I eat meat—get over it

I seldom find columns at Salon that I can accept.  However, this is one that I applaud wholeheartedly. It’s by Max Lindenmann.  I know nothing about him except—he must be giving PETA fits!  That’s good enough for me. 

I eat meat: get over it

I like to think of myself as an animal lover.  I talk in baby-talk to strangers’ dogs.  When my best friend threatened to have his basset hound puppy de-barked — that is, rendered unable to bark above a whisper via the removal of tissue from her vocal cords —  I threatened to cut all ties with him.  When another friend’s pit bull tried to climb onto the couch I happened to be surfing, I moved over, and ended up spooning her till dawn.  Around my neck, I wear a medal bearing the image of St. Francis of Assisi, who reportedly evangelized to birds and wolves. 

But I eat meat.  Lots of it.  I play no favorites with fish or fowl, white meat or red.  I ask only that my red meat live up to its name.  Unless it oozes blood like a war wound, I feel as though I’ve fallen from the middle class.  As much as I affect to hate all those trendy, angsty vampire novels, the truth is, if I were to run into an actual vampire, the two of us would probably find a fair amount of common ground.  Ditto a werewolf.  “Passing man-kibble must feel like the seventh circle of Hell,” I’d offer, giving it a sympathetic scratch behind the ears.  “ArooooOOOO,” it would answer, meaning, “Sho’ you right.”

That leaves the question: How do I square the two?  Trust me, it’s easy when you hate vegetables.  Actually, “hate” is too dignifying a word; I despise vegetables.  There’s hardly any “there” there worth hating.  The things are mostly water, anyway.  Lettuce and tomatoes may be pretty to look at, but they’re about as insubstantial as cotton candy, only without the virtue of being disgustingly sweet.  Both, along with mushrooms and peppers, make a fine chorus in any comedy starring a half-pound beef patty.  

He continues on in the same vein.  Go here and read it all. It’s a hoot.

Some good news for me

Thursday, Mrs Crucis and I had our six month check up at our respective docs. We’re both in good health, but in this day, it’s a rarity for someone to reach our age without being placed on some medication. We both take medication for blood pressure (note: I didn’t say high blood pressure) and to control cholesterol.  A couple of decades ago, my blood pressure would have been considered fine, but twice in a row it was 130/80 a few years ago so now I gobble a small tablet daily to control my blood pressure.  Since that time, it’s been in the region of 115/70.  I have some basic medical knowledge—having taken the same courses in college as those in pre-med.  I’m no medical practitioner but I do understand what those blood pressure numbers indicate.  

My cholesterol on the other hand was high and it is now in a much better range.

The area of concern was, as I posted a few months ago,  blood sugar.  My father developed Type II diabetes when he was in his 70s. My doc has been watchful for symptoms in me.  He thought he’d found it when my A1C kicked up to 6.4 from its previous reading of 6.1 the previous year.  

He was all ready to add a third catagory of medication but I begged off.  We agreed that if I could lower my A1C and lose some weight, we’d forego further medication as long as I could keep the A1C down.

I’m happy to report my A1C has dropped from 6.4 to 6.2 and I’ve lost either 10lbs or 18lbs (depending on whose scales are used.)  

Since April, I’ve started walking several times a week, and cut down on the food intake (which is much more difficult.) It, albeit slowly, appears to be working.          

Presidential Denial

I suppose this piece could come under the label, “You just can’t make this up!”  A pool by democrat pollsters Stan Greenberg, James Carville and Bob Shrum, shows that by a 64% – 29% margin, the American people believe that things in this country “have gotten pretty seriously off on the wrong track.”  

Obama, on the other hand is deep into denial.  At a fundraiser in Columbus, OH, he said, Slowly but surely, we are moving in the right direction. We’re on the right track.” In response to a question about the viability of Social Security, he also stated, So here’s the thing. Social Security is not in crisis.” He said this when it was just announced in the last few days that Social Security was and will be operating in the red for the 2010 and 2011 fiscal years.

The 2010 Social Security Trustees Report, released on August 5, shows that the program will run cash-flow deficits in both 2010 and 2011 due to the effects of the recession. Then in 2015, Social Security will begin to inflict massive permanent annual deficits on American taxpayers.

When I read such statements by Obama and other democrats, I have to ask.  Are they in denial or just lying. If I give them the benefit of the doubt, I’d say they were in denial.  If I consider their other multitude of statements—all outrageously inaccurate and false, then I have to say they are lying.

History has proven. Democrats lie—it’s what they do.

Ithaca Auto and Burglar

A post by William the Coroner tickled a memory. The Ithaca Auto and Burglar mention by William is a sawed off shotgun with a 12 1/4″ barrel. It’s now outlawed by the feds but in past years it was the go-to weapon for close-in personal protection.

Dad had one.

During the William/Franklin County union/KKK/gangster wars of the 1920s and 1930s, Dad became an auxiliary Deputy Sheriff. Dad was a coal miner and UMWA member as was Grandpa. Grandpa was active in the union and in the local democrat party and was a bit “controversial.” This lead some to believe the Dad was the same and after a few confrontations decided he needed some personal protection.

This was reinforced when Dad’s younger brother Frank, the youngest of the family brothers, was murdered in Benton, IL. The family knew who did the killing but the murderer was a protected member of the Shelton gang.

Dad joined the Franklin County Sheriff’s office in 1928 as an auxiliary. He was issued with a uniform, a .38 Smith & Wesson pistol, handcuffs and a Winchester model 1897 12ga pump shotgun with the barrel and magazine tube cut down as was the stock just behind the pistol grip to produce a weapon about two feet in length. If I remember correctly, it held four rounds, one in the chamber and three in the truncated magazine.

I don’t know if Dad ever used the shotgun. If fact, I don’t remember him ever firing it, but I saw it daily in its clip inside the driver door of Dad’s GMC pickup. I remember Dad kept a handful of green Remington shotshells in the pickup’s glove box but I never thought much about it. The shotgun and pickup was a part of Dad. Dad kept the shotgun long after they were declared illegal. He was a “lawman” and no one made an issue of its length.

Sometime in the 1950s the shotgun disappeared. A new Sheriff was elected who fired all the deputies and replaced them with political favorites. Dad turned in his badge, handcuffs and uniform. He kept the .38, paying for it I expect, until it was stolen two decades later with all the rest of Dad’s guns.

I learned to drive in Dad’s pickup at age 10 when I was big enough to reach the pedals. Wherever I drove that truck, Dad’s shotgun went with me. I never thought much about it but it was there if need arose.

Sheriff Joe

Talk about chutzpa.  The Obamanoids are investigating Sheriff Joe Arpioa and are threatening to sue Sheriff Joe “because he isn’t cooperating.”

A federal investigation of a controversial Arizona sheriff known for tough immigration enforcement has intensified in recent days, escalating the conflict between the Obama administration and officials in the border state. 

The US Justice Department can’t be bothered with upholding federal immigration law but they’re right on top when it comes to harassing state and local officials to who do.

Justice Department officials in Washington have issued a rare threat to sue Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio if he does not cooperate with their investigation of whether he discriminates against Hispanics. The civil rights inquiry is one of two that target the man who calls himself “America’s toughest sheriff.”

It seems a yearly event that the local leftists make some attack against Sheriff Arpaio. In every case the Sheriff has won.  Now the FedGov is getting in the act.  Heaven forbid that an elected law enforcement official would actually do his job rather than caving to political pressure from the left.

The standoff comes just weeks after the Justice Department sued Arizona and Gov. Jan Brewer (R) because of the state’s new immigration law, heightening tensions over the issue ahead of November’s midterm elections. The renewed debate has focused attention on Arpaio, a former D.C. police officer who runs a 3,800-employee department, and a state at the epicenter of the controversy over the nation’s estimated 12 million illegal immigrants. 

The gist of the issue is politics. The suit is being managed by a US Attorney who, until recently, was Sec’ty of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano’s top aid.

The investigations reflect the tangled politics surrounding the immigration debate. The criminal probe is led by Dennis K. Burke, the U.S. attorney in Phoenix who was a top aide to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.

Two of Arpaio’s attorneys, Robert N. Driscoll and Asheesh Agarwal, were officials in the Justice Department’s civil rights division in the George W. Bush administration. They denied that the sheriff, a Republican who has been reelected four times since 1992, has been uncooperative or has engaged in racial profiling, misusing money or targeting political enemies

“The sheriff’s office is cooperating fully with the grand jury investigation and has complete confidence that the inquiry will clear it of any wrongdoing,” Agarwal said. “The office has always fulfilled its responsibilities truthfully, honorably, and in full compliance with state and federal law.

Arpaio’s attorneys contend that the investigations are politically motivated, citing a news conference in March at which Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. was quoted as saying he expects the inquiries to “produce results.”

Intimidation.  That is what is being attempted here.  The problem is that Sheriff Joe doesn’t intimidate.  He does the intimidatin’!                   

Indiana in Summer

This is for all my blogger friends in Indiana—Tam, Roberta, Frank, Brigid and all the others I met last month.

Stupid is as stupid does. pt 2

I wrote a post in May of this year about how the Obama Administration—then in the guise of Eric Holder’s suit against Arizona’s new Immigration law, seems to go out of their way to antagonize the citizens of this country. Over the weekend, Obama did it again by speaking out in favor of the two mosques to be built next to the 9/11 site in New York City.

The idiot left has been pushing this effort for some time first by NYC Mayor Bloomberg and then by the NYC government and zoning commission. The construction unions are beginning to unite against the construction of the two mosques and opposition is reaching tsunami levels across the country.

Last Friday evening at an IFTAR dinner to celebrate Ramadan, an Islamic holy period, Obama said muslims have a right to build there once they bought the property.

That, is a lie. Ownership of property do not have the right to build whatever they want. Zoning laws across the country refute that statement. Near Kansas City, a large protestant congregation was refused permission to build a large church in the middle of a residential area.

What did NY do? They changed the zoning practice* to allow the mosque in the middle of the business district. Yes, there has been churches and other religious building in other business districts but in most cases those religious sites pre-existed the zoning laws. The practice up to this point was to disapprove zoning exceptions for religious institutions.* There was a Greek Orthodox Church that was heavily damaged in the 9/11 attack. They STILL have been granted approval to rebuild.

Why is it that the democrats and the idiot left push Islam to our detriment while constraining Christianity?

That question will have to be answered elsewhere. But for now, here are some comments about Obama’s statements and his backpedaling the following day when he realized just how deep he stepped into it.

  • Friday: ‘Let me be clear: As a citizen and as President I believe that Muslims have the same right … to build a place of worship and a community centre on private property in Lower Manhattan’
  • Saturday: ‘I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making a decision to put a mosque there’
  • Hamas: Muslims ‘have to build everywhere’ so they can pray like Christians and Jews
  • Friday: ‘Let me be clear: As a citizen and as President I believe that Muslims have the same right … to build a place of worship and a community centre on private property in Lower Manhattan’
  • Saturday: ‘I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making a decision to put a mosque there’
  • Hamas: Muslims ‘have to build everywhere’ so they can pray like Christians and Jews
  • From the UK Daily Mail…

    Obama backtracks over Ground Zero mosque after furious 9/11 families label him ‘insensitive and uncaring’

    • Friday: ‘Let me be clear: As a citizen and as President I believe that Muslims have the same right … to build a place of worship and a community centre on private property in Lower Manhattan’.
    • Saturday: ‘I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making a decision to put a mosque there’.
    • Hamas: Muslims ‘have to build everywhere’ so they can pray like Christians and Jews.
    Barack Obama has backtracked over his support for plans to build a mosque near Ground Zero.

    The U.S. President was hit by a furious backlash from victims of the September 11 terrorist attacks after he backed the highly controversial plans in a speech on Friday.

    The proposed site for the 13-storey building is close to where almost 3,000 people died nine years ago after Muslim hijackers flew two jet airliners into the World Trade Center.

    Mr Obama expressed his support for the mosque, which will replace a building damaged by the attacks, at a White House meal celebrating Ramadan.

    In his speech on Friday, Mr Obama said: ‘Let me be clear: As a citizen and as President I believe that Muslims have the same right to practise their religion as everyone else in this country.

    ‘That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community centre on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable.’

    Muslims in the US and around the world applauded Obama’s statements.

    He (Obama) spoke as Islamist group Hamas today backed the mosque plan. (Emphasis mine: Crucis)

    Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahar said Muslims ‘have to build everywhere’ so that followers can pray, just like Christians and Jews build their places of worship.

    Al-Zahar spoke Sunday on ‘Aaron Klein Investigative Radio’ on WABC-AM in the U.S. He is a co-founder of Hamas and its chief on the Gaza Strip.
    Even democrat Senator Charles Schumer wasn’t thrilled by Obama’s support.

    Senator Chuck Schumer says Al-Zahar’s comments don’t carry any weight because Hamas is a terrorist organization. Schumer hasn’t taken a stand on the mosque.

    Mr Obama was heavily criticised by a group representing the families of victims of the terrorist attack, who called the plan a ‘deliberately provocative act that will precipitate more bloodshed in the name of Allah’.

    Debra Burlingame, a sister of a pilot killed when his plane was flown by a hijacker into the Pentagon and a spokesperson for victims’ families, said: ‘Barack Obama has abandoned America at the place where America’s heart was broken nine years ago, and where her true values were on display for all to see.’

    Peter King, a Republican congressman in New York, said the President had been wrong to back the plan, adding: ‘It is insensitive and uncaring for the Muslim community to build a mosque in the shadow of Ground Zero.’

    Sally Regenhard, whose firefighter son was killed at the World Trade Center, condemned the President for a ‘gross lack of sensitivity to the 9/11 families and to the people who were lost’.
    Others on both sides of the political isle have chimed in on the subject.
    Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner said the decision to build the mosque wasn’t an issue of religious freedom, but a matter of respect.

    ‘The fact that someone has the right to do something doesn’t necessarily make it the right thing to do. That is the essence of tolerance, peace and understanding,’ he said.

    New York Republican Congressman Peter King added: ‘President Obama is wrong. It is insensitive and uncaring for the Muslim community to build a mosque in the shadow of Ground Zero.’

    Democratic Senate candidate Jeff Greene of Florida said: ‘President Obama has this all wrong and I strongly oppose his support for building a mosque near Ground Zero especially since Islamic terrorists have bragged and celebrated destroying the Twin Towers and killing nearly 3,000 Americans.

    I repeat. Obama’s actions of this last weekend is a prime example of “Stupid is as stupid does.”

    (* Update. I omitted the word practice above. Practice is “business as usual.” Up to this point, the practice was to disapprove zoning exceptions.)