Toon Update March 2011

After getting busy and not posting for a few weeks, I often do an update on what we’ve missed. In this case, we’ll use the “a picture is worth a thousand words” strategy. It’s also a lot more fun. It would be even more fun if not so true. Hope you enjoy.

See the archive at March 2011 Toon Review. This month focuses primarily on the UN and foreign policy.

Website Updates for Feb and March 2011

Once again, I got covered up at work the past couple of months and had little time to blog. I’m currently designing electrical facilities and upgrades for several ports on the east coast. Hopefully the work load will ease up by mid-to-late April. In the meantime, I’ll attempt to keep posting as much as possible.

During this time, we were able to finish several projects on our main site. We made some headway on our Bible Book Intros section, consisting of Brief Surveys, Historical Backgrounds, Timelines, Main Themes, Outlines, Interpretation Challenges and more for each book of the Bible. We still hope to finish all the books in the next two years or so. We also just uploaded a major article Can America Claim the Promises of 2nd Chronicles 7:14? in our Bible Commentary and America’s Christian Heritage sections that also examines how the Old Testament applies to Christians today. We invite you to visit our What’s New page for other recent writings.

Thanks again for all the support and God Bless.

Death of Pershing’s Last Patriot

Frank Buckles, the last surviving American veteran of WWI died this week at the age of 110. Mr Buckles was born in Missouri in 1901 and was raised in Oklahoma. He was rejected numerous times by military recruiters for being under-aged, until he finally convinced an Army captain that he was 18, and joined the military at the age of 16. Despite his efforts however, Mr Buckles never got to see combat. Nevertheless, his family obtained an exception to government rules, and plans are to bury him at Arlington National Cemetery. The latter years of his life were spent advocating for a national monument to honor veterans of the Great War.

As reported in The Marine Times:

Buckles, who also survived being a civilian POW in the Philippines in World War II, died of natural causes Sunday at his home in Charles Town, biographer and family spokesman David DeJonge said. He was 110. Buckles would have wanted people to remember him as “the last torchbearer” for World War I, DeJonge said Monday.

Buckles had been advocating for a national memorial honoring veterans of the Great War in the nation’s capital and asked about its progress weekly, sometimes daily. “He was sad it’s not completed,” DeJonge said. “It’s a simple straightforward thing to do, to honor Americans.”

On Nov. 11, 2008, the 90th anniversary of the end of the war, Buckles attended a ceremony at the grave of World War I Gen. John Pershing in Arlington National Cemetery. He was back in Washington a year later to endorse a proposal to rededicate the existing World War I memorial on the National Mall as the official National World War I Memorial. He told a Senate panel it was “an excellent idea.” The memorial was originally built to honor District of Columbia’s war dead.

More than 4.7 million people joined the U.S. military from 1917-18. As of spring 2007, only three were still alive, according to a tally by the Department of Veterans Affairs: Buckles, J. Russell Coffey of Ohio and Harry Richard Landis of Florida. The dwindling roster prompted a flurry of public interest, and Buckles went to Washington in May 2007 to serve as grand marshal of the national Memorial Day parade. Coffey died Dec. 20, 2007, at age 109, while Landis died Feb. 4, 2008, at 108. Unlike Buckles, those two men were still in basic training in the United States when the war ended and did not make it overseas. The last known Canadian veteran of the war, John Babcock of Spokane, Wash., died in February 2010. There are no French or German veterans of the war left alive.

Buckles served in England and France, working mainly as a driver and a warehouse clerk. An eager student of culture and language, he used his off-duty hours to learn German, visit cathedrals, museums and tombs, and bicycle in the French countryside. After Armistice Day, Buckles helped return prisoners of war to Germany. He returned to the United States in January 1920.

In 1941, while on business in the Philippines, Buckles was captured by the Japanese. He spent more than three years in prison camps. “I was never actually looking for adventure,” Buckles once said. “It just came to me.”

In spring 2007, Buckles told the AP of the trouble he went through to get into the military. “I went to the state fair up in Wichita, Kansas, and while there, went to the recruiting station for the Marine Corps,” he said. “The nice Marine sergeant said I was too young when I gave my age as 18, said I had to be 21.” Buckles returned a week later. “I went back to the recruiting sergeant, and this time I was 21,” he said with a grin. “I passed the inspection ... but he told me I just wasn’t heavy enough.” Then he tried the Navy, whose recruiter told Buckles he was flat-footed.

Buckles wouldn’t quit. In Oklahoma City, an Army captain demanded a birth certificate. “I told him birth certificates were not made in Missouri when I was born, that the record was in a family Bible. I said, ‘You don’t want me to bring the family Bible down, do you?’” Buckles said with a laugh. “He said, ‘OK, we’ll take you.’” He enlisted Aug. 14, 1917, serial number 15577.

During the trip to attend the ceremony for Gen Pershing in 2008, Mr Buckles noticed memorials for WWII, Korean, and Vietnam veterans, but nothing for the heroes of WWI. David DeJonge became the president of the The World War I Memorial Foundation and made Mr Buckles the honorary chairman.

Bills regarding the WWI Memorial have been introduced in both the US House and Senate, yet neither has passed to date. During a time when Congress can find time to pass tax-payer funded memorials such as an almost $70 million dollar shrine to Ted Kennedy, a $150 million plus airport memorial that services about 20 people per day for John Murtha, and numerous other wasteful projects, it is downright shameful that our legislators can’t establish a memorial to our true heroes that is being paid for primarily by private funds.

Finally, we’d like to say to Mr Buckles and the countless other veterans who have made, and continue to make, great sacrifices in order to serve our country even though their efforts often go unnoticed or taken for granted, “Thank You and God Bless”.

Candles, Marxists, and the Word of Truth

As we witness the riots and unrest in Egypt, it brought to mind an incredible untold story (at least by our secular media) during the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Most of us remember the usual talking heads focusing on the surface themes of politics and economics, while denying that Ronald Reagan had anything to do with the event. Yet, as with most stories, the important underlying causes were ignored by the media.

It is true that political and economic conditions had reached critical mass in Eastern Europe and Asia by the late 1980s, but this emergency situation was the direct result of the moral and spiritual crises created by communism’s Marxist worldview. If we are open to the truth about this atheistic worldview, we can easily see that it must inevitably lead to this outcome.

A primary tenet of Marxism is the supposition that God only exists in the imagination of the economically downtrodden; that He is subjectively created as a wishful fantasy to remedy a person’s misery or unhappiness. Thus, while American liberals generally view religion as the root of all evil, a true Marxist would view religion as the imaginary, but ineffective solution to evil, with the primary evil being an unequal distribution of wealth. If one could build an alternative system (under government control); a new world order in which all persons were monetarily equal (except the ruling elite, of course), then there would be no further need for religion. After all, why would someone cling to fanciful thoughts of a joyful hereafter when they could have a utopian paradise in their present life on earth? We, of course, see this "government is the solution to all our problems" theory promoted by many today.

So, for Marxism to work, it must “kill God”, at least in the sense of replacing His memory in the minds of the people with reliance on the government. We’ve seen from history however, that any attempt to eradicate God is always doomed to failure. Just to give a few examples, at the beginning of the fourth century, Roman emperor Diocletian began possibly the most intense empire-wide persecution in an attempt to eradicate Christianity. Yet within a few years, Constantine took the throne and later made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire. In the eighteenth century, the French philosopher Voltaire declared that within a hundred years, there would not be a single Bible left on earth. The house where he lived is now a distribution center for Bibles printed in many different languages. Finally, in 1966, the New York Times declared that “God is dead”, but as Ravi Zacharias so aptly noted, the Times was “dancing on an empty grave”.

Another major reason that Marxist socialism is destined to always fail is that it is based on the false assumption that man’s nature is inherently good; that putting man into a better environment will solve all his problems (one glance at the Garden of Eden experience disproves this presumption). It assumes that enough people will be willing to work hard while others are idle, and yet share everything equally. On the other hand, the Free Enterprise system thrives because it is consistent with man’s fallen nature, rightly assuming that most folks won’t work without reward. One of my former pastors, Dr Harold O’Chester from Austin, used to say that he could tell how a person would vote based upon the answer to one question, “Do you believe man is inherently good or evil?” As Adrian Rogers once said,

You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the industrious out of it. You don't multiply wealth by dividing it. Government cannot give anything to anybody that it doesn't first take from somebody else. Whenever somebody receives something without working for it, somebody else has to work for it without receiving. The worst thing that can happen to a nation is for half of the people to get the idea they don't have to work because somebody else will work for them, and the other half to get the idea that it does no good to work because they don't get to enjoy the fruits of their labor.

Perhaps the best account of the Soviet collapse is recorded in a book by Barbara von der Heydt entitled Candles behind the Wall: Heroes of the Peaceful Revolution That Shattered Communism. Ms von der Heydt had worked with the first displaced Eastern European refugees in 1989, and much of her account is based on personal interviews with everyday people involved in the struggle against those who were attempting to obliterate any traces of the Faith. She recounts the stories of individuals whose grass roots movements eventually challenged the very core of communism. We recommend everyone read this book who has the opportunity, but we’ll paraphrase a couple of examples here.

One of the stories that stood out to me was the account of Uwe Holmer, an East German pastor who, along with his wife, managed a Christian organization for the mentally and physically disabled. In 1989, Dictator Erich Honecker resigned due to health issues. Honecker was so hated that even his own daughter refused to take him in. Yet, the Holmers finally provided the former tyrant and his wife with shelter even though the pastor’s family was terribly persecuted during his reign. When asked why, Pastor Holmer replied

The Lord has charged us to follow him and to take in all those who are burdened ... to follow his commandment to love our enemies; and to live by the prayer he taught us in these words, “forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.” ... We want to live by Christ’s example.

Ms von der Heydt also provides us the inside story on the tense situation outside the Russian parliament in August of 1991. The Soviets had recently lost control of Eastern Europe, so while Michael Gorbachev was in the Crimea, the totalitarian communist party seized control of the government. They dispersed tanks and their troops and surrounded the Russian parliament, trapping Boris Yeltsin and the legislators inside. The world watched anxiously as thousands of freedom-seeking civilians formed a human barricade around the building.

According to Ms Von Der Heydt, it was at this point that Iven Kharlanov and Anatoly Rudenko of the Bible society in Moscow called other Bible societies around the world asking for prayer before coming up with a brave but dangerous plan. They contacted other Christians and drove a truck full of New Testaments to the scene, arriving just as the military was about to storm the building.

Christians took the Bibles and began handing them out to the soldiers quoting Exodus 20:13, “thou shall not kill”. At the same time, others began going tank to tank, handing out the Scriptures and quoting the verse. Ms Von Der Heydt specifically mentions one woman, Shirinai Dossova, walking over to one of the tanks and banging on its side with her bare knuckles until the mystified driver finally opened the hatch. She held the Bible out to him and declared, "It says in this book that you shouldn't kill. Are you going to kill us?" The young soldier was obviously baffled, but nervously took the Bible while saying, "We not intending to kill anybody."

Ms Von Der Heydt also reported that very few of the soldiers refused the Bibles. Some tucked them in a pocket or bag, but others, who probably had never seen one but perhaps may have been wanting one, began reading right away.

Of course, we know from history that the attack on the parliament building was averted and the coup collapsed. Yet to this day, secular historians still puzzle in amazement as to why the almost certain attack failed to transpire. But now, as Paul Harvey would say, we know the rest of the story. It was the Hand and the Word of God.

Democide: Death by Liberalism

We’ve always admitted that many liberal ideas sound good, in a religious pie-in-the-sky utopian sort of way. The problem is that, in almost every case, they simply don’t work in the real world, and some are actually dangerous or, in some cases, even deadly.

A couple of week ago, the American Thinker featured an article that highlighted a new book by JR Dunn entitled Death by Liberalism - The Fatal Outcome of Well-Meaning Liberal Policies. In the book, Mr Dunn highlights several liberal ideas going back to our country’s founding and describes their deadly impact on people and society. Relying on well-established facts, Mr Dunn details the liberal’s approach to fuel-efficient cars, crime, abortion, environmentalism, banning of DDT, and others, then traces their disastrous and deadly results.

This is not the first publication that has attempted to itemize some of these tragedies. Among others, John Hawkins wrote in a 2007 Townhall article entitled Liberal emotion vs. Conservative logic:

Why don't they learn anything from failed liberal policies? Because there is nothing underpinning them other than feelings and so even when they don't work, their good intentions are treated, by other liberals at least, as more important than the results of their actions.

Just to name one example of many, look at Vietnam. South Vietnam was policing its own country and holding off aggression from the North with the help of the United States. But, people get hurt in wars, so wars are bad. As a result of thinking that went no deeper than that, liberals in Congress cut off the aid and air support we promised the South Vietnamese. The result?

The conquest of South Vietnam, a holocaust in Cambodia, millions dead and in prison camps, another million boat people, a crisis of confidence in America, and our country's reputation around the world was left in tatters, which led to a revolution in Nicaragua, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and a lack of faith in the U.S. military which wasn't truly restored until Operation Desert Storm.

So, we're talking about one of the most shameful and damaging mistakes in American history. Yet, the left is pushing to do the same thing in Iraq, despite the fact that catastrophic consequences would surely also follow a U.S. retreat in that country.

But, this isn't just about foreign policy. Look at Lyndon Johnson's "war on poverty," which did nothing to reduce the poverty rate despite the trillions that were spent; however, it did help drive the illegitimacy rate among black Americans from 22 percent in 1960 to 70% in 2005.

You could go on and on with these sort of examples -- rent control, which causes housing shortages, the minimum wage, which costs poor people jobs, the liberal insistence on putting “making nice at the U.N.” above looking out for American interests. That's what happens when you make decisions based on emotion and wanting people to like you, rather than using logic and doing the right thing.

This coming Wednesday will mark the eighth anniversary of the space shuttle Columbia disaster, when the shuttle broke apart as it re-entered the Earth's atmosphere, killing all seven astronauts aboard. To this day, a primary cause has been virtually ignored by the media. As reported in Front Page Magazine (August 2003):

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration, better known as NASA, said in July that it had found the "smoking gun" that caused the space shuttle Columbia to break apart as it re-entered the Earth's atmosphere on Feb. 1: a piece of foam that had peeled off the external fuel tank and struck the shuttle's wing 1 minute and 22 seconds after liftoff.

But many experts looking at the tragedy that killed seven astronauts say there is a deeper cause. They say that the metaphorical smoking gun should be painted green.

Because of demands that the agency help to front for environmentalism, and under pressure from the Clinton-Gore administration's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) led by Carol Browner, NASA had stopped using Freon, a fluorocarbon that greens claim damages the ozone layer, in its thermal-insulating foam. NASA found in 1997 after the first launch with the politically correct substitute that the Freon-free foam had destroyed nearly 11 times as many of the shuttle's ceramic tiles as had the foam containing Freon. The politicized foam was less sticky and more brittle under extreme temperatures. But apparently little or nothing was done to resist the environmentalist politicians.

"It was at least a contributing factor, if not a major factor," says Hannes Hacker, an aerospace engineer and former flight controller at NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston who is affiliated with the Ayn Rand Institute in Irvine, Calif. Hacker tells Insight: "The risk of a piece of debris falling off and causing significant damage to the space shuttle's thermal-protection system was [more than] 10 times greater with the new material than with the old material."

The ditch alongside the road throughout history is littered with failed liberal ideas. While many liberals subscribe to the eugenics movement, many others are actually well-meaning with their ideas. Unfortunately, very few actually gauge the results of their ideas. One of their favorite themes is “We must look to the future, not to the past”, and herein is one of their greatest failures. We must look to the future, but we must not forget the lessons of the past. Otherwise, we continue to repeat the same unsuccessful and often deadly ideas.

Baby Bottles for Life 2011

Today is Sanctity of Life Sunday, held each year on a Sunday near the anniversary of the 1973 Roe vs Wade court case which legalized the killing of unborn babies in our country. Many churches are participating in the Baby Bottles for Life program, in which families may take home a baby bottle for three weeks and fill with change, currency and/or checks. The bottles can then be returned to a designated collection area to support the ministry of Real Options for Women.

Real Options helps expectant mothers make informed decisions about abortion or continuing their pregnancy. Unlike the so-called “pro-choice” organizations, which really offer only one choice (to kill the baby), this ministry offers real choices. All consultations and other pregnancy related services are offered in confidence and to anyone regardless of their ability to pay. Because of this, they need our financial support.

As families participate in this program, it not only helps Real Options provide these needed services, but can teach your children the importance of missions. Above all, it will help protect the most innocent among us... those that don't have a choice. If your church is not involved with this program this year, you can still participate by visiting the Baby Bottles for Life website. Thank you and God Bless.

Are You Smarter than an Elected Official?

Remember the uproar a week or so ago from the liberal Dems and their friends in the media when the Republicans opened the 112th Congress by (gasps and horrors!) actually reading the US Constitution. Most condemned the idea as a publicity stunt and a waste of time. After all, what does the Constitution have to do with governing? As Nancy Pelosi said during the healthcare debate, “we need to stop worrying about rules and procedures and get this thing done”.

This is actually a defining difference between liberals and conservatives. Some of my liberal friends (yes, I have several good friends that are politically liberal) charge that the term “liberal” is a meaningless label that is constantly overused. Ignoring the fact that the media rarely uses it as opposed to constantly overdosing on the “C-word” (conservative), we know that the word liberal comes from a Latin word that means "to not be bound by". Thus a liberal politician believes that we are not bound by the Constitution, just as a liberal theologian believes that we are not bound by the Bible. Therefore, to a liberal, why read something that is perceived to possess no authority. The Constitution is merely a "living document" to be interpreted however it suits them at the time.

Many conservatives even joked that the opening of the congressional session might be the first time that many Dems had actually been exposed to the Constitution. Now, our good friend Dee alerted us to an article that appears to confirm that it may not be a joke.

Richard Brake, co-chairman of the Intercollegiate Studies Institute's National Civic Literacy Board writes in AOL News, Elected Officials Flunk Constitution Quiz:

When the Republican House leadership decided to start the 112th Congress with a reading of the U.S. Constitution, the decision raised complaints in some quarters that it was little more than a political stunt. The New York Times even called it a "presumptuous and self-righteous act."

That might be true, if you could be sure that elected officials actually know something about the Constitution. But it turns out that many don't. In fact, elected officials tend to know even less about key provisions of the Constitution than the general public.

For five years now, the Intercollegiate Studies Institute has been conducting a national survey to gauge the quality of civic education in the country. We've surveyed more than 30,000 Americans… Included in the adult sample was a small subset of Americans (165 in all) who, when asked, identified themselves as having been "successfully elected to government office at least once in their life" which can include federal, state or local offices.

The survey asks 33 basic civics questions, many taken from other nationally recognized instruments like the U.S. Citizenship Exam. It also asks 10 questions related to the U.S. Constitution. So what did we find? Well, to put it simply, the results are not pretty.

Elected officials at many levels of government, not just the federal government, swear an oath to "uphold and protect" the U.S. Constitution. But those elected officials who took the test scored an average 5 percentage points lower than the national average (49 percent vs. 54 percent), with ordinary citizens outscoring these elected officials on each constitutional question.

Examples:

• Only 49 percent of elected officials could name all three branches of government, compared with 50 percent of the general public.
• Only 46 percent knew that Congress, not the president, has the power to declare war -- 54 percent of the general public knows that.
• Just 15 percent answered correctly that the phrase "wall of separation" appears in Thomas Jefferson's letters -- not in the U.S. Constitution -- compared with 19 percent of the general public.
• And only 57 percent of those who've held elective office know what the Electoral College does, while 66 percent of the public got that answer right. (Of elected officials, 20 percent thought the Electoral College was a school for "training those aspiring for higher political office.")
• Overall, our sample of elected officials averaged a failing 44 percent on the entire 33-question test, 5 percentage points lower than the national average of 49 percent.

The fact that our elected representatives know even less about America's history and institutions than the typical citizen (who doesn't know much either) is troubling indeed, but perhaps helps explain the lack of constitutional discipline often displayed by our political class at every level of our system. Given this dismal performance, it would seem that last week's House reading of the Constitution shouldn't be described "presumptuous and self-righteous," but as a necessary national tutorial for all elected officials.

In fact, we can only hope that this trend of Constitution reading will continue to sweep the nation and states. After all, there are 50 state constitutions as well. When elected officials take an oath "to protect and defend the Constitution," shouldn't they know what they are swearing to?

You may follow the article link above to take the test for yourself.

UnPLANNED

A new book is being released today, but you probably won’t hear about it in most major media outlets, except maybe to pan or dismiss it if the book gets too popular. The book entitled “unPLANNED” is the story of Abby Johnson, a former director of a Planned Parenthood clinic, whose life was forever changed on October 6, 2009.

It was on this fateful day that she was asked to help on an actual abortion, something she had never done or even witnessed before. After watching the 13-week-old baby fight for its life before losing it to the abortionist she was assisting, she quit her job and became a pro-life activist.

I’ve often heard it said that “if wombs had windows, abortion would cease”. I believe that on that day, Ms Johnson realized for the first time that her clinic was actually murdering babies, not just aborting some glob of tissue like they were telling the mothers.

From the publisher:

Abby Johnson quit her job in October 2009. That simple act became a national news story because Abby was the director of a Planned Parenthood clinic in Texas who, after participating in her first actual abortion procedure, walked across the road to join the Coalition for Life.

Unplanned is a heart-stopping personal drama of life-and-death encounters, a courtroom battle, and spiritual transformation that speaks hope and compassion into the political controversy that surrounds this issue. Telling Abby’s story from both sides of the abortion clinic property line, this book is a must-read for anyone who cares about the life versus rights debate and helping women who face crisis pregnancies.

From the Inside Flap:

“As I took the ultrasound probe in hand, I could not have imagined how the next ten minutes would shake the foundation of my values and change the course of my life.”

Abby Johnson joined Planned Parenthood as a college student because she wanted to help women in crisis—a goal she believed the organization shared. As she rose through the ranks to become a clinic director, however, things started to shift. Finances grew tighter, clinic practices changed, and Abby became increasingly unsettled about what she was being asked to do. But it wasn’t until she helped perform an actual abortion procedure that Abby fully realized what she’d been a part of all those years.

In the pages of Unplanned, you’ll also discover:

• What Abby found so attractive about the mission and goals of Planned Parenthood
• The personal secret that Abby had kept buried for years
• The things she’d believed and told patients that she discovered not to be true
• An insider’s perspective on Planned Parenthood’s practices as well as the heartfelt but misguided efforts of some radical antiabortion activists
• The courage and resilience she’s seen on both sides of the fence—from staff members to clients in crisis to prayerful volunteers

A compelling story of crisis and change, Unplanned is also a reminder of how grace finds us in unlikely places, and how we can all reach out with love to those who stand on opposing sides.

Abby Johnson holds a B.S. in psychology from Texas A&M University and an M.A. in counseling from Sam Houston State University. She was hired by Planned Parenthood in 2005 and progressed to the position of community services director and health educator, where she served as liaison between the community and Planned Parenthood as media correspondent. Later promoted to health center director, Johnson ran both the family planning and abortion programs. In 2009 she left Planned Parenthood and joined the local Coalition for Life as a volunteer. She continues her volunteer activities and now works on projects with the national 40 Days for Life campaign. She and her husband, Doug, have a young daughter and live in Texas.

We highly recommend this book to anyone who wants to know the truth about the abortion industry, but particularly to those parents who are facing these decisions.

Armed Forces Bowl 2010

Yesterday, I had the great privilege of attending the Armed Forces Bowl with my two sons and a bunch of great friends. Due to construction on the Ft Worth stadium, the bowl was held in Dallas at SMU’s Gerald Ford Stadium. It was a tremendous experience, but to full appreciate it, I must tell of a couple of incidents that happened before we got to the game.

My older son Jeff, who attends SMU, had bought 16 tickets and went early with several friends. My younger son Justin, a US Marine who recently returned from Afghanistan, woke up to find his car had been burglarized, resulting in excessive damage, so Justin, his fiancé and I stayed behind to file the police reports. I found it ironic that he had spent nine months putting his life on the line to come home to this. We found out later that six other cars were hit in the area. Fingerprints confirmed that the same person was involved and that the police had a suspect.

Just about kickoff time, we left for the game and decided to take the DART train. I hadn’t ridden the train in a couple of years, but had good service with courteous drivers when I rode it regularly in the past. The three of us got our tickets and walked toward the 11:27am train at Parker Station, along with two other parties that we did not know. We asked the driver if this train was going by SMU and she motioned for us to get on. Unfortunately, she must have been an Obama supporter because, as soon as she noticed my son’s marine shirt, she locked the door and sped off, leaving us and the other two parties standing on the platform. We weren’t too upset at first since we encounter this every now and then, but in one of the other parties, a mother and her young child had attempted to board and she had to pull her child back at the last second, thus avoiding a tragic accident. So, we all waited another twenty minutes and took the next train to the game.

We arrived just as the halftime show was beginning, and what a contrast in attitude toward our veterans than what we experienced at the hands of DART. Many veterans received free tickets to the game. Dozens upon dozens of people shook my son’s hand and thanked him for his service. A stranger behind us served in the same marine unit as Justin 30 years before.

The halftime show consisted of various honors and awards for our troops. A group of local army graduates were sworn in. Many wounded warriors were introduced to thunderous applause. As a surprise, Operation Finally Home presented a mortgage-free, custom-built home to Army Specialist Hugo Gonzalez, an Army war veteran who was severely wounded while serving in Iraq. The program also pays the property taxes for the first two years. On hand was his wife Amy and their three children.

During the second half, a couple of the latest marine attack helicopters were on display, and we received satellite feeds on the big scoreboard from troops in Afghanistan wishing their families and supporters a Happy New Year. At the end of the third quarter, the troops who piloted the flyovers were introduced.

Lots of other stuff was happening, but it was too much to remember it all. Oh yeah… in the middle of all this was a good football game, in which the Army Black Knights defeated the SMU Mustangs 16-14.

His Name is Sean

As reported in the Tacoma, Washington News Tribune, the parents of Sgt Sean Collins, a Yelm, Washington soldier killed in Afghanistan earlier this month, was very grateful for the outpouring of support from friends and strangers, but were stung by slights from two Democratic politicians.

“As a father of someone killed, it is overwhelming,” said Lt. Col. Patrick Collins (Ret.). His son, Sgt. Sean Collins, was buried Wednesday at the Tahoma National Cemetery. Among that outpouring of empathy, two politicians inadvertently stung the family.

One slight came in a letter of condolences the family received from the office of Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash. At first, the Collins family appreciated that Cantwell had taken the time to send a letter acknowledging their son’s sacrifice. But the letter misidentified the slain soldier in its last paragraph, which reads:

“Again, please accept my warmest condolences. May your memories of Bryn and the knowledge that he made a positive impact on the lives of so many serve as a source of comfort to you during this time of sorrow.”

The letter was dated Dec. 20 and delivered to Sean Collins’ mother, Linda Collins of Yelm. The error conveyed to the family that Cantwell had sent a form letter. “They couldn’t even proofread it,” she said. “I’m sure if her son had died, she would’ve at least wanted his name spelled correctly.” “That’s just sloppy staff work, that’s an embarrassment,” Patrick Collins said. He has not yet called Cantwell’s office to ask for an apology.

Cantwell’s office is on short staffing for the holiday week and has not replied to an email to its press staff. The Collins family was in touch with Cantwell’s office in the capital Thursday, and was told Cantwell’s staffers were looking into the mistake.

The other slight came when Patrick Collins called the White House and asked to have President Obama call his ex-wife, Linda, to talk about their son. He was told that Obama did not regularly make phone calls to the families of fallen soldiers.

Later, Patrick Collins read a story about Obama’s phone call to Philadelphia Eagles owner Jeffery Lurie. Obama reportedly praised Lurie for giving quarterback Michael Vick a second chance to play football after serving time in prison for running a dog fighting ring.

“That burns,” Patrick Collins said Thursday. “Any soldier that gets killed in action, you’d think the president would be calling someone in the family. There’s no politics in it. His predecessor did it,” Collins said.

After the newspaper’s blog posted this story, a commenter called “First_Lefty” left several comments, giving his condolences, then proceeded to defend Mr Obama, writing “who he calls and why is his business”. He then went on to blame President Bush for Sean’s death, and decried the perceived shameful treatment given to Cindy Sheehan. The following is the reply to First_Lefty from Lt Col Collins.

First_Lefty: Well, your name kind of says it all. I'd like to set the record straight, but first I'd like to thank you for your condolences. You should be thankful. A better man than you just died defending your right to express your opinion.

There was an error in the original article, I never called the White House - I have no desire to get a call from the President. I did make a request for the President to call my ex-wife. I believe it is something that should be done. If Gen Petraeus can take time to write a personal note, if my son's Company Commander can find time to make a phone call - all while fighting a war; if the Governor of Washington can find time to send personal condolences, then yes the President should be able to find time. Ultimately, it's not even a question of time. I would understand the President saying that it is not his policy, that the Office of the President cannot get involved in every soldier's death. But that's not what was said. The response we were given was that he is too busy to fit it into his schedule. That's what makes bogus calls to the President of the Eagles so galling (incidentally, yeah, Michael Vick has had a tremendous year ... playing nothing but a game).

As far as Senator Cantwell, sending a form letter is "okay", even nice. Having such a poor quality control, especially on a letter to a Mother who has lost her son at Christmas is just pathetic.

Is this political (?), maybe in your eyes. However we actually waited because we knew someone like you would make this accusation. When we told the reporter, it was in response to a question. In fact, we purposely told him that we didn't want to make this about politics. It may come as a surprise to you, but calling the Senator's office while we were grieving the loss of our son wasn't high on our priority list. Taking care of our son's three siblings and arranging for a burial somehow rated higher in importance.

Finally, to answer your first suggestion, that we should focus our anger on those who sent him to war - that would be Mr. Obama. My son was a member of the 101st Airborne. They are in Kandahar Province as a part of the surge ordered by the President almost a year ago. Not only did I agree with that decision by the President, making it something I would never blame him for, I have no doubt that your political persuasion would have enabled you to put an equally feeble comment in response to that if I had mentioned it.

You sir are a sad excuse for a man. It almost makes me sad to think I spent 28 years, and my son sacrificed his life, defending your right to be as misguided as you are ... yet that is where we are today.

Thank you, Lt Col Collins. Our nation owes your son Sean a great debt of gratitude. God Bless your entire family.