The Death of Reagan Conservatives?

I know. I know that there are a great many of you who are disheartened out there in Conservativeville. I know that there is great disheartenment in the Conservative world, great discouragement, great disgust.

The battle is not lost. We live to fight another day. WE WILL ENDURE. We will endure because we have the ultimate weapon at our disposal, and that weapon is our minds.

We are not dead, nor are we a lost cause.

I told someone the other day that I never thought that I would live to see the day where I felt like I was the product of a bye-gone era. I am constantly amazed and bewildered by the general apathy among the twenty-somethings I know in regards to things political and to the work ethic. It very simply boggles the mind.

Yes, that's the word, and that's part of the problem. The mind.

I don't think that the upcoming generation really knows how to think.

A few years back I did a piece, which I posted originally here this past year, called Thought and Modern Man that dives into this issue. Sometimes a article is of such depth and magnitude (yes, I've been told I have a huge ego) that it needs to be reposted for emphasis, and I am doing so below.

I don't think conservatism is in it's death throes. We are taking a beating, true, but we are an ideology based in thought, and in reason, rather than based in feeling. Rationality and reason will always triumph, ultimately, over emotion; virtue based in the value of human achievement trumps virtue based in the sacrifice of self. Man alone of all animals is given the ability to reason and to function as a thinking being; we do not rely on sheer instinct for our survival. To rely upon instinct rather than thought is to offer ones self up for destruction.

So, to paraphrase the bard, "Read on, MacDuff," and take heart. While thinking men and women still live, so will live the ideology of conservatism to battle liberalism.

Thought and Modern Man

In the generations following the New Deal era of the FDR administration, and the free love culture of the flower child generation, we find ourselves today in a situation in which thought, reason, and rationality have found themselves having been replaced by feelings and emotions. Rational thought is no longer taken into account when one is dealing with the situations that face modern society, what has become more important than the reason behind what motivates the individual is not the thought process of the individuals mind, but the feelings that the individual experienced while in the process of performing an act, be it for the benefit or detriment of self or others.

Our society is driven now by feelings, speed, and convenience than by reason or thought. In our quest for convenience, we have made for ourselves, as a society, a culture of drones who work in jobs that require no thought, no reasoning skills, only the ability to press a few buttons with not words, but pictures upon them when ringing up a sale at a fast food restaurant. And somehow, the order the customer places invariably winds up to be incorrect even with the ease and convenience of having the job all but done for the workers running the machinery. It is only in the higher quality and higher caliber restaurants that one can find the service that is both well planned and the waitresses and waiters seem to take pride in their ability to remember a customers order with few mistakes, and the chefs able to complete an order on time without it not being prepared in a manner not to the customers ultimate satisfaction.

We have taken this fast food industry approach in regards to our fuel and transportation needs, as well. The garage with the attendant who is there to fill the gas tank of the customer, check the air in the tires, wash the windows, and check the oil is rarely to be found anymore amongst the quick marts, 7-11’s, mini marts, and such. Even the major fuel distributors in large cities have abandoned the full service gas station in favor of the convenience store, a place where the customer can fuel up their car, pick up a soft drink, a snack from the deli, a pack of cigarettes if (gods help them should the politically correct elitists see them) the customer happens to need a fresh pack. But woe unto the traveler who has a fan belt or radiator hose to break or rupture while on their journey, for the gas station is no longer an option, the driver will have to find an automotive specialist to do the repair work, after scheduling an appointment and having to wait for the wrong part to be sent, returned, and the right part to arrive. And please, don’t expect the staff at these stores to be happy to see the customer come in and do business; after all, someone owes them these jobs, but that doesn’t mean that there should be any work involved, or at least that seems to be the attitude of a great many.

Yet we love our modern conveniences, and rightly so. Technology has brought about such marvels as high definition television, high speed digital communications, and a great deal of other things for modern people to use for their personal enjoyment. It has improved modern medicine to the point where it is no longer a Stone Age practice of divination, but a science. Technology has also enabled the world of production to increase it’s output to a point unheard of during the industrial revolution, and has eased the workday of the modern factory worker considerably from the conditions of early factories, making the speed and efficiency of modern production a thing that modern industrialists should view with pride and a sense of accomplishment when running a line to produce their products. Yet government regulations have so choked the production industry, and taxation has so struck the profits of such industries, that corporations have begun to move their manufacturing outside of US borders in order to find cheaper labor, therefore insuring that the stockholders and owners of these companies can insure their profits, profits that are the expected right for the fruits of one’s labor.

Our government, while not exactly going to the same measures as the government in Atlas Shrugged, has, in the past century or so, managed to become something strikingly similar TO the government that exists in Atlas. The number of regulations and standards that exist today are enough to discourage the would-be ambitions of modern inventors from developing new products and then manufacturing them. What research IS done today is done by existing companies within their laboratories, but with contracts signed by the developers that any product of the researchers mind belongs to the company, a company that would just as soon pay a gifted chimpanzee, in many cases, as to pay for the worth of man’s mind, thus discouraging the brightest of researchers and developers to fall to a point of mediocrity, for they rest in the knowledge that their best efforts will be rewarded the same as the most ludicrous of others who surround them.

The root of this crisis of thought, this lacking of ideas and reason, can be traced to our public education system, in which competition for grades has become a thing of the past, but an atmosphere of making a student feel good even though he or she is not capable or willing to produce the same level of work as a student who gives entire devotion and dedication to study and success. The earliest examples of this are to be found in the elementary years, where children are taught that there are no differences in any of us, individualism is not important but is dangerous, and it is more important to do something for the benefit of everyone than to ever do something strictly because it is what the individual desires to do. Individualism is also broken down and destroyed in the middle and high school years with the introduction of the school uniform.

The ideal of rugged American individualism is in danger of becoming a thing of the past; however, we have not gotten to the point yet where the American people, and indeed, the people of the world, are beyond hope. The political system of the 1900’s needs to be revamped and retooled, as a large government is a thing of waste and a burden to the public for which it strives (pretends) to work. This is not the call for revolutionary activity, and I speak not with the fervor or vehemence of the extremist militia, but merely as a thinking man who sees that this could be accomplished by taking the existing system and returning it closer to a form of government as existed in the days before the administration of Woodrow Wilson, after which time a great many things have been introduced as legislation that are in direct violation of the wording, meaning, and spirit of the United States Constitution. It is time to abandon the notion Lincoln forwarded in the Gettysburg Address that all men are created equal, Lincoln was a racist, and all men are not created equally, for we each are created with our own unique gifts and talents. The application of these talents, or lack of application, is what identifies us as either productive citizens or as a burden to others.

The greatest sin to be committed by man is the sin of failing to think.

The Government of the United States has become, as was foretold in Atlas Shrugged, the welfare state, a term used by critics of today’s government. This term is not used loosely, however, when one considers farm subsidies, corporate subsidies, and the general welfare program itself, which is overrun with abuses that go unchecked by social workers whose caseloads are so full that they often cannot put a face to a name when filing their reports to the larger cogs of the wheels of a government that has overstepped it’s authority and purpose in its attempt to become both mother and father to the generations of welfare recipients who are stuck in a cycle of poverty that is supposed to be a temporary state, but winds up binding its members with regulations so stringent that the incentive to work is all but killed out of those who are able bodied and willing to do so, with threats of loss of benefits to those who make an amount that the government deems too much in any given month. This is not a system that is designed to help people, it is a system designed to make a generation dependent upon the government for support and livelihood.

So often in the news today, especially during election years, politicians running for office moan and decry the state of the government systems, and promise to do something for change, while offering no solutions, no remedies, no repeals of the over reaching fingers of the government and it’s numerous agencies which, while in theory are established to serve the common good, are nothing more than machinery that is fed by the tax system, robbing the individual of his or her income by imposing a tax system that is unfair and inequitable, in the name of fairness to all. The individual is better judge of what his income is spent on than the federal government, yet the politicians that are elected, while paying lip service to tax reform to their constituency, seldom do more than token efforts to maintain the status quo rather than to do what common sense and reason deem the only logical choice of action: the elimination of redundant government programs, the elimination of government waste, and the reduction or elimination of the income tax system.

With these thoughts in mind, I close this offering of the thoughts of my mind, after years of seeing these things come to pass, and having only recently discovered Ayn Rand’s works and her incredible vision.

MT

17OCT2002

Postscript: It’s been roughly five years since I first set these thoughts down as “record.” I find myself, in reviewing them, considering a few things in retrospect. I haven’t changed my mind on anything that was said that evening these years gone by now when I first wrote this piece; if anything, I’m more convinced in rereading over it now that I’m correct in my observations. At the time of the original writing, I was “teaching” history and government classes at a juvenile justice facility. Since that time, I’ve walked away from the public education system in absolute dismay at the overwhelming apathy of school administrations that are more interested in the bottom line (money) than in the education of our children and in ensuring that students have learned to THINK.

Mind you, I’m in no way, shape, or fashion opposed to making money. I’ve stated fairly recently to those I work with that I’m VERY mercenary in regards to my work, and will go where I can make more money when and if the opportunity presents itself. However, as John Galt made clear in the book Atlas Shrugged, my mind IS my own, and I will use it as I see fit, rather than being forced to use it without proper recompense for the fruits of my thought and my labor.

“Who is John Galt,” Rand asks in her novel. The man who set out to stop the engine of the world, and succeeded. If things continue on the course that we currently travel, as a nation, as a people, I think that we may see the answer to another question asked the other day of “Where is OUR John Galt?” As one who DID as John Galt did, one who walked away from a system that had no appreciation for my intellect or talent, one who walked away from a system that strives to squelch independent thought, I can truthfully say there was more than a little John Galt in me when I left the public education system. A move which opened the floodgates in the system where I worked and saw several others walk away as well, choosing to take employment where their minds and talents WERE better appreciated and recompensed.

"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of
another man, nor ask another man to live for mine."

Check out my Random Thoughts, as well...

Once and Always an American Fighting Man

2JUL2007


.

Indoctrination 101

[Update-] The University of Delaware has removed all publicly available links to the program’s content. Thanks to Jason Steck from The Van Der Galiën Gazette, for the email alerting us. Go read about it.... Via another email from Emily it seems that President of U. of Del. has called for the immediate elimination of this program. I will update with a supporting link s soon as it is available.....VERIFIED, Hat tip to Hot Air[End Update]

"Something's wrong with the world today, I don't know what it is. Something's wrong with our eyes. I'm seein' things in a different way and God knows it ain't his. It sure ain't no surprise..." Aerosmith

Atlas Shrugged

"Capitalism demands the best of every man – his rationality – and rewards him accordingly. It leaves every man free to choose the work he likes, to specialize in it, to trade his product for the products of others, and to go as far on the road of achievement as his ability and ambition will carry him." Ayn Rand.

There is a quote that is used several times in Rand's novel, Atlas Shrugged, used by several characters throughout the book: "There is something wrong with the world." I tend to agree. Like the characters in the book, first published in 1957, I see a general decay in the world around me today as I travel and work. I see people who frankly just don't give a damn; not about their work, or how well they do their work, not about the way they look, not about the conditions in which they live...not about anything. This isn't limited to any one race, any one sex, any one segment of social standing. My work puts me in contact with people from all walks of life, and the decay is there, in all but one segment of society: older people. It begins with people my age, those in their forties; a general lack of self-respect and contempt for others, a sullen resignation to things. With the next generation down, there is not only the lack of self-respect and contempt, but a blatant embracing of such attitudes. Think I'm wrong? Look around you at what you see when you walk out the door tomorrow. How many well dressed, well groomed twenty somethings do you see? How many overweight young people (and I'll confess here that I'm certainly no John Basedow, far from it, but self-realization comes from reflection upon one's self and reflection of the mirror, as it were.)

I'm going to let you in on a little secret. Ready? It's a shocker. Those who don't respect themselves can have no respect for others.


I can't exactly pin point an exact period in time when it began. Perhaps it's always been there, just under the surface, festering, growing, a malignancy upon the collective soul of mankind. Some who see problems and have concerns are more than willing to point their fingers at the flower power generation, the free love society, the "dawning of the age of Aquarius."

I'm not so sure.

What I DO know is this, and I've said it for a long time now, starting before my soiree into the field of education, and more critically after I walked away from the field in utter disgust at the entire system. Our children are being indoctrinated. OUR generation was indoctrinated. I would dare say that our PARENTS were indoctrinated to some degree as well.

There are phases to this indoctrination; I'm going to touch on just a few of them. I hope in doing so that I may spark some recognition within you to see them, and that we can all begin to start undoing some of the damage that has already been done.

BOURGEOISIE

The first I'll mention is the vilification of industry and corporations. I don't even see the need to cite any references for this one, as it's so heavily prevalent in the attitude of the American worker and the American media. Anyone who makes money, anyone who generates a means by which others make money, is under fire. How many of you would like to be Bill Gates? How many out there would like to hold stock in Halliburton? Exxon? In fact, the only corporate giant who seemed to be able to win the love of the American people in the past several years was Sam Walton. Or Oprah Winfrey.

But Oprah CARES. She CRIES and she TOUCHES us...

Bah.

But how did Sam Walton amass his fortune? He WORKED for it. He used his mind and his abilities. He competed. He did what he needed to do and he reaped the benefits of his labor. How, then, is he different from Gates and Trump and any other mogul you may want to name? He isn't. Each one of these people has worked for the position that they have attained and have been successful in doing so.

But if we are to listen to SOME in our society, they have no right to enjoy what they have worked for. They have to share. It's not right for people to be wealthy. According to one caller in to the Steve Gill Show yesterday, anyone making over $200,000.00 a year should have to pay one hundred percent tax on anything OVER that mark.

SARGE WANTS TO TAX PEOPLE EARNING OVER $200,000 AT $100%.
October 30, 2007 - 09:19

A West Tennessee caller suggested today that taxing the super rich folks who earn over $200,000 should pay 100% of their income above that level as taxes because anybody with that much money has "made enough." The "evil" top 1% of earners in this country already pay 40% of the total federal income tax burden, but Sarge and the Democrats think they are "taking" too much without paying their fair share...

Do you think you're paying enough in taxes? Or do you agree with Charlie Rangel that you should be paying more of your hard earned money in as taxes?

WHO IS BURIED IN GRANT'S TOMB?

Two more from Ayn Rand:

"What objectivity and the study of philosophy requires is not an 'open mind,' but an active mind - a mind able and eagerly willing to examine ideas, but to examine them critically."

"In order to live, man must act; in order to act, he must make choices; in order to make choices, he must define a code of values; in order to define a code of values, he must know what he is and where he is – i.e. he must know his own nature (including his means of knowledge) and the nature of the universe in which he acts – i.e. he needs metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, which means: philosophy. He cannot escape from this need; his only alternative is whether the philosophy guiding him is to be chosen by his mind or by chance."

I've written before about revisionist history and my strong stance against it. School should be a place for learning HOW to think, not what to think. History, philosophy, civics, mathematics, and language skills. We've allowed politically correct thinking and mindset to infiltrate our "social studies" programs.

Case in point: during my senior year in high school, one of my teachers presented our class (I won't mention the name of the teacher or which class was being taught) with a "documentary" on the conditions of the children in Ethiopia. This was the mid-80's, the conditions in Ethiopia were civil war, famine, and plague. I can't remember which group had sent him the film, UNICEF if I'm not mistaken, but it only showed the starvation and the hunger of the citizenry. The entire classroom had felt the tugs of the heartstrings. I raised my hand and asked "what about the reports of the army (communist regime at the time) confiscating all incoming shipments of food and using it to feed the troops instead of the people?" Stunned silence on the part of my teacher. I was the only senior male in the room, I was already enlisted in the army, and was keeping an eye on potential hot spots that I might be deployed to during my time in service. I don't recall anyone stepping forward to contribute any money for the Ethiopian cause that day.

Why is this important, you ask? I made a point NEVER, EVER, to let my political opinions or my "causes" infiltrate my classroom setting, and I was a teacher of history and government. It's unprofessional, it's improper, and in my mind, it's unethical. Had he presented the facts of the situation, that there was a war in Ethiopia, that people were starving, that UNICEF was taking donations, that the government was not allowing the people access to the food that was being sent, blah blah blah blah BLAH, I would have no problem with it.

My problem was with the "agenda."

Education is filled with people with an "agenda" today. That's one reason our schools are turning out graduates who think two plus two equals five, and that "cat" is spelled k-a-t.

This brings us to another point in our look into indoctrination; the agenda that makes whites responsible for all the suffering and hardship of the world, thus making them the modern "bourgeoisie" for our budding communist generation. Let us first revisit the Communist Manifesto to read what it has to say:

The distinguishing feature of communism is not the abolition of property generally, but the abolition of bourgeois property. But modern bourgeois private property is the final and most complete expression of the system of producing and appropriating products that is based on class antagonisms, on the exploitation of the many by the few.

In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.

We Communists have been reproached with the desire of abolishing the right of personally acquiring property as the fruit of a man's own labor, which property is alleged to be the groundwork of all personal freedom, activity and independence.

In the time of Marx and Engles, the bourgeoisie would have been today's Trumps, Gates, and so forth. Today, it's an association of guilt for being white because of the actions in the past of our European ancestors. I suppose that for someone like myself, of mixed European and American Indian heritage, that I should feel a special self loathing for myself because part of my ancestors were mean to other parts of my ancestors? Do you see how ridiculous that sounds? Yet and still in Delaware, we have a situation at a PUBLIC UNIVERSITY where they are being indoctrinated with such racist attitudes against whites. Hat tip to Hot Air for this:

University of Delaware Requires Students to Undergo Ideological Reeducation

October 30, 2007

FIRE Press Release
NEWARK, Del., October 30, 2007—The University of Delaware subjects students in its residence halls to a shocking program of ideological reeducation that is referred to in the university’s own materials as a “treatment” for students’ incorrect attitudes and beliefs. The Orwellian program requires the approximately 7,000 students in Delaware’s residence halls to adopt highly specific university-approved views on issues ranging from politics to race, sexuality, sociology, moral philosophy, and environmentalism. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) is calling for the total dismantling of the program, which is a flagrant violation of students’ rights to freedom of conscience and freedom from compelled speech.

“The University of Delaware’s residence life education program is a grave intrusion into students’ private beliefs,” FIRE President Greg Lukianoff said. “The university has decided that it is not enough to expose its students to the values it considers important; instead, it must coerce its students into accepting those values as their own. At a public university like Delaware, this is both unconscionable and unconstitutional.”

The university’s views are forced on students through a comprehensive manipulation of the residence hall environment, from mandatory training sessions to “sustainability” door decorations. Students living in the university’s eight housing complexes are required to attend training sessions, floor meetings, and one-on-one meetings with their Resident Assistants (RAs). The RAs who facilitate these meetings have received their own intensive training from the university, including a “diversity facilitation training” session at which RAs were taught, among other things, that “[a] racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality.”

The university suggests that at one-on-one sessions with students, RAs should ask intrusive personal questions such as “When did you discover your sexual identity?” Students who express discomfort with this type of questioning often meet with disapproval from their RAs, who write reports on these one-on-one sessions and deliver these reports to their superiors. One student identified in a write-up as an RA’s “worst” one-on-one session was a young woman who stated that she was tired of having “diversity shoved down her throat.”

According to the program’s materials, the goal of the residence life education program is for students in the university’s residence halls to achieve certain “competencies” that the university has decreed its students must develop in order to achieve the overall educational goal of “citizenship.” These competencies include: “Students will recognize that systemic oppression exists in our society,” “Students will recognize the benefits of dismantling systems of oppression,” and “Students will be able to utilize their knowledge of sustainability to change their daily habits and consumer mentality.”

At various points in the program, students are also pressured or even required to take actions that outwardly indicate their agreement with the university’s ideology, regardless of their personal beliefs. Such actions include displaying specific door decorations, committing to reduce their ecological footprint by at least 20%, taking action by advocating for an “oppressed” social group, and taking action by advocating for a “sustainable world...”

Um, right. I thought we were supposed to be trying to STOP racist attitudes, not turn them around on white people?

"Guilt is a rope that wears thin." Ayn Rand.

The expected reply from the university:

October 31, 2007

Samantha K. Harris
Director of Legal and Public Advocacy
Foundation for Individual Rights in Education

Dear Ms. Harris,

Thank you for your letter to President Patrick Harker dated October 29, 2007 detailing your concerns about the University of Delaware’s residence life educational program. I appreciate your commitment to the role of free speech in education. Though we may articulate views quite differently, a commitment to free speech is one we share. As noted in our own literature, “the central mission of the University of Delaware is to cultivate both learning and the free exchange of ideas.”

Your letter asserts a number of conclusions that can be supported by a selective citation of documents, but are not actualized. The idea that students are “required to adopt university approved views” on the issues listed is not a goal of this institution or of the residence life department. This type of goal is both highly undesired and wholly unattainable. Students are challenged to express themselves as free-thinking citizens. The indoctrination you speak of serves no educational purpose and does not exist as part of a systematic effort on this campus. I assume that you have noted the absence of any policy, rule, or regulation pertaining to your concerns about disciplinary action being taken against students for unwillingness to be changed in the manner that you describe.

There is in fact a program within the residence halls that engages students in self –examination of the roles they hope to take in society. This effort is consistent with the mission of the University which states, “Our graduates should know how to reason critically and independently…communicate clearly in writing and speech, and develop into informed citizens and leaders.” The program is designed to encourage students to think about and to consider a number of issues, but all make their own decisions about the outcome of this reflection. FIRE’s assertion that students are told what to think is inaccurate. In common with FIRE, our institution values free speech, active voice, and open dialogue. We believe that students learn and grow in part by engaging in significant discussions on both sides of the classroom door.

I do acknowledge that there have been some missteps with the implementation of our program. This is a new effort involving over two hundred staff. As with any University educational endeavor assessment and feedback measures have been established to identify issues or concerns. Each of the issues FIRE presents are currently under review. In fact, we recently became aware that students in several residence halls were told their participation is mandatory at these activities and we have taken steps to clarify this misconception and to notify students of their rights in this area.

Additionally, I would like to briefly comment on several of the other concerns expressed in your letter.

* The information about "best and worst" RA/resident one-on-ones are certainly of concern, but taken out of context. This terminology has only been used by supervisors to ask Resident Assistants to reflect on their facilitation skills and never to describe students or the outcome of a conversation.

* Students are not required to participate in any residential activity, educational program, or to maintain the University provided nametag on their door. We do, however, encourage students to participate in as many experiences as they are able as we believe this enhances their life at the University.

* We share your concern about the language used in our assessment plan. The term “treatment” is commonly used in research and assessment literature. Admittedly, this language is easily misinterpreted and may be construed as inappropriate for use in this educational setting. On the other hand, your assertion that “progress is apparently determined by examining whether there is an increasing proportion of ‘right’ answers over time” is not an accurate way to describe the aim of the program or assessment goals.

I have tremendous respect for the ability of our students as well as their emotional and intellectual capacity. My main point of contention out of the multiple assertions is that the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education seems to presume that our students are so empty-headed and ignorant that they would be "indoctrinated" with ease. I believe you have underestimated the quality and caliber of our students. You have examined many internal and public documents in your search for concerns. I invite you to explore our web site more fully to get a better picture of the capacity of a University of Delaware student. You will find that they are highly intelligent and capable to assert their viewpoints and to face challenges from a variety of areas. Our students are fully able to encounter multiple values and perspectives and remain true to their own identity. As they emerge from college, their ability to use their free speech rights will be only one of many talents they possess. While I consider many of your points to be open for legitimate discussion and debate, the supposition that University of Delaware students are simply empty vessels to be filled by any willing authority figure is an unstated assertion where we can find no common ground...

Yadda yadda yadda. As I said, the expected reply from the university.

Let's see what the rest of you think. From the University of Delaware website:

Diversity Initiatives
Diversity Vision Statement

"The Office of Residence Life, within its offices and its residence halls, will become a place where diversity among people is recognized, valued and demonstrated. Racism, sexism, heterosexism, ageism, ableism and other behaviors and systems that empower some while oppressing others will not be tolerated. Programs, policies, and procedures will reflect the importance and acceptance of diversity. Actions that encourage and promote diversity will be valued and rewarded."
Diversity Committee Information

The Office of Residence Life Diversity Committee is a group of professional staff members and graduate assistants working to encourage and support the diversity vision of the Office of Residence Life by integrating diversity values into all aspects of the department culture. The committee coordinates the campus-wide diversity efforts of the Office of Residence Life and supports the many other diversity programs offered by Residence Life staff to residents on a complex, building, or floor community level. The Diversity committee develops diversity training modules for all levels of Residence Life staff and coordinates initiatives such as the Unity Project and Multicultural Leadership Retreat. For more information please contact Michele Kane, Assistant Director for Residence Education and Chair of the Diversity Committee at michelon@udel.edu.
Multicultural Leadership Retreat
Unity Project

Whole New World Training
Minority Student Network

The Minority Student Network (MSN) provides a social network and support system for students of color living on East Campus but is open to all. The group provides programs, trips, hot topic discussions, and social gathering for students. For more information contact the MSN advisor, Ivet Ziegelbauer.
LEAP

Quest plans, sponsors, and supports diversity programming on campus. The group is comprised of Residence Life staff and residence hall students committed to diversity issues. Quest projects include initiatives like the monthly Being Educated About Diversity (BEAD) Project, the Diversity Film Series and Black History Month Task Force. Quest also actively supports diversity programming on campus. The Graduate Assistant for Diversity Initiatives is the advisor for Quest . For more information about Quest, please contact Michele Kane at michelon@udel.edu.

Did you catch that "Whole New World Training" segment? The title alone speaks volumes, in my way of thinking.

DON'T GIVE TIL IT HURTS, GIVE TIL IT FEELS GOOD...

A great part of the problem, I think, is the altruistic mindset that is pervading the world today. You see it everywhere. Volunteer to help do this, pitch in a hand to help do that. There is NOTHING wrong with pitching in and giving a hand to others, as long as it doesn't become the be all, end all of your existance.

What is altruism?

Altruism is selfless concern for the welfare of others. It is a traditional virtue in many cultures, and central to many religious traditions. In English, this idea was often described as the Golden rule of ethics. Some newer philosophies such as egoism have criticized the concept, with writers such as Nietzsche arguing that there is no moral obligation to help others.

Altruism can be distinguished from a feeling of loyalty and duty. Altruism focuses on a motivation to help others or a want to do good without reward, while duty focuses on a moral obligation towards a specific individual (for example, God, a king), a specific organization (for example, a government), or an abstract concept (for example, patriotism etc). Some individuals may feel both altruism and duty, while others may not. Pure altruism is giving without regard to reward or the benefits of recognition.

The concept has a long history in philosophical and ethical thought, and has more recently become a topic for psychologists, sociologists, evolutionary biologists, and ethologists. While ideas about altruism from one field can have an impact on the other fields, the different methods and focuses of these fields lead to different perspectives on altruism.

Rand on altruism: "Altruism declares that any action taken for the benefit of others is good, and any action taken for one's own benefit is evil. Thus the beneficiary of an action is the only criterion of moral value – and so long as that beneficiary is anybody than oneself, anything goes."

Indoctrination of our youth has even reached to the point of coming to them across the television. Nickelodeon television has entered into this trend by using children to show other children how to "stand up to the man." Hat tip to ArmyWifeToddlerMom, Michelle Malkin, and STOP the ACLU for this one:

Nickelodeon is trying to brainwash your children in the morning, or a leftist primer
My Husband sent me this link this morning. Please watch this, in its entirety. It is imperative that you SEE what Nickelodeon is showing at 5:00am.

NICKELODEON IS BRAINWASHING YOUR CHILD

Linda Ellerbee is the host, that should be enough said.

Pay particular attention to the second and fourth stories.

This Nickelodeon "news program", is not a news program. It is a leftist primer on how to be a "left-wing radical REBEL".

I am not a blind follower of our Government, and I also think that Government should be watched by it's citizens. It is our civic duty.

However this program led by Ellerby, is anti-war, anti- GWOT, anti-military.

This "news program" is not about people changing the World around them.

Ms. Ellerby uses leftist propaganda buzz words like "taking on the establishment".

She shows a group of "tweenagers" walking around in orange jumpsuits, hooded and yelling from a bullhorn. "We are not ok, with people being tortured by American soldiers!" "Are cooperation's priority over human lives?"

There is also a call for the impeachment of the President in the second segment of the video, "democracy is at stake because of the President violating the Constitution".

The fourth segment of video shows another tweenager, who has put together a video of wounded Iraqi children, with the song Jesus Loves Me playing over it. This teenager blames America, the military, for what is happening in Iraq. This young girl says "she finds, videos and facts on the Internet" to show what is REALLY happening in Iraq. I am guessing she is getting these images from Al Jazeera.

Nickelodeon is the new training ground for leftist propaganda.

Amazing. You really must watch this video...

Children making anti-establishment statements. It brings to mind something said by someone back in the 1950's (surprise, it's not Ayn Rand this time):

Soviet premier Nikita Khrushchev famously used an expression generally translated into English as "We will bury you!" ("Мы вас похороним!", transliterated as My vas pokhoronim!) while addressing Western ambassadors at a reception in Moscow in November, 1956.[1] The translation has been controversial because it was presented out of context as being belligerent. The phrase may well have been intended to mean the Soviet Union would outlast the West, as a more complete version of the quote reads: "Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you"(Нравится вам или нет, но история на нашей стороне. Мы вас похороним)—a meaning more akin to "we will attend your funeral" than "we shall cause your funeral".

Several online sources incorrectly claim that he made this statement at the United Nations General Assembly on October 11, 1960, when he is said to have pounded the table with his shoe, or with an extra shoe he had brought with him explicitly for that purpose. [2] (Occasionally these incorrect reports give the date October 12, the date this incident was reported in most newspapers.)

Speaking some years later in Yugoslavia, Khrushchev himself remarked, "I once said, 'We will bury you,' and I got into trouble with it. Of course we will not bury you with a shovel. Your own working class will bury you", [3] a nod to the popular Marxist saying, "The proletariat is the undertaker of capitalism." Khrushchev later went on to explain that socialism would replace capitalism in the same manner that capitalism itself supplanted feudalism. (This is an orthodox view of Marx's theory of history.)

It would seem that his prediction has been put into practice. I can't imagine these children doing this for Nickelodeon without the approval and permission of their parents. But then again there are a lot of things children do that are done without their parents approval today that sometimes leave me wondering at the fitness of the parents...

"When you come to a fork in the road....Take it." Yogi Berra.

The bottom line is this. We are reaching an ideological crossroads. If our society is to survive, we must truly do as the title of this blogsite says and WAKE UP, AMERICA!

The freedoms we love and cherish today are not free. They have been bought and paid for with the price of the blood of patriots; of men and women who believed in freedom and in the rights of the individual. That fight continues today. Like it or not, agree with what you think the motives might be or not, that fight continues today in the sands of the Middle East. We are under assault not just by Islamic jihadists, but by a mindset within our own nation that the greater good outweighs the needs and rights of the individual. And that mindset is choking the will out of the American people. It suffocates the spirit of creativity. It stifles individual achievement.

We complain that our jobs, our factories, our manufacturing, have gone overseas, and yet we put in office the very people who tax our producers to the point they are driven to take their industries overseas. Why? Because it isn't fair that one person should make more money than someone else.

We leave our borders open so that millions upon millions of illegal aliens have entered our country and we see our own culture diluted and diminished. Why? Because the evil white men have oppressed the rest of the world, and it isn't fair.

Our children graduate from high school unable to cope, compete, or function in society. They can no longer rely on industry for work because we've created a situation where there is little industry, or what industry there is has hired cheap labor from a growing pool of illegals. Why? Because it's more important that our children be taught their self worth based upon what they can do for others so that they'll feel good, rather than teaching them the importance of diligence and self worth through their own accomplishments.

Why do we do these things?

Because we have become inverted.

But we can not live in an inverted world.

"The world you desired can be won, it exists, it is real, it is possible, it's yours. But to win it requires total dedication and a total break with the world of your past, with the doctrine that man is sacrificial animal who exists for the pleasure of others. Fight for the value of your person. Fight for the virtue of your pride. Fight for the essence, which is man, for his sovereign rational mind. Fight with the radiant certainty and the absolute rectitude of knowing that yours is the morality of life and yours is the battle for any achievement, any value, any grandeur, any goodness, any joy that has ever existed on this earth." John Galt quote that ended Ayn Rand's last public speech (New Orleans Nov 1981)

HCDL

Once and Always, an American Fighting Man

.

Inverted

We talk about Ayn Rand's works from time to time here because they're so visionary. Before 1950 she had given us a glimpse of sorts into the future (from her standpoint), a glimpse that ties in so well with the the world we live in today. In my mind, there is only one word that can truly describe what she saw, and the route we, as society, have chosen for ourselves today.

Inverted.

One of the first things we learn in emergency services, one of the first things that doctors learn, is a simple little premise; "First, do no harm." Refusal to treat or tend to those in need can bring legal problems for those who refuse to do so. It is considered unprofessional and unethical to refuse to render assistance to those in need. And yet we are seeing a growing trend of students who are studying medicine to choose whom they will NOT treat:

From The Sunday Times
October 7, 2007
Muslim medical students get picky
Daniel Foggo and Abul Taher

Some Muslim medical students are refusing to attend lectures or answer exam questions on alcohol-related or sexually transmitted diseases because they claim it offends their religious beliefs.

Some trainee doctors say learning to treat the diseases conflicts with their faith, which states that Muslims should not drink alcohol and rejects sexual promiscuity.

A small number of Muslim medical students have even refused to treat patients of the opposite sex. One male student was prepared to fail his final exams rather than carry out a basic examination of a female patient.

Inverted.

One has to wonder if they are learning just enough medical knowledge to treat Jihadists.

And the left in our country stand up to SUPPORT these people. Excuse me, I have to ask, didn't our nation lead the FIGHT for women's rights? Did we not, along with Great Britain and a handful of other European nations, decide that women had equal rights as men, and equal opportunities? How, then, can liberals, who are so hell bent for leather that everyone be "equal" can support an ideology and a religion that deals in the subjugation of women and is so close minded that it won't allow for individual beliefs and freedoms that are contrary to Islam?

Inverted.

Our nation was founded, in part, as a rebellion of a people against on overbearing, gluttonous system of government that had relied too heavily upon taxation to support itself. Our founding fathers new and understood the principles that if people are to survive, if a nation is to thrive, if individuals are to achieve, they must be able to control their own destinies, their incomes, their livelihoods. No nation in history, no country, no kingdom, no system of government, ever taxed itself into prosperity. And yet where are we today? Heavily taxed, again. Consider, if you will, just the simple little task of driving a vehicle. First, there is the sales tax for the vehicle itself. To legally put a vehicle on the road, it has to have license plates, which is a form of a tax, a wheel tax in some municipalities, the driver must be licensed, there is a tax for the license itself, the car has to have fuel, which is heavily taxed by both the state AND the federal government. Then you have to take toll roads into consideration, where they exist. Figure about five to ten dollars for each time you crank your engine before you even take it out of park. Seriously, take a ten dollar bill out of your wallet every time you crank up your engine and lay it aside. My figures, of course, are not scientific, they are a VERY rough estimate, but you get the idea.

That's just to drive to the grocery store/school/work/wherever. I won't even MENTION the income tax, property taxes, sales taxes, ENTERTAINMENT TAXES (we actually have that in TN), tobacco taxes, alcohol taxes, firearm taxes, ammunition taxes, taxes for hunting and fishing licenses, taxes for utilities...

Shall I go on?

Inverted.

The individual was once celebrated in this nation. Those who achieved, those who created jobs, those who rose to the top, those who inspired. How many of you out there despise Bill Gates and Donald Trump for the fortunes they've amassed because they're good at what they do? How many people does Microsoft Corporation employ, providing jobs for people? How many people work for Donald Trump at his casinos, his hotels, his offices? How many people out there vilify those who produce, who achieve, who toil and have the AUDACITY to enjoy the fruits of their labors? Hillary Clinton would have those people give up a part of what they have earned "for the common good." Wouldn't the common good be better served if such individuals were encouraged to continue creating jobs in the private sector rather than expanding the welfare state to be even more all encompassing than it already is? This socialistic mindset has been growing and invading our society and our mindset since the beginning of the last century. It failed in Russia, it failed in Eastern Europe, it has failed in Britain and the Commonwealth, and yet we are heading pall mall and helter skelter right down the road of socialism, rather than continuing on the path of rugged individualism that our nation was founded on.

Inverted.

Our nation was established with a system of checks and balances to keep any one branch of government from becoming more powerful than any other; laws were and have been set in place to protect the individual. Our most recent sitting Congress has made attempt after attempt to undermine the power of the office of the President, the President controls the appointment of judges to federal legal positions (these postings are lifetime appointments), and the courts make rulings on their interpretations of what the law should be. Our nation has a constitution that sets the standards and determines what is to be and what is not to be. Our constitution is daily under assault by the very leaders we have elected to protect it, by the very leaderships we have entrusted to uphold it, by the very people who swore oaths to defend it. We are, it is said, a nation of immigrants. This is true, in spirit, perhaps, but by and large the majority of the populace of this nation are people who were BORN here, on this soil, on these shores, within our national boundaries. So then, why are we so willing to allow those who enter this nation illegally to stay here, to take jobs from our citizenry, to create a welfare system that requires more money to be thrown into it via the tax system which is already overburdening the American citizenry. Why do we allow our nation to be dictated to by the United Nations, an organization that has clearly and consistently shown itself, as a body, to despise our nation and our way of life? Where is that taste for personal liberty and freedom that our founding fathers felt so clearly and so hungrily that they were willing to fight and die for it?

Inverted.

Our Constitution was established to protect the rights of the citizenry of this nation. It was not built nor designed to be a free get out of jail card for our enemies and those who violate our laws by remaining in our nation, in our country, illegally. It was intended to protect the rights of U.S. citizens, not non-citizens. The leader of a nation that is a declared enemy of OUR nation is invited not only to address the United Nations on our shores, but to speak at one of our universities as an invited guest.

Inverted.

Our Constitution clearly states that Congress shall make no laws which respect any single establishment of religion; the reason for this was that the founding fathers had experienced, in England, a national Church supported and sanctioned by the government. In England, the reigning monarch is the head of the Church of England. Our founding fathers saw the wisdom of our nation not going down that road. There is NOTHING in the Constitution, however, that says that there is to be an absolute separation of church and state. Revisionist historians would have you believe that many of our founding fathers were either atheists or "deists" and did not necessarily believe in the concept of God. There were some who fall into that category, however, not all of them fit that description. A great many of them were religious and upstanding individuals who held the beliefs that patriotism and religion were complimentary to one another, not counter to one another. We are at a point, now, in our society, where the founding belief structure of our nation is under assault from within. Christianity itself is under assault. Belief in anything absolute, in any morality that comes from a higher belief than ones self is questioned. Prayer in school, references to Christ in the work place, such things have become subject and fodder for law suits. The Folsom Street Fair, however, is acceptable.

Inverted.

Patriotism was once defined as standing up for our nation, for our rights, for our beliefs. Patriotism was a willingness to put ones self in harms way to defend our way of life. Patriotism was once something to be cherished, it would stir the heart of even the most stony individual, it was the tear in the eye of the veteran at the playing of the National Anthem at the raising of the flag. We once stood at attention with our hands over our hearts as the song was sang or played. I was recently at a rodeo, the National Anthem was played as the flag was raised, and I was appalled at the number of people talking and moving about during it. Patriotism is now defecating on our flag, denouncing our nation as evil and vile, promoting immoral activity, defending the rights of those performing and seeking abortions, defaming those who promote standards of behavior that are not deviant.

Inverted.

I could go on. I could continue to list things here and point out the inverted thinking that has become so prevalent in our society. I could go into the legal system and point out how many rights the accused and convicted have in contrast to how few rights the offended and victimized by crime have. I could go further into our medical fields. I could go much, MUCH further into politics and political law, corporate law, so forth and so on. But I think, maybe, I've inspired thought in what I have chosen to include in this.

Personal achievement is a virtue to be cherished, to be inspired, to be promoted, not to be condemned and belittled. To achieve greatness is to uplift self and humanity. Lincoln's great lie was "all men are created equal." Lincoln was a politician, in the right place at the right time for history to remember him as being great. He was a man. His personal achievements, his work, his perseverance, led him to greatness. I say we are NOT all created equal. If we were, we would all be able to play basketball as well as Michael Jordon did. We would have been no Sultan of the Swat, as Babe Ruth was labeled. Lou Gehrig wouldn't have been baseball's Iron Man. We would all be able to create code and make computers like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak. We would all have the audacity and creativity in war of Forrest, Rommel, Patton, and Napoleon. We would all write as well as Shakespeare, draw and create art as great as da Vinci or Michelangelo. We would all be as intellectual as Socrates, Plato, Archimedes.

We are all born with our own talents and abilities, and we are all given the opportunities to achieve greatness. Jealousy, class envy, undermining personal achievement leads to the downfall of all that our ancestors worked to create in this nation. We show a great, great disrespect to ourselves, and to those who fought for our rights and our liberties, we disrespect ourselves by not standing up to those who would see our nation fall.

To borrow from the liberals, we disrespect our children by not making sure that our nation stands free for them, as it was for our generation.

Ayn Rand quotes:

An individualist is a man who says: 'I will not run anyone's life - nor let anyone run mine. I will not rule or be ruled. I will not be a master nor a slave. I will not sacrifice myself to anyone - nor sacrifice anyone to myself.' "Textbook of Americanism"

Inflation is not caused by the actions of private citizens, but by the government: by an artificial expansion of the money supply required to support deficit spending. No private embezzlers or bank robbers in history have ever plundered people's savings on a scale comparable to the plunder perpetrated by the fiscal policies of statist governments. "Who WIll Protect Us From Our Protectors"? The Objectivist Newsletter, May 1952

It is not justice or equal treatment that you grant to men when you abstain equally from praising men's virtues and from condemning men's vices. When your impartial attitude declares, in effect, that neither the good nor the evil may expect anything from you - whom do you betray and whom do you encourage? "How Does One Lead A Rational Life in An Irrational Society," The Virtue of Selfishness

The socialists have a certain kind of logic on their side: if the collective sacrifice of all to all is the moral ideal, then they wanted to establish this idea in practice, here and on this earth. The arguments that socialism could not and would not work, did not stop them: neither has altruism ever worked, but this has not caused men to stop and question it. Only reason can ask such questions - and reason, they were told on all sides, has nothing to do with morality, morality lies outside the realm of reason, no rational morality can ever be defined. "Faith And Force: The Destroyers of the Modern World," Philosophy: Who Needs It

As far as the issue of actual pollution is concerned, it is primarily a scientific, not a political, problem. In regard to the political problem involved: if a man creates a physical danger or a harm to others, which extends beyond the line of his own property, such as unsanitary conditions or even loud noise, and if this is proved, the law can and does hold him responsible. If the condition is collective, such as in an overcrowded city, appropriate and objective laws can be defined, protecting the rights of all those involved - as was done in the case of oil rights, air-space rights, etc. But such laws cannot demand the impossible, must not be aimed at a single scapegoat, i.e., the industrialists, and must take into consideration the whole context of the problem, i.e., the absolute necessity of the continued existence of industry - if the preservation of human life is the standard. "The Left: Old And New," The New Left: The Anti-Industrial Revolution

Justice does exist in the world, whether people choose to practice it or not. The men of ability are being avenged. The avenger is reality. Its weapon is slow, silent, invisible, and men perceive it only by its consequences - by the gutted ruins and the moans of agony it leaves in its wake. The name of the weapon is: inflation. "Egalitarianism And Inflation," Philosophy: Who Needs It

When "the common good" of a society is regarded as something apart from and superior to the individual good of its members, it means that the good of some men takes precedence over the good of others, with those others consigned to the status of sacrificial animals. "What is Capitalism?" Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal

Amazing it took a woman born in Russia to understand the American Dream so well.

Points to ponder from:

Once and Always, An American Fighting Man

.

Totally at Random

This is one of those nights where I sit at the screen thinking, "Where do I start? What do I start with?"

Ever have those nights? Those of you who write know what I'm talking about. It's a sort of writer's block, but not really, because you have a MILLION and one ideas running through your mind but can't think of which one you want to lead out with.

The trick is to pick ONE thing, then let the others just sort of flow until you finish, depending of course on what your subject matter is. Fortunately, this particular piece has no singular subject matter OTHER THAN the randomness of ones own mind, and I gotta tell ya, sometimes, THIS mind can be fairly random.

Some say it's a symptom of genius, others that it's a sure sign of insanity.

Perhaps it's some sort of strange conglomeration of both.

History will be the judge.

Raoul, Dracula, whatever you're calling yourself tonight, my offer still stands, btw. Bring it on, amigo. I'm waiting. :)

Ahem.

I don't often "toot my own horn," soneone recently pointed out on this site my qualifications and experience, commenting that I was being FAR too modest about myself. What follows is, I suppose, something that goes along those lines, and I say what I'm about to say not to take any credit for myself, but rather to, hopefully, inspire thought and action from others. I met a man this week through my work, he was one of my customers, who is a Vietnam veteran (for those of you who don't KNOW exactly what it is that I do, right now I'm a communications contractor, at this customer's home I was installing a digital satellite television system). I arrived at his home to meet him as he and his brother were heading to the hospital some 60 miles away for his weekly radiation therapy. He has cancer. Cancer caused by Agent Orange. His mother was staying at the house as I did my work. During the course of my doing my thing, doing what I do, I learned this from her, about the Agent Orange and his fight the past few years with cancer that had been caused by it. There are many days when he is too ill to do much other than to lay in bed and watch television. His one satellite receiver was located in the living room. Typically, running a second line, called a mirror line, from one location to another so that both television sets are showing the same thing gets an extra charge. I pondered this as I was working, pondering the fact that this man served our nation in an unpopular war, that he has, according to his mother, difficult nights many times because of the things that he experienced, and the fact that while I served at a time when we weren't actively engaged in hostilities (officially, anyway) that I have my own difficult nights from let's just leave it at that I have difficult nights as well. I don't want to dwell and tonight be one of them. Anyway, I decided that I would run the second line for this man, this brother veteran, at no charge. It was the least I could do as a gesture of thanks for his service, and hopefully a little something to ease him a bit in what he and his family know are his last days.

Little things.

I share this illustration not to praise myself, not by any means. I share this illustration to hopefully show how SIMPLE it is to do little things to say "thank you" to our veterans.

Random acts of kindness.

It's an amazing thing how twisted things SUCH as kindness can be twisted around, as well. A few of us from time to time refer to Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. What an incredible visionary this woman was. A child of Russia, she had seen first hand the trappings of socialism and the way that it can take the ordinary and the most basic of human nature and virtue and TWIST it into something surreal, something vulgar, something...else. Another magnificent work by Rand is The Fountainhead, which I am reading now for, unfortunately, the first time. One of the main characters IS a Socialist, and she shows, through her writing, how skillfully and artfully, how INNOCENTLY, people can be manipulated into absolute ruin and self doubt, allowing themselves to be controlled by others. This work was written almost a CENTURY ago, and yet both works are so highly relevant to our society today.

Prophetically so.

A few lines from The Fountainhead, because I HIGHLY, HIGHLY recommend this book to be read, as well as Atlas Shrugged:

"One Small Voice" never seemed to say anything dangerously revolutionary, and seldom anything political. It merely preached sentiments with which most people felt in agreement: unselfishness, brotherhood, equality. "I'd rather be kind than right." "Mercy is superior to justice, the shallow-hearted to the contrary notwithstanding." "Speaking anatomically - and perhaps otherwise - the heart is the most valuable organ. The brain is a superstition." "In spiritual matters there is a simple, infallible test: everything that proceeds from the ego is evil; everything that proceeds from love for others good." "Service is the only badge of nobility. I see nothing offensive in the conception of fertilizer as the highest symbol of man's destiny: it is fertilizer that produces wheat and roses." "the worst folk song is superior to the best symphony." "A man braver than his brothers insults them by implication. Let us aspire to no virtue which cannot be shared." "I have yet to see a genius or a hero who, if stuck with a burning match, would feel less pain than his undistinguished average brother." "Genius is an exaggeration of dimension. So is elephantiasis. Both may be only a disease." "We are all broghers under the skin - and I, for one, would be willing to skin humanity to prove it."

How much of that sounds familiar, if one steps back and takes a look at the world around them? How MUCH of that diseased mindset has settled itself into our society today? How much of it do we see so subtly delivered to us from the pulpit of the modern Democratic party? Worse, how much of it is seeping over to the Republicans?

Something to think about, methinks.

I'm amazed at the work ethic of so many of our younger generation, as well. I can tell a major difference in the quality of work done by some of the young twenty-somethings that do the same sorts of work that I do. I'm amazed at the quality of work in other places, as well. My mother was commenting today about my brother's car having to go back into the shop this week after being serviced just last week, because he has a problem that was caused, likely, BY the routine service work.

I suppose it's always been that way, though, but I'm not sure.

I do remain hopeful, or at least I try to. I know others who have magnificent work ethics and excel at what they do.

We have let our guard down as a nation. We have allowed Nikita Khrushchev's prophecy of "taking us from the inside" almost to come true. Almost. But not quite.

We can take the words that make the title for this blogsite and make them a mantra. We can take them into our hearts, and into our MINDS, and live them, breath them, use them.

Wake Up America can be our rally cry, and this, from Atlas Shrugged, our oath of our character and a testiment of our determination: "I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine."

Random thoughts, from

An American Fighting Man

.