The Final Closure

Skipping politics oh so briefly, I felt compelled to go with this story because it literally hits close to home.

In February of 2004, we packed up and left my wife's home town and place of my collegial career. I had a new job that I had been commuting to and from since December, and to cut back on the hour long drive, we moved closer to work and coincidentally, closer to my wife's future work. Usual story for folks just out of college.

Three months later, an attractive, young college student was abducted not far from our previous residence. It was a huge surprise. Sure, it is a college town, but in many regards, a sleepy college town compared to other universities, especially the more infamous red-headed step-sister college 50 miles south and on the wrong side of the tracks. Filthy beast it is.

Anyway, a kidnapping that took the community by surprise and for over five years, hung over the head of this town like an ever present haze. Collectively, we all knew she was dead. After all, she was a pious person, and not prone to such shenanigans of taking off and showing up months later with a new tatoo and grizzled boy friend while sharing wild tales of Vegas and cops. Those of you not in the know, I am speaking of Brooke Wilberger.

For years, here in my town, there was a billboard in the north end of town citing a "reward" for any information on her whereabouts. I hated looking at it, because again, I knew where she wasn't: alive and well. And when I worked for the state, I drove by it every day. Such a pretty girl, but such a loss too.

Now, I don't mean to say that ugly girls are not such a loss either. But this was a good girl, insofar as I've heard and read. And honestly, let's be honest here, those types of girls are a rarity in today's age.

And then, less than a week ago, it finally comes out: Joel Courtney confesses to posing as a FedEx delivery man, pitting himself between her and a wall, then coursing her by knife point into his green minivan. There, she was bound, and after getting himself high, getting hungry, and traveling out deep into the forest, kept her for 24 hours in which he raped, sodomized and eventually bludgeoned her head in because she "fought too much."

It is a terrible, but all too often, a repeated story these days.

I seem to imagine myself in the woods there too. In one vision, I am a hunter and thus, a hero thereafter because of unloading a full magazine into Mr. Courtney. But the pragmatic person in me says that it was May, and therefore, not hunting season unless I was a poacher and thus, not the hero, but a criminal thrust into a situation of fight or flee.

The other visual I have is one of mercy. I'm there, but in spirit, and she's already in the final grasps of life, and I just want to be there on the other side waiting for her to return, to ease the pain, to tell her it'll be okay, justice will be served, and everything will be made whole once again. I just didn't want her to die alone, in the middle of no where, after all that transpired. Least of all die with just the perpetrator standing nearby.

Now granted, I will not pretend to know the grand scheme of things, and maybe there were angels on hand to welcome her back, but for my sake, I do need a sense of closure. Which is what brings me to the crux of this post.

This whole story concluded because a certain coward, fearing for his own life, cut a deal with the Wilberger family and the District Attorney. In exchange for not seeking the death penalty, he would let them know where she was laid to rest (and that doesn't seem like the right words for this). The family, interested in having a final closure, coupled with a proper burial, agreed. Ergo, Mr. Coward will live out the rest of his days in New Mexico (rape charges there) and Oregon, with no chance of parole. But is that good enough... for me?

In many regards, I am old school notion: eye for an eye. Yeah, I've read the nifty left-leaning bumper stickers that purport; "An eye for an eye and the whole world is blind." But, that's missing the point and assuming that everyone is a willful law-breaking jerk. Let's break it down so we can get back to the story.

What many incompetent bumper stickering fools fail to realize is that 'an eye for an eye' is the first notable attempt at juris prudence for man. What that means is, a law of equivalency for the people. An eye for an eye means that you cannot over punish someone for a crime -- if they steal an apple, you cannot cut off their hand. That is too harsh a penalty for such a crime. If you steal an apple, then it is required of you to repay the debt to equal terms. So, willfully killing someone should mean that you are killed, unless suitable recompense can be met. But what could replace a life? Nothing in my book.

Looking at Joel Courtney, however, instead of having to feel remorse for his crimes, he gets to plea-bargian his way out, and not worry about much of anything for the rest of his life. But, we need to look at this another way. We're a third party looking in, and that's a shallow aspect. We'll skip Mr. Courtney's perspective -- I'm not psychologist so I could only assume his position. So, that leaves us with the Wilbergers.

Unfortunately, this does not seem too out of context for me to presume, but if my daughter was kidnapped and missing for over 5 years, and one day the DA calls and says, "He'll tell you where you can find the remains of your daughter if you agree to not seek the death penalty..." my response is ... I just don't know. The "justice is served" part of me says that I drop a litany of swear words and let him hang. But then, my daughter is out there somewhere, in a shallow, unmarked grave. No place to mourn her. And further, perhaps no true sense of closure, either.

I know there are lessons in forgiveness, but this country is too soft on crime already. And letting one more get off the hook of true justice just emboldens another to copy him.

I have friends who actively went out searching for Brooke, and no doubt if a similar situation arouse with my daughters, they'd all do it all over again. Brooke was one of our own, from a town in my state, abducted not far from my previous home -- a place I knew, no less! And so, I feel a bit of kinship and even responsibility on the matter. True, it was entirely out of my control, but the feeling is still there.

In my mostly vague attempts to be more empathetic, I need to come to a conclusion on this matter. Now, I figure my wife would want full closure, but I want full justice. The quick end to this argument is that my wife would win. That seems like a cheap way out of this debate, but it is the most truthful as well. But I'll add this; after the guilty confession, burial, and proper mourning, said criminal would be dead. Stabbed to death, in the shower, for however amount of cigarettes it would take to achieve such solutions. I can live with that.

The sad part is, I want some sort of epiphany in this. I don't want this death to have been in vain. Something has to be learned here! And yet, I can't figure it out. Why not? I know vengeance is suppose to be in God's hands, but let's look at his time frame: it sucks! It's like he's part of the government or something. "Uh, yeah, I'll have to get back to you on that..." I know, begging for a lightening bolt here. Meh, nothing new in that regard, no?

Maybe I've posted too soon on this issue, but I also felt compelled to say something. Anyway, perhaps my shower wish will come true. But until then, there is no end to this story for me.

***

Just some additional notes; 75% of criminals are repeat offenders and Courtney was one of them having already spent time in prison for attempting to rape his own sister. This tells me that jail is not an effective means of changing behavior. Maybe it's too easy in there these days.

Last May, I attended the Child Abuse Summit. It was awesome, information wise. Child porn has risen 1480%* in a decade. 30 years ago, when there was an abduction, local police and FBI would wait for a ransom note and go from there. Now, only 10% are for ransom, the rest of kidnappings are used for self-gratification. Clinically proven, there are no differences between your brain, and those of pedophiles or people with sexual fetishes. This means that it is a learned behavior, which may start as early as 3 years of age. They are not born with it ingrained into their heads.

So now you know. Be on the look-out and implant a GPS into your kid.

*You're going to have to take my word on this percentage -- I heard it from a presenter who works for Interpol on child trafficking. I tried to google for this statistic, but google pretty much shuts down when you type "child porn" into the search engine -- and I was just looking for statistics. Bet I just showed up on some government radar... whoops.

Change I could believe in

I appreciate the nice comments from a couple of you about spreading the, or rather, my word, out to more people. Well, this isn't a private blog so anyone that wishes to see my ranting can give it a look-see whenever they want. However, I already feel guilty when I fail to update this blog for the scant 4 of you that frequent here. Imagine how I'd feel if that doubled overnight? Yeah, a bit overwhelmed. So, feel free to tell anyone about this dusty place, but I don't have the time to put in real journalistic standards and as you know, there is a bit much opinion laced in every post.

So, what brings me here today? Same thing as you. Ha! Yeah, I guess we get bored often, eh?

Okay, moving on here...

I read a lot. Used to be books I read. I like books; tangible goods that I can carry around and just look smart because I am holding a book. I wish I had to wear glasses more often just to finish off that presumption.

But these days, I read a lot online. As most of you know, I spend a bit of time at conservative websites such as AmericanThinker, AIM.org, Drudgereport, wnd, and then other places such as CNN, Reuters, politico, factcheck and so on and so forth (I look for the meta-story within the "news"). And after reading so much over the course of the summer, I've come to the conclusion that I no longer care about political parties. That's it. I'm done. Sure, by default I am conservative and as such, align with the republicans because they espouse the closest ideals to the conservative agenda and are able to wield influence because of their power. According to wiki, I am actually a conservative libertarian. But that party will never make it off the ground, especially with the two parties choking anything that even dares to rear it's head towards power.

The problem I have with democrats is that about 40 years ago, they were high-jacked. It happened under the banner of "liberalism" which is now called progressivism. Both are lies. The real agenda is called socialism, communism, even fascism and pretends to be a method of social justice.

Hold on, before we move forward, we need to discuss government ideology before we get to my conclusion about political parties.

For the most part, people tend to agree that the political spectrum is a circle. Or maybe you have heard of the Nolan Chart? Kinda the same... meh, maybe. Anyway, on one end of the cycle you have freedom, and on the other is tyranny or often called its softer form, totalatarianism. Tyranny is utter control by the government. In the vapid sense, you can say anarchy proceeds freedom as anarchy would be completely free of any laws whatsoever. I remember talking in high school about how cool it would be to live in anarchy. Of course, had that happened then, I am sure I would have been subjugated by someone with more power and guns. Quickly. Thus, I have come to appreciate laws and law abiding citizenry as a manner of self preservation.

I said it was typically thought of as a circle because once the house of oppressive cards falls (fascism, communism), anarchy ensues and then, at least in the case of the US, a great nation is formed on the basis of conservative beliefs and values. It was liberating! It took liberal thinkers based on God-given conservative foundations to make it happen. But like I said, the liberals of old are not related to today's people of the same name.

Side note: some often state that socialism/communism is on the left whereas fascism is on the right. That doesn't really make sense, however. The spectrum is based on freedom, and fascism offers about as much freedom as communism. And both employ the ideology that the state knows best, or rather, that the state in its infinite wisdom is infallible.Ergo, in this topic, such things are on the same end of the spectrum.

So here we have today's liberals/progressives/socialist/closet communists all claiming to be Democrats when in fact, they are wolves in sheep's clothing. I've already shown in a previous post that Obama ran on the Socialist Democrat ticket ["New Party"] in Chicago for the state senate. And this past Sunday, Van Jones the "Green Czar", a communist, 9/11 truther (i.e., someone who believes the US government was behind the 9/11 attacks), resigned after a myriad of outings and blunders. Do you know who originally outed him? Trevor Loudon of New Zealand back in April! Then WND picked up the story and Glenn Beck ran with it over the summer. You would think the White House would know the history of birds they flock with, right? Oh yes, they do. And the White House didn't ask for his resignation either, which tells you a lot about the people they want to associate with. Interesting to note that the main stream media didn't mention a flippin' thing about it until Jones resigned Sunday morning. Then it was news...

So the democrats are not the good party they used to be.

As Obama would say, "on the other hand" we have the republicans. Used to be a good group of people. Had their morals, their financial position, and our trust. They emancipated the slaves and sponsored the Civil Rights Act (which Al Gore's father, a democrat, vehemently refused to pass as a Senator). But, in the last 20 years, something happened between "read my lips: no new taxes" and John McCain's liberal republican policies. They are called "RINO's" now, or, "Republican In Name Only" and there are a few of them in Congress, saying one thing and voting another. Sen. Collins, Snow, McCain, and former RINO now (D) Specter to list a few. It has come to a point where I cannot trust any of them at all regardless of the letter following their name, (R) or (D).

So this is where you come into play. Yeah, that's right, I need your help to get me into power. We'll start with the US and then the world. One of you needs to be called "pinky" just for nostalgia sake.

I used to think I would start a third political party and gain influence that way, but lately, I think I've come up with a better idea. I am going to abolish all political parties. Forever. Let's face it, they run on a ticket of being a democrat or republican, and this immediately conjures up beliefs in those parties; pro-abortion, anti-gun, fiscally responsible, national health care advocate, anti-cap-n-trade, immigration reform, etc. And then they get into office and we get screwed because they aren't exactly what we anticipated nor towing a party line.

Look at it this way, I just want candidates to say exactly what they believe in on every issue. No glossing over or ambiguity. Just honest to goodness truth from every one of them. And then we all go home, support the one we like, and then vote on it. That way there is no confusion on what we get. It's all on the table or s/he will lose votes. And if they lie about it, we'll all know.

And there's a bonus! By doing this, we abolish the electoral college! How about that!? We, the people, finally get to elect the president that we voted for, and not these silly redrawn voting districts that cater to voting blocks instead of the masses. It'll also remove the voting blocks for congressmen as well, because once there are no drawn districts, it'll be a crap-shoot for them on guessing where they are likely to get votes from since they'll have to be honest about their personal policies henceforth.

Seriously though, looking at the past few decades, a lot of politics has been self-service rhetoric that has undermined this country. Look at AIG, also known as "too big to fail." Yet Lehman Brothers was allowed to fail. So why did we pump $170 billion into one and not the other? Because Federal Pensions aren't carried by Lehman Brothers, but AIG does. And who knows the amount of suffering these poor politicians would endure if they had to go through what the rest of us already have. Same goes for healthcare. You think the politicians will be on the "public option" they are pushing for the rest of us? Think again. You're not special. Makes you wonder about it if they have no faith in being treated on that plan.

Obama says he's going to "fundamentally transform" this country. That tells me he plans to destroy the foundation this country was built upon -- life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. With Obamacare, there goes the 'life' aspect. With cap-n-trade, immigration reform, hate laws, etc. takes out 'liberty' and the 'pursuit of happiness' could be all that and more, such as higher taxation or lower standards of living.

It isn't too much of a shock to us, after all, we've been in this pot of heated frogs for a while, but will we jump when it starts to boil? There should have been something preventing this from happening all along, which is why I propose the abolishment of the parties now. Too many have hid under a cloak without scrutiny. They served their purpose back in the day, but they have grown fat and useless, spineless, and worse, corrupted by the very enemy we helped defeat 20 years ago. Correlation? Why not...

Granted, there are no promises with my plan, and parties are bound to evolve once again. Still, an honest fresh start would be a welcomed event. I could make parties illegal...

Vote for me! I offer hope and cha-- erm, challenges! All I want is more truthiness, followed by cow bell!