Friday, May 25, 2018

Memorial Day 2018


Monday, May 28th, is Memorial Day. It's a day set aside in 1967 to honor military veterans who died in service to their country.

Originally known as Decoration Day, Memorial Day was a yearly event in which people decorated the graves of fallen military members. It began in 1861 but really took shape during and following the Civil War, when the graves of both Union and Confederate soldiers were decorated each year by local citizens. (Over 620,000 men died in the Civil War. Those citizens were busy.)

The tradition continued without being a holiday until 1967, when Lyndon Johnson declared it the Memorial Day Holiday. It was originally observed on May 30th, until the government created Monday holidays for most American days of observation.

Many people confuse Memorial Day with Veterans' Day, or believe they are similar. They're not. Veterans' Day is a day set aside to honor all military veterans, living and dead, to thank them for their service. Memorial Day is set aside specifically to honor those who made that ultimate sacrifice in service to their country.

It is said that a veteran is a person who “at some point, wrote a blank check to 'the people of the United States of America' in the sum of 'up to and including my life.'” And in many ways that's true. Not all military members end up in harm's way. I served eight years during what was mostly peacetime (Grenada happened while I was in) and never had to deploy to a combat zone. But I would have had it been necessary.

My point is when you join the U.S. armed services you basically volunteer your life in service to your country. And many end up making that ultimate sacrifice. And that's why we have Memorial Day – to honor those who selflessly served the people of this nation.

Many Americans will spend Monday barbecuing and spending time celebrating with family. And I'm OK with that. The men and women who sacrificed their lives would be OK with that too, I'm sure, because freedom to enjoy life is what they sacrificed their lives for. All I would ask is that at some point in the day they contemplate the true purpose of the day and honor those who made it possible for them to celebrate.

In 1991, I was living in Leavenworth, Kansas, just outside the front gate of Fort Leavenworth. The Saturday before Memorial Day I took my six year old son to Fort Leavenworth and we helped soldiers and other volunteers place American flags in front of every grave stone in the national cemetery on the grounds of the fort. It was truly a humbling experience and such an honor. It was my way of not only honoring my fallen military comrades but also of teaching my son the importance of doing just that. And while it didn't have quite the same significance for him that it did for me, I know he never forgot the experience.

I read something the other day that said “Don't wish people a happy Memorial Day because it's a day of remembrance and solemnity.” I disagree. I wish everyone a happy Memorial Day in celebration of the freedoms we have thanks to our military members, and particularly those who died while fighting to preserve our freedom. As long as you remember the true meaning of the day there is no reason you shouldn't celebrate what it has brought us.

I offer a heartfelt thank you to all military members, but this weekend, particularly to those who made that ultimate sacrifice on my behalf. You may not get the recognition you deserve on a regular basis but Monday is your day.

President Trump Wins Again... Democrats Go Crazy


Kim Jong Un threatened to pull out of the Singapore meeting with President Trump because he doesn't like the fact that the United States held a joint military exercise with South Korea this month. Their Foreign Affairs Minister delivers a hostile public message concerning remarks made by Vice President Pence and National Security Adviser John Bolten. He also says they were going to cancel the meeting and reminds the world that they have nuclear capabilities.

Trump cancels the meeting scheduled for next month.

Democrats go crazy. They say Trump is a fool, that Kim Jong Un is laughing at us and that Trump once again is risking nuclear war with North Korea. Nancy Pelosi goes on national TV defending Kim Jong Un. (So far this month President Trump has caused the Democrats to defend Hamas, MS-13, and now Kim Jong Un. Makes you wonder who's side they're really on....)

Trump goes on international TV, even as the Democrats are ridiculing him, and tells Kim Jong Un that it's OK. He was speaking with our allies, South Korea and Japan, and readying our militaries for anything should Lil Kim decide to do something stupid. He makes it clear that our nuclear capabilities far outweigh that of Lil Kim's. Democrats go crazy again saying that Trump is trying to get us into a nuclear war. But he does say that if Lil Kim is still willing to talk, he's ready. By the end of the day, Lil Kim is saying “Hey, wait... I'm still willing to have the negotiations in Singapore.”

That's what happens when you have a strong leader instead of a spineless, pacifying President, such as the last one. Obama traded five terrorists to get Bow Bergdahl, a deserter who was convicted of that very charge after he returned to the United States, released by the Taliban. He paid $400 million to get some sailors released, who were being held captive by Iran. He was the first President in history to pay ransom for Americans.

President Trump may be crude, and even rude. But he knows how to deal with people. His negotiation techniques are hard line and he doesn't play games. I heard some far-left pundit yesterday say that “There is a difference between the art of the deal and diplomacy.” Actually, there's not. It's the same thing. Diplomacy is making deals with other countries. It's either done well with hard line negotiations, such as the way Trump does it, or it's weak, wishy washy, concessions, as Obama did. Trump is a master at negotiation and is making the Obama administration look even more foolish than they already do. Obama was a pacifier. Trump is a leader. And those who choose to deny that are fooling themselves.

Tuesday, May 22, 2018

Democrat Congressman Wants To Confiscate Your Guns


Representative Eric Swalwell, (D-CA) was on Tucker Carlson's show last night. He told Tucker several months ago that if he got positive evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians he would return to the show and present the evidence. Well, apparently he called Tucker and said he had the evidence... except he didn't.

Swalwell spent about 10 minutes repeating all of the Democrat talking points about Russian collusion. He had no new evidence nor even any he could use to prove collusion between the campaign and the Russians. He cited Trump's “invitation” to the Russians to hack Hillary's emails as positive proof. (Trump joked about it during a campaign speech in 2015.) And he cited the infamous meeting between Don Junior and the Russian attorney. Proof, Congressman? Really?

Following that segment Tucker asked him about something that has far more serious implications for Americans than the Russian witch hunt.

It seems Congressman Swalwell recently wrote an Op-Ed in which he proposed that the government ban “assault style” rifles, initiate a buy back program to get as many as possible and then prosecute and jail anyone who doesn't comply and take their guns.

Carlson mentioned gun confiscation and the Congressman said that's not what it was. “It would be following the law,” he said. Really, Congressman? So a law that allows the government to take someone's guns away and prosecute them for having them isn't confiscation?

Confiscation: the action of taking or seizing someone's property with authority.

I'm not a college graduate nor a lawyer like Congressman Swalwell but I'm intelligent enough to understand that what he is proposing is exactly that – gun confiscation. Use your doublespeak and spin all you want, Congressman, but even though you suggest a buy back, what you're proposing is gun confiscation, plain and simple.

Tucker asked if the Congressman was worried about starting a civil war by enforcing a gun confiscation law. The Congressman repeated the Democrat mantra over and over... “It's about the children.” So Congressman Swalwell believes that a possible civil war in the United States is less of a concern than another possible school shooting, which is bound to happen anyway given the lack of moral behavior, the decline of Christian values, and the lack of proper upbringing at home in this country.

Tucker disappointed me a little because he didn't point out to the Congressman that the most recent school shooting was not committed with an AR-15 and didn't ask if Swalwell intended to confiscate handguns and shotguns as well. But the fact that Swalwell is willing to risk civil war to accomplish his goal of gun confiscation says a lot.

My question is – how do so many ignorant politicians keep getting elected and re-elected in California?

Monday, May 21, 2018

Houston Police Chief Wants To Take Away Guns


Houston Police Chief Art Acevedo recently posted a gun control rant on Facebook that included: "I know some have strong feelings about gun rights but I want you to know I’ve hit rock bottom and I am not interested in your views as it pertains to this issue. Please do not post anything about guns aren’t the problem and there’s little we can do."
My response to the Chief would be this:
As a police officer, especially one in your position, you should have an extensive knowledge of guns and their function. You should also have a good working knowledge of human behavior. So I would ask you this question.
When is the last time a gun walked alone into a school (or any other venue) and killed anyone? Guns are tools, Chief - just like hammers, knives, screwdrivers or any other tool that people use to kill others. They are incapable of acting on their own.
In 2017, 7,105 people were murdered with handguns. 3,077 were murdered by other types of unspecified guns, and 262 were murdered with shotguns. I'm assuming you're already in favor of banning AR-15s from law abiding citizens (although I bet the people of Hitchcock, Texas, would disagree with that idea) but are you going to ban handguns and shotguns as well? None of the types of guns named kill anyone without someone pulling the trigger. So why don't you get down to the actual cause of the violence - a lack of proper training at home, a lack of instilled moral values, and a society that shuns family values, Christian values, and compassion for human life?
Over 1 million babies are murdered by abortion every year but I don't hear those screaming for gun control screaming to end abortion. Motor vehicle accidents killed 40,000 people in 2016. When is the last time someone called to ban vehicles because they kill people?
Have you guessed the common denominator here? Both guns and motor vehicles need human interaction to do anything. Guns are no more responsible for deaths than vehicles. Just over 10,000 people died from gun violence last year but over 40,0000 died in vehicles and over 1 million died at the hands of "doctors."
It would seem to me that it's not the killing you're interested in preventing, only specific causes of it. Otherwise you'd be fighting causes of death that are far greater than firearms. But hey - you've already said you're not interested in my opinion. How open minded of you to let everyone know if they don't agree with you you're not interested in what they think.

Tuesday, April 3, 2018

Jerry Brown Pardons Five Criminal Illegals To Thwart ICE



California's liberal, progressive, Democrat governor, Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown, has once again told the citizens of California and the federal government that they are not important and he will do what he wants, regardless of the law or possible consequences.

Two weeks ago I predicted that Brown and his followers in law enforcement would begin releasing illegal immigrants from custody to prevent ICE from taking them into federal custody. On Friday, ol' Moonbeam proved me right.

The governor pardoned five criminal illegal aliens who were facing deportation. They will be released to the streets of California so ICE cannot find them. One was in prison for kidnapping and robbery, one for serious assault on his wife, and the other three for drug crimes.

Moonbeam says that they are “changed men” because of their incarcerations and that they will now be good citizens. Except they're not citizens. They're here illegally. And incarceration rarely changes criminals. The recidivism rate is around 67%.

Governor Brown proves on a regular basis that the legal citizens of California are less important than the people who are in California illegally. Yet the people keep re-electing him. It's difficult to understand.

In other news, immigration attorney and frequent guest on the Fox News talk shows, Francisco Hernandez, says that sanctuary cities are non-existent. He says there is no such thing as a sanctuary city. He also says that immigration policies need to change and that the only problems ICE has is their own ineptness rather than the lack of cooperation by local authorities.


Apparently Mr. Hernandez doesn't watch the news. When you see mayors on TV declaring publicly that their cities are sanctuary cities, declaring that “undocumented immigrants” will be safe from ICE in their cities; and you hear the governor of California announce that the entire state will be a safe haven for illegal aliens, that pretty much means sanctuary cities are real.

Hernandez says since ICE has jurisdiction anywhere in the country then there are no such things as sanctuary cities. But when local authorities refuse to hold illegal immigrants for ICE agents and at least one mayor warned all illegals in her city that ICE was planning a raid on a certain day that means those illegals have a certain amount of safety from federal law.

I say arrest that mayor and Governor Brown for aiding and abetting criminals. Make an example of them. The mayor of Oakland has stated she is willing to go to jail to protect people who are here illegally. I say let's give her what she asked for.

Tuesday, March 27, 2018

The Crucifixion Of Jesus From A Medical Standpoint


Every year at Easter I remember an article I read when I was a paramedic in the Air Force. It was the medical version of what Jesus Christ suffered from the time He was arrested in the Garden of Gethsemane until He died on the cross. Most people have no idea just how gruesome the crucifixion of Jesus was. An article written by a physician explained it very well. I first read the article about 40 years ago and still remember it. It was that powerful.

The text below is not the original article that I read but it contains the same basic information. It's not for the faint of heart. This is a physician's description of what Jesus actually suffered in those those two days before He died for all of us. It was written by Dr. C. Truman Davis, MD and here is summarized by Michael K. Farrar, O.D. I hope you'll read it and get a perspective of what Jesus really suffered for us.

The Crucifixion From A Medical Perspective
Summarized and Edited by Michael K. Farrar, O.D.
From an article by Dr. C. Truman Davis, M.D., M.S.
God’s Breath Publications

The movie “The Passion of the Christ” is a very dramatic movie concerning what Christ went through during His crucifixion. I thought it might be beneficial to share with you a summarized version of an article I read some years ago on the physical experiences of Jesus during the crucifixion.

The physical suffering of Christ began in the Garden of Gethsemane where Christ is confronted with the reality of His approaching death. In this intense moment, Luke 22:44 states that being in agony, Christ’s sweat became as blood. This is a true medical phenomenon called “hematidrosis.” Under great emotional strain, tiny capillaries in the sweat glands can break, thus mixing blood with sweat, thus the term “bloody sweat.” We can’t even imagine the amount of emotional stress Christ was under at this time.

After the arrest in the middle of the night, Jesus was brought before the Sanhedrin and Caiphas, the High Priest; it is here that the first physical trauma was inflicted. A soldier struck Jesus across the face for remaining silent when questioned by Caiphas, John 18:22. The palace guards then blindfolded Him and mockingly taunted Him as they each passed by, spat on Him, and struck Him in the face.

In the early morning, Jesus, battered and bruised, dehydrated, and exhausted from a sleepless night, is taken across Jerusalem to the Praetorium of the Fortress Antonia. This is the seat of government of the procurator of Judea, Pontius Pilate. Through popular request of the people, Pilate orders Jesus to be crucified, but first to be scourged. The soldiers prepare Jesus for scourging by first stripping Him of all His clothing and then His hands are tied to a post above His head. The scourging begins, by the Roman legionnaire stepping forward with the flagrum (or flagellum) in his hand. This is a short whip consisting of several heavy, leather thongs with two small balls of lead attached near the ends of each. The heavy whip is brought down with full force again and again across Jesus’ shoulders, back and legs. At first the heavy thongs cut through the skin only. Then as the blows continue, they cut deeper into the lower tissues, producing first an oozing of blood from the capillaries and veins of the skin, and finally spurting arterial bleeding from vessels in the underlying muscles. The small balls of lead first produce large, deep bruises that are broken open by subsequent blows. Finally the skin of the back is hanging in long ribbons and the entire area is an unrecognizable mass of torn, bleeding tissue. When it is determined by the centurion in charge that the prisoner is near death the beating is finally stopped. Half-fainting, Jesus is then untied and allowed to slump to the stone pavement, wet with His own blood. A robe is thrown across His shoulders. The taunting Roman soldiers place a stick for a scepter in His hands. A small bundle of branches covered with long thorns is formed into the shape of a crown and then pressed into Jesus’ scalp. Again, there is much bleeding (the scalp being one of the most vascular areas of the body). After mocking Him and striking Him across the face, the soldiers take the stick from His hand and strike Him across the head, driving the thorns deeper into His scalp. Finally, they tire of their sadistic sport and the robe is torn from His back. This had already become adherent to the clots of blood and serum in the wounds, and its removal causes excruciating pain and the wounds begin to bleed again.

We should mention at this point the exact type of cross which Jesus is to carry to His crucifixion. We usually see pictures of Christ on a “Latin Cross.” In reality, Jesus was actually crucified on a “Tau Cross.” The Tau Cross had a “stipe” (upright portion) and a “Patibulum” (Cross-Arm) just like, the Latin Cross, only the Tau Cross patibulum was placed in a notch at the top of the stipe. This gave the Tau Cross the appearance of the Greek letter Tau or the English letter T. The patibulum of the cross was placed on the shoulders of Jesus and this was what He carried up to Golgotha.

With this heavy burden, Jesus begins His slow 650-yard journey along the path to the hill of Golgotha. In spite of His efforts to walk erect, the weight of the heavy wooden beam, together with the shock produced by copious blood loss, is too much. He stumbles and falls. The rough wood of the beam gouges into the lacerated skin and muscles of the shoulders. He tries to rise, but human muscles have been pushed beyond their endurance. The centurion selects a person from the crowd to carry the cross of Jesus.

The crucifixion begins. Jesus is offered wine mixed with myrrh, a mild analgesic mixture. He refuses. The patibulum is placed on the ground and Jesus is thrown backward onto it. The legionnaire feels for the depression at the front of the wrist. Again a common misconception is that the nails were driven through the palms of Jesus’ hands. This could not be true for the hands would tear apart trying to support His weight on the cross. It is know that the wrist was also considered to be part of the hand, so the nails were driven between the two wrist bones and provided for a very adequate support system during a crucifixion. The legionnaire upon finding the depression between the bones in the wrist drives the heavy, square, wrought iron nail through Jesus’ hand and into the wood. Quickly, he moves to the other side and repeats the action, being careful not to pull the arms too tightly, but to allow some flexion and movement. The patibulum is then lifted in place at the top of the stipe and the “titulus” reading (Jesus, of Nazareth, King of the Jews) is nailed in place.

The left foot is pressed backward against the right foot, and with both feet extended, toes down, a nail is driven through the arch of each, leaving the knees moderately flexed. Christ is now crucified. As He slowly sags down with more weight on the nails in the wrists, excruciating, fiery pain shoots along the fingers and up the arms to explode in the brain; the nails in the wrists are putting pressure on the median nerves. As He pushes Himself upward to avoid this stretching torment, He places His full weight on the nail through His feet. At this point, another phenomenon occurs. As the arms fatigue, great waves of cramps sweep over the muscles, knotting them in deep, relentless, throbbing pain. With these cramps comes the inability to push Himself upward. Hanging by His arms, the pectoral muscles are paralyzed and the intercostal muscles are unable to act. Air can be drawn into the lungs, but cannot be exhaled. Jesus fights to raise Himself in order to get even one short breath. Finally, carbon dioxide builds up in the lungs and in the blood stream and the cramps partially subside. Spasmodically He is able to push Himself upward to exhale and bring in the life giving oxygen. It was undoubtedly during these periods that He uttered the seven short sentences recorded in the Bible.

The first sentence was while He was looking down at the Roman soldiers throwing dice for His seamless garment, “Father forgive them for they know not what they do.” (Luke 23:34)

The second sentence was to the penitent thief; “Today thou shalt be with me in Paradise.” (Luke 23:43)

The third, while looking down at the terrified, grief stricken, adolescent John, “Behold they mother,” and looking to Mary, His mother, “Woman, behold they son.” (John 19:26-27)

The fourth cry is a quote from the beginning of Psalm 22, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”

Hours of this limitless pain, cycles of twisting, joint-rending cramps, intermittent partial asphyxiation, searing pain as tissue is torn from His lacerated back as He moves up and down against the rough timber; then the other agony begins. A deep crushing pain deep in the chest as the pericardium (the sack enclosing the heart) slowly fills with serum and beings to compress the heart.

It is now almost over, the loss of tissue fluid has reached a critical level, the compressed heart is struggling to pump heavy, thick sluggish blood into the tissues; the tortured lungs are making a frantic effort to gasp in small gulps of air. The markedly dehydrated tissues send their flood of stimuli to the brain.

Jesus gasps His fifth cry, “I thirst!” (John 19:28)

A sponge soaked in Posca, a cheap, sour wine that is the staple drink of the Roman legionnaires, is lifted to His lips. He apparently doesn’t take any of the liquid. The body of Jesus is now near death. He can feel a cold chill creeping through His tissues. This realization brings out His sixth cry, possibly little more than a tortured whisper: “It is finished.” His mission of atonement for the sins of mankind has been completed. Finally He can allow His body to die.

With one last surge of strength, He once again presses His torn feet against the nail, straightens His legs, takes a deeper breath, and utters His seventh and last cry, “Father, into Thy hands I commit My Spirit.”

The common method of ending the crucifixion was by curifracture, the breaking of the bones of the legs. This prevented the victim from pushing himself upward, the tension could not be relieved from the muscles of the chest, and rapid suffocation occurred. The legs of the two thieves were broken, but when they came to Jesus, they saw that this was unnecessary.

Apparently to make double sure of death, the legionnaire drove his lance through the fifth interspace between Jesus’ ribs, upward through he pericardium and into the heart (John 19:34). The watery fluid that escaped from this wound was the fluid that had built up in the pericardium around the heart and the blood from within the heart. We therefore have evidence that our Lord died not from the usual crucifixion death by suffocation, but from heart failure due to shock and constriction of the heart by fluid of the pericardium.

Here we have a glimpse of only the physical torture that our dear Lord endured during the crucifixion. We can only imagine the emotional and psychological sufferings that took place, not to mention the spiritual burden of carrying the penalty for all the sins of all those who have ever and will ever live. Christ paid a great price, but rose in victory, proving His offer of everlasting life is available to anyone who would simply accept Him as his or her Savior and Lord.

IGNORING WITH ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY


From my 80+ year old (and very wise) father-in-law. He nails it. It's not the gun.

We are supposed to learn from history, but we do not even learn from recent history. In the 30s we saw half the children living on farms and ranches with parents that fed the other half of the country. We all had guns almost since we can remember. My first rifle was waiting for me in Dad’s closet for my 11th birthday. It was a hand-me-down .22 caliber single-shot which was shorter than my height at the time. I was a locally well-known marksman; could knock a squirrel out of a tree at near 50 yards.

We hunted jack rabbits at night on big ranches from the back seat of a Model A Ford (with the top down). Very few girls bothered with guns, but a few had them. Had my first BB gun at age 9, It was a Daisy model; they came out just before the Red Rider models. I could use Dad’s db. bbl. 12-gauge shotgun for bird hunting with the guys.
We never dreamed of using these arms against humans. Nowadays, people have conniption fits if they see a boy of 15 with a BB gun, once a natural American sight (and at younger ages). Any teenager could go into a hardware store and buy any gun or ammunition, no questions asked. With a note from my Dad, I could buy dynamite (we dug wells and post holes by hand using dynamite for the rock). If you could bear it (carry it) you could buy it. There was no legal age limit.
We never knew school shootings, although several of the guys had rifles or shotguns hanging in their vehicles (parked just off campus) when I was in high school (some guys had old cars or pickups their dads got for them). Guns were not only plentiful; they were a natural part of life - especially for us guys living out of the city limits.
This is how we know with absolute certainty that the availability of guns has nothing to do with their present misuse by certain individuals. We know that the shrill demands of emotional children and their emotional parents are from misled fallible human brains as to the cause of school shootings. If we ask ourselves about the differences between the culture of the 30s and today’s, we have the cause of contemporary gun misuse in an instant.
Further, the FBI statistics on today's banned rifles and all other kind of rifles as being 368 out of 17,250 homicides. Banning rifles of all/any kind will have almost zero effect on the murder rate with guns. Calls for more restrictive gun ownership are part of a larger strategy to outlaw gun ownership. This would leave private gun ownership strictly in the hands of outlaws.
Discarding with dead certainty that gun availability can be blamed for either school shootings or mass shootings; can be blamed for most of homicide with guns; we are faced with what gun haters are avoiding: School shootings are a part of and reflect the declining moral values of our culture. The definition of progressive liberalism is: The degeneration of a culture through the legitimization and/or the normalization of deviate behavior.
All around us and in the media is reflected: disrespect for those in authority; disrespect for accountability (in ourselves and others) for anti-social behavior; gutter vocabulary language, even in the media and from our youth; the anti-religious activities toward Christianity (source of peace) which reinforced morality and an acceptance of Islam (source of violence); disrespect of creditors (failing to pay debts); tolerating theft by government which forcibly uses one American for the purposes of less worthy Americans (legalized theft) and which accounts for about three quarters of government spending that will eventually lead to total poverty/bankruptcy through the eventual devaluation (collapse) of the Dollar. Defending our children will cost more than a bundle.
JIM N. TAYLOR