Lex Rex

verbum sat sapienti

Lex Rex

Tuesday, November 30, 2004

Rather Ghost Talk

Some snips, needs no further comment:

It was a given that Rather had long since devolved into something of a jokey caricature, what with his homespun wisdom, his pomp-rich demeanor, his windbag-y tendencies and his overall weirdness.

Of course, the guy has always been a little bit out there. There was his decision to sign off his newscast with the word "Courage" for no apparent reason three times during a single week in 1985 as well as the bizarre 1986 incident in which Rather was roughed up by attackers who reportedly asked, "Kenneth, what is the frequency?" -- a line later immortalized in an R.E.M. tune.

It also didn't take much to prompt certain peculiarities to exit Rather's lips, such as during my interview with him last year.

Describing his love of CBS and CBS News, Rather observed in the interview last year: "In my mind and the minds of the people I work with, this is a magical, mystical kingdom -- our version of Camelot. And we feel we are working at a kind of roundtable of King Arthur proportions. Now, it may be that this kingdom exists only in our minds. But that makes it no less real for those of us who live it every day."

And then there was this: "Ed Murrow's ghost is here. I've seen him and talked to him on the third floor of this building many times late at night. And I can tell you that he's watching over us."

Monday, November 29, 2004

WMD Attack on US Inevitable, ELIs More Harmful

The greatest threat to America is not a WMD attack from the outside, but ELI (Enactments of Liberal Ideology) attacks from our domestic enemies. True, WMDs have a "wow" factor that plays well on the nightly news, but arguably more misery occurs at the hand of liberals. To keep tabs on our domestic enemies, I think we should have a color coded threat matrix patterned after the Homeland Security model, only reversed. "Red" means that conservatives are in control and the threat of internal destruction is relatively low, while moving up the spectrum to "Code Blue" means that the policies and ideology of the Blue States are taking hold. An elevated blue warning would signal Americans to shift assets to tax free investments and pull their children out of public schools.

As to the WMD threat, Yossef Bodansky had this to say:

An al-Qaida attack on the US with non-conventional weapons is virtually "inevitable," and the organization is likely "tying up the knots" for such an attack, Yossef Bodansky, former director of the US Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, told The Jerusalem Post on Sunday.....

"All of the warnings we have today indicate that a major strike something more horrible than anything we've seen before is all but inevitable," he said.....

He said that al-Qaida has not carried out a second major attack on the US until now for internal psychological and ideological reasons, but after the reelection of President George W. Bush, it has gotten "the green light" to do so from leading Islamic religious luminaries, as well as from "the elites of the Arab world." ....

Bodansky said that while there may still be some vestiges of debate and doubt within Islamic circles, he believes that planning for such an attack is finished. "They got the kosher stamp from the Islamic world to use nuclear weapons," he said.....

Moreover, Bodansky said that America is losing the war against terrorism, noting the number of recruits bin Laden is able to count on, as his call to arms gains widespread support throughout the Muslim world.....

In the pre-9/11 world, Bodansky said, jihadists could count on 250,000 individuals trained and willing to die, and 2.5 million to 5 million people willing to help them in one way or another. He cited intelligence estimates from this summer that suggest that as many as 500,000-750,000 people are willing and trained to die, 10 million are willing to actively support them, short of killing, while another 50 million are willing to support such a movement financially.....

While I do believe that another attack is inevitable, as inevitable as it was on September 10, 2001, I take issue with the assessment that we are losing this war. In fact, it is just odd that anyone of reasonable intelligence would think we are losing. I guess it depends on what "losing" means, but given the intense pressure we have put on terrorist organizations worldwide, I don't see us "losing" any more than we were losing in the early stages of WWII. We have a plan to defeat terrorism, it doesn't happen over night, but it will happen.

Compare the enemy to America. On the enemy's side, perhaps more are willing to support terrorism, but never has it been more difficult to do so. Assets are being tracked down, confiscated, destroyed, or frozen. Meanwhile, our financing of the war goes on un-hindered and on public display, right down to the vote and location of our funding process being recorded live on television. Indeed, our assets continue to grow daily. Terrorists are increasingly on the run, forced to hide in caves and safe houses, moving from one location to the next every four hours, and filtering cryptic taped messages through stealth conduits to their media outlets (CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, and of course, Al Jazeera). Our side? Our soldiers walk around freely, and malls were filled with anti-terrorist Bush supporters this past weekend. Our leaders appear publicly regularly, and live in the media. I've seen the White House and it's no cave. The only frequent movements that Bush made was during the last leg of this past election (a cuss word to jihadists) where he won the popular vote (whoops, another bad word) by a large margin.

It is inevitable in any war that numbers will increase in support of an enemy, but we now have a coalition against terrorism that is larger than the elites care to admit. They may have 500,000 willing to die, we have millions just in our own armed services that accept the dangers of the war, but would rather make the terrorists die for their cause. They may have 10,000,000 willing to support terrorism, but by the latest count, we have at least 61,000,000 in support of crushing terrorism and this number is growing.

All this said, we should brace ourselves for another attack, but in that event, the American spirit of freedom will only grow stronger. Indeed, if there was anything good that came out of 9/11, it was the rousing of patriotism and Christianity. America is now firmly a Super Power. If there is a kryptonite that would weaken our resolve, it is the complacency born during the soft non-war periods in American history. In this post-modern era, while we are not busy fighting wars, we now elect weak leaders. If the terrorists only knew that they could realize their dream of America's fall by merely sitting back and patiently doing nothing, why then, then we would be at our greatest level of danger; Code Blue.

Friday, November 26, 2004

Bloggers Force Rather Into Retirement: Replacement Selected

In an effort to encourage a seamless transition between reporting styles, CBS has announced that former Information Minister to Saddam Hussein, known as "Baghdad Bob" will replace Dan Rather. CBS President Jeff Sagansky commented, "we wanted the viewers of CBS Evening News to ease into the new anchor, and quite frankly, the timing was great for the recently unemployed minister." Although several candidates were considered for the job, Lex Rex has obtained footage of BB's screening. "He's a natural. We offered use of our forged document service to him, but he really won't need it. He's that good," stated Sagansky.

Baghdad Bob Replaces Rather

Wednesday, November 24, 2004

Jehovah Sabaoth Emanu

On the eve of Thanksgiving, we all have things to be thankful for. To those in circumstances that make it difficult to be thankful, I offer this name of God: Jehovah Sabaoth Emanu, or "The Lord of Hosts is with you."

Some excerpts from Precept Ministries:

"The Hebrew for "host" is Tsaba used 486x with most uses having something to do with warfare, armies or fighting. In general, "Host" can describe a multitude of men or army...Believers today must remember that this is the same Name that all in covenant with Him can run to, crying out in their hour of need, when all hope seems to be lost & defeat appears inevitable. May we all learn to cry out to our Warrior, the Lord of Hosts it is He, for the battle is His....In sum, Jehovah Sabaoth is God's Name for man's extremity, those times when we have reached our end, finding ourselves impotent, in turmoil, embroiled in real spiritual warfare & with no other source of help. So meditate deeply on the truth revealed in the magnificent, sufficient Name of Jehovah Sabaoth...."

I paraphrase David Jeremiah who had this to say today, "The enemy seeks to limit us to our present calamity in order to divert us from the greater works of God." His message was one of hope to the troubled, based on Psalm 46. He mentioned the hymn, often called the "Battle Hymn of the Reformation," Martin Luther's "A Mighty Fortress", which has been translated into almost every known language, and at least eighty different translations have been made into English. "A Mighty Fortress" so captured the spirit of the Protestant Reformation that when Protestant emigrants were forced into exile or martyrs went to their death, "A Mighty Fortress" always seemed to be the song they chose to sing.

During times when the Reformation seemed lost, Luther would say to his friend Melanchthon, "Let's sing the Forty-sixth Psalm." [Psalm 46]


A mighty fortress is our God,
A bulwark never failing;
Our Helper He amid the flood
Of mortal ills prevailing;
For still our ancient foe
Doth seek to work us woe;
His craft and power are great,
And armed with cruel hate,
On earth is not His equal
Did we in our own strength confide,
Our striving would be losing;
Were not the right Man on our side,
The Man of God's own choosing;
Dost ask Who that may be?
Christ Jesus, it is He;
Lord Sabaoth, His name,
From age to age the same,
And He must win the battle.

So sing to the Lord of Hosts this Thanksgiving, and be joyful in all our circumstances!

Monday, November 22, 2004

Bush Aids Secret Service Agent: A Tale of Two Men

While Kerry believes that the OBL tape cost him the election, he needs to look no further than the character that is within him. Contrast the story over the weekend of Bush aiding his secret service agent with that of Kerry blaming his [expletive deleted] secret service agent when he fell during an "I'm cool" photo op on the slopes of Idaho. Here is a snip:

"President Bush stepped into the middle of a confrontation and pulled his lead Secret Service agent away from Chilean security officials who barred his bodyguards from entering an elegant dinner for 21 world leaders Saturday night.

Several Chilean and American agents got into a pushing and shoving match outside the cultural center where the dinner was held. The incident happened after Bush and his wife, Laura, had just posed for pictures on a red carpet with the host of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit, Chilean President Ricardo Lagos and his wife, Luisa Duran.

As Bush stepped inside, Chilean agents closed ranks at the door, blocking the president's agents from following. Stopping for more pictures, Bush noticed the fracas and turned back. He reached through the dispute and pulled his agent from the scrum and into the building.

The president, looking irritated, straightened his shirt cuffs as he went into the dinner...."



They say the definition of character is what we do when nobody is looking. When you're POTUS, however, there are few un-public moments. But what a president does when there is a crisis before him is also a window into his soul. There is no question that a President Kerry [shudder omitted] would not have "stopped" and turned on the terror/Iraq war. He no more would have then walked towards the war on terror, and we can be certain he would not have defended America or others in need. The most that can be said is that Kerry would have perhaps turned his head towards the "commotion" or "nuisance" of terrorism, given a casual glance, but then quickly walked away hoping whatever it was didn't follow him. While likely not public for political reasons, a European influenced private President Kerry would have blamed [expletive deleted] America for terrorist attacks.

The difference between Bush and Kerry could not be more contrast. The difference between these two men can be compared side-by-side in two different incidents with Secret Service Agents. And I thank God we made the right choice on November 2nd.

Friday, November 19, 2004

Targeted Salvation Army Will March On

As the G-rated version of the old saying goes, "it is unwise to go number two where you eat." Or maybe that's where you sleep. The Minneapolis based Target has done a lot of good for its local community, and the community has done a lot of good for Target. Which is why I am so perplexed by the decision to silence the bells. I do not think the pages of the blogosphere could contain the stories of those touched by the Salvation Army, but here are just a few examples of do-goods by Salvation Army in the Twin Cities area:

- A shelter housing work release prisoners, and homeless shelters generally.

- Local tornado relief.

- Nursing home visits and toys for children.

- Providing a place for chemical dependent mothers and health care to the uninsured.

- Administering the future Kroc Community Center

Through fiery hell andhigh water, the Twin Cities Salvation Army has put the light in the Northern Lights. Personally, I get a little melancholy when I hear that bell and see that red bucket. Memories drift back to my childhood and my mittened hand gripping the coat tail of my mother as she bee-lined towards those soldiers of Christ and dropped her change in that bucket. "It's not how much" she would say, "it's whatever you have" as she gave one-hundred percent of what was in her purse. Probably not much, but it added up. Today, I can't pass one until I do the same. But I take solace in Newton's Second Law: any loss from the forces at Corporate Target, will be made up and then some from the spirit that has kept that bell ringing. We can start here.

Thursday, November 18, 2004

Expect Specter to Influence Judiciary

Just a quick thought today. We have got to do something about these country club republicans who today unanimously supported Specter for the chair of the judiciary committee. He may not overtly oppose nominees, but you can be sure that signals will be sent to Bush on who he will ultimately "announce" as his picks. The easy route would have been to kill his chairmanship. Who cares if he opposes on the committee or on the floor? We have the votes anyway. More on this later.

Wednesday, November 17, 2004

Matt Drudge: We Salute Your Nine Years of Service

Matt Drudge has taken a lot of heat over the years, but in my view he has single handedly put the "Old" in Old Media. Indeed, he is to internet news what Rush Limbaugh was/is to conservative talk radio. From his humble beginnings literally digging up celebrity garbage, he has used his powers for good. Matt, the United States is blessed to have you.

Semper Vigilanes

Tuesday, November 16, 2004

Media Knee Jerk

CNN and other outlets report to day of the shooting of a wounded terrorist in a Fallujah mosque.

Besides the obvious fog of war and the added fact that a marine was killed the day before as he knelt to give aid to a terrorist in the same mosque, my question is simple: Why is it so important to report this story now? Such a report can only serve to inflame the Muslim world against our troops who are battling terrorist as we speak. Moreover, reporting this now can have a huge chilling effect on soldiers in combat thereby further jeopardizing troops. I am all for embedded reporters, but let's keep a muzzle on some of this until after our troops are out of harms way.

Monday, November 15, 2004

Realignment, Now More than Ever

Some snips from Fred Barnes, conclusion - our children may very well grow up in a free country after all:

KARL ROVE SAID LAST YEAR that the question of realignment--whether Republicans have at last become the majority party--would be decided by the election of 2004. And it has. Even by the cautious reckoning of Rove, President Bush's chief political adviser, Republicans now have both an operational majority in Washington (control of the White House, Senate, and the House of Representatives) and an ideological majority in the country (51 percent popular vote for a center-right president). They also control a majority of governorships, a plurality of state legislatures, and are at rough parity with Democrats in the number of state legislators. Rove says that under Bush a "rolling realignment" favoring Republicans continues, and he's right. So Republican hegemony in America is now expected to last for years, maybe decades.

Listen to Walter Dean Burnham, professor emeritus at University of Texas at Austin, who is the nation's leading theorist of realignment, the shift of political power from one party to another. The 2004 election, he says, "consolidates it all"--that is, it solidifies the trend that has favored Republicans over the past decade. To Burnham, it means there's "a stable pattern" of Republican rule. "If Republicans keep playing the religious card along with the terrorism card, this could last a long time," he says. Burnham, by the way, is neither a Republican nor a conservative.

His definition of realignment is "a sudden transformation that turns out to be permanent." The breakthrough occurred in 1994 when Republicans shattered the 40-year Democratic grip on Congress and the statehouses. ...

Sounds like we will not be wiping the smile off our face for a while.

Friday, November 12, 2004

Blue State Misers, Cuba Dreams & Bee Gee 8-Tracks

On the generosity of red states v. blue, a study done by Catalogue for Philanthropy found that red states make up eighty percent of giving. No surprise there. Just compare the giving of Kerry and Bush and Gore and Bush. To be fair, I think democrats count their taxes in their tithe since Big Government is their choice in supreme being worship. Here is a breakdown:

Reportedly on the Today Show, Lynn Cheney was describing the rag tag nature of George Washington's army when Matt Lauer interrupted and stated, "you mean like the insurgents in Fallujah?" Mrs. Cheney was quick on the comeback and responded, "with one difference Matt, we fought for freedom and they are fighting for tyranny." As evil dictators continue to fall the Matt Lauers of the world can only hold out hope for the Cuba/North Korea/China styled utopian society.

Heard on the radio that blue state ideals have finally taken root in formally Red Russia. A woman has reportedly filed suit against McDonalds for burns she received from hot coffee. This same woman not too long ago had to wait in line 4 hours to buy a loaf of bread for a bazillian rubles. This also just in, the Bee Gees are starting to catch on in Russia and 8 track sales are sky rocketing.

Thursday, November 11, 2004

Terrorist & Nobel Peace Prize Winner Dead

The usual suspects in Old Media (hereinafter "OM") report on the death of a terrorist as follows: CBS opens with, "Yasser Arafat, who forced his people's plight into the spotlight but failed to achieve his lifelong quest for Palestinian statehood, died early Thursday. "We will follow in your footsteps," vowed a tearful Arafat aide...." ABC begins, "Yasser Arafat, the unchallenged Palestinian leader who fought for decades for statehood but was later seen by many as an obstacle to his people's dreams, has died." And NBC, "GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - Thousands of Palestinians took to the streets throughout the West Bank and Gaza Strip on Thursday in an outpouring of grief over the death of Yasser Arafat, the enduring symbol of their nationalist cause." To his credit, Prime Minister John Howard predicts that "History will judge Arafat harshly." There is also some hope for OM, Editorials. In his article entitled "Arafat the monster" Jeff Jacoby writes:

"YASSER ARAFAT died at age 75, lying in bed surrounded by familiar faces. He left this world peacefully, unlike the thousands of victims he sent to early graves. In a better world, the PLO chief would have met his end on a gallows, hanged for mass murder much as the Nazi chiefs were hanged at Nuremberg. In a better world, the French president would not have paid a visit to the bedside of such a monster. In a better world, George Bush would not have said, on hearing the first reports that Arafat had died, "God bless his soul."

God bless his soul? What a grotesque idea! Bless the soul of the man who brought modern terrorism to the world? Who sent his agents to slaughter athletes at the Olympics, blow airliners out of the sky, bomb schools and pizzerias, machine-gun passengers in airline terminals? Who lied, cheated, and stole without compunction? Who inculcated the vilest culture of Jew-hatred since the Third Reich? Human beings might stoop to bless a creature so evil -- as indeed Arafat was blessed, with money, deference, even a Nobel Prize -- but God, I am quite sure, will damn him for eternity.

Arafat always inspired flights of nonsense from Western journalists, and his last two weeks were no exception.

Derek Brown wrote in The Guardian that Arafat's "undisputed courage as a guerrilla leader" was exceeded only "by his extraordinary courage" as a peace negotiator. But it is an odd kind of courage that expresses itself in shooting unarmed victims -- or in signing peace accords and then flagrantly violating their terms.

Another commentator, columnist Gwynne Dyer, asked, "So what did Arafat do right?" The answer: He drew worldwide attention to the Palestinian cause, "for the most part by successful acts of terror." In other words, butchering innocent human beings was "right," since it served an ulterior political motive. No doubt that thought brings daily comfort to all those who were forced to bury a child, parent, or spouse because of Arafat's "successful" terrorism.

Some journalists couldn't wait for Arafat's actual death to begin weeping for him. Take the BBC's Barbara Plett, who burst into tears on the day he was airlifted out of the West Bank. "When the helicopter carrying the frail old man rose above his ruined compound," Plett reported from Ramallah, "I started to cry." Normal people don't weep for brutal murderers, but Plett made it clear that her empathy for Arafat -- whom she praised as "a symbol of Palestinian unity, steadfastness, and resistance" -- was heartfelt:

"I remember well when the Israelis re-conquered the West Bank more than two years ago, how they drove their tanks and bulldozers into Mr. Arafat's headquarters, trapping him in a few rooms, and throwing a military curtain around Ramallah. I remember how Palestinians admired his refusal to flee under fire. They told me: `Our leader is sharing our pain, we are all under the same siege.' And so was I." Such is the state of journalism at the BBC, whose reporters do not seem to have any trouble reporting, dry-eyed, on the plight of Arafat's victims. (That is, when they mention them -- which Plett's teary bon voyage to Arafat did not.)

And what about those victims? Why were they scarcely remembered in this Arafat death watch?

How is it possible to reflect on Arafat's most enduring legacy -- the rise of modern terrorism -- without recalling the legions of men, women, and children whose lives he and his followers destroyed? If Osama bin Laden were on his deathbed, would we neglect to mention all those he murdered on 9/11?

It would take an encyclopedia to catalog all of the evil Arafat committed. But that is no excuse for not trying to recall at least some of it.

Perhaps his signal contribution to the practice of political terror was the introduction of warfare against children. On one black date in May 1974, three PLO terrorists slipped from Lebanon into the northern Israeli town of Ma'alot. They murdered two parents and a child whom they found at home, then seized a local school, taking more than 100 boys and girls hostage and threatening to kill them unless a number of imprisoned terrorists were released. When Israeli troops attempted a rescue, the terrorists exploded hand grenades and opened fire on the students. By the time the horror ended, 25 people were dead; 21 of them were children.

Thirty years later, no one speaks of Ma'alot anymore. The dead children have been forgotten. Everyone knows Arafat's name, but who ever recalls the names of his victims?

So let us recall them: Ilana Turgeman. Rachel Aputa. Yocheved Mazoz. Sarah Ben-Shim'on. Yona Sabag. Yafa Cohen. Shoshana Cohen. Michal Sitrok. Malka Amrosy. Aviva Saada. Yocheved Diyi. Yaakov Levi. Yaakov Kabla. Rina Cohen. Ilana Ne'eman. Sarah Madar. Tamar Dahan. Sarah Soper. Lili Morad. David Madar. Yehudit Madar. The 21 dead children of Ma'alot -- 21 of the thousands of who died at Arafat's command.

Couldn't sum up my thoughts better, so I won't. But suffice it to say that in a perfect world, a terrorist dying of "natural causes" could only mean a well placed RPG. One other thought. It is a good thing that I am not God, because my worldly nature shows no mercy in times like this. Whenever evil leaders die, I reflect on God's mercy, His "amazing grace." I recall that two sinners hung on a cross next to Yeshua, one received God's mercy and grace, the other spurned the same. Both stepped into eternity, but only one will spend it in Heaven. And yes, Jesus even died for Yasser Arafat, a repentant Arafat that is. And so Bush's first words, "God bless his soul" were indeed appropriate for we cannot know what fate Arafat faced, but we do know that his fate is in the hands of God. Believe it or not, God does not desire that one person perish. Arafat has escaped justice on earth, but no one escapes Justice in the hereafter.

Wednesday, November 10, 2004

Fat, Drunk & Stupid

Last night on MSNBC I heard a RNC strategist compare the Democrats to an "alcoholic who has yet to hit rock bottom." He predicted that the DNC would hit rock bottom, around 2006. The analogy is a good one. The DNC continues in its post election stupor, staggering around in search for yet another kook theory pusher to reassure them that it was not them, rather, it was too many idiot Republicans who negligently exercised their franchise along party lines. This conclusion is illogical on its face. Republicans made more gains in traditional Democrat strong holds than in those of the party faithful; substantial gains in the minority vote (Hispanics, African Americans, and Jewish), received a majority of the catholic vote, closed the gap in the female vote, and are continuing the closing of margins in blue states generally. Indeed, the elephant is now firmly in their living room and no one of common sense in the DNC, besides Zell Miller, wants to stand up and proclaim its existence. Shortly after the Kerry/Daschle defeat, DNC Chairman Terry McCauliff boldly stated that the party was never in better shape. Remarkably, pointing to their ever fattening war chest of contributions, McCauliff then declared victory for the DNC. But fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through a political life. It is a truism that most alcoholics have to hit rock bottom in order to begin their rehabilitation. But it is also true that most who hit rock bottom fail to rehabilitate at all. In the DNC's case, there are too many drinking buddies remaining in and at the party. Truth be told, few Democrats will see success unless they appease the anti-war, big tax, big government wing of the party. My prediction is that the DNC will be off the wagon well beyond 2006. Like a drunk slurring, "I can drive - just gimme them keys", the Democrats will continue in their blue state of denial. During the sobering period between binges, Andy Griffith reserved a cell for Otis who would promptly check himself in and slumber in his false euphoria. Our party will likewise continue locking up the vote as the DNC voluntarily walks the path of destruction.

Tuesday, November 09, 2004

Abject Hatred

I am not certain why Republican states are red and Democrat blue. Perhaps it is a backhand reference to communist dictatorships. Like early patriots who embraced the derogatory Yankee Doodle, I nevertheless proudly embrace the attempted slander. But it is mainly liberals who are red in the face when Bush invades the conversation. Why? This abject hatred appears to have no anchor in reason. What exactly is there to hate Bush for? It cannot simply be Iraq; their vitriol hatred existed long before March 2003. Never mind that unemployment is lower than the average of the 70s, 80s, and 90s. Never mind that this president is the first overhaul Medicare since its inception. And forget that he joined hands with none other than Ted Kennedy to pass real educational reform that has changed how we think about young minds; soft bigotry is now in a coma. Let's also forget about how he bravely led the charge to cut taxes in a time of war, which resulted in the most shallow recession in recent memory. Of course, we shouldn't remember that this president has placed more minorities in high places than any other in history. And yes, we should forget that he calmly and resolutely has confronted more crisis situations than any other president; from the constitutional crisis of the 2000 election, to the downed plan in China within weeks of his inauguration, to the worst attack on American soil in US history, to a difficult war on terror where the enemy has no heads of state and are interspersed throughout the entire world even in our own communities. Moreover, he has remained calm and resolute through the most viscous campaign of personal attacks ever waged by MSM, Hollywood, foreign entities, politicians, judges, and even OBL himself, all united to tear down our president. Through all this, he has never uttered a disparaging word. Forget about all of this and let the liberals only remember what they hate this president for, which is....well, I forget. Liberals confuse hatred with justice. "But hatred is not justice, and revenge is inconceivable without hatred. Hatred consumes him who bears it, not against him at whom it is directed. Hatred claims the soul of man, and it is for this reason that the Apostle Paul asks of us "do not avenge yourselves, in order to make peace" (Romans 12, 19)

Monday, November 08, 2004


Well, mission accomplished, sort of. We are now as safe as we can be for another four years. With the 2004 election, Bloggers have been elevated to their rightful place of influence and honor; the so-called "New Media" will continue to relegate Big Media to its deserved "B" rating! But now is not the time to rest on our laurels! It is my vision that Lex Rex contributes in its own small way to the further reddening of America. While the Bush Country map looks like there is little work to do, the fact remains that there are many areas that are in desperate need of a conservative revolution. Indeed, urbanites within throwing distance of ground zero are still being held hostage by the left and forced into a blue world view that can only spell more suffering and turmoil. We have made gains, but ask yourself how John F. Kerry received 48% of the popular vote? There will always be a 20% radical fringe, but what of the additional 28%? It is too easy to blame Big Media alone, whether its lacking semblance of any objectivity in reporting, or its overt omission in silence, the fact remains that at least 28% of America pulled the lever for what would have been the largest disaster in presidential history. Put another way, just 70,000 changed Ohioan minds would have changed history forever, for the worst that is. So it is with this ongoing mission that Lex Rex launches into the Blogosphere! I welcome everyone into our very large red tent!