But the video serves its purpose.

For anyone who has young kids:

Please, God, bless this family.

Through the enduring wisdom of St. Ronnie, Ronald Cass reminds us what is really at stake in next week's elections.

"Democrats today, as in the 1970s, believe that government knows best how to handle a broad array of problems; that it should take more in taxes and spend more at home; that we're better off hoping for the best than taking the fight to our enemies; and that freedom and responsibility are subordinate values to their own vision of what society should be.

Nothing in that should be a surprise. No one who follows politics even a little could imagine that the America of Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Howard Dean, and Nancy Pelosi would look anything like Ronald Reagan's America.

Yet, shockingly, this election hangs in the balance because many conservatives don't think it's worth coming out to vote. Races across the country will turn on who goes to the polls and who stays home. Conservatives should flock to the polls to protect Reagan's legacy."

In other words, if the message of Ronald Reagan still resonates with you, if you still believe, despite the constant drumbeat from the MSM and loud-mouth liberals, that this country is a bastion of hope and freedom then by God prove it by voting next week!

As Cass further says:

"Conservatives should flock to the polls to protect Reagan's legacy."

Peggy Noonan has a wonderful article on the kind of person we need in the United States Senate, namely, Rick Santorum.

Noonan describes a cheerful, faithful man staring into polls that have him down ten points. Santorum is not afraid to talk about the things that matter with anyone, including his opponent. The only problem is his opponent apparently is afraid to discuss the issues, or at least he is afraid to discuss them with Senator Santorum.

As Noonan says, "Mr. Santorum has taken to carrying an empty chair and merrily addressing it".

I don't blame Casey for not wanting to debate Santorum. It's tough to win a debate with someone so passionate and knowlegeable as Santorum.  Casey may just understand that is a no-win situation for him, so why play that card?

Noonan concludes that she agrees with the "crusty old moderate Republican" she references earlier in the article, and I concur,

"But if Rick Santorum goes down to the defeat all expect, I will feel it. Like the crusty old moderate Republican, I know a national loss when I see one."

And finally, IF (please note the big IF) the dems win the house, Charles Krauthammer brings a little bit of reality to the situation.

"What to say about such a victory? Substantial, yes. Historic, no. Before proclaiming a landslide, one has to ask Henny Youngman's question: "Compared to what?'' (His answer to: "How's your wife?'') Since the end of World War II, the average loss for a second-term presidency in its sixth year has been 29 House seats and six Senate seats. If you go back to Franklin Roosevelt's second term, the House loss average jumps to 35. Thus a 25/6 House/Senate loss would be about (and slightly below) the historical average."

Krauthammer also reminds the reader of a very important and timely historical fact:

"In his sixth year, the now-sainted Ronald Reagan lost eight Senate seats that gave the chamber back to Democratic control. That election was swayed by no wars, no weekly casualty figures, no major scandals. The first inkling of the Iran-Contra scandal broke on the morning after the election."

Just watched Moyers on America on the local public channel. This particular episode focused on conservative evangelicals and their views on the enviornment and global warming.

The main lesson from the episode taught that there are two kinds of conservative christians: the ignorant ones that don't believe in global warming and thus care nothing about the earth, and the ones whose "scales have dropped from their eyes" (direct quote), having accepted global warming.

I'd like to get one thing straight - it's a point that Mr. Moyers seems to fail to realize:
Believe it or not, one can be interested in protecting the environment and not believe that global warming is real.

Crazy, I know. 

Further, one can be a conservative christian and be interested in protecting the environment. 

Ok, one more point:

If one is a christian and has chosen not to believe in global warming, it may be because that person has done their own reseach and came to their own decision.  It's not always because a christian leader has told that person how to think.

But then, I know it's very hard for a liberal to understand that a christian can think for him or herself. After all, christians believe in all that... you know... "bible stuff".

A reporter asked the president at the press conference this morning if it is true what the democrats are saying, that it is the fault of the current administration that North Korea has nuclear weapons.

And as the president diplomatically pointed out, it was the previous administration that dropped the ball. 

This is one of those points that liberals will never concede.

After all, it doesn't matter under whose watch the bombs were built, only when they were completed and tested.  .... right??

Whether you blame Clinton, Bush or both for North Korea, it's pretty hard to ignore that the 1994 agreement Clinton signed with North Korea was worthless. Kim Jong-Il had no intention of discontinuing his production of nuclear weapons, but he knew he had the wool pulled over the eyes of the American president and his chief negotiator, Jimmy Carter.

According to a 2003 article written by Ben Johnson at FrontPageMag.com:

"Under the final terms of the Agreed Framework approved in October of 1994, Clinton agreed to provide the "Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea" (DPRK) with two light water nuclear reactors and a massive allotment of oil.  The U.S. agreed to ship 500,000 metric tons of oil annually in response to the North's pretense that the energy-starved backwater had developed the nuclear facility to generate power.  These shipments have cost taxpayers more than $800 million to date - a bargain compared with the $6 billion spent on constructing the nuclear reactors, which now empower North Korea to produce 100 nuclear bombs each year.

In August 1998, North Korea lobbed a Taepo Dong 1 missile over Japan. Four months later, officials refused U.S. inspectors access to a suspected underground nuclear reactor at Kumchang-ni.  President Clinton then sweetened the deal by rewarding Kim Jong Il's half-year-long stall tactics with 1.1 million tons of food worth nearly $200 million. Not surprisingly, American inspectors found no signs of wrongdoing at the long-sanitized facility."

What is this if not appeasement? 

And what does it mean that it failed miserably?

Well, any logical person would look at that and say that appeasing a mad man does not work. However, logic is a rarely-used trait of those on the left - it plays no role in their quest to regain power.

Can anyone honestly blame Kim Jong-Il though? Look at the prizes he has won from blackmailing the United States. Why would he not continue with the same tactic when it worked so swimmingly in the past?

As hard as the left is trying to re-write history when it comes to its hero, Billy Boy, it won't work.  Especially in the case of North Korea, there is too much evidence of his neglect for history to be kind to him.

The Shadow Boxer is a common man that yearns on some level to be non-common. He is driven by a desire to please God and a longing for knowledge.

He is an anonymous, content, faithful family man. Occassionally, a quiet frustration bubbles below the surface.

That frustration is the creator of this blog.