It was later reported that these men were connected to al-Qaeda.

The First Article of United States Bill of Rights states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." This is a powerful liberty to allow the press (or media) uncensored freedom to publish what they want. It also carries great responsibility. For instance, during Orson Welles's broadcast of War of the Worlds, people panicked because they thought Earth was being invaded by Mars. Another example is yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theater. Both have the potential for getting people hurt. So does the careless reporting of military activities and/or secure information.

While we normally think of war as being between countries, the terrorists have declared war on the United States, and have attacked our citizens & military numerous times. And we have declared war on the terrorists and any country that helps them. Does anyone doubt that this is a war? Do you remember September 11, 2001?

Article 3 Section 3 (in part) of the United States Constitution deals with the subject of Treason, and declares that "Treason against the United States, ... or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort." By this definition, the media is dangerously close, if not in fact, to committing treason against the United States. Giving the terrorists information that will aid them in avoiding detection and apprehension is definitely helping them, and hurting us. And I know that there are other laws, Federal laws, that list penalites for behavior damaging to this country and its citizens.

The problem is that the media, print and otherwise, is now an entertainment industry, not a news reporting industry. In the rush to report the latest, greatest story so that better ratings can be gained, responsible journalism has gone out the door. This lack of regard for the safety of this country and its citizens & soldiers sickens me. Where will this irresponsible behavior stop? What will it take? Personally, a good start would be the prosecution of the idiots that can clearly be linked to security breaches or actions that can be proved to have caused harm or death to United States citizens and/or military personnel. Sorry, in my book, freedom of the press should not be used as a shield for giving a self-declared enemy information of what is being done to thwart their activities.

To those journalists who take issue with the above statement, consider this scenario. You report live that the FBI is closing in on a terrorist cell in Mytown, USA, your home. Tipped off by the report, the terroists flee before they can be captured. They are spotted leaving, and a running gun battle races across the city, ending up in your neighborhood on the street you live. The terrorists break into your house to take refuge. Your wife and children are home. Rather than surrender, they scream "Allah Akbar!!" just before they detonate their last bomb, reducing your house and everyone in it to splinters and hamburger. So how would you feel? Think a responsible application of the First Amendment was in order? Or would you take comfort in the higher ratings your station just received? Think it can't happen? Go talk to the Israelis.

Thursday, February 02, 2006

Nagan Again?

Saw the New Orleans Mayor Ray (There was a hurricane coming?) Nagan on the news this morning. He was answering questions from a Congressional inquiry on his actions & views on the Hurricane Katrina disaster. His answers showed that he was back-pedaling and blaming everyone and everything for the delays in getting help, not evacuating, etc...

One of his answers really struck me as odd, and definitely showed me that he hadn't a clue as to what his office really stood for and the authority & responsibility that he had to help the people of New Orleans.

He was asked why there was such a delay in issuing the order to evacuate the city. His response was that he had to check with his legal advisors to see if such an order was within the powers of his office.

Now any mayor that knows anything and has attended disaster training sessions & meetings knows that he has the authority to save the citizens of his city from disaster by issuing an evacuation order. Obviously, this yahoo(!) had no friggen idea what to do, how to do it, or if he could do it. And with a hurricane bearing down on his city, he should have known what his options were ahead of time since he had plenty of warning. What an incompetant idiot...

I wonder if Nagan will run for re-election. If he gets re-elected, then it will be a sad state of affairs for New Orleans.

Wonder how the Governor will do in these same hearings...

Hamas's True Nature

If you ever wanted to find out what Hamas is really all about, follow this link or copy the following into your browser:

Thanks to Joe Hagarty at Civil Discussions for this one.

Wednesday, February 01, 2006

State of the Union Speech

Having watched the State of the Union speech last night, I now understand why Ronald Reagan was such a forward thinker in leaving the Democratic Party. This Party acted like jerks, and showed their true colors.

I understand not showing support for the President during his speech by not clapping or standing, and President Bush did slap them around verbally for their actions on a variety of critical issues. But here are the items that I really think that show that this party is acting like their mascot, the donkey.

One of the President's points called for making the tax cuts permanent. The Democrats sat there stone-faced & not moving. What do you think that they are going to do if they ever get back into power? Raise your taxes, of course.

Another point was the elimination of government agencies that were under performing, not performing, or did not add to the overall efficiency of the government. Again, the Democrats sat there stone-faced & not moving. Hmmm...they like big government.

The only time they showed life was when the President mentioned that Congress did not pass a Social Security reform. Then they jumped up, hooting & hollering & slapping each other on the back. However, the President put a cap on that noise by mentioning that the problem with Social Security still exists and needs to be fixed. Of course, the Democrats sure didn't offer any alternatives last year, and still don't have a plan to fix the system.

Of the many initiatives given by the President, the Democrats were not receptive of very many of them. Then again, they sure haven't done their part either. They want things back the way they were when they had control of Congress.

In closing, the President did state that he wanted both parties of the Congress to work together on all of the issues, foreign and domestic, to move the country forward and be prepared for the future. Do you think that this reasonable request fell on deaf ears? I do.