Sunday, June 28, 2009

American cry-babies

American cry-babies
By: Ken LaRive

For two thousand and many more years, men have made and accepted predictions about the “End Times.” In retrospect, those who totally accepted this premise became, to a degree, stagnant and dogmatic, while those who promoted and controlled these forecasts became rich and powerful. To faithfully accept these presumptions emphatically stimulates complacency, with fearful and hopeless resignation for what they might consider inevitable, while those in control reap from the instability and fear it produces. Even when the faithful espouse them for the good, like the return of Jesus, some might be prone to inaction and dysfunction in the here and now, while waiting for what they might consider inevitable and eminent.

If those books had actually been read instead of quoting and trusting someone else’s interpretation, the student would see the many times it is emphatically stated that no man knows the future... but what he is responsible for self and to make his way by His grace. God helping those who help themselves permeates these writings, and that, in and of itself, is the primary strength of America. It is called accountability. If we fail, it is because we have lost sight of this singular principle, and its many obscure aspects that also influence us.

We have free-will in America, all men do, and that means nothing is set in stone. If we were predestined we would live meaningless and inconsequential lives, without reason, without hope, and nothing could be explained, or goals formulated.

If one observes something that needs changing, worth keeping or striving for, an effort has to be made, and those who can’t or won’t take up the challenge should get out of the way... This is not readily understood today when uneven playing fields first used as a helping hand to overcome social adversity, becomes the norm for a societal term called the “have-nots.” It must now be understood that after fifty years of justification for inequity, the days of the supposed “have-nots” are over. The metaphorical “ladder” and America’s sound equal rights are based in unassailable law, and emphatically in place. What holds back accomplishment is found inside of a person’s head, and no one but that person should be held to blame.

Underachievers no longer have excuses, and can now be considered the “don’t want to be.” No child left behind is a complete fallacy now, as anyone who has ability, common sense, work ethics, and a bit of luck, can achieve. Not everyone can win, of course. It is not nature’s way that everyone can come in first, or at all. If we don’t see this concept, all of us are in jeopardy, as those who so choose to win, will have to carry those who by their own volition choose not to. When this becomes manifest in our society, most likely few will finish at all, and those who do will be exhausted and become unmotivated, unfairly pulling the weight of the “don’t want to be”.

Yes, it is scary to stand up and make a difference, to try, but that is what men with spirit do, and what America is. You might be surprised at what you can achieve if you whiners would just quit lamenting, and start doing. The only constant I see in this world is that there will always be winners and losers, survivors and victims, go-getters and cry-babies, and all else is purely semantics.

America is known to be the ladder for success and the foundation of freedom, yet more than 50 percent now consider themselves wounded commoners, and cry for attention like a brood of new-born kittens. The ladder remains, the foundation still there, but big government sponsorship of weak natured people inhibits not only the climb, but undermines the reason to try. It is evident that without government they would surely die unfulfilled, unrewarded, and unverified. They think that strength of purpose comes from outside, too myopic to realize that it dwells within. If not set in place by good example, it will become evident with limp handshakes, inactive heads, the shifty eyes of irresponsibility, and mannerisms resembling both immaturity and cowardice. Sorry to say, but these characters will also be passed on to their children, who will unconditionally accept the government yoke gladly.

Men and women just a hundred years ago lived and died by faith in themselves and the spirit of God who was their strength. Yes, they cried. They cried empathetically for the loss of loved ones by starvation, war, disease, heat and cold. They cried with a passion and fortitude to forge this nation by their own blood and sweat, and gave it to us intact. In those days, cry-babies found it difficult to exist, but today they are incorporated into the folds of society like parasites, without pride, dignity, honor, or even base self-esteem. Artificially held afloat, they now have the power to vote for those they think can perpetuate their dependence, and by a Hollywood media’s propagandized mind control, they do. The masses are born and raised to have little regard for anything but selfish concerns. Leaders revel in this dependence, and grow rich in the dynamics they have created and motivated in a welfare state.

There seems not to be enough strength, intelligence, or goodness in the common man to balance this vote, and their dependence is the excuse our corrupt leaders give for pissing away the greatest country the world has ever known. I’m telling you, this does not have to be so, and saying it out loud is half the battle won. Truth has a way of finding the good in all of us, and the past does not equal the future.

The time for crying is over. It is time to take this country back. The answers will become evident and more and more imaginative as everything is taken from us, i.e., liberty, our constitution, and economy. What we will have left is the memory of our dreams. That is the American way, responsible for our own destiny; we can pick up our tools and start again.

Faith and belief are powerful forces, and affirmative influences for the advancement of mankind. There seems to be nothing wrong with provisional presumptions pinpointing a time of disaster and its resurrection, so long as one continues to be a viable part of society, and contribute for the good.

No matter how God is perceived or interpreted by men, the essence of God is constant. America is a melting pot of many cultures, races and religions, and the term “In God We Trust” should represent all of faith. Those who have decided not to have faith in an Almighty, should have respect for those who do, because your decision is also based on faith, whether you admit that or not, and accepting even the presumption of atheism, has all the marks of religion. In essence, under the skin, we are all one.

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Dolsie's 90th

Dolsie hits 90!
Born June 15, 1919... Happy Birthday!

Theresa “Dolsie” Norman hit her 90th birthday with a bang at Acadian Village. Over 100 people attended her birthday celebration and everyone had a great time. Five children, 10 grandchildren, 9 great grandchildren and all of her friends from Camelot in Broussard were all there, and they ate, danced and laughed until finally getting kicked out! Everyone from 101 to 1 years of age wished her many more as she blew out nine candles!

One high point was Dolsie singing several of her old favorites, including “Baby Face”, and with the same gusto as always.

Dolsie moved to Broussard from New Orleans after Katrina to be close to family. “I always loved this area,” said Dolsie, “everyone is so nice, like one big family. I have been doing my part to help teach some how to cook New Orleans gumbo, I do miss that!”

Monday, June 22, 2009

Obamanation news

Obamanation news... premier issue!
By: Ken LaRive

Obama tells the gay community to “suck it up!” while in the same day he was overheard in the parking lot to say, “We can now kill two birds with one stone,” and “closing the door on openness. What is in a promise anyway? I wasn’t yet briefed!” Gays took offence thinking he was referring to them, and said they would “Slap him silly, if they could.”

Riot Police in Iran use tear gas to make protesters more sensitive. An American Journalist hiding in the bushes thought he heard something like “Allah Akbar, give us back FACEBOOK!” being chanted in the street. A concerned empathizer citizen in New York was quoted to say “I don’t speak dat language, but tears bring out the best in people.”

North Korea tells the US that they have all of their I's dotted and t's crossed too! So there!

Al Qaeda is quoted to say they would use nukes if they had them, and it wouldn’t be pretty.

“Obama’s approval rating drops to the highest level ever...” Says the Galloping goourmet.

Goldman Sacks make biggest profit ever, and has no apology. “Barclays Capital, Credit Suisse and Deutsche Bank are among the European firms expected to register bumper profits, along with US banks JP Morgan and Morgan Stanley following the near collapse and government rescue of ajor trading houses including Citigroup, Merrill Lynch, UBS and Royal Bank of Scotland.” Said Drudge, “A repay of the stimulus money might be feasible if a record had actually been kept.” A top unanimous official allegedly stated.

Arizona has the longest stretch of low temperatures since 1913, while Global warming comes to Louisiana dressed like an Indian in summer to confuse us more. Al Gore had no comment.

Suicide bombers give US troops a grand sendoff, and Iraq clams victory... “38 aren’t a lot.” A soldier was overheard saying. “Man, we go'in a home!”

It is now insinuated that Silvio Berlusconi thought to pay for his hooker parties with the 40 billion he was to take from the 134 billion in confiscated US bonds. “Too bad they were fake!” He said with a wink during an impromptu press conference as he exited his flat. A reporter standing in the back noticed the Berlusconi had his fingers crossed during the questioning. “I have noticed that it is always best to answer a question with a question.” He said, “That way you can never be miss-quoted.”

Friday, June 19, 2009

Questions for Americans


1. Do we citizens, individually and collectively, know America's core values?

2. Do we adequately explain them to our children and grandchildren?

3. Do we citizens love what America stands for with greater intensity than our potential enemies hate what America stands for?

4. Do our Federal level elected servants have the political will to protect and defend America, more than the rulers of our potential enemies have the political will to destroy America?

5. Do we citizens, collectively, have the will to demand our Federal level elected servants protect and defend America, in the event they fall short of upholding their oaths to do so?

6. Do we citizens value our sovereignty and citizenship with greater intensity than those who illegally invade our nation ignore our sovereignty and citizenship?

7. Do we know, understand and value our Constitution more than those, in and out of government, who would usurp or reject it?

8. The next time America is threatened or attacked by hostile force, do we citizens have the determination to go to the wall for America similar to how our Greatest Generation did?

9. Do we citizens value our republic with the determination and intensity to sustain and maintain it?

10. Would we allow entities in America to change our republican form of government without a vote of the People or their representatives?

11. Are such issues too trivial or retro for our current society?

Growing older

Queeny goes swimming

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Wafa Sultan speaks of Obama

Wafa Sultan...

Who Should We Believe?

After President Obama's Cairo speech, many of my Middle Eastern Arab readers reacted with bewilderment. As one of them expressed; "Who should we believe, Obama or you?" in particular his statement that "America and Islam overlap and share common principles, the principles of justice, to lerance and dignity for men and women".

True, reading the Arab press's reaction to his speech it is clear that many Muslims now love Obama. After all, he introduced to them a narrative that affirms their conspiracy theories and their identity as victims of the West. Hence, the Arab media expressed their confidence that the speech will provide a "new stance towards Islam and the Muslims, after centuries of aggression and hostility." (Al Ahram - Egypt- MEMRI)More than anything, I am reminded of a story by Nizar Qubbani, the famous Syrian poet. His young son was a physician and suffered from an acute heart problem. When Nizar asked his son about his heart condition, the son drew a red heart. Being a poet, the father interpreted the drawing as asign of a vibrant and healthy heart and took great comfort in believing this to be a sign of recovery. After his son's passing, Nizar wrote a poem describing his feelings as a heartbroken father. He felt unbearably saddened as he realized he had misinterpreted the drawing. Obviously, the son's sketch of a red heart was meant to convey no hope for his profusely bleeding heart, while the father's understanding of the symbol as a hopeful one was wrong.

The poet and the physician perceived reality in totally different ways;similar to the dichotomy between President Obama's view of the Islamic world and mine.The truth is, however, that only one reality exists.

Mr. Obama is a politician, and a very astute one. However, his speech revealed that his view is unduly influenced by naïve desire. His perception of Islam and the reality of Islam need to be synchronized. I am a physician and a realist who has lived and experienced the effect of my Arab culture and Islamic religion since childhood.

The president pandered to Muslims: praised their accomplishments,commiserated with their grievances, and apologized for injustices done to them by centuries of colonialism -- without once mentioning the history of rampant and violent Arab colonialism. He avoided any mention of Jihadi tenets, or of the Islamic political ideology of supremacy over all non Muslims -- principles embedded in Sharia law. These are taught and sanctioned openly by Al-Azhar, the university that hosted him, the foremost center of Sharia studies. Obama underscored the supposed American mistreatment of terrorists and apologized for torture in Guantanamo, forgetting that Islamic regimes are brutal to their own people. The president also repudiated significant U.S. contributions in both the lives of its soldiers and humanitarian aid to Muslims across the globe made throughout history -- despite Muslim attacks against America and Americans. In short, parts of his speech sounded like a new Pan-Arab messiah come to usher the Arab world back into its rightful world dominion.

Most disturbing was the president's call to defend Muslims against negative stereotypes. A dangerous precedent is set when freedom of speech is silenced and ideological criticism forbidden. This, again, is the stuff of nightmarish totalitarian regimes. The beauty of the US Constitution is its balance, and the wisdom it embraces by distinguishing between that which should be protected and defended and that which should be prosecuted and decried. Encouraging laws to make criticism of Islam an offense punishable by law is troubling.

Since arriving in the US, I have enjoyed the freedom to educate my Arab brothers and sisters in the Middle East, who yearn for real freedom - and I have seen successes. Mr. Obama calls these very successes into question rather than championing freedom.

As the president embarks on his new task to defend Muslims against negative stereotypes," does this mean he will somehow interfere and undermine that message? Or, perhaps it means he may join with the Organization of Islamic Conference, the 57 Muslim countries that work relentlessly to promote a United Nations resolution to suppress voices of dissent against Islam? I am confident we would all come to regret this.

Obama sidesteps the acute state of affairs in the Islamic world with flattery, failing to encourage accountability for rhetoric, practices and the behavior that feed stereotypes. I did not hear an exhortation to the Islamic world to open itself to diversity, to accept women as equal citizens with the same rights and protection under law as men. I did not hear a challenge to the Muslim world to accept other religions and their ability to practice openly within the Islamic20world -- where the practice of Christianity, Judaism and other religions would cost an individual his or her life in most Muslim countries. I did not hear a call to erase for all time, Dhimmi racism -- the Sharia law-based dictate that Christians and Jews are inferior and should be destroyed. Are these "…the principles of justice, tolerance and dignity for human beings"?

In contrast, I see my people's heart bleeding and know the pressing need for self-correction and honest examination for the sake of urgent repair. Obama dangles the carrot but shies away from the imperative issues boiling beneath the surface. Obama's reality makes my work and that of others who speak up against intolerant Islamic doctrines more challenging. He undermines this mission by placating abusive, xenophobic policies and enabling those within the Islamic world to subjugate others, to coerce others to its beliefs, and to continue these pursuits with his blessing.

The president failed to join freedom-loving individuals, liberated Arabs like myself. He failed to lead the Muslim world into modernization and vital reform. Rather than calling out, "The house is on fire." Obama smiles and tells us how beautiful the house is as it burns out of control and threatens to destroy us.

To the question I received on my e-mail; "Who should we believe, Obama or you?" I elaborated to my Moroccan reader that Obama is a politician who wishes to use sweet talk and to whitewash reality to make amends with Muslims.

I, on the other hand I am a pragmatic Arab woman who escaped from prison within Islam to the free world and now devote my life to expressing views freely and pressing for a genuine difference in Islam. We cannot have it both ways. Intolerance never tolerates freedom.

Monday, June 15, 2009

Conservative Percent by Gallup 2009

Conservatives” Are Single-Largest Ideological Group Percentage of “liberals” higher this decade than in early ’90s
by Lydia Saad

PRINCETON, NJ -- Thus far in 2009, 40% of Americans interviewed in national Gallup Poll surveys describe their political views as conservative, 35% as moderate, and 21% as liberal. This represents a slight increase for conservatism in the U.S. since 2008, returning it to a level last seen in 2004. The 21% calling themselves liberal is in line with findings throughout this decade, but is up from the 1990s.

These annual figures are based on multiple national Gallup surveys conducted each year, in some cases encompassing more than 40,000 interviews. The 2009 data are based on 10 separate surveys conducted from January through May. Thus, the margins of error around each year's figures are quite small, and changes of only two percentage points are statistically significant.

To measure political ideology, Gallup asks Americans to say whether their political views are very conservative, conservative, moderate, liberal, or very liberal. As has been the case each year since 1992, very few Americans define themselves at the extremes of the political spectrum. Just 9% call themselves "very conservative" and 5% "very liberal." The vast majority of self-described liberals and conservatives identify with the unmodified form of their chosen label.

Party-Based Ideology
There is an important distinction in the respective ideological compositions of the Republican and Democratic Parties. While a solid majority of Republicans are on the same page -- 73% call themselves conservative -- Democrats are more of a mixture. The major division among Democrats is between self-defined moderates (40%) and liberals (38%). However, an additional 22% of Democrats consider themselves conservative, much higher than the 3% of Republicans identifying as liberal.

True to their nonpartisan tendencies, close to half of political independents -- 45% -- describe their political views as "moderate." Among the rest, the balance of views is tilted more heavily to the right than to the left: 34% are conservative, while 20% are liberal.

Gallup trends show a slight increase since 2008 in the percentages of all three party groups calling themselves "conservative," which accounts for the three percentage-point increase among the public at large.

Thus far in 2009, Gallup has found an average of 36% of Americans considering themselves Democratic, 28% Republican, and 37% independent. When independents are pressed to say which party they lean toward, 51% of Americans identify as Democrats, 39% as Republicans, and only 9% as pure independents.

Ideological tendencies by leaned party affiliation are very similar to those of straight partisan groups. However, it is worth noting the views of pure independents -- a group usually too small to analyze in individual surveys but potentially important in deciding elections. Exactly half of pure independents describe their views as moderate, 30% say they are conservative, and 17% liberal.

As reported last week on, women are more likely than men to be Democratic in their political orientation. Along the same lines, women are more likely than men to be ideologically "moderate" and "liberal," and less likely to be "conservative."

Still, conservatism outweighs liberalism among both genders.

The pattern is strikingly different on the basis of age, and this could have important political implications in the years ahead. Whereas middle-aged and older Americans lean conservative (vs. liberal) in their politics by at least 2 to 1, adults aged 18 to 29 are just as likely to say their political views are liberal (31%) as to say they are conservative (30%).

Future Gallup analysis will look at the changes in the political ideology of different age cohorts over time, to see whether young adults in the past have started out more liberal than they wound up in their later years.

Bottom Line
Although the terms may mean different things to different people, Americans readily peg themselves, politically, into one of five categories along the conservative-to-liberal spectrum. At present, large minorities describe their views as either moderate or conservative -- with conservatives the larger group -- whereas only about one in five consider themselves liberal.

While these figures have shown little change over the past decade, the nation appears to be slightly more polarized than it was in the early 1990s. Compared with the 1992-1994 period, the percentage of moderates has declined from 42% to 35%, while the percentages of conservatives and liberals are up slightly -- from 38% to 40% for conservatives and a larger 17% to 21% movement for liberals.

Survey Methods
Results are based on aggregated Gallup Poll surveys of approximately 1,000 national adults, aged 18 and older, interviewed by telephone. Sample sizes for the annual compilations range from approximately 10,000 to approximately 40,000. For these results, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±1 percentage point.

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls

Thursday, June 11, 2009

Olympus TOUGH-8000 put to the test

SHOCKPROOF (6.6ft.)Life can be tough, this camera is tougher. Rugged metal body and revolutionary shock-absorbing construction are designed to withstand a 6.6-foot drop, bump or other mishap.

WATERPROOF (33ft.)A revolutionary system of waterproof seals and gaskets keeps water out so you can take pictures as deep as 33 feet underwater.

FREEZEPROOF (14°F/-10°C)Boldly enter that winter wonderland without worrying about your camera. This camera is winterized to perform at below-freezing temperatures.

CRUSHPROOF (220lbf.)With a rugged body and reinforced LCD, the STYLUS TOUGH-8000 withstands up to 220 pounds of pressure so your camera and images are protected.

DUAL IMAGE STABILIZATIONForget about blurry shots with this 2-in-1 anti-blur solution. Sensor-Shift Image Stabilization compensates for camera shake to keep your shots steady while Digital Image Stabilization captures crisp, clear images in any situation.