At Christmas, Thank God you're an American

My dad was born two years into the 20th century. One day, late in his life, before his death in the 1980s, dad told me he lived in mankind’s best times.

He said when he was born, the horse was the common mode of transportation, and that within a few years of his birth, the automobile became the universal mode of transportation in America.

Oil lamps were replaced by electricity. The telegraph and telephone provided instant communication. Flight grew from nothing to a great industry. Radio and television were invented and soon became common to every American home.

Wood heating changed to coal, then to oil and then to natural gas and nuclear energy. Central heating replaced fireplaces and stoves.

Supermarkets replaced small stores. Air conditioning became an essential in every home. And America put men on the moon.


As I have reread the histories of Jamestown, the Plymouth colony, and the French at Quebec, I marvel at how far we in America have come.

When Cartier made his second voyage to the St. Lawrence River (1534), he and his men had none of the things that Americans had when my dad was born.

That winter at Quebec, when the snow hit and the river froze, the French were trapped in their huts. Scurvy broke out. Twenty-five men died, and only three or four remained healthy enough to care for the dying.

An Indian saved those on death’s door with a “tea” (from the Aborvitae?) that provided the vitamin needed to ward off the scurvy. There were no stores, doctors, or efficacious medicines. What little food they could find came from the few animals hunted and from the river. Shelters were barely heated.


Dad didn’t live to see the computer come into common use. There were no cable networks. No email. No cellphones. You couldn’t go on FaceTime and see your daughter as you talked. You couldn’t download an app and watch virtually every Notre Dame sporting event from your phone or computer. He never knew of the internet, which today we take for granted.

The advanced batteries that we now have to power our cars hadn’t been invented in his time. The treatments for cancer and other illness that we take for granted today, didn’t exist.


There is a simple truth involved in all of this. There’s something wonderful we should be thankful for this Christmas.

We live in America. Whether we are Bill Gates’ rich, or on welfare, we still live in the greatest country in the world.

People from all over the globe opt to come here; not to Russia, China, France, Venezuela, or Cuba. Not even Sweden.

Here you can practice the religion of your choice without government interference. You can travel from Florida to Washington, from Maine to Arizona, anytime you want without a passport or government permission.

If you are arrested, you get all the rights set out in our Bill of Rights. You are presumed innocent, the government must prove your guilt to a jury of your fellow citizens (not other government officials) beyond a reasonable doubt.

If you hate the president, you can call him all sorts of vile names without fear of being imprisoned or sent to indoctrination or re-education camps. (Some 800,000 Muslims in China are presently in indoctrination/re-education camps.)

There is no nation in the world where you could enjoy greater freedom of religion, speech, association, and press.

You are free to work and grow rich. If not, there’s the social safety net. Think about it. Today, the people on welfare in America live better than virtually anybody did before the beginning of the 20th century — including kings!


Kings might have had gold, and lived in palaces. But did 19th century kings have the range of foods anybody can find in an American supermarket? The medicines? The doctors? The sanitation systems? Central heating? Air conditioning? Cell phones? TVs? Computers? Internet? Cars? Trains? Airplanes?

Were their subjects free to denounce the king on the street corner or in print? Free to practice the religion of their choice? Our country is not perfect. But it’s the best so far.


This Christmas, thank your God that you’re an American.

Posted: QCOline.com   December 21, 2018
Copyright 2018, John Donald O'Shea

Time for North Korea to Vote itself out of Existence

North Korea came into existence in 1945 at the end of WWII. The Japanese had occupied Korea during the war. Upon Japan’s defeat, Korea was divided into U.S. and U.S.S.R. zones of occupation along the 38th parallel.

It has been a communist state for 73 years. Europe, which was also divided into Western and Soviet zones of occupation with the collapse of the United Soviet Socialist Republics in 1990-1991, has ceased to be divided.

So, why does North Korea continue to exist? Why, if socialism works, does North Korea remain an economic failure?

North Korea has operated under its own ideology since 1955 — “Juche.” It emphasize the centeredness of North Korea. It embodies the so-called “wisdom” of Kim Il-sung.

North Korean leadership claims it provides “a complete answer to any questions that arises in the struggle for national liberation.” It has three core principles: economic self-sufficiency, military self-reliance and an independent foreign policy.

It was originally described in North Korean propaganda as a “creative application” of Marxist-Leninism, but more recently, it has been re-described as “the only scientific thought ... and most effective revolutionary theoretical structure that leads to the future of communist society.”

In the 1980s, references to Juche eventually replaced Marxism–Leninism references. The 2009 North Korean Constitution dropped all references to communism and focused instead on the regime’s military-first policy. It also confirmed the position of Kim Jong-il. Nevertheless, today, the North Korean constitution still retains references to socialism. Today Juche provides the justification for North Korea’s spartan economy, poverty and discipline demanded by its totalitarian government.

The only reason I can see for North Korea continuing to exist is to provide Kim Jong-un, his relatives and his henchmen, with positions of power and wealth. If it’s no benefit the starving populace; there is a much easier and quicker way to get the job done. But that would involve the North Korean leadership giving up its privileged positions of wealth and power. It would involve uniting with South Korea.

The GDP of South Korea is currently estimated at 36.7 times that of North Korea. In 2013, the North Korean GDP was estimated at $33 billion. The South Korea GDP at $1.19 trillion. The per capita South Korean GDP was estimated at $33,200, but only $1,800 in the North (as per CIA World Factbook.)

South Korea’s trade volume in 2013 was $1.07 trillion. North Korea’s was $7.3 billion. North Korea runs a huge trade deficit. The opposite is true of the South. South Korean brands are known worldwide. They include Samsung, Hyundai and Kia.

North Korea does not produce enough food to feed its population. Chronic food shortages have resulted in undernourishment among the North Korean people. As a result, North Koreans tend to be smaller than South Koreans. North Korean life expectancy (69.2 years) is lower than South Korea’s (79.3 years). The infant mortality rate in South Korea is 4.08 per 1,000 live births; in North Korea it’s 26.21 per 1000 (2012 figures).

Contrary to the rules in South Korea, North Korea prohibits its citizens from freely traveling and immigrating abroad, and from using the internet. According to the 2014 Press Freedom Index, South Korea ranks 57th; North Korea, 179th.


The bottom line is this: If the North Korean leaders gave a damn about their people, the would vote North Korea and its leadership out of existence, and vote to unite with the South. Starving people can’t eat ICBMs.


The U.S.S.R. came into existence in 1922 and dissolved on Dec. 26, 1991. Its promises of a socialist utopia failed miserably. When it did, Eastern Europe, which had been dragged into communist socialism, repudiated its great “gift” from the U.S.S.R.

North Korea has existed four years longer than the U.S.S.R., and has produced even worse results. The regime’s legacy is totalitarianism and malnutrition. How much more suffering is the leadership willing to force upon its own people?

The time has come for North Korea to follow the lead of the Soviets and dissolve itself. 

And for all who want the U.S. to become a socialist utopia, take a trip to North Korea — if you can get in — and live there a while. Of course, you may not be able to get back out!

Then again, it might be safer to take a shorter educational trip to Venezuela.

Posted: QCOline.com   December 13, 2018
Copyright 2018, John Donald O'Shea

Where's Coverage, Outrage over Muslim Terrorist Attacks?

Attacks by Muslim militants around the world have become so commonplace that scant mention of them is made in our local papers.

Indeed, only passing reference is made of them even on CNN, Fox, NBC, etc. Obviously, all Muslims are not terrorists. But it is equally obvious that some are.

Here are two recent examples of barbaric terrorist attacks. Were you aware of either of them?

The first was reported by Crux, a Catholic organ, on Nov. 24, as follows: “48 people died during an attack on a Catholic cathedral in the Central African Republic last weekend. The death toll from the Nov. 17 attack on Alindao Cathedral, had originally been put at 37, which included two priests.

“The bishops in the Central African Republic ... have placed the blame for the attacks on militants from the ... UPC — former members of the Seleka, a Muslim militia that briefly took over the country in 2013. Christians make up about 80 percent of the population of the Central African Republic; Muslims about 15 percent.”


The second, credited to the Washington Post, reports:

“Afghanistan reeled from an attack [in Kabul] on the nation’s highest religious body. The assault on a gathering of Sunni Muslim scholars and clerics Tuesday killed 55 people and wounded 94 .... More than 20 of the wounded were reported to be in critical condition.

“Hundreds of delegates from the Afghan Ulema Council and their followers were commemorating the birth anniversary of the prophet Muhammad when a suicide bomber, who had infiltrated the assembly, detonated a vest packed with high explosives, shattering an opening recitation of Koranic verses.”


So is the threat of terrorism from radical Islam real? Or is it just imagined? And if real, why is it largely ignored by the news media?

In the wake of two recent incidents of terror in Australia, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison has made clear he believes the threat to be real.

On Nov. 9, an attack occurred in Melbourne. It was perpetrated by a Somali-born Australian immigrant. Hassan Khalif Shire Ali terrorized Bourke Street, setting his car on fire, stabbing three bystanders, and stabbing to death a well-loved restaurant owner.

Speaking after the incident, Morrison dismissed mental health explanations as an excuse for the deadly actions. “He was a terrorist. He was a radical extremist terrorist who took a knife to another Australian, because he [Shire Ali] had been radicalized in this country.”

In the hope of preventing other such incidents, the PM called for a roundtable discussion with Muslim leaders to discuss what the Muslim community could do to help the Australian authorities prevent further attacks.

The Australian grand mufti responded by denouncing the PM for inferring “that the [Muslim] community is collectively culpable for the criminal actions of individuals.” He complained that the PM’s remarks expressed “the very sentiments that the Muslim community considers to be invalid and divisive.”

The Australian PM shot back, “I won’t cop the excuses. For those who want to stick their head in the sand, and for those who want to make excuses for those who stick their head in the sand, you are not making Australia safer. You are giving people an excuse to look the other way and not deal with things right in front of you.

“If there are people in ... an Islamic community, that are bringing in hateful, violent, extremist ideologies into your community, you’ve got to call it out.”


Some 10 days later, a second attack in Australia was foiled. Three Australian citizens, inspired by the Islamic State, were charged with planning a mass-casualty attack in Melbourne. All three earlier this year had had their passports canceled on suspicion that they intended to fight with extremists overseas.

According to Victoria Police Chief Commissioner Graham Ashton, “Whilst a specific location was not finalized, there was a view toward a crowded place,” where they could kill more victims.


So, who is right? The prime minister or the grand mufti? Obviously, all Muslims are not terrorists. But clearly, some are.

So, is the prime minister overreacting? Do terrorist attacks by radicalized Muslims remain a bona fide threat? If worshipers are being murdered in a cathedral, and scholars while at prayer, where is the outrage?


Where is the wall-to-wall coverage given to the murder of the Turkish journalist Jamal Khashoggi?


Posted: QCOline.com   December 6, 2018
Copyright 2018, John Donald O'Shea