Headline Alert - Hussein Verdict

In less than four hours, the first verdicts in the trial of Saddam Hussein are to be delivered. Does he deserve the death penalty? Will he get it? Keep an eye on your news source of choice for the latest... .

Joe

Issue: War

Probably the biggest issue this election season is the war in Iraq. For coverage of this issue, I turn to two famous Great Americans, and one unknown Great American.

"As of this writing 2,802 young Americans have been killed during three and a half years of war in Iraq. That's roughly the same number killed at Iwo Jima during the first three and a half days of fighting against the Japanese. Every life lost was precious and every loss grievous to those who loved them. Unfortunately, our media intends to use every one of those killed to make their point. It's a lesson they learned in Vietnam. On Feb. 27, 1968, after a month of brutal fighting and daily images of U.S. casualties on American television, Walter Cronkite, then the host of the CBS Evening News, proclaimed that the Tet Offensive had proven to him that the Vietnam War was no longer winnable... It didn't matter that Tet had been a decisive victory for the United States and South Vietnam. Today's potentates of the press are trying to deliver the same message: that Iraq, like Vietnam, is un-winnable. One television network has gone so far as to broadcast images of U.S. troops being killed by terrorists---making Iraq the first war where Americans get their news from the enemy. The war in Vietnam wasn't lost during 'Tet 68' no matter what Cronkite said. Rather, it was lost in the pages of America's newspapers, on our televisions, our college campuses-- and eventually in the corridors of power in Washington. We need to pray that this war isn't lost the same way." ---Oliver North

"Sometimes it seems [the news media] are less interested in legitimate news than they are in proving their knowledge and wisdom is superior to ours. The most frustrating thing is when I have the facts to prove them wrong but cannot reveal those facts without endangering security or wrecking some plan we're engaged in." ---Ronald Reagan

"Democrats are more concerned with Democrat political power than the welfare of our troops and our nation. Lies and forgeries of documents have been their modus operandi. Regardless of the Democrat continuous negative political blitzkrieg, our nation has recovered from 9/11 beyond all expectations, particularly beyond all Democrat predictions. Please tell me that Americans aren't stupid enough to swallow all the socialist Liberal Democrat diatribe on Election Day." ---a reader of The Patriot Post, San Jose, California

There isn't a great deal to add. I learned last night that my youngest nephew has chosen to follow in the footsteps of his father and enlisted in the U.S. Marines. My brother's time of service is complete, as is mine and my father's. My nephew now takes up the fight. It is for brave people such as him that you are able to read these words.

We must achieve victory in Iraq. Sooner rather than later, if possible, but victory nonetheless.

God Bless America, our fighting men and women, and God Bless that nephew of mine.

Joe

Issue: Marriage

Marriage has been a campaign issue over the past several elections. More specifically, whether Marriage should be defined as only the union of one man and one woman, or be opened up to allow homosexuals to unite in marriage. It's one of those issues that most people have an opinion on which they are unwilling to budge from.

Those who stand for Traditional Marriage have very sound, solid reasons for their views. They back up their stance with the Bible, family values, and hundreds of years of how things have always been done.

Those in favor of allowing homosexuals to marry believe that they have good reasons as well. They cite civil liberties, black oppression, and discrimination as their war cry. They liken themselves to Martin Luther King and Malcolm X struggling for equality.

There are those voters, believe it or not, who don't have a firm stance for one view over the other. It doesn't matter to them because they don't think it will have any impact on their lives if homosexuals marry or not. It's the "what's done in the privacy of their own home" argument.

What they don't seem to realize is that it's s much more than just "what's done in the privacy of their own home." If homosexuals are allowed to marry, then it becomes what's done everywhere, right out in public, for all the world to see, without regard for common decency! Because homosexuals won't keep their perversion within the confines of their own homes. Accepting homosexual marriage as normal is the equivalent of accepting homosexuality as normal. It will only encourage those who choose this unnatural lifestyle to display their perverted affections in public. I, for one, don't care to expose my children to such vulgar behavior.

There are those that will argue that homosexuality is inborn, not something you choose. There are researchers who have even tried to prove that homosexuality is genetically determined. I offer two pieces of proof to the contrary: anatomy and wildlife.

I'll agree on one point: sexual association is determined genetically. Unless you've been afflicted with some form of physical anomaly or defect, every mammal (not just people, which is important) is born with either male or female genitals. That is how your genes determine your sexual association. If you were born with male genitalia, you're a man, and any sexual associations you have should be with a woman, and vice versa (preferrably monogamously). In the animal kingdom, male animals associate with female animals for the propagation of the species. There are no homosexual lion prides, elephant crashes, wolf packs, etc. (again, unless there's some kind of birth defect).

It's why buttons have holes, light bulbs have sockets, and plugs have outlets. That is how the pieces naturally fit together. Man has woman, and woman has man, because that is how the pieces naturally fit together!

So how does homosexual marriage affect you? Progression. Most of us as children played a game where someone told someone else a secret, the secret was then relayed one person at a time through a number of people, only to come out with a shockingly different meaning at the other end. This is exactly what will happen to society if homosexuals marry. Why, then, can men not have more than one wife? Some people could even claim it's a common practice in their religion (some people already make that claim today). If we allow two men or two women to marry, why not three men, or four women (or six, or eight, or even a hundred)? Why, we don't even need a legal age of consent then, do we? If two men can marry, why not a man and a boy? You think it can't happen? Think again: there is an entire organization that supports the idea of men and boys engaging in such relationships. It's called NAMBLA -- The North American Man-Boy Love Association. What's to stop them from rallying for their cause of inappropriate sexual relations between grown men and young boys?

YOU! That's right, you can put a stop to the perversion! How? VOTE! Cast your vote on Tuesday in favor of Traditional Marriage. If there isn't a Marriage Amendment on your ballot, vote for a candidate that supports Traditional Marriage. Not sure who those candidates are? Here's an organization that can help.

And remember, if you don't vote, you don't really have a right to complain about the outcome of Election Day or the makeup of the government as a result.

Joe

A Conversation On Politics

The following is a real conversation I had about the upcoming election with a co-worker. For the sake of anonymity I'll call the co-worker "Ted." The conversation began when Ted said, "I'd just like to see sixteen or seventeen new Democrats elected to the Senate."

JOE: Why?

TED: Because I think we need to see some change.

JOE: And what kind of change do you expect to see?

TED: They can finally get some things done.

JOE: What will they get done?

TED: Changes.

JOE: Nothing's going to get changed by a Democtat-controlled Senate while George Bush is President.

TED: It'll provide balance.

JOE: No more balance than there is now. Republicans right now are no more united behind Bush than the Democrats. They aren't towing the party line and doing the President's bidding. Let me ask you a few questions.

TED: Okay.

JOE: What do you think about Illegal Immigration?

TED: I think it's bad and they need to put a stop to it.

JOE: Do you know where most Democrats stand? The majority of Democrat candidates support amnesty for illegals in the country now. Which means a guy who crawled under a fence eight years ago -- BAMM! -- instant citizenship, while the guy trying to do it right has to go through all the red tape.

TED: Okay.

JOE: Most Republicans favor stopping new illegals and somehow legalizing the existing ones without amnesty.

TED: Okay.

JOE: Which means your stance is pretty much aligned with Republicans. What do you think about gay marriage?

TED: I hate it.

JOE: Most Democrats support either gay marriage or civil unions, while most Republicans stand behind Traditional Marriage. Again, your beliefs pretty much line up with Republicans.

TED: Okay.

JOE: What do you think about the war on terrorism?

TED: I'd like to, um --


JOE: You want to see it end soon, but in victory?

TED: Yeah.

JOE: The majority of Democrats want to see an immediate withdrawal, or at the very least a concrete timeline for withdrawal.

TED: Yeah.

JOE: Most Republicans want to see a victorious ending.

TED: Do you think there should be a timeline?

JOE: Not a timeline so much. Call it a goal line. We need a defined series of goals we must achieve prior to pulling out, the last of which would be victory. I do think we need to be a little more aggressive in pursuit of victory.

TED: I can agree with that.

JOE: And again you are more in agreement with Republicans than Democrats. I already know what you think about abortion.

TED: A woman should have the right to choose.

JOE: Do you know that, historically speaking, it's easier to pass a law granting new rights than to strip rights by repealing a law?

TED: Yeah.

JOE: Which means Democrats would be more likely to pass gay marriage than Republicans would be to stop abortion. In fact, gay marriage is already starting to sweep across the country state by state.

TED: I know.

JOE: So abortion is essentially a non-issue right now.

TED: Okay.

JOE: This election is less important for what will happen the next two years than it is for what comes after the next two years. A Democrat controlled Senate is unlikely to advance their liberal agenda with President Bush in the White House.

TED: Go on.

JOE: The Republicans may be hard pressed to nominate a solidly electable candidate for the White House in 2008. If we end up with the Democrats controlling the Senate and the White House in 2008, this country is going to Hell.

Our conversation ended when he asked me what I thought of the ACLU. That's a conversation for another time.

Joe

Issue: Illegal Immigration

Illegal Immigration. Where do you stand on the issue? It's one of the biggest issues in the upcoming midterm elections, and every candidate has a position.

Specifically, in the state of Indiana, in the race for the Congressional seat currently held by John Hostettler, and challenged by Brad Ellsworth.

Hostettler is in favor of stiffer regulations and actions to stop illegal immigrants before they enter our country. Ellsworth, on the other hand, supports sweeping amnesty for illegal immigrants who are currently in the United States illegally. Where do you stand?

Illegal immigrants come into our country and take jobs away from American citizens. Some argue that they only take the jobs that Americans don't want. True or False? If they're taking jobs that Americans don't want, then they aren't actually causing any harm. True or False?

On both counts, False! How can you say that the jobs taken by these illegals are not wanted by anyone else? Have you really given everyone an opportunity to take the job? And illegals working in the American systen do harm Americans. How? They are mostly paid under the table to protect the crooked companies that employ them. This illegally exempts them from paying taxes, increasing the tax burden for honest Americans and legal immigrants. It allows their law breaking employers to skirt the system and avoid paying Unemployment Taxes and Social Security Taxes, leaving these systems greatly under funded and creating the great debate of privatized Social Security.

Hiring legal workers, whether they be American citizens or Resident Aliens, allows the systems to be fed fairly and equitably by every member of the workforce. When we all carry our share of the load, the system functions better for everyone. And I didn't even address how the current security holes that allow illegals to enter the country can help terrorists to enter as well.

Illegal immigration is a problem for every American, and drastic measures must be taken swiftly to stop illegals from crossing our borders and to either legalize (without amnesty) or deport those who currently reside here illegally. Do your part on Tuesday and cast a vote to stop illegal immigration.

Joe

Issue: Full-Day Kindergarten

An oft-discussed issue in the races for the State House in Indiana is Full-Day Kindergarten. While some states have already adopted Full-Day Kindergarten, many states are currently toying with the idea.

The arguments I've heard most recently in favor of Full-Day Kindergarten include:

• It's good for the lower class who aren't able to afford sending their children to preschool. These children start kindergarten developmentally behind their preschool counterparts, and Full-Day Kindergarten gives them the opportunity to catch up.

Counterargument:

• First, in Kindergarten, those children are on the same developmental path, whether they attended preschool or not. Those who attended preschool have only two real advantages. They are likely to perform better socially, as preschool should have taught them basic social etiquette skills and an understanding of the organizational structure of the classroom. Children who attended preschool are likely better adapted to being away from parents for a portion of the day. Both of these advantages can also be picked up by non-preschoolers through free church activities, low cost organized sports activities such as my son's basketball program, play dates with other children (friends, cousins, etc.), and time spent with a babysitter while parents enjoy some time together. How much real learning actually occurs in preschool? Nothing that can't be at least matched in the home by loving, involved parents.
• Second, how can you argue that kids who missed preschool will get caught up with the extra time of Full-Day Kindergarten when the kids who went to preschool also get the same amount of extra time? Either the non-preschoolers will get caught up while the preschoolers fall behind, or the preschoolers will continue to develop ahead of the non-preschoolers. That is, if you even believe they had an advantage to begin with.

The pro argument:

• Full-Day Kindergarten allows a stay-at-home parent to return to work a year earlier.

The counterargument:

• Many stay-at-home parents do so by choice and would likely choose to do so during the additional Kindergarten year. Half-Day Kindergarten provides both parent and child an opportunity to adjust to the major life change of school and, if chosen, returning to work.

There are no doubt many more arguments in favor of Full-Day Kindergarten, but as you may have guessed, I'm not a proponent. So here are some more reasons I think Full-Day Kindergarten is a bad idea:

• Taxes: With Half-Day Kindergarten, most Kindergarten teachers have two classes, morning and afternoon, in one classroom. Switching to Full-Day Kindergarten would increase education expenses in several ways, and those expenses would be absorbed by taxpayers. Full-Day Kindergarten with the same number of kids would mean our current teachers would have their days filled with just one class instead of two. This presents the need for twice as many teachers and twice as many classrooms, unless you just dump twice as many kids into each full day class, which would mean less individual attention per student, resulting in a lower quality education. More teachers means more teacher salaries. More classrooms means construction costs, additional supply costs, additional utility costs, increased insurance costs, and the list goes on and on.

• Family: Full-Day Kindergarten means less time for children to be home with the family during the most formative years of their lives. I'm a firm believer that a solid, loving, supporting home life is the most important factor in developing quality future citizens from today's children.

• Childhood: I'm already thinking that my son's childhood is going by way too fast. The last thing I want to see is that being expedited even more by rushing him into a full-time school life.

• Education: Quality of education reports consistently list children that are home-schooled as being better developed and better prepared than those who go through public education systems. This is just one more reason not to rush our children into the hands of someone else for the most important developmental period of their lives.

The success of American society depends on our children. The way we prepare them today will determine how productive they are tomorrow. Time spent in a loving home with the support and tutelage of caring parents will reap benefits that can never come from the teaching of a stranger in a cold, sterile classroom.

So don't rush your kids -- or mine -- out of the house. Say no to Full-Day Kindergarten. Do it with your votes on Tuesday.

Joe

13 Reasons To Vote Conservative

If you needed some clarification on the issues before voting next week, or maybe a little incentive to even go to the polls, here are thirteen sound reasons to vote for a Conservative -- which means Republican in most cases, with the exception of the rare Conservative Independent like Rick Hale of Indiana.

This comes from National Review Online, but you can find it where I did, on
CBSNews.com here.

I can understand why Democrats are jazzed about November’s election. The polls combined with the fawning media (“Oh, please, Sen. Obama, let us kiss the hem of your garment!”) are giving them goose bumps such as they have not experienced since “An Inconvenient Truth” debuted in theaters. What I don’t understand is the seeming tepidness of so many Republicans. Yes, the war in Iraq is a long, hard slog. The world is not Topeka, Kansas (would that it were). A journalist pointed out to President Bush at his most recent press conference that the Iraq war has now been going on as long as World War II did for the United States. Well, yes, but we lost 407,316 men in World War II. On Iwo Jima alone, we lost 6,800. This is not to say that the deaths of our people in Iraq should be trivialized. But comparisons with World War II — in terms of sacrifice and terrible price paid — are ridiculous. Republicans have abundant reasons to reserve a spot at their polling places on Election Day:

1)The economy. More than 6.6 million new jobs have been created since August 2003. Our 4.1 annual growth rate is superior to all other major industrialized nations. The Dow has set record highs multiple times in the past several weeks. Productivity is up, and the deficit is down. Real, after-tax income has grown by 15 percent since 2001. Inflation has remained low. As Vice President Cheney summed it up at a recent meeting with journalists, “What more do you want?” The tax cuts proposed by President Bush and passed by a Republican Congress can take a bow.
2)The Patriot Act. Democrats and liberals mourn this law as a gross infringement upon civil liberties. Yet the much-discussed abuses simply haven’t materialized. The law has, on the other hand, permitted the CIA and FBI to cooperate and share information about terrorist threats — at least so long as the New York Times isn’t publishing the details of our counterterrorism efforts on the front page.
3)The Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, to which liberals clung with passionate intensity, has been cancelled, permitting us to work on missile defense. In the age of Kim Jong Il and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is anyone (except Nancy Pelosi) sorry?
4)Immigration. Republicans in Congress insisted upon and got the first serious immigration restriction in decades. On Oct. 26, the president signed a law that will build a 700-mile fence along our southern border and, what is more important, does not offer amnesty.
5)There has not been another terrorist attack on American soil since 9/11. Who would have predicted that on 9/12?
6)Libya has surrendered its nuclear program.
7)A. Q. Khan’s nuclear smuggling network has been rolled up.
8)John Roberts and Samuel Alito sit on the U.S. Supreme Court.
9)Those Democrats who do not want to close Guantanamo Bay altogether want to give all of its inmates the full panoply of rights Americans enjoy in criminal procedures.
10)Democrats believe in immediate withdrawal from Iraq. If they succeed in forcing us to leave under these circumstances, the United States will suffer a stinging defeat in the war on terror. The terrorists already believe that they drove the Russians from Afghanistan and Israel from Lebanon and Gaza. They are convinced they chased us out of Lebanon in 1983 and from Somalia in 1993. According to Osama bin Laden and those who share his views, we are militarily strong but psychologically and spiritually weak. Like it or not — and no one likes it — we cannot leave Iraq now without utterly and decisively validating this analysis. We might as well run a white flag up the flagpole at the Capitol.
11)Democrats would like to eliminate the terrorist surveillance program.
12)If Democrats achieve a majority in the House, Barney Frank will chair the Financial Services Committee, Henry Waxman will head the Government Reform Committee, and Alcee Hastings will chair the Intelligence Committee.
13)Democrats believe that the proper response to Kim Jong Il’s nuclear test is “face to face talks.” That’s what the Clinton administration did for years. It worked out well, didn’t it?

By Mona Charen

I've quoted the entire article here because it's surprising to see such an article posted by CBSNews.com, and there's no telling how long it will actually be up on their site.

Whatever you do next Tuesday, go out and vote. It's not only your right as an American, it's your responsibility!

Joe