Quote

People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it. Welcome to From On High.

Saturday, September 22, 2007

Not Only Is It Cowardly ...

... but it makes little sense.

Why would Waite Rawls, president of the Museum of the Confederacy, want to consider the remote site of Ft. Monroe for part of the priceless collection of Civil War artifacts that he's desperate to bust up?

Apparently, in his mind, it has a "historical connection" to the war:
Fort Monroe eyed to house artifacts
Assocaited Press


Richmond — The Museum of the Confederacy, which has been considering spreading the bulk of the world's largest collection of Civil War artifacts among three new locations, has proposed that one branch be sited at Fort Monroe after the Army departs in 2011.

[Museum president and CEO S. Waite Rawls III] said yesterday that Fort Monroe was selected as a potential site because of its historical connection to the Civil War: Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee supervised construction of the fort and Confederate President Jefferson Davis was a prisoner there. The site also was selected for its potential as a tourist destination after the Army departs, and because it is located in a different region than the other two possible sites, broadening the museum's reach.
(
link)
With that twisted (and painfully feeble) logic, Bland County qualifies for the museum's assets. We too have a connection - almost as tentative - to the war, and we are in "a different region than the other two possible sites."

Historians - unlike museum presidents - know full well that Ft. Monroe played little part in the Civil War. In fact, after the first few months of the war, it played no part at all, except as a supply depot, a never-used defensive fortress, and as a prison. For that "connection," it is to receive this priceless collection? There are hundreds of sites in Virginia alone that have a greater significance.

The more I read about this travesty - the Museum of the Confederacy is being destroyed as an entity because it now proves to be politically incorrect in this age of McCarthy-style enlightenment - the more I come to believe that the people making the decisions for the museum haven't the first clue as to what they are doing, much less what their charge as overseers of this historical treasure is.

A portion of the Museum of the Confederacy - a repository created by devoted daughters of the Old South with the intention of preserving for posterity the memories of their loved ones who fought and died for a cause they believed in and were willing to give their last full measure to defend - is to be relegated to a former dungeon. And God knows where else.

Speaks volumes about what we've become.

You Thought We Had Killed It

Maybe we have. Maybe ...

Alaska Ends Plan for `bridge to Nowhere'
By Steve Quinn, Associated Press


Juneau, Alaska (AP) — Some called it a bridge to the future. Others called it the bridge to nowhere.


On Friday, Alaska decided the bridge really was going nowhere, officially abandoning the project in Ketchikan that became a national symbol of federal pork-barrel spending.

While the move closes a chapter that has brought the state reams of ridicule, it also leaves open wounds in a community that fought for decades to get federal help.

"We went through political hot water — tons of it — and not just nationally but internationally," Ketchikan-Gateway Borough Mayor Joe Williams said. "We have nothing to show for it."

The $398 million bridge would have connected Ketchikan, on one island in southeastern Alaska, to its airport on another nearby island.

Gov. Sarah Palin said Friday the project was $329 million short of full funding. (link)

Don't think it's over. Despite the fact that this has been recognized the world over as being the most wasteful project in the history of mankind, government officials in Alaska (don't forget, government exists to protect and grow government) are still plotting:

""We will continue to look for options for Ketchikan to allow better access to the island," the Republican governor said. "The concentration is not going to be on a $400 million bridge."

No, it'll be on a $1 billion bridge. Count on it.

Impervious to any known antidote, the project lurks in the half-light of government planning offices. To rise some day from its deathbed, when the innocent sleep and America is unsuspecting, and once again prey on America's taxpayers.

Where Once 'Liberality' Thrived

The American college campus. Where "liberals" prove every day that they haven't a clue what that word means.

Columbia University, where the founder of The Minuteman Project was driven off the stage after being roughed up by "liberal" students there a year ago, and after the university president gave those found to be guilty of having committed the assault a slap on the wrist, invites a terrorist to speak on campus next Monday. And the university president trots out the tired - and demonstrably false - argument that his campus defends everyone's right to speak.

At the same time, on another campus, led no doubt by individuals who profess to cherish the "liberalism" and "open-mindedness" that exists there, a man branded as being some kind of conservative has had an invitation to speak to a group of regents rescinded. His thoughts on the dangerous subject of competitiveness - a subject from which the students needed to be protected, apparently - were not to be expressed.

Our colleges were once charged with educating the leaders of tomorrow. The institutions of higher learning where today decadence, self-indulgence, moral decay, and illiberality thrive.

It's sad. But irreversible?

It Goes Well Beyond That, Rudy

I suppose it was unrealistic to expect too much from Rudy Giuliani's speech before the NRA yesterday. At least he didn't come across as a panderer, as so many Democrats are wont to do (think MoveOn.org). And he didn't attack us, which is to his credit, I guess.

But from the quotes attributed to him in the speech he delivered, I have a bad feeling that he just doesn't get it. He doesn't know us. And he sure as hell doesn't understand why we demand the inviolable right to keep and bear arms.
Giuliani Claims An Evolution On Gun Rights
By Marc Ambinder, The Atlantic


Glossing over the less appealing line items on his gun control resume, ex-NYC mayor Rudy Giuliani presented himself as sympathetic to the aims of the National Rifle Association and pledged, as president, to protect gun rights.

"Your right to bear arms is based on a reasonable degree of safety," he said.

He indicated that he would oppose new efforts to tighten national gun laws.

"I believe that law endforcement should focus on enforcing the laws that exist on the books as opposed to passing new extensions of laws," he said. "A person's home is their castle. They have the right to protect themselves in their own home." (link)
It goes way beyond our interest in safety, Rudy.

It's about liberty. Freedom. And make no mistake, it's intended to be an eternal check on an imperial government.

"To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws."
---John Adams, A Defence of the Constitutions of the United States 475 (1787-1788)

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."
---Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787).

Safety, Rudy? Yes. But it goes so much deeper.

Don't Give Her Any Ideas

A woman was leaving a convenience store with her morning coffee when she noticed a most unusual funeral procession approaching the nearby cemetery. A long black hearse was followed by a second long black hearse about 50 feet behind the first one. Behind the second hearse was a solitary woman walking a dog on a leash.

Behind her, a short distance back, were about 200 women walking single file. The woman couldn't stand her curiosity. She respectfully approached the woman walking the dog and said, "I am so sorry for your loss, and I know now is a bad time to disturb you, but I've never seen a
funeral like this. Whose funeral is it?"

"My husband's."

"What happened to him?"

The woman replied, "My dog attacked and killed him."

She inquired further, "But, who is in the second hearse?"

The woman answered, "My mother-in-law. She was trying to help my husband when the dog turned on her."

A poignant and thoughtful moment of silence passed between the two women.

"Can I borrow the dog?"

"Get in line."


Author unknown.