Wednesday, April 23, 2008


Such an irony! Valimir Lenin's birthday and Earth Day share the same date, April twenty-second. Lenin was the father of the Russian Revolution of 1917 and was the genesis of the Soviet communist society. There are little differences between communism and modern environmentalism since both seek political power and detest capitalism.

The first Earth Day was in 1970, and was founded by the modern environmental movement. Its purpose is to make the masses aware of environmental concerns. Today those concerns are magnified with the global warming hysteria. Not only does the green crowd want to make citizens aware, they seek legislation to ensure it. They have been successful.

Environmentalism has a goal of making good little greenies out of all of us. We should all recycle, watch are carbon footprints and cut down on are energy consumption. Just to make sure, we need laws to enforce that! Lives will be seriously altered and freedoms will go out the window. Ultimately this disrupts the capitalist engine of a free society, which is what I believe is the true intention of the movement. Not much different that the goal of communism, is it?

I refuse to recycle because for two reasons. There is no cause for me to do so, and I will be dammed if a government entity tells me I must over a silly little matter. I shall resist any attempts to change my lifestyle.

There is nothing wrong with an individual making efforts to conserve and be environmentally aware. I applaud that. But don't force it on others.

There is much debate about the notion of human activity harming the planet. Obviously, I don't believe that notion at all. Using the smokescreen of Global Warming to scare the masses into false actions that will harm some basic freedoms is dangerous to me. Vlaimir Lenin would be right at home with the modern environmental movement.

Monday, April 21, 2008


Finally! Danica Patrick is a winner. This weekend the IndyCar driver won her first open wheel contest, the Toyota 300, in Japan. I must admit, I am a fan of hers, and I have been rooting for her. It is wonderful to see a lady be so successful in the sport. How I like the women drivers!

There is no question that Danica Patrick has talent. Finishing second twice last year, one had the feeling that she would finally break through in 2008, since this is her second year with a good IndyCar team, Andretti Green. Patrick gives much credit to her teammates for her first victory. Crew Chief Kyle Moyer's fuel strategy was the key element behind the win. Racing is really a team sport, and she is lucky to be there. In the past, women have suffered being on mediocre teams where they have a hard time showing their talents.

Auto racing is the only major sport where women compete at the same level as their male counterparts. Not only are there lady drivers, but females are found throughout the racing world on race teams, such as pit crew members. You can also find them in the garages as mechanics, or even as officials for most of the major racing sanctioning bodies.

Patrick is by far not the first lady to break in to the sport. Janet Guthrie raced three times in the Indianapolis 500, and in 1978 finished ninth. Guthrie was the first woman to compete in a major NASCAR race and ended up in 33 of them, finishing in the top ten 5 times.

Historically, the woman at the top of the list is Shirley Muldowney, the First Lady of Drag Racing. She won the NHRA Top Fuel Title three times, and is a member of both the International Motor Sports Hall of Fame and the Motor Sports Hall of Fame of America. Muldowney is a legend.

Many women have found a home in drag racing. You must give the National Hot Rod Association a lot of credit for welcoming talented females. They are proud, as they should be, of their pioneering efforts in featuring successful women drivers. Since 1966, nine females have recorded victories, lead by Pro Stock Motorcyclist Angelle Sampey with forty-one. (Muldowney is second with eighteen.) Owning three championships, the lady is a superstar. Along with Sampey, Melanie Troxel, Karen Stoffer, Peggy Llewellyn and Erica Enders are all past winners and current competitors on the NHRA circuit. When I can, I always try to catch an event on the tube and enjoy when those women excel.

In the most popular form of auto racing, NASCAR Sprint Cup, women have been few and far between. Guthrie has been the most successful. Shawna Robinson, Erin Crocker, Kelly Sutton, Kim Crosby, Tina Gordon and Deborah Renshaw have struggled in the minor leagues and have not made much of a mark.

Formula One has seen a handful of ladies behind the wheel. Only Lelli Lombardi scored points an F1 race.

Danica Patrick has raced side by side with Sarah Fisher and Milka Duno. Sadly, a 1-2-3 female finish is nearly impossible, since both women are stuck on weak teams.

Last year in the Champ Car Series, which now has merged with the Indy Racing League, Kathrine Legge was a regular, but did not fare well. She left to race in Europe, and will not compete in the IndyCar Series this year.

Less than 24 hours after Patrick's victory in Japan, Simona De Silvestro won the Champ Car Atlantic Series race in Long Beach. She became the second woman (Katherine Legge the first) to win in that series. She is a bright star on the horizon and could soon be competing on the same tracks with Patrick. I shall be watching.

Danica Patrick now is carving a nice niche in the legacy of female auto racers. Her Toyota 300 victory will be not be her last. Leading in the 2005 Indianapolis 500 in her rookie year made a believer out of me. Last weekend's win has made believers of the rest. Not only is she is a serious contender for the IndyCar Championship, the lady has a good chance to capture the Indy 500 next month. I will be cheering her on! Go Danica!

Saturday, April 19, 2008


My wonderful parents raised their three children Roman Catholic, as it was their duty to. I went to parochial schools for most of my life and I was caught in the middle of Pope John XXIII's Vatican II reforms. That spanned the old catechism of holding a priest in higher regard that my father in second grade, to a high school 'rap' class where all we did was sit in a circle and rapped about anything that would come to mind.

Much confused me about the religion I was raised in. When I was old enough to choose my faith, I enrolled in an course in college about Catholicism in hope to resolve some questions. With Father Martin as the professor, to my surprise, I became aware of many things I was not taught previously in my many years of Catholic Schools. "The Roman Catholic Church has tried to change with the times." To my shock, Father Martin then revealed that he was a Marriage Counselor. No, they had not changed! This is an example of what I believe is the problem with the Roman Catholic Church.

The vow of celibacy prevents a Priest from the most common human activities, which is so important in marriage. There is one thought I could never get out of my mind since college: The teacher has no experience. How can someone who has never flown console flyers in need? There is an easy answer to that question. Simply because they are told to.

In my childhood years of Catholic instruction, sex was never discussed, in fact, it was as if any mention of it was hidden under the covers or locked in the closet. What about the opposite sex? Women could only receive six of the seven holy sacraments, since they could not be priests. The implication sometimes lead one to casually surmise that males are the dominate sex and women are mere objects. Another blow to healthy sexual attitudes.

Once the sexual abuse was discovered and revealed, the Roman Catholic Church hid it from the rest of us, a crime almost as severe. The guilty were moved, and many of them did it again! The sacrament of confession, I have always thought, was like a revolving door. One sinned - went to confession - you did your penance, and, alas! Your soul was free to sin again.

It was nice to see both popes, the late John Paul and Benedict, apologize for the scandal. Granted, the church has tried to reform. They realized it was wrong to suggest a priest was the best a boy could be and they made the mass more user friendly, dropping Latin. Still, this elaborate, authoritarian structure still is present.

As for celibacy, it remains too. Over a year ago the pope wrote: "Priestly celibacy lived with maturity, joy and dedication is an immense blessing for the Church and for society itself." I don't see the church changing their mind anytime in my lifetime.

Pope Benedict XVI's visit to the United States reinforces my conclusion that the sexual abuse stems from the church itself. The elaborate costumes the former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger wears come straight out of the middle ages, representing a time of tyrannical shepherds and meek sheep. To the country's faithful the pope is the vicar of Christ to the world. An American Catholic should be considered a Roman Catholic first, since the pope at the top of the hierarchal ladder. He is more important, and should have more influence, than the president, that is, if one truly practices their faith like a good catholic should.

The celibacy, the sacraments, the hierarchy, the concept of a conversation with God only through a vicar can cause a soul tremendous torment. Like a rat in a maze, a true path is hard to find. There still exists many 'built in' issues with The Roman Catholic Church. Sadly, it is clear that most of the important problems they will face will be of their own making.

Monday, April 14, 2008


Barack Obama is an elitist. The Democratic Candidate believes that the only class of Americans that really matter are the ones that he perceives are superior by their high education levels, or by their financial resources. Obama sees the others, the ones who do not have his social class - but truly make the country work, as racists, bigots and gun-toting hillbillies. Barack Obama has finally made his fatal mistake.

When speaking to his supporters (his chosen elite) in a San Francisco fund raiser about the challenges he is facing in next week's Pennsylvania Primary, the Illinois Senator said: "It's not surprising then, that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." His words say so much: Obama thinks he is better than them.

There is so much wrong with his statement, which I believe he never intended it to be heard publicly. A good place to start picking his words apart is to simply understand that Barack Obama is a presidential candidate seeking the votes of the so-called frustrated Quaker State citizens. In his heart, the Pennsylvania faithful are not smart enough to vote for him. It is easy to conclude that Obama must believe the same for the people from the Appalachian Mountains across the country to the Great Basin. He is the self appointed messiah that will take away their frustrations through government, if they are only smart enough to see it!

In truth, Obama represents the entity that seeks to take their guns away and laughs at their religion. That entity is pure, unabashed, flat out liberalism, where the ones who call others racists, bigots and ignorant, are those things themselves.

I now know more about the Reverend Wright-Barack Obama relationship. The Democratic Candidate can condemn his former pastor's comments all he wants, however, there is a good chance that he shares the same ideas.

Barack Hussein Obama is a horrible Presidential Candidate! His latest political gaff, beliefs that he truly professes, has sealed his fate. He is a classic liberal in the George McGovern/Teddy Kennedy tradition. Middle America will never vote for him as President. Thank God!

Wednesday, April 9, 2008


British singer Elton John, a former hero of mine, gave a charity concert on April 9 for Democratic Presidential Candidate and New York Senator Hillary Clinton. During the concert, the over-the-hill singer lashed out at the USA by saying: "I never cease to be amazed at the misogynist attitude of some of the people in this country. I say to hell with them." Well, Elton, I say to hell with you!

The brilliant political mind from England has concluded that the reason Mrs. Clinton is behind in the polls, and will most likely lose the Nomination to Barack Obama, is because voters in the Democratic party, most of them he would probably consider both friends and fans, hate women.

The notion that a citizen from another country is actively participating in America's political arena, by giving a charity concert for an American presidential candidate, is ridiculous. John should keep quiet to and just sing. There are about 300 million people born here who have more of a right to adore or trash the New York Senator than him.

U.S. election laws ban foreigners from donating or raising cash for candidates, however, there is an exception: As long as the foreign national isn't compensated. The left leaning singer is not believed to be getting paid for the fund-raiser.

Elton John should have retired from the music business years ago. In his never ending quest to maintain his extravagant lifestyle and excessive spending, he has churned out a run-of-the-mill, unlistenable product since the mid-eighties. Amazingly, John has said he is currently playing, singing and writing at his best. Surely a sign that he has not fully recovered from his well publicized alcohol and drug addiction.

To be fair, Elton has done some great charity work, especially for AIDS, with his Elton John AIDS foundation. I commend him for that.

The old classic rocker that I loved in the seventies is no longer around. "Goodbye Yellow Brick Road" is one of my all time favorite albums. In my mind, no one could come close to Elton John. On October 1, 1975, in the Tucson Community Center, I was a witness to Captain Fantastic in the best concert I ever saw. I will never forget it! I knew the words to most of his songs, while worshiping every note.

Near the end of the seventies, I feared he was losing his form. For the most part, his albums were beginning to bore me. He did Diet Coke commercials, and Disney Movie Scores. Those were entities I thought a true rocker would never do. He sold out. "Candle In The Wind 1997," a tribute to most over-rated personality of the twentieth century and my choice for the worst song ever, was the final nail in Elton's coffin for me.

With the Hillary Clinton concert being no exception, Elton John has a long history of showing the world how intelligent he is. Just a year ago he ranted that we all should ". . . get out in the streets and march and protest instead of sitting at home and blogging. I do think it would be an incredible experiment to shut down the whole internet for five years and see what sort of art is produced over that span.” A Profound Elton once confessed that the world should "ban religion completely," and his opinions about abstinence programs are absolute: "They don't work."

Even though Elton actually accused his democratic comrades of hating women at his concert for Senator Clinton, he will feel right at home with them. They will hardly notice, for he has some work to do for Hillary and the party. As the 2008 Presidential campaign progresses, he will continue to bash conservatives and preach his liberalism. Fortunately for the opposition, the piano man will be on the attack with the same quality found in his dismally selling and easily forgotten records of the past few decades. Elton John is an old, tired, washed-up idiot. What he says in both words and craft are useless today.

Saturday, April 5, 2008


Hillary Rodham Clinton would be nowhere if she had not been the spouse of the forty-second president of the United States. That conclusion comes very easy when one simply reads her biography and notices some of the curious decisions she has made.

One in a series of those decisions was her 1975 wedding to a fellow law student she met at Yale four years earlier, William Jefferson Clinton. Marriage and politics go together, and the new bride could hardly ask for a better groom: A young brilliant, ambitious young lawyer with a bright future. One will go nowhere without a mate. It would not take long for both political careers to take off. In 1978, Bill Clinton was elected governor of Arkansas, which soon would launch both into the national spotlight.

If it hadn't been for a broken promise by George Bush Sr. to raise taxes, William Clinton may have not have been elected president in 1992. He was, and there was a democrat in the White House again. Hillary proudly served as first lady for eight years. Surely, husband Bill always had the wish to be president, but it is unclear when his wife had the first thoughts about following in his footsteps. Some say it may have been before her White House years, others say it may have been while serving as first lady. Whatever the case may be, as a candidate, Mrs. Clinton has labeled those eight years as political experience on her resume for seeking the highest office in the land in 2008.

From 1993 to 2001, Hillary Clinton did not make any important decisions that impacted the laws of the United States. She only acted as an advisor, probably one with considerable influence, since she was the president's wife. When she did act in that role, her best known proposal, as chairperson of Task Force on National Health Care Reform, was rejected by both the house and the senate. In addition, much of her time was spent dealing with the sexual escapades of her husband, both alleged and real.

America suspected that the first lady had the oval office in mind when she ran for senator from New York in the last year of her husband's term. Why not Arkansas, where the Clinton's lived before? She had never lived in the Empire State. Simply owning a house there was enough to qualify to run for office. New York is an extremely liberal state, which suits Clinton's political philosophy well, and it holds much power, more, than, say, a state like Arkansas? She was easily elected. A question comes to mind as to the stature of a first lady of the United States: Could Hillary be elected, or even run, if she were not in that position? I think not.

New York Senator Hillary Clinton could not have come this far without her husband. Today, her campaign is in trouble due to her lack of political experience. Seven years as a senator seems not to be enough. She will not win the 2008 Democratic Nomination, a prize many thought she would easily get six months ago. The major error she has made is that she is running on her accomplishments when she was in her white house, a place she could not have reached if she was not Bill Clinton's wife. Democratic voters are taking a look and are asking: "What accomplishments?"