Colin Powell endorses Obama, but... why?

It's pretty late in the game for an endorsement of Obama to make a difference, isn't it?

Sure, the endorser matters, and depending on the type of "expert" opinion he/she gives regular folks like you and I could be swayed. After all, Joe the plumber is causing a big change in the independent vote, which now swings toward John McCain. Joe's grace under pressure and unpretentious, no-nonsense (and well-informed) attitude are inspiring to many voters who feel intimidated- or just annoyed- by the elitist, we-know-better-than-you personas of the Democrats and their accompanying media pundits.

And on the liberally-leaning conservative side of the voting population, Powell is a champion. He quibbled with Bush (albeit, privately) about whether or not to engage in combat in Iraq, pushed forward the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" legislation which allowed gay men and women to join the military without revealing their sexual agenda, and publicly declared that Saddam Hussein was actively producing wmds. His first White House appointment was as National Security Advisor to President Reagan, and he's a highly decorated Vietnam veteran too.

He's shown himself to be cautioned and thoughtful; even when it's turned out to look like foot-dragging he's stuck to his ground. All in all he's a pretty respectable advisor and military man.
But does the demographic he appeals to large enough to tip the voting scale toward a "President Obama?"

Powell's reasons for supporting Obama are also a little sketchy. It's not about race, Powell says. Ok, right. But his other reasons for supporting Obama are vague and lacking in power. We're supposed to believe that: "Powell's endorsement may also sway some voters who were hesitant to vote for Obama because they felt he was not ready to be the nation's commander in chief, said Bill Schneider, a CNN senior political analyst." (CNN.com) Ok, but why exactly?

"It was extremely reassuring for this experienced military leader, a general, someone who is chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who was secretary of state..." (Keep in mind at this point Schneider is still talking about Powell, not Obama!)

"...to endorse Barack Obama and say, 'His world experience, his commitment and knowledge of national security are fine. You can vote for him without those kinds of reservations,' " Schneider said."

Fine? Obama's "world experience" and "knowledge of national security" are just fine? Sorry, but I want a President whose knowledge and experience are above average, his policies innovative and reflective of the people, not of his own ideology alone. I don't want fine, I want excellent.

Powell also cites that, "over the last seven weeks, the approach of the Republican Party and Mr. McCain has become narrower and narrower." But shouldn't McCain's focus become narrower as he sets sights on the most important issues for the American people, so that when he is in office he knows where to begin? I don't want my newly-elected President to start thinking about his major moves after he unpacks the boxes!

Finally, in regard to the economic bailout situation, "Powell said he found McCain 'a little unsure as how to deal with the economic problems that we were having, and almost every day, there was a different approach to the problem' (CNN.com). Again, if McCain was trying to come up with several solutions and some of them didn't work, so be it. At least he was trying! There has been no better moment than, at the recent "roasting" of Obama, McCain joked sarcastically that Obama would be ready for all drastic economic changes, even a rapid rebound. If that were to happen, McCain guffawed, Obama would halt all campaigning and rush to D.C. to stop it.

So, is Powell's endorsement the "warm glass of milk" that Schneider thinks it is to voters yet undecided? It does bear a resemblance: it's tepid and uncontroversial, bland and goes down easy. Yet it has no substance. In comparison, McCain as of late looks like a shot of whiskey.

John Stossel's "Politically Incorrect Guide to Politics"

I try not to kvell about news.

After all, with the "dinosaur media" (t.v.) consistently feeling out their unchecked power in new and frightening ways (like Diane Sawyer only sticking up for Obama, for example), it's hard to even take what they're saying seriously. When you suspect them of stacking the deck so viciously, why even play the game?

Having said that, I've been a fan of 20/20 since I was about twelve. Back then Barbara Walters was my gal, and I could make a strong argument that her presence on Friday night t.v. inspired me to personal journaling, college journalism and, ultimately, this blog. But she's since gone awol, indiscreetly pandering to the liberals in a most disturbing way. I used to look up to her, for goodness sake; now she's on "The View!" Several other tried-and-true anchors have also turned left recently, which leaves wide open space in the weekly news genre.

Enter John Stossel.

Though I don't always agree with him, he has proven himself to be the most objective journalist on the scene nowadays. He's put together two great specials in the past year, one on the stupidity of our students (pre-college) and his "Politically Incorrect Guide to Politics."

In the latter, Stossel takes a stance against the broad scope of government, citing several ways in which more bureaucracy has been equal to less progress in the actual arenas it's trying to control, including the saving the family farm, regulating campaign spending and rebuilding of homes after natural disasters like Hurricane Katrina. His interviews with economists and politicians are revealing of their agendas in surprising ways.

These topics may sound boring, but trust me and watch the videos. For me they are a welcome break from the relentless individualistic campaigning of the two presidential candidates, while simultaneously talking about the candidates and how government works (and doesn't) in a broader sense. Eye-opening!

I've put them all here so you don't have to search on You Tube.

Because U.S. high schools need another way to promote sexual behavior...

Chicago may get 'gay-friendly' high school

McDonald's agrees not to promote 'gay' agenda

I referenced this a couple days ago (see: "Folsom Street Blues") in regard to companies that donate to the gay agenda. By way of the Americans for Truth website, I found out McDonald's had donated $20,000 to the National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce. The American Family Association quickly promoted a boycott of the fast food chain.

The AFA has now called their efforts a success since the McDonald's executive who had been serving on the NGLCC board decided to step down from his position and take a job for McDonald's Canada. McDonald's also stated that the executive liason position to the NGLCC would not be filled by anyone in the future.

"McDonald's stated that the company would remain neutral in the culture war surrounding homosexual marriage," the AFA said.

So... your only conflict of conscience now is how bad that food is for you! But their fries are good...

You can find the full story on World Net Daily here.

Firey Friday!

Ah, who am I kidding? I'm always on fire about something.

Today it's that I was asked to stay on at my job for another 30 days, working a normal M-F, 8-5 workday! This news comes after finding out only yesterday our CAT (catastrophe) unit is being shut down and disseminated, thus eliminating my temp position.

So how psyched am I? Very! Don't get me wrong; my job finder has been good about setting me up with things back-to-back, but getting a direct request is waaay better (sorta makes me look better, too).

Giving credit where it is due: Thank God for another job. He is continuing to bring these to me even though I am who I am, and don't deserve any of it. Praise God for His being so good, and not just, and loving toward me (and you)!



ps. Thanks everyone for the bday well wishes!

ACORN voter registrars say, "We don't know if a card is fictitious"

A national voter-registration group admitted to Cuyahoga County election officials Tuesday that it cannot eliminate fraud from its operation.

The group blamed inefficiency and lack of resources for problems such as being unable to spot duplicate voter-registration cards or cards that may have been filled out by workers to make quotas.

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, has turned in at least 65,000 cards to the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections in the last year. The board has investigated potentially fraudulent cards since August.

The group has faced similar inquiries in other large Ohio counties. And Nevada state authorities recently raided ACORN's Las Vegas headquarters searching for evidence of fraud, according to the Associated Press.

Local representatives of the organization told Cuyahoga board members that they don't have the resources to identify fraudulent cards turned in by paid canvassers who are told to register low- and moderate-income voters.

Cuyahoga election workers flagged about 50 names on suspicious cards. The cards were to register the same names, raising the possibility that canvassers shared information when trying to make quotas.

"This is not something you can catch with your internal controls, apparently," said board member Sandy McNair at the meeting.

"Not perfectly, no," replied Mari Engelhardt, ACORN political director for Ohio.
Once stacks of registration cards are returned to ACORN offices, workers verify information by calling the phone number provided on the card, the board was told. If information is missing or ACORN identifies a suspicious card, it is given to the Board of Elections with a notice that it could be problematic.

ACORN workers who double-check cards can't be expected to remember names and addresses previously verified, said Teresa James, an attorney for Project Vote representing ACORN.

Engelhardt said supervisors sometimes fail to prevent different canvassers from attempting to register the same person.

"We do not have the resources to know if a particular card is fictitious," James said.
Voter-registration organizations cannot, by law, withhold registration cards from election boards. The groups are obligated to report potential errors, a spokesman for Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner told The Plain Dealer.

Kris Harsh, ACORN's head Cleveland organizer, blamed the elections board for not scrutinizing ACORN's suspicious cards. He said the group can't be expected to catch everything.

"None of us have ever achieved perfection," Harsh said.

The elections board will continue its inquiry Monday, when it expects testimony from three people it will subpoena after a review of the ACORN investigation. The names appeared on multiple registration cards submitted by ACORN and other organizations.

Posted by Joe Guillen/Plain Dealer Reporter (cleveland.com/blog) October 07, 2008

*Emphasis mine

Less Money, More Problems

Original article may be found here on National Review

Mortgages, Fannie, Freddie, "predatory lending," CSA, Obama, ACORN and Clinton: what do all these things have in common? They're all components of an economic mystery that recently surfaced and I, for one, am disastrously confused by.

Fortunately for me there is National Review, full of intelligent and forthright journalists who fill in all the gaps for me.

And fortunately for you, you've got me to read and report back to you. Ain't life grand?

Stanley Kurtz wrote an excellent article today about the whole loan debachle. Covering the history of these "militants unafraid to confront the powers that be" (author Heidi Swarts) from 1977 to 2008, this informative piece will bring you up-to-speed on the financial tumult, who's involved, and how it all turns out to be a good ol' Democratic conspiracy (they set 'em up, knock 'em down, then blame it on someone else!).
For anyone whose head is spinning from the Stock Market stats and the confusing buying-lending speak of the pundits, this one's for you. Please note the systematic accomplishment of ACORN's strategy (paraphrased from article):

1. [Use] provisions of a 1977 law called the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) to delay and halt the efforts of banks to merge or expand until they had agreed to lower their credit standards.

2. Pressure local banks into offering poor or minority applicants a 5-percent down-payment rate, instead of the normal 10-20 percent (leaving all the responsibility of these mortgages to the local banks, because Fannie and Freddie would, at that rate, refuse to buy them).

3. Accuse Fannie and Freddie of loan bias, thus coercing them into relaxing credit standards on the loans they would buy, so they are politically-moved into buying them.

"Housing activists have been pushing hard to improve housing for the poor by extracting greater financial support from the country’s two highly profitable secondary mortgage-market companies. Thanks to the help of sympathetic lawmakers, it appeared...that they may succeed."
Chicago Tribune, 1991

4. Celebrate the victory of formerly-bankrupt, poor credit historied peoples being able to mortgage a home. (Um... hooray?)

Here's the excerpt:

At first, ACORN’s anti-bank actions were relatively few in number. However, under a provision of the 1989 savings and loan bailout pushed by liberal Democratic legislators, like Massachusetts Congressman Joseph P. Kennedy, lenders were required to compile public records of mortgage applicants by race, gender, and income. Although the statistics produced by these studies were presented in highly misleading ways, groups like ACORN were able to use them to embarrass banks into lowering credit standards.

At the same time, a wave of banking mergers in the early 1990's provided an opening for ACORN to use CRA to force lending changes. Any merger could be blocked under CRA, and once ACORN began systematically filing protests over minority lending, a formerly toothless set of regulations began to bite.
Planting the Seeds of Disaster, Stanley Kurtz

Full article may be found here on National Review Online

Folsom Street Blues

*** warning * graphic text and innuendo follows***


Once again the Folsom Street spectacle (I refuse to call it a "fair;" fairs don't have totally naked men walking around pleasuring each other) of sadomasochism has made its way through the winding streets of San Fran-sicko, California. For those of you unschooled in the ways of this parade of debauchery... God bless it! You've not been exposed to this filth masquerading as "free love." Unfortunately, after reading this, you'll get the idea and be appalled. D'oh!

This year I'm not going to honor it by writing anything grand, or even scathing. I'm not writing more than 300 words about it. That said, I want to refer you to a couple points:

--Miller co-sponsored the event this year. I hope knowing this will lead you to modify future alcohol purchases.

--Americans for Truth is an organization committed to exposing the gay agenda (and the corporate support and furthering of it) in the broader sense. The link provided here will take you to their "corporate promotion" page, which highlights who's who among gay supporters. You will be SHOCKED at who is donating to PFLAG (Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays) and the HRC (Human Rights Commission).

In effigy of the Folsom business I have changed my homepage and search engine to Altavista, instead of using Google (they donate oodles of money to support gay "rights"). I encourage you to reconsider your buying patterns after you read what Americans for Truth have put together on the topic.

An alarming return! A.K.A. not exactly new, but...

I speak not of myself here, recovering from the world of the unemployed and now sitting comfortable at State Farm insurance.

Nor do I reference this post, and my return to the blogosphere after a long first week of aforementioned j-o-business.

And NO, it has NOTHING to do with politics (breathe a sigh of relief, at least for now).

No, I have come back to alert you all of a most shocking return to the world of pop music! Not a place I usually visit, and in fact wasn't even intending to when I flipped open YouTube tonight. But there they were, a promoted video: the flipping New Kids on the Block!

Many of you will scoff (especially those of you who grew up in a cool place like Grand Rapids, who lived and breathed rap and r&b before I even knew who New Edition was), but sadly this is one of the boy groups we favored out in lake country, good ol' Minnesnowta.

Yep, my sister Lea's first concert was NKOTB, on the fourth of July when I was nine years old. I was so jealous but I would never tell her that, not even to this day. Declaring the group stupid and her devotion to them a flash in the pan, I had to listen to them in secret behind my sister's back. I scoffed at her "Donnie's Girl" homemade t-shirt and practiced my early dance moves to Hangin' Tough playing oh-so softly on the boombox in our basement.

So, in honor of this group who has obviously soured (their new single is called "Single" for crying out loud), and to continue my quest to let you all in on my little secret childhood (I am in no way cool, never have been, never will be, and let this post be a lesson to it!)... here's a look back on one of their better ones, "Please Don't Go, Girl" from 1989.

For fun, count how many times they clench their fists in effigy. I think I got up to 37.

Biden, Obama helped keep 'Bridge to Nowhere' alive

By Drew Griffin and Kathleen Johnston
CNN Special Investigations Unit


DEWEY BEACH, Delaware (CNN) -- Although Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden routinely mocks his Republican counterpart, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, for her onetime support of the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere," Biden and his running mate voted to keep the project alive twice.

Both Biden and Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama voted to kill a Senate amendment that would have diverted federal funding for the bridge to repair a Louisiana span badly damaged by Hurricane Katrina, Senate records show.

And both voted for the final transportation bill that included the $223 million earmark for the Alaska project.

An amendment offered by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Oklahoma, would have stripped the money appropriated to connect the Alaskan coastal city of Ketchikan to its airport on sparsely populated Gravina Island and diverted the money to Louisiana.

But Biden andObama and 80 of their colleagues rejected the measure, an amendment to a massive 2005 transportation bill that funded thousands of projects across the country. Watch how Biden has blasted Palin »

"That is probably the most disturbing element of this and the campaigning on the Bridge to Nowhere," said Bill Allison of the Sunlight Foundation, a taxpayer watchdog group. "Because, yes, they had a chance to vote specifically against the Bridge to Nowhere in Alaska to redirect the money to people, to bridges and infrastructure damaged by Hurricane Katrina going in to New Orleans, and they chose not to."

The final version passed the Senate 93-1. Republican presidential candidate John McCain, who has made his opposition to congressional "pork-barrel" spending a cornerstone of his campaign, did not vote on either the Coburn amendment or the final bill.

Palin, whom McCain chose as his running mate in August, has regaled crowds at the Republican convention and on the campaign trail with her declaration of "Thanks, but no thanks" for the bridge. But her conversion came after she became Alaska's governor in 2006 and after the bridge became a national symbol of congressional waste.

The record shows that she supported the bridge as a gubernatorial candidate, and Democrats have seized on the flip-flop, perhaps no one with as much relish as Biden.

"I got also a bridge I got to sell you here, and guess what, it's in Alaska, and it goes nowhere," Biden mocked Palin on the campaign trail last week in Maumee, Ohio. And in Canton, Ohio, he tied it to McCain.

"If you look at it John McCain's answers for the economy, and we're in such desperate shape, is the ultimate bridge to nowhere. It's nowhere," Biden said. "It takes you nowhere."

But while the applause line appealed to the Democratic faithful, it could come back to bite the Delaware senator.

This year, Delaware has requested 116 congressional earmarks through Biden, its longtime senator, at a cost to taxpayers of $342 million. In an appearance on CNN's "American Morning" with anchor John Roberts, Biden said that he had been open about those requests and that they all can be justified.

"Everyone has seen them, and we have no Lawrence Welk Museums and have no bridges to nowhere in Delaware. It's all straight up," Biden said.

Among his requests: $1 million for renovation of an opera house in Wilmington, another million for the construction of a children's museum and thousands of dollars for a water park renovation in Lewes.

"I think opera patrons generally can afford to -- you can raise money for an opera house; you can refurbish things a lot of different ways," Allison said.

"To have federal taxpaying dollars -- which is coming from people all over the country; low-income, middle-income people, as well as the wealthy -- to go to pay for the renovation of something that is really a luxury for Wilmington ... There are far more vital projects that anyone could think of that needs money. You got health care. You got education. You got all other types of things. Instead, we are redirecting money to refurbish an opera house in Wilmington or to build a children's museum."

And Biden's request includes a bridge that even the head of the Rehoboth Beach-Dewey Beach Chamber of Commerce says is not crucial at this juncture.

The Indian River Inlet Bridge is a vital link between two popular beachfront towns: Dewey and Bethany. Without it, the estimated 30,000 summer visitors would have to travel an additional 35 minutes to get to the towns.

"We need a new bridge, and we are fortunate to be at a place where it is finally going to happen," said Carol Everhart, the chief of the Chamber of Commerce.

The existing bridge has some erosion problems, and if it ever collapsed, Everhart said, it would cause an economic disaster in the community. But it's safe for now.

"The bridge, as it is, is perfectly safe," she said.

Still, Biden asked for $13 million to help shore up the existing bridge and begin construction of a new one. And that's what troubles the Sunlight Foundation's Allison.

"This bridge is not in any danger of collapse, and essentially what Sen. Biden is doing is saying, 'My state bridge gets the priority dollar even though it is not a priority project,' " Allison said.

He said the Department of Transportation, rather than U.S. senators, should be deciding which bridges get priority funding in the country. That way, the bridges in the U.S. that need immediate repair would be first in line for the dollars needed to do the work.

As he embarked on his presidential bid in 2007, Obama said he would no longer ask for earmark projects. McCain, who has been a longtime critic of the process, does not seek any for his home state of Arizona.

CNN asked Biden's campaign whether it could ask the senator about his earmark requests and his votes on the Bridge to Nowhere.

In response, a staffer e-mailed, "You've interviewed Gov. Palin re: her completely made up position on the Bridge to Nowhere right?"

Enforce this!

This is your last day to watch Church Wars for free!!

I thought I had recently published a link to an excellent documentary about the Anglican Church of Australia, but I just saw that it is still sitting in drafts! Whoops! Here is the info again.

Embedded below is both a link to the preview of the documentary (watching the full-length doc. will cost you $1.80 to watch on their website- well worth it!) and a link and password for watching it for free using my account.

************************

There is much going on in the Church worldwide, and Australia's Anglican branch is no exception. Below is the first part of a documentary by Journeyman Films about the stir and subsequent schisms caused by the American Episcopalian church's ordination of a gay man to bishop status and one minister's brave moves to stand on the Bible's teaching, not kowtow to a sister sect's insistence that "all are made in God's image."

Truly inspiring, this minister's firm stand in the faith shows us that we needn't be hostile to those wanting to water down Christian theology, just firmly adhere to what we know God's Word says about sin, and act accordingly.

To watch the full feature (40 min.) will cost you $1.80 (one British pound, payable through paypal) but it is definitely worth it. Full-length documentary is available at this web location. Also, check out their other films on youtube at: http://www.youtube.com/user/journeymanpictures, or at the Journeyman Films website.




Here is the info for watching it free using my account (available only Tues. and Wed.):

link to the Church Wars sign in page

password is: 67gfawn2

New U.K. program asks, "Can you make someone a Christian?"

*In continuing coverage of 'Christless Christianity' (aka religious teaching by moral example and devoid of terms like sin, blood, redemption, depravity, etc.) I bring you this story from last month about a new t.v. program in the United Kingdom on which hosts try to 'reform' participants by 'turning them' into Christians.

Please note a couple of items before reading:

1) The reformation time for contestants is set at 3 weeks.
2) This is the follow-up to last year's "Make Me a Muslim."
3) The participants are shown how to "live like Christians;" what does that mean to you?

I urge you all to comment on this and other posts relating to this phenomena of false reformation.
****************************

Lesbian, atheist, Muslim all attempt Christian life
Reality program follows people for 3 weeks of holy reformation

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: August 10, 2008
© 2008 WorldNetDaily (italics and boxed commentaries are mine)



A new television program being broadcast this month follows a group of 13 non-Christian volunteers, who, on camera, attempt to "live by the teachings of the Bible for three weeks."

"Make Me a Christian," broadcast in a three-part series, asks the participants to be mentored by four pastors from a variety of backgrounds – Anglican, Catholic, Evangelical, and Pentecostal – as they attempt to live like Christians, an effort that runs in stark contrast to many of the participants' backgrounds.

The 13 volunteers who will make the effort include a tattooed militant atheist biker, a man who converted from Christianity to Islam, a lesbian schoolteacher, a lap-dancing witch with a lust for expensive shoes, a middle-class yuppie couple that can't find time to spend with their children and a party animal who claims he's slept with over 150 women.

Whether people can be made into Christians by a three-week crash course in discipleship, however, remains a matter of debate.

The Rev. George Hargreaves, one of the four mentor pastors featured on the show, was quoted by The Christian Post as saying, "Viewers will be deeply moved by the participants' personal journeys. I believe that a major nationwide evangelism initiative could be launched on the back of the series."



A review by Charlie Brooker of England's Guardian newspaper, however, expressed severe criticism of the show's depiction of Christianity.

Brooker wrote sarcastically, "The broadcast will doubtless be accompanied by the percussive sound of thousands of Christians enthusiastically smashing their foreheads against the wall with delight at the way they're represented."

According to the C4 (channel that airs the program)website, the first episode sends the participants to York Minster, "an awe-inspiring cathedral that's almost 1,000 years old, where they are asked to participate in a communion service."



After that, the four mentors – Pentecostal minister and leader of the Scottish Christian Party Rev. George Hargreaves, Church of England Curate the Rev. Joanna Jepson, Catholic Fr. John Flynn, and the World Harvest Christian Centre's Pastor Wale Babatunde – visit the volunteers in their homes and make specific recommendations on how to conform to a Christian code of conduct. The lesbian is asked to throw away her porn, the witch is encouraged to toss her Tarot cards, the womanizer is instructed not to look lustfully at women and so forth.



The show's website concludes with the teaser line, "All this is just the start of their three hard weeks. Can they embrace Christian ideals and learn to live in a different way or will their old lives prove just too strong to resist?"

Whoopee, another "relevant" sermon!

This link will bring you to the "Elevation Church" and their series on Song of Solomon (supposedly), entitled "Visionary Love, Dream Sex." Yup, that's really the title. This is, by the way, the follow-up series to "Bringing Sexy Back," their last venture into the Word (??).

Whatever happened to preaching the Word of God to convict a sinner of his need for a holy and just God Who not only forgives him, but creates in him a new man who will grow to love and worship his God in truth and in love, learning how to stand against the perils of the world in the process?

What could be more relevant than that???

Rick Warren Uses Sarah Palin call as news fodder

from blog, Slice of Laodicea

"Imagine asking a pastor for advice and Bible verses on dealing with a specific problem. He isn’t your pastor, but it’s someone you respect, and you ask for advice. Within a short period of time, the pastor decides that the news is so juicy, it just has to be told publicly. That’s what happened to Sarah Palin when she returned a September 6 phone call from Rick Warren."

Read more here:
Slice of Laodicea reports on Sarah Palin and Rick Warren

Happy Birthday to my Mom!!!

To my adorable mother on her birthday,

I wish I could be there to help you blow out the candles
like we did a couple of years ago!

I love you,

Vicki

Teacher fights to post Declaration of Independence quote

Principal claims 'endowed by their Creator' is too Judeo-Christian for school
Posted: September 09, 2008

By Drew Zahn
© 2008 WorldNetDaily
********************

A math teacher sued his school district after the principal told him the words "In God We Trust" and "All Men Are Created Equal, They Are Endowed By Their Creator" must be removed from his homeroom wall because they convey a Judeo-Christian viewpoint.

In January, Principal Dawn Kastner told Westview High School math teacher Bradley Johnson that a banner he had posted in his classroom for 25 years, and another that was posted for 17 years, needed to come down.

The older banner, measuring 7 feet by 2 feet, contained the words "In God We Trust," "One Nation Under God," "God Bless Ameirica" and "God Shed His Grace On Thee." The second banner quoted the Declaration of Independence by including the phrase, "All Men Are Created Equal, They Are Endowed By Their Creator."

Even though 4,000 students have passed through Johnson's classroom without a single complaint in 25 years, the principal told Johnson the banners were now impermissible because of their religious content.

The Thomas More Law Center, a not-for-profit law firm dedicated to the defense of religious freedoms, filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Johnson against the Poway Unified School District of San Diego, Calif., which includes Westview High School, claiming the order to remove the banners violated Johnson's First Amendment freedom of speech, particularly since the district permits other teachers to hang Buddhist, Islamic, and Tibetan prayer messages on their classroom walls.

Richard Thompson, president of the Law Center, commented, "Many public schools exhibit a knee-jerk hostility towards Christianity and seek to cleanse our nation's classrooms of our religious heritage while promoting atheism or other religions under the guise of cultural diversity."

The school district, in turn, filed to have the lawsuit dismissed. But last week, Federal District Judge Robert T. Benitez denied the request, stating, "Johnson has made out a clear claim for relief for an ongoing violation of his First Amendment free speech rights," and calling the principal's order "an unequivocal case of government hostility" toward the Judeo-Christian viewpoint.

"Judge Benitez's strongly worded opinion sends a clear message to school districts across the country that hostility toward our Nation's religious heritage is contrary to our Constitution," said Rober Muise, the Thomas More Law Center lawyer handling the case.

According to court documents, the school district argued for dismissal, saying that Johnson's banners do not enjoy First Amendment protections "because Johnson is speaking as an educator, not a citizen" and "because Johnson was a teacher, he had no First Amendment protections in his classroom."

Judge Benitez sharply disagreed, claiming the district's argument amounted to saying that Johnson has no free speech rights at all because he is a government employee.

Benitez quoted the 1969 Supreme Court decision Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, which stated, "It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate. This has been the unmistakable holding of this Court for almost 50 years."

The judge then added, "In the 40 years since, the Supreme Court has neither diminished the force of Tinker for teachers nor in any other way cabined the First Amendment speech of public school teachers."

Benitez then presented a strong rebuttal to the charge that the Declaration of Independence and phrases like "In God We Trust" represent unconstitutional religious establishment.

"The Court does not understand Johnson's banners as communicating a religious Judeo-Christian viewpoint," Benitez wrote in his decision. "Rather, the banners communicated fundamental political messages and celebrate important American shared historical experiences."

Benitez further wrote, "That God places prominently in our nation's history does not create an Establishment Clause problem requiring curettage and disinfectant of Johnson's classroom walls. It is a matter of historical fact that our institutions and government actors have in past and present times given place to a supreme God."

Benitez then quoted a 1952 Supreme Court ruling, Zorach v. Clauson: "We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being."

The judge concluded his decision with the remarks, "By squelching only Johnson's patriotic expression, the school district does a disservice to the students of Westview High School, and the federal and state constitutions do not permit such one-sided censorship."

Please contact OBAMA to support the working surge in Iraq

Bless his heart

I have to give credit where credit is due... Nic has been watering my garden back home every day for me. He's even been thinking of a better way to fence in the green beans so they can grow upwards.

Please don't let me forget that he is doing this small, yet huge, thing for me while I'm gone.

, honey.

Mirror, mirror on the wall....

FORGET BARACK'S SINISTER SMILE... IS THIS THE SCARIEST PICTURE YOU'VE EVER SEEN, OR WHAT???

She likes to conserve

Fall fashion tips, pt. I

I applaud Target for employing the talents of more upscale designers, I really do. And now that Isaac Mizrahi is finally moving on there is a nice little platform available for whomever can clamor to the top of the not-quite-a-department-store market.

But seriously, who do they think they're fooling offering this jacket to middle America?



Yeah, I know I'm stereotyping "middle America" a little by asking that question. But I sincerely believe the majority of Target devotees are not going out in public wearing this. They're not even wearing it in the privacy of their own homes. Maybe, just maybe, their little girls are using it for playing 80s career gal dress-up, but I doubt it.

Trust me, if you're not Japanese you will look ridiculous in this "fashion-forward" piece.

One of the Many

The following is an excerpt from a local Reformed church's website. It is a section of the Belhar Confession, recently adopted by several RCA (Reformed Church in America) members.

"...we reject any doctrine which absolutizes either natural diversity or the sinful separation of people in such a way that this absolutization hinders or breaks the visible and active unity of the church, or even leads to the establishment of a separate church formation; [or any doctrine]which denies that a refusal earnestly to pursue this visible unity as a priceless gift is sin..."

It is esentially saying, "we refuse to allow part of our church to separate from another part of our church that is openly sinning" and "we have to keep our congregation together at all costs, because if we don't we are being sinful."

Now ask me again why it's so hard to find a home church here.

Ain't No Change in His Game

Last Thursday, in political threads all across the nation, the twitter was undoubtedly focused on John McCain's recent television ads targeting Obama's elitist persona. Perhaps you have not seen these ads? They liken Senator Obama to Britney Spears, citing his recent jump to celebrity status as he caroused around the globe, spreading his unfounded message of "change" to other unfortunate countries (tip: they don't cast a vote, so conserve your fuel, will ya?).

The virtual newsrooms have picked up on the story, each one clinging to a barebones story for fear of promoting an actual opinion, though predictably, the focus is on Obama's reaction to these ads, not even attempting to give equal time to McCain's intention behind them.

I do not support McCain. I am yet undecided on casting a vote at all come November 8th. However I must ask are McCain's jabs about Obama's undeserved popularity so far from the truth? Isn't Obama just using a brand of surface-grazing rhetoric that any celebrity with an opinion finds impossible to resist shouting to the audience, now that an audience is so ready and willing to listen? The question is, is McCain's claim unsubstantiated?

"Basically what they're (the current administration) saying to you is, 'We know we didn't do a good job, but he's (Obama) too risky.' Well let me tell you something. When we are in such dire straits economically, when our foreign policy has gotten so messed up, what's the bigger risk: choosing change, or choosing to do the same things that got us into this mess in the first place?"
--Barack Obama

He sure talks like a celebrity; scripted. But I've heard Ben Affleck speak about Darfur off-the-cuff with more compassion.

Obama's brilliant conclusion that "choosing change" would automatically improve the state of our economy and foreign policies is sophomoric. Will choosing a socialist system (which Obama subversively supports by way of increasing government control and programs to the nth degree) really turn this country around within his- at most- eight year career? It's a little more than audacious, it's just plain idiotic.

But if Obama really wants to push ahead with his rhetoric, his elitist priorities, his "I-know-better-than-you" platform, let him do it. And if he is still in need of a VP runningmate, I nominate Ginger Spice, formerly of the Spice Girls. She's been a UN ambassador for ten years so she's got the experience, and she might lend just the kick of girl power Obama's campaign needs. Just a suggestion.


McCain's two ads targeting Obama's celebrity status





One response: pay attention for the Obama camp's response ("Blah blah blah"). Now who's acting like a political child?

From one disenchanted politico to another...

Ladies and gentlemen, I implore you:

If you haven't read it on her blog, please visit the link below to read my friend Parisienne Farmgirl's recent rant about the Great One, Barack Obama. She couldn't be closer to the target on several of her statements therein.


Parisienne Farmgirl's spot-on analysis of B.O.

Immigration gumballs

An interesting illustration of what effect the U.S. policy of taking in immigrants actually has on the poverty-stricken people we are purporting to have compassion on by doing so.

The Full Armor of God: day one, Attributes

This is a wonderful commentary from Matthew Henry on the spiritual armor we must all wear as Christians. I hope you find it edifying as I do. Related texts: Isaiah 59:17, Ephesians 6:13-17, 1 Thessalonians 5:8.

"Spiritual strength and courage are needed for our spiritual warfare and suffering. Those who would prove themselves to have true grace, must aim at all grace; and put on the whole armour of God, which he prepares and bestows. The Christian armour is made to be worn; and there is no putting off our armour till we have done our warfare, and finished our course.

The combat is not against human enemies, nor against our own corrupt nature only; we have to do with an enemy who has a thousand ways of beguiling unstable souls. The devils assault us in the things that belong to our souls, and labour to deface the heavenly image in our hearts. We must resolve by God's grace, not to yield to Satan. Resist him, and he will flee. If we distrust either our cause, or our Leader, or our armour, we give him advantage.

commentary by Matthew Henry

His purpose is not contingent on our doing- praise God!

"For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven

and do not return there but water the earth, making it bring forth and sprout,

giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater,

so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth;

it shall not return to me empty,

but it shall accomplish that which I purpose,

and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.


For you shall go out in joy and be led forth in peace;

the mountains and the hills before you shall break forth into singing,

and all the trees of the field shall clap their hands.

Instead of the thorn shall come up the cypress; instead of the brier shall come up the myrtle;

and it shall make a name for the LORD,

an everlasting sign that shall not be cut off."

Isaiah 55:10-13

They Don't Make 'Em Like They Used To?

Women don’t swoon anymore; have you noticed? Women used to swoon over every little thing: a tidbit of passionate speech from their husbands (sometimes in a handwritten letter); the warm spring air wafting into their bedrooms accompanied by the scent of lilacs; even the clip-clopping sound of a horse’s heavy steps down the road, signaling a trip to the city was in her near future. Indeed the city itself could produce fainting ladies, with its bakeries’ cases piled high with melt-in-your-mouth pastries, excess of tiny shops crammed with treasures and trinkets, and streets that pulsed with the comings and goings of their inhabitants.

Of course, no one writes real letters anymore, or lingers in their bedrooms beyond an alarm clock’s blast, or travels by horse. We order our pastries by the dozen from Dunkin Donuts, unearth trinkets on eBay and cringe at the thought of mixing into the comings and goings of all those city people, preferring to travel by car, alone. But is there nothing left to swoon about?

We still have our gardens, do we not? Wriggling above ground from dry, sandy soil I see bright green beans, zucchini curling on its vines, cantaloupe and squash growing fat and happy, pumpkins and, if treated most tenderly, plump, shiny green peppers. Hollyhock blasts upward in dazzling magenta like fireworks exploding while its neighbor decadent Hibiscus laboriously unfolds huge crimson petals around a most sensuous inner - ahem - shaft. (I couldn’t resist!) Meanwhile tiger lilies, untamed and slightly mischievous, stretch their necks high to bask in the sun, only for a moment before they begin their unruly migration both above and below the soil’s surface. Their cousin, Asian lily, standoffishly refuses to bloom for anyone. Instead, she is inclined to shade the unknown plant that lives below her in a statement of duty, all the while leeching all the moisture from the soil in a most un-ladylike fashion.

Ah, the sumptuous drama of it all! And I’m talking about beans and buds here, people!

And of those letter-writing husbands, who extolled their wives’ graces to everyone they met; are they so far from what we have now? The language is different, to be sure, but are they not as just in their praise as men of yesteryear? There is no sweeter sound than the clatter of a fork on a well-cleaned plate of something I’ve thrown together into a pan. For at the precise moment my fears he will notice how ramshackle and devoid of presentation it is becomes unbearable, he licks his lips and declares, “You’ve never made a bad dish!” And if that compliment wasn’t enough, sometimes it is followed with, “I’ll do the dishes tonight.”

Never were words more entrancing!

In conclusion, ladies, count your blessings. Your life could be filled with the passion, heartbreak and subsequent melancholy of French novels from the 1800s, and if you would dare that path it is not hard to find, though it is ill-advised. But if your desires are of a hearty, more modest and long-lasting variety, I suggest you look in your own backyard.

Friday funny

"This makes the Daily Show look like child's play."
-Nic

Celebrities: what are they up to this week?

Shakira: trying to find a new way to tousle her coif




Victoria Beckham: taking her children for a walk




Erykah Badu: channeling the previous owner of this hat, asking, "why? why?!"

About that drilling business...

FIRST, do you know what ANWR is?

ANWR = Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

First, a comparison:



And some perspective:



NOTE WHERE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREA IS (it's in the "ANWR Coastal Plain").

THIS IS WHAT THE DEMOCRATS, LIBERALS AND "GREENS" SHOW YOU WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT ANWR:







And they are right; these ARE photographs of ANWR.

ISN'T ANWR BEAUTIFUL? WHY SHOULD WE DRILL HERE (AND DESTROY) THIS BEAUTIFUL PLACE?

WELL, THAT'S NOT EXACTLY THE TRUTH...

Do you remember the map?



The map showed that the proposed drilling area is in the ANWR Coastal Plain; do those photographs look like a coastal plain to you?

WHAT'S GOING ON HERE?

THE ANSWER IS SIMPLE--

THAT IS NOT WHERE THEY WANT TO DRILL!

THIS IS WHAT THE PROPOSED EXPLORATION AREA ACTUALLY LOOKS LIKE IN THE WINTER:




AND THIS IS WHAT IT ACTUALLY LOOKS LIKE IN THE SUMMER:





AND LIBERALS SAY THAT THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE EFFECT ON THE LOCAL WILDLIFE.

HERE IS A PHOTO (SHOT DURING THE SUMMER) OF THE "DEPLETED WILDLIFE" SITUATION CREATED BY DRILLING AROUND PRUDHOE BAY (*The Prudhoe bay area accounts for 17% of U.S. domestic oil production). DOESN'T IT LOOK LIKE THE CARIBOU REALLY HATE THAT DRILLING?



HERE'S THAT SAME SPOT DURING THE WINTER:




HEY, THIS BEAR SEEMS TO REALLY HATE THE PIPELINE NEAR PRUDHOE BAY!




NOW, WHY DO YOU THINK THAT THE DEMOCRATS ARE LYING ABOUT ANWR?

REMEMBER WHEN AL GORE SAID THAT THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD WORK TO ARTIFICIALLY RAISE GAS PRICES TO $5.00 A GALLON?

WELL...

AL GORE AND HIS FELLOW DEMOCRATS HAVE ALMOST REACHED THEIR GOAL!

NOW THAT YOU KNOW THAT THE DEMOCRATS HAVE BEEN LYING, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?

Stay tuned for updates and info...

(origin of post unknown; it was e-mailed to me)

'Gay' man sues Bible publishers

$70 million being asked for emotional distress because homosexuality cast as sin


A homosexual man who has a blog on Sen. Barack Obama's campaign website is suing two major Christian publishers for violating his constitutional rights and causing emotional pain, because the Bible versions they publish refer to homosexuality as a sin.

Bradley LaShawn Fowler, 39, of Canton, Mich., is seeking $60 million from Zondervan and another $10 million from Thomas Nelson Publishing in lawsuits filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, the Grand Rapids Press reported.

Fowler filed his claim against Grand Rapids-based Zondervan Monday, alleging its Bibles' references to homosexuality as a sin have made him an outcast from his family and contributed to physical discomfort and periods of "demoralization, chaos and bewilderment," the paper said.

He filed suit against Tennessee publisher Thomas Nelson in June.

Zondervan says that even if Fowler's claim is credible, he's suing the wrong party. A company spokesman told WOOD-TV in Grand Rapids that Zondervan doesn't translate the Bible or own the copyright for any of the translations but relies, instead, on the "scholarly judgment of credible translation committees."

U.S. District Judge Julian Abele Cook Jr. refused Monday to appoint an attorney to represent Fowler in the Thomas Nelson case, saying the court "has some very genuine concerns about the nature and efficacy of these claims."

Fowler, who is representing himself in both lawsuits, says in his complaint against Zondervan that the publisher intended to design a religious, sacred document to reflect an individual opinion or a group's conclusion to cause "me or anyone who is a homosexual to endure verbal abuse, discrimination, episodes of hate, and physical violence ... including murder."

Fowler alleges both Zondervan and Thomas Nelson, with its King James Bible, manipulated Scripture without informing the public by using the term "homosexuals" in a New Testament passage, 1 Corinthians 6:9.

He told the Grand Rapids TV station in an interview he wants to "compensate for the past 20 years of emotional duress and mental instability."

Zondervan, he contended, is misinterpreting the Bible.

"These are opinions based on the publishers," Fowler said. "And they are being embedded in the religious structure as a way of life."

'Astounding research'

Fowler's blog on Sen. Barack Obama's campaign website features a post titled "Unleashing America from Injustice," in which he says he "was completely distraught after discovering the term-homosexual-was added to the bible, in 1976, and then removed, in 2001 and 2006, without any consideration to the many victims who committed suicide or were murdered because of their sexual preference of homosexuality."

[The Obama campaign notes the opinions expressed in its community blog section "in no way should be interpreted as endorsed or approved by the campaign."]

On a separate personal blogsite, Fowler features his related book, written under the name "Bradley-Almighty," which, he boasts, contains "astounding research from within the pages of the bible, that will change the face of religion across the globe."

Titled "365 Reason's to Study the Bible," he says his "debut book" takes the reader "on a journey through time, as he shifts swiftly, yet gracefully, through the pages of religious history, slowly exposing hidden secrets bible publishers have fought- feverishly to keep hidden from the general public for centuries. An avalanche of secrets that are keeping millions around the world enslaved today."

Fowler cites his interview with a newspaper called Michigan Front Page in which he said, "Lack of sincerity from bible readers has helped this conspiracy go on this long."

'Engrossed' with Scripture

On his personal blog's "About Me" page, Fowler says that while serving a sentence in the Michigan Department of Corrections, he "gained a sincere interest" in the Bible's teachings and, over a 10 year period, "became so engrossed within" the Scriptures, he couldn't do much more than eat and sleep.

In the rambling piece, he says "everything inside of me suddenly became consumed and overwhelmed by something greater than me ... that's when I found God."

Then, in an apparent reference to the complaint in his lawsuit, he says, "Discovering how much the bible has been changed through man's decisions and incorrect interpretations was hard to accept."

His discovery, he says, "proves we all have been strung along, foolishly, lost in the essence of our minds."

Fowler concludes with a description of himself as a "small business owner, part-time college student, member of the Christian Writer's Guild, freelance writer for the Michigan Front Page, and author of two new books."

Fowler, notes a post by JoAnne Thomas on RightPundits.com, explained his complaint on his blog. He writes:

"In 1970, I Corinthians 6:9 read as followed-

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind.

In 1982 ,the same scripture read like this-

Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived, neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites.

In 2001 the same scripture reads like this-

Surely you know that the people who do wrong will not inherit God’s kingdom. Do not be fooled, those who sin sexually, worship idols, take part in adultery, those who are male prostitutes, or men who have sexual relations with other men, those who steal, are greedy, get drunk, lie about others, or rob these people will not inherit God’s kingdom."


*original post from WorldNet Daily, posted 07/09/08

An introduction to Reformed theology

Why do people want it to be so complicated?

Coffeehouse philosophy: gotta love it. But let me clear it up for you:

There is a God. And He hates sin.

And the devil exists, and is not found in your heart alone, though the presence of sin within you would make it seem so. However, the devil cannot make you do anything. Your desire to sin is what makes you sin.

Overheard in New York, pt. II

Kid #1: Paper beats rock. BAM! Your rock is blowed up!

Kid #2: "Bam" doesn't blow up, "bam" makes it spicy. Now I got a SPICY ROCK! You can't defeat that!

--6 Train

Crazy: So I had to get fillings in all of my teeth.

Passenger: Uh huh.

Crazy: But I figured, why let them do that to me after they drilled holes in my brain, ya know?

Passenger: Sure.

Crazy: But I figured, might as well! Although if they were going to fill my teeth, I'd want them to use jelly.

Passenger: Yep.

Crazy: But the guy at the counter said they were out of jelly. So I got a blueberry muffin.

--R train

The Drug Legalization Debate; NYC Edition

Hobo: Look, I'm not going to lie to you. I'm not hungry or sick, I just need some money so I can get high, but it's just weed, I don't do heroin or cocaine or any of that s---.

Guy: You know, it's because of guys like you that people think pot should be illegal! Look at you! When I get high, I pay my own way! I earn my own money and get high! There are little kids on this train! What do you think they're going to learn? Man, think a little!

--4 train

Notes from the New York Underground

The subway doors open. A hobo enters, holding a bottle of windex in one hand and a tube of toothpaste in the other.

Hobo: Which is the better time to read Dostyevsky? Winter? (He sprays the windex.) Or Spring? (He squeezes toothpaste out of the tube.)

Japanese girl: Spring!

Hobo: You are correct.

--F train

[Homeless man is giving directions to tourists.]

Construction worker to tourists below: Don't listen to that guy, he's a homeless bum. He don't know what he's talking about, he's crazy. Seriously, stop talking to him, he's just a whacked out homeless guy.

Homeless man: Yeah, well... You're homeless! Yeah, how you like that?

--Columbus Circle

Overheard in New York, pt. I

Woman: Do you have a non-fiction section?

Book guy: Well, everything that's not fiction is non-fiction. [Over] there's cooking, and there's history.

Woman: No, that's not what I asked. Do you have a section for non-fiction?

Book guy: Well, there are no non-fiction novels. Everything here that's not a novel is non-fiction.

Woman: But you don't have a non-fiction section?

Book guy: No. Everything that isn't fiction is non-fiction.

--Barnes & Noble, Staten Island

Why Immigrants Do Not Require Amnesty

(title given by best_intentions author)

by D.A. King

King is president of the Georgia-based Dustin Inman Society, a coalition actively opposed to illegal immigration and illegal employment. He has appeared on numerous national television and radio networks as an authority on the issue. On the Web: www.TheDustinInmanSociety.org
*column originally published on NumbersUSA.com

"A recent news report in the Carrollton Times Georgian on a rally staged by and for people in my nation illegally has caused this long-time American to take a few moments out of his day to reply with a more pro-American side of the May Day march. And a few words on illegal immigration in general.

First: Readers can only hope that all ‘journalists’ connected with the publication of the one- sided promo piece for criminal immigration activity take a long hard look at the Code of Ethics from the Society of Professional Journalists. Respectfully, the section concerning bias, fairness and balance in news reporting should be studied in depth.

From someone who has spent the last eight years studying the illegal immigration and illegal employment crisis created by the reality that the federal government has refused to secure American borders in a war on terror, a couple of facts:

It is a federal crime to transport, assist, shelter, harbor or to hire an illegal. Illegal employers should be made to march and stage rallies to demand the “right” to ignore the laws of the land along with their black-market laborers.

There is no universal civil right to live and work in the United States. We as a nation take in well over a million real, legal, immigrants every year - more than any nation on the planet. We can’t take in everyone – that’s called “open borders.”

We don’t have anything to apologize for - and sneaking into the U.S. to steal an American’s identity or creating fraudulent ID to steal an American job while illegally lowering American wages does not make one an “immigrant.”

The term is “illegal alien;" Immigrants come legally. A quick and fool-proof method of telling the difference: Immigrants do not require amnesty.

Our government says we have to pay our taxes to educate illegal alien children and provide the victims of geography with free medical care - but not that we must remain silent and allow the open borders, radical left to trample the rule of law upon which our Republic was founded.

Another one: When a participant in a march demanding amnesty for illegal aliens is speaking in a foreign language, using a candidate for office from the Socialist Workers Party (Eleanor Garcia) as a translator is not an efficient way of hiding the leftist agenda of those who regard borders as human rights violations and our nation as little more than an address.

Most Americans proved they demand defined, defended borders and a common and official language last summer when they defeated the Ted Kennedy and John McCain sponsored attempt to repeat the one-time amnesty of 1986.

Legalization is not the answer. It‘s enforcement that stops criminal activity.
On language: It was a coalition of the Chamber of Commerce and the ACLU types who defeated Rep. Tim Bearden’s HR 413 in the Georgia legislature this year that would have allowed Georgians to vote in November on making English the constitutionally official language of government in Georgia.

English as official is “anti-immigrant,” according to Bearden’s opponents.
Most Americans have had enough of the nonsense myth that there are “jobs Americans will not do” or that illegal aliens marching in American streets demanding citizenship somehow represents “equal rights under the law.”

Most of us also take a dim view of the vile comparison of illegal aliens and their mindless demands to the cause of Americans struggling for the civil rights due them as citizens under their own constitution.

Many of us think Barbara Jordan, the first black woman elected to Congress from the deep south, put it very well more than a decade ago. We live in fervent hope that we can elect leaders who share her courage and honesty.

In 1995, as the Bill Clinton appointed Chairwoman of the Commission on Immigration Reform, Jordan, a presidential Medal of Freedom winner, testified to a Congressional hearing on how to gain credibility on immigration policy: “Those who should get in, get in; those who should be kept out are kept out; and those who should not be here will be required to leave. Deportation is crucial. Employer sanctions can work.” (see full quote here)

To begin to solve the undeniable illegal immigration problem, we should ignore the open borders lobby and heed the words of Barbara Jordan.

Friday is Now Officially Charles K. Opinion Day

Obama's Metastatic Gaffe
By Charles KrauthammerFriday, May 23, 2008; Page A17


When the House of Representatives takes up arms against $4 gas by voting 324-84 to sue OPEC, you know that election-year discourse has entered the realm of the surreal. Another unmistakable sign is when a presidential candidate makes a gaffe, then, realizing it is too egregious to take back without suffering humiliation, decides to make it a centerpiece of his foreign policy.

Before the Democratic debate of July 23, Barack Obama had never expounded upon the wisdom of meeting, without precondition, with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Bashar al-Assad, Hugo Chávez, Kim Jong Il or the Castro brothers. But in that debate, he was asked about doing exactly that. Unprepared, he said sure -- then got fancy, declaring the Bush administration's refusal to do so not just "ridiculous" but "a disgrace."

After that, there was no going back. So he doubled down. What started as a gaffe became policy. By now, it has become doctrine. Yet it remains today what it was on the day he blurted it out: an absurdity.

Should the president ever meet with enemies? Sometimes, but only after minimal American objectives -- i.e., preconditions -- have been met. The Shanghai communique was largely written long before Richard Nixon ever touched down in China. Yet Obama thinks Nixon to China confirms the wisdom of his willingness to undertake a worldwide freshman-year tyrants tour.

Most of the time you don't negotiate with enemy leaders because there is nothing to negotiate. Does Obama imagine that North Korea, Iran, Syria, Cuba and Venezuela are insufficiently informed about American requirements for improved relations?

There are always contacts through back channels or intermediaries. Iran, for example, has engaged in five years of talks with our closest European allies and the International Atomic Energy Agency, to say nothing of the hundreds of official U.S. statements outlining exactly what we would give them in return for suspending uranium enrichment.

Obama pretends that while he is for such "engagement," the cowboy Republicans oppose it. Another absurdity. No one is debating the need for contacts. The debate is over the stupidity of elevating rogue states and their tyrants, easing their isolation, and increasing their leverage by granting them unconditional meetings with the president of the world's superpower.

Obama cited Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman as presidents who met with enemies. Does he know no history? Neither Roosevelt nor Truman ever met with any of the leaders of the Axis powers. Obama must be referring to the pictures he's seen of Roosevelt and Stalin at Yalta, and Truman and Stalin at Potsdam. Does he not know that at that time Stalin was a wartime ally?
During the subsequent Cold War, Truman never met with Stalin. Nor Mao. Nor Kim Il Sung. Truman was no fool.

Obama cites John Kennedy meeting Nikita Khrushchev as another example of what he wants to emulate. Really? That Vienna summit of a young, inexperienced, untested American president was disastrous, emboldening Khrushchev to push Kennedy on Berlin -- and then nearly fatally in Cuba, leading almost directly to the Cuban missile crisis. Is that the precedent Obama aspires to follow?

A meeting with Ahmadinejad would not just strengthen and vindicate him at home, it would instantly and powerfully ease the mullahs' isolation, inviting other world leaders to follow. And with that would come a flood of commercial contracts, oil deals, diplomatic agreements -- undermining the very sanctions and isolation that Obama says he would employ against Iran.

As every seasoned diplomat knows, the danger of a summit is that it creates enormous pressure for results. And results require mutual concessions. That is why conditions and concessions are worked out in advance, not on the scene.

What concessions does Obama imagine Ahmadinejad will make to him on Iran's nuclear program? And what new concessions will Obama offer? To abandon Lebanon? To recognize Hamas? Or perhaps to squeeze Israel?

Having lashed himself to the ridiculous, unprecedented promise of unconditional presidential negotiations -- and then having compounded the problem by elevating it to a principle -- Obama keeps trying to explain. On Sunday, he declared in Pendleton, Ore., that by Soviet standards Iran and others "don't pose a serious threat to us." (On the contrary. Islamic Iran is dangerously apocalyptic. Soviet Russia was not.) The next day in Billings, Mont.: "I've made it clear for years that the threat from Iran is grave."

That's the very next day, mind you. Such rhetorical flailing has done more than create an intellectual mess. It has given rise to a new political phenomenon: the metastatic gaffe. The one begets another, begets another, begets . . .

letters@charleskrauthammer.com

This week's "Right on!" post

Serious props to Cheri Jacobus from rightwingnews.com for her short article, "Obama's Elitist Vacation."


Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has criticized John McCain and Hillary Clinton for their support of a summer break from the 18.4 cent per gallon gas tax as a way to provide a bit of relief for Americans so they can enjoy their summer more and, hopefully, perhaps stimulate the economy a bit, as well.

Obama has stated that some experts say it could mean only a $30 average savings per family. That means those who are still unable to afford to take a vacation, won’t, and for others the savings may be $60 or $90 or more.

Elitist Barack Obama thinks that is chump change that won’t make any difference for anyone. Afterall, as we know from the Obama family’s Easter getaway, a vacation for them is a luxury trip to the Virgin Islands. However, for many Americans, summer “vacation” is a trip to another state to visit grandma or a camping trip a few hours away from home. That 18.4 cents per gallon savings can mean the difference of an extra one, two or three tanks of gas or an extra night or two at a motel or campground which can mean the difference between taking the family on a summer vacation -- or NOT.

Obama’s sneering opposition to the McCain proposal illustrates just how out of touch he is with average working Americans. No, the gas tax “vacation” won’t pay for an Obama-style family vacation in the Virgin Islands, but it can go a long way towards helping working class Americans enjoy a typical summer vacation.