A Voice of Reason: Sane Views for a Crazy World

May 4, 2007

GOP Debate: Forget “Who Won” – Who Lost? Answer Fred Thompson

Well, the snapshot GOP debate is over and rather than mull over who are the winners I’ll go out on a limb, and disagree with many blogs when I make this assertion, Fred Thompson is the Big Loser. You may argue, how could he lose, he wasn’t there. If you did that, you just gave the reason. His absence here was notable, and it will hurt him.

The adage of out of sight out of mind must be remembered. There will be some likely shifting in the polls from the debate. My feeling is that Romney will pick up a few points from his anemic 10%, but where will it come from is the important question. There are a few sources, but there is no bigger source than the non candidate Fred Thompson who is around 15% in most polls, and Former Speaker Newt Gingrich who has about 8%, but I don’t think Newt is a viable candidate and he’s smart enough to know that he can’t win. He’s far too polarizing a figure.

So, that makes Fred Thompson as the most likely source to lose support, and it will go to Mit Romney who spoke articulately and clearly on a number of positions. I also think that when the dust settles, it is not likely that Giuliani will lose any ground, and will probably pick up a few points. Senator McCain is also hard to figure. On the one hand he spoke his voice, but he also seemed edgy and a bit too agressive for the format. He constantly went over his time, and I have a feeling that the base, that isn’t too enamored with him as it is, and is looking for reasons to vote against him, which may be unfortunate, I see him staying pat, but Romney closing in, and possibly losing ground to Giuliani. He could find himself in third place after this debate, which would be a disaster for his campaign.

However, former Sen. Thompson’s non participation and non announcement reinforce a perception about a dispassionate person, who does not feel a fire to run. That doesn’t bode well, as people want a Chief Executive who wants to be there.

Advertisements

Survey USA Poll: Giuliani Beats Opponents in Debate

A poll of 317 viewers watching the debate were asked to rate the performance of the candidates:

Rudy Giuliani 30%
Mitt Romney 12%
John McCain 11%
Jim Gilmore 8%
Duncan Hunter 7%
Sam Brownback 4%
Mike Huckabee 4%
Tom Tancredo 4%
Ron Paul 2%
Tommy Thompson 2%

UPDATE: Drudge report is having an interactive poll, but it does allow for multiple voting, so pretty worthless.

The Debate: Who Won and Why?

You see the title; what is your answer. I will reply after I think.

Updated: Well I thought and I will now take out my teacher’s red pencil and give each a grade in no particular order.

Rep. Tom Tancredo – Looked frustrated at times. I think part of it is that his campaign is struggling for air, and the format hurt him as he tried desparately to get out his views and distinguish himself, particularly on immigration. I also think that people saw that frustration and it didn’t help. Grade D

Rep. Duncan Hunter – Was clear, concise, and strong in many of his answer. One area that may hurt him was he was the most aggressive on Iran, and to a country that is not at all happy with Iraq, showing this posturing towards another nation in the area, one that does make everyone nervous may hurt with many even among Hawks. His trade and pro-worker solutions were noteworthy. Grade B-

Mayor Rudy Giuiliani – He was strong on war on terror and framing himself in his model of Conservativism. The questions on abortion won’t help with the base, and will help him with those who are softer on pro-life/pro-choice. He stumbled on that area, but did make his case with his time as NYC Mayor. I still support him. Grade B-

Sen. John McCain – Anyone who said that he lacked vigor got the reply in spades, he was energetic, perhaps too much so, to the point of aggressiveness in tone and body language. He also really had a problem keeping to the time, and wasn’t held to the time limits strictly. He didn’t hurt himself, but I don’t think he helped himself too much. He came out fairly strongly against President Bush, with saying numerous times, “The war was mismanaged”. He seemed passionate and assertive, but perhaps too agressive. Grade C+

Gov. Mit Romney – Of all the candidates the former Bay State Governor stood out. I am not a big Romney fan, but if I had to declare an overall winner, it would be him. He was able to frame his “flip flop” on abortion, and gave a reason that was credible. He also was well versed on the issues and inviting. Grade A

Gov. Jim Gilmore – Did very well tonight too. He was able to state that he was the “consistent Conservative”. He also did well to elicit his positions. However, there are few moments that make him stand out, and he probably won’t see his coin rise. Grade B-

Gov. Tommy Thompson – Did very well on many areas, but there was one area that may hurt him, and that was the question about firing people due to their sexual practices. I also believe that there was a pause that would have allowed him to nuance his position, and his silence was pregnant. This will be picked up. I don’t know if this is a valid reason to terminate an employee in the private sector, other than religious organizations, such as a parochial school, which are exempt from such restrictions and understandably so. His Iraq solution is interesting and deserves a look. Grade B-

Sen. Sam Brownback – Made some good points tonight, and particularly in his stressing the need for the political process to have a more dominant role in the process. His stands on abortion will help only with those who don’t know him, as they are well known. He also held up his credos to the bases fondness of evangelical base. Overall he may have helped himself, but like so many in the second tier is so far behind. Grade B-

Rep. Ron Paul – Made his stand as the maverick in the field. He also came across as passionate, principled, and had a good wit. However, his views on foreign policy are going to hurt him in the end. As much as America may wish to go back to isolationism, that ship has sailed. He advocated himself well, but his views won’t hold. Hard to grade with this dynamic, but based on his performance, and not his substance B.

Gov. Mike Huckabee – He had some good moments, and probably the biggest yuck of the night with his joke concering “The Governator”. He came across as genuine but may have suffered from the format as his positions are hard to define from some of the others, and nuance of his stands may be lost in the shuffle. Grade B-

Overall big winner has to be Romney. He did very well, and being slotted first, by the draw helped him. I think the big loser was Tom Tancredo, and this is not a slight, but he seemed frustrated and this won’t give him much of a bump.

I think that the only shift will be Romney moving up, but the question is who will pay for this hike Giuliani – who probably won’t lose support, McCain or maybe the non-announced candidate, who will also miss South Carolina’s debate, Fred Thompson.

If I had to be like a reality show and only promote five I think these five will likely be in SC.

Giuliani, McCain, Romney, Rep. Hunter, and either Sen. Brownback or Gov. Huckabee.

Then again, I could be wrong.

May 3, 2007

Where You Stand Politically

So, you want to  know where you stand and how you can get that cool little icon like I have on my blog?

Well, just go to this site and take the quiz.  I would put no opinion if you are not sure about something.

Please post your results, and you get BIG TIME BONUS POINTS for reasonableness if you score Moderate, Conservative or Liberal!  I “hope” I have constructed a place where divergent views are allowed and where we gain from seeing each other’s perspective.  I also hope that sometimes someone will say, I see your point, or something like that.

So often politics are too personal, so maybe this would at least bring back agreeable discussion and dissent to the forefront.

I’m posting this on all topics to hopefully get maximum participation.

IF you wish to take the quiz it is here.

Thanks!

April 17, 2007

Your Ideal Candidate

Found this site which allows you to measure your candidates positions by some positions which are important to you.  No surprise here, although I did not like all the options which were either or options, so on a few questions I clicked neither, as I would be “in between” polar positions on some issues.

A big shocker, Rudy wins, followed by McCain and then Hunter, who still has “no chance” to win.  Interestingly Fred Thompson and of all people John Edwards come in fairly close to each other, which helps me understand why I can tolerate Edwards more than most of the Dem field.  Pretty much this is a fairly accurate reflection of me, and Lord I hope most Americans.

Hope you guys see this and POST your results here!!!!!

1.  Theoretical Ideal Candidate   (100%)
2.  Rudolph Giuliani   (65%)  Click here for info
3.  John McCain   (64%)  Click here for info
4.  Duncan Hunter   (62%)  Click here for info
5.  Fred Thompson   (56%)  Click here for info
6.  John Edwards   (55%)  Click here for info
7.  Sam Brownback   (54%)  Click here for info
8.  Joseph Biden   (51%)  Click here for info
9.  Al Gore   (50%)  Click here for info
10.  Hillary Clinton   (49%)  Click here for info
11.  Newt Gingrich   (48%)  Click here for info
12.  Chuck Hagel   (46%)  Click here for info
13.  Tom Tancredo   (45%)  Click here for info
14.  Mitt Romney   (43%)  Click here for info
15.  Jim Gilmore   (40%)  Click here for info
16.  Wesley Clark   (39%)  Click here for info
17.  Barack Obama   (38%)  Click here for info
18.  Mike Huckabee   (35%)  Click here for info
19.  Christopher Dodd   (35%)  Click here for info
20.  Dennis Kucinich   (29%)  Click here for info
21.  Bill Richardson   (23%)  Click here for info
22.  Ron Paul   (22%)  Click here for info
23.  Tommy Thompson   (21%)  Click here for info
24.  Elaine Brown   (20%)  Click here for info
25.  Mike Gravel   (8%)  Click here for info
26.  Kent McManigal

April 4, 2007

Speaker Pelosi’s Syrian Tour

Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, met with Syrian President Assad and Syrian Public Relations Muhsan Balal today.
After giving Syria a message of Israel’s assurance for peace, the Syrians let out a few statements:

“If Israel is really interested in renewing negotiations for peace, it must declare this in a clear manner,” Bilal said.

Well, isn’t that just special, I wonder if Syria would be interested in also declaring in a clear manner a willingness to have peace by confronting Hamas openly about their positions concerning Israel’s right to exist, and maybe do a bit better at guarding their borders – yes the irony of guarding borders doesn’t escape me – and not allowing terrorist to saunter into Israel with a bit more difficulty than most teens have at getting beer for a Friday night kegger. It would also be meaningful if Syria would drop their demand for the return of the Golan Heights – as that will not happen. Nothing personal, but if someone historically has used an area as a easily for a route of invasion like it is familiar as Little Red Riding Hood’s route to Grandma’s house, I have a feeling there will be a no standing or parking sign put up in that area.

While it would not be reasonable to have a dialogue with nations, it would be important for that dialogue to be genuine. Other Representatives present at the fact finding mission, had some worthwhile additions to the conversation.

The U.S. House members, who included Virginia Republican Frank Wolf, Pennsylvania Republican Joe Pitts and Alabama Republican Robert Aderholt, also said they had raised with Syrian officials the issue of stopping the alleged flow of foreign fighters from Syria to Iraq. In a statement issued by the U.S. Embassy in Damascus, the congressmen said they had talked about “ending support for Hezbollah and Hamas, recognizing Israel’s right to exist in peace and security, and ceasing interference in Lebanon.”

This is altogether proper. That is part of the process of negotiations, that they are done in good faith. Hopefully, this will be more than a photo opportunity for Speaker Pelosi, who is well within her pervue to undertake such a mission and conference. Like it or not, she is the third senior politician in succession.

And then came Iraq – what you didn’t think that would be mentioned.

Syrian officials said Damascus wants to help Washington achieve an “honorable withdrawal” from Iraq but in return the United States must press Israel to return the Golan Heights, which Israel captured in the 1967 Six Day War.

Ahh, you knew it was coming, a win-win for Syria. If you pull out of Iraq and make Israel give back our staging area for invasion, we’ll try to enter a dialogue. What a bunch of guys. Although it is GOOD to see that the Congress’ plan of withdrawl has the official sponsorship of Syria. Of course this drew a comment from Madam Speaker:

Pelosi said she and other members of her congressional delegation raised with Assad their concern about militants crossing from Syria into Iraq, as well the Israel Defense Forces soldiers kidnapped by Hezbollah and Palestinian militants.

Now, I don’t dislike Speaker Pelosi, I really don’t. I like to hope she will be an effective leader as her party won, that’s how democracy works gang, in case we forgot, but this “raising of concern” seems to be a bit timid. And for those that think for a moment Syria will be the guardian against terrorists crossing into Iraq (cough) and Israel (pardon me while I choke), I would like to have you go over some waterfront property in Death Valley that I want to unload.

I’m all for talking; I was for it when President Reagan tried to positively engage Syria, and would be for it now, but until these other nations are willing to be honest bargainers, and realize that a mere promise – that hasn’t been backed up by any change of behavior – is not the basis for constructive negotiations. Perhaps President Bush summed this one up the best by calling these talks, “counterproductive and encouragement for a “state sponsor of terror.”

I’m not from Missouri, but Syria, Iran, and all the other nations of this region are going to have to “Show Me” something before I’d be willing to have my dialogue be, have a nice day and try not to kill a few hundred Jews or US Servicemen.

April 2, 2007

The “What the Hell On Terror”

Great post, by My Errant Mind

In this post he really hits some nails on the head.  What the WOT is becoming is another euphemism, akin to the War on Poverty and the War on Drugs.  Until this nation shows it is taking this “war” seriously, it will have many problems, and will lose support, as it does even today.  Wars are not euphemisms.

To sum up his points:

What Is Wrong With The Global ‘What The Hell?’ On Terror?

  • The war is being paid lip-service.
  • Action is not being taken to win the war.
  • Unnecessarily expending the lives of good fighting men.
  • Needless social trauma that can and should be avoided.
  • Cowardly failure to identify the enemies clearly and comprehensively and stick to that definition.
  • A concerted effort to prolong the war by the military-industrial complex.
  • Weak governments let international opinion dictate action instead of their security needs.
  • Sovereignty of nations is being weakened.
  • Values are being compromised to secure aid from dubious governments we should be at war with.
  • We allow inept and cowardly generals and politicians to continue breeding.
  • We are not holding our leaders accountable.
  • None of our leaders are truly worth following.

It is long past time to either fight this damn war the way it needs to be, or call it quits. The longer it continues, the more we are sowing the seeds of future wars.

That is, however, just what the military-industrial complex wants.

I would add securing our borders as another thing that is wrong with the “WOT”

March 29, 2007

A Momentary Lapse of Reason: In Praise of Isolationism

I’m not sure if this should be categorized under the “Momentary Lapse of Reason” section, but we’ll see.

I have a new vision of America – not of one spreading democracy throughout the world – not of one that gives a rat’s rearend about the problems of Darfour, Baghdad, Rwanda, Somalia or anywhere else outside the Western Hemisphere.

To those in Europe who are having problems with Jihadism creeping into their borders, well it’s your problem, not ours. UK, it’s been a good relationship. Ever since that War of Independence and War of 1812 thing, you’ve been about our best friends, but all things must end. France, thanks for the help in the Revolution and for the statue. We’ve paid it back in spades two times. So, you can take your superior attitude, cuisine – we got most of your good recipes now – and your wine since what we grow is as good, and everything else you possess, including your sanctimonious attitude and be left alone. You won’t have us to kick around anymore, or to bail you out when your friendly German neighbors start acting – well – German. Russia, hey, it’s been nice to be all pal like with you, but in honesty, it was a bit less complicated, albeit scarier when we didn’t like you. Historically, you’re a a backwards people, hate to break the news to you, have always been a backwards people, and other than your vodka, and well 0kay, some of your women are babes – we won’t miss dealing with you that much. You and China can duke it out if you wish. So, Europe, here’s the new US foreign policy to you, F*** you.

To Africa – we’re truly sorry about the spread of the AIDS virus, and what it is doing to your continent, but alas, you are also on your own. No, we’re not going to be moved by some video from a cable news show depicting how bad life is for you all down there. Honestly, we don’t care. We have our own crap to deal with, and a lot of money that we’re spending on your health care issues, we could be spending on our own people, and developing our own cures, which we’ll keep to ourselves. We really don’t need anymore people selling ripoffs of $10000 handbags in Times Square, so stop queing up to come on in. We don’t need you, and we don’t feel sorry for you. So, Africa, and we’ll send this in a special delivery memo to our buddy in the UN Koffi; this is the new US policy to Africa, F*** You.

Asia – China you’re doing great, and we’re going to cede you economic domination of this region. It’s really what you wanted. Taiwan, Korea, F*** You. Sorry that you have about 1.4 billion people with a government that has a slightly negative attitude about your existence, but you see, it’s really not our problem. Hey, we’ve propped up your economies long enough, and we can use good ole US ingenuity to make the stuff you make and figure out a way to make it cheap while providing labor with a decent age. One word of advice, you have the nukes, use em. India – we may make an exception for you if you send us a LOT of your women, because, Indian woman are just plain sexy, and well American women are a bit too complicated now that the ERA may pass again, so how about we make an exception just for you, that in exhcange for one million women – aged 18 to 25 – we keep sending you cheap laptops so your kids can run our kids into the educational dirt in say the next 20 to 30 years. Deal? Good! Oh, and if you can’t read between the lines, this is our message to you who live in Asia, F*** You.

To that wonderful region known as the Middle East – Thanks for the oil, we’ll figure out a way to fuel our own cars and heat our own homes, but you’re all on your own, including Israel. Nothing personal, but your problems, are just that, your problems. Iran, you got away with it with us in 79, and you know what, you win. Hell, do what you want to do in your region. Of course Israel will make sure that mushroom clouds are appearing in the suburbs of Tehran, sooner or later, Hey, once you are almost annhilated as a race not once, but twice if you count the Diaspora, you get a little touchy about those who question your right to exist. However, for now, you are the boss man of da’ Middle East. Because another big F you goes to Iraq. We’re really sorry about all the confusion we caused when we removed Big Daddy Sadaam from you, but we have no doubt that once we pull out the stakes from our pup tents, you’ll manage to find an even worse SOB (maybe SOC for camel would be a better term) to make your wonderfully enlightened and peace loving population have a new boot permanently implanted about your neck. To the Kurds, well, sometimes life just plain sucks, so you’re on your own, and best of luck to you, honest. Which brings us to Israel. We respect you, and we wish you well and good luck. You’re gonna need it, but we’re sorry, cause no more Uncle Samuel to be a big cop lurking in the background. Think of the bright side, God is on your side. So, good night good luck and God bless. Mazeltov! So Middle East, we unveil our new foreign policy towards you, it is a new salute, middle finger approriately raised aloft, as we say in unity, F*** You.

Which now brings us to our own little hemisphere. Canada, our friendly neighbor to the North. You really are kind of like a cousin, one that you like, but think is kind of strange, yeah , we know you feel the same. Well, we’re going to have a BIG job for us to work on cooperatively. It’s called a wall. You see, we really don’t need you, and like relatives, you kind of piss us off, and that wears thin on the relationship. It’s nice to see you around the holidays in short doses. So, a nice big wall will do nicely, and we’ll have the Alaskan version to work on to. Your sanctimonious attitude towards our health care program, or lack of one, will be fixed. We’re gonna be saving a lot of money by not dabbling in other people’s business, and besides, your hockey teams are usually better than ours, so you can have the CHL and we’ll have the AHL. We’ll still send you Christmas cards, okay.

Mexico, yes we know you like us so much you are just pouring in. Sadly, the southern version of the 21st Century Great Wall will keep you on your side and us on our side. We don’t need your goods to fill our dollar stores, because we deported all the illegals from the Middle East that own them. Come to think of it, paying $2.99 for a box of Fruit Loops while it is more expensive than paying $1 for Juan’s Fruity Luepos is a small price to compensate for the megabucks we end up spending on those who scamper across our borders everyday. So, hosta la vista, and we “are” truly sorry for that Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California controversy, but be big about it and let bygones be bygones, and oh, F*** you.

Of course this is all silly. I mean what would our idiots on parade have to protest about. Oh, it would be about the calloused lack of sympathy of the evil and greedy Americans, who “care so little about the rest of the world” (you must pronounce your “L” and “R’s” as “W’s” there, not that the idiots like “W” that much, but it does sound so much like the Elmer Fudd babel they typically produce). Well, don’t worry idiots, we’re going to send you to the country you protested in favor for the most. So, if you wanted to cry (please  remember the “W” rule, it’s still in effect) for the poor Mexicans, don’t feel too bad, say “hola” to your new home. Now, just fill in the blank for the bastion of decency you wish to emigrate to. You’ll be happy, we’ll certainly be happy, and I”m sure your new neighbors will just adore you. And, Oh, we didn’t want to leave you, of all people out, so, F*** you.

Of course this new isolationisms policy of F*** you will also apply to our new domestic policy. We do like to be consistent.

So, if you are in the middle of Cowdung Arkansas and need a billion here or there for some soybean hybrid experiment, F*** you.

If you are applying for “artistic grant money” so you can put an American flag, a copy of the Declaration of Independence, and The Constitution and cover it with smearings of dung from some crack heads and heroin junkies who suffer the opression of a cruel system and thus offer their valid protest. Your grant will be returned with this on the heading: F*** You.

To those who want some extra money spend on Social Security so Grandma can have both her medicine and her grocery bags filled with the finest cat and dog food, well…. F*** You.

Ahh, this is just the start of it. Wouldn’t Isolationism be grand?

I guess this was a momentary lapse of reason.

March 21, 2007

Idiots on Parade – The San Francisco “Out of Everywhere” March

But I am a Liberal posted a wonderful photo essay about the protest march in SanFrancisco earlier this week.

Don’t worry if you missed the original, many future productions are sure to be in planning.

I fully support these people’s right to protest, and fully hate what they stand for.  Just remember who these people want to run the country when you vote in 08.

March 20, 2007

Humanity in the Balance?

As one reads the various blogs, as one watches the news from around the world has there ever been a time of such stark and shifting contrasts?  Imagine if you would, a room awash in gasoline, and there are matches spread about just waiting to be struck.  Will someone willingly strike the match?  Has the match already been struck and we are in this moment awaiting for the engulfment of flames?  Much has been written of course, from both sides concerning the role of fanatical Islam and the reactions that have been brought about.  In a post at Woman Honor Thyself, the author writes in striking terms about the fear that many in the Free Democracies, mostly typified by the West have towards the possibility of offending the practitioners of Islam.  This fear is understandable, and should be based on the proper sense of “humanism” that the Western Democracies have developed over thousands of years, but I fear it is not.  Through the elevation of the human spirit, and a guiding principal, typically shown, with some horrific detours thankfully the exception and not the rule, the estate of man has risen, dramatically.

The  point raised, that we – of Western culture –  are scared of them – Islamic culture – is so true.  I wonder if it is that we are scared of them, or scared of what many of us, and even myself at times wish to do with those people.  While I do not blame all Muslims for the acts of 9/11, for the car bombs that blow up all over in their region, so typically directed against the practitioners of democratic governments, At times the virulent anger that I feel towards the movement of Islam is palapable, and while one can never excuse excesses, and remain civilized, it brings understanding of how such horrific atrocities can occur.

Sadly, those people, have little remorse, and seem to glory in such acts of barbarism. We see this every day a bomb goes off, we see this in the training of children to carry on the will of their God, which is to actively promote wanton destruction.  I would postulate that this is a very different God from the other branches in the tree of monotheism.  What I fear is in fact the reality.

What is that reality?  A great many of those people wish nothing but to wipe their feet upon the ashes of our humanity and our culture. While I don’t know an exact percentage, and probably no one does know, the number is certainly sizeable.  In a very real way they pose a clear danger to not only the security of the United States and other liberal democracies, but to the ethos of Western Civilization itself.

The questions which must be asked by every member of democracies which place a proper “humanistic” value on the right to life, the right to participate in self-government, the right to worship God as one pleases, even to ignore or discount, the right to live without fear, is what are we as individuals, as member of societies where government is placed squarely on the hands of the people prepared to do if this view is commonplace among those people. Do we dare risk our correct liberalism with views of tolerance and respecting differences by taking on the face of distrust and of not believing that inside every human being is a spark that wishes to burn not in hateful flames, but in the warmth of reason and moderation? 

In a Free Society, there is a tacit understanding that our differences – if we share the common ground of loving the concept of liberty – as a part of our citizenship more than the concept of devotion to the an individual cause which is allowed only because of that free society.  Yet this other society demands conformity and the bended knee to their view of God.  While in the West, even amidst the rhetoric of religious and non religious, people who are of faith are not threatened by those who do not share that faith.  Indeed, a civil discourse, filled oftentimes with good humor and concern from the common strands of humanity we share, however they got there, are a part of the compact we make with society.  I accept you, even if I don’t agree with you, and I value your right to be what I am opposed to, because in that I protect not only you, but eventually myself.    This concept of community, is sorely lacking in those people.

Perhaps the lines are being drawn. Perhaps they have been drawn for longer than many of us would like to admit.  Perhaps this is the climactic struggle of the ages, where history lies balanced on a thread, freedom and light contrasted by domination to a code enforced by the tyranny of evil men. All of our fathers and mothers of history look to us from wherever they lie. Never in the mind of mankind has an age of prosperity and the candle of liberty burned so brightly within our species. Yet, perhaps never are the consequences to guard that light so important.

Sadly ironic that so much of this struggle in concerned over oil.  Oil, which in the literature of both cultures plays a soothing role, a role that is shown to be linked to thoughts of light, and peace, reflection upon God.  The miracle of the Macabees for the Jews, the indwelling of God, the Holy Spirit for the Christian.  And yes, in Islam oil is seen as being the cures for many ills, and is given in tradition in preparation for pilgrimages.  Yet, oil, may be the crux or the agent which fills the room, ready for the match to strike. 

We must all ask ourselves, what am I prepared to do.  It would seem that a dark chasm fills the days ahead.  Ask yourself, do you see things getting better or worse in the next thirty years.  Consider the rapidity of the rise of this conflaguration.  Recall the happiness that the vast majority felt when two leaders worked together and seemingly the nuclear nightmare that had blanketed this planet for a generation was lifted.  How lifelong enemies became concilatory, cooperative and working towards friendship.  And yet, in the midst of that time perhaps an even greater danger to the world was arising.  What is life like today, compared to that time?  What do you feel life will be like for your children and by mercy, your grandchildren.  What type of world will they awake into.

At times like these I can understand the cries from the Psalmist who envisioned a day that enemies by nature would lie together.  I can understand the cry from the  heart of mankind to have a time when justice and peace shall reign, and the worlds swords will be changed to bring tools of harvest.  And yet, that moment, at this particular time seems more illusory to my own eyes than it has ever in the short time that I have lived on this planet.  At times I see hope, and then I see the gathering of clouds. 

It may well be that humanity is in the balance.  Is there light?  Does anyone see it? 

“For sleep one needs endless depths of blackness to sink into; daylight is too shallow, it will not cover one”.

Anne Morrow Lindbergh

Oh how I yearn to be awake in the sun.

Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.