Slain Soldiers Family Adopts His Dog.

I saw a report about this morning and had to mention it. Even if you are not a dog lover, this is a great story.

SAVANNAH, Ga. - Marine Cpl. Dustin Jerome Lee and his German shepherd, Lex, scoured Iraq for roadside bombs together, slept next to each other and even posed in Santa hats for a holiday photo.

When a mortar attack killed the 20-year-old Marine in Fallujah a few months later, Lex, whimpering from his own injuries, had to be pulled away, Lee's father was told.

....

On Wednesday, the Marine Corps finally announced Lex could go home to Lee's family. It is the first time the military has granted a dog early retirement to be adopted by someone other than a former handler.

"We knew that's what Dustin would have wanted out of this," said Jerome Lee, the slain Marine's father. "He knew that we would take care of Lex and love him, just like our own."

Read the whole story here.

Inspiration.

Jake Keesler lost both of his legs fighting for our country in Iraq. While a trying experience, Jake and his wife Vanessa have fought hard to stay together, adapt together, and grow. And they have.

Jake and Vanessa both are heroes in the truest sense of the word. They both have sacrificed so much for our country, having their lives altered in ways they didn't anticipate or imagine. Instead of being discouraged or placing blame... the exude hope. Instead of dwelling on how much they've lost, they radiate an appreciation for how much they have. Jake has a new lease on life, and is spending his time conquering things many people with two legs can't accomplish. While in the hospital, a friend placed a sticker at Jake's hospital bed that said "Live to Ride, Ride to Live". While Jake hasn't driven a motorcycle since loosing his legs, he isn't giving up hope. And he has already taken on rock-climbing, skiing, and scuba diving.

Click here to watch The Keesler's interview on Glenn Beck's show 5 months ago.

The story touched me and I know it touched countless others, including Bill Hattan, a listener of Beck's radio show. In 2002 a car struck a guard rail at 80 miles per hour while Bill was working in a construction zone. Bill lost both of his legs. A co-worker lost her life.

Like Jake Keesler, Bill Hattan hasn't spent his time feeling sorry for himself or blaming the world. I'm sure there were moments like that, but it hasn't consumed him. Bill Hattan has taken what life has dealt and adapted. Hattan now owns Cool City Customs where he designs and builds custom motorcycles.

On Glen Beck's show tonight, he updated his viewers on this story and talked about Bill Hattan's latest custom motorcycle, and probably his most imporant: the custom bike he and his shop are building for Jake Keesler right now.

Jake Keesler will ride a motorcycle again.


At a time when everything on the news is full of skepticism, political attacks, or lack of personal responsibility, I'm thankful to watch a story that lacks all of the above. The Keesler's like Mr. Hattan have every reason in the world to place blame on others and give up. But they haven't. Instead they are taking what life offers and making the best of it... on the way offering a lesson or two for us all.

Blogroll Addition.

A good read, and new addition to the blogroll.

An Inconvenient Truth About Iraq. I particularly liked the editorial the author linked to in an update: The Clinton-Obama-Bush Doctrine.

On the Amendment (Cornyn Amdt. No. 2934 )

To express the sense of the Senate that General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq, deserves the full support of the Senate and strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the United States Armed Forces.

Please note that the above resolution mentions nothing of support of the administration's Iraq War Policy, or how long the troops should remain and fight. Yet, the following 25 Senators voted against the resolution anyway.

NAY

• Akaka (D-HI)
• Bingaman (D-NM)
• Boxer (D-CA)
• Brown (D-OH)
• Byrd (D-WV)
• Clinton (D-NY)
• Dodd (D-CT)
• Durbin (D-IL)
• Feingold (D-WI)
• Harkin (D-IA)
• Inouye (D-HI)
• Kennedy (D-MA)
• Kerry (D-MA)
• Lautenberg (D-NJ)
• Levin (D-MI)
• Menendez (D-NJ)
• Murray (D-WA)
• Reed (D-RI)
• Reid (D-NV)
• Rockefeller (D-WV)
• Sanders (I-VT)
• Schumer (D-NY)
• Stabenow (D-MI)
• Whitehouse (D-RI)
• Wyden (D-OR)

And another three Senators couldn't be bothered to make the vote, including Barack Obama would somehow made it to another vote 20 minutes or so earlier.

DIDN'T VOTE

• Biden (D-DE)
• Cantwell (D-WA)
• Obama (D-IL)

Thankfully 72 Senators did vote in favor of the resolution, condemning personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the United States Armed Forces. And I thank them for maintaining some semblance of honor and respect in the Senate.

YAY

• Alexander (R-TN)
• Allard (R-CO)
• Barrasso (R-WY)
• Baucus (D-MT)
• Bayh (D-IN)
• Bennett (R-UT)
• Bond (R-MO)
• Brownback (R-KS)
• Bunning (R-KY)
• Burr (R-NC)
• Cardin (D-MD)
• Carper (D-DE)
• Casey (D-PA)
• Chambliss (R-GA)
• Coburn (R-OK)
• Cochran (R-MS)
• Coleman (R-MN)
• Collins (R-ME)
• Conrad (D-ND)
• Corker (R-TN)
• Cornyn (R-TX)
• Craig (R-ID)
• Crapo (R-ID)
• DeMint (R-SC)
• Dole (R-NC)
• Domenici (R-NM)
• Dorgan (D-ND)
• Ensign (R-NV)
• Enzi (R-WY)
• Feinstein (D-CA)
• Graham (R-SC)
• Grassley (R-IA)
• Gregg (R-NH)
• Hagel (R-NE)
• Hatch (R-UT)
• Hutchison (R-TX)
• Inhofe (R-OK)
• Isakson (R-GA)
• Johnson (D-SD)
• Klobuchar (D-MN)
• Kohl (D-WI)
• Kyl (R-AZ)
• Landrieu (D-LA)
• Leahy (D-VT)
• Lieberman (ID-CT)
• Lincoln (D-AR)
• Lott (R-MS)
• Lugar (R-IN)
• Martinez (R-FL)
• McCain (R-AZ)
• McCaskill (D-MO)
• McConnell (R-KY)
• Mikulski (D-MD)
• Murkowski (R-AK)
• Nelson (D-FL)
• Nelson (D-NE)
• Pryor (D-AR)
• Roberts (R-KS)
• Salazar (D-CO)
• Sessions (R-AL)
• Shelby (R-AL)
• Smith (R-OR)
• Snowe (R-ME)
• Specter (R-PA)
• Stevens (R-AK)
• Sununu (R-NH)
• Tester (D-MT)
• Thune (R-SD)
• Vitter (R-LA)
• Voinovich (R-OH)
• Warner (R-VA)
• Webb (D-VA)

NOTE: I find it especially interesting that John Kerry, who was disgusted that anyone questioned his military credentials and record during the last campaign, wouldn't condemn anyone making personal attacks on General Petraeus and our troops. I find it not surprising at all that every single one of the Democrat presidential candidates in the Senate voted against the amendment or didn't vote... apparently it is more important for them to have the support of MoveOn.org than to support our troops.

Senators, General Petraeus has not betrayed anyone. I'm not sure that the 25+3 of you could honestly say the same thing to our troops.

MIKE HUCKABEE RESPONDS TO BUSH SPEECH

First, Chris Matthews and Keith Olberman are schmucks. Governor Huckabee on the other hand comes across more professional and more genuine than 95% of the people who ever make it to either Mathews' or Olderman's shows. I agree with Governor Huckabee's comments 100%.

The Necessity of a Response?

I'm only 28, so forgive me if I am naive, but when did having the opposition's response become necessary after a Presidential Address? Has it always been this way? I know its been going on for a while, but when did it start and why? Does the idea of "equal time" really apply to the President addressing the nation? Is it really an important practice when the Commander-in-Chief is speaking during a time of war?

I'm tired of watching people placing more importance on politics at the expense of patriotism. Yes, I am calling the need to have an opposition response after a Presidential Address unpatriotic. The President articulated a clear plan of reducing our troop deployments gradually over a specific period of time, having commanders give a report to Congress again in March, and making necessary transitions from troops in everyday security missions to playing advisory and counter-terrorism roles. The President presented a plan and gave a time driven reduction in our troops. He also gave us a new deadline to expect additional progress. That should make the left happy. But it doesn't. Instead the Democratic Response was full of attacks on the President and a litany of talking-points designed to undermine his message and question any plan.

The opposition continues to be more about hatred towards Bush, obstructionism to Administration policies, and the priority of political gain in exchange for national security. The opposition response was blatantly political and intellectually dishonest.

God help us if this is the path our country is going to continue upon. God help us when we can't stop trying to score political points when lives are at stake. I hope one day we can rise above this pettiness and find a way to place our love of country over our desire for political gain. God help us.

Very important read.

The Big Picture, a post by Karl and Protein Wisdom deserves everyone's attention. Make sure you have half an hour or so on your hands. I have not seen a more very detailed account of the accurate reporting (or lack thereof) of the war in Iraq. Draw your own conclusions as to how the reporting on the war has shaped popular opinion.

If you only pay attention to one thing online today,
this should be it.

Today is the day.

I'm not sure it was such a good idea to make today such an important day. Liberals and conservatives alike have been waiting with baited breath to see what General Petraeus is going to say as he reports on the war in Iraq and the success of the surge. We already have a good idea of what he is going to say, and the media will be abuzz all day with further speculation and preliminary strikes. You can probably judge if politics are more important than the success of our troops or security of our country by which politicians try to short-circuit the process today and come out against General Petraeus' comments even before he has made them. MoveOn.org's ad calls him "General Betray Us"? Really? Does anyone take this group seriously? Amazing that an ad of that calibre makes it in the New York Times, while an ad supporting the troops and the war can't even be run on cable news. I don't know why I'm surprised... but I am.

The importance of today's speech by the General was a handout to everyone calling for a "timeline" or "deadline" in Iraq. You can't fight a war telegraphing to the enemy when you are going to pack up and go home... and anyone who has any political honesty knows that. Nonetheless, it has been politically advantageous to use that fact against the administration as some supposed-proof of "no plan". The administration theoretically bought some time a few months ago by setting this date as a quasi-deadline... although even that didn't stop the anti-war crowd from a constant drumbeat of surrender pleas. And now, this deadline that isn't really a deadline is upon us. Since the surge is working, I wonder if the administration will set a new deadline for another report and buy the troops some more time? If WE THE PEOPLE really trust the commanders more than Congress and the White House, shouldn't it be enough to silence the people clamoring for a pullout because the war isn't popular?

Only time will tell, but I doubt it. I think the war will do better in the polls, if only briefly. Within a few days everything will get back to normal, as Dianne Finestein, Harry Reid and their ilk attack General Petraeus as a man and continue their chorus of withdrawal, the General's comments not withstanding. Obama and Edwards will lash out too, because why not continue and score political points at the detriment of national security? And Hillary will carefully craft her message of support but not really, which will morph over the days back to pleas of troop withdrawal, the severity of which will only be tempered by the beliefs of whichever group she is appearing before.

And this day will be like any other day. With the troops fighting against an insurgency in Iraq, and fighting for their honor and the right to complete their job at home. Oh yes, they are fighting for the rest of us too... and our children... but somewhere along the way we have forgotten that.

Letter from General Petraeus

Real Clear Politics has a copy of the letter from General David Petraeus to our troops in Iraq. The letter is dated September 7th. After reading the transcript of Bin Laden's tape released on the same day, I find it even more important to read General Petraeus' accounts of what is happening on the ground, directed to his troops. It should give us some insight on the General's upcoming report to congress, and provide contrast to the words of Bin Laden.

The Osama Tape

The text of Osama Bin Laden's latest video is available online. I found it at ABC. If you think this man doesn't hate us, you must read his words. While Ron Paul thinks they were just mad at us for having troops in Saudi Arabia, Bin Laden decries our capitalism and democracy as the plagues of our society. Bin Laden then proceeds to try and convince us how peaceful he and Islam are as he pleas for us to denounce the West, our government and democracy and he tries to convince us to join in his cause.

Bin Laden is smart and manipulative. He is playing on current economic problems, taxes, the mortgage crisis and other societal ills to try and attempt to win our people over. He mentions time and time again big corporations and conjures up the industrial-military complex trying to take advantage of the fears and conspiracy theories of many on the far left. It might actually work. Just as Ron Paul thinks they had no qualms with us before our liberation of Kuwait, and many liberals questioned why they hated us on September 11th... some in our country will believe everything Bin Laden says and renew their calls for our return to isolationism and withdrawal.

For those people I fear there is no hope. If you don't recognize pure evil as it threatens your very way of life, then I don't know how to convince you otherwise. But remember, Hitler only wanted Poland. Once you begin believing maniacal terrorists and appease their evil schemes, they will only want to take more. Just as Hitler didn't stop at the Polish Corridor, Bin Laden would not stop at the Twin Towers.

The only way to stop him is to keep up the fight. The only way to win is to remain firm in our resolve. Have we learned anything from history, or are we doomed to repeat the same mistakes?

WE THE PEOPLE.

NOTE: This post is a response to a comment left by Daniel on this post about last night's debate.


What the people think does matter, that is why we have elections. In representative republic (what we actually have), we elect people to office based on what they tell us they believe and how we think they will handle themselves. Then it is up to the elected official to act accordingly. WE THE PEOPLE don't get to dictate every little decision... if we don't like the decisions our elected officials make, then we get to "throw the bums out" and elect new officials.

Now that that's out of the way... I would rather have a representative that is willing to lose an election, or be voted out of office, never be elected, or be vilified in the polls once elected in order to do what he/she believes is right. I don't want the government basing every decision on what WE THE PEOPLE believe according to some pollster... as polls are almost always inaccurate, and the populous as a whole is very fickle.

Honor is not more important than what WE THE PEOPLE think... but I venture to guess WE THE PEOPLE, by and large, want to protect our honor and understand that this war is about something greater than ourselves. WE THE PEOPLE were attacked on 9/11. WE THE PEOPLE re-elected a President who brought us into two fronts of a war trying to prevent 9/11 from happening again. WE THE PEOPLE overwhelmingly supported that war, and re-approved it by Bush's re-election in 2004. Just because some of THE PEOPLE have forgotten what it felt like on 9/11 or no longer have the stomach for this just cause doesn't mean that we should take our ball and go home.

Make no mistake, this war and the greater fight against terrorism and specifically Islamic fundamentalism is the greatest threat we have ever faced. Much greater than the threat of nuclear war with the Soviets... because at least they didn't really want to die for their cause. If not for Mutually Assured Destruction (i.e. if the Soviets had been societal maniacs who wanted to kill us at all costs, including the lives of their own families and themselves) we'd already be dead. Now the protection of Mutually Assured Destruction is no longer available as the terrorists proved on 9/11 and again with various suicide bombings in Israel before and since. If they are willing to die and kill innocents for their "cause" then much of our protection is gone.

George W. Bush understood this, as did many of the citizens in this country. Sadly, some of THE PEOPLE have since forgotten.

Did Sadam and crew plan 9/11? No. And no one ever said he did. What they did say, and I will continue to espouse is that those who think Iraq didn't have anything to do with 9/11 are missing the big picture. Sadam supported terrorism. Sadam tortured his own people. Sadam & Sons put citizens in wood chippers. Sadam was sending money to the families of suicide bombers in Israel and the Palestinian territory. Sadam wanted weapons of mass destruction, and had previously used them on his own people. We, and the world are better without Sadam. Period. And removing him, and working to make a democracy in the Middle East has a DIRECT EFFECT on our possibility of ending Islamic terrorism, stopping the terrorist attacks, and securing America. It is a long hard road, but if we see this through, my children and my grandchildren will be safer because of it.

The Iraq war has not been downgraded by anyone but the media. There were multiple reasons for going to war... the greatest of which was to fight there so we could attempt to prevent fighting again here. Did the administration sell it wrong? Absolutely, but that doesn't mean the cause wasn't just.

I grew up in a military town and have many servicemen in the family. Try telling any of them that we are not doing good things over there and see what they say? Try telling them that the cause isn't just and the purpose isn't clear. Try telling them their sacrifice wasn't worthwhile and we are going to just pack up and leave. While we get to argue about it on blogs in some idealistic world, they make real sacrifices for it everyday. They don't just talk about it, they do it. And they deserve our commitment and our HONOR.

The United States of America doesn't back down from a fight or stop when the going gets tough. The security of our future depends on that fact remaining true. If we are willing to turn tail and run away... what happens the next time free-loving people and our own citizens need a champion? Who will protect them then? Who will protect us? Freedom for all people, both home and abroad, depends on us maintaining our HONOR. We must see it through.

Thank God many of THE PEOPLE agree with that, including Governor Huckabee. It will be a sad day if we elect a President who doesn't.

I Stand Corrected...

I'll admit it. Calling Fred Thompson the winner before seeing the commercial, the debate, or the post-debate Leno appearance might have been pre-mature. I still believe it was an intelligent and out-of-the-box political move. And Fred did well on The Tonight Show last night. But, what I noticed last night on Leno with Senator Fred is something I fear will cause some viewers to tune out. Fred doesn't seem to believe in sound bytes much (I applaud him for that), but some of his answers to Jay's questions were a bit long for the setting. I, for one, actually appreciate that... I like that there is no easy answer on Iraq or the "Shouldn't People Like Us More?" nonsense... but I'm not sure that Leno was the right place for such critical topics from a man who actually had realistic and well thought out positions. I wonder if some in the audience tuned him out when the answers lasted longer than 10 seconds. It is late night however, and people are either watching through their eyelids... looking for a laugh... or paying more attention to the Serta sheep they are trying to count and not the background noise of the tv. I guess in the coming days we will know how successful the Leno-Pre-Launch-Launch was.

That being said... for the albeit smaller, but probably more interested audience who watched the debate... there is no question who the winner was... Mike Huckabee. Being a recent Huckabee fan, maybe I'm a bit biased, but Governor Huckabee stood out among the GOP hopefuls last night. And based on the unscientific measure of sales at our little shop, Huckabee outsold Thompson stuff 5 to 1 (of course we only sell gear for a few candidates).

Mike Huckabee was a star. It was nice to see someone (other than the moderators) really take on Ron Paul. Their exchange about pulling out of Iraq should be popular on YouTube today. Ron Paul is a divider. He's wrong about Iraq withdrawal, he's wrong about how to fight the war and arguably why we are there. He's certainly wrong about how you handle these situations. And if you watched the debate in its entirety, you know that Ron Paul just doesn't get what we are fighting now. Contrary to what Paul said during another exchange in the debate, Islamic Terrorists don't hate us because we had troops in Saudi Arabia... they hate us because we are not them. Mike Huckabee got it right, time and time again.

My only disagreement with Huckabee is the immigration issue. Yes, he says he is for locking down our borders, but also sticks with a previous claim that some of the anti-illegal immigration movement is racist. I don't think that's fair, nor does it characterize this debate properly. The word "racist" is thrown around entirely too much in today's culture, and I dare say the Republican Party shouldn't be throwing out such labels, especially when they are about to face a woman or a black man as the Democratic nominee. Its too easy to score political points and label something as racism when you disagree with their point of view. Just wait to see how many people are called "sexist" or "racist" when they disagree with Hillary or Obama as the election draws near.

Wanting people to assimilate, learn our language, adopt our culture, and desire to be an American first is not racist... it is what the founders believed. Yes, we will take "your huddled masses yearning to breathe free" but we expect them to come here because they want to stay. We expect them to come looking for a better life, "yearning to breathe free" and make this their new home and their new country. We expect them to join our society and help continue to build on what makes America great.

The problem with the influx of illegal Mexicans into this country is that many of them aren't here "yearning to breathe free" and aren't ready to join our society and continue to build on the ideal that is America. They are here for short-term opportunity... many of whom will return their earnings and eventually themselves to Mexico as time moves on. And it shows by the way they come. If you wanted to be a part of what makes America great, you would try to do so legally. You would respect our laws and desire citizenship. For people who do it the right way, I welcome you with open arms. Come, Join Us. BUT, for those who only wish to exploit opportunity and send their social security back to Mexico to prop-up their economy and have no desire to follow our laws or become a citizen... then we don't need you.

Its not racism. Its reality. Its the desire to protect what makes America great and not dilute it. We are Americans... first and foremost. Any other hyphenated label or allegiance elsewhere is not needed or desired. As Governor Huckabee said last night regarding Iraq... we are "One Nation, Under God." We shouldn't have it any other way.