Tony Snow Dies of Cancer
Tony Snow, former White House Press Secretary and political commentator died early this morning after a long fight with cancer. He was 53. Snow was described as a pleasant man to work with by friend and adversary alike.
He is survived by his wife Jill Ellen Walker, whom he married in 1987; their son, Robbie; and daughters, Kendall and Kristi.
The Big Dog family extends its prayers to the Snow family. May God have mercy on Tony’s soul and may be now have peace and comfort.
Source:
Fox
Ignoring History Leads to Ignorance
Jul 6, 2008 General
George Santayana is credited with saying “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This goes along the lines of the thinking that people learn from their mistakes. Unfortunately, there are segments of any society (and some individuals within) that would prefer to ignore the past, thus guaranteeing a repeat performance of history, bad and good.
People like Bill Clinton write books that are supposed to be an accounting of thier lives and public years but those books leave out the bad things that happened and they gloss over or spin things that cannot be avoided. This is dangerous because people who read those accounts believe that is the way things happened and the accounting of history is changed. We see this every day with people repeating falsehoods in order to make them part of the collective psyche so they will be accepted as true. The repetition and gullibility of people is why a site like Snopes exist.
The Germans have a sordid history in the last century. They had a maniacal leader who exterminated millions of people, most of whom were Jews. Adolph Hitler was on a quest for power and was hell bent on taking other county’s land by force. He wanted to rule the world. He was, by all accounts, a certifiable nut though I am sure there are instances in his life where he did good things. However, ignoring him and failing to display his life before the public does no one any good. For if we hope to never repeat his mistakes then we must know them and learn from them.
Madame Tussauds’ Berlin affiliate had a wax statue of Hitler displayed in a bunker. The look was sullen and it was obvious that this was supposed to be the way Hitler looked near the end, when defeat was all but certain. There was a big ruckus about the display. People complained that it should not even exist and that it was wrong. Only moments after the doors opened a maniac (someone no less maniacal than Hitler) ran in and ripped the head off the statue. He was arrested but people in Berlin are hailing him as a hero. The saddest part of the story is that people think that his actions were appropriate.
In Pearl Harbor there is a museum and the Arizona rests at the bottom of the Harbor. There are pictures of Japanese airplanes and the people who were in command of them. We do not slash them with knives or destroy them because they are a part of history. Those displays do not honor the people who attacked us, they show the history of how it happened.
There are plenty of items of history that are displayed everyday and people don’t run around destroying them. The people of Germany need to get over this idea that the mention of Hitler is taboo and tantamount to treason. He was a part of their history and they should acknowledge it. By recognizing the danger that just one person can inspire the Germans, and the rest of the world, will be less likely to repeat the mistake of blindly following a charismatic lunatic to destruction.
We have museums that demonstrate the horrors of the slavery that once was a legal part of this nation and we have plenty of memorials to the people who fought for state’s rights and those who fought against them. Somewhere along the way slavery was ended and that was a good thing. Of course, we have our deniers as well. There are those who refuse to allow a Confederate Flag, who refuse statues to Confederate soldiers and who refuse to allow anything that demonstrates the struggles of that time in our history. They refuse by erroneously calling it racist when the Civil War was not about race or slavery. It was about state’s rights and slavery was one of the issues.
Whether it is Germany, the US or somewhere in between, people must be willing to face the ugly chapters in history in order to keep from repeating them.
Source:
TimesOnline UK
Tags: history, Hitler, vandalism, wax museum
Happy Birthday America
Jul 4, 2008 General
This great nation proclaimed its independence in 1776 and fought the British to gain just that. We became a nation in 1781 with the Articles of Confederation. Our new nation recognized that the form of government needed fine tuning and a Constitutional Convention was called for in 1787. Our Constitution went in effect March 4th 1789 and the Bill of Rights was ratified December 15th 1791.
It took from 1776 to 1791 to establish our government and ratify its governing documents. It took 15 years to get it right but that was time well spent. The United States has accomplished more in its short history than any other nation on this planet including those that have been around for thousands of years.
Keep this in mind when people complain about how long it is taking Iraq to form its government. Remember that it took us a long time to get established and we should not expect any other nation to move at any faster pace than our own country did. For what its worth, our government still moves at an extremely slow pace and we are not fighting a war on our soil.
I thank God for allowing me to be born in the USA thus giving me the gift of freedom.
I thank the US Military for keeping that gift from God safe.
God bless America. Happy birthday USA.
Feel free to trackback with anything you want to promote.
UPDATE: This is from and article in the International Herald Tribune about the troops and the holiday:
For others, the day was a reminder of their duty to their country.
At Camp Victory outside Baghdad, 1,215 troops from the Army, Marines and other services re-enlisted in a mass swearing-in ceremony led by General David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq. At least two husband and wife couples were among those signing up for another military stint.
Before an immense American flag hung in the rotunda of the palace headquarters of the U.S. military in Iraq, the troops saluted Petraeus, then sang “God Bless America.”
What a great military we have. At least these folks believe in their mission. Too bad Obamabi was not there to see this.
Others with interesting posts:
Stop the ACLU, Perri Nelson’s Website, Maggie’s Notebook, Shadowscope, The Amboy Times, Leaning Straight Up, Democrat=Socialist, Pet’s Garden Blog, third world county, McCain Blogs, Woman Honor Thyself, Pirate’s Cove, Rosemary’s News and Ideas, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Tags: birthday, constitution, freedom, independence, usa
Supreme Court Rules on Second Amendment Tomorrow
Jun 25, 2008 General
Tomorrow the Supreme Court will rule, for the first time in its history (on this particular issue), on whether the Second Amendment means an individual’s rights or the collective right of a militia. Anyone with brains knows that this is an individual right. The Bill of Rights discusses those things that the federal government may not take away from the people. The Bill of Rights does not grant rights, it says what rights (that have already existed) may not be infringed upon. The Second Amendment uses the words “…the right of the people…” The phrase “the people” is used throughout the Constitution to mean all citizens and not the militia so why would the Second Amendment use of “the people” refer to a militia. Sure, the word militia is mentioned but not as a precondition for gun ownership. I read a comment at a site and I copied it. I cannot remember where I saw it but it is a good description:
All reasonable people fully understand that the Second Amendment clearly guarantees the right of the people to keep and bear arms, and declares that there shall be no infringement. It also states that a well-regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free state. As the militia were understood at the time to be all able-bodied men, this amendment therefor[sic] presumes that if all men may be armed, the militia will be armed should it need to defend the commonwealth. Yet, though the armament of the militia proceeds from the armament of the populace, and it is a necessary precondition that if the militia is to be armed, the men must be armed, it is neither necessary nor a condition that the men be members of a militia in order to keep and bear arms.
I always believed that if we want to know what the Amendments mean we should read the words of those who wrote them. They clearly described what they meant when they wrote the words. Go to Walter Williams’ site for a list of quotes from the founders. This should clear up any misconceptions.
The Supreme Court is reported to have decided this in 1939 in the Miller case and that is what lower courts have used to justify upholding gun bans. However, Miller is not settled law because the SCOTUS remanded it back to the lower court and the issue was not about an individual right. Miller claimed he had a right to carry the weapon under the Second Amendment. The Court ruled that the sawed off shotgun did not fit the definition of a military type weapon that would be used by a militia. Since it did not (in the court’s opinion even though sawed off shotguns had been used in the military) Miller’s argument was not valid and the case was remanded. Notice what people ignore. If the gun had been ruled a weapon used by the militia, Miller would have had a right to carry it even though he was not in the militia.
The Court actually did have a ruling that demonstrated guns were an individual right and not a collective militia one. It was in the Dred Scott v. Sandford case. When the justices ruled against Scott they wrote:
The Court also presented an argument describing the feared results of granting Mr. Scott’s petition [for freedom]:
“It would give to persons of the negro race, …the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, …the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went.” Wikipedia [emphasis mine]
The Justices stated that if he were a free man he would be allowed to keep and carry arms wherever he wanted which means that all Free Men were allowed to keep and carry arms.
“No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”
Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334,[C.J. Boyd, Ed., 1950]
The ruling tomorrow should put an end to this foolish debate about having to belong to the militia to own weapons (but our militia is defined as all men 17-45 and all women in the National Guard so a lot of people should be carrying weapons). I am fairly confident that the Justices will rule that keeping and bearing arms is an individual right but if they don’t there will be a lot of instant criminals in this country.
They can come for my guns, they will get the ammo…
“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing.”
Adolph Hitler, Hitler’s Secret Conversations 403 (Norman Cameron and R.H. Stevens trans., 1961) [from Williams’ site]
Tags: gun rights, militia, Second Amendment
Justice Kennedy Screws the Children
Jun 25, 2008 General
Ronald Reagan’s second mistake, Justice Anthony Kennedy (the first was Sandra Day O’Connor), put the screws to children who are victims of rape. Kennedy, who is the swing vote in many close decisions, decided that the crime of raping a child is not worthy of the death penalty thereby ensuring that those who rape children will live their lives cared for in jails at taxpayer expense (and possibly be released) while the victims will live their lives with emotional and psychological damage.
To Kennedy and the other liberals on the court (he might as well be one, he acts like it) there are no crimes that warrant the death penalty except murder and many of them oppose it in that case as well. To them, raping a child is something that should be punished with jail time which means anything short of life without parole would allow the offender to gain freedom and rape again. Justice Alito wrote the dissenting opinion. Here is part of it and it makes the most sense:
“The Court today holds that the Eighth Amendment categorically prohibits the imposition of the death penalty for the crime of raping a child. This is so, according to the Court, no matter how young the child, no matter how many times the child is raped, no matter how many children the perpetrator rapes, no matter how sadistic the crime, no matter how much physical or psychological trauma is inflicted, and no matter how heinous the perpetrator’s prior criminal record may be. The Court provides two reasons for this sweeping conclusion: First, the Court claims to have identified “a national consensus” that the death penalty is never acceptable for the rape of a child;second, the Court concludes, based on its “independent judgment,” that imposing the death penalty for child rape is inconsistent with “‘the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society.’” Ante, at 8, 15, 16 (citation omitted). Because neither of these justifications is sound, I respectfully dissent.”
If a person who rapes a child is released and rapes again I assume that the flawed opinion of Kennedy and the others will be little consolation to the victim and his parents. I think if a person who rapes a child (in a state that had the death penalty for the offense) is released and rapes another child, the members of the court who allowed it should be hanged in front of the Supreme Court building. The idea is for laws to protect the public and this ruling does nothing to accomplish that. If it were my child they might not make it to the hanging.
While I am disgusted with the ruling in this case I actually have no feeling one way or the other about putting a criminal to death for raping a child because that can be accomplished anywhere regardless of what the court says. When the animal is sent to jail put him in the general population and let them know what he is in for. He will be killed in jail and the problem will be solved and with no appeals.
I cannot imagine what children must go through after they are raped and it is just as hard on the families. It makes it even harder when the courts rule that the criminal somehow has more rights than the victim. The criminal must be afforded a stretch of the VIIIth Amendment to stay alive while a child, who was subjected to cruel and unusual punishment at the hands of the attacker, must go through life bearing the scars. If some person who raped a child were released I would not blame any victim’s father who decided to remove the trash from this Earth. If I were on that jury he would walk away a free man.
Kennedy and the others are worried about cruel and unusual punishment. The death penalty is too good for these scumbags. They should be hanged, drawn and quartered (the criminals, not the justices, though that might not be a bad idea).
America, these justices are no where as liberal as those Barack Obama will appoint if he becomes president. There will likely be a few openings in the next president’s term. It is important that those positions are filled with justices who will not use public sentiment and personal feelings when interpreting the Constitution. We need more like those who were in the minority on this vote.
Be careful how you vote. Your vote has many more consequences than just putting someone in office.
Hugh Hewitt
Yahoo
Big Dog Salute to Donald Kochan
Tags: anthony kennedy, child rapists, death penalty, rapists, scumbags, supreme court