Reject the Status Quo

You Decide

I heard waterboarding being discussed on two different radio talk shows today. Both radio hosts said that we need to do whatever is necessary to prevent terrorist attacks. I, on the other hand, agree with Sen. John McCain when he said, "It's not about who they are. It's about who we are", while defending his opposition to torture of detainees in the "war on terror".

One of my favorite quotes is by the Mexican revolutionary Emiliano Zapata; who said, "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees". If we as a nation resort to 'whatever is necessary', are we in effect living on our knees by succumbing to our fears and accepting actions that we would otherwise find abhorrent.

See video of a waterboarding demonstration here and decide for yourself.

You Won't See This on ABC

John Stossel interviews Ron Paul.

I've been a fan of John Stossel for several years. His 'Give Me a Break' segments on ABC's '20/20' are some of the best TV available. His libertarian leanings have long been evident in his commentary and I was happy to learn that he had interviewed Ron Paul. Unfortunately, ABC decided to not air the interview. However, due to the wonders of modern technology, you can see the interview here. Parts 1-6 of the interview are all available on You Tube.

Gandhi on the Iraq War

"What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans, and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty and democracy?"
– Mahatma Gandhi

Pretty wise for a man who walked around wearing a bedsheet.

Rudy on Guns

Giuliani has claimed that the only legitimate uses of guns are hunting and law enforcement. Watch the video here. He said that gun manufacturers are producing 3 to 4 times as many guns as needed and that they are knowingly supplying an illegal market.

Supposedly Rudy has realized that his lawsuit against the gun manufacturers was misguided. Only a fool would believe him. The illegal market he refers to is you and me owning a handgun to protect our families against the likes of Benito Giuliani.

Bob Dylan has a Message for You

Why Believe Rudy on Guns?

Rudy Giuliani lied spoke to the National Rifle Association yesterday and told the group that he supported their right to bear arms. His views have apparently evolved since he was the mayor of New York City, when he was a strong gun control advocate. He says the 9-11 attacks "casts somewhat of a different light on the Second Amendment and Second Amendment rights. It doesn't change the fundamental rights, but maybe it highlights the necessity for them more." I'm pretty sure the Founders included the 2nd Amendment in the Constitution for protection against the likes of Rudy Giuliani rather than against some jihadi.

I do not believe that Giuliani has had some epiphany on guns and the 2nd Amendment. Just like I don't believe him when he says that he will appoint conservative judges, or anything else he says for that matter. I believe that he will say whatever is politically expedient.

Giuliani says that he supported gun control while mayor of NYC because fighting crime was all-important. Our Constitutional rights are not based on the whim of any man's priorities as mayor. To paraphrase Franklin, the man who gives up liberty for safety deserves neither.

Giuliani once said, "Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do." I do not trust anyone in a position of power who would make that statement.

Just ask Donna Hanover (wife number 2 of 3) if Rudy is honest and trustworthy. Please do not let this man fool you.

Peroutka Endorses Paul

Michael Peroutka, the Constitution Party presidential candidate in 2004, has endorsed Ron Paul for President. Along with a handful of other folks, I voted for Peroutka for President in 2004. I had to write him in on the Texas ballot (the bi-factional Republican/Democrat party in TX makes it as difficult as possible for third party candidates to take a slice of their pie). Peroutka recognizes that Paul is the only acceptable candidate running for President.

See Peroutka's endorsement here.

Horns Need Improvement

The Longhorns season opener was not what I expected it to be. I had never even heard of Arkansas State, so I did not expect it to be much of a game. I figured that everyone on the 3-deep roster would get to play and that Colt McCoy would be on the bench after the first series of the second half. Wrong. The Longhorns finished with only 21 points, and I expected them to score that many in the first quarter.

A lackluster performance is nothing new for a Mack Brown coached team, and the Horns will need to buckle up their chinstraps and come out ready to play if they hope to beat TCU next Saturday. And improvement is needed on both sides of the ball if the Horns hope to be competitive. 172 yards in penalties, 4 yards per rush, and two interceptions are all stats that do not bode well against what may be the second best team that Texas plays this year.

The Horns difficulties stem from two problems that have plagued the program since Mack Brown took the helm. One is that the Horns never play as if they are angry. They need a little fire in the belly. The second is that Greg Davis sucks. The only reason Davis still has a job was that one of the greatest talents ever to play college football made us forget what an idiot Davis was for three years.

Of course Saturday's game could have been worse. We could have lost like Michigan. If the Indians had been able to score on any of their first four drives inside the Texas 20, then we may have witnessed the two worst college football upsets ever on the same Saturday.

Update - I spoke to my dad who was at the game, and he says it was even worse than I imagined. Especially the performance by the defense and the offensive line. He believes that it could be a long season.

Bob Dylan - Masters Of War

Beware the Military-Industrial Complex

President Dwight Eisenhower gave his farewell address to the nation on January 17, 1961. The speech is now known as the Military-Industrial Complex Speech.

Eisenhower was the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe during WWII and was responsible for planning and executing the D-Day invasion. Eisenhower knew the costs of war and he hated it. He said, "I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity."

In his farewell address, Eisenhower warned of the military industrial complex. He said, "...we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted."

The military industrial complex that Eisenhower warned of still exists. Since October 2006, contracts have been granted totaling $172,748,149,370 based on information released by the Department of Defense. And today, in addition to the traditional military contractors such as Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and General Dynamics; there are also numerous contractors such as KBR in Iraq providing logistical support (i.e., performing mundane tasks done by troops in previous wars). Private contractors employed in the military service industry complex now outnumber our troops in Iraq.

If you think I'm a kook, then answer this question for me - why do we have a military budget that is larger than the next 14 biggest spenders combined? And no, the costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are not included in that budget. My best guess is that lots of people are making lots of money if America is in a perpetual state of war.

The Yellow Bus

No offense meant to those of you with children in government schools.

The Yellow Bus
by Vox Day

It was a fine September day
When my sweet princess came to say,
"Oh Daddy, could we please discuss
The purpose of that yellow bus?
I see the children get on board
While our house is always ignored.
It looks like fun, it looks so cool,
To ride upon it off to school!"

Her little face was serious,
And naturally curious
About this strange phenomenon
Her friends had all departed on,
With some misgiving then I knew
An explanation now was due.
I placed a hand under my chin
And wondered how I should begin.

Then I remembered my school days
Now dim in memory's fading haze
The good times, and the bad times too,
When everything was bright and new.
And yet my main recollection
Was a sense of disaffection.
Endless boredom, a parody
Of learning, farce and tragedy!

"Do you know what they'll learn today?"
She shook her head without delay.
"They first will learn the alphabet - "
"But Daddy, don't they know it yet?"
She interrupted in surprise,
Amazement in those big brown eyes.
"Ten letters is the minimum,"
I said, "that's where they're starting from."

She blinked and looked somewhat perturbed.
"So, what would I do?" next I heard.
"I know my letters, phonics too,
Today I read a book – no, two!
And yet, they're gone for the whole day
Do they do nothing there but play?
That sounds so fun, can I go there?
I think that would be only fair!""

They do play, my lovely flower,
But for just one single hour.
Then all the rest they sit in class
And wait as the long hours pass.
For no child can hope to move on
'til all is learned by everyone."
"But Daddy, that's ridiculous.
Surely, it could never be thus!"

It's worse than that, (I thought it through),
As they teach things that are not true.
They will not let you learn of God
And instill logic badly flawed.
It's not so much education
As naked indoctrination.
For little is more blindly cruel
Than sentencing a child to school.

Of course, these thoughts I did not share
As she stood innocently there.
"Their parents love your friends, I'm sure,
But Mommy and I love you more.
These next years will suffice to show
How freedom helps a mind to grow,
And you, my dear, will always be
A child of God and liberty."

Did she fathom?
I cannot say.
She'll tell me so
One day, I pray.

Bush's Hypocrisy

Bush stirred controversy when he invoked the tragedy of Vietnam to justify our continued presence in Iraq during a speech delivered on August 22 . During the speech, Bush once again trotted out the fictitious assertion that "for the security of the United States of America,we must defeat them overseas so that we do not face them in the United States of America".

On the same day, the Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell told the El Paso Times that the number of Iraqis detained crossing the Southwest border this year has tripled compared to last year. The majority of those detained were supposedly seeking asylum, however an anonymous U.S. intelligence analyst told the Times that coyotes are telling Iraqis to ask for amnesty if caught. McConnell admitted that a small number of people with known ties to terrorism have been caught crossing the border.

So Bush has our troops deployed in Iraq to prevent terror attacks on Main Street USA, while every year hundreds of thousands of people (including hundreds of Iraqis, i.e., potential terrorists) are allowed to illegally cross our southern border. Bush wants to close Iraq's borders with Iran and Syria, but apparently doesn't give a damn about securing our own borders. Of course Bush lives in a bubble and either doesn't realize or doesn't care that far more Americans have been killed in the last six years by drunk driving and murdering illegal aliens than died on 9-11.

Mr. President, you're no Patrick Henry

(click here to view)

Richard Bartholomew Artizans.com Aug 15, 2007 EditorialCartoonists.com

Trial Balloon

The Bush administration launched a trial balloon this week. Bush's war adviser, Army Lt. General Douglas Lute, was asked about a return to a military draft on NPR's August 10 edition of All Things Considered. Lute responded that "it makes sense to certainly consider it", and that the draft "has always been an option on the table". The current size of the military is apparently not sufficient to fight the war in Iran that Dick Cheney and his warmongering allies in the media are presently building the case for (just as they did in 2002 before the invasion of Iraq).

The prolonged conflict in Iraq is already straining our military. In December 2006, Colin Powell told CBS News' Face the Nation, "The current active army is not large enough...for the kinds of missions they're being asked to perform". Earlier this year, active-duty Army troops had their deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan extended from 12 months to 15 months in order to increase the number of troops in Iraq for the "surge". Many troops have served multiple tours and when in Iraq often serve months on end with no time away from the front lines.

As it is, the Bush administration would not be able to wage the war in Iraq if it did not rely on an army of private contractors that outnumbers the troops in Iraq. For perspective, contractors were 5 percent of the total force deployed during World War II and Korea, and the percentage doubled to 10 percent during Vietnam and the first Gulf War.

Wars that should not be fought, cannot be fought without conscription (or at least huge numbers of private contractors as noted above). Involuntary service is antithetical to the American notion of freedom and all attempts at instituting a draft were rejected by the American people until World War I. Americans would riot in the streets if the government determined it necessary to confiscate our television sets for use by government to fight a war. Hopefully we would express the same moral outrage over the confiscation of the lives of our young men.

The 13th Amendment to the Constitution seems clear on the subject to most Americans (excluding politicians and the Supreme Court). It says, "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."

Ron Paul summarized it well in his book Freedom Under Siege, "Conscription contradicts the whole concept of natural rights. If our lives and liberties are gifts of the Creator, as our Founding Fathers believed, the use of our lives should never be controlled by the State. If they are controlled, it supports the totalitarian notion that rights are mere privileges granted by the State and, therefore, removable at will by the state, an idea alien to the American tradition".

Hopefully, General Lute's statement will go down like a lead balloon.

You're a Ron Paul Voter

"If you support...

secure borders, lower taxes, lower spending, lower debt, protecting privacy and property rights, ending senseless military globe trotting, saving America's independence & sovereignty, stopping inflation & overregulations, ending government banking cartels, stopping corporate welfare, fixing out-of-control entitlements, reigniting the American dream, and real progress for generations to come...

then you're a Ron Paul voter. "

(Credit: T-shirt design available at www.cafepress.com)

190,000 Weapons Unaccounted for in Iraq

A Government Accountability Office (GAO) report issued July 2007 disclosed that 190,000 weapons are unaccounted for in Iraq. The weapons were issued to Iraqi security forces and include 110,000 AK-47 rifles and 80,000 pistols. The lack of accountability was attributed to insufficient staff and no fully operational network to distribute equipment (i.e. weapons were distributed on a first come, first serve basis).

At $500 a weapon (my rough estimate), that is $95 million in weapons that have gone missing. Of course that is a drop in the bucket considering since 2003, $2.8 billion US taxpayer's dollars have been spent to arm Iraqi forces and $19 billion total has been spent to develop Iraqi security forces. As of the July 2007 publication of the GAO report, the Department of Defense still had not specified which accountability procedures apply to the train-and-equip program.

The man in charge of the US train-and-equip program for Iraq during 2004-2005 when most of the weapons were distributed was General David Petraeus. Petraeus was in charge of training the new Iraq army for 15 months, and two years later they are still not ready to stand on their own. In comparison, 18 months after America declared war on Germany in 1917 we had mobilized and trained an army, put that army in the field oversees, and defeated the enemy. Petraeus has since been elevated to commander of all U.S. forces in Iraq.

We will never know how many of our troops have been killed with weapons supplied to the insurgents courtesy of the US government. At the same time, the neo-cons are beating the drums of war about Iran supplying weaponry to our enemy. And to think, if you blinked then you likely missed this story.

A little bit about Johnny Sutton

A little bit about Johnny Sutton, the Bush lackey behind the prosecution of former Border Patrol Agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean. Sutton is the US Attorney for Western Texas, and is described by El Presidente as a "dear friend". When Bush was Texas governor, Sutton spent five years as his director of criminal justice policy. After Bush became President, Sutton became legal policy coordinator in the White House transition team, working with another Bush Texas colleague, Alberto Gonzalez, the current US Attorney General.

In 2006, Sutton was appointed chairman of the Attorney General's advisory committee which, says the official Department of Justice website, '"plays a significant role in determining policies and programs of the department and in carrying out the national goals set by the President and the Attorney General". Sutton has so far been extremely successful in carrying out Bush's goal of intimidating law enforcement and leaving our border unprotected.

Upon Sutton's appointment, Attorney General Gonzales said, "Together, we will work to combat terrorism, reduce violent crime and drug trafficking...and protect the civil rights of all Americans". Like his boss, Gonzales is a well practiced liar and spoke these words with a straight face.

Free Ramos and Compean

Why is the Bush administration taking their marching orders from the Mexican government? Former Border Patrol Agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean are currently serving 11 and 12 year sentences in the federal penitentiary for doing their jobs. At a minimum, Johnny Sutton and his prosecutors have unjustly prosecuted Ramos and Compean instead of a known drug smuggler. To add insult to injury, the prosecution charged the agents with discharging a firearm in relation to a crime of violence, resulting in automatic 10 year minimum sentences.

U.S. Congressman John Culberson (R-TX) says "Mexico wants to intimidate our law enforcement into leaving our border unprotected". This would not surprise me; I expect nothing more from Mexico. What enrages me is that I believe the Bush administration is attempting to intimidate our law enforcement into leaving our border unprotected.

The fix was in from the beginning and there is plenty of evidence of prosecutorial misconduct. The prosecution portrayed Aldrete-Davila as a first time drug smuggler who was recently out of work and in need of money to buy medicine for his sick mother. They withheld from the jury that Aldrete-Davila was connected to a second drug shipment only two months before the trial began - after he was given immunity and a pass to cross the border. Three jurors have come forward to say they were coerced by the court into finding the agents guilty.

Sutton repeatedly and disingenuously says the agent shot "an unarmed, fleeing suspect in the back". Johnny Sutton is the only person I have ever heard refer to the a$$ (the side of the left cheek to be exact) as the 'back'. Doctor's testimony was consistent with Aldrete-Davila turning back toward the agents while running away (as if aiming a weapon maybe). And as for the suspect being unarmed, that was based on the word of a drug smuggler versus that of Agent Compean.

There has been a bi-partisan effort to free Ramos and Compean. Both the Senate and the House have held hearings to investigate the prosecution of the agents. Senators Feinstein and Cornyn sent Bush a letter asking him for clemency for Ramos and Compean. Several members of the House have also sent Bush a letter seeking of commutation of the sentences.

President Bush could pardon or commute the sentences of Ramos and Compean today if he so desired. He did it just weeks ago for his friend Scooter Libby. Unfortunately, justice for Ramos and Compean does not serve Bush's interests.

3628

3628 American deaths in Iraq. Each soldier and marine had a mother. Many were husbands and fathers. Many more were young men who will never have the opportunity to be husbands or fathers. Never to return home again. To what end?

3489 American deaths in Iraq since Bush declare "Mission Accomplished" on May 1, 2003. You can see the list here of the men who have died - their names, ages, hometowns. You will not see the dreams that have been snuffed out, or the loved ones left behind. How many more must die before this senseless war comes to an end.

The Bush administration and it's AM radio mouthpieces say that we are fighting the terrorists in Iraq so that we don't have to fight them here at home. When our enemies spout such lies we call it what it is, propaganda.

Our gutless Congress needs to listen to the American people and stand up to Bush, cut off the funding for his war, and support our troops by bringing them home alive.

Why I Won't...

Why I won't vote for Rudy McRomney, in a nutshell.

Because the lesser of two evils is still evil.

For the Children's Sake

My first instinct is to throw in the trash any book titled "For the Children's Sake". It reminds me of the drivel spouted by politicians trying to foist their leftist social experiments on us. However, the book was included with the kindergarten curriculum that we purchased for our son so my wife and I both agreed to read it.

Written over twenty years ago by Susan Schaeffer Macaulay and subtitled "Foundations of Education for Home and School", the book describes how to harness a child's innate desire for knowing and experiencing to provide a solid education based on the Christian meaning of life. Macaulay builds on the educational philosophy of Charlotte Mason, an 19th century English educator.

As a reader and lover of books of all sorts I like Macaulay's practice of replacing "twaddle" with a steady diet of "living books". Mason defined twaddle as "mentally inferior and useless stuff produced or written for children by adults" that bores kids and dulls their natural desire to learn. Macaulay believes that reading good books aloud to a child and then providing interesting books for the child to read themselves once they are able is the foundation on which the child's later education is built.

An exercise that I found interesting and will try with my own kids is what she calls narration. After reading to a child, ask them to describe in their own words what they have heard. Once they are old enough to read, kids can write their narration. Narration seems to be a thought provoking and creative process. Macaulay, like Mason, believes that children should be treated like thinking persons. This is done by not talking down to children, respecting their ability to think, and letting them come to conclusions themselves.

Macaulay describes education as the knowledge of God, of man, and of the universe. The knowledge of God is most important and should be the parents primary concern. Knowledge of man includes history, literature, morals and citizenship, composition, languages, music and art. Knowledge of the universe is science, math, geography and physical development. The book briefly discusses principles of learning in each subject that will lead to a solid education.

The book was food for thought for me and will be used as a guide by our family as we begin homeschooling our kids. Parents with kids in public/private schools would also benefit greatly from this book since all education begins at home and parents are responsible for their kids education whether they are schooled in or out of the home.

Thank You Senators Hutchison and Cornyn

I just emailed both of my state's Senators to thank them for their vote earlier this week against amnesty for illegal aliens. I was happy to see that they both put the interests of their constituents ahead of corporate dollars.

I took the liberty to advise them (since they had heeded my earlier advice and voted against amnesty) that another step that needs to be taken is repeal of the 14th amendment to the Constitution that grants citizenship to any person born in the United States. The amendment made sense when it was ratified in 1868 since its intent was to protect the rights of former slaves. The anchor baby policy is now outdated and rewards lawbreaking by offering benefits at taxpayer expense.

I also requested that they work to enforce our current laws to secure the border and prosecute businesses that employ illegal aliens. If there are no jobs, there is no incentive to break the law and enter our country illegally. Also, enforcement of our current laws would lead to self-deportation, or attrition. It seems fairly simple, unless you are Jorge Bush or Ted Kennedy. I assume Kennedy is drunk; what is Bush's excuse?

Kudos to Biggio

Craig Biggio has solidified a Hall of Fame career by becoming the 27th major leaguer to collect 3,000 hits. And Biggio did it in style, tying his career high with 5 hits on the night that he joined a club of baseball's elite players.

I believe that Biggio has often been overlooked by baseball fans outside of Houston. But any fan can take a look at Biggio's career stats and see that he is a surefire Hall of Famer. Besides being a member of the 3,000 hit club, the seven-time All Star is fourteenth in career runs scored and sixth in career doubles.

Biggio is truly a Houston icon, spending his entire 20 season career with the Astros. His first four seasons in the big leagues were spent behind the plate before becoming a four-time Gold Glove winning second baseman. Biggio exemplified team player when he moved to the outfield during Jeff Kent's two years with the Astros before reclaiming the second base position upon Kent's departure.

Baseball statistics guru Bill James has created two metrics, or standards of measurement, to measure how likely a player is to get into the Hall of Fame. In both metrics Biggio scores above the average Hall of Famer. The only question now is will he be elected to the Hall on the first ballot?

Ron Paul for President

Ron Paul represents what I once believed the Republican party stood for - limited government, lower taxes, individual rights and freedom. He is now the only GOP candidate espousing these values. He has written extensively on all political topics of interest (www.ronpaullibrary.org), so there is a record of what the man believes. Unlike most modern politicians, Paul's set of beliefs is not based on prevailing popular opinion or what is most likely to get him elected. Ron Paul is consistent and does not compromise his principles.

Paul opposes any legislation that is not explicitly authorized by the Constitution. He believes in a republican form of government as envisioned by our nation's founding fathers, not the out-of-control, wasteful behemoth that we have today.

Ron Paul is strongly pro-life and his position is not just one of political expediency. He is a medical doctor who delivered 4,000 babies during his career. His voting record in Congress has earned him a 0% rating from NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action League).

Paul has opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning and believes that no war should ever be fought without a declaration of war voted on by the Congress, as required in the Constitution. It has become apparent to all but the most ardent koolaid-drinking Bushites that the war is a failure that we were led into under false pretenses. We were attacked on 9-11 by 15 Saudis, an Egyptian, a Lebanese and two men from the United Arab Emirates; and we responded by invading Iraq. Ron Paul supports our troops by seeking to bring them home now, preventing the deaths of thousands more of our young men.

Ron Paul, like our founding fathers, knows that the biggest threat to our liberty is our own government. Paul defines freedom as "the ability of citizens to live without government interference." He knows that the founders did not include the 2nd amendment in the Constitution for 'sporting purposes'. Paul's own words say it best. The 2nd amendment "is about preventing tyranny. The Founders knew that unarmed citizens would never be able to overthrow a tyrannical government as they did. They envisioned government as a servant, not a master, of the American people." Ron Paul is a strong defender of the right to bear arms and has been rated 100% by the NRA.

Ron Paul believes that free trade deals like NAFTA, and world governmental bodies are a threat to our national sovereignty. He believes that we must withdraw from organizations that threaten our freedom and independence.

Paul believes that one of the legitimate functions of government is securing our borders. He is opposed to amnesty for illegal aliens and has introduced a constitutional amendment (H.J.RES.46) to end the insane anchor baby policy that rewards lawbreaking.

Ron Paul is the true conservative in the race. (Note that war is not a conservative value. Democrat presidents got our country involved in every major war that America fought in during the 20th century.) Ron Paul stands in stark contrast to the front runners from either party. He and I share common values and aspirations for our country, and that is why I support Ron Paul for President in 2008.

Gandhi on Ron Paul

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." Mahatma Gandhi

Franklin Said it Best

"Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." Ben Franklin

Evangelicals for Rudy

Rudy Giuliani leads the early polling among evangelical Christians in the 2008 presidential race. Apparently these folks are so scared of terrorists that they would jettison all purported values to support the perceived "security" candidate. It is amazing how the people who said that"character matters" when Clinton was President (rightfully so) are now willing to give the moral reprobate Giuliani a pass. It seems as though many American Christians are worshiping the GOP rather than GOD.

"Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness.." Isaiah 5:20

Why Homeschool

Our 5 year old son will begin kindergarten in the fall and my wife and I have decided to homeschool him. Below is my list of reasons why we have chosen homeschooling. These are not necessarily the same reasons that my wife would offer.

• Matthew 6:33 "But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things will be added to you." The absolute most important thing is that all of our children put their faith and trust in Jesus Christ. Everything else is secondary. I see homeschooling as the best way to achieve the desired outcome. Note that this may not be the first response that I would offer to someone asking the question, why homeschool? But it is my primary reason.
  
• I believe that my wife and I can provide a better education for our kids than they would receive in public schools, at least during the early school years.
  
• Government schools are either moral neutral, moral relativists, or worse, they teach a worldview totally antithetical to our beliefs. We have a limited time to influence the values and character development of our children, and we have decided not to expose them to several hours a day of we don't know what, while hoping for the best.
  
• We chose to protect our kids until they are old enough to distinguish between truth and error.
• I don't want my kids to be dependent on others for their sense of well being and self esteem.
  
• I want to tailor learning to my child's interests and allow my children time to learn subjects not usually taught in school. I want to allow my children to have time for more in-depth study on subjects that are of interest to them.
• School is a waste of time. Why sit in school for 6-7 hours a day for 3 hours of instruction and 5 minutes of one-on-one time?
• I want independent, free-thinking kids. I am not raising sheep.
  
• I do not believe that the state's interests and the best interests of my kids are the same.
• Not to disparage all young people, but if I what I observe on a daily basis is the result of socialization; then my children and I will pass. I don't need to expose my kids to bullying, materialism, sex, drugs, disrespect for authority, etc.

I do not expect most people to understand or agree with my reasoning, and in most cases I do not care what they think. They are my kids (they do not belong to the village), God has given my wife and me responsibility for them, and I will one day answer to Him on how I have raised them.

Rating the GOP Candidates

With one exception, the GOP candidates for President do very little to excite me. If any of the front-runners win the nomination I will either stay home on election day or cast my vote for a third party candidate. I supported the Republican presidential candidate from the time that I was of voting age until my disgust with King George's first term had me pulling the lever for Perouka (Constitution Party candidate) in 2004.

The Republican party once again offers no real candidate for the Christian conservative to vote for with a good conscience. I am 100% behind Ron Paul and the ideals that he stands for, and my car sports a Ron Paul for President bumper sticker, but I realize that he has little chance of being the Republican nominee. The following is my impression of the Republican candidates for President and why I will not be voting for whichever one wins the nomination.

Guiliani - I'm not sure why he is a Republican. He is pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, anti-2nd amendment; yet he is the front-runner at this early date. I believe him to be a man of no moral character and a possible fascist. I would sooner vote for Hillary. It will be interesting to see the bumper stickers in the parking lot at the megachurch I attend if he is the Republican nominee.

McCain - I believe that he is already finished. McCain-Feingold campaign reform, his support of the current amnesty for illegal aliens, and general holding hands with the Democrats are three strikes against him. Also, he and Guiliani both have another thing in common that would preclude my voting for either man. As Harry Truman is reputed to have said, "How can I trust a man if his wife cannot".

Romney - If it was a beauty contest then he would have my vote. But anyone who is elected to statewide office in the state that has sent Ted Kennedy to the Senate for the last 30 years is a liberal. Also, even though it is not politically correct to say so, I would not vote for Romney for President because he is a Mormon. I believe it to be akin to voting for someone who believes in Santa Claus. I will change my mind if the Mormon church can produce the golden plates and the miraculous spectacles that Joseph Smith used to translate them. (Note: I would also not vote for a Hindu, Muslim, Hare Krishna, Scientologist, etc.)

Gingrich - I do not doubt his genius, but he has the same problem noted above concerning McCain and Guiliani. Not only is he an adulterer, but he is a hypocrite as well. He was having an affair with a 20-something year old staffer while leading the charge to impeach Clinton.

Fred Thompson - My mind was made up about him when I read the following statement in a story at Politico.com. "Fred Dalton Thompson is planning to enter the presidential race...and is being backed by insiders from the past three Republican administrations, Thompson advisers told the Politico." (Politico.com 5/30/2007). Enough said.

The second tier candidates Tancredo, Huckabee, Hunter and Brownback are all candidates that I agree with on most issues. However, I disagree with them all on the war in Iraq. At this time I consider the possible loss of thousands of more US serviceman in a seemingly pointless war to be the issue that trumps all others. I personally do not believe the Bush administration propaganda about fighting them over there so that we are not fighting them here. The chances are much greater of my family or me getting killed by a drunk driving illegal alien than dying in a terrorist attack.

All of the above being said, I support Ron Paul for President in 2008.