No Post This Week

My column will return on Tuesday, July 24. Let me suggest you use this off week to re-read the first 12 installments of The Lambert Commentary. Let's face it, we all need a refresher course every now and then. See you next week.

Confessions Of A Global Warming Convert

Now it all makes sense. Now I can see how wrong I’ve been. Now I can stop all the ranting I’ve done about the myth of man-made global warming and start working to reduce the effects of my personal carbon footprint by going to Al Gore’s website and buying some carbon credits. There’s no denying it: I’m a changed man.

Forget the fact that there are scores of credible scientists who have risked their reputations, their funding, and even their careers by saying that the idea of man-made global warming is a questionable hypothesis. Forget the fact that the polar ice caps on Mars are melting without one single sport utility vehicle filling the atmosphere with “dangerous” CO2 emissions. Forget the fact that the earth has gone through periods of warming and cooling throughout its history. And forget the fact that Buenos Aires has just experienced their first snowfall in 89 years and Johannesburg last week had the first snow they have seen since 1981.

None of those things matter anymore. This past Saturday, the entire global warming discussion was permanently transformed. The debate over climate change has been brought to an end.

Let me be the first to apologize for my past denials of the reality of man-made global warming. If I had known then what I know now, things would have been quite different. I would have voted for Al Gore in 2000. I would have protested outside the White House and gone on a hunger strike until President Bush signed off on the Kyoto Protocol. I would have limited my toilet paper usage to one square in an effort to do my part to save the planet (Sheryl Crowe is a lot smarter than I gave her credit for). I would have given up my gas guzzling Dodge pick-up in exchange for a 1987 Yugo converted to run on recycled vegetable oil.

Alas, my earlier transgressions are ever before me. And yet, I can’t undo the past. All I can do is, starting with the man in the mirror, begin to make a change (thanks to Michael Jackson for giving me the words to express myself). So here I am: the new Shane Lambert.

What has changed my mind, you ask? I thought that was obvious.

This past weekend, Snoop Dogg said that global warming is bad. If that doesn’t settle it, I don’t know what will.

It's Somebody Else's Fault

I grew up watching professional wrestling. When I was five-years-old, my father accepted a new job that required our family to relocate to Columbus, Georgia. During that time, we were frequent visitors to the Columbus Municipal Auditorium to witness first hand the stars of Georgia Championship Wrestling. As a young boy, I cheered wildly for the good guys like Tommy “Wildfire” Rich and Mr. Wrestling #2. I booed furiously when bad guys like Mad Dog Buzz Sawyer and The Great Kabuki made their way to the ring. (What was that green stuff that would come out of Kabuki's mouth?)

My grandfather used to tell me that the whole thing was fake; that the same guys who beat each other senseless in the ring would later leave the arena together and go out for a bite to eat. Although I was certain that he was wrong about that, it wouldn’t have mattered to me if I had known he was right. Just seeing those superstars up close and personal was a thrill for me, and fake or not, it was incredibly entertaining.

As I grew older and we moved away from the Columbus area, my interest in professional wrestling began to wane. It wasn’t until my mid-twenties that I became somewhat fascinated by wrestling again. This time, however, I was sure it was all just a show. Honestly, I didn't care. I guess you could say it was like a soap opera for men. The plot lines were intriguing, and the athletic stunts pulled off by the performers made it compelling television. I never watched the WWF/WWE, primarily because I was quite uncomfortable with how vulgar it had become. It was the WCW (Ted Turner’s attempt to compete with Vince McMahon's WWF) that caught my attention, and I became a regular viewer in the nineties. I know it was incredibly immature and I was a minister and probably shouldn’t have wasted my time with it, but hey, I’m a guy.

Eventually I outgrew this phase in my life. OK, so I became a married man and the WCW went out of business, but I like to think that I outgrew it. I’ve not really followed professional wrestling closely since then, so I feel incredibly out of the loop even discussing it. That being said, however, I was shocked last week to learn of the tragic murder-suicide involving wrestler Chris Benoit and his family. What would lead a man to kill his wife on Friday, his son on Saturday, and take his own life on Sunday?

There have been attempts to blame Benoit’s actions on his obvious steroid abuse. I would never condone the use of performance enhancing drugs for athletes, but to put the blame on steroids is an attempt to shift responsibility. I have no doubt that these drugs did irreparable harm to Benoit, and they may have even contributed to his mindset. That, however, is no excuse for the evil actions that led to three deaths in three days.

Some have and will put the blame on professional wrestling. And why wouldn’t they? After all, this is a sport . . . I mean form of entertainment that has become increasingly violent and more bizarre as the years have gone by. I thought things were pretty extreme when Buzz Sawyer used a belt to whip Tommy Rich back in the early eighties. Kids watching wrestling today would probably laugh at such an incident, most likely thinking it moderately boring and incredibly lame. In today’s wrestling world, the brutality has got to be over the top and the shock factor off the charts. And much of the subject matter in today’s televised broadcasts of professional wrestling would have easily earned an “R” rating for a theatrical release not too many years ago.

But is wrestling to blame for the Benoit murder-suicide? Without condoning the current state of professional wrestling, I have to conclude that there is only one who bears the responsibility for this tragedy: the person who perpetrated it.

These attempts by society to try to find something or someone else to blame have led to a culture where we have a hard time accepting responsibility for ourselves. Why is it in this country that we’ve always got to go back and find some excuse for the detestable things we do? Whatever happened to people being accountable for their actions instead of trying to place the blame on their parents, their employer, or their miserable lot in life?

What we need in the world today are people who are not afraid to stand up and say, “It’s me! I’m to blame for how messed up I am, and I need somebody to pull me out of this pit I’m in.” And then, when a person comes to grips with the reality that it is their own sin that has led them to where they are, that is when they are ready to receive the forgiveness that is available only through Jesus Christ.

Until we recognize that we are sinners, we’ll never recognize our need for a Savior. And we’ll keep trying to blame our problems on everybody and everything else.

Chris Benoit was, I am certain, negatively affected by the performance enhancing drugs he chose to use. Similarly, I have no doubt that his choice of career as a professional wrestler took its toll on his physical and mental well-being. But that doesn’t change the fact that those were choices he made.

It is often said that with freedom comes great responsibility. Nowhere is that more true than with the freedom of choice.

Is This Political Blackmail?

Playing politics is nothing new in Washington. In fact, it is something that we've come to expect from both political parties. And I guess there are a few things that get done that way when nothing else will work. But there are some issues where politics should be set aside and doing the right thing should be paramount.

A story appeared yesterday saying that some Republican congressmen have threatened to pull their support of war funding unless President Bush backs off on the illegal immigration bill. Somebody please tell me that they were misquoted; that this was just a big misunderstanding. Surely they're not planning to withdraw funding for our troops in harm's way simply to gain leverage in the debate over the amnesty legislation.

Now don't misunderstand me; I am wholly opposed to this bill that would grant legal status to immigrants who are here illegally. I think I've made that clear in some of my earlier columns. If we're going to do this, why don't we just pronounce all other lawbreakers in our country innocent, as well? Drug dealers, you get a free pass. Prostitutes, you're in the clear. Bank robbers, just keep the money. After all, you risked your life to pull off your illegal undertaking, and you should be rewarded for your bravery. Besides, you did it to help your family.

Our lawmakers in Washington wouldn't dare decriminalize 99% of all criminal activity in this country (well, most of them wouldn't). So why do many feel, along with our President, that illegal immigration is the one crime that's not really a crime? Are they afraid of being labeled a racist or a bigot? With all due respect to our national leaders, this has nothing to do with race or bigotry. It's a matter of what is right and what is wrong (not to mention the national security implications behind it all). With immigration, as with everything else, there is a right way and a wrong way to do things. We shouldn't be rewarding these lawbreakers who are doing things the wrong way.

Having said all of that, I must admit, however, that I don't think this issue is worth sacrificing support for our troops. If the only way this bill can be defeated is by using our troops as pawns in the political process, then the cost is too high. What will be next?

Today we've conveyed to the president our intention of withholding funds for orphaned children in this country. Unless he votes with us, we're cutting off money for the kids. Maybe next time he'll think twice before he supports some legislation that we don't agree with.

Absurd? Not much more so than threatening to hold our troops hostage in a political power play. It's just as wrong when the Republicans do it as it is when the Democrats do it. And all who would participate in such a thing should be ashamed.

You don't have to read much of what I write to get a sense of which way I lean politically. More often than not, I agree with the Republicans. But I'm not going to walk in lockstep with everything they say when my conscience would dictate another direction. I'm deeply disappointed with our president over his support of this amnesty bill. I'm equally disappointed with those Republican congressmen who have shown a willingness to play politics with our troops in harm's way.

Let's just pray that this bill will be defeated without having to use our fighting men and women as tools in the political process. They deserve much better.

A Lott To Think About

With the presidential election coming up next year, it’s time to start figuring out which candidate most deserves your vote. And the only way to do that, obviously, is by tuning in to Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity to see which candidate they are supporting. We average Americans are clearly not smart enough to make an important decision like that on our own. No, we must listen to talk radio and then follow their particular marching orders without any reservations. It’s so nice not to have to think for ourselves. We just incline our ears toward the radio and process the information like robots that can do nothing but follow their master’s instructions.

Let’s face it; the average American is dumb as a brick. OK, I don’t actually believe that, but that’s what Mississippi Senator Trent Lott seems to believe. He gives the impression that the powerful talk radio hosts are controlling people’s thoughts and actions, so much so that he wants something done about it. Last week, Senator Lott said, “Talk radio is running America. We have to deal with that problem.”

His implication? That Americans aren’t smart enough to make up their own minds, and talk radio is essentially running the country by methodically brainwashing the masses. Therefore, something must be done immediately to deprogram the indoctrinated multitudes and stop talk radio from further taking over America.

Maybe I read too much into Senator Lott’s comments, but it sounds eerily similar to the recent cries from the left to bring back the Fairness Doctrine. I guess when Air America (a liberal talk radio network) proved to be a miserable failure; they had to find some other way to stem the tide of right-wing voices that are so prominent on the airwaves. Should the Fairness Doctrine be revived, it will have a chilling effect on free speech in this country. Talk radio programs would be forced off the air because they don’t meet a certain politically correct standard. Conservative talk radio would become a thing of the past and liberal talk radio would, well, nothing would really change since there’s never actually been a truly successful liberal talk show on the radio.

So why is the conservative senior senator from Mississippi coming out now and attacking talk radio? Well, he’s unhappy with how the industry has framed the debate over the illegal immigration bill. Senator Lott, for reasons unknown, is a big supporter of this amnesty plan. And he seems to think that talk radio, that massive entity that is “running the country,” is having a direct effect on how Americans feel about this bill.

Memo to Senator Lott:

I lived in Mississippi for four years. I even voted for you while I was living there. You’re a good man. You’ve been a good senator. I haven’t always agreed with you on everything, but for the most part I think you’re a stand-up guy. So please know my heart when I break the following news to you:

I DON’T NEED RUSH LIMBAUGH AND SEAN HANNITY TO TELL ME HOW I SHOULD FEEL ABOUT A BILL THAT GIVES LEGAL STATUS TO PEOPLE WHO ARE HERE ILLEGALLY! I DON’T NEED NEAL BOORTZ AND MICHAEL SAVAGE TO EXPLAIN TO ME THE PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH PUTTING THESE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ON A PATH TO CITIZENSHIP! I’M PERFECTLY CAPABLE OF THINKING FOR MYSELF AND FORMING A PERSONAL OPINION WITHOUT THE VOICES OF LAURA INGRAHAM OR MARK LEVIN TELLING ME WHAT TO BELIEVE!

There, I’ve said it. Sorry for shouting, but you know how worked up we talk radio listeners can get sometimes. Please senator, if you think something needs to be done about talk radio, don’t join forces with Teddy Kennedy to do it. In fact, don’t do anything. Leave it alone. Talk radio isn’t running this country, and the American people aren’t nearly as uninformed as you elites in Washington seem to think we are.

Respectfully,
Shane Lambert

P.S. Have a nice day!

Anybody think I’ll hear back from him?

The More Things Change...

“I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is called a disgrace, that two are called a law firm, and that three or more become a congress.” That is how Peter Stone and Sherman Edwards, through the character of John Adams, begin their somewhat historical play 1776. Every time I’ve watched the movie version of this Broadway classic, Adams’ words have always conjured up images of our senators and representatives in Washington D.C. And although that may appropriately describe some of our national leaders, I’ve now come to recognize that these words more accurately describe our state congressional delegation in Montgomery.

Why is it that, for the most part, when the state of Alabama makes national headlines, the news is usually embarrassing? Although I realize my home state has had a lot of black marks in its history, I have maintained a steadfast belief that we have largely put our past transgressions behind us and are moving forward. Many people who come to visit Alabama for the first time are amazed that there are no more police dogs attacking African Americans, no more bus burnings, and no more chants of “segregation forever.” They are even more surprised to discover that most people in Alabama actually have all of their teeth and are more than able to form coherent, intelligent sentences and engage in thoughtful conversation. What they find, in other words, is a state and people whose reality is far-removed from universal perception.

But then there are national headlines like this one from last week: “Fistfight breaks out on floor of Alabama Senate.” And to top it all off, the whole thing was captured on video and has been played via television and the Internet for the whole world to see. So once again, the stereotypical image of Alabama as being a backwards-thinking state made up of backwards-thinking people continues to be perpetuated. And that, my friends, is a shame.

What needs to happen is a good old fashioned “throw the bums out” housecleaning in Montgomery. We need a state congressional delegation that can accomplish more in a legislative session than just giving themselves a 61% pay raise (which is about all they’ve accomplished recently). We need leaders, on both sides of the aisle, that will represent the interests of the state of Alabama as well as they represent the interests of their own districts. And we need legislators who will not bow down to the powerful special interest groups in our state. Our current congressional leaders (there’s an oxymoron if there ever was one) have become a joke in their own state, and the time has come for a new direction in Montgomery.

The state of Alabama, fortunately, has moved past it’s dark and disturbing past. From the rocket scientists who call Huntsville home to the world-class medical professionals in Birmingham to the players in the Shakespeare Festival in Montgomery, our state has much to be proud of. Alabamians are not, as we are often portrayed, a bunch of back-woods rednecks (well, most of us aren’t). There are a lot of good old country folks here, but that doesn’t make us ignorant. Just because we like to eat pinto beans and corn bread doesn’t mean we are a third world country. We have clung to all the things that were good about our past while discarding those things that were abominable.

Alabama has come a long way in the past fifty years. Too bad our state legislature hasn’t.

Blame It All On Bush

When is good news really bad news? Answer: When you’re a liberal and the good news is concerning a victory in the war on terror. The last thing the Democrats want to hear about as they are gearing up for next year’s presidential election is that our country may be actually doing something right. And when there is the slightest hint of good news, the left-wing playbook calls for an all-out assault on President Bush.

Last week’s news about a thwarted terrorist plot to blow up the jet fuel pipeline at JFK airport should have been acknowledged by Democrats as a victory in the war on terror. That, however, might make George Bush look good, which in turn might make Republicans look good, which in turn might lead to the Democrats losing next year’s presidential election. So the only recourse they have is to blame the whole thing on President Bush and his “misguided” war in Iraq. In other words, they continue to blame America first.

Sunday morning on ABC’s This Week, Congressman Jack Murtha was asked about the terrorist plot. His response:

Our presence in Iraq, our occupation of Iraq, gives (the terrorists) the inspiration…I'm absolutely convinced that this is the kind of thing that inspires these people to take on the United States…Our presence in Iraq is inspiring them to recruit people all over the world. So this is the problem that we have.

ABC’s George Stephanopoulos did have the presence of mind to mention to the congressman that, “We did have 9-11 before we went into Iraq” (not bad for a former Clinton advisor). Murtha’s response was, “Yeah, we had 9-11, but that came from Afghanistan.” So that means that a terrorist attack from Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan can be blamed on the terrorists, but a terrorist plot that came from Al-Qaeda in Iraq is obviously the fault of George Bush. Does anybody other than me find that reasoning absolutely ludicrous?

Democrats act as if Muslim extremists in Iraq had a deep love and appreciation for the United States before we ever went to war. I hate to break it to them, but we were hated just as ferociously when Bill Clinton was president as we are now with President Bush. And these guys who plotted this latest threat weren’t even in Iraq; they were operating right here in the land of the free.

Speaking of that, shouldn’t this be a signal to President Bush that his support of an amnesty program for illegal immigrants is not a great idea? Do we really want to give provisional legal status to a group of people who are, by definition, here illegally? Should it be the policy of this great country to reward those who break our laws? Will that ever be a good idea? Sorry to keep asking questions; inquiring minds want to know. But, I digress.

Senator Barack Obama was asked about the terrorist plot during Sunday night’s Democratic debate. His response:

But the fact of the matter is that we live in a more dangerous world, not a less dangerous world, partly as a consequence of this president's actions. Primarily because of this war in Iraq, a war that I think should have never been authorized or waged. What we've seen is a distraction from the battle to deal with Al-Qaeda, but in Afghanistan. We have created an entire new recruitment network in Iraq.

Once again, the liberals are convinced that fundamentalist Muslims in Iraq were at one time totally at peace with America’s place in the world. They would have us believe that it was only after Operation Iraqi Freedom that terrorists were recruited and trained in Iraq. Murtha, Obama and other liberals believe we should be ashamed of ourselves for defending freedom and trying to prevent more terrorist attacks on our soil. I wouldn’t be surprised if they sought to charge President Bush with treason for having instigated this latest terrorist plot.

So where do we go from here? The Democrats first need to understand that you can’t deal with a problem by pretending that it doesn’t exist. The city where I live, for instance, has seen a steady increase in violent crime in recent years. Should our law enforcement officials work aggressively to arrest the offenders and prevent more offenses in the future, or should they take a hands-off approach for fear that we might incite more violence if we make the criminals mad? For me, that’s a no-brainer. But then again, I’m not a liberal, so my brain works a little bit differently.

Another thing the Democrats need to do is stop playing partisan politics with national security. When there is genuinely good news in relation to the fight against terrorism, it shouldn’t be seen as an opportunity to attack the president and Republicans. Isn’t this at least one issue where we can all stand side-by-side, knowing that we are united for the defense of our country in spite of other areas where we vehemently disagree? It should be, and I believe it can be. But as long as winning elections is the most important thing, the sad truth is that it never will be.