In Greek mythology, Icarus was a typical kid, the kid who is full of spit and vinegar, an indelicate way of saying full of himself, invincible, and cocky. 

Exiled to Crete with Daedalus, his father, the skilled artist Daedalus fashioned a set of wings for himself and his son so that they could fly away home.  Daedalus firmly cautioned Icarus not to fly too high or get too close to the sun because the handy dandy wings he had created had a manufacturer’s defect:  They were made of wax and would melt. 

Sure enough, young Icarus felt exhilarated with his ability to fly and soared higher and higher, and closer and closer to the blazing sun, ignoring Daedalus’ warning until, you guessed it, his wax wings began to melt.  He began to flap his arms frantically to no avail and ultimately plunged to his death in what is now aptly called the Icarian Sea.

Those ancient Greeks were an imaginative people;  some were also very wise people.  The story of Icarus was meant to be an admonition to all to be careful of getting carried away with yourself, to be mindful of humility and of your humanity, and to watch out for waxen wings.

The Bible includes a comparable caution.  Proverbs 16: 18 warns that, “Pride goeth before a fall,” also translated as, “Pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty sprit before a fall.”  In contemporary English we might just say, “Watch your butt if your head gets too big.”

Should the Secret Service or FBI read this, I would certainly not want it interpreted as a threat against anyone, anymore than the Icarus tale or the Biblical words were meant as a threat against any individual.  They were simply intended as words to live by, as is this.

Obviously, however, I do have someone in mind who fits the Icarus profile.  We now have a candidate

Free speech and the protections of the First Amendment be damned, there are certain topics in today’s America which must be broached gingerly, if at all.  One of them is the topic of homosexuality

Of course, infringements on constitutional rights can only be perpetrated by government but inhibiting free speech is rapidly becoming a trend in many areas of society, such as the mass media and even in public conversation.  Thus the famous references to gays in Seinfeld, all of which were immediately followed by, “Not that there’s anything wrong with that,” as if any such reference would be subject to misinterpretation so had to be followed by a disclaimer lest it be seen as homophobic.

This trend has been going on for a few generations now, ever since the homosexual movement exited the closet with the New York City Stonewall riots in 1969.  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_riots) 

This is not to suggest that there is no longer a stigma attached to a gay lifestyle.  If that were the case, gays wouldn’t still be reluctant to “out” themselves and, outside some limited areas, they are reluctant, and with good reason.  Despite articles such as “How America Went Gay,” http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/socarides.html, the truth is that America hasn’t “gone gay,” but America is well on its way to accepting homosexuals as simply a variant of normal.

The ramifications of that acceptance for our nation and its people will be the subject of this occasional series and I know full well it will stir up antipathy in the gay community as well as charges that I am homophobic and/or a closet homosexual, which seem to be the preferred modus operandi of that group.

Nevertheless, I’m willing to suffer their slings and arrows.  (Actually, they’re more amusing than hurtful.)   And I’m willing to subject myself to their attacks for one principal reason:  As Dr. Sacarides, an admitted homosexual, says at the end of the article cited above,  “When homosexuality takes on all the aspects of a political movement, it, too, becomes a war, the kind of war in which the first casualty is truth, and the spoils turn out to be our own children. An exaggeration? Well, what are we to think when militant homosexuals seek to lower the age of consensual sexual intercourse between homosexual men and young boys to the age of 14 (as they did in Hawaii in 1993) or 16 (as they tried to do in England in 1994)? In the Washington March for Gay Pride in 1993, they chanted, “We’re here. We’re qu**r. [Townhall will not permit the Q-word] And we’re coming after your children.”

If nothing else, Sacarides is an honest homosexual because they are coming after your children.  That fact alone is reason enough to suffer those slings and arrows.

More to follow…

Today is 3-For-One-Day as we combine 3 Obama articles, each of which in its own way exposes the Obama cult.

For an excellent bit of irreverent satire on the Obamessiah from the U.K., this piece is not to be missed:  http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/gerard_baker/article4392846.ece.  (Ecce homo?)

Nor is this scathing expose’ on media bias which appeared in Investor’s Business Daily, http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=301702713742569.  (Guess which political party benefits most when lib “journalists” open their own wallets instead of just favoring candidates who want to pick yours.) 

Nor this item which examines the brouhaha between the Pentagon and the Obamanistas:   http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0708/DoD_spokesman_says_Obama_camp_was_reminded_of_political_rules.html(We report and you decide which is telling the truth.  Hint:  It can’t be both since the stories are diametrically opposed.  Did career officers at the Department of Defense deny Obama the right to visit the troops, knowing their careers could be jeopardized should he be elected president?  Or were the Obamanians so p*ssed that they couldn’t milk the visit as a photo op when the DOD chose to follow the rules that they said, Screw the troops?) 

Idealism is an admirable quality. 

The reality is, despite the idealistic dreams of the founder of the modern Olympiad and the current members of the IOC, the Games have never approached the “equality of sports which are international and democratic” nor have they ever come close to their goal of contributing “to building a peaceful and better world.”  Would that it were so, but it isn’t so.

In fact, for many decades now, the Olympics have been a venue for nationalistic propaganda, racism, boycotts, drug use, terrorism, and just downright cheating. 

This site lists the “worsts,”  including Jesse Owens infuriating Hitler in Berlin in 1936, Black Panthers infuriating America with their insulting salute in 1968, the slaughter of Israeli athletes in 1972, nations trading boycotts in 2000 and 2004, as well as various fixes, phony judges and judging, and trailer trash Tonya Harding’s knee-capping Nancy Kerrigan in 1994:  http://www.listafterlist.com/tabid/57/listid/12304/Sports++Recreation/Top+10+Olympic+Scandals+and+Controversies.aspx

But those only represent the tip of the Olympic Scandal Iceberg.  As the passengers on the Titanic discovered, the most obvious isn’t always the worst.  The Olympics’ iceberg is wide and deep and treacherous.

Should we end what has become a biennial festival?  Of course not.  What we should end is the charade that it’s fair and unbiased and that it fosters “a peaceful and better world.” 

(For those who enjoy quizzes, this one on Olympic scandals, try http://quizzes.familyeducation.com/olympic-games/law/55595.html)

Next:  CHINA–Let The Games Begin, But Why There?