Looks intriguing. Just might print that one out and give 'er a try soon.

I've said before that I'm leaning Bachmann-Cain, but I sure wouldn't mind Sarah Palin being on the ticket. I agree with you; it's likely to be a polar day in the nether regions before libs agree that opposition to a Cain/Palin ticket would necessarily be both racist and sexist, though those are the metrics they applied to criticism of the Obama candidacy and presidency. In liberal eyes, opposing Herman Cain wouldn't be racist, as he would be labeled some variety of "tom" or "oreo," and opposing Sarah Palin wouldn't be sexist because, as one feminist put it a few years ago (I'd give my eyeteeth right now to remember which one, but I can't), she isn't a real woman, that is, no real woman could possibly fail to support "reproductive rights" and other items on the feminist agenda. With so many liberals, especially those on the Hard Left, it's always a game of "heads I win, tails you lose."

...I am leaning more toward the Fair Tax... That's 'cause you're smart. The more I read about the history of taxation in this country, the more I'm convinced that the Fair Tax will have most or all of the salutary effects of high tariffs--it was during the period from the War of Northern Aggression to Woodrow Wilson that we had, simultaneously, an almost unbroken string of Republican presidents, enormous economic expansion, small federal government, high tariffs and no income taxes--with few or none of the negative effects (the occasional shielding/propping up of businesses that would otherwise go under due to shoddy management.

Well, I wear a watch and feel pretty much nekkid as a jaybird without one. Maybe that's just the ancient ol' redneck in me comin' out.

Tough, yes. I used to know a pastor who once remarked that he'd done a lot of funerals, and that at one of them, a mourner had come up to him and remarked about how hard it was to deal with someone's passing, even someone whose profession of faith in Christ was very clear, and everyone knew exactly where that person was. "How," the mourner wanted to know, "do people deal with it when they don't know where their loved one is?" "They don't deal with it very well," was all the pastor could say. I have kept that story in mind ever since. It is a terrible thing to leave a family behind without making it clear that you know in Whose hands your eternal destiny lies, and I have always encouraged people to let their relatives know. Clearly, your grandmom did that for you. You have no doubts as to Whose fellowship she is enjoying right now, even though it's painful for you to be apart from her. That's a blessing; you know that someday, you will be reunited with her. Hard as it may be to focus on that at holiday time, it's something to hold onto. Blessings.

The liberal love affair with Islam is perplexing. After reading The Grand Jihad (highly recommended), I would disagree. It is a case of the left and Islam having many goals in common. Or at least I would argue such when it comes to the movers and shakers on the left. People that are more-or-less ignorant dupes--well, they're more-or-less ignorant dupes.

Amen, and amen... I'm reminded of something I heard Levin say. Pity I don't have a transcript, this is from memory: "We're not looking for compromise with those that seek to undermine our Constitutional liberties! We seek victory!

Herman frequently substitutes for Neal Boortz on the radio; I have heard him many times, and he is absolutely da bomb.

"The mean people...are everywhere; the world is crawling with them." But of course! Here's a trick that works well for me: every day, I pretend that I'm going to the circus to watch the clowns. Life can be hilarious that way.

We all have "roaring lions" in our lives... Boy howdy. You said it. Like sheep who are wholly dependant on their shepherd, we must fully rely on God's wonderful grace and love for protection, strength and guidance. It also helps to have an accountability partner who will actually hold you accountable and whom you can completely trust. This has helped me immeasurably.

Kat, I haven't looked at the comments over there (and may not--well over fifty comments at this point, and there's only so much time in the day!), but truthfully, I'm not sure that there's much point in engaging him on most of what he wrote. He pretty much gave the game away when he wrote:Let’s not kid ourselves as to who these 20 million people are. 20 million Canadians, or Irish, or Europeans probably wouldn’t phase our American sensibilities so much. In fact, we’d probably welcome them with open arms to revive our manufacturing base, do the jobs nativist Americans simply do not do, or to reinvigorate our population replacement rates. But it’s 20 million Mexicans. 20 million people of a foreign people (i.e. not European). 20 million people who don’t speak English. …and so, rather than appealing to our logic, we appeal to baser instincts.So, there it is: you want immigration laws enforced it's because you don't like Mexicans. Heck of an argument. Seen if often before. Have to wonder why he didn't just openly call people raaaaaaaacists. Times like this, I'm grateful for my wife's heritage (her grandmother immigrated from Mexico; her mom's side of the family is pretty much all Mexican-American, bilingual, the whole nine yards...). Grateful, too, for the opportunity to teach English to Mexican immigrants (legal ones, insofar as I know; I'm pretty sure...), as between the two, it makes it darn hard, in my case, anyway, for people to make the "you just don't like Mexicans" crapola stick. I'm not at all familiar with the gentleman who wrote the original post. I have to wonder if he generally leans libertarian. Rather a lot of libertarians find themselves highly offended at the thought of laws limiting where a person can live; like globalists, they think free markets exist only where there is free flow of goods and people across borders. I noted that at one point, the man apparently confused free trade (it has a very specific definition) and free markets; if he did not, he was mixing his arguments somewhat... It's fundamental to any nation to be able to say who and who should not be able to enter. If you cannot say who and who should not be able to enter, that is, in effect, the same thing as saying that everyone should be able to come--a practical, to say nothing of logical, impossibility. More consistent thinkers, in my opinion, recognize that not everyone can come here, for one reason or another, and further, that the determination who can come here rests not in the hands of would-be immigrants, but in the hands of the country's citizens. Just my two cents.

Obviously, I didn't know your father, but you certainly come across as a clear-headed person, loving, lovable, and firm in her faith, and the old saying is that the apple don't fall far from the tree, so he must've been a pretty good guy!

Nicely done!

Sorry to hear about your loss. Can't be easy.

Glad you enjoyed the cartoon! My mother's sent me most of the funny stuff I've been publishing lately. Only God knows where she gets it.

There's not much in life more satisfying than seeing your children do well.

I look forward with great anticipation to MSM coverage of this news that will, no doubt, be commensurate with the coverage they gave the unveiling of the fossil. I mean, they wouldn't fail to adequately cover this just because they have an axe to grind, would they?

See, this is how it's supposed to work. Now if we could only get Congress and the administration to let health insurance be sold competitively across state lines. Nah. Never happen. That might actually work.

It will, I promise you, get far, far worse before it gets better. I deliver and install home medical equipment for a living, and after seeing what I've seen among the old, what I see among the young scares me. People are just flat refusing to take care of themselves. They don't seem to think their health is their responsibility.

Thanks for the link! Great googly-moogly, the whole world's gone nuts...

I've always felt strongly that an armed society is a polite society. Or at least more polite than it would otherwise be. I like guns, Kat, I really do. I offer up only this one caveat: don't ever rely on them, or on any other weapon, for all your defensive needs. Ever wonder why there are so many wrist releases in martial arts? It's because the natural thing to do, when your opponent is obviously about to pull a weapon, is to grab his arm or wrist. To successfully use a weapon--any weapon--you first have to be able to successfully get it out. All I'm sayin' is that while firearms are a great thing, one shouldn't overlook the fundamentals of unarmed defense.

No, really, c'mon, tell us how you REALLY feel... :)

Congratulations! We look forward to many years of blogging to come!

Ya did good, Miss Kat...

Excellent post. I don't know that I can add much to that!