The Old Man's Tears

I was walking through the park the other day when I came across an older gentleman sitting on a bench. Every time I walked by him, I noticed there were tears streaming silently down his stubbled cheeks.

On my third lap around the park, I decided to sit down and try to console the man. Perhaps he was mourning his wife or a child and the least I could do was sit with him for a spell.

"Sir," I said, sitting on the bench next to him. "Are you OK?"

He turned and looked at me, as if surprised that I even noticed him.

"Young man, I'm in mourning.

"My wife is healthy, and all my children and grandchildren are living happy and healthy lives, but still I mourn."

"A good friend?" I asked, thinking back to how I felt when a few of my friends had passed over the years.

"Oh, I wish it was that simple," he said, laughing bitterly.

"What else is there to mourn this much for?" I thought to myself.

"Son, let me tell you a short story.

"I fought in a war that freed a continent from evil and stopped the wholesale oppression and slaughter of a people only to see much the same thing here a home.

"I watched as a great man marched peacefully in far too many cities to bring equality and freedom to people long held as 'inferior.' In fact, I marched with him when I could, and was there in spirit when I couldn't.

"I worked hard to bring financial security for my family so that they would never know the deprivation we now know as the 'Great Depression.' For us, it was just 'hard times.'

"I've watched as people have come and gone, making unfulfilled promises along the way.

"I've wondered at the technological marvels and medical miracles our society has produced for all mankind - jet fighters and passenger jets, helicopters, prosthetic limbs, diseases cured. All of that brought about by free-thinking, freedom-loving people with a will to break from tradition and convention.

"I watched with fascination as mankind slipped free the bonds of Earth and traveled to the moon and focused their eyes on the stars.

"I watched with amusement as science chases God with intent to destroy Him, and laughed as He wriggled free of their grasp and created more of His wonders for them to study.

"I've seen evil come along on gilded wings, yet be rejected, defeated, when good people took a stand.

"I've seen more good than bad in my days here.

"And yet...." he trailed off, staring off into the distance.

As he had spoken, the tears had dried. Now, they returned full force.

"What?" I asked, spellbound. This man knew how to tell a story. "Why do you cry?"

"I don't weep for myself. I've had a long and mostly happy life.

"I don't cry for my friends, who are more like me than not.

"I don't cry even for you. You're old enough to have fought for the right things. Whether you did or not is immaterial - you should have.

"I weep because that which we have fought so long for, that which we have gained, we are losing! Worse, we are giving them away!

"What has happened to the only nation where the freedom to speak your mind is guaranteed? When did we devolve into a nation of sissies, afraid to hear a viewpoint opposite of our own?

"When did we decide that giving up our own rights was the 'safe' thing to do?

"I weep for the United States of America I used to know out of the fear that my grandchildren will never know what it means to be truly FREE." ~ Hunter

Free Speech: If We Lose That, America Is Done

Recently, the comedian Jerry Seinfeld declared that he would no longer perform on college campuses, joining Chris Rock and several others in that sentiment. Seinfeld says that the atmosphere of political correctness makes it impossible for comics to play a college. He's right.

 

This is the United States of America. The very first amendment to the Constitution, the cornerstone of our society, is the right to free speech. That guarantee was meant specifically to protect unpopular, possibly offensive, speech. There is no inherent obligation for others to listen to that speech, but the right of the speaker to say it is inviolable.

 

Or it used to be.

 

Today, we have "free speech zones" on college campuses, meaning that if you want to say something that might offend someone else you must be in one of those zones when you say it or face disciplinary measures. It isn't just private colleges with "free speech zones." Public colleges have them, as well as colleges that take our tax dollars.

 

Private institutions can, and should, have their own rules. If they want to ban free speech, it's within their rights to do so. They will eventually pay the price when people stop using their services, buying their products, etc.

 

The fact is that colleges and universities are fast becoming the places where individual freedoms and critical thought go to die, which is diametrically opposite what they should be.

Any public institution, or an institution that takes public money, should be the staunchest DEFENDERS of free speech anywhere on campus.

 

You may ask why I single them out specifically. That's easy. Using the liberal thought process, which is so ridiculously simple that an underachieving 2nd grader can follow it.

If the government is the guarantor of the fallacious "separation of Church and State" in that prayer and religious symbolism should not and cannot be on or in public properties, i.e., schools, courthouses, and other government buildings, and that's in keeping with the religious freedom portion of the 1st Amendment, should it not also follow that the government is the guarantor of the free speech portion of the same amendment on public lands?

 

Why one and not the other?

 

If we lose the freedom of speech, this nation is gone, and gone forever. We must take a stand against the tyranny of political correctness.

 

The time is now. ~ Hunter

 

 

Are You Ready For The Department Of Parental Suitability?

In addition to the pages I help run, I belong to a few private Facebook groups for conservatives. They're groups for conservatives to get together, share ideas, gather facts, and just generally have fun making fun of the socialist morons we call "liberals."


(As an aside, I absolutely LOATHE using that word for them. Allowing them to claim they're standing for freedom puts true liberals - you know, the conservatives that stand with the Founders and Framers - at an immense disadvantage. We need to reclaim that word.)


The reason I bring up the groups is because late into the night a couple of days ago, I was engaged in a debate with a fellow conservative in the comment thread of this story, which is the Chicks On The Right commentary about this story.


The subject of our debate was this conservative's insistence upon setting standards for becoming - and remaining - a parent as a way to keep people off, or remove them from, government assistance programs. He didn't just insist upon standards, though; he wants to set up a government bureaucracy - a "Department of Parental Suitability," if you will - in order to administer his "objective test" for prospective and current parents.


Yes... You did read that correctly.


I have often said that conservatives need to bring the fight to liberals using the same tactics liberals use. That means flooding liberal pages with conservatives, but instead of using "what ifs" or feelings, we need to use the facts that most conservatives usually have on hand. Overwhelm them. Get down and dirty, call the names like they do to us, It's long past time to adjust our fighting style to match theirs. I did NOT mean to use the same WEAPONS.


According to this conservative's grand plan, the idea is to establish some sort of "objective test" to determine whether one is suitable to become a parent. The criteria includes your financial situation (salary, savings, home ownership, etc.), drinking and smoking habits, marital situation. Practically every aspect of your life will be laid bare before some faceless, "objective" government worker. Sounds a little Nazi-esque to me.


Basically, his proposal means that you have to earn a certain amount, lose the right to do as you please within the law, and accede to the demands of others in how you live your life. When he made this proposal, I literally had to check to make sure right and left hadn't changed places when I wasn't looking. Fortunately, King DingleBarry was making some patently ridiculous statement at the time and Ronaldus Magnus was still credited with ushering in the single longest peacetime economic expansion in the history of the world, so I figured it out pretty quickly.


My immediate response, along with several other people in the group, was to tell him that to invite more government intrusion into our lives runs counter to everything conservatives believe, and that using his "remove people from the government dole" excuse wasn't sufficient reason to expand the government into areas it was never designed to go. Good intentions aren't enough to ensure the system won't be abused.


How long before a Lois Lerner wannabe decides to start asking, "How conservative are you" to determine suitability for parenting? Think that can't happen? I'm fairly certain that the conservative groups that filed for their tax exempt status didn't think it could happen to them, either. Can you say "unintended consequences?"


The bottom line is that doing "good" at the point of a gun - which is what government is - isn't really doing good at all. It's just doing less bad. Our position as conservatives should always be on the side of less government, as the Founders intended. When modern liberal ideas start creeping into conservatism, we might as well switch sides. It is ridiculous to invite the government deeper into our lives, especially under the guise of "doing good." It's never worked before. All one need do is review the welfare system. The poverty rate has remained virtually unchanged in the fifty-plus years since LBJ declared his "War on Poverty."


While I agree with the overall premise that the breakdown of the nuclear family is one of the central reasons for the "need" for welfare, but in true liberal fashion, welfare is a major cause of that family breakdown. I submit, however, that being single should not be a disqualifier to becoming, or remaining, a parent. I was a single father, with custody for seven years before meeting my now-wife. On top of that, I was dirt poor (another disqualifier under his proposal). I challenge anyone to find a more respectful, better adjusted child than my son. No, my situation wasn't ideal for raising a child, but it clearly worked. I've also known two parent households, in what would be ideal conditions according to the "objective test," that aren't worth a damn. The point is this: parenting situations are not static, nor is one situation identical to another.


As I said earlier, good intentions aren't enough of a safeguard against further government interference in our lives. There isn't a single government program that has stayed within its initial parameters. Ever. Why would this one be any different?


If we don't guard against this kind of thinking, we're essentially no different than those we profess to be fighting against, and this nation really will be lost. FOREVER. ~ Hunter

Remember What This Day Means, Not Just To Us, But To The World

As everyone heads out tonight for fireworks displays, please keep in mind exactly what we're celebrating today - the birth of the greatest nation ever to grace the Earth.

For all her faults and foibles, no other nation in history has been as consistent a force for good as the United States of America.

Without America's ingenuity and manufacturing might, most of Europe would be living under goose-stepping despotism, not to mention the precious blood that was spent liberating that continent. Without America's resolve, guided by the steady and worthy hand of Ronaldus Magnus, the Soviet Union would still hold sway.

How many other nations can say that they very nearly singlehandedly defeated no less than TWO of the greatest evils this world has ever known? No other nation can lay claim to saving the world from itself as many times as the U.S.

Conceived in hardship by the most brilliant minds ever assembled in a single place and time, and forged by the fires of a war it neither wanted, nor sought, the world is a far better place than it would be had she never existed.

God help us all if she falls...