MLK was NOT God!

There was a letter to the editor in The Dallas Morning News yesterday about James Fantroy (see previous post "Why would you give a thief a pat on the back?"). In this letter, Kay Brooks of Irving talks about Mr. Fantroy's "worst" sin. In her opinion, it wasn't that he stole $20,000. It wasn't that he adamantly refused to admit his guilt. It wasn't that he lied when he said he was going to pay the money back. No, according to Ms. Brooks, "the really horrid thing Mr. Fantroy did was to compare himself to the Rev. Martin Luther King. This was a colossal insult to a great man."

I can agree with Ms. Brooks that Fantroy is no Martin Luther King. He does not come anywhere close to having King's charisma or oratory skills. However, Martin Luther King was also a thief. It is well-known and documented that he plagiarized. Starting in 1986, Ralph E. Luker and Clayborn Carson worked on researching King's early life for the Martin Luther King Papers Project. Luker said, "What became increasingly clear as we worked through the papers from King's early career is that there were serious problems of plagiarism in his academic work." Boston College convened a panel and concluded that there was certainly plagiarism, but they declined to revoke his degree. There were, however, dissenters to the decision. According to Luker, Garry Wills argued "that there was no statute of limitations on plagiarism. Neither death, nor Nobelity, nor immortality conferred immunity from the consequences of academic theft, he said. Boston should have revoked the doctorate."

I don't see what's so "horrid" about one thief comparing himself to another thief. MLK was a thief (not to mention also an alleged adulterer) -- he was not God!

Is the glass half empty or half full?

According to a news report I read yesterday, about half of California voters support same-sex marriage. Hmmmm -- guess that means about half don't!

This is the law -- well except for you and you and . . .

The Dallas City Council has voted to implement an addition to the city's towing policy. Currently, any uninsured vehicle involved in an accident is towed. The addition expands that policy to uninsured vehicles stopped for traffic violations. Texas state law requires every motorist to be insured.

Immediately we hear the outcry, "But that's not fair!" Dallas Councilwoman Elba Garcia says the ordinance will create a "government-inflicted burden" on Dallas' poorest residents who will be forced to choose between food, shelter, and auto insurance. Texas state law already requires them to have insurance. The Dallas ordinance is merely a means of enforcing that law. The poor do not get a free pass! The law applies to everyone! If they are so poor as to have to make the choice between food and insurance, I'm sure they qualify for at least one of the myriad welfare programs our federal and state taxes fund. They can go grocery shopping on that.

And let's think about this: the ordinance applies only to vehicles involved in accidents and traffic violations. Aren't people who are involved in accidents and who are committing traffic violations the very ones who should have insurance? What about the "deadbeat-inflicted burden" on the victims of these scofflaws? Driving a car on public thoroughfares is not a right. Before one is accorded the privilege, there are conditions that must be met -- a valid drivers license, vehicle registration and inspection, obeying the traffic laws, and BUYING INSURANCE! If you can't afford it, you can't drive!

When they pry it from my cold dead fingers . . .

Think banning guns is a good idea? I received this video link via email today. I encourage you to take a look at it. It's a bit long, but it says what I believe so much better than I could ever articulate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGVAQOUi6ec

Why would you give a thief a pat on the back?

From 2001 to 2003, James Fantroy embezzled more than $20,000 from Paul Quinn College. Still maintaining his innocence, he was convicted of the crime. Fantroy does not deny he wrote the checks to himself and his family. He says they were loans, and he always intended to pay them back, but he told no one about the loans, and he made no payments until confronted by officials who discovered the checks. Prosecutors introduced evidence showing that when Fantroy had the means to do so, he still didn't return the money.

Fantroy is sick now with kidney cancer (Or so he claims. I remember Al Lipscomb looking as if he were on his deathbed at his trial; after it was all over, he seemed to make a remarkable comeback). The judge offered him the opportunity to avoid jail time if he would admit his guilt. Fantroy will go to jail -- he refuses to say he was wrong. "I've said from day one, 'Not guilty.' That hasn't changed."

Reaction to his stubbornness from Tennell Atkins, his handpicked successor on the Dallas City Council is a little disconcerting. He says that Fantroy's unwavering proclamation of innocence is a sign of strength. "He's his own man and his own person, and you've gotta commend him for that. He's standing by what he said and what he believes, and he deserves a pat on the back for that."


Could we say the same thing for, say, Adolph Hitler? Saddam Hussein? Jim Jones? Fidel Castro? They all stood by what they said and believed. Do they deserve a pat on the back? I think not! If you're a thief, and what you say and what you believe is a lie, why on earth do you deserve a pat on the back? I could be wrong, but I don't believe Mr. Atkins would have said the same thing if Mr. Fantroy had been white.

Wish I'd said that!

Historian David McCullough gets my Bravo for today.

In his address at a Boston College commencement, he said, "Just imagine if in his inaugural address John F. Kennedy had said, 'Ask not what your country can, you know, do for you, but what you can, like, do for your country actually.'"

I bet it's global warming!

The Dallas Morning News reports today that the summer job market for teenagers is shaping up as the weakest in more than 50 years. A little over one-third of 16-19 year olds are likely to be employed this summer. Restaurants, big employers of teenagers, are adding jobs at a slower pace than in previous summers. Retailers, a major source of summer jobs, blame a loss of American spending power.

Do you think this could be the result of what economists predicted a little over a year ago when employers were forced to raise the minimum wage? That they couldn't afford the increases, and the result would be fewer jobs? Naaaaaaah -- Must be global warming.

We're on the slippery slope.

Yesterday, I wrote about how Obama thinks we shouldn't be allowed to keep our thermostats set on whatever temperature we want. I questioned whether or not this would require some sort of surveillance. In today's newspaper, I got my answer.

Oncor Electric Delivery's goal is to install a high-tech electricity meter in every home and business in North Texas by 2012. You will pay for this meter at the rate of $2.35 a month for 11 years.

The company boasts of the ability of this meter to collect all sorts of data about how you use electricity. Now comes the scary part. These meters allow Oncor to communicate with individual appliances in your home. They don't like how much power your refrigerator uses? They can cut it off. They can cycle your individual appliances on and off "in an emergency." If they can do it in an emergency, they can do it anytime they want.

Retail electricity providers could charge different prices for power at different times of the day, they say -- in other words, they can look at what time of day you use the most power and raise your rates for that time period. You can bet they're NOT going to use this ability to lower your rates.

I don't know about you, but I don't think Oncor needs to know how many appliances I use and at what times. If I pay my bill, they need to keep their nose out of what I'm using the power for. And if Barak gets his way, you won't even be able to decide for yourself whether your house is too hot or too cold.

Yes, my friends, I believe we're on the slippery slope toward losing our freedom.

Obama just wants to be your big brother!

The more I learn about Barak Obama, the more apprehensive I become about what will happen to us if he becomes the President. I am not one to go for rumors and wild speculation, but this pretty much comes from the horse's mouth.

Here is a quote from Michelle Obama:

"He (Barack) is going to demand that you shed your cynicism . . . that you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones. That you push yourselves to be better. And that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed."

Here is a quote from Barack:

"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times . . .and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK."

He demands that we shed our cynicism? Cynicism can be a very good thing, particularly when you're dealing with politicians! He demands that we come out of our comfort zones? What business is it of his how we live? He demands that we push ourselves to be better? Better by whose standards? His? He will not allow us to go back to our lives as usual? I don't know about you, but I like my life and my freedom! I don't want him controlling what I am allowed and not allowed to do.

We can't drive our SUVs? Does that mean he's going to give up his jet? We can't eat as much as we want? Does that mean food will be rationed? We can't keep our homes at 72 degrees? How does he plan to enforce this? Wouldn't there have to be some sort of surveillance? Since when do we need other countries to approve or disapprove of our lifestyle?

This is a dangerous man controlled by an even more dangerous woman, and we better take both of them seriously!

You owe me a place to live . . .

Have you heard about the new Dallas homeless center, The Bridge? It's supposed to be the be-all and end-all in taking care of the hardcore homeless. What's different about The Bridge? No rules -- I kid you not, no rules!

You see, the reason some of these folks don't get help is because they're intimidated and they're not capable of following rules. So at the Bridge, they don't have to pay anything and they don't have to go to rehab. Officials say it will be "tough to get kicked out." Many of their expected clients have been barred from other shelters for not following rules. Jay Dunn, the center's managing director, said, "We're not going to write people off. The reason why a lot of people have been experiencing long-term homelessness is not because they haven't had opportunities but because they haven't been able to make those opportunities work." Huh? I'm not sure I know what that means, but I think it means that you can offer most of these people all kinds of services and programs, but it generally doesn't change a thing.

Mr. Dunn needs to get rid of his rose-colored glasses. I don't think he's had much experience with the homeless. The sad fact is, most of those people are homeless because they won't work, they won't give up their drugs and alcohol, and/or they can't get along with people. With no rules, how long do you think it's going to be before this $21 million facility is trashed and the neighbors are complaining to city hall about the problems they're experiencing from the bums hanging around their doors? Not long -- The Dallas Morning News reports that a fight broke out at the ribbon-cutting ceremony. Oh, and they do have some rules -- the police stopped the fight.

It's a sign of the times . . .

There's an old 1960's song called "A Sign of the Times." I think Petula Clark sang it. Anyway, it's kind of been on my mind the past few days.

It seems that every way we turn, gay rights is being thrown into our faces. I wrote yesterday about the letter to the editor from Tracy Aydelott who thinks homosexuality is just fine. The California Supreme Court last week struck down that state's ban on same sex marriage. In the wake of that decision, Ellen Degeneres (Mr. Essie May calls her Ellen Degenerate) announced on her show to thundering applause that she's getting married. Tru TV has been covering the McGreevey divorce trial, the former New Jersey governor who announced that he's a "gay American." What his nationality has to do with his perverted lifestyle, I don't know. Perhaps he thought that made him sound just like you and me.

We are deemed bigots, homophobes, hypocrites, intolerant, and ignorant if we believe as God does about sexual perversion. So what does God say?

"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!"

"This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come, for men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof."

Is that not an accurate description of our society? Untold dollars are spent so that people can outdo their neighbors in conspicuous consumption. People indiscriminately bandy about the f word and take God’s name in vain. Our juvenile facilities are overflowing with uncontrolled children. People think they are entitled to a living without working for it, and they flagrantly use the system to enrich themselves at the expense of others. Preachers use the internet to lure children into sexual encounters. And homosexuals are entitled to marry each other just because we’re afraid of being politically incorrect.

Yes, I think the California decision is definitely "A Sign of the Times."

What would Shakespeare say?

There was a letter to the editor in the local paper recently by Tracy Aydelott of Morrison, CO. He wrote in response to an editorial by Philip Hamilton. I didn't read the original editorial, but I picked up enough in Mr. Aydelott's response to get the gist of it.

It seems Mr. Aydelott is upset because Mr. Hamilton doesn't believe like he does. Mr. Hamilton believes homosexual behavior to be a choice. Mr. Aydelott does not. Mr. Aydelott seems to be quite paranoid -- even though he is not homosexual, he says, how can we stand by and let Mr. Hamilton espouse his views without fearing he will come after us next?

Mr. Aydelott says the only problem he has with people is when they try to "shove alien culture and reprehensible behavior down my throat." Oh, I get it. You mean like gay pride parades, and demanding we accept gay marriage, and calling us bigots if our moral standards are high.

Mr. Aydelott says as far as he can tell, the gay and lesbian community is socially responsible. Yeah, that's why they're the ones who suffer the most from AIDS, I guess.

Mr. Aydelott says, "If your life is so devoid of worry that you have the energy to be concerned about this issue, then you are either one very fortunate individual or you're completely off your rocker." Yet he wrote a letter taking up some 13 column inches on the subject. Guess his life is pretty devoid of worry.

Mr. Aydelott stresses that he is not homosexual: "I'm as heterosexual as they come;" " . . .not any sort of advocate for the gay and lesbian community;" "Maybe you could choose to be attracted to males, but not me." Was it Shakespeare who wrote, "Methinks thou dost protest too much"?

I smell a rat!

There was an article in our local paper yesterday about a couple who may become homeless because of a stolen mortgage payment. Maybe it's just me, but I think their story has more holes than a slice of Swiss cheese. Bill Hankins, the reporter, doesn't say anywhere in the article what steps he took to check out their story. Perhaps he did check it out and just didn't say so, but if he didn't, I predict he's going to end up with egg on his face.

Here's how the story goes:

Robert and Judy Brown of Detroit, Texas, had a mortgage on their home with Wells Fargo Home Mortgage. They were $3500 behind in their payments when Wells Fargo demanded the money. They sent $2000 which Wells Fargo refused because it was short of the total owed. The company informed them by letter that the money would be wired back to them by Western Union. That's flag #1 -- If the Browns sent a check or money order, why didn't Wells Fargo just send it back? If they sent the money by Western Union, why did Wells Fargo pick it up in the first place? And if Wells Fargo had picked the money up, why didn't they just send a check back to the Browns? And if the Browns said, "We're sending the rest of the money," why didn't Wells Fargo just hold the $2000?

The Browns managed to scrape up the remaining $1500 to make up the payment. That's flag #2 -- if they were able to scrape together the full amount, why didn't they do so to begin with?

They went to Western Union to pick up the $2000 wired back to them. As instructed by Wells Fargo, they took the letter from the company, their receipt, and a photo ID. They were informed by Western Union that someone else had already picked up the money in New Orleans. That's flag #3 -- I would come much nearer believing this had the money been picked up locally, but New Orleans? Whoever got the money had to have some idea it was there. And how did they get the documentation required to pick it up? And does Western Union not offer some type of protection in this instance? After all, if they released the money to an imposter, aren't they responsible?

The Browns went to the police department and were told, in essence, "Tough luck." That's flag #4 -- if they went to the local police department, shouldn't they have been told to contact New Orleans police since that's where the crime occurred? And if they contacted New Orleans police, you'd think that department would at least go through the motions of taking a report.

Bill Hankins concludes that since the Browns were nowhere near New Orleans when the money was picked up, it is "an open and shut case of stolen identity." Maybe, maybe not. Just because the Browns say they weren't in New Orleans doesn't mean they don't know who got the money.

I smell a big fat rat! But then again, it could be a case of "what goes around, comes around." I did a little checking and discovered in a Lamar County judicial records search that the Browns, themselves, were charged with theft a couple of years ago.

Like, what word would we, like, use if we didn't, like, have like?

Like, Mr. Essie May and I, like, had breakfast at, like, a restaurant, like, the other day. Like, while we were, like, waiting to be, like, seated, like, these two, like, young girls, like maybe 17 or 18, like came in. Like, they were, like, basically, dressed, like, alike -- like they had on these, like, midriff, like, tops, and, like, their skirts were, like, hip-hugging and, like, OMG, really, really short. And like, one of them, like, had this, like, tattoo on her belly, but, like, only part of it was, like showing -- like the rest of it disappeared into, like, you know, her like, waistband.

And like, the first one goes, "OMG, did you, like, see, like the way he, like looked, at me." And the second one like, goes, "OMG, like creep me out!" And like, the first one goes, "Like, I felt like, like, you know, OMG, like, he was looking right, like, through my like clothes. And like, I, you know, thought about like, you know, going like, 'What are you, like, staring at, Mister.'" And the second one goes, like, all like, you know, indignant, like, you know, like, "The world is like OMG, full of like dirty old, you know, men!"

Like, ladies, like, my first advice, like to you, like is to go, "OMG, come on, like, girls! If you, like, don't like, like, being, like, stared at, don't, you know, like, dress, like, in a way that says, like, 'Look at me!'" Like my second, like, bit of advice, like, OMG, is to ban like from your, like, vocabulary, you know? Like my third bit, like, of advice, is, like, to learn that go is not a synonym for, like, OMG, said. Like, if you, like, do those three things, like, you'll find, like, far fewer, like, you know, like people, staring at, like, you! OMG!

Stupid is as stupid does.

The Carrollton mayor's race has some interesting issues. Incumbent Becky Miller faces Ron Branson in Saturday's election.

Mayor Miller, according to herself, has a quite colorful past. She attended the University of Kentucky, and she used to sing backup for Linda Ronstadt and Jackson Browne. She was once engaged to Eagles singer-songwriter Don Henley. Her brother sacrificed his life for freedom in Vietnam.

Mr. Branson was suspicious of these stories. When Mayor Miller's supporters approached him and asked him not to run, he told them he wouldn't if they would prove the stories true. He's still in the race.

The Dallas Morning News decided to check out the mayor's stories. Neither Jackson Browne nor Linda Ronstadt has ever heard of Mrs. Miller. "I was using another name then," she says. The News says they gave the names Becky, Rebecca, Miller, Gibson, Sampson (Mrs. Miller's maiden and married names). Nope, they still don't remember her. What names would they know her by? Maybe Pinky, Mrs. Miller says. Nope, don't remember any Pinky's either.

The University of Kentucky has no record of her enrollment. "Well," she says, "I attended only two months." Anything more than two weeks, they'd have a record of according to university officials.

Engaged to Don Henley? He never heard of her. "Well, maybe we weren't engaged, but we dated." Still never heard of her.

The brother who died in Vietnam? Her father says he had only one son who's still living and never served in the military. Half-brother or step-brother maybe? Not unless his wife of 60 years has one hidden away somewhere, he says. "Oh well, he has Alzheimers," says Mayor Miller, "He can't remember today from tomorrow." They better check the living brother then, because he doesn't remember their soldier brother, either. But Mrs. Miller can prove it -- she has a name. Sure enough, he's on the Vietnam memorial. He's a Negro. Mrs. Miller is white. Oops!

Mrs. Miller's brother is a songwriter for the Eagles, she says. He's not listed on any of the professional registers. Mrs. Miller says she doesn't like people delving into her personal life. Imagine that!

Mr. Branson says all this is relevant to the election, because it brings Mrs Miller's character and integrity into question. Forget character and integrity -- this woman is too stupid to be mayor!

Translation: That's nuts!

I just heard that the students in one of our local school districts didn't have to go to school today. They had a holiday for Cinco de Mayo.

Es muy loco!

Can you hear me now?

I just got home from church, and evidently the man running the sound system thinks God is hearing impaired. The sound was teeth-rattling loud. Add to that the persistent beat of the drums and bass guitar, the attempt to cram umpteen dozen "praise" choruses into a service, and the clapping and standing ovations, and I felt like I'd had a big amphetamine hit by the time we walked out of there.

I go to church in an attempt to escape the world and find a place that will calm my spirit and be conducive to worship. Loud and fast doesn't provide that place.

When I came home, I opened a window. It was nice and calm outside and there were birds singing in the trees. Think I'll just do my worshiping here.

Stop the Presses!

A few words from politicians and editors:

Governor Rick Perry is quoted in The Dallas Morning News of April 23, 2008: "I don't want to go to Washington. I've got a great job . . . you can do more from your prospective state . . ." I think he means "respective." I'm pretty sure we took care of that prospective state thing in 1845 and again after the Civil War ended.

April 20, 2008, Mary Madewell said: " . . .Texans split ballots among independents Carole Keeton Strayhorn and Pinky Friedman . . ." Guess she's had a little too much Pinky Wilson-- the Friedman guy's name is Kinky.

May 2, 2008 -- Eric Clifford, in urging his tax freeze ordinance presented to the Paris City Council in an initiative petition be passed, says the flaws in it are only minor and can be dealt with later. Yeah, that's what the contractor told me about the crack in my foundation just before my kitchen fell off.

Also May 2, 2008 -- Mary Madewell writes, "City engineer Shawn Napier, in his roll as staff contact, distributed . . ." Wrong role. Here's the difference illustrated in a sentence: In the new movie, Let the Presses Roll, Mary Madewell played the role of the managing editor -- but not very convincingly.

"Teach-in" or political indoctrination?

An article in today's Dallas Morning News details a California "teach-in" held May 1. For this "teach-in" protest, regular curriculum was suspended. Social Studies Teacher Craig Gordon said the goal was to raise awareness among students who may not have a firm grasp of the relationship between what happens at home and what happens "out there." "I want them to actively think about the priorities of society, because they are the ones who are going to be most affected," Gordon said.


Of course, a third of Gordon's students were missing. Latino students staged their own protest, marching in front of the school to complain about their perceived lack of immigrant rights. If they're so oppressed here, my suggestion to them is to go back to Mexico where they can get a real quality education.


Anyway, back to Mr. Gordon. Despite what he says, Mr. Gordon doesn't want his students to "actively think." He wants them to think the way he does. Examples from his discussion topics prove the point: students from elementary to adult education discussed "everything from whether the U.S. was committing acts of violence against innocent people to whether American businesses were getting rich on the backs of the poor." I don't know about you, but that sounds a little biased to me. One worksheet handed out to students assessed current events: "About 1,000,000 Iraqis are dead and 4,000 American soldiers . The war will cost the U.S. about $2.8 trillion. Our schools don't have money. Many people don't have health care." Do you think this man is a liberal or a conservative? If he's not indoctrinating, you shouldn't be able to tell.


And all these young skulls full of mush (as Rush would say) are falling for this crap. "We don't have any money because it's all going to the war," said Ashley Lawless, an 18-year-old senior who, moments before, had been obsessively fixing her hair.


District officials, while not sanctioning the teach-in, didn't condemn it, either. They said they recognized the need to teach current events, and these lessons exemplified that.

Make no mistake -- these were NOT current events lessons. The teach-in was nothing short of political indoctrination. And if it ever occurs in my school district, they'll have more than a bunch of Mexicans protesting in front of the school!

Every parent's dream . . .

I don't know where Billy Ray Cyrus left his brain when he allowed 15-year-old Miley to be photographed in provocative nude poses. It may not technically qualify as child pornography, but it's definitely child exploitation. The scariest thing about the publication of the photos is Rosie O'Donnell. On her blog, she describes the pictures as "beautiful." Just what every parent dreams of -- Rosie O'Donnell lusting for their teenage daughter!