Chief Justice Moore is making a stand. He is willing to put his life in jeopardy to overturn the practice of Federal Courts ruling in matters they cannot have jurisdiction over.

The first amendment is clear:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

This means that there can be no federal law that says someone may or may not practice a particular religion. Thus, the federal court's "finding" that Chief Justice Moore is violating the imaginary "seperation between church and state" by placing a monument in the foyer of the state court is bogus. There can be no federal law saying you cannot have anything religious in a public building. Congress is the only branch of government that can make laws, and they are explicitly prohibited from making any such law!

Instead, hundreds of lawless judges -- judges who make laws when they have no power to do so -- have tried to join together to exert their illegitimate power in a judicial dictatorship. They are telling us to abide by their lawless rulings or suffer the consequences!

What power does a federal judge have to decide whether or not you can have an abortion? What power does a federal judge have to decide whether or not you can worship your God in a particular place? What power does a federal judge have in determining whether or not a particular group of people can decide to commit heinous acts of sexual depravity? Absolutely none, and teh constitution is explicit in saying so. Go read Amemendment the 10th if you don't believe so. Where in the constitution does it mention immorality or abortion? Nowhere. And so the power to decide on these issues lies only with the states and the people. Where does it mention that congress is allowed to even approach the subject of religion? In the 1st amendment, it explicitly states that they cannot. Since the 1st amendment still stands, they cannot.

I pray to God in the holy name of Jesus Christ that Justice Moore is able to revolt against these lawless judges. I pray that he is able to bring to the forefront of political discourse the idea that the constitution means what it says, not what some tyrannical judges try to interpret or invent! May dictatorships and tyranny, wherever it is found, be overturned, and in its place, lawfulness, obedience to God's will, and happiness found instead. Amen.

It seems anyone can justify any extreme government spending by claiming "It's for the children". If we don't correct that mistaken notion, our nation will become a third world country.

Children have a divine claim on their parents. Parents who do not take care of their kids are held responsible in God's Eternal Courts. Parents who trivialize their children or abuse their children are breaking sacred commandments. The result of this irresponsibility is a punishment that will exceed any punishment any court in the United States can ever exact.

Children are not the responsibility of the government. Where in any constitution does it say that the government claims responsibility for the children? If such a thing were to exist, it would conflict with the divine responsibility that rests on the shoulders of the parents. After all, if parents believe that government has more responsibility over their children than themselves, they will neglect their own responsibility, instead relying on the government.

We see this today. How many parents expect the government to fully fund the eight hours of babysitting we call education? How many parents seem uninterested in the events in the lives of their children, and instead focus more on obtaining more wealth to buy boats and fancy cars? Who do they think is raising their children? Unanimously, they feel that government is somehow responsible.

There is a commandment found in the Bible. If a child is raised, and he grows up to be disobedient and disrespectful, the parents are commanded to execute their child with stoning. This kind of law reinforces the concept that parents, not the government, is ultimately responsible for their children. Any defects in the child's nature rests in the hands of the parents, and they are required to exact God's judgment on those children who chose to do evil.

We must remove government as a "second parent". We must restore the divine order and give the ultimate responsibility over their children. Let the government spend nothing on children, and let it have no accountability.

When we see cases of abuse or neglect, let us ask, "What punishment should the government exact upon the parents?" rather than "What should the government do to fix the problem?" Government is not responsible for our children. We are. We should be held accountable for our mistakes, not the government.

Next time you hear, "The government should do something for our children", you can respond, "No, the parents should do that for their children. If they don't, we should punish the parents. Government is not the parent, nor should it ever be."

Recent politics are revealing that once again, Rush is right.

Rush predicted that as the liberals lose power, they will start behaving like lunatics. This is true.

Observe the California recall election. Observe what a liberal -- Governor Gray Davis -- is doing as he watches his power slip through his fingers.

He starts off first pretending that the people of California wants him as governor. I'm sorry, that's just not true. The people of California want him removed from office.

He then pretends that the recall effort was the result of rich, right-wing Republicans putting their minds together in a conspiracy. Governor, 30% - 40% of the 1.6 million people who signed the recall initiative were registered Democrats. They only needed something like 800,000 signatures to succeed, so a Democrat could've pushed this thing through with only a little help from the Republicans. As far as rich Republicans, the funding for the recall effort was mostly provided by hundreds of middle-class families who spared a couple of bucks to put the state government back on track. You'll note that most super-rich people are actually Democrats, not Republicans, so the myth of the "rich Republican" is mostly that -- a myth.

Then he pretends that somehow a citizen-led initiative is un-democratic. Maybe it is anti-republic, because it does not work through the duly elected representatives, but it is certainly not un-democratic. How can you call something where every legal resident of California is allowed one vote un-democratic? Only if you are a liar and a cheat.

He then claims that Republicans have been trying to steal elections because they cannot win. First off, Republicans are winning the elections. For the first time in most people's lifetimes, the Republicans gained control of the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the White House. Similar victories are recorded in record numbers throughout the state governments. If there is one thing the Republicans can't seem to be doing, it is losing elections.

But what about the effort to "steal" elections? He cites the impeachment of the rapist Bill Clinton, the disenfranchisement of the Florida voters, and the current effort to recall the governor of California. First, the impeachment was over the crime of perjury, AKA "lying", not sex. The courts found Bill Clinton in contempt of court, and revoked his lawyering license. It was the duty of the House to impeach him, because he committed a crime in a high place, or in other words "high crime". It was the duty of the Senate to remove him from office. However, this can hardly be considered an effort to "steal" an election. Should the Senate've removed the president, Al Gore would've been the new president. He is hardly a Republican.

And the Florida fiasco. Every recount revealed that Bush won the state. After significant investigation, a civil rights commission discovered that in fact, no one's right to vote had been infringed. The people who did have their ballots discarded were hundreds of deployed soldiers, and those who were responsible for it were the Democrats. So in reality, it was the Democrats who disenfranchised, and the Democrats who attempted to steal the electiong from Bush, who won both counts.

But the lies don't stop their. Blaming the Republicans, and in particular Bush, for the energy crisis was the frosting on the cake. What governor appoints a lobbyist on his council, despite the obvious conflict of interest? Why, Gray Davis. And then when the appointed lobbyist spends the state money by directing it to his employer, who is to blame for that? If you believe the lies of Davis, it would be Bush's fault.

But what about the Bush-Enron connection. If Enron made so much money from California, and Bush helped Enron, then it is Bush's fault, right? Unfortunately, the only relation between Bush and Enron is that they come from the same state. The truth is that many of the board members and leadership of Enron were staunch Gore supporters, and received help from time to time from the Clinton administration. Sure, they donated a few bucks to the Bush campaign, but they donated far more to the Gore campaign. And this somehow makes Enron a Bush company? I don't think so.

If only conservatives were allowed to make unsubstantiated claims like liberals can. Unfortunately, the double standard means that conservatives must be saint-like, or fear their name being spread across every headline. Take the case of the Republican member of congress that was speeding when he hit and killed the motorcyclist. That seems to be pasted all over the headlines. But mention "Ted Kennedy" and "Drunk Driving", and the cameras turn off and the ink dries up.

We don't have to lie to provide our ammunition. We can only cite the facts and still have more than enough to fight back.

- The Democratic Party has always stood in the way of civil rights for the minorities, while the Republican Party was founded on the principle of equality for all.

- It was democrats who charged a poll tax, predicated the right to vote on literacy, and shot minorities who attempted to vote anyway. The republicans sent federal troops to the South to protect the minorities and prevent the democrats from raping their women and murdering their children.

- It was democrats who got the state of California in the fiscal mess. Uncontrolled spending with the raising of taxes and increased regulations had two effects: A giant deficit, and a dead economy. The republicans were not in office, and had little to no control over the budget. However, during the Reagan years, there were surpluses, thanks to limited spending, decreased taxes, and reduced regulation. The effects of the Reagan governership was prosperity and a budget surplus.

- It was democrats who lie, cheat, and steal their way to get elected. Al Gore sued so that a third, fourth, and fifth recound should be performed. It was Al Gore who sued to desenfranchise the military voters of Florida. It was Al Gore who pushed the case all the way to the Supreme Court, which ruled that the laws of Florida are the laws of Florida, and there can only be one recount.

So this election cycle, be sure to elect strong, conservative republicans to positions of power. Democrats are racist, evil, and are trying to usurp power while destroying government.

Many people are puzzled at President Bush's political inaction. He is as popular as a president could be. Anything he puts his weight behind will get done.

He has two conservative judges waiting to be confirmed by the senate. Yet instead of mounting a huge campaign against the democrats who stand in the way, he stays out of the way and allows the senate to handle their own.

He has a tax-cut bill that is being chewed up and spit out. He could stand against those who oppose it, humiliate them and turn the public against them. He could puch his bill through untouched. But instead, he is quiet.

He has real political enemies in the United States. There are those who only want to see him impeached or worse. His response to these opponents? Silence.

Bush hand the eyes of the nation on him while he spoke from the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln. Anything he said would be accepted by the people. He was unstoppable.

His message? He declared that the war on terror is not over, that the terrorists would be pursued until they are all gone. He declared that dictatorships will be overturned and replaced with freedom. He declared freedom as critical as food, water, even air.

What is he doing?

He is being the President. He is above politics. He is saying that there are things a leader does, and there are things a leader doesn't do. Setting the tone, setting the moral grounds for all of our society's actions is his duty. Getting involved with petty political squabble is not.

Compare this with his predecessor, Bill Clinton. It seems everything Bill was, President Bush is not. Everything Bill was not, Bush is.

Could he be reengineering the entire political structure of the United States? Could he be starting a new era of politics, where moral authority is more important than political power? Could he be showing by example that government isn't supposed to be involved in endless arguments, but instead, to focus on the tasks at hand? And when tackling the tasks on hand, is he demonstrating by example, that rather than capitalize on the events of the day for your political benefit, you should instead do your duty and let the cards fall where they may?

If this is the new tone, I like it. Perhaps more of our politicians will understand it. Perhaps the bitterness and hatred that is so obvious will be toned down. And perhaps we will see more politicians willing to sacrifice their political goals for doing the right thing.

On the subject of religion, I find it interesting that:

1) No one can refute the claims of a believer in Christianity. No one can refute the resurrection of Christ (there are too many witnesses who died as martyrs) nor the creation of the world by the hang of God (the proof of this is the world itself).

2) No one can refute the effects of living a Christian life. The peace and prosperity that a Christian believer and follower achieve surpass that of any other person on the planet. Our great nation is different from all nations because of our attention to Christian ideals.

3) No one can refute our sincerity. While there are many who profess a belief in Christ, we judge them by their actions alone. If their actions are outside of that which we call "Christ-like", they cannot be Christian. Therefore, many so-called Christian preachers and priests in our eyes are really charlatans.

4) The only acceptable practice of refuting Christians is to denigrade them with ad-hominem attacks. How many times have I heard that Christianity is wrong because it is plain silly, or that "everyone knows evolution is right and Christianity is wrong"

Prove me wrong.

Consider this.

I am a racist because I am white. I am a sexist because I am male. I am a nationalist because I am American.

The charges go on and on. You can ask many people today about my ~isms because they are more than happy to call me a bunch of dirty names. These names have nothing to do with who I am, but have everything to do with what I am.

The same culture that denounces racism discriminates. I am talking here of Black (or African-American or Negro or whatever we are supposed to name it to be polite nowadays) groups that deem all white people to be the source of their problems.

The truth is that the white people are responsible for a lot of what is good in their lives. My ancestors fought to ensure their civil liberties. I am not just talking about the Civil War, but every war fought by Americans before and after that. Even the British and the Magna Carta, and even the Greeks and the Romans can be credited with their freedom.

The "feminists", who are really women who wish they were men, call me sexist because I am a man. They blame me for generations of women who sacrificed their lives to raise their children and provide a comfortable home to their families.

The truth is, women have a lot to owe to me and my ancestors. After all, it is men that granted women the right to vote. It is men that secured our great land and our freedoms so that they can do what they like with their lives.

And other countries hate me because I am American. They say I am trying to conquer the world or set up some kind of empire. The truth here too, is that if it weren't for the Americans (and the brave British and many others), we would live in an oppressive world. On the one hand, we would have constant warfare between nations. On the other hand, we would live under a fascist, socialist dictatorship. And on yet another hand, we would live under a brutal society where good is evil and evil is good. And on another hand, we would live in a world where a few crazy people can hold entire nations in fear. Yet we don't, because of me and my ancestors.

Isn't it interesting that the same people who complain about discrimination discriminate?

Isn't it interesting that the same people that plead for tolerance don't tolerate others?

I am not a sexist. I am not a racist. I am not a nationalist.

So before you go and accuse someone of ~isms, remember, you yourself are probably far more guilty than your victim.

I am drawn back to this concept again and again as I encounter the application of physics, math, and science in reality.

The concept is pretty fundamental to understanding exactly what correlation math and reality have with each other. That correlation can be summed up as follows.

Mathematics applies to reality inasmuch as it correctly describes reality.

That's a pretty basic statement. But it has a deep meaning.

For instance, what does "1+1=2" have to do with anything? The answer is nothing at all.

But what does "1+1=2" mean when the 1 represents 1 apple, and the 2 represents 2 of them? It means what you have been taught it to mean. If you take a group of 1 apple, and combine it with another similar group, you get a group of 2 apples.

So we see that this mysterious behavior of numbers we name "addition" has a correlation with reality.

Now, numbers themselves have no meaning. They are as meaningful as letters, blotches of ink, or scribblings on the corner of the paper. It is only when they are used to represent things, or symbolize something, that they become meaningful. It is at this point that the mathematical properties of the numbers have meaning as well.

This is why something like "irrational numbers" are really pretty rational. This is why something like "imaginary numbers" are befitting of reality as "real numbers" are. They are numbers that do indeed correspond with reality if applied correctly. The behavior of these numbers reflect the behavior of reality.

I am amazed at how far we have progressed as a society. We live out our lives with numbers on a piece of paper representing our worth. We buy and sell things by adding and subtracting numbers. We make predictions with numbers as our guide, and entire nations are built and prosper on mere theory.

We live in a world that only makes sense when we abstract it out into a bunch of symbols that live most unnatural lives. Reality is subdued by the imaginary.

Nowhere is this best demonstrated than in the industry of software development. We move numbers about and talk about them as if they were real. We make fortunes on making our numbers dance better and faster than someone else's. And we live as kings because we can see farther than the average man, and delve deeper into the maze of the imaginary than they can imagine.

We are real people, living imaginary lives. And somehow, it all works out in the end.

Watching the news today, I heard about the casualties, captures, and mistakes made today.

War is horrible. No one argues with that. But this war is necessary.

Even if it is true that the Iraqis don't want to be free, they deserve the chance to freedom that they never had. It is not right for one person to have so much power over another, the way Saddam does over his people.

When the dust settles, when the bodies are counted, and when it is safe to come out and celebrate victory in the streets, then the Iraqis will know the meaning of freedom for the first time.

The Kurds will no longer live in fear. Nor the Shiites. While segregation, inequality, and discrimination will exist for many, many years to come, they will be far better off in a few months than they were today.

For the first time, in this country of sand and rivers, there will be freedom. Those lives that are lost, those people who are tortured, and those people who are wounded, will be thanked eternally for that.

We thank those who came before us for our freedom. And we thank those who sacrifice today. Those are the heroes, those are they who are really demonstrating love for their fellow man.

"Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.' (John 15:13)

Indeed, Jesus himself laid down his life for us. Did we accept it? Many still do not. Yet he did it anyway, that we might live. Let use remember these soldiers who are falling today as saviors. They are laying down their own lives so the Iraqi people don't have to. We are doing something for them that they cannot do for themselves. This is true love, true service. There is no more noble a duty than to serve those around you in ways they cannot serve themselves.

President Bush is praying for God's comfort to be with their families. I am praying for them as well. Let us all pray for all of those who have lost their lives in this war, on both sides. Let us pray for God's comfort to visit all those who are affected by this war. When the fighting is finished, let there be a great peace throughout Iraq for many hundreds of years to come.

I read through Lawrence Lessig's journal, and I encountered an entry he made about John Edwards.

I have grown up with my own ideas about things. I believe strongly in freedom. I understand that to gain freedom, you have to take away the freedoms of some of the people around you.

I understand the importance of "the rule of law", which seems to be a mantra of the right that condemns the left nowadays. Let me break down what it means. It means that no one -- not the President, not the Supreme Court, and not even Bill Gates, or anyone, is above the law. The law is what governs us. It is what ties us together, and guarantees freedom for all.

The most important fight going on today is happening in the Senate house. You see, a bright, motivated Hispanic lawyer, who has developed his own ideas about the world, and who leads his own life, has found himself nominated by President Bush for a very high court appointment.

This drives the left nuts, because America is not a liberal country. More than half are "right-wing conspirators", according to some real wack-jobs. They believe that words mean things, that lying is as bad a crime as stealing, and that people should work for what they need, and what they earn is theirs. In other words, they believe in the law, in conservatism, and in doing the right thing.

The left cannot win in an election. They know this. Here's proof: when is the last time you have seen a liberal run a national campaign of liberalism? Clinton didn't win that way, and Gore tried to come off as more conservative than Bush,

They can't push their liberal bills through without an uproar. It seems when they do, there is a revolution, and the bill gets reversed.

So they have to rely on courts to "interpret" (or, as we honest people say, "make") the law to their liberal ends.

Now Bush is president. Say what you like, he won hands down two recounts in Florida, and the laws of the land say he is president. He has nominated conservative judges, which is a code word for judges who don't legislate from the bench, even when it is not in their political agenda to do so. It is his right to nominate anyone he likes.

It is the duty of the senate to review his nominees to see if they are fit. The liberals are using this power to hold america hostage and prevent anyone from being sworn into the bench. Why? Chuck Schumer said it best when he plainly states that he is opposed to the candidates for ideological reasons alone. Scholars and most everyone else who has been around the block know that you can't question a judge's political opinions, only their legal ability. To question their political opinions is to turn the judiciary into a political arena, which we have sworn we would never allow.

In short, they are taking measures never before taken -- measures that go against the constitution, that go against standard practices, and measures that are angering the American populace.

When 2004 rolls around, I predict several things. I predict the GOP will pick up more seats in the house and the senate. Not just a few seats, but enough to guarantee a super-majority in both places. President Bush will be reelected, without any close calls.

And the liberals will cry foul. "We couldn't raise any money, because we do not cater to the rich." "How can America be free when only one party is in power?" "Bush used his power to ensure his victory. This is wrong!"

The left is falling into obsolescence, like the USSR, the UN, and Iraq. What will they do in their final throes? What more can they do besides what they have already done?

Side with the enemy. We already know that the democratic party has strong ties with China, has sought help from the USSR to get Carter elected, and has actively sponsored civil disobedience. We already know where their loyalties lie -- with regaining power over the people, rather than empowering the people.

I predict we will see the left show their true colors. We will see real rebellions, with guns and shooting and stuff. We will see all kinds of interesting phenomena we didn't imagine possible. But in the end, they will be gone. They will assimilate back into society, plotting their return to power. And we will be there to ensure that America ia free from them forever.

And Bush will still be here. In America, the majority rules, and minority has to learn to live with it.

After more than two years of waiting, we're finally going to see another tower of the enemy bastion fall.

Saddam Hussein has a long history of evil. I'm not talking Dr. Evil Evil, I'm talking Jeffrey Dahmer Evil. I'm talking Evil you can't imagine.

Saddam Hussein celebrated the day thousand of Americans and hundreds of foreign nationals were burned alive or jumped to their deaths. He celebrated because he wanted to see it happen as badly as Osama Bin Laden. He celebrated because years of his own hard work had gone into this.

The "Axis of Evil" is falling. As long as Bush ignores the French (motto: "Who painted our white flag red and blue?") and other idiots who don't have the best interested of America and the rest of the world in mind, and as long as Bush continues to fight the fight, despite the hate-America democrats and hate-America socialists that we allow to live in our country, we will be free.

One day, South Korea and North Korea will be united under a banner of freedom. China and Russia will finally give up plans for becoming a superpower, based on repression. The Middle East will become a hotbed of capitalism and democracy, One day, we will be able to get rid of the Terror Alert system. We will be able to go out and live our lives without worry of Los Angelos being burned with nuclear fire, and without worry of New York being destroyed with biological weapons.

We will be free again. The world will be free -- many for the first time. Who will we thank for it? Who will they thank for it?

Ten, twenty, years from now, we will look back, and declare President George W. Bush one of the great presidents. He will enjoy a status enjoyed only by the memories of Washington, Lincoln, and Reagan. We will have a "Freedom Day", synonymous with "George W. Bush Day", where we will celebrate by thanking God and our ancestors for the freedom we enjoy.

Those people who are putting their lives on the line, who are leaving their families behind, not knowing if their families will ever see them again, or if they do see them, if they will still be as healthy as they were when they left, those people are the heroes as well. They answered the call of freedom. They will be able to tell their children, "I fought for the right. I guaranteed your freedom. I guaranteed some Iraqi child's freedom. Today, they are happy, because of me."

Now, the question all you America-haters (and I DO question your patriotism, you snivelling unthankful idiots) will have to answer: Where were you when Bush beat the war drums? Where were you when the line was drawn between the good guys and the bad guys?

Your children will come to you one evening. They are going to say, "Mommy, daddy, when Bush brought freedom to the Middle Easy, were you one of those people who held up the 'Support Our Troops' signs?"

You know what you will say? You won't say anything. You won't dare let your kids know that you didn't support the troops. You won't dare let your kids know that you supported an evil dictator that committed crimes far worse than anything you imagined. You'll probably lie and tell them that you did support the troops. But deep inside, you know you were wrong. You will have that cankerous black sore on your heart that will plague you forever.

Yes, war is horrible. But it is the best option. It is the only option for us. And we are doing the right thing. And we will always be remembered for doing the right thing when it wasn't the easy thing.

If you are for the war, express your support.

If you are opposed, go ahead and post your anti-freedom, anti-Bush, pro-evil statements below. I always find your comments amusing, because they make absolutely no sense, yet you seem to believe them as if they are scripture codified by some God who you deny the existence of.