Buy Fruit While You Can

While this is only a major problem in California, the winter is still young. There are still 3 more months through which Florida must remain freeze-free. If anything happens to those crops, we're in a lot of trouble. For the time being, expect prices to rise for citrus, strawberries and avocados. So far, this has cost $1 billion in crop destruction, and may amount to the worst such case in California's history. AP Reports:

Three nights of freezing temperatures have destroyed up to three-quarters of California's $1 billion citrus crop, according to an estimate issued Monday as forecasters warned the weather could continue.

Other crops, including avocados and strawberries, also have suffered damage in the cold snap, agricultural officials said.

"This is one of those freezes that, unfortunately, we'll all remember," said A.G. Kawamura, secretary of the California Department of Food and Agriculture.

The latest freeze will likely surpass the damage done by a three-day cold snap in December 1998 that destroyed 85 percent of California's citrus crop, a loss valued at $700 million, Kawamura said.

Chavez is Planning to Stay in Office... Indefinitely

In another major blow to constitutional democracy, Hugo Chavez now wants the terms limits normally imposed on leaders of his country eliminated so that he can "serve" as leader indefinitely. This announcement came after he stripped one of Venezuela's largest TV channels (the only channel left that allows dissenting views from that of Mr. Chavez) of it's license to broadcast, effectively taking state control of the media. Oh, and for good measure, he also went ahead and nationalized the country's biggest oil company. Viva socialism.

As he works to consolidate his power, I can't help but feel sorry for the people of that country as their freedom is taken away from them, piece by piece. It's heartbreaking to watch the manipulation and lies that are leading that country down a very dark road.

But even more ominous is what this will mean for the United States in a few short years. We will have a very oil-rich and powerful dictatorship at our doorsteps in South America. And as Mexico falls deeper and deeper into chaos, you can bet that Red Hugo will eventually slide into that country as it's savior and literally be in our backyards. Think Ahmadinejad was bad calling for Israel to be "wiped off the map?" Mr. Chavez has openly called for the destruction of the United States.

2007 Has Started, and Already the World is Going Crazy

Looks like 2007 is off to a tumultuous start. I've always said that odd years are the bad ones. Here's just a few headlines from today:

New York City plagued by mysterious fumes that cause panic and require evacuations.

Downtown Austin, Texas evacuated and shut down due to mysterious bird deaths.

Fund Manager who predicted the 1987 market crash and the 2001 gold rush predicts severe market "correction" in 2007. That means, sell now before the crash.

Killer Bees found near New Orleans.

Iran threatens to stop oil flow.

Possible bomb found at Port of Miami.

Ding Dong Saddam is Dead

It has been a long time coming, but Iraq's former dictator, Saddam Hussein, has been executed by the hands of those he brutally oppressed for 20+ years. It is unclear how his death will be received in Iraq over the next few days, but one shouldn't be surprised to see an increase in terror attacks and sectarian violence. In the long term, however, this might prove to be a turning point for the struggling new democracy in Iraq.

Saddam Hussein Abd al-Majid al-Tikriti
1937-2006

London Braces for Attack; 'Miracle' If There Isn't One

This is a scary sign of the times. If there is an attack, this will mark the first time authorities have successfully predicted (and failed to stop) a terrorist event. While this warning is specific to England, and not America, all Christians should be vigilant during the Season.

British intelligence and law enforcement officials have passed on a grim assessment to their U.S. counterparts, "It will be a miracle if there isn't a terror attack over the holidays in London," a senior American law enforcement official tells ABCNews.com.

95% of Americans Have Pre-Marital Sex

I'm going to take a different tone than the authors of this study, who seem too overcome with exuberance to provide any information worth remembering. First of all, this number is astounding. Most people could have guessed that most people engage in pre-marital sexual behavior, but 95 percent? Wow.

It didn't take long for the study authors to begin making political decisions for Americans:

"The data clearly show that the majority of older teens and adults have already had sex before marriage, which calls into question the federal government's funding of 'abstinence only until marriage programs for 12- to 29-year-olds.'"

What kind of logic is that? Should we then, based on this line of thinking, stop funding drug awareness programs if 95% of people are hooked on cocaine? Should we forget about trying to save the environment if we've already polluted it 95%? Most people would laugh at such thoughts... yet when it comes to pre-marital sex, we're told to "get real." In fact, CNN calls this article a "reality check." Gee, thanks CNN! Without reporting like that, I might be inclined to think Santa Claus is real, too!

Just because 95% of people do something, it doesn't mean that thing is right. One could also cite other parallel statistics that trend upwards based on sexual promiscuity... like the AIDS rate, broken homes, selfishness, sex crimes, sexual addictions, apathy towards real affection and love. It's all there, right before our eyes.

Then there are those of us who dare say such things... we're labeled prudes, old-fashioned or worse. It's funny that the people who usually celebrate studies like this are the same, liberal-types who push messages of tolerance and diversity down our throats. That is, as long as you agree with their backward logic. Try telling someone on the left that pre-marital sex is a problem and see how tolerant of your view they are. Try it. I dare you.

Read the study HERE.

Terrorist Attack in Europe Imminent

Or so says John Reid, Britain's top law enforcement official. Apparently, Ayman al-Zawahiri is expected to make some statement that may or may not be the precursor to an attack around the holidays.

Al Qaeda's media division, Al-Sahab, described the upcoming announcement to address "the truths about the clash between Islam and atheism."

Read ABC News article HERE.

Limited Nuclear War Would Be Damaging to Environment

On first blush, one would be tempted to reply, "duh." But what's most ironic is how these scientists highlight the potential damage to the environment as the ultimate catastrophe in this scenario. Never mind the fact that the entire human race would be irrevocably changed. But I guess to the scientific elite, humans are the worst thing that has happened to this planet since it's creation. Nonetheless, the study itself is interesting.

SAN FRANCISCO—A small-scale, regional nuclear war could disrupt the global climate for a decade or more, with environmental effects that could be devastating for everyone on Earth, researchers have concluded.

[...]

The lingering effects could re-shape the environment in ways never conceived. In terms of climate, a nuclear blast could plunge temperatures across large swaths of the globe. "It would be the largest climate change in recorded human history," Alan Robock, associate director of the Center for Environmental Prediction at Rutgers' Cook College and another member of the research team.

[...]

For a regional conflict, fatalities would range from 2.6 million to 16.7 million per country. "A small country is likely to direct its weapons against population centers to maximize damage and achieve the greatest advantage," Toon said.

[...]

Will the conclusions result in worldly changes? "We certainly hope there will be a political response because nuclear weapons are the most dangerous potential environmental danger to the planet. They're much more dangerous than global warming," Robock said.

Again, duh.

Venezuela Votes to Continue and Expand Dictatorship

Voters poised to re-elect Chavez in a landslide.

The opposition to Chavez's dictatorial rule had no chance. Chavez has a record of stifling all opposition, including sending his violent supporters to blockade media outlets that broadcast anything negative about the Dictator. It's gotten so bad that the free press in Venezuela is only free inasmuch as it supports President Chavez. The network brave enough to broadcast other opinions, Globovision, has had it's offices torched by Chavez supporters, and it's cameramen and anchors killed and brutally attacked. It's a shame that little of this is reported in the North.

Chavez, who doesn't give a darn about the poor people in his country, plays upon their poverty and fears to maintain a tyrannical hold on power. He buys their votes with subsidies the country cannot afford, and takes wealth and property away from the middle class using the power of the government. This is called the redistribution of resources and is a hallmark of communism - a despotic form of government that Chavez openly supports.

The system that Chavez is building cannot be supported on oil revenue alone, and I expect to see Venezuela doing a bit of expansion in the coming decade or so. Unfortunately for freedom's sake, it seems that his eventual takeover of Latin America will have been freely handed to him by the people based on the promise of "free stuff for all" at the expense of liberty and individuality.

So, given this kind of hostile atmosphere, it's still impressive that Chavez's opposition got any votes at all. Good for them, even if they failed in the end. Someone needs to stand up for freedom in that country.

Is The Middle East Coming Unraveled?

It would appear so, at least on the surface.

In Iraq, the perception is that the terrorists have the upper hand. Even though, when engaging US troops, the terrorists haven't won a single gun battle. They have, however, been extremely successful in turning the American population against their own leadership. The terrorists know that they can't win on the battlefield, but if they can consistently pick off US soldiers now and again, they can win the war of public image. They know Americans have no patience for a war that lasts more than a few months. So they hold out, inflicting little in the way of physical damage, but causing intense psychological trauma.

The same thing happened in Lebanon between the Israeli military and Hezbollah terrorists in the hills of Lebanon. Hezbollah knew they were no match for Israel's military strength, so they brought the war into Lebanon's infrastructure - hiding weapons in hospitals, and using office buildings as shields. They knew it would only be a matter of time before the West called for an end to the "Israeli aggression." After all, they learned how to fight a successful public image war in Iraq.

In both cases, large modern military forces were proven impotent in the theater of urban warfare. The terrorists know that Western armies are unwilling to wage the kind of war it would take to truly eradicate the terrorists - a war of total annihilation. That doesn't fly in today's world of media-covered battles. Just the fact that civilians are still living in Baghdad should tell most people that this is not a war like WWII where cities were left in total ruins. For the most part in Iraq, business goes on as usual around the fighting. This is something completely new to the world of warfare and should be appreciated as such.

But aside from who may be winning the physical war vs. the media war, there has been one constant force behind almost all of the major unrest in the Middle East - IRAN.

This isn't some conservative attempt to take the focus off of Iraq, this is a fact. And if we shrug it off, we'll be as guilty as those who, through their complacency, allowed Nazi Germany to rise to power in the 1930s. We are facing a similar threat now, and it needs to be recognized and dealt with.

Iran is behind Hezbollah, which is now marching on the Lebanese parliament demanding the ouster of its Prime Minister. If that pro-Western government falls, it would go a long way to proving Iran's power in the region. If the US leaves Iraq due to the insurgency that is also backed by Iran, it would create a vacuum that would result in Iran controlling a third of the world's oil supply by going into Iraq. That would provoke Sunni powers (like Saudi Arabia) to stand up to Iranian expansion. None of this would be pleasant for a world conveniently ignoring what needs to be done in Iraq by burying their heads in the sand.