Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Warren Buffett: An Unbounded Enthusiasm for Abortion

Warren Buffet is a very rich man. That's no secret. And because Americans tend to equate wealth with wisdom and even virtue, Warren Buffett is well respected.

He shouldn't be.

For one of the primary causes he has invested in heavily is the cruel destruction of preborn boys and girls. And, by so doing, Warren Buffett is among so many other rich people who are investing in God's judgment rather than His mercy.

The latest report of Buffett's abortion involvement came in a story published by the New York Times. It revealed his behind-the-scenes bankrolling of a plan to increase the number of abortionists in America and to paint them in a more positive light. That story has since been examined and commented on by Patrick Craine of LifeSiteNews.

She describes two training programs for abortionists that are central to this strategy. The first, called the “Family Planning Fellowship,” is a two-year post-residency program designed to further equip doctors for providing abortions and contraception. She says this fellowship is now being offered at 21 university campuses. The second is called the Kenneth J. Ryan Residency Training Program, which aims to supply medical schools with funds to train ob/gyn residents in providing abortions. So far, this program has funded 58 campuses in the U.S. and Canada.

...But as the two training programs have grown, this anonymous donor has become more widely known, she says. “In the course of my reporting, two doctors who had not done the fellowship themselves, but who work in universities, volunteered to me that the money for the programs comes from the Buffett Foundation,” she wrote.


According to Bazelon, the Buffett Foundation’s tax records reveal that most of its spending is allocated to “abortion and contraception advocacy and research.” The Foundation has given tens of millions to Planned Parenthood and Ipas, as well as millions to other pro-abortion groups like Catholics for Choice. Buffett has pledged to give away 99% of his estimated $47 billion assets, with most of it going to the Gates Foundation, which is infamous for its avowed emphasis on population control.

Leftist Journalists Have Gone Off the Edge

If you were in the presence of a man having a heart attack, how would you respond? As he clutched his chest in desperation and pain, would you call 911? Would you try to save him from dying? Of course you would.

But if that man was Rush Limbaugh, and you were Sarah Spitz, a producer for National Public Radio (update: Spitz was a producer for NPR affiliate KCRW for the show Left, Right & Center), that isn’t what you’d do at all.


In a post to the list-serv Journolist, an online meeting place for liberal journalists, Spitz wrote that she would “Laugh loudly like a maniac and watch his eyes bug out” as Limbaugh writhed in torment.


In boasting that she would gleefully watch a man die in front of her eyes, Spitz seemed to shock even herself. “I never knew I had this much hate in me,” she wrote. “But he deserves it.”


Spitz’s hatred for Limbaugh seems intemperate, even imbalanced. On Journolist, where conservatives are regarded not as opponents but as enemies, it barely raised an eyebrow...


On Journolist, there was rarely such thing as an honorable political disagreement between the left and right, though there were many disagreements on the left. In the view of many who’ve posted to the list-serv, conservatives aren’t simply wrong, they are evil. And while journalists are trained never to presume motive, Journolist members tend to assume that the other side is acting out of the darkest and most dishonorable motives...


As he did yesterday, Jonathan Strong from the Daily Caller is again sharing the exact words of powerful, well-entrenched liberal journalists openly sharing with one another their irrational hate for conservatives, their desires of unconstitutional censorship, their willingness to engage in dirty tricks to further their own ideology, and other disgusting sins.

Pass this on. We must awaken the public to how radical, how conniving and how dangerous to freedom is the mainstream press.

Kagan's Lies About Partial-Birth Abortion Disqualify Her for Court

An Open Letter to the American People:

For many years, before, during and after my service as surgeon general of the United States, I've been known for presenting my unvarnished opinion on medical matters, regardless of the views of political parties or outside influences. The time has come for me to do so again.


I was deeply disturbed to learn the Elena Kagan, the nominee for Supreme Court scheduled for a Senate committee vote next week, manipulated the medical policy statement on partial-birth abortion of a major medical organization, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) in January 1997.


The problem for me, as a physician, is that she was willing to replace a medical statement with a political statement that was not supported by any existing medical data. During the partial-birth abortion debate in the 1990s, medical evidence was of paramount importance.


Ms. Kagan's amendment to the ACOG Policy Statement--that partial-birth abortion "may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman"--had no basis in published medical studies or data. No published medical data supported her amendment in 1997, and none supports it today.
Indeed, there was, and is, no reliable medical data that partial-birth abortion is safe or safer than alternative medical procedures.

There are other medical options.


In my many decades of service as a medical doctor, I have never known of a case where partial-birth abortion was necessary in place of a more humane and ethical alternative. Not only have I never seen such a case, but I have never known of any physician who had to do a partial-birth abortion--nor have I ever met a physician who knew of anyone who had to perform one out of medical necessity. In fact, partial-birth abortion has risks of its own, and could injure a woman.


Medical science should not have been twisted in 1997 for political or legislative gains.


Ms. Kagan's political language, a direct result of the amendment she made to ACOG's Policy Statement, made its way into American jurisprudence and misled federal courts for the next decade.


She misrepresented not only the science but also misrepresented her role in front of your elected representatives in the United States Senate. This is unethical, and it is disgraceful, especially for one who would be tasked with being a measured and fair-minded judge.


Americans United for Life Action has released a thorough and comprehensive report on this matter, a report that provides substantive evidence of Ms. Kagan's actions in this matter. I ask that Senators and the American people give this report their most serious consideration. I urge the Senate to reject the politization of medical science and vote no on the Kagan nomination.


Sincerely,


C. Everett Koop, M.D., Sc.D.

Surgeon General of the United States Public Health Service, 1981-89

Tuesday, July 20, 2010

Today's Posts

A Princess in Distress

I really like Gina Dalfonzo's work.

Gina, if you don't already know, hosts two excellent blogs (The Point and Dickensblog) as well as writing for Chuck Colson's BreakPoint radio program and other publications. She is, as the occasion calls for it, funny or pensive or challenging -- but always winsome and wise.

But Gina has just written one of her best in The Good Christian Girl: A Fable (What heeding a decade and a half of dating advice can mean.) It is a very poignant essay, one that is written with tremendous empathy and which elicits the same from its readers. And even though I am a man blessed with a long and wonderful marriage (perhaps because of that), I was deeply moved by the plight of the fable's unhappily single heroine.

There is gentle correction in this compelling story (especially to those whose advice to Christian singles has been too broadly proscriptive or devoid of practical guidance) but there is gentle understanding and encouragement too.

Do check it out over here at Christianity Today. And let it be a stimulant to better, more sensitively befriend the singles you know.

A New Pro-Life Blog: Erase The Need

Barb Malek, one of the directors of the AAA Center for Pregnancy Counseling here in Omaha enters the world of blogging with Erase The Need.

That's good news for it's a natural extension of her ministry with the CPC. After all, she has a lot of heart, a lot of writing talent and lot of soulful experience with this ministry. Those make for a great foundation for a blog which will reach out to inform and inspire those facing unplanned pregnancies -- and those who want to help the CPC in its crucial work.

So check out the opening post on Erase the Need and give it a bookmark so you can more easily keep track of what's happening over there.

The Tax Man Cometh (After You!)

Here's some news you might well need to hear -- but news which certainly won't make you feel any more pleasant towards Barack Obama, that fellow in the White House who is taking your freedom, taking your safety, taking your money, taking your kids' future -- and giving you in return nothing but headaches and heartbreaks.

Read "Why the Self-Employed Might Owe OfficeMax a 1099" by Laura Sanders over here at the Wall Street Journal.

And then put your accountant on speed dial.

Small businesses and self-employed workers, look out: There is a blizzard of new tax paperwork on the horizon.

The reason? To help fund the health-care changes, lawmakers passed a provision aimed at stopping cheats responsible for a big chunk of our "tax gap," the $300 billion-plus of revenue lost to tax evasion every year.


Starting in 2012, businesses could have to file hundreds of millions of new 1099 information reports with the Internal Revenue Service. The forms will be due whenever a firm buys more than $600 a year in goods or services from a vendor, even when the vendor is a giant company like Staples...


To see how the new rules make a difference, consider this hypothetical case: Susan owns a restaurant, and last year she wrote a $2,000 check to a freelance plumber. Because the plumber was unincorporated and her payment greater than $600, she owed the IRS a 1099 report. But she didn't have to file a different report for the $1,000 she paid to a big-box store for sinks and materials.
Under the new rules, Susan would now have report the sink payments. In fact, she will have to file 1099s with the IRS for each vendor who supplies goods or services totaling over $600 a year, whether the payments are for forks, food supplies, paper napkins or consulting. That will mean tracking small payments throughout the year to see if the total is greater than $600...

The potential new record-keeping "is making my accountants cross-eyed," says Pat Felder, the co-owner of Felder's Collision Parts, a regional auto-parts supplier in Baton Rouge, La., that employs 25 people. For example, several times a year Ms. Felder may throw a steak cookout for her staff after a good month, spending $300 for meat. Under the new law, she says, "We'd either have to track those purchases or buy from somebody else, just for tax reasons."


It gets worse: If the vendor won't supply his tax ID number, then the payer is supposed to stand in for the taxman by withholding 28% of the payment and sending that amount to the IRS...

Planned Parenthood: The Lies Are the Same, The Lies Are Unending

The youth-led pro-life group Live Action released a new undercover video today showing staff at an Indianapolis Planned Parenthood clinic using manipulative and medically inaccurate counseling to convince a young woman to have an abortion. This is the third undercover video Live Action has released showing abusive counseling practices at Planned Parenthood of Indiana.

If The Feds Would Only Let Billy Loose!

The media are trying to move off the story of the Gulf disaster in order to protect President Obama and the Democrats who have so terribly fumbled and stumbled in their non-response. But the locals still have to deal with the effects of the catastrophe every hour of every day.

Billy Nungesser, the President of Plaquemines Parish in suburban New Orleans, thinks these uncaring politicians ought to go to jail for criminal diffidence.

Of course, you won't hear that from Katie Couric. In fact, the media wants to keep Billy Nungesser as far from the cameras as possible. So here, from a local Republican who is having to fight the Feds and BP just to get the chance to fight the oil spill, is what's really going on.

"Have You Heard of Anybody in the Federal Government Losing Their Job?"

"You've heard of a lot of layoffs. Have you heard of anybody in the federal government losing their job? That's all I need to say."

This employment tip was passed on from Shirley Sherrod, a USDA official, to an audience at the recent NAACP convention.

And it was to that same audience that Ms. Sherrod explained how she had purposefully withheld help from a farmer because he was white.

It wasn't an appropriate anecdote to share, especially given the attention given to the NAACP's denunciation of supposed racism in the Tea Party movement. For though the evidence of racism cannot be established on the latter charge, Ms. Sherrod's racism was right there on You Tube for all the world to see.

That was just too embarrassing for the NAACP and they were forced to repudiate her attitudes. And it was too embarrassing for the USDA too who would have faced a firestorm if it didn't fire such a smugly racist employee. Fortunately, Ms. Sherrod helped them out and resigned.

Which, of course, ends up making Ms. Sherrod's employment advice ("Have you heard of anybody in the federal government losing their job?") most ironic, indeed.

In Their Own Words: Journalists Are an Integral Part of Team Obama

That the mainstream media pampered, protected and actually promoted Barack Obama during his run for the presidency isn't big news. Everybody knows it.

Nevertheless, this article in the Daily Caller is quite a shocker, featuring as it does fresh evidence of a deliberate, concerted and mean-spirited effort by "journalists" from Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon, the Washington Independent and the New Republic to help Obama's cause -- including trashing the reputations of anyone (conservative or even fair-minded reporter) who hampered their effort.

It is a sickening display of how far in the tank the press corps went for Obama -- and by so doing, how far behind they left objectivity, honesty, fairness, and the search for truth. They stopped being journalists and became agents of the Obama campaign, but dirty agents at that who didn't have the candor to admit their real purpose or dishonorable methods.

This article quotes them in their own words. And that's why it is a must-read that you should definitely pass around to others.

Here's just one example. It comes from Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent. He was talking to his MSM pals on the now infamous Journolist forum about the explosion of Jeremiah Wright onto the scene. It was the kind of scandal that would have meant thorough disaster for a Republican but the far-left reporters went into action to deflect the damage to Obama, including using the power of the press to change the subject altogether and portray conservatives as racists rather than Wright or Obama.

Listen in...

What is necessary is to raise the cost on the right of going after the left. In other words, find a rightwinger’s [sic] and smash it through a plate-glass window. Take a snapshot of the bleeding mess and send it out in a Christmas card to let the right know that it needs to live in a state of constant fear. Obviously I mean this rhetorically.

And I think this threads the needle. If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they’ve put upon us. Instead, take one of them — Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists. Ask: why do they have such a deep-seated problem with a black politician who unites the country? What lurks behind those problems? This makes *them* sputter with rage, which in turn leads to overreaction and self-destruction.


This is ugly. This is sinister. And this must be exposed to the American public to keep them from being duped by such dolts in the future.

Again, this Daily Caller article by Jonathan Strong is a must read article. It reminds us of what journalism can be. Don't miss it.

Hat tips: Lucianne.com and The Pearcey Report)

Monday, July 19, 2010

Today's Posts

The Zek Who Changed the World

Modern College Students: "Experts in Infidelity"

Would Darwin Grant You a License to Breed?

In Case You Didn't Hear

The Zek Who Changed the World

In 1962 the Soviet literary journal Novyi Mir published Alexander Solzhenitsyn's short novel, One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch. The editor, Alexander Tvardovsky, knew he had discovered an astonishing new writing talent with a courageous moral vision, something that hadn't appeared in print in Russia since the days of Dostoevsky and Tolstoy.

But then how could Tvardovsky have read such authentic Russian literature? Such writers were not only refused publication under the Communist regime, they were frequently refused the permission to live.

But there was something new in the wind that gave Tvardovsky enough confidence to take this daring manuscript to the authorities and ask for permission to publish it. Stalin, the monomaniac who had savagely murdered millions of his own people, was dead. And his eventual successor, Nikita Khrushchev, had his hands full trying to wrest control from Stalin's hard-line comrades in the Politburo. In fact, Khrushchev had already launched (within the private domains of the Soviet elite) his attack on the "cult of personality," a campaign which presented Stalin as a paranoid dictator whose excesses had actually undermined the Glorious Revolution.

Khrushchev was anything but the liberated, enlightened soul that the liberals in the West first believed. He was just another Communist thug intent on developing his own power. Discrediting Stalin, even it meant exposing some of the ugliness of Soviet history, was merely the means to get a tighter grip on the Kremlin. Khrushchev saw quickly how One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch, with its heart-rending portrayal of the senselessness and brutality of a Stalinist-era forced labor camp in Siberia and its author being a former zek who lived through the hell himself, would make an effective move in the next stage of his campaign. And that was to take his attack on Stalin's "cult of personality" beyond the autocracy to the Soviet public itself...and then to the inquisitive journalists of the West.

However, Khrushchev did not understand just how powerful an influence he had launched when he permitted Tvardovsky to publish Solzhenitsyn's small book. The Stalinists around Khrushchev proved harder to defeat than he imagined. Indeed, their rage over his allowing just a few of the crimes of the Soviet Union to be published became vicious.

Instead of securing power, Khrushchev began to lose it. And even the little scent of freedom that arose from the publication of the novel (and especially Solzhenitsyn's emergence as a respected dissident voice by the West) had an intoxicating effect on the Russian populace.

Khrushchev had desired only a little light to shine. Just enough to expose Stalin's treachery to the ideals of the Communist Revolution. Just enough to illuminate his way to a more secure place at the top.

But what he got was a light that grew hotter and more brilliant than he ever imagined, one which exposed the utter wickedness and absurdity of Communism itself.

Khrushchev saw the monumental failure of his tolerance quickly and tried to reverse it with a complete suppression of Solzhenitsyn's work and reputation. But it was too late. And the comparatively mild match that was Denisovitch would eventually blaze up into torches with the publication of more detailed, more searing revelations: the Gulag Archipelago, Cancer Ward, The First Circle, and more.

Published in Western editions, Alexander Solzhenitsyn's work would destroy the Soviet Union's claims of a Communism with a moral foundation. And when that began to weaken, other heroes of freedom (Ronald Reagan, Lech Walesa, John Paul II) would follow and, by their efforts, take down the Soviet Union's tyranny over Eastern Europe.

Re-reading One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch recently proved as thrilling as ever as I contemplated how God had used this small novel as such a big voice for freedom.

The soaring of the human spirit represented in that book is inspirational on many levels. For instance, the clever sarcasm the author uses to show the foolishness of the Soviet schemes is superb while the introduction of Alyosha presents the strongest Christian character Russian literature had seen in three generations. Finally, the passion for a detailed history of how the camps were run strongly foreshadows the full exposure Solzhenitsyn would produce in his later works.

All these elements of One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch (and more) show the spiritual genius as well as the bold courage of Alexander Solzhenitsyn -- a zek who quite literally and splendidly, changed the world.

Modern College Students: "Experts in Infidelity"

Thanks to a society that no longer believes in healthy boundaries nor explains why they are important, students on college campuses are learning to be experts in infidelity; they are studying how to lie and cheat with their bodies and affections...Ask any college student on your choice of campuses across the United States and few would contest that the hook-up culture has wiped out the dating scene and has emerged as primary mode of interacting among young adults...

Knowing what promiscuity has brought to the party (epidemic levels of sexually transmitted disease, confusion and guilt, loss of self-esteem and empowerment, broken hearts, long term physiological effects, and the prelude to failure in marriage), this brief Mercator article by Viviana M Garcia is awfully frightening.

And yet, Garcia sees some grounds for hope, particularly in the increasing participation of students in groups like the one she helped found at Providence College, groups that provide information, encouragement and accountability so that students make wise choices. Check it out here.

Would Darwin Grant You a License to Breed?

In the 5 years before the Second World War, Germany sterilized somewhere around 400,000 people whom eugenicists deemed "unfit to breed." However, Germany wasn't alone in pursuing this goal. In the early decades of the 20th Century, the United States sterilized 60,000 -- 20,000 from California alone.

David Klinghoffer has a provocative article over at the Huffington Post which summarizes a new documentary, What Hath Darwin Wrought?, that is making waves even before it is shown. The film takes a hard look at the eugenics movement so thoroughly denounced in our time but once highly praised by Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger and other "progressives." The documentary delves into the philosophical foundations of eugenics all the way back to Darwin's survival of the fittest -- foundations that Klinghoffer says are at the very least overlooked...and, quite possibly, willfully suppressed.

Friday, July 16, 2010

Today's Posts

On Dumbed Down Schools

Check out these provocative paragraphs from an essay entitled “Democratic Education” written way back in 1944. It was a response to the false premise, gaining popularity even then, that making schools more democratic would require them to be less rigorous in pursuing academic excellence.

Apparently, we must also abolish all compulsory subjects and make the curriculum so wide that every boy will get a chance at something. Even the boy who can’t or won’t learn his alphabet can be praised and petted for something – handicrafts or gymnastics, moral leadership or deportment, citizenship or the care of guinea pigs, hobbies or musical appreciation. Anything he likes! Then no boy and no boy’s parents need feel inferior.

And education on those lines would be pleasing to democratic feelings. It will have repaired the inequalities of nature but it is quite another question if it will breed a democratic nation which can survive or even one whose survival is even desirable. The improbability that a nation thus educated could survive need not be labored. Obviously it can only escape destruction if its enemies are so obliging as to adopt the same system. A nation of dunces can be safe only in a world of dunces.


Oh yes. Did I forget to mention the author of this confrontational essay was a fellow you may well have heard of -- C.S. Lewis.

While America Apologizes, China Advances

Helle Dal, a senior fellow in public diplomacy studies at the Heritage Foundation, has a few provocative comments over at NRO's The Corner about how China is "making friends and influencing people" in the U.S. and far afield. While American diplomacy seems to stand for timidity, remorse and an irrational retreat from hegemony, China is feeling strong and aggressive.

And it's successfully selling this new image all around the world. Writes Dal,

This October is the tenth anniversary of President Clinton’s signing the agreement to give China permanent normal trade relations. Now, as the United States faces a potential double-dip recession, China continues to maintain strong economic growth. The Chinese believe they are winning — that Western capitalism and culture will ultimately fall short of their own model. Many Westerners implicitly believe this too and are convinced that the next decade will be China’s.

Today I have a new article
[here in World Affairs Journal] that delves into another way that China is beating the United States: public diplomacy. This fight is one that we are voluntarily losing.

The Chinese have invested heavily in making friends and influencing competitors. China has opened 60 cultural centers (called Confucius Institutes) at American universities. The U.S. has nothing comparable in China. China uses its version of the Peace Corps to influence developing countries such as Laos, Ethiopia, and Myanmar. Their diplomats stay in their posts far longer than the U.S. average, which is two years, and their students are studying abroad in ever increasing numbers. China is developing a widespread, highly sophisticated influence machine to demonstrate that Chinese state capitalism is the way of the future.


We may be dealing with our share of other difficulties, but we cannot ignore the aggressive game being play by our “permanently normal” trading partner.

Jim Wallis: Paid by George Soros and Friends to Sell Evangelicals Down the River

Liberal activist and pseudo-evangelical Jim Wallis is not only a representative of the worldliness and theological emptiness that has so effected the evangelical church in our time, he is dedicated to extending this apostasy further still.

I've warned readers of Wallis' heterodoxy in the past (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7) but here are a couple of recent examples that show the increasing willingness of evangelical leaders to aid Wallis in his unholy mission. The first is the break in precedent of Lifest, an annual Wisconsin event featuring music and speakers, in avoiding controversial figures. For despite Wallis' extremely liberal views and protests which even included some sponsors pulling out of the event, he was kept as one of the keynote speakers.

It is significant to me how often contemporary Christian music is the draw to bring large crowds of people together, crowds that are then addressed by these false teachers. But because music is the tale wagging the dog for modern evangelicals (rather than theological orthodoxy and commitment to the gospel), few churches or organizations dare to complain. I applaud Q90 FM for taking the stand they did even as I am saddened and appalled at the many sponsors who shrugged their shoulders and the many pastors who failed to warn their parishioners of participating in the event.

The second issue is the revelation that Wallis' publication Sojourners has received very large grants from far-left billionaire, George Soros. Records show that Sojourners (which couldn't survive if it had to depend on its readership alone) has been given grants involving hundreds of thousands of dollars from Soros, the same fellow who has given millions to abortion, atheism, same-sex marriage, and tyrannical government schemes.

Indeed, the magazine's fortunes have soared since radical libs saw how they could use the publication to undermine evangelicalism and thus dilute one of their primary obstacles to wholesale cultural renovation.

They pour in the money and Wallis pours out the heterodoxy.

We had always thought Jim Wallis peddled liberal religion simply because he was a misguided ideologue -- a person who, like so many who profess Christianity, never really stopped loving the world and yearning to be loved by it in return. It turns out he's also getting paid handsomely for the sell out.

Very, very sad.

The 92 Favorite Toys of Your Childhood

Joe Carter over at First Things took on a big job when he tried to list The 100 Greatest Children’s Toys. In fact, it was so big that he only came up with 92. I think you'll enjoy looking through the alphabetical list and seeing if it contains your favorites.

Among those in Carter's list that were around our home (the 5 Hartford kids were born in the span from 1946 to 1961) were Army Men, jump rope, Lincoln Logs, Mr. Potato Head, Play-Doh, Matchbox cars, roller skates, Slinky, teddy bears, Tinker Toys, and View Master.

What our family used that didn't make his list were:

* Balls. Sorry, Mr. Carter, but this was a serious omission. Rubber balls, plastic balls, beach balls, baseballs, basketballs, footballs, whiffle balls, Super Balls, even old golf balls -- these were by far my favorite toys from the earliest age.

* Balloons. These were a summer staple in our neighborhood. Why? Think water hose, hot days, and backyard frolics.

* Bikes. I can see why this might be disqualified from a toy list but, hey; he did list Big Wheels, wagons and roller skates.

* Electric football.

* Guns. Carter listed the Daisy BB gun which our folks never let us possess. (A wise decision, I think. All three boys had trouble enough surviving childhood.) But he didn't list air rifles which we did have and all those play pistols. We also had a plethora of squirt guns but since Carter does list the Super Soaker (alas, too expensive a water weapon to ever make it under our Christmas tree), I'll let that pass.

* Jacks

* Marbles

* Models (planes, cars, ships, monsters, Rat Fink)

But, like I said, Joe Carter's list is still quite impressive. And he's done us all a nice service not only for you to go on over and see if your favorites made the grade but to use as a conversation starter for family reunions this summer. Thanks, Joe.