Archives: May 2006
Wed May 31, 2006
Sign Up Now!
Voice Your Values for Marriage Before the Senate Votes!
May 24, 2006 | Refer a Friend
Less than two weeks from today the U.S. Senate will vote on S. J. Res. 1, the Marriage Protection Amendment to the Constitution. Marriage is an indispensable institution, and this is a vote of surpassing importance. In the decades to come, our children and our grandchildren will turn to us and ask, “When the issue of marriage was decided, were you involved? Where did you stand?”
I’ve written lengthy emails on this issue before, but this one will be short. We need at least 13,000 more signers of our online petition to reach our goal. These petitions will be presented to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist on Monday, June 5. I would like to count your name, and those of your family and friends, among the signers. Please take a few seconds to add your name to this petition in support of the Marriage Protection Amendment.
Let’s all take the actions needed to answer the question the rising generations will ask us: “Where did you stand?”
Sign The Marriage Petition to save traditional marriage:
https://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=PT06C01&f=AL06E09&t=e&track=0
* A Message from Family Research Council @ www.fcr.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Da Vinci Code: Liberal Gnosticism
By Thomas E. Brewton
The Da Vinci Code’s gnosticism is not something that disappeared centuries
ago. It survives as the religious substance of today’s liberalism and its
kindred sects of socialism.
-------------------
Gnosticism is the belief that intellectual elites have secret knowledge about
the structure of human society and about the relationship between humans and
the cosmos. These elites are thereby empowered to direct human affairs.
Gnosticism has surfaced repeatedly over the ages, in modern times in the
philosophical underpinnings of the 1789 French Revolution.
The Da Vinci Code’s depiction of gnosticism as the preserver of the “truth”
about Jesus and Christianity falls into the debunking tradition that commenced
in 18th century France with attacks by Voltaire and others on the Catholic
Church.
Appropriately, American liberalism, a lineal descendant of the gnosticism of
the French Revolution, is implicit in Dan Brown’s novel. In the Da Vinci Code,
a fictional gnostic doctrine preserved knowledge with the power to destroy
Christianity. American liberals seek to destroy Christianity in order to
create a society of egalitarian perfection.
A characteristic common to all the varieties of gnostic socialism is the belief
that human conduct, indeed fundamental human nature, can be manipulated by
controlling and changing the the conditions in which people live. This will be
found in all of the 19th and 20th century varieties of socialism, from Henri de
Saint-Simon and Auguste Comte, to Charles Fourier and Robert Owen, to Karl
Marx, Vladimir Lenin, Benito Mussolini, Adolph Hitler, and Franklin Roosevelt.
The corollary is that, in order to restructure society and control the
conditions which determine human nature and conduct, it is necessary to get rid
of inconveniences like Christianity, personal moral responsibility, and private
ownership of property that stand in the way. This is the role played by The Da
Vinci Code’s debunking.
Eric Voegelin in his 1959 “Science, Politics & Gnosticism” describes the
salient characteristics of gnosticism, all of which apply to the doctrines of
American liberalism.
First, the gnostic liberal is dissatisfied with the world as he finds it. He
rejects the evidence of history that there always will be strife, wars,
inequalities in ability and station, and some degree of poverty. And he is
confident that he has the knowledge (gnosis) to make things perfect, which he
defines as equality in all things.
Second, the gnostic-liberal attributes the problems of human life to poor
organization of the economic and political realms. Evil and hardship must
therefore arise from some identifiable source (capitalism? ownership of private
property?) that deforms the proper structure of society.
Third, the gnostic-liberal has a deep faith that earthly salvation from the
world’s tribulations is attainable, a trait markedly evident in the theoretical
models of Soviet Russia and Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal.
Fourth, the gnostic-liberal believes that this salvation is attainable through
the process of history (which , of course, he uniquely understands). Auguste
Comte’s 1820s gnosis was his discovery of the “immutable law of history,”
according to which there are three ages of human social development, the third
stage in the 19th century being the new scientific, socialistic age into which
only knowledgeable intellectuals could lead the masses.
The same three-phase philosophy of history reappears in Hegel and Marx. Note
that Hitler’s National Socialism was consciously called the Third Reich to
identify it with the gnostic millennium of earthly harmony and peace.
Note also that the nature of gnosis is that its secret knowledge is available
and comprehensible only to a select few. This has always implied in socialism
a vulnerability to dictatorial concentration of power in the collectivized
state. In Italy and Germany of the 1920s and 1930s it was expressed as the
Leader Principle Ð Il Duce and Der Fuhrer.
Fifth, the gnostic-liberal believes that, having discovered the secret meaning
of history, he can implement and control the process of history by political
and economic means, i. e., via socialism.
And, finally, the gnostic-liberal’s core belief is that salvation, the
perfection of social relations and human conduct, is attainable via human
action, here on earth. This is the source of Lenin’s mystical concept of the
dictatorship of the proletariat that would bring peace and harmony to the
people and would lead to a gradual withering away of formal government, leaving
the Soviet people living in a modern Garden of Eden Ð from each according to
ability, to each according to need.
We see the manifestation of this mystical, gnostic vision every day in liberal
politicians’ belief that individuals are incapable of fending for themselves,
that only the national political state can do the job. There is always
something wrong with society and always a politician confident that one more
set of regulations or one more welfare-state program will make everything
OK.
Gnosticism’s message that life really can be made perfect here on earth, I
believe, accounts for the mass appeal of Ron Brown’s “Da Vinci Code,” which is
a sort of adult version of Harry Potter wizardry.
People want to believe that a body of secret knowledge will free them from
Christianity’s stern admonitions to work hard, save for a rainy day, abjure
hedonism, and recognize that perfection of human life is impossible in the
earthly realm. It’s so much easier to eat, drink, be merry, and let the
government take care of us.
Thomas E. Brewton is a staff writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc. The New
Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers,
journalists and grass-roots media outlets.
His weblog is THE VIEW FROM 1776
http://www.thomasbrewton.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2004, liberal filmmaker, Michael Moore, maliciously accused President Bush of having supposed close ties to Osama BinLadin.
But Michael Moore, as usual, wasn’t telling you the truth.
You see, the BinLadin family does have close ties to an American president, but it isn’t George W. Bush they were closest to.
NO, that distinction belongs to disgraced former President, Jimmy Carter.
An investigation by the Censure Carter Committee into the financing for “The Carter Center” of Atlanta, Georgia (founded by President Carter and his wife to advance his “Blame America First” foreign policies) reveals that over $1,000,000 has been funneled from Bakr M. BinLadin for the Saudi BinLadin Group to the Carter Center.
In fact, an online report accuses former President Carter of meeting with 10 of Osama BinLadin’s brothers early in 2000. Carter and his wife, Rosalyn followed up their meeting with a breakfast with Bakr BinLadin in September 2000 and secured the first $200,000 towards the more than $1 MILLION that has since been received by the Carter Center.
If you think this news troubles Michael Moore and his friends in the liberal, anti-war crowd, think again. You see, they’re not interested in the truth - they only seem interested in advancing their defeatist political message: “America is almost aways wrong… America is the source of many of the world’s problems.”
In fact, during the 2004 Democratic National Convention, former President Jimmy Carter hosted Michael Moore in the presidential viewing box, while ex-President Bill Clinton addressed the crowd.
So, have you had enough of former President Jimmy Carter and his continued pattern of undermining American national security? Are you sick and tired of seeing him defend every despot, dictator and anti-American terrorist organization under the sun?
Then please - support our efforts at the Censure Jimmy Carter campaign.
We are about to launch a 2nd wave of television ads on national television networks asking Americans to rebuke Carter’s efforts in North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Venezuela, Cuba and elsewhere.
We are raising the money to air this ad on TV - and we need your help. The more money we raise, the more airtime we can purchase.
A typical spot on CNN or Fox News during the daytime will cost us about $4,000 - $6,000. We must collect the contributions of thousands of people who can make a $25, $50, $100 or $250 contribution.
Or we can make up our goals with fewer people contributing a more generous amount - say $500, $1,000, $2,500 or even the full $4,000 or $6,000 to buy each spot that will be seen by people all across the nation.
No matter what you can afford, please make your contribution now, and help us get the message out:
Sincerely,
Melanie Morgan
Chairman, Censure Carter Committee
http://www.CensureCarter.com
----------------------------------------------------------
Cracking Da Murtha- Pelosi Code
by John Lillpop
When Rep. John Murtha made headlines by campaigning(again) for
the Iraqi insurgency against the US Marines, it seemed to me the
gentleman had fallen victim to a late onset of
Alzheimer’s---very late, indeed.
Or perhaps it was the emergence of a second childhood, along
with the diaper rash so commonly part of that malady?
But after seeing the Da Vinci Code this weekend, my mind was
unwilling to let Murtha off the hook so easily.
There was a conspiracy somewhere---but where?
Then it struck me. Nancy Pelosi, inventor and architect of the
Culture of Corruption, has been under a great deal of pressure
lately because of William J. Jefferson.
Remember, Jefferson is one of the few politicians in history to
be caught on video receiving $100,000 in bribes and then
staunchly defended by the Speaker of the House and President of
the United States.
The fact that Jefferson is a Democrat, whereas his two powerful
allies are Republicans, added to the intrigue.
Today’s news brought further enlightenment: Pelosi, jabbing
hard at Jefferson to resign from the House Ethics Committee, had
been backed into a corner by the Black Caucus.
Seems that esteemed body, in retaliation for Pelosi’s attack on
one of the brothers, threatened to campaign vigorously against
Pelosi this Fall.
Such a move could render all that ‘Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the
US House’ stationery nearly as obsolete as her last three
face-lift surgeries.
Cunning political animal she is, Pelosi cleverly agreed to back
off Jefferson after receiving assurances the Black Caucus would
not campaign against her.
What does John Murtha have to with all this?
Think about it: How much coverage did the Pelosi-Black Caucus
deal get in the MSM?
How about zero? Nada?
And that is because John Murtha timed his public assault on the
Marines perfectly. Perfect, that is, to keep Pelosi’s backroom
wheeling and dealing off the front pages.
How did I figure all that out? Its called Symbology, a
sophisticated new-age science featured in Da Vinci Code.
Here is how it works: Backwards, the names Murtha and Pelosi
spell Ahtrum Isolep.
According my calculations, Ahtrum Isolep means ‘Bait and
Switch.’
And that says it all!
[0] comments (3472 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Tue May 30, 2006
Loosing Freedom Part II
Loosing Freedom Part II:
When America Looses its Voice
by
Rob Hood
The deep political divide in America has caused a great uproar among internet users recently. Long ago television and newspapers were our major sources of news and there was no one to dispute the findings and reports of organizations like CBS News and numerous others when it came down to politically tied subjects.
Today things are different. The internet has forever changed the way that news and commentary is published. We now have a choice in what kind of reports we listen to and since the internet has come into play, news media just don’t like it. Why? For one thing the internet takes away some of the ratings that news organizations get plus it takes away newspaper sales, but these are not the primary reasons for the discontent of the modern day news media.
One word says it all :BLOG! Internet blogs have popped up all over and almost everyone I know has one. I have two of my own. Internet blogs and internet news sites like Cybercast News Service (www.cnsnews.com), World Net Daily, and numerous other major sites have reached an audience that tends to be more conservative in nature than the mainstream news media would like to admit.
Now whenever there is a major world news story brewing we have two side to the story. We have the regular biased mainstream news media story that airs on CBS, CNN, NBC, ABC, PBS, or other places as well like The New York Times and other left wing newspapers. Then, we have the internet bloggers that do their own research, come to their own conclusions, and expose the media’s flaws in their very biased stories. Many don’t take internet bloggers and internet news organizations seriously, but just ask John Kerry and Dan Rather how serious internet news has become. Internet news and bloggers cost John Kerry the presidency and Dan Rather his job. Organizations like The Drudge Report, Human Events, Red State Blog, Townhall.com, The Media Research Center, Newsbusters, and others have made quite an impression in the world of news today. Fox News is known for its conservative following, not because it leans to the right, but because it features both sides of a story instead of one story with one side designed with a political agenda in mind like most of the mainstream stations now.
I figured whenever conservatives like Sean Hannity, Bill Bennett, Rusty Humphries, Tony Snow, and many others like them would get real popular as they are now, liberals would come up with something to restrict conservatives from receiving the whole story and boy oh boy was I ever right! It is called “Net Neutrality” and it is the silliest thing to ever exist in history. There are two sides to this Net Neutrality though. Part of is just about how government would regulate consumer choices in the types of internet services that would be available such as dial-up, DSL, and other types of services. The second part of the net neutrality movement is about what type of content that can be displayed which is greatly feared by religious organizations, conservative groups, and conservative internet bloggers. This movement is being pushed somewhat by Google and a handfulof other companies with a political agenda.
Recently two really great conservative news/commentary sites have been “neutralized” by Google because some liberal reported “hate speech” to Google on the site New Media Journal (www.newmediajournal.us). Google has systematically banned conservative news articles on certain sites if it contains any talk of radical, militant Islam being anything other than o.k. Mich News (www.michnews.com) was the other blocked site that was “neutralized” by Google’s very left wing social policies. Google has also played politics in advertising as well. I have hear some complaints about Google refusing to post ads that were paid for because they were too conservative or too Christian. I found out just how biased and left wing Google really is when it comes down to playing fair. Google, at one time, blocked paid ads because the ad promoted a book that was negative towards Bill Clinton. The link to this story is on World Net Daily at http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44717
Net Neutrality pretty much says that conservatives cannot say just anything they want even if they live in a country that guarantees freedom of speech. Net Neutrality is just another lame attempt at silencing the conservative movement and already there are organizations passing petitions to restrict Net Neutrality from ever becoming the law of the land. Net Neutrality is dangerous because it takes away the right of free speech in that we cannot say one thing without reporting the direct opposite which defeats the whole purpose of the report to start with. It also takes away the freedom of choice concerning types of services offered from the ISP.
Net Neutrality along with the “Fairness Doctrine” has upset many people today. We can pretty much say that Net neutrality and The Fairness Doctrine are one in the same as far as some things go. The UN does want control of the internet so that they can censor those who oppose them and impose an internet tax on all, as if we weren’t taxed enough already. We have to oppose this takeover of the internet so that we can remain a country of free speech with a freedom of choice. Yahoo and Google already censor sites in China. Let’s not make America the next target of digital discrimination ( a new term for conservatives to learn). The last thing we need is another government run public service.
I am asking all who love the freedom of internet bogging and the internet in general and do not want it in the hands of the UN or some other power for taxation or censorship, please visit the following sites and help the campaign for a free internet and save the remains of free speech:
I urge you to get involved and tell your leaders in Washington to stop paying attention to the UN’s demands of global domination through taxation and legislation. You can sign the petition for the government to keep their hands off the internet here : http://cap.com/cfif/issues/alert/?alertid=8574316&type=CO
REFERENCES:
Google Blocks ad for negative Clinton Book but continues to allow ads bashing Tom Delay
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44717
Demand Better Government! Protect The Future!
www.moveoff.us
Center for Individual Freedom
www.cfif.org
ABOUT ROB HOOD
Rob Hood grew up in rural Mississippi and was rooted in the doctrine of the Southern Baptist Convention and its teachings of Biblical right and wrong, accountability to a higher authority, and the birth, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. He was a participant in Bible Drill for nine years, a Southern Baptist Convention program devoted to educating children and youth with scriptures from the Bible for use in everyday life situations. He graduated from Holmes Community College in Grenada, Mississippi with an Associate of Applied Science (AAS) degree in Electronics Technology and is currently employed as an Electronics Technician with HAM radio equipment manufacturer. He is also a Federal Communications Commission licensed Technician Class HAM radio operator and lives in North Mississippi.
Mr. Hood is also the author of Issues That Matter : America’s Moral Battleground and a columnist for six of the news/commentary sites of the Move Off Network at www.moveoff.net ) in addition to The Kentucky Conservative and also runs his own site and his own blog. You can check out Rob Hood’s blog at http://robhood.us ( click on blog ). Check out his regular site at www.standfortruthonline.com .
[0] comments (970 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Click!
Click here for a great message about the Ten Commandments:
God’s Powerful Ten Commandments ..by Michael Westfall
http://michaelwestfall.tripod.com/id70.html
[0] comments (691 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Liberal Aggression!
Liberal Aggression and the Da Vinci Code
By Thomas E. Brewton
Despite Dan Brown’s disclaimers, his book and the movie version are attacks on
Christianity. Liberalism’s hopes for survival necessitate such unprovoked
aggression.
-------------------
Liberal intellectuals know that the survival of Christian truth is life-
threatening to liberalism. Poland’s Catholic-inspired revolt against Moscow is
an ever-present reminder. In the United States, even with monopoly control of
elementary and high schools, and our colleges, liberal-socialism ultimately
cannot withstand rational scrutiny, because universal experience proves it to
be ineffectual and corrosive nonsense.
Only by fabricating history and continuing to suppress teaching of American
constitutional traditions can liberals hope to avoid joining the Soviet Union
in history’s dustbin.
This explains the crude attack in the May 23, 2006 post on The Daily Kos, one
of the most popular liberal websites:
“Getting back to the movie, however, I’ve noticed anti-"Da Vinci Code” signs at
local churches, too. And these aren’t isolated incidents, either. You can’t
watch Fox News for five minutes without catching a host or commentator
challenging the movie, much like the network made it a point to assault
“Brokeback Mountain” at every turn. Or bash Mexicans.
“Why do people behave so irrationally? Because they fear change. They fear that
the face of the 21st Century in America won’t be white. They fear that fewer
people view two loving people who happen to share the same sex as a threat to
democracy. And they fear that people may ask questions about the origins of
their faith. Why think for ourselves when these people, these arbiters of
wisdom, can do it for us?”
“....But these people, these turds in our collective punch bowl, fail to
recognize the spectacular hypocrisy inherent in their outrage..…
“You want to know what’s a real threat to people’s faith? Church sex abuse. And
the longer some blame liberals for the blight instead of looking in the mirror,
the more problems the church will have. Problems like the fact that some people
consider it a good thing to physically assault those whose only crime is
holding different viewpoints. Problems like the notion that Pat Robertson and
others like him say things they’d spend a lifetime decrying if they came from a
mullah. Problems far greater than “The Da Vinci Code”.”
Liberals are particularly exasperated by the resurgence of Christianity and
religious Judaism, because they were confident that spiritual truth had been
mortally wounded in the 1930s and dispatched finally in the 1970s.
In his 1934 “A Common Faith,” John Dewey, 20th century America’s high priest of
liberal-socialism, wrote:
“Criticism of the commitment of religion to the supernatural is thus positive
in import.… The objection to supernaturalism is that it stands in the way of
an effective realization of the sweep and depth of the implications of natural
human relations. It stands in the way of using the means [i.e., socialism]
that are in our power to make radical changes in these relations.… Secular
interests and activities have grown up outside of organized religions and are
independent of their authority. The hold of these interest upon the thoughts
and desires of men has crowded the social importance of organized religions
into a corner and the area of this corner is decreasing.”
When Dewey wrote this, liberalism was on the crest of the socialist wave from
the 1917 revolution in the Soviet Union. Liberals everywhere were confident
that Russian experience would demonstrate conclusively the superiority of
socialism over Christianity.
As we know, it didn’t turn out quite that way. Liberals nonetheless cling to
their secular religious faith, blindly assuring themselves that, absent bad
leaders like Hitler, Mussolini, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and Castro, socialism would
have perfected human society.
In that vein, President Clinton’s Labor Secretary Robert Reich more recently wrote in The American Prospect:
“The great conflict of the 21st century will not be between the West and
terrorism. Terrorism is a tactic, not a belief. The true battle will be between
modern civilization and anti-modernists; between those who believe in the
primacy of the individual and those who believe that human beings owe their
allegiance and identity to a higher authority; between those who give priority
to life in this world and those who believe that human life is mere preparation
for an existence beyond life; between those who believe in science, reason, and
logic and those who believe that truth is revealed through Scripture and
religious dogma. Terrorism will disrupt and destroy lives. But terrorism itself
is not the greatest danger we face.”
New York Times columnist Paul Krugman wrote, on March 29, 2005:
“Democratic societies have a hard time dealing with extremists in their
midst.… We can see this failing clearly in other countries. In the
Netherlands, for example, a culture of tolerance led the nation to ignore the
growing influence of Islamic extremists until they turned murderous. But it’s
also true of the United States, where dangerous extremists belong to the
majority religion and the majority ethnic group, and wield great political
influence...
“One thing that’s going on is a climate of fear for those who try to enforce
laws that religious extremists oppose. Randall Terry, a spokesman for Terri
Schiavo’s parents, hasn’t killed anyone, but one of his former close associates
in the anti-abortion movement is serving time for murdering a doctor. George
Greer, the judge in the Schiavo case, needs armed bodyguards.....And the future
seems all too likely to bring more intimidation in the name of God and more
political intervention that undermines the rule of law..… America isn’t yet a
place where liberal politicians, and even conservatives who aren’t sufficiently
hard-line, fear assassination. But unless moderates take a stand against the
growing power of domestic extremists, it can happen here.”
Let’s just say that Messrs. Reich and Krugman exaggerate a bit.
If a disinterested observer were to survey all the news reports of recent
years, he would find that violence has been perpetrated, not by Christians and
religious Jews, but by liberal mobs blocking city streets, denying emergency
vehicle access, smashing storefront windows, and damaging automobiles in their
path.
When liberals speak to student assemblies, they are not assaulted or shouted
down by Christian students. But conservatives and Christians are physically
assaulted and otherwise prevented from speaking by liberal students.
Thomas E. Brewton is a staff writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc. The New
Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers,
journalists and grass-roots media outlets.
His weblog is THE VIEW FROM 1776
http://www.thomasbrewton.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Media Research Center needs your help.
Please help the MRC expose the liberal biased news media.
Log on to www.fightmediabias.org today for more information.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Mission America needs your prayers and support to help protect innocent children from the growing homosexual left wing lobby. Tell friends and church members about Mission America at www.missionamerica.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------
[0] comments (3453 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Mon May 29, 2006
ATTENTION!
ATTENTION!
Please be aware that internet search engines like Google and some others are in a bad habit of acting like a communist controlled government. This one group has started censoring news items on conservative websites. Will yours be next?
One such site is The New Media Journal at www.newmediajournal.us . Remember to go to this site daily for great news and commentary. Bookmark it and let Google know that they cannot stop the conservative Christian movement in FREE AMERICA!
Write to the New Media Journal and encourage their good deeds and show them that you support real news!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROPHECY NEWS WATCH
In the Bible we are given many things to watch out for during the end times right before Jesus comes back. This website is devoted to news around the world that pertains to fulfilling the end times prophecy according to scripture. I urge everyone to sign up for the free weekly newsletter. This is something you should not miss! To do so visit www.prophecynewswatch.com .
[0] comments (3263 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Sat May 27, 2006
For Today:
You Got Googled
by Bob Parks
In one of those “Are we really surprised?” moments, while singing “Live To
Tell” during a recent concert in Los Angeles, Madonna suspended herself from a
mirrored cross simulating her crucifixion. Of course this was meant to piss off
Christians.
As I said before, Christian bashing in Hollywood is big business. Whether it be
aloof actresses like Heather Graham or the controversy surrounding the movie
release of “The Da Vinci Code”, those who worship are easy targets as they
usually end up staging lame protests.
After all, what would happen if Madonna really made a statement against
religious fanaticism and, let’s say, used a giant riser shaped like the Quran,
her life insurance premiums would skyrocket. Offending Christians may get you
boycotted; offending Muslims might get you killed.
Oops. Betcha that got me “Googled.”
(One of the greatest compliments anyone can get is to have one of their words
and or phrases become a part of the national lexicon. I’m crossing my fingers
hoping I’ve given that term new meaning….)
As it turns out, the mega search engine Google has been taken over by the left
and any key words that someone there deems “hate speech” results in that piece
disappearing.
Not that I go out of my way and issue what may be considered by some “free
speech” liberals hate speech. I admit, I am critical at times. That may be why,
some of my pieces appear on Google and some, suspiciously do not.
Now if you think I’m being paranoid, I’ll refer to a piece on Newsbusters.org
“This is how poisonous it’s gotten in Washington,” says a consulting lobbyist
for a broadcast network. “You have Republicans taking money from companies and
firms working to end their control of Congress, and even worse, working with
outfits like MoveOn.org. And they are taking this money to not only help groups
dedicated to defeating Republicans, but also for legislation that would
regulate the Internet.”
What makes (Republican lobbyist Vin) Weber’s cynical support of the legislation
even worse, say Republican Hill staffers, is that his activities also aid
MoveOn.org, the extremist, left-wing organization, which is now being
financially backed by Google so that MoveOn can help Google with “Net
Neutrality.” Google has become the single largest private corporate underwriter
of MoveOn. According to sources in the Democrat National Committee, MoveOn has
received more than $1 million from Google and
its lobbyists in Washington to create grassroots support for the Internet
regulation legislation. Some of that money has gone to an online petition drive
and a letter-writing campaign, but the majority of that money is being used to
fund their activities against Republicans out in the states.
For example, MoveOn is said by one DNC source to have funneled at least
$100,000 “Net Neutrality” money to its operations in Pennsylvania (where MoveOn
is organizing against Sen. Rick Santorum). It has also sent funds to Florida,
Ohio, and Missouri.
MoveOn is also using the funds to help Democrats, including House minority
leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington state. “A month
ago, Representative Pelosi didn’t know what Net Neutrality was, then she heard
that Google and other Silicon Valley firms wanted it. Now it’s one of her top
issues. What Silicon Valley wants, Silicon Valley gets,” says a House Democrat
leadership staffer.”
While I may appear to be a wee bit paranoid, apparent censorship has already
happened. Frank Salvato, editor of the New Media Journal, one of many sites
that carry this column, has been “Googled”.
Michelle Malkin had difficulties becoming part of Google News. Charles Johnson
of Little Green Footballs complained about not being able to get on Google’s
good side.
What’s the link to Madonna?
As I’ve written before, bashing a Christian or any right wing group is okay
with the left. However, criticism of anything radical Islam is considered by
them to be racist and intolerant. Is it a true belief in all that’s good in
suicide bombers or abject fear, one can only wonder what goes through the mind
of a liberal. But this much is clear: Google is now a tool of the censor-
hypocrite left and finding alternative points of view are now in jeopardy. This
is in reality the latest example of
“by all means necessary” and the liberal retaking of the House and Senate is
priority one to them. In this current example, Google is reportedly removing
anything that criticizes violent Islamic fundamentalists.
That is consistent with the anti-Isreal liberal thought running rampant on
college campii, but now Google is taking it to the streets. Say something bad
about militant Islam and it’ll be like your words were never written, at least,
people will have a lot more hassle trying to find it.
And is it safe to say this is only the beginning...?
What happens when a conservative columnist condemns junk science that
supposedly backs the “global warming” theory? Will we easily find followup
stories on Congressman William Jefferson, Democrat, Louisiana, on his bribery
charges? What will we know and when will we know it? November 8th?
As a veteran, I’m down right pissed off about the VA’s cavalier protection (or
lack thereof) of millions of personal data now in a thief’s hands. With that,
what could be the next step with Google? I am a user of “Gmail”, Google’s email
program. Google obviously has access to my daily correspondence. What’s to say
they aren’t checking out my personal and/or politically strategic messages on
an hourly basis? The same person who now trolls through and finds topics they
alone deem “offensive”,
could read personal political musings between myself and any of my editors or
political contacts. This information could go where…?
Since Google has teamed up with MoveOn, I’m hoping that Rupert Murdoch steps up
to the plate and attempts to right his “MySpace” wrong and buy up, let’s say,
Lycos or another major search engine.
Until then, whether it be liberal professors on the one hand supposedly
promoting a “diversity of ideas” on campus, while leading silent protests of
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s commencement address at Boston College,
or Madonna’s latest anti-Christian display, I don’t want to hear any more of
this “tolerance” liberal bullshit.
Google Inc. can work hand-in-hand with the ChiComms and agree to censor search
results in China, adhering to the nation’s “free-speech restrictions” in return
for better access in the Internet’s fastest growing market. Google can sell out
and urinate on the very American philosophy that makes their existence
possible. Google can take what is supposed to be a source of information and
turn it into a politically correct engine for the selectively intolerant left.
It’s time to seek out alternatives to Google. If the left considers foreign
surveillance “domestic spying”, Google’s abilities far exceed anything the
federal government does in the name of national security. Google can spy on
anyone using their Gmail for purely partisan political reasons. And as far as
what the search engine that controls half the nation’s online searches…
“It’s a dangerous thing when those who identify themselves as disseminators of
information begin to establish definitions for the rest of us. One man’s “hate
speech” is another mans dissent. While some, or many, may disagree with the
information presented in any given publication (I personally was offended by
the untrue stories of Qurans being flushed down toilets by Newsweek and Dan
Rather and Mary Mapes trying to pass off manufactured news as the truth) it is
still in the interest of
preserving free speech that all information be presented, for the public to
decide.
In the Google discrimination issue it is easy to see their hypocrisy. One can
still search and find information presented by al Manar (the Hezbollah news
site) and al Jazeera who regularly publishes opinion that is quite offensive to
those of us who are not Muslim and who like our heads. Further, not only are
The New Media Journal pieces cited by Google as “hate speech” still available
on Google through other publications, websites from the KKK, The American Nazi
Party, The New Black Panther
Party and The Mazui Foundation - that offers a t-shirt that says “Kill Whitey”
for $15 - still present themselves in Google search results.
All entities, be they governmental or private, need to protect the sanctity of
free speech. This is a basic civic responsibility. Those who do not are tyrants
and cowards. Sadly, we live in an era when civic responsibility is disposable,
considered a burden, an annoyance, rather than a privilege. Our Founders are
weeping.”
Frank Salvato, Editor, New Media Journal
Rush Limbaugh once said, if you don’t cheat, you’re not trying hard enough.
The Democrats and their liberal minion are pulling out all the stops to win in
November. However, their activities will forever change how we as a nation gets
our information. What we find now online will not be the result of an
intelligent starting point. What we find may only be what we were meant to find
and the gatekeeper of this knowledge may just be some unbathed Birkenstock-
wearing punk who has a “Bush Worst President Ever” bumper sticker on his
Cooper.
Welcome to the new world, and I’m glad you got a chance to read this column.
You may have to “search” for me in the near future.
Bob Parks is a member/writer for the National Advisory Council of Project 21,
and is a Staff Writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc.
..........................................................................................................................
Why I’m a Conservative
by Robert E. Meyer
The question of why someone should be a Conservative, is one that may be
addressed in differing ways. Much is made out of the traditional dictionary
definitions of what constitutes a Liberal or Conservative, but these types of
discussions tend to obfuscate the real issue in dispute. So much of the current
loathing over conservatives, is based on an entirely specious foundation as to
what being conservative is all about. It might be better to start this
discussion by defining just what
conservatism is not.
First of all, a Conservative is not one who lacks compassion. A conservative
sees compassion as doing what is in the best interest of the individual or
corporate body at large, over the long haul. We know that if you give a man a
fish he has food for a day, but teaching him how to fish, gives him food for a
life time. Both teaching and giving have implications on what true compassion
really is about. One who gives, but never instructs, fosters an ugly sort of
dependence, which leaves the
recipient in the lurch once the giving ends. The teacher, on the other hand,
leaves a lasting empowerment and inspiration with his/her charges. Which then
is greater compassion long term?
A Conservative believes that the best charity is a boost to someone who
eventually won’t need that help, but that out of gratefulness, will render the
same help to someone in his former position. A conservative doesn’t see charity
as a life-long dependency on government agencies, or a new program from a
politician who is investing in his perpetual incumbency--he instead calls this
a condition of bondage.
A Conservative is not opposed to all taxation, but rather sees taxes as a
necessary evil, and therefore wants to encourage only the level of taxation
that will support the necessities of limited civil government. Tax policy
shouldn’t be used as a means to punish economic social classes that have
benefitted from the America Dream, nor as a wedge to promote envy,
discontentment and coveting. Fiscal policies should be like tides that can
raise all boats. Economic egalitarianism is an evil that
creates more unfairness and disparity than it corrects. Some level of poverty
will be with us always, and not everyone will achieve the same results, nor
should we expect it to be so. Needs ought to be met through personal
philanthropy and a conscience of obligation toward one’s fellow man, but not
through state coercion.
Conservatives aren’t moral relativists. They find such a system of belief is
self-contradictory. They thus believe in a transcendent truth and moral
absolutes. They don’t confuse truth with opinion, and thus maintain a hierarchy
of values and beliefs. They are not concerned so much with genuflecting to
“your truth” and “my truth,” but rather discovering “the truth.” Hate and
violence are not fostered by moral certitude, or by persons who believe that
certain principles are transcendent and
immutable, but rather by forgetting that all individuals are created in the
image of God, thus they have inherent value.
Conservatives aren’t Neanderthals caught up in the past. They simply understand
that approval of immorality isn’t tantamount to being “progressive.” Progress
in technology doesn’t impact the principles that are at the foundations of
traditional mores. Instead of “keeping up with the times,” the conservative
asks whether the cultural paradigm is deviating from transcendent truth.
Conservatives do not revel in state hegemony, or believe government has all the
answers, or that they should do everything. The government has a limited
function to provide national defense, law enforcement, and enhance “general
welfare” (not hand-outs, but universal rather than specific welfare).
Conservatives believe the state shouldn’t do those things that ought to come
from, the family, neighbors and friends, the church, public charity, or God.
Conservatives generally don’t see religious faith as a sham to control people,
nor do they think that man created God, but rather that he is sovereign. They
don’t try to claim, that God, out of necessity, is on their side. They pray for
the wisdom, understanding and humility to be on God’s side--for God has
preferences in the conduct of human affairs.
These are some of the reasons why I’m a Conservative.
Robert E. Meyer is a Staff Writer for The New Media Alliance. The New Media
Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers, journalists and
grass-roots media outlets.
Columns by this author can be read regularly on TheRealityCheck.org.
[0] comments (3126 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Fri May 26, 2006
Exiting Public School!
From Agape Press,
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/5/252006b.asp
Baptist Pastor Trumpets Another Call for ‘Exit Strategy’ from Schools
By Jim Brown
May 25, 2006
(AgapePress) - A Southern Baptist pastor from Florida says Christians are
losing the battle in public schools. The pastor, a member of the committee that
brings resolutions forward for the denomination’s consideration, says the
Southern Baptist Convention should consider developing an “exit strategy” for
children from those schools.
Pastor Darrell Orman is the pastor of First Baptist Church - Stuart, Florida,
and a member of the Resolutions Committee for the upcoming SBC annual meeting
in Greensboro, North Carolina. He says the denomination should consider a
proposed resolution that encourages Baptists to develop a strategy for leaving
the nation’s public school system. Another education-related resolution that
has been submitted for consideration urges Baptists to support public schools.
The Southern Baptist Convention has voted on similar education-related
resolutions in the past, and last year approved a resolution calling on its
churches to investigate what impact the homosexual agenda is having on public
schools. Orman believes evangelical churches underestimate the influence of the
public education system to silence even godly Christians working in it.
“Evangelism’s down across the nation. People are intimidated. Our kids are not
being the salt and light that a lot of times they should be,” the pastor
shares, “and that’s why right now, the statistics I keep seeing over and over
again say 85 to 90 percent of our kids, when they leave high school, … also
leave our churches and never come back.” The Florida pastor says according to
information he has been told, that ratio corresponds almost directly with the
number of children in churches who are in public school.
Pastor Orman cites reasons he sees for the effectiveness of efforts to squelch
the Christian message in public schools.
“I think the public school system has moved so far [to the] left, part of it
with the influence of the teachers union and the left leanings of the teachers
union across the nation,” he says. “And then you’ve got the ACLU and others,
the separation of church and state people, who are trying to inoculate the
public system from Christianity, pretty much.”
Orman suggests that churches, if they are able to do so, would be wise to start
Christian schools that provide families an alternative to public education.
* A Message from Mission America @ www.missionamerica.com
PLEASE ASK YOUR CHURCH AND PASTOR TO GET INVOLVED IN THIS MOVEMENT!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[0] comments (3236 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Exiting Public School!
From Agape Press,
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/5/252006b.asp
Baptist Pastor Trumpets Another Call for ‘Exit Strategy’ from Schools
By Jim Brown
May 25, 2006
(AgapePress) - A Southern Baptist pastor from Florida says Christians are
losing the battle in public schools. The pastor, a member of the committee that
brings resolutions forward for the denomination’s consideration, says the
Southern Baptist Convention should consider developing an “exit strategy” for
children from those schools.
Pastor Darrell Orman is the pastor of First Baptist Church - Stuart, Florida,
and a member of the Resolutions Committee for the upcoming SBC annual meeting
in Greensboro, North Carolina. He says the denomination should consider a
proposed resolution that encourages Baptists to develop a strategy for leaving
the nation’s public school system. Another education-related resolution that
has been submitted for consideration urges Baptists to support public schools.
The Southern Baptist Convention has voted on similar education-related
resolutions in the past, and last year approved a resolution calling on its
churches to investigate what impact the homosexual agenda is having on public
schools. Orman believes evangelical churches underestimate the influence of the
public education system to silence even godly Christians working in it.
“Evangelism’s down across the nation. People are intimidated. Our kids are not
being the salt and light that a lot of times they should be,” the pastor
shares, “and that’s why right now, the statistics I keep seeing over and over
again say 85 to 90 percent of our kids, when they leave high school, … also
leave our churches and never come back.” The Florida pastor says according to
information he has been told, that ratio corresponds almost directly with the
number of children in churches who are in public school.
Pastor Orman cites reasons he sees for the effectiveness of efforts to squelch
the Christian message in public schools.
“I think the public school system has moved so far [to the] left, part of it
with the influence of the teachers union and the left leanings of the teachers
union across the nation,” he says. “And then you’ve got the ACLU and others,
the separation of church and state people, who are trying to inoculate the
public system from Christianity, pretty much.”
Orman suggests that churches, if they are able to do so, would be wise to start
Christian schools that provide families an alternative to public education.
* A Message from Mission America @ www.missionamerica.com
[0] comments (663 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Exiting Public School!
From Agape Press,
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/5/252006b.asp
Baptist Pastor Trumpets Another Call for ‘Exit Strategy’ from Schools
By Jim Brown
May 25, 2006
(AgapePress) - A Southern Baptist pastor from Florida says Christians are
losing the battle in public schools. The pastor, a member of the committee that
brings resolutions forward for the denomination’s consideration, says the
Southern Baptist Convention should consider developing an “exit strategy” for
children from those schools.
Pastor Darrell Orman is the pastor of First Baptist Church - Stuart, Florida,
and a member of the Resolutions Committee for the upcoming SBC annual meeting
in Greensboro, North Carolina. He says the denomination should consider a
proposed resolution that encourages Baptists to develop a strategy for leaving
the nation’s public school system. Another education-related resolution that
has been submitted for consideration urges Baptists to support public schools.
The Southern Baptist Convention has voted on similar education-related
resolutions in the past, and last year approved a resolution calling on its
churches to investigate what impact the homosexual agenda is having on public
schools. Orman believes evangelical churches underestimate the influence of the
public education system to silence even godly Christians working in it.
“Evangelism’s down across the nation. People are intimidated. Our kids are not
being the salt and light that a lot of times they should be,” the pastor
shares, “and that’s why right now, the statistics I keep seeing over and over
again say 85 to 90 percent of our kids, when they leave high school, … also
leave our churches and never come back.” The Florida pastor says according to
information he has been told, that ratio corresponds almost directly with the
number of children in churches who are in public school.
Pastor Orman cites reasons he sees for the effectiveness of efforts to squelch
the Christian message in public schools.
“I think the public school system has moved so far [to the] left, part of it
with the influence of the teachers union and the left leanings of the teachers
union across the nation,” he says. “And then you’ve got the ACLU and others,
the separation of church and state people, who are trying to inoculate the
public system from Christianity, pretty much.”
Orman suggests that churches, if they are able to do so, would be wise to start
Christian schools that provide families an alternative to public education.
* A Message from Mission America @ www.missionamerica.com
[0] comments (640 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Thu May 25, 2006
ATTACK ON FREEDOM!
Loosing Freedom, The UN Attacks the Second Amendment
by
Rob Hood
July 4 is Independence Day. Many across America will celebrate the day that America declared itself a free and sovereign people. People will cook out on the grill, have family get togethers, and just celebrate freedom in general. However, the UN has plans for this day as well - and these plans are not at all celebrating freedom. These plans are sinister in character and threaten our sovereignty as a free nation.
The United Nations has decided to hosts it annual global gun ban conference called the 2006 Small Arms Review Conference or RevCon during the fourth of July holiday period right here on American soil. The UN ad its liberal allies in Canada, Australia and liberals right here in America would like nothing more than to erase the Second Amendment from the constitution and ban all firearms around the world.
This is a real threat to freedom and I encourage you as a free American to voice your opposition to the UN for its anti-American sentiments and its anti-gun stance. There is no way (under a conservative administration) that America will give in to the UN’s demands that America disarm its citizens and destroy a vital part of the constitution. Having the Second Amendment ensures that every American is entitled to won a firearm for hunting, sport, collection, self-defense, or for whatever reason there may be to own one.
For many years now the UN has looked down on the conservative movement in the United States as a threat to their agenda for global domination. The UN is very anti-American and is plagued with corruption and scandal after scandal. Sure they help feed hungry people around the world, but other than that deed of kindness, the UN is an organization strattling the line between reality and science fiction.
The UN nor any nation on earth has the right nor the authority to overrule America’s constitution and as for me, the Second Amendment will stand for as long as the United States shall exist. The Second Amendment is a great idea from a group of men that knew what freedom really meant when they drafted the Constitution. Now the UN wants to erase our history and tear down our rights as free Americans by suggesting that guns are dangerous and should be destroyed.
My friends, guns are only as dangerous as we make them. For example, If I owned a machine gun which was loaded and ready to fire and I simply placed it on the floor in the middle of a room somewhere, that gun is not going to grow legs and shoot someone. Guns have never killed anyone. People kill people because of SIN. The UN cannot understand this because they lack the concept of individualism. They do not embrace the idea of real freedom. The very nations that are telling the US to disarm its citizens are six nations that sponsor terrorism and the others amount to about 50 nations that are dictatorial in nature and have killed over 80 million of their own citizens, so how can we trust them at all?
Many people put bad labels on guns because of a negative past experience or from a fear derived from watching too much mainstream media news which always paints a bad picture of guns. The media can never get much of anything right-especially gun truths and myths. Guns save the lives of residents and storeowners everyday across our great land. People take a stand against crime and thugs who wish to rob us, rape us, and kill us. Every day we can read stories about how a firearm saved the life of an elderly citizen or a single mom whose house was being broken into in the middle of the night. Most of the time calling 911 is only an option after the battle between the victim and the criminal begins. In other words, there may not be enough time to call 911 before the intruder invades the home. It is then time for other alternatives like using one’s handgun to defend the home. The UN doesn’t get this because they believe in fairy tales and media myths like allot of misguided people here do. Anti-gun people like Gorge Soros, Hillary Clinton, and Micheal Bloomberg don’t help maters much either.
It is a known fact that everywhere guns have been banned, crime rates soar thereafter because the honest citizen no longer has adequate protection and the criminals know this and take advantage of unarmed innocent people. Just ask London England about their crime rate after gun bans.
I urge everyone reading this to oppose the UN’s efforts to stop freedom. I have personally mailed a card to the UN showing my voice of opposition. The card came inside an NRA magazine that I read and you probably won’t see one anywhere else. If you want to write a letter defending your Second Amendment Rights, please send it to :
The Honorable Kofi Annan
Secretary-General of the United Nations
UN Headquarters
First Avenue at 46th Street
New York, NY 10017
It is clearly evident that the UN has no respect for American freedom and law and that they blatantly defy us on our Independence day on our own soil. Please take a stand for your rights today, before it’s too late!
REFERENCES:
America’s First Freedom, June, 2006, pages 8-9 & 33-35
NRA News @ www.nranews.com
[0] comments (3203 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Wed May 24, 2006
Defy!
When “NO” is the Only Answer
by
Rob Hood
Defiance! It’s a word and an act that we see often these days. Most of the time, an act of defiance is considered a bad thing, but I just read about a case in which all out defiance is a the greatest thing to do. We all know how stubborn and how relentless the ACLU is at attacking anything to do with the Christian faith. Well, recently they got a taste of their own medicine. The ACLU suffered from a stunning blow of defiance by a group of high school seniors. I bet that was embarrassing. Here’s the story of why this great event happened and why you should encourage more of it:
Recently in Kentucky the ACLU sought to ban a prayer at a local high school graduation because of one complaint by a fellow student. A judge later declared that such a prayer at a graduation would be prohibited. Well, this is a typical ACLU scenario. They find a left wing judge to go along with their plot, and then the buzzards move in to feast on the prey. It has been happening like this for years, but this was no ordinary case. The ACLU and that judge really messed up when they decided to go picking on a bunch of defiant and highly energized teenagers.
So what happened next you ask? I must say the greatest thing that has happened to the ACLU since Christmas carolers sang in front of their national headquarters at Christmas time. This group of teenagers decided to take control of the situation and say the prayers regardless of what any judge or ACLU lawyer said. Not only did they defy the orders of the court and the ACLU, but they had cheering crowds to urge them to continue with their prayers. Some students stood up to quote the Lord’s Prayer to a standing ovation. So much for the ACLU petty lawsuits eh?
This event just goes to show how much the word “NO” really means when many unite for a great cause. Like the title of the article says, “No is the only answer” sometimes and we must continue to make examples out of those who wish our faith dead. The ACLU got put to shame in this event and if only we would triple this effort worldwide, perhaps we could bring the ACLU to its knees once and for all and show them that communism is dead and will remain dead for as long as conservatives exist. We must prove to them that their pathetic lawsuits and corrupt justices mean nothing to a defiant group of conservatives that stand united for freedom and real justice.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[0] comments (3202 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Tue May 23, 2006
Carter Harms us ALL!
What we must now do is speak out, condemn Carter’s actions and make him so controversial of a figure that he will be unable to advance his foreign policy agenda of American appeasement and surrender to the demands of the world’s tyrants and dictators.
The latest offensive action by Carter came yesterday, when the former president wrote an OpEd in USA Today that attacked Israel and defended the Palestinian regime now led by the terrorist group, Hamas.
This is only the most recent incident where Carter has attacked Israel, while simultaneously defending the Palestinian people who have declared Israel and the United States to be their most hated enemies.
Carter’s working for the wrong side again, folks. On September 11th we were all frozen in horror and disbelief at the sickening images of so many innocent American civilians being slaughtered by Islamic terrorists.
Yet the streets of the Palestinian territory were a different story. Many Palestinians were delighted to see the United States wounded, and they took to the streets with spontaneous celebrations. How can Jimmy Carter always manage to pick the wrong side to sympathize with?
Above: Palestinians celebrate the 9/11 terrorist
attacks by al-Qaida against the United States.
As we have seen happen countless times before, Jimmy Carter’s attacks against U.S. foreign policy have been used by many in the Middle East to rally opposition against the United States and Israel.
Egypt’s Middle East Times picked up Carter’s recent comments and noted that he was more supportive of the Palestinian movement than many Middle East leaders even were. Al Jazeerah was so inspired they reprinted Carter’s recent editorial demanding funding for the Hamas-led Palestinian government. And Lebanon’s Al Manar TV used several excerpts from Carter’s USA Today opinion piece to rally support for the Palestinian cause.
*** We’re Fighting Back Against Carter! ***
This Sunday (May 21st) and Monday (May 22nd) marks the launch of our major pushback against Jimmy Carter. Help us generate momentum for the “Censure Jimmy Carter” campaign by making a contribution to our campaign:
We need your support. Please ask others to sign the “Censure Jimmy Carter” petition online:
And while you’re at it, ask them to match your financial contribution to our campaign so we can deliver our message to the nation. We’re on a quest to raise $100,000 from 2,000 Americans (making a $50 contribution) and with your help we’re going to make our goal!
Ask your friends to make a contribution here:
http://www.CensureCarter.com/contribute
*There are NO contribution limits. You can contribute $1.00 or $1,000.00 or $100,000 - whatever you can afford to help our cause.
You may also mail in your contribution to our headquarters:
Censure Carter Committee
770 L Street #1400
Sacramento, CA 95814
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mission America is pleased to announce the addition of another fine group
endorsing our Risk Audit for Schools on the issue of homosexuality.
Culture Campaign,
www.culturecampaign.com
We are so grateful for the support of this fine group headed by recognized pro-
family leader, Sandy Rios.
If you have not reviewed the Risk Audit, please visit our home page at
www.missionamerica.com .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[0] comments (5034 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Mon May 22, 2006
Stop Domination!
Should the internet be regulated? Nathan Tabor
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/14701.html
Net Neutrality
China does it. The European Union is trying to do it, and there are
increasing concerns that the U.S. government might one day try to do it.
³It² is regulating, and possibly censoring the Internet. So far, lawmakers
have been reluctant to replace the flexible, market-driven success story
with a system of intrusive regulation, but the House is now considering a
bill that would make it illegal to access networking sites such as
MySpace.com from a school or library. The website, which has been linked to
alleged instances of adult sexual predators trolling for naïve minors, has
caused concern among legislators who are rushing to what could be a very
slippery slope.
For the sake of argument, what if Congress managed to shut down MySpace.com?
What would be next and when would the censorship or wave of more and more
regulations ever end? Can you imagine a political party in power deciding
that blogs supporting the other sides¹ positions merited closer scrutiny?
If you¹ve never considered the possibility that the federal government might
one day tell you what websites you could access, what files you could
download, and even what software packages you could install on your
computer, it might be time to take a look at ³Hands Off the Internet,² a
site representing a coalition of Internet users who have taken a proactive
stance on maintaining ³Net Neutrality.² Their logo of ³Say NO to Government
Regulation of the Internet² is complimented with pages of links to articles
which further address the subject, a news section, two form letters to
contact your legislators to voice your concerns about possible government
interference of the Internet, and a chance to sign-up for site updates and
further legislative movement as it develops.
Stop by http://handsoff.org/ while Congress is preoccupied with illegal
immigrants. Who knows what¹s next on their agenda?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Nicholas A. Jackson
The Southern Baptist Exit Strategy: Let Our Children Go!
May 16, 2006 08:11 AM EST
All Eyes on Greensborough
In the year 2006, never has there been such a clear antithesis between those
who love our God, our country and our children, and those who wish to destroy
our God, our country and our children. Nowhere is this battle being fought more
aggressively and fiercely than in the halls of our government (public
schools).
Federal circuit court judges held in November 2005 in Fields v. Palmdale that
“parents have no constitutional right … to prevent a public school from
providing its students with whatever information it wishes to provide, sexual,
or otherwise, when and as the school determines that it is appropriate to do
so.”
In December 2005, a federal judge ruled in favor of government schools
indoctrinating children with Darwinian dogmatism. It is self-evident that
secular humanism and its concomitant moral relativism has become the official
state sponsored religion in government schools.
Amidst this overt indoctrination there is rightly reason to be concerned but
also reason to have hope.
Enter the Southern Baptists.
Last year at the 2005 SBC Annual Meeting, the messengers adopted a resolution
urging churches and parents to investigate their public schools to determine,
among other things, whether they are endangering children in their care by
collaborating with homosexual activists.
Dr. Albert Mohler, President of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, weighed
in on the controversy stating that “We have no reason to believe that next year
will not bring even more urgent concerns related to public education” and
declaring that it is time for responsible Southern Baptists to develop an exit
strategy from the public schools.
Roger Moran, a member of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Executive Committee
and a leader in the Missouri Baptist Convention, and Dr. Bruce N. Shortt, co-
sponsor of the 2004 and 2005 Christian Education Resolutions and author of The
Harsh Truth About Public Schools, have submitted a resolution for consideration
at the 2006 SBC Annual Meeting urging churches to heed Dr. Mohler’s call to
develop an exit strategy from the public schools that will give particular
attention to the needs of orphans, single parents, and the disadvantaged.
This year’s SBC Annual Meeting will be held June 13-14 in Greensboro, North
Carolina, and indeed all eyes will be on Greensborough.
A Divided Denomination
Much like the divide over conservative and liberal theology, another battle
line is being drawn.
I witnessed this divide when I submitted a resolution to the state Convention
of Southern Baptists in Ohio in December of 2005 urging pastors to encourage
parents to remove their children from public schools. There was a debate
between those who could see the spiritual danger being wrought upon our
children, and those who for whatever reason felt that “their schools were
different.”
A precious lady talked about how our children seem to have no hope, and that we
have to give them hope. The Ohio resolution passed but stopped short of calling
on parents to withdraw their children and instead urged parents, “to embrace
their responsibility to educate their children by choosing a means of education
that would “…ensure their physical, moral, emotional, and spiritual well-being,
with a goal of raising godly men and women who are thoroughly equipped to live
as fully devoted followers of Christ”
Are our children becoming “devoted followers of Christ” in our government
schools?
The Salt and Light Myth, and Who’s Converting Whom
Dr. Shortt argues that this is an issue that must be faced squarely: “Many
Christian pastors and leaders still try to evade the cold, hard facts by
talking about ‘school reform’ and ‘salt and light.’ Well, we’ve tried that
strategy for forty years and more, and, after trillions of dollars of reform,
anyone who takes a serious look at the consequences of our government school
habit can see that the Church has been hemorrhaging children for more than a
generation and that the public schools are stuck on stupid morally and
academically.
E. Ray Moore, Jr., founder of Exodus Mandate describes how the tables have
turned in the government schools, “In the early days of homeschooling,” Moore
said, “ people always used to ask us two questions: ‘The government lets you do
that? and What about socialization?’
“Now the environment in the public schools has grown so toxic that it’s our
turn to ask Christian parents who’ve left their children in these schools, ‘God
lets you do that?’ and ‘What about socialization?” (Lee Duigon, Homeschooling
Goes on the Offensive, Chalcedon: November 1, 2005.)
Shortt goes on to say, “Older people just don’t understand the current state of
the schools,” he said. “After a generation of defining deviancy downward and
accepting lower and lower standards, the schools today are as different from
the schools of 40 or 50 years ago as a 747 is from a biplane.”(Lee Duigon,
Chalcedon: November 1, 2005)
We have been deluded to think that because a teacher has a scripture verse on
the desk, we gather around a flag pole, or a have a moment of silence in the
morning that our kids are getting a Christian education.
We are raising up warriors for homosexual activism rather than warriors for
Jesus Christ. More often than not our children are losing their savor, and
their light is being extinguished.
Reaping the Whirlwind
Dr. Rick Scarborough, Founder of Vision America, the leading Southern Baptist
grassroots activist, and author of the recently released Liberalism Kills Kids,
strongly endorses the resolution and sees an urgent need for the SBC to plan an
exit strategy: “Public Schools have long ceased to be a positive reinforcer of
traditional values. In fact, they are not even neutral on many crucial issues
which are important to people of faith. Unfortunately, public education has
been hijacked by people who reject Biblical teachings on man’s origin, the
proper role of sex and the acceptability of homosexuality. These are non-
compromising issues for Christians.”
Linda Harvey of Mission America has developed a survey instrument known as the “
Risk Audit” to assist Christian organizations, churches and parents in
determining whether their local school districts are placing children at risk
by having clubs, programs, policies, or curricula that could influence children
to regard homosexual behavior as an acceptable lifestyle.
Harvey says, “Based on my ten years of tracking and researching the growth of
homosexual activism in public schools, I know that very few parents are aware
that the majority of public school districts are selling our children the
dangerous and false notion that homosexuality is a normal and acceptable
lifestyle.”
The numbers speak for themselves.
A 2001 Zogby Poll of high school seniors found that roughly 2/3rds of those
seniors believed that homosexual marriage and adoption should be legal. Even
higher percentages supported “hate crimes” legislation to give special status
to homosexuals and effectively silence the church.
The impact of homosexual activism alone has been staggering in my sphere of
influence. There are young women in their early twenties, having lesbian
affairs on the job, and acting it out on the clock. Women are abandoning their
husbands and children for other women, men are abandoning their wives and
children for other men, there are countless men who want to be women, and
countless women who want to be men.
The church is not immune to these issues as well. During the marriage petition
drive in 2004 in Ohio which passed by an overwhelming 62 percent, the issue of
homosexual marriage was at the forefront. It became frustrating to have to
explain to young “Christian,” youths why two people loving each other do not
automatically qualify for marriage. The Church and consequently the nation is
reaping a whirlwind.
Defending the Fatherless
One powerful aspect, and God honoring quality of the 2006 resolution is that
it, “Asks That Particular Attention be Given to the Needs of Orphans, Single
Parents, and the Disadvantaged.” Dr. Voddie Baucham, a prominent SBC leader,
and author of the book, Ever Loving Truth endorses the resolution because he
knows from personal experience how the government school monopoly fails
millions of children every day: “I know what its like to be a poor kid trapped
in underperforming schools. Being raised by a single mother in the inner city,
I had no choice but to accept the inferior education my schools offered. Not to
mention the drugs, sex, and violence that were all part of the package.”
“Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, to visit the
fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from
the world.” James 1:27
The time has come to make sure men and women like Baucham are not left behind.
For Such a Time as This God has uniquely positioned the SBC to encourage
fathers, and come alongside single mothers and equip them to provide a
thoroughly Christian education either through Christian schooling or home
education. Imagine if every SBC church had an adjacent Christian school, and
encouraged and assisted parents in educating their children. The impact would
be staggering.
Much however, depends on the outcome in Greensborough and whether pastors will
defend our children, or continue to stay silent. The cost of silence may be too
high.
At the SBC’s own 2002 annual meeting, the Southern Baptist Council on Family
Life reported, that 88 percent of the children raised in evangelical homes
leave the church at or about age 18.
Soon the SBC will work its way into irrelevancy, and we will lose our
denomination.
“For if thou altogether holdest thy peace at this time, then shall there
enlargement and deliverance arise from the Jews from another place; but thou
and thy father’s house shall be destroyed: and who knoweth whether thou art
come to the kingdom for such a time as this, (Esther 4:14)
“As goes the SBC so goes the larger Church in the USA and, as goes the Church,
so goes the nation.”-- E. Ray Moore, Jr, USAR Ret CH (Lt.Col.)
Now is the time to act. Please SBC, let our children go!
Nicholas A. Jackson: Nick is Executive Director of Reform America, and Ohio
Coordinator for Exodus Mandate. In addition, he spends time as a free-lance
writer articulating the Christian viewpoint into our culture.
“And they that shall be of thee shall build the old waste places: thou shalt
raise up the foundations of many generations; and thou shalt be called the
repairer of the breach, the restorer of paths to dwell in.” Isaiah 58:12
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/articles/article.html?id=14617
Catch Nick on
Website: www.reformamerica.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Think about this: If you don’t want to forward this for fear of offending someone-----YOU’RE PART OF THE PROBLEM !!!!
Subject: THIS WAS IN A TAMPA NEWSPAPER
This is an editorial written by an American citizen, published in a Tampa, FL Newspaper. He did quite a job; didn’t he? Read on, please!
IMMIGRANTS, NOT AMERICANS, MUST ADAPT.
I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we
are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Americans. However...… the dust from the attacks had barely settled when the “politically correct! “ crowd began complaining about the possibility that our patriotism was offending others.
I am not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who is seeking a better life by coming to ! America. Our population is almost entirely made up of descendants of immigrants. However, there
are a few things that those who have recently come to our country, and apparently some born here, need to understand. This idea of America being a multicultural community has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity. As Americans...… we have our own culture, our own society, our own language and our own lifestyle. This culture has been developed over centuries of struggles, trials, and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom.
We speak ENGLISH, not Spanish, Portuguese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language.
Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society, learn the language!
“In God We Trust” is our national motto. This is not some Christian, right wing, political slogan.. We adopted this motto because Christian men and women.......on Christian principles..........…
founded this nation..… and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it
on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as
your new home.........because
God is part of our culture.
If Stars and Stripes offend you, or you don’t like Uncle Sam, then you should seriously consider a move to another part of this planet.
We are happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and we really don’t care how you did things where you came from. This is OUR COUNTRY, our land, and our lifestyle. Our First Amendment gives every citizen the right to express his opinion and we
will allow you every opportunity to do so!
But once you are done complaining....… whining..… and griping....… about our flag....… our pledge...… our national motto........or our way of life...I highly encourage you to take advantage of one other Great American Freedom....…
THE RIGHT TO LEAVE.
It is Time for America to Speak up
If you agree—pass this along; if you don’t agree—delete it - You are in the WRONG Country!
[0] comments (4810 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Wed May 17, 2006
Boycott the Myth...
Religious Leaders Call for Boycott of Sony’s
‘Da Vinci Code the Movie’
Sony’s Da Vinci Code the Movie… seeks to profit off bigotry, proselytizes
paganism, and undermines the dignity of women ...,” states prominent Roman
Catholic Priest
WASHINGTON, May 17 /Christian Newswire/—The Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer,
President of Human Life International (HLI), joined Dr. Ted Baehr of
Movieguide.org, Don Feder, Austin Ruse of the Catholic Family and Human Rights
Institute, Patrick Reilly of the Cardinal Newman Society, and Bob Knight of
Concerned Women for America as part of The Interfaith Coalition Against ‘The Da
Vinci Code.’”
An address by Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer, President of Human Life International
(HLI), at the National Press Club:
“Good Afternoon, I am the Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer, President of Human Life
International a Catholic Human Rights Organization with offices in 75
countries.
“The Da Vinci Code is filled with contradictions, nonsensical statements, and
innumerable artistic and historical inaccuracies.
“It is not the contradictions and two-dimensional characters that have led to
our boycott of Sony’s Da Vinci Code the Movie.
“Human Life International is boycotting Sony’s Da Vinci Code the Movie because
it seeks to profit off bigotry, proselytizes Satanism, and undermines the
dignity of women.
“Sony’s Da Vinci Code the Movie seeks to profit off the permissible prejudice
of anti-Catholic Bigotry. If Ron Howard were to replace the word Catholic every
time it appeared in the Da Vinci Code with Jew or Muslim, the outcry from the
mainstream media would have rightfully been deafening.
“Why is it acceptable to slander Christians generally and Catholics
specifically?
“If Sony profits from anti-Catholic bigotry this May, what can we expect in the
future?
“Next summer, will they seek to profit off anti- Semitism: Protocols of the
Elders of Zion coming to a theater near you, Directed by Ron Howard?
“Will Sony remake Birth of a Nation?
“Tom Hanks starring as Hitler in Sony’s Mein Kampf may be just around the
corner.
“Sony must get the message loud and clear: you can not profit from hate. Sony
may make money by bashing Christians and Mocking Jesus Christ with Da Vinci
Code the Movie, but they will pay every penny back in dollars in the years to
come.
“Let us reject bigotry and Boycott Sony’s Da Vinci Code Movie.
“The Da Vinci Code glorifies hieros gamos a satanic ritual that reduces women
to nothing more than objects in a male dominated sex ritual.
“Out of respect for women, let us boycott Sony’s Da Vinci Code the Movie.
“Should any Christian see this movie? At our baptism, we pledge to ‘reject
Satan, and all his works and all his empty promises.’
“Let us reject Sony’s Da Vinci Code the Movie!” concluded the Rev. Thomas J.
Euteneuer.
Founded in 1981, Human Life International is the world’s largest pro-life, pro-
family organization that is dedicated to defending life, faith and the family,
with branches and affiliates around the world.
Christian Newswire
To: National & International Desks
Contact: Jason Jones, Media Director for Human Life International,
540-551-0217, jjones@hli.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Democrats, MSM and ACLU Continue to Dismantle Country
by Sher Zieve
It’s increasingly hard to believe but, the ACLU, mainstream media and Democrats
(all part of the same familial group) are working their proverbial derrieres
off in continuing attempts to destroy the country—in their plan to tear down
President Bush’s administration. Question: Due to the president’s (and the
Senate’s) to date unwillingness to effectively address border security, aren’t
his poll numbers low enough for them?
I guess not, as there our internal and domestic “axis of evil” sits—plotting
and planning its ongoing and apparently lifelong efforts toward the country’s
demise.
The axis’ latest attacks are against the NSA data mining program. The ACLU has
filed a lawsuit to stop it—remember this is the same ACLU that supports
convicted terrorist supporter Sami al-Arian—Democrat leaders (including but not
limited to Durbin, Graham, Kerry, Kennedy and Schumer) are screaming about it
and the mainstream media is misrepresenting it. The problems with and
disingenuous nature of their complaints are:
1. The US Supreme Court’s Smith v. MD (442 U.S. 735) 1979 decision regarding
the privacy of phone call records upheld the lower court’s decision that “
warrantless installation of the pen register [the call record monitoring
device] did not violate the Fourth Amendment” and further held “the
installation and use of the pen register was not a ‘search’ within the meaning
of the Fourth Amendment, and hence no warrant was required” (pps. 739-746);
2. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (passed by Congress and signed by then
President Clinton) advised that call records are owned by the serving phone
companies, are not private and may be used by authorized governmental agencies
and law enforcement.
These Call Detail Records (CDRs) are used regularly, frequently and legally by
multiple organizations. The Democrats, mainstream media and most certainly the
group of lawyers who comprise the ACLU are well aware of these facts. However,
they still feign “ignorance” and “shock” that the government would try to
protect its citizens against another terrorist attack via legal and effective
means. Effective that is until the MSM gets information from their leakers and
publishes their red meat for the world to devour.
Note: If our Democrat Representatives and Senators are not aware that the
practice of data mining is legal and has been used by authorized entities for
years, perhaps a more informed and intelligent group of leaders should be
elected—and the current crop-of-the-ignorant discarded.
We either take the security of our country seriously including, but not limited
to, tracking terrorists who want to destroy us and shoring up our borders or we
will have no country left. If our National security continues to be a
political “how can we destroy Bush” football, the enemies of the US will
quietly and covertly sneak into the country with their dirty bombs while the
politicians argue about how to get reelected, the mainstream media continue
their assaults on a Republican president
and the American people and the ACLU tries to figure out how it can establish
Islam as the official religion of the United States of America.
References:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=442&invol=735
http://www.fcc.gov/telecom.html
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=442&invol=735
[0] comments (4956 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Tue May 16, 2006
News Alert:
*News Alert from: http://www.CensureCarter.com
HUGO CHAVEZ RAISES STAKES AGAINST U.S.
Today the Reuters news agency reported that the U.S. will ban arms sales to
Venezuela following efforts by Hugo Chavez to interfere with counter-terrorism
efforts.
This follows an earlier threat by Hugo Chavez that he would stop shipments of
oil to the United States if action were taken to stop Iran from developing a
nuclear weapons program.
Chavez spoke to supporters of the Venezuelan government in the United Kingdom
and said, “We are facing the threat of global challenges stemming from the
genocidal, immoral, sick, and corrupt elite currently governing the United
States.”
Don’t believe me? Then read for yourself in this story from the Cuban News
Service:
http://www.ain.cubaweb.cu/idioma/ingles/2006/may15chavez-socialismo.htm
Chavez is now seeking a referendum to allow himself to solidify his hold on
Venezuela for the next 25 years. An ally of Fidel Castro and Saddam Hussein
(and also the current regime in Iran), he seeks to see the United States
brought down to its knees. He even attacked the United States for going after
al-Qaida in Afghanistan following the September 11th attacks!
And guess who helped Hugo Chavez seize power? If you guessed that shameful
meddler in international affairs, Jimmy Carter, you guessed right!
Carter has repeatedly come to the assistance of Hugo Chavez, helping to rally
international support for Chavez’s regime. It was Jimmy Carter who certified
the election of Hugo Chavez to power in the most recent elections It’s
deplorable.
Jimmy Carter has traveled repeatedly to Venezuela where he was typically
entertained by Chavez. The efforts to woo the terminally naive Jimmy Carter
worked. Carter wrote glowing diary accounts of his interactions with the
Marxist dictator, Chavez.
“This is a triumph for the democratic process in Venezuela, and all
elements
of the process deserve credit. President Chavez fulfilled his promise to
us and
made a positive statement accepting the challenge.”
We cannot continue to employ the policy of appeasement against those who seek
to bring harm to the democratic people of the West.
Whether it’s North Korea and Iran and their respective threats of nuclear
action; demands for international funding by Hamas in the Palestinian
territory; or the latest demands from Marxist dictator Hugo Chavez, it seems
that those who wish to bring harm to the world are feeling unstoppable.
And in each of those regions one man - and only one man - bears responsibility
for setting up this policy of appeasement: Jimmy Carter.
My friends, we can keep pretending that Jimmy Carter is a thing of the past.
We can keep pretending that the best thing to do is just ignore him.
But while we do that those who approve of his policies of appeasement that are
embraced by the UN and those who support the “Blame America First” movement
continue to pressure Republicans and Democrats in this country into going along
with Carter’s agenda.
Iran. North Korea. Venezuela. Palestinian Authority (Hamas).
It’s one messed up situation after another and it’s time that we brought a
resolution of Censure against the man who was the architect for these foreign
policy fiascos: Jimmy Carter.
* Sign the “Censure Jimmy Carter” petition HERE:
http://www.CensureCarter.com
* Contribute to the “Censure Jimmy Carter” campaign:
http://www.CensureCarter.com/contribute
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Safe Place for Kids to Learn Homosexual Sex:
The real story about community ‘GLBT’ youth centers
By Linda Harvey
www.missionamerica.com
(From May/June/July/Aug.2006 issue of “Choice 4 Truth")
***"There’s no required parental notification or consent, but kids are assured
of ‘confidentiality.’"***
---------------------------
It’s Friday at 5:00 p.m. Do you know where your kids are?
Your sixth grader, Nick, stayed after school with his new buddy, Joel. They’ll
be home soon on their bikes, because they had a last-minute homework assignment
in the library. Or so they told you.
There’s one place in the neighborhood most parents might never think their kids
would end up. It’s the local community center for homosexual kids. That’s right—
- for kids. And your sixth grader would be welcomed there by adult volunteers
and staff, and allowed to socialize with high school and college age ‘gay’
youth, without your permission or knowledge. All he or she has to do is show
up, and many are located conveniently on bus lines, for kids under driving
age.
“No parents” plus homosexual approval is the reason these centers call
themselves “safe” places. There is a homosexual youth center now in virtually
every medium or large city in the U.S. Many are funded by private foundations
or connected to a local adult center for “GLBT” (“gay, lesbian bisexual and
transgendered”) people. Some are even funded by United Way.
And this summer, a traveling group of HIV positive young adults called “Hope’s
Voice” will be visiting these centers all over the country, giving speeches,
interacting with local kids, talking about “safe sex” and condom use -— and
affirming the homosexual lifestyle. As a part of this tour and other contacts
with local AIDS groups, your sixth grader could get a free HIV test right then
and there, without your consent or knowledge.
Danger: Unsafe Zone
Preying on vulnerable teens and pre-teens, these centers provide instant access
by homosexual adults to kids who have the unfounded notion they are “gay.”
These misguided youth can adopt this high-risk identity and become sexually
involved with peers and/or older homosexuals, all without a parent’s or
guardian’s knowledge or even an objective bystander to watch over them.
Some community groups target youth by an upper and lower age limit, like 13 to
24. Others have an even lower age limit of 11 or 12. Some simply say they are
for youth “age 22 and under.” How far under? And who checks? Thirteen- year-
olds don’t have driver’s licenses or usually any form of legal ID. These
centers in reality can do little verification of age.
( For the COMPLETE article, go to
www.missionamerica.com .)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, this is very interesting. The director of a major taxpayer funded group
supposedly fighting AIDS and HIV in Ohio, has not only engaged in a paranoid
campaign against abstinence groups in Ohio and at the federal level during the
past year(I will write the details about this at some point), but he is now
after me and Mission America, only because we asked for information from the
Ohio Department of Health available under the Freedom of Information Act.
How does he have time to do this, first of all? He’s supposed to be managing a
large staff of people and millions of dollars in funds.
I have never spoken to, e-mailed, or attempted to contact this man. I have no
idea how he got our video and DVD.
This is not the first time he’s targeted us. He called a press conference
solely devoted to Mission America and what we are “up to” several months ago,
providing inaccurate information to a few reporters. Now he continues....
---------------------------
(E-mail received today, May 16, by Linda Harvey)
Ms. Harvey:
I realize it’s last-minute, but I wanted to extend an invitation to join us
today for the following event – you would be free to talk about your films, the
background, and the agenda of Mission: America.
Earl Pike, Executive Director
AIDS Taskforce of Greater Cleveland
3210 Euclid Avenue
Cleveland, Ohio 44115
216-357-2221
2nd Annual
International Day Against Homophobia
May 16, 2006
Join us for screenings — and criticism — of two anti-gay “documentaries”
produced by Mission: America, the Columbus, Ohio group that recently launched a
records request that “appears to be aimed at harassing organizations that do
HIV prevention work in the LGBT community.”*
Veil of Deception:
The Impact of Same-Sex Marriage on American Youth
&
No Tolerance for Truth:
What Our Children Are Learning about Homosexuality
Tuesday, May 16th, 12:00 — 1:30
AIDS Taskforce of Greater Cleveland, 3210 Euclid Avenue
A pizza lunch will be served, but please RSVP via e-mail to mgipson@atfgc.org
In 2005, the International Gay and Lesbian Association, with over 400 member
organizations from 90 countries, launched the first annual International Day
Against Homophobia, to be held on May 17th. The idea caught on, and this year,
groups from around the world are planning events on and around May 17th to
spotlight the ongoing reality of discrimination against LGBT people.
* Gay People’s Chronicle, March 24, 2006.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[0] comments (1045 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Mon May 15, 2006
Harvey Prayer:
Paul Harvey’s On Air PRAYER
“Heavenly Father, we come before you today to ask your forgiveness and to seek your direction and guidance.
We know Your Word says, ‘Woe to those who call evil good but that is exactly what we have done.
We have lost our spiritual equilibrium and reversed our values.
We have exploited the poor and called it the lottery.
We have rewarded laziness and called it welfare.
We have killed our unborn and called it choice.
We have shot abortionists and called it justifiable.
We have neglected to discipline our children and called it building self esteem.
We have abused power and called it politics.
We have coveted our neighbor’s possessions and called it ambition.
We have polluted the air with profanity and pornography and called
it freedom of expression.
We have ridiculed the time-honored values of our forefathers and
called it enlightenment.
Search us, Oh God, and know our hearts today;cleanse us from every sin and set us free Amen!”
Commentator Paul Harvey aired this prayer on his radio program, “The Rest of the Story,” and received a larger response to this program than any other
he has ever aired.
With the Lord’s help, may this prayer sweep over our nation and
wholeheartedly become our desire so that we again can be called “one nation under God.”
If possible, please pass this prayer on to your friends. “If you don’t stand for
something, you will fall for anything.”
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Friends, breaking news this week that you need to know about.
Jimmy Carter has helped the terrorist group Hamas to win another battle.
And YOU are the losers.
Think I’m making this up? I only wish I were.
The Associated Press is reporting that the U.S. has bowed to pressure and will provide “humanitarian aid” to the Palestinian government which is now ruled by the terrorist group, Hamas. [ You can read the story for yourself here: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/10/ap/world/mainD8HGJ588E.shtml ]
This comes after Jimmy Carter butted his nose again into international affairs and undermined U.S. foreign policy. We wrote to you earlier about Carter’s call for the U.S. to provide funding to the Hamas-backed Palestinian government. [ Here’s that link again in case you missed it: http://www.cartercenter.org/viewdoc.asp?docID=2337&submenu=news ]
So now OUR TAX DOLLARS are now going to be sent to the Palestinians under the
rule of one of the most bloody anti-Western terrorist groups in the world. It
was bad enough when Jimmy Carter was helping the corrupt United Nations secure
funding - some of which later went to terrorist organizations in the
Palestinian region - but now the U.S. will be handing over more money straight
from the pockets of U.S. taxpayers.
Aren’t you sick of feeling like the United States keeps caving in to those who
wish us harm? Don’t you wish that we could turn around the debate and condemn
people like Jimmy Carter who keep leading the charge for America’s enemies?
If you do, then please do something about it. As you can tell, I am motivated
to build momentum for our “Censure Jimmy Carter” drive and make history by
having Congress censure this man for repeatedly undermining U.S. interests and
the missions our troops are serving in.
I NEED YOU to stand with me. Please, make a contribution of $25, $50, $100,
$250, $500 or more to our “Censure Jimmy Carter” campaign.
Contribute online here: http://www.CensureCarter.com/contribute
And if you know someone who might be equally disgusted to see U.S. tax dollars
going towards Hamas then forward this email to them. Ask them to match your
contribution.
If just 500 people on this list contributed $100 and found one other person to
match their contribution we’d raise $100,000 from this one email. And that
will make a powerful impact on our efforts.
Ask a friend, family member, political ally, etc… to match your contribution:
http://www.CensureCarter.com/contribute
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>>> So if Bush was right, then who was wrong? Well, that would be former
President Jimmy Carter who has repeatedly defended Saddam Hussein, opposed UN
sanctions against Iraq and is now urging the international community to fund
the Palestinian government being run by the Islamic terrorist group, Hamas.
Here’s what Jimmy Carter told Katie Couric of the Today Show when she asked him
about Saddam Hussein and the war in Iraq:
Carter: “That was a false statement. It was false to state that
Saddam Hussein had a vast store of weapons of mass destruction
or that Iraq was a direct threat to the security of the United
States. The war has been unnecessary. And now I think we’ve reached
a point in Iraq that it’s become a quagmire - very similar to what
we experienced in Vietnam. There’s no real extrication for us to
accomplish the goals that we had when we went in. I think a lot
of the violence in Iraq now is directly attributable to the fact
that U.S. forces are there. And there’s no clear concept at any
early stage of when they will be withdrawn.
Had enough of Jimmy Carter? Then sign up to support the “Censure Jimmy Carter”
campaign - a project of Move America Forward.
* Sign the “Censure Jimmy Carter” petition - http://www.CensureCarter.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[0] comments (3278 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Fri May 12, 2006
Why Liberals Hate Mississippi...
One More Reason Why Liberals Hate Mississippi
by
Rob Hood
The state of Mississippi has long been a target of political hum drum from liberals and particularly from the news media. There’s just something about my home state that liberals cringe when they hear the word Mississippi. Yes, we had our fair share of racial disputes in the past,but for the most part, that is a thing of the past.
When news anchors report about Mississippi they often portray the state as a backwards hillbilly country filled with uneducated, poor people which is not an accurate description. Mississippi has come long way in all areas. Education has improved dramatically and so has technology. There are several electronics and high-tech companies in Mississippi that give way to high paying high tech jobs for engineers and technicians. There are still poor people here in Mississippi, but that is everywhere and not limited to just one state.
The majority of Mississippi are conservative and as friend pointed out to me once, Mississippi is one of the last standing states where we have CONSERVATIVE PRO-LIFE DEMOCRATS serving in the Senate and House. I consider myself a conservative Republican, but many who consider themselves democrats here in Mississippi are still pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, and are still conservative in their faith and religious moral beliefs.
Liberals often tout Southern conservatives more because of our longstanding and unwavering faith in Jesus Christ and the word of God, the Holy Bible. Conservative Mississippians share this faith and often show it in our political decisions which liberals hate even more.
During the 2004 presidential election there were eleven states who had a same-sex marriage ban proposal on the ballot. Mississippi was the leader with an 83% vote to ban same-sex marriage which is the highest percentage vote of any state concerning this issue to this day. Mississippi also is one of the hardest states to get an abortion in because of strict stipulations brought on by religious pro-life conservatives such as the organization Pro-Life Mississippi (www.prolifemississippi.org
Once again liberals are going mad all over the nation because conservatives want to put back the institution of God into the very classroom that it was taken out of by the radical left since the 1960s liberal revolution. All over the United States the debate of Intelligent Design vs. the Theory of Evolution and what can and cannot be taught is going on.
Just recently Mississippi made a bold move that may change the course of everything on this issue. Mississippi has now paved the way for Intelligent Design to be taught in schools along side of evolution. Conservative Republican Governor Haley Barbour signed a new state law that basically says that no restrictions can be placed on teachers or students when discussing the origins of life in the classroom. This law basically allows a student to question evolution and to discuss Creation if that student or teacher chooses to do so. The new law prohibits the school board, superintendent, or principal from placing restrictions on discussions about the origins of life.
This new law is a breakthrough to me because that means that the age of indoctrination is over in the classroom. Students can legally question the theory of evolution and legally challenge it with discussions of creation in the classroom. I am sure this will be a model for other states to follow and the sooner the better.
The Tupelo, Mississippi based American Family Association (www.afa.net
Lately AFA has put the hurt on Ford Motor Company by placing a boycott on all companies worldwide that are owned by Ford such as Volvo, Lincoln, Mercury, and others in the group. This boycott started as a way to tell Ford that conservative Christians do not appreciate Ford’s political involvement and promotion with gay and lesbian activist groups. Ford refused to stop supporting the groups so AFA launched a boycott that, at first, seemed to not be working. Then the figures came out.
A recent report says that Ford dealers are feeling the effects of the boycott. Because of the boycott, Ford’s sales have dropped by 5 % in march of 2006. Since the boycott began, Ford’s stock has dropped 14% which is the lowest in 20 years. Even some preachers have been speaking the message in the pulpit to stop buying Ford until they stop support homosexual activist groups against traditional marriage. I own a Ford myself, but if Ford continues in their ways, I will be one of those looking elsewhere when it comes time to buy another vehicle.
Liberals still hate Mississippi and Mississippians still value traditional marriage and Biblical values. Some things never change. Many have said that Southerners are hard-headed and downright stubborn when it comes to changing our belief system just because someone said it is “old-fashioned”. I guess we really are. People call me old fashioned because I still believe in waiting until marriage for sex, marriage is reserved for one man and one woman, abortion is murder, the Bible is the infallible word of God, and only salvation through Jesus Christ can get you into Heaven for eternity. Call me old fashion and hard-headed if you want, but like I said before - some things never change. My faith and belief system is one of them. Where do you put your faith?
ABOUT ROB HOOD
Rob Hood grew up in rural Mississippi and was rooted in the doctrine of the Southern Baptist Convention and its teachings of Biblical right and wrong, accountability to a higher authority, and the birth, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. He was a participant in Bible Drill for nine years, a Southern Baptist Convention program devoted to educating children and youth with scriptures from the Bible for use in everyday life situations. He graduated from Holmes Community College in Grenada, Mississippi with an Associate of Applied Science (AAS) degree in Electronics Technology and is currently employed as an Electronics Technician with HAM radio equipment manufacturer. He is also a Federal Communications Commission licensed Technician Class HAM radio operator and lives in North Mississippi.
[0] comments (3222 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Thu May 11, 2006
Boycott Citgo...
Cindy Sheehan & Chavez
Venezuela Dictator Vows To Bring Down U.S. Government
NOTE - The Venezuela government is the sole owner of Citgo gasoline company
Venezuela Dictator Hugo Chavez has vowed to bring down the U.S.. government.
Chavez, president of Venezuela, told a TV audience: “Enough of imperialist aggression;
we must tell the world: down with the U.S. empire. We have to bury imperialism this century.”
The guest on his television program, beamed across Venezuela, was Cindy Sheehan,
the antiwar activist. Chavez recently had as his guest Harry Belafonte, who called
President Bush “the greatest terrorist in the world.”
Chavez is pushing a socialist revolution and has a close alliance with Cuban
dictator Fidel Castro.
Regardless of your feelings about the war in Iraq, the issue here is that we have
a socialist dictator vowing to bring down the government of the U.S. And he is
using our money to achieve his goal!
The Venezuela government, run by dictator Chavez, sole owner of Citgo gas co.
Sales of products at Citgo stations send money back to Chavez to help him in his vow
to bring down our government.
Take Action
Please decide that you will not be shopping at a Citgo station .
Why should U.S. citizens who love freedom be financing a dictator who has vowed to take down our government?
Very important. Please forward this to your friends
and family. Most of them don’t know that Citgo is
owned by the Venezuela government.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
News Media Still Yawning Over Rampant UN Corruption
by Jim Kouri, CPP
The United Nations Oil for Food Program was probably the biggest scam in the
history of geopolitics. Not only did the program fill the pockets of corrupt
politicians, diplomats and businessmen, but it also allowed Iraq’s dictator
Saddam Hussein to continue building up his military with the help of such
countries as Russia and France.
The US news media continue to yawn over the UN scandal involving participants
in the Oil for Food Program. In fairness, only part of the reason is the
media’s hesitancy to criticize an organization that is practically sacrosanct
in the view of liberals. A large part of the media’s failure to report on the
UN malfeasance is that it is such a complicated case of fraud, duplicity and
mendacity that reporters find themselves incapable of dumbing down the story
for human consumption.
In 1996, the United Nations (UN) Security Council and Iraq began the Oil for
Food program to address Iraq’s humanitarian situation after sanctions were
imposed in 1990. More than $67 billion in oil revenue was obtained through the
program, with $31 billion in humanitarian assistance delivered to Iraq. The
2005 Defense Authorization Act mandated that GAO review the Oil for Food
program.
The UN Oil for Food program would have benefited from an internationally
accepted internal control framework to provide reasonable assurance in
safeguarding assets and meeting program objectives.
Although the program averted a humanitarian crisis while limiting Iraq’s
ability to purchase military-related items, internal control problems allowed
the former Iraqi regime to manipulate the program and circumvent sanctions to
obtain billions of dollars in illicit payments.
In particular, weaknesses in the control environment of the Oil for Food
program compromised oversight and made it vulnerable to fraud and abuse. For
example, Iraq negotiated contracts directly with companies purchasing its oil
and selling commodities.
In the absence of UN oversight, Iraq manipulated contract terms and obtained
kickbacks. Moreover, the program had a complex structure with unclear lines of
responsibility and authority. This diffusion among various entities meant that
no single entity was accountable for the program in its entirety. This allowed
all parties involved to perpetrate fraud without fear of detection.
The Oil for Food program also had weaknesses in the four key internal control
standards --risk assessment, control activities, information and communication,
and monitoring—that facilitated Iraq’s ability to obtain illicit revenues
ranging from $7.4 billion to $12.8 billion. In particular, the UN did not
provide for timely assessments to address the risks posed by Iraq’s control
over contracting and the program’s expansion from emergency assistance to
commodities for 24 sectors.
The UN Security Council established the UN Compensation Commission (UNCC) in
1991 to process claims and pay victims of Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait. Security
Council resolution 986 provided that a portion of proceeds from Iraq oil sales
would go to the compensation fund.
The commission approved awards of $52.5 billion to more than 1.5 million
claimants and has paid more than $20 billion of this amount; however, Iraq
still owes almost $32.2 billion in unpaid awards. Future payments for these
awards could extend through 2020. These unpaid awards are in addition to the
$51 billion that Iraq owes to international creditors.
The Oil for Food program offers several lessons for designing future sanctions
and strengthening existing UN programs: assess whether the sanctions program
gives undue control to the sanctioned country; consider the economic impact
that sanctions have on neighboring countries; ensure that all aspects of
sanctions are equally enforced; establish clear authority and responsibility
for management, oversight, and monitoring activities; assess and mitigate risk
as programs and funding expand; and
assess the role of internal oversight units and ensure that they have the
resources and independence needed for effective oversight.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Day of Regret
By: Nathan Tabor
To hear liberals tell it, George W. Bush doesn¹t have a prayer of
succeeding.
What with the war in Iraq, soaring gasoline prices, and the high cost of
medical care, the President¹s critics dismiss him on good days as
ineffectualŠon bad days as a dunce.
Yet, the President, with his cockeyed optimism and can-do American spirit,
seems to believe he can and will succeed. And he believes that much of the
credit can be attributed to prayer.
You see, this is a praying President. Maybe that¹s why he catches so much
flack from the media elite, who never met a praying man that they liked.
This is a Commander-in-Chief who believes strongly in the power of prayer to
give wisdom, counsel, and fortitude to a leader. He believes that prayer
not only moves mountains, but changes hearts.
And he believes that the power of the Almighty is stronger than the power of
the chairman of the Democratic Party.
At a White House celebration of the National Day of Prayer, Bush said,
³America is a nation of prayer. It¹s impossible to tell the story of our
nation without telling the story of people who pray. At decisive moments in
our history and in quiet times around family tables, we are a people humbled
and strengthened and blessed by prayer.²
In fact, this President was bold enough to say that prayer is the greatest
gift a citizen can offer him. Not a vote. Not a contribution to the
Republican Party. Prayer.
³In my travels across the great land, a comment that I hear often from our
fellow citizens is, ŒMr. President, I pray for you and your family.¹ It¹s
amazing how many times a total stranger walks up and says that to me. You¹d
think they¹d say, ŒHow about the bridge?¹ Or, ŒHow about filling the
potholes?¹ No, they say, ŒI¹ve come to tell you I pray for you, Mr.
President.¹²
Yet, this is not a President who is commanding people to pray‹as some on the
left would have you believe.
³We are a people united by our love for freedom, even when we differ in our
personal beliefs. In America, we are free to profess any faith we choose,
or no faith at all.²
Unfortunately, for many of us, the National Day of Prayer is a national day
of regret. This is because we are not really free to pray at times in the
land of the free. For instance, our children are banned from offering an
earnest prayer at school‹where prayer is often needed the most.
A number of liberals would like to shut down churches where pastors are bold
enough to dare speak against modern-day ills such as abortion, the break-up
of the family, and pornography. They claim such clergymen are venturing
into the religious no-man¹s land of politics.
Retailers routinely secularize religious holidays, refusing to acknowledge
God at all. This is curious, given the fact that national public opinion
polls actually show that most people do believe in Him.
This was a nation founded on deeply-held religious principles of right and
wrong. Our laws are based on the Judeo-Christian tradition of morality.
Our founding fathers did, in fact, have more than a casual acquaintance with
the Bible.
Eliminating God from the public sphere is a short-sighted strategy. You may
be able to keep peace with atheists in the short-term that way but, over the
long haul, all it does is further divide our nation.
Simply put, we need more than a national day of prayer. We need 365 days of
national prayer.
Copyright © 2006 by Nathan Tabor
Nathan Tabor is a conservative political activist based in Kernersville,
North Carolina. He has a bachelor¹s degree in psychology and a master¹s
degree in public policy. He is a contributing editor at
www.theconservativevoice.com and his 60-second commentaries are heard on
over 250 stations daily. Visit www.aconservativemoment.com to hear them. You
can contact him at Nathan@nathantabor.com
[0] comments (4308 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Tue May 09, 2006
Boycott Da Vinci lies...
As we all know, the da Vinci Code movie is about to be released. This is a
blasphemous story which attacks the very heart of Christianity, the deity of
our Lord. A number of prominent Christian leaders have recommended we go see it
so we can counter it, but this idea is RUBBISH!
Christians have no business going to see this movie, boosting its box office
numbers and supporting Tom Hanks and Ron Howard. There is enough documentation
about what they teach and we can easily counter it with the truth and from
history. What I believe the Christian community (believing Catholics and
Protestants) should do is not only boycott the movie, but any theater showing
it for the duration of its run. If we do this in significant numbers, we will
send this movie back to hell where it came from in short order.
We should also consider a long term boycott of the works of Ron Howard and Tom
Hanks. Please consider this request. The Christian community has the power to
make its voice be heard, but not by blending in with the world and rushing out
to see this movie.
From Michael Burkard,
mjburkard@earthlink.net
* A Message from Mission America @ www.missionamerica.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
www.marriagedebate.com
GET INVOLVED TODAY!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just when you thought Jimmy Carter couldn’t sink any lower, he has hit a new
low.
In a newspaper OpEd piece published this weekend, former President Jimmy Carter
has pathetically attacked the United States and defended the terrorist group,
Hamas. Carter says we have engaged in a “crime” in our tough stance against
these terrorists and he calls America to task.
Please realize that Hamas is the most deadly and bloodthirsty Palestinian
terrorist group in the world.
You should read Jimmy Carter’s OpEd that was published over the weekend. It will help you to understand just why it is that we have launched the “Censure Jimmy Carter” campaign [website: ]http://www.CensureCarter.com] . When a former President writes that America is wrong, and the terrorists are right, then he sends a message to the rest of the world that undermines the mission our men and women of the U.S. Armed Forces are serving in.
Read Carter’s Op Ed:
http://www.cartercenter.org/doc2337.htm
OK, so did you read his “OpEd” - do you now understand how dangerous and
destructive an influence Jimmy Carter has become?
Should you have any doubts about the deadly nature of the terrorist group,
Hamas, then maybe pictures will help set things straight for you. Here’s a
sampling of pictures of recent Hamas-led terrorist strikes.
NOTE: Some of these photographs are rather graphic, so please do not open them
if you aren’t sure whether you can cope with the honest, brutal images of what
terrorist attacks can do to innocent people.
http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/terror_96/photo5.gif
http://www.peacewithrealism.org/images/busbomb2.jpg
https://www.aipac.org/hamas/gallery/images/HamasSlideshow_03.jpg
Enough is enough. We cannot allow Jimmy Carter to continue to hurt America and
set back our war against terrorism. We cannot sit idly while he rallies the
world to oppose U.S. policies in the fight against terrorism.
It is time once and for all for the Congress to issue a resolution of Censure
against Jimmy Carter, condemning him for his shameful conduct and letting the
rest of the world know that his views do not represent the thoughts and
feelings of the American people.
Please, support our Censure Jimmy Carter campaign.
SIGN THE PETITION:
http://www.CensureCarter.com
SUPPORT OUR TV AD CAMPAIGN (to get the message out):
http://www.CensureCarter.com/contribute
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Agape Press,
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/5/92006b.asp
TVC Blasts GLAAD’s Pro-Homosexual Ad Campaign, CBS-TV’s Complicity
By Jim Brown and Jenni Parker
May 9, 2006
(AgapePress) - A conservative group is criticizing CBS Television for airing a
pro-homosexual public service announcement during a daytime soap opera. The
network was to air the PSA at the end of today’s episode of As the World Turns,
which featured a teen character who tells his parents he is homosexual.
The PSA urges viewers to “take a stand against the discrimination and prejudice
faced by gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.” The spot is all part
of a campaign by the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) called
“Be an ally and a friend.”
Andrea Lafferty, executive director of the Traditional Values Coalition (TVC),
says her group is unhappy with CBS’s decision to use daytime television to
promote homosexuality among teens. “Traditional Values Coalition thinks this is
wrong,” she says. “They also think it’s unfair.”
The TVC has offered to help CBS come up with a PSA that presents another point
of view about homosexual individuals, Lafferty points out—namely, “a view
that you are not born that way and that you can come out of the homosexual
lifestyle.” But the network has decided to air GLAAD’s spot, she says, “And so
we are encouraging people to contact CBS and voice their concern about this
biased move.”
According to the pro-family spokeswoman, the organization behind the “Be an
ally and a friend” campaign is one of the most dangerous homosexual activist
groups around. This, she asserts, is due to its powerful influence over the
mainstream media and Hollywood.
“We have to understand that GLAAD, this organization, is the reason that we
have a lot of different homosexually-themed shows or characters [on
television],” Lafferty says. Also, she contends, these activists wield
influence over the news media and “even control the wording that journalists
use in writing stories.”
The TVC’s executive director believes the message in today’s scheduled PSA will
be an attempt by the “gay and lesbian” activist group to stigmatize anyone who
thinks homosexuality is immoral or abnormal. While “most people of faith
believe homosexuality is a sinful behavior and that it can be healed,” she
asserts, “GLAAD is telling Americans that their religious beliefs are wrong.”
But Lafferty says GLAAD is “seriously misleading” the public about the nature
of homosexuality, and she maintains that the pro-family movement is, in many
ways, letting the pro-homosexual group get away with it. “This has become a
very powerful organization,” she notes, “and part of the reason is Americans
have not stood up and said, ‘We object to this.’”
The Traditional Values Coalition feels GLAAD is using free advertising to push
a message about homosexuality that is simply not true. The pro-family group’s
executive director points out that thousands of former homosexuals can attest
to the fact that people are not born with that sexual orientation, and that
change of one’s homosexual orientation is possible.
Lafferty says Americans must reject GLAAD’s “underlying religious bigotry.”
Meanwhile, she and her group are urging CBS affiliates to refuse to run the pro-
homosexual organization’s inaccurate public service announcements.
[0] comments (921 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Mon May 08, 2006
A Model...
The Socialist International: Model for the UN
By Thomas E. Brewton
The UN is based on the ideas and goals of the three major Socialist
Internationals, and its ineffectiveness is a function of the inherent flaws of
the Internationals. Current campaign rhetoric of the Democratic Party, driven
by its left-wing extremists, parrots the doctrines of the Socialist
Internationals.
-------------------
The concept of the United Nations springs from the utopian doctrine of
socialism and was first manifested in the efforts of socialists to create and
sustain Socialist Internationals.
Socialism from its beginnings presumed to be a universal religion based on
atheistic materialism. Henri de Saint-Simon, its first codifier, wrote “The
New Christianity,” acknowledging that socialism had to be more than a
mechanical economic doctrine, that it had to become the cultural supplanter of
Christianity, which was the unifying principle of Western civilization. His
colleague and successor Auguste Comte created The Religion of Humanity,
something akin to ethical humanism. Comte confidently expected that his
religion would be so compellingly rational that everyone in the world would
come to France to study under him and implement his promulgations of right
conduct.
The universal religious pretension of socialism rests upon the assumptions that
only physical labor produces value, that the workers of the world are the
source of all the world’s valuable output, and that the capitalists, labor’s
class-war enemy, have stolen what rightfully belongs to labor, calling it
profit.
This accounts, of course, for liberalism’s cohabitation with labor unions and
for the identification of labor unions historically with socialism and
anarchism.
From this comes the doctrinal tenet that the only truly unifying world-
principle is the socialistic brotherhood of the workers, which transcends
national borders. Socialism postulates that spiritual matters such as
patriotism, family and clan loyalty, and principles of morality are fictions
created by the capitalist masters to subjugate the workers.
These beliefs were the impetus for organizing the Socialist Internationals,
which were organizations for mutual support among socialist parties in
different nations in order to promote the political triumph of socialism. The
first of them was organized by Karl Marx in 1864, near the end of of the
American Civil War. The Second International was formed after Marx’s death in
1889, and the Third International (the Comintern), by Lenin in 1919.
A common feature of the three major Socialist Internationals was their belief
that wars are entirely the product of capitalist maneuvering for monopolistic
control of markets. Therefore, by abstaining from work and from military
service, socialists around the world could prevent wars and bring about an era
of unending world peace.
This accounts for American socialists’ resistance to our entry into World War I
and for the creation of the ACLU to defend them. We see its echoes in today’s
liberal tactic of mass street demonstrations, riots, and general strikes, here
and abroad, against the Vietnam war and now against our military response to
Islamic jihad.
In the vein of Socialist Internationalism, liberals today presume that all
rational people everywhere in the world (except for ignorant Christians and
religious Jews) think as they do and that, therefore, foreign-policy
disagreements can be worked out and wars prevented simply by getting everybody
together for nicely-nicely discussions in the mass-meeting hall of the UN
General Assembly.
Military action to protect our national interests can only be a continuation of
monopolistic tactics by “the rich” to seize control of Iraq’s oil and to
benefit Halliburton. In their view, the Islamic “freedom fighters” are analogs
of the oppressed workers of the world whose work product has been stolen by the
capitalists. Settling Al Queda’s grievances is therefore merely a matter of
giving them a bigger share of our materialistic wealth.
Reviewing the unbroken record of failure to sustain effective, voluntary
cooperation in the Socialist Internationals and in the League of Nations and
the UN suggests, however, that these fundamental liberal tenets are delusions.
Attempting to get world unanimity on specific diplomatic action is a fool’s
errand. Even the socialists in their Internationals, supposedly united by
their brotherhood in labor, were continually at each other’s throats.
The First International broke up in a fight between Marx’s doctrines and the
anarchism of Mikhail Bakunin. The Second International disintegrated in 1914
at the start of World War I, when national socialist parties mostly ignored the
call to abandon their national patriotism and boycott or sabotage the war
effort. The Third International (Comintern) was held together only by the iron
hands of Lenin and Stalin and the Soviet army.
Experience in the UN has been of a similar kind. Only at the end of World War
II, before the Cold War, was there any degree of apparent unity. With the
explosion of UN membership in the 1950s, as newly-minted, small, and
economically dependent African and other nations became members, the UN
degenerated into a propaganda organ and an undercover dispenser of graft for
the Soviet Union and its socialist allies. Under-the-table bribes to these
nations to secure their votes in the General Assembly became the order of the
day. Ultimately, as we saw in the Iraqi food-for-oil scandal, the corruption
of the UN reached greater financial proportions than ever before in history.
Thomas E. Brewton is a staff writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc. The New
Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers,
journalists and grass-roots media outlets.
His weblog is THE VIEW FROM 1776
http://www.thomasbrewton.com/
=======================================================
The Ministry of Truth
by Erik Rush
There are scores of broadcast news bureau chiefs and newspaper editors whom I
would simply adore seeing flung from their office windows - the condition being
that the fall would prove fatal.
Do you suppose this impacts my credibility as a “Christian gentleman”?
For the uninitiated: The citation of the Ministry of Truth refers to the bureau
that controlled all media in George Orwell’s political novel 1984 – truth being
anything but what came out of that establishment.
Although the activist (mainstream) press distorts pretty much everything, the
reason I find their being the single most damaging force upon race relations in
America so egregious is because it affects people and their humanity in a way
few issues do. I also realize that the aforementioned hurling of newsmen (and
women) to their deaths would only be of symbolic significance; like Mafiosi and
drug lords, there are always underlings waiting in the wings to man the helm
anew and continue the evil
work.
Mexican-Americans - even many who arrived here illegally – are, by and large,
as patriotic and industrious as the rest of us. How do I know this? Because I
know tons of them. Those we see living their lives, working and trucking their
kids around town aren’t the ones we’ve seen marching in the streets, however.
In relative terms, there are but a handful who approve of amnesty for illegal
immigrants and open borders or Mexican immigrants who remain nationalistic
(with respect to Mexico) after emigrating here. Those whom we have seen
protesting over the last weeks are generally activists, misguided students and
miscreants spurred on by Marxist, racist and international socialist
interests.
You wouldn’t think so though, if you watch the news coverage on your
brainsucker box every day, given the volume of pro-illegal immigration coverage
available versus anti-illegal immigration coverage.
When I was growing up in New York during the Civil Rights Movement, I
experienced some people who were bigoted and some who just couldn’t get along.
Blacks marched in the South for good reason. I lived in a lot of different
neighborhoods in the New York area; for the most part, most of the people
there – as in most places I’ve lived since - did get along. That is because (I
believe) most Americans are decent and reasonably open-minded.
The media’s reporting of things – as many have noticed – changed over the
years, from the imparting of information to propagandization. Of course some of
it has to do with money; if my wallet got fatter every time I was the bearer of
bad news, I’d be inclined to spin things to the negative side when speaking to
people. Heck, I might just make some stuff up every now and then. But the
infiltration of outright socialists and craven internationalist intellectuals
into that industry cannot be
credibly denied.
The marches led by Dr. King were worthy of worldwide news coverage, but the
fact that someone like Al Sharpton rose to prominence in America via leading
gratuitous, self-aggrandizing and useless marches in New York City, framing
police and attacking Italian-Americans is testimony to how the media changed
from 1960 to 2000. What did it get Sharpton, who continues his “racist America”
rhetoric and self-serving mission? Why, fame and fortune, of course.
The saddest part is that people like him present an ugly face to the majority
of Americans with regard to whatever group they represent. I know for a fact
that relations between Blacks and Whites in New York were harmed by the acts of
Sharpton and the press; the image of Black Americans has no doubt suffered
nationwide due to such phenomena and their incessant, sensationalist coverage
by the media.
Now, Mexicans, Mexican-Americans and others have taken to the streets in the
name of granting amnesty to people whose initial act upon entering the U.S. was
itself criminal, attacking those who oppose their position as though it is
somehow analogous to having supported Jim Crow.
Due to America’s loss of critical thinking skills and decades of substandard
education, somehow it went unnoticed that the media failed to mention that the
big pro-illegal immigration rallies were held on the holy day of Communism.
Things did “grind to a halt” when the Communists took over on May Day, and
there’s little doubt that the communists principally involved in the
demonstrations last week were snickering up their sleeves at the subtle
emblematic significance.
I won’t even elaborate here on the national security concerns regarding our
southern border; I’ve done it before, and it should be evident by now that the
press and our enemies within aren’t going to highlight the fact that a) there’s
a hazard there and that b) remediation of same is one of the primary
Constitutional obligations of our federal government.
We’ve been seeing a lot of brown people on our television screens lately who
either hate America outright or are thoroughly dissatisfied with it in some
respect. What effect do you think that has on your average non-brown person
regarding their neighbors when they’ve been hammered on unceasingly with
hateful imagery of people of color?
What sort of preconceptions and suspicions are developing right now amongst non-
Hispanic Americans toward their Hispanic neighbors due to the poisonous deceit
purveyed by the media and the activists (who, Hispanic or non-Hispanic, share
the blame for their manifestly seditious and irresponsible behavior)?
I have a lot of contact with intellectual, dyed-in-the-wool liberals. Even some
of the more extremist and paranoid ones are viewing the demands for amnesty as
far over the top. Although the press claims that it is not so, many maintain
that the pro-amnesty cause and its credibility has been hurt by the vitriol and
belligerent demands of its proponents and that they’ve bitten off far more than
they can chew.
I for one, hope they choke on it this time. Figuratively speaking, of course.
Erik Rush is a New York-born Black columnist and author who writes “The Culture Shark,"a weekly column of political fare. He is also a Staff Writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc. The New Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers, journalists and grass-roots media outlets. An archive containing links to just about everything he’s written is at http://www.erikrush.com
[0] comments (5032 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Sun May 07, 2006
ISSUES THAT MATTER...
To obtain a copy of Rob Hood’s book Issues That Matter:America’s Moral Battleground click:
http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?&isbn=0-595-35667-2
To obtain a signed copy, please send $9.95 plus $2.50 shipping to :
STAND FOR TRUTH
c/o Rob Hood
P.O. Box 758
Starkville, MS 39760
Be sure to include a letter stating that you want a signed copy of the book and the quantity. Please allow two week for delivery.Checks or money orders only. Please do not send cash. Sorry, no credit cards.
Be sure to share this with a friend!
[0] comments (5068 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Articles for today...
Cheney Is Right About the Russians
by Jim Kouri, CPP
There is so much to write about the Russian government, it’s difficult to be
pithy and comprehensive at the same time. However, let’s just review a few
recent news stories regarding our “friends” the Russians:
* In the run-up to the war in Iraq, the Russians not only assisted Iraqi
dictator Saddam Hussein with weapons, military advisors and materials, but they
also provided Hussein’s military with the US-led coalition’s invasion plan.
It’s believed they obtained the invasion plan from a “mole” in either Central
Command (CentCom) or the Pentagon.
* While appearing to be allied with the US in stopping Iran’s nuclear program
and curtailing it’s military buildup, the Russians have been selling the
Iranians weapons systems, arms and other military equipment.
* Along with the Chinese and North Koreans, the Russians have been selling
weapons systems and arms to Venezuela’s madman Marxist President Hugo Chavez.
* The Russian government has allowed racially motivated crimes to go unpunished
and has even aided in violating the human rights of many Russian citizens. It’s
also banned non-governmental organizations, or NGOs, from working within
Russia.
So what is the big news story this week? The Russian anger over Vice President
d*** Cheney’s accusation that President Vladimir Putin’s government is actively
restricting the freedom of its own people while using its energy resources as
“blackmail” to inhibit democracy in other countries.
Putin’s spokesman responded angrily stating it isn’t using energy (oil, natural
gas) for political leverage and that the US get used to Russia’s more active
role in geopolitics.
The US news media appear to be quaking in their shoes. For instance, USA Today
wrote, “Washington’s strongest rebuke of Russia yet comes at a tense moment in
US-Russia relations as the White House pushes for Kremlin cooperation on
Iranian nuclear issues and many Russians say their country has returned to a
Cold War footing.”
However, Cheney isn’t backing down. Yesterday in Lithuania Cheney said, “In
Russia today, opponents of reform are seeking to reverse the gains of the last
decade.”
“In many areas of civil society—from religion and the news media to advocacy
groups and political parties—the government has unfairly and improperly
restricted the rights of her people,” he claimed during a conference.
The blunt VP pointed to Russia’s difficult relations with three neighbors:
Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova. Experts on Russian politics and society have
noted that Moscow punishes gas customers, such as Georgia and Ukraine, which
follow a democratic path, while subsidizing the energy supply to autocratic
allies such as Belarus. The bad guys get the energy, the good guys get the
shaft.
“No legitimate interest is served when oil and gas become tools of intimidation
or blackmail, either by supply manipulation or attempts to monopolize
transportation,” Mr. Cheney said.
“And no one can justify actions that undermine the territorial integrity of a
neighbor, or interfere with democratic movements.”
The VP’s comments regarding territorial integrity were clearly aimed at
Moscow’s support for separatist movements in Georgia and Moldova.
Moscow’s reaction was quick and bitter. “We cannot accept some statements today
by Mr. Cheney,” Dmitry Peskov, a spokesman for President Vladimir Putin, said
last night.
Russia has a right to defend its own interests, Mr. Peskov told USA Today, “The
energy sources that Russia possesses must be used for our own people, not to
help development of democracies in neighboring countries.” The West also
confuses the actions of Russian companies with Moscow’s policy, the Kremlin
spokesman added.
The argument between the two former Cold War adversaries was ostensibly about
Russia’s energy policy and the democratization of former Soviet states, but
tensions have been rising between the two countries on many other fronts in
recent months, including the revelation the Russia sold Iran a state-of-the-art
defense system designed to counter aircraft or helicopter attacks. The Russians
are also believed to have sold Iran advanced missile technology.
Many Americans wondered what the United States appeared so reluctant to openly
criticize Russia as the US tries to encourage support at the UN for action
against Iran’s nuclear program. Russia refuses, however, to turn against one of
its major trading partner, especially in the lucrative business of weapons
sales to Iran.
Russia hosts the Group of Eight summit in three months, marking its first
presidency of the prestigious club of countries, but some prominent US
politicians have called for a boycott of the event to protest against Kremlin
policies they describe as autocratic, according to the BBC.
However, some of political leaders—those on the left—are fearful a
boycott by the US will have serious repercussions. Their response to Cheney’s
comments is similar to that which President Ronald Reagan received when he
called the Soviet Union “The Evil Empire.” How can the US call the Russians
“evil?”
In fact, reading The Nation’s column on Cheney is proof the left believes the
US is evil—that is Bush is evil and Cheney is evil—not Russia. Oh how
they miss the good old days of Stalin and his ilk, especially the New York
Times which became Stalin’s and the Soviet Union’s biggest cheerleader.
Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of
Chiefs of Police and he’s a staff writer for the New Media Alliance (thenma.
org). He’s former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington
Heights nicknamed “Crack City” by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s.
In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university
and director of security for several major organizations. He’s also served on
the National Drug Task Force and
trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for
many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The
Narc Officer and others. He’s a news writer for TheConservativeVoice.Com. He’s
also a columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and
he’s syndicated by AXcessNews.Com. He’s appeared as on-air commentator for
over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah, McLaughlin Report,
CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox
News, etc. His book Assume The Position is available at Amazon.Com. Kouri’s own website is located at http://jimkouri.us
*************************************************************
Socialism Defined by the Socialists
By Thomas E. Brewton
Socialism, as defined by the originators of socialism, is essentially the
policies espoused by American liberals today. Defining liberalism as a “middle
way” or an attempt to “save capitalism from itself” is simply blowing smoke in
your eyes to hide the truth.
-------------------
After World War II, with the advent of the Cold War and revelations about the
tens of millions of citizens liquidated by the Soviet Union after 1917,
socialism lost the public favor it had enjoyed in the United States during the
first 40 years of the 20th century.
To escape public opprobrium, liberals after 1945 worked assiduously via public education and the liberal-controlled media to obscure the identity of American liberalism, world socialism, and the policies of the Soviet Union. In that regard, see A Liberal’s Definition of Liberalism.
If, however, we go back to the seminal era of socialism an unobscured picture
of socialism emerges. Its tenets are indistinguishable from those espoused by
American liberals in the 1930s and today.
ƒmile Durkheim in the 1880s was a principal founder of the separate field of
study now called sociology. The term itself had been coined earlier by Auguste
Comte, who along with Henri de Saint-Simon, was an original codifier of
socialist doctrine. Durkheim was both a pupil of Comte and a close student of
the development and doctrine of socialism.
Durkheim’s 1895-96 lectures on the history of socialism were published in the
United States under the title of “Socialism.”
The following quotations from that work set forth some of the basic principles
of socialism:
“...one calls socialist those theories which demand a more or less complete
connection of all economic functions or of certain of them, though diffused,
with the directing and knowing organs of society....Socialists do not demand
that the economic life be put into the hands of the state, but into contact
with it..… Even according to the most celebrated theoreticians of socialism,
the state as we know it would disappear and no longer be the central point of
economic life Ð rather than economic life being absorbed by the state. For
this reason, in the definition, we have not used the term “state,” but the
expression Ð expanded and somewhat figurative Ð “the knowing organs of
society.”
(the KGB, perhaps?)
“.....Socialism is essentially a movement to organize.”
“.....In reality, amelioration of the workers’ fate is only one goal that
socialism desires from the economic organization it demands, just as class war
is only one of the means by which this reorganization could result, one aspect
of the historic development producing it.”
“And in fact, what is it, according to socialists that causes the inferiority
of the working classes and the injustice whose victims it declares them to be?
It is that they are placed in direct dependence, not on society in general, but
on a particular class powerful enough to impose its own wishes on them. That
is, the “capitalists.”
“......These premises posed, it is clear that the only means of at least
tempering this subjection and and ameliorating this state of affairs, is to
moderate the power of capital by another [force] which at first may be of
equal or superior strength but which [in addition] can make its action felt in
conformity with the general interests of society.… only the state is capable
of playing the role of moderator.”
(Compare this to the statement of Dee Dee Myers, President Clinton’s press
secretary, that only the government can improve people’s lives, or to President
Franklin Roosevelt’s March, 1933, first inaugural address:
ÒPlenty is at our doorstep, but a generous use of it languishes in the very
sight of the supply. Primarily, this is because the rulers of the exchange of
mankindÕs goods have failed through their own stubbornness and their own
incompetenceÉPractices of the unscrupulous money changers stand indicted in the
court of public opinion...True they have tried, but their efforts have been
cast in the pattern of an outworn tradition.ÉThe money changers have fled from
their high seats in the temple of our civilization. We must now restore that
temple to the ancient truths [established by socialists in 1825]. The measure
of the restoration lies in the extent to which we apply social values more
noble than mere monetary profit.… It can be helped by national planning for
and supervision of all forms of transportation and of communications and other
utilities which have a definite public characterÉ")
Continuing with Durkheim:
“.....it is necessary to completely suppress the medium of the capitalist who,
by wedging himself between worker and society, prevents labor from being
properly appreciated and rewarded according to its social value.… That is to
say that the capitalist class under these conditions must disappear, that the
state fulfill these functions at the same time as it is placed in direct
relation with the working class, and in consequence, must become the center of
economic life.”
Juxtaposing Durkheim’s descriptions with the pronouncements of radical liberals
like Senators Ted Kennedy and Charles Schumer makes clear that little has
changed in left-wing thinking since 1895.
Thomas E. Brewton is a staff writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc. The New
Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers,
journalists and grass-roots media outlets.
His weblog is THE VIEW FROM 1776
http://www.thomasbrewton.com/
********************************************************
Remember Rob Hood’s book ISSUES THAT MATTER: AMERICA’S MORAL BATTLEGROUND. It sells for $9.95 and can be purchased through most online stores like Amazon or go to www.standfortruthonline.com, look in the top left hand corner and click on the book to place an order. Be sure to tell your friends about it!
********************************************************
[0] comments (3121 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Sat May 06, 2006
Helping the Kids...
BAPTIST CHILDREN’S VILLAGE
The Baptist Children’s Village goal for Mother’s day this year is $380,000. The BCV helps children and families experience healing through Jesus Christ. Over 300 children a year are cared for through this unique ministry. The BCV is privately funded mostly through individuals and donations from church congregations. To learn more about how you can help visit the BCV online at www.baptistchildrensvillage.com If you would like to contribute funds to this ministry you can do so online or by mail by sending your donation to:
The Baptist Children’s Village
P.O. Box 27
Clinton, MS 39060-0027
(601) 922-2242
[0] comments (3246 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
The real world...
The Changing Face of an Already Confused People
by
Rob Hood
America today, particularly those who call themselves Christians, are really confused a several key issues. There are now so many denominations of Christianity that it’s hard to keep up with, how many there are, from what branch they stemmed from, and why.
Believe it or not there are some churches out there that are “gay” churches, if you call that a church. Believe it or not there are even some “liberal” churches out there that totally contradict what the word Christian means according to the Bible.
The main topic I wish to discuss is homosexuality. This one subject alone has been used by Satan to split almost every denomination right down the middle. God says homosexuality is sin. Satan says it is not. So who’s side are you on? The only denomination that has not had a great deal of trouble with this issue is the Southern Baptist Convention, of which I am a member. The Southern Baptists as well as many other denominations have remain rock solid on our faith and have not wavered our belief system just because those of the secular world demand it.
The secular world do not understand our beliefs system in that homosexuality is sin before God and can never be viewed as anything other than that. It always has been sin. it is sin now, and 100,000,000,000,000,000,000 centuries from now it will still be sin. Right and wrong, and good and evil, never change. They stay what they are for eternity. Sure it is possible and preferable for evil people to turn good, but evil will be around for as long as this world exists.
For those who may be reading who do not understand where this all began, let start from the very beginning: CREATION! To believe in jesus Christ, you first have to belive in a moment in history when God spoke the universe into existance in 6 literal days just as Moses wrote in the book of Genesis. If you read Genesis and do not believe in how sin entered into the world through Eve and then Adam, then my friend, there is no use in you reading the rest of the Bible at all, becuase the rest of the Bible deals with what to do after the fall of man and how to be saved from eternal judgement.
You cannot graps the concept of sin and evil until you know where it came from. genesis expalins all we need to know about where this sin came from. Think of it like this: If sin had never entered into the world, we would all be enjoyng each other’s company in a lush garden paradise. No war would have ever existed. no murder would have ever taken place. No theft would have ever happened. No one would have ever lost a loved one to death becuase disease, sickness, famine, and other things would have never existed. There would be no need for doctors becuas esickness wuld never occur. No need for lawyers becuase disputes would never happen. Get what i am saying? Genesis is the root of today;s problems and unless you accept that, you cannot understand where the church is coming from in their teachings of right and wrong.
Right now across America Satan is waging war becuase of his hatred for God’s kingdom. Churches are breaking up over blind politics that can be easily remedied if one seeks counsel from God through prayer. The issue of homosexuality has caused turmoil and has blatantly done so by falsely declaring the issue one of civil rights when clearly it is not.
The civil rights movement of the 1960s and the gay rights movement now are two totally different things that is as different as daylight and dark. The Bible plainly condemns homosexuality, yet we have so called preachers and church leaders saying it is ok and even encouraging it. These false prophets of God will have to answer for their actions one day though. This sickening and perverse routing of pulpit sodomy will not last forever because one day the king of Kings and the Lord of Lords will step down from the great White throne and declare evil no more.
Out school system has turned into a political hotbed of corrupt fantasies and immoral gestures rather than a center for learning. the children are infiltrated by evil God hating liberals who would rather live under rule of the UN and EU than declare themselves to be members of a sovereign nation under god. In colleges across America, the brilliant young minds of eager learners are being infiltrated by immoral and absolutely unnecessary propaganda by the extreme far left who love Fidel Castro’s communist Cuba more than they love a free America and the leadership therein.
Just a few days ago on April 27, a Day of Truth was declared as it was last year. The movement grew and amazing 150 % from last year. Started by the Alliance Defense Fund, the Day of Truth was intended to counter the “day of Silence” in high schools across the nation. The Day of Silence was a day to recognize homosexuality among school peers while the day of Truth was to teach that these acts were sinful.
As a matter of fact, thirteen student in a high school in California was suspended because they exercised their freedom of speech and wore shirts to school that said “Homosexuality is sin”. The school pitched a hissy fit and suspended the students. I myself have seen very vulgar and often racist t-shirts pass by school faulty without a word being said, but if a conservative does something along the same lines he or she is persecuted to no end. The students are looking to sue the school for violation of free speech, playing the ACLU at their own game. I wish they would call the ACLU and ask them to take the case since this was a violation of religious free speech and if the ACLU refuses to take the case, then they should sue the ACLU for religious discrimination. Let the ACLU eat a piece of their own pie for a little while.
The Baptist have developed a plan of their won to battle the counter culture war at school though. Baptists are calling for parents to pull their children from public schools that teach that homosexuality is normal. A resolution called “The Harsh Truth about Public Schools” urges agencies of the Southern Baptist Convention to assist churches as they plan their exit strategy from the public education system. Could we be possibly looking at a newly forming Christian school system where evolution would be discarded, homosexuality never mentioned, and condoms never heard of be coming soon? It would be a great thing if the Baptist did form a new type of schools system where we mimicked the schools of the 1950s where children learned math, science, history, and of course modern day things like computers, etc. without all the political indoctrinations and sexual orientation. I say it’s high time we abandoned all public and private schools, clubs, organizations, companies, manufacturers, governments, and other things that publicly and openly support abortion, homosexuality, and the criminalization of faith and prayer in public.
The Tupelo, Mississippi based American Family Association has done so in its public declaration of a worldwide boycott of Ford Motor Company for its involvement with a gay pride event recently. Ford Motor Company never financed the event, but did publicly support it and offered to cut back support of this, except for the Ford owned Volvo. I should have known. Volvo, Subaru, they kind of go together with the whole Starbucks gay liberal group thing. Hopefully there will be no compromise. Ford will either have to pull all support of all owned companies or the boycott will go on. Car manufacturers are already hurting, they don’t need a worldwide boycott, but AFA will not show sympathy because of FMC’s financial strain as they shouldn’t. Two superbowl’s ago AFA launched a boycott of Dodge because of a very inappropriate commercial Dodge was sponsoring. After about two days or so, Dodge pulled support of the ad and AFA dropped the boycott. Sometimes these things work and sometimes they don’t, but it is well worth it to give it a try.
I have noticed companies have truly embraced the whole homosexual and left wing movement. They often portray hidden agendas and liberal philosophies in advertisements as simply as hamburger ads. Start paying attention to the ads and tell me how many you count that you can tell was written by liberals and feminists. I have noticed it more recently. Perhaps it is just me being paranoid? Maybe, but time will tell. It seems like there are more commercials making MEN look stupid and incompetent these days. It seems to me that there are more commercials with sexual references that have a way of saying these acts are okay. it seems to me that there should be a better way to advertise a product than with a political agenda. maybe we should go back to actually focusing on the product itself in the ad rather than the actions of the people portraying the product. Recently Nissan has advertised it’s new Pathfinder SUV by saying “What would the world be like if there were only left turns?” All throughout the commercial “left turns” are mentioned and encouraged. Nissan makes a great product the Pathfinder is surely a great SUV, but making a political motive is not the way to advertise it. A GPS unit called Tom Tom has also used political tactics in its advertising. Once again they declare that “left” is the only turn you should make. However, they have came out with one that the lady actually say “ I have been accused of leaning to the right” when asked “ should I take a right here?” Even CBS (should have known) has teened up with a gay activist group to promote teen homosexuality. Take a look at the references below for a more detailed story too long to touch on.
Political correctness is made of Washington democrats and liberals, not advertising agencies, churches, and schools for Pete’s sake! I sometimes wonder if people have lost their minds. As a matter of fact, I laughed and agreed with an actor on Rambo III that I was watching recently. He stated” God must love crazy people because he made so many of them”. The whole world has gone stark raving mad and is too far gone to save now.
The fact that homosexuality is being embraced to the point that forced acceptation is demanded scares me a little. Recently the European Union has ordered that member nations accept homosexuality as normal. I wonder how long it will be before the UN wants us to do the same. They already want to ban our guns and kill our babies, now want to tear apart what is left of a decent culture. We cannot afford to let these rogue nations order us around like this. we need ambassadors far stricter than John Bolton if we are to save our nation. The best thing we can do is pull out of the UN before it’s too late.
Yes, out nation is falling apart at the seams and no one cares but a few. People have grown weak in their faith and corrupt in their ways, but will have to give an account one day regardless. As for me, I know what I believe. I believe that I am a follower of the Lord Jesus Christ first and foremost, and secondly a free citizen of the sovereign United States of America where I speak ENGLISH, fly my flag high, and fight for what is right for my country and for my God. That is who I am. Are you with me?
REFERENCES:
EU forces other countries to recognize “gay marriage”
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/may/06050204.html
CBS teams up with gay activist group to promote homosexuality to teens
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/may/06050404.html
The Baptist Proposal
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49910
Students suspended for free speech
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/5/32006a.asp
What Christianity has done for America
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2006/118/32.0.html
Preachers hit Ford Motor Company in Sunday Sermons
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060502/AUTO01/605020368
Students at more than 700 Schools participate in Day of Truth
http://www.alliancedefensefund.org/news/story.aspx?cid=3737
ABOUT ROB HOOD
Rob Hood grew up in rural Mississippi and was rooted in the doctrine of the Southern Baptist Convention and its teachings of Biblical right and wrong, accountability to a higher authority, and the birth, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. He was a participant in Bible Drill for nine years, a Southern Baptist Convention program devoted to educating children and youth with scriptures from the Bible for use in everyday life situations. He graduated from Holmes Community College in Grenada, Mississippi with an Associate of Applied Science (AAS) degree in Electronics Technology and is currently employed as an Electronics Technician with HAM radio equipment manufacturer. He is also a Federal Communications Commission licensed Technician Class HAM radio operator and lives in North Mississippi.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[0] comments (3151 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Fri May 05, 2006
ARTICLES of IMPORTANCE...
Groveling Worship of Ignorance
By Thomas E. Brewton
Liberals blindly worship their “scientific” doctrines concocted out of thin air
by the high priests of socialism 200 years ago. Living in a utopian world,
they simply ignore real-life experience.
-------------------
Latest data from the IRS and other economic and statistical arms of the Federal
government paint a picture that is the opposite of liberals’ theoretical
expectations.
President John F. Kennedy’s most effective single policy initiative was his
round of massive income-tax cuts in the early 1960s. Criticized by social-
justice liberals for not raising taxes and doling out more welfare-state
benefits, Kennedy famously retorted that a rising tide lifts all boats;
everyone benefits when the level of economic activity rises and more jobs
become available.
Kennedy’s tax cuts started a huge and long-lived uptrend in the nation’s
economy. Twenty years later, tax cuts by President Ronald Reagan did the same
thing, just as have the tax cuts initiated by the George W. Bush
administration.
Wall Street Journal editorial board member Stephen Moore writes in his May 4,
2006, op-ed article that the Bush “tax cuts for the rich” not only have put the
economy into high gear, but they have counter intuitively increased the tax
burden on the wealthy and decreased the burden on the lowest income
percentiles.
“Between 2002 and 2004, tax payments by those with adjusted gross incomes (AGI)
of more than $200,000 a year, which is roughly 3% of taxpayers, increased by
19.4%—more than double the 9.3% increase for all other taxpayers.
Between 2001 and 2004 (the most recent data), the percentage of federal income
taxes paid by those with $200,000 incomes and above has risen to 46.6% from
40.5%. In other words, out of every 100 Americans, the wealthiest three are now
paying close to the same amount in taxes as the other 97 combined.”
“....Millionaires paid more, too. The tax share paid by Americans with an
income above $1 million a year rose to 17.8% in 2003 from 16.9% in 2002, the
year before the capital gains and dividend tax cuts.”
“.… capital gains receipts from 2002-04 have climbed by 79% after the
reduction in the tax rate from 20% to 15%. Dividend tax receipts are up 35%
from 2002 to 2004, even though the taxable rate fell from 39.6% to 15%.”
“....The main factor at play here is the robust economic expansion, which has
led to real income gains for most tax filers. Higher incomes mean higher tax
payments. Between 2001 and 2004, the percentage of Americans with an income of
more than $200,000 rose from 12.0% to 14.2%. The percentage of Americans
earning more than $50,000 a year rose from 40.8% to 44.2%—and that’s just in
two years.”
“....The slice of the total income pie captured by the richest 1%, 5% and 10%
of Americans is lower today than in the last years of the Clinton
administration.”
“.… And we now have the evidence to confirm that the latest round of tax cuts
worked—five million new jobs, a 25% increase in business spending, 4% real
economic growth for three years and a $4 trillion gain in net wealth. So now
the very class-warfare groups who, three years ago, swore that the tax cuts
would tank the economy rather than revive it, pretend that this robust
expansion would have happened without the investment tax cuts.”
“....Just last week, the Department of the Treasury released its tax receipt
data for March 2006. Tax collections for the past 12 months have exploded by
14.4%. We are now on course for a two-year increase in tax revenues of at least
$500 billion, the largest two-year increase in tax revenue collections after
adjusting for inflation ever recorded.”
Liberals ability to ignore repeated factual confutation and continue in their
fatuity is, to borrow H. L. Mencken’s comment about Puritanism, a form of
neurosis. It borders on the heretical religiosity that led followers of cults
like Jim Jones’s Peoples Temple to commit mass suicide in Jonestown, Guyana, in
1978.
The most fundamental dogma in the catechism of the socialist religion is the
blind faith that human nature and human society can be perfected by the simple,
materialistic mechanism of redistributing income as equally as possible. If
everybody has an equal income, so the theory goes, all envy, greed, and
aggression will vanish. We will then be able to enter the earthly paradise of
Marxian Leninism in which the apparatus of government will slowly wither away,
and all peoples will live in perfect harmony with plentiful supplies of all
truly needed food, clothing, housing, medical care, education and jobs
(assigned, of course, by the state planners).
This accounts for the never-ceasing yowling and mewling by the New York Times,
the Washington Post, and Democratic Party leaders about “tax cuts for the rich”
and the income gap between the wealthiest and the poorest in our society.
In the interests of factuality, let’s remind ourselves that the dogma of human
perfection via redistribution of income is a purely theoretical concept dreamed
up by Jean Jacques Rousseau in the mid 1700s. Even he admitted that he had no
proof, that no precedent for it existed in history. Nonetheless, his “reason”
told him that it must have been true. Liberals, who never lose an opportunity
to sneer at Christians and religious Jews as ignorant troublemakers, have no
problem with believing with all their hearts in Rousseau’s pie-in-the-sky
heaven-on-earth.
What makes liberals’ blind faith all the more untenable is that large numbers
of political leaders around the world have given socialistic egalitarianism a
try, and all have failed. Not only has there been no progress in social
harmony, but economic performance, supposedly the materialistic strong suit of
liberalism, has declined or lagged behind non-socialistic nations in all
cases.
Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal turned an ordinary economic recession into an
unprecedented ten years of misery in which unemployment never fell below 14%.
Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society entitlements wrecked the economy with the
highest levels of inflation ever experienced here and surges in unemployment,
crime, drug use, illegitimacy, single-parent families, and long-term welfare
dependency, together with collapse of the educational system.
France, the “rationalistic” home of socialism, has run through many more than a
dozen different constitutions, at least five republics, restorations of
monarchy, and several imperial interludes. Today France is the sick man of
Europe, its government brought to its knees by unemployable students at the
Sorbonne rioting in the streets. The nation that was the most powerful force
on the Continent in the Christian era of its history is now being slowly
strangled by its social-justice commitments to welfare-state benefits
entitlements that its economy increasingly cannot support.
All this is the direct product of blasphemous groveling to the heretical
idolatry of anti-Christian materialism.
Thomas E. Brewton is a staff writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc. The New
Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers,
journalists and grass-roots media outlets.
His weblog is THE VIEW FROM 1776
http://www.thomasbrewton.com/
======================================================
You gotta love Robin Williams...…
Even if he’s nuts! Leave it to Robin
Williams to come up with the perfect
plan. What we need now is for our
UN Ambassador to stand up and
repeat this message.
Robin Williams’ plan...(Hard to
argue with this logic!)
“I see a lot of people yelling for peace
but I have not heard of a plan for
peace. So, here’s one plan.”
1) “The US will apologize to the world for our “interference” in their affairs, past & present. You know, Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Tojo, Noriega, Milosevic, Hussein, and the rest of those “good ‘ole’ boys”, we will never “interfere” again.
2) We will withdraw our troops from all over the world, starting with Germany, South Korea, the Middle East, and the Philippines. They don’t want us there. We would station troops at our borders. No one allowed sneaking through holes in the fence.
3) All illegal aliens have 90 days to get their affairs together and leave. We’ll give them a free trip home. After 90 days the remainder will be gathered up and deported immediately, regardless of whom or where they are. They’re illegal!!! France will welcome them.
4) All future visitors will be thoroughly checked and limited to 90 days unless given a special permit!!!! No one from a terrorist nation will be allowed in. If you don’t like it there, change it yourself and don’t hide here. Asylum would never be available
to anyone. We don’t need any more cab drivers or 7-11 cashiers.
5) No foreign “students” over age 21. The older ones are the bombers. If they don’t attend classes, they get a “D” and it’s back home baby.
6) The US will make a strong effort
to become self-sufficient energy wise. This will include developing non polluting sources of energy but will require a temporary drilling of oil in the Alaskan wilderness. The caribou will have to cope for a while.
7) Offer Saudi Arabia and other oil producing countries $10 a barrel for their oil. If they don’t like it, we go someplace else. They can go somewhere else to sell their production. (About a week of the wells filling up the storage sites would be enough.)
8) If there is a famine or other natural catastrophe in the world, we will not “interfere.” They can pray to Allah or whomever, for seeds, rain, cement or whatever they need. Besides most of what we give them is stolen or given
to the army. The people who need
it most get very little, if anything.
9) Ship the UN Headquarters to an isolated island someplace. We don’t need the spies and fair weather friends here. Besides, the building would make a good homeless shelter or lockup for illegal aliens.
10) All Americans must go to charm and beauty school. That way, no one can call us “Ugly Americans” any longer. The Language we speak is ENGLISH...learn it...or LEAVE...Now, isn’t that a winner of a plan?
“The Statue of Liberty is no longer
saying “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses.” She’s got a baseball bat and she’s yelling, ‘you want a piece of me?’ “
[0] comments (3188 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Thu May 04, 2006
What is a Liberal? ... Really?
A Liberal’s Definition of Liberalism
By Thomas E. Brewton
Professor Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., is a highly regarded liberal icon. His
views of American liberalism in the 20th century reflect the domination of our
nation’s political and social mores by liberal-socialism between the end of
World War II and the Vietnam War.
-------------------
Professor Schlesinger’s views on American liberalism are backed by strong
credentials. He was a Harvard history professor, twice winner of the Pulitzer
Prize for works of history, the author of one of the definitive studies of the
New Deal, and a member of President John F. Kennedy’s White House staff.
In “The Vital Center” (1949) and “The Politics of Hope” (1963) Schlesinger
depicts American political liberalism as a moderate and responsible mean
between a failed conservatism and a revolutionary, radical socialism. He sees
Teddy RooseveltÕs New Nationalism, Woodrow WilsonÕs New Freedom, and Franklin
RooseveltÕs New Deal as parts of a Progressive continuum aimed at bringing
politics back to a compromise center. On balance Schlesinger sees liberalism
as the party of hope, of commitment to change to meet the problems created by
ongoing economic and scientific change.
This, of course, is the picture espoused by liberals even today, when their
goals and methods have become considerably more radical than in the 1950s and
early 1960s.
Schlesinger rejects the 1920s purer socialism that coalesced around the views
of John Dewey and Thorstein Veblen, who wanted revolutionary changes (not
necessarily by violent means) in the nature of society, with social and
economic order planned and directed by a central government elite on purely
rational principles. Those of the Dewey-Veblen tradition, Schlesinger says,
were disappointed that the New Deal did not go far enough.
Schlesinger says that liberalism is not socialism, because it rejects the Ò...
classical connotation of state ownership of the basic means of production and
distribution.Ó
This, however, is an intellectually dishonest dodge. Henri de Saint-Simon and
Auguste Comte, who first codified socialism as a coherent doctrine, explicitly
identified government regulation alone as both the essential element of
socialism, and as sufficient to effect it. The social engineering mechanisms
they proposed were precisely the sort that were imposed directly or indirectly
in the 1930s New Deal and subsequently: a managed currency; control of farm
output and prices; regulation of industrial output, prices, and wage rates;
steeply-graduated income tax rates; welfare-state benefits, and, above all, PC
control of education, so that only liberal doctrine might be taught.
Moreover, the central theological goal of classical socialism, as well as
todayÕs American liberalism, is egalitarianism, and state ownership is no more
than one possible means of effecting equal distribution of property. Political
liberalism, especially since the 1960s, is focused squarely on egalitarianism
(e. g., emphasis on ÒfairnessÓ in taxation, denunciation of “tax breaks for the
rich,” fixation on poverty, multi-cultural education, and affirmative action).
In the middle 1800s, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Schlesinger says, saw the basic
difference between conservatism and liberalism as that between the party of the
past and the party of the future, the party of memory and the party of hope.
EmersonÕs vision clearly was a utopian one based partly on Victorian optimism
in perfectibility of man and society as a product of the growth of scientific
knowledge, as well as a reflection of German Idealistic philosophy. Yet,
contradicting himself, Schlesinger specifically rejects utopianism as part of
the liberal philosophy and says that liberals in mid-20th century, for example,
Reinhold Niebuhr, recognized the reality of human imperfection.
SchlesingerÕs image is that Ò...Liberalism in America has been a party of
social progress rather than of intellectual doctrine, committed to ends rather
than to methods.Ó Laissez-faire was good when Jefferson introduced it;
regulation was good when Franklin Roosevelt implemented it. ÒThe ideological
content of American liberalism has been less coherent than its political and
administrative evolution.Ó
Experience, however, belies this picture. SchlesingerÕs liberalism is a purely
mechanical construct aimed at superficial political rules of conduct, without
any moral content (e.g., the liberal push for absolutely unrestricted speech,
no matter what is said, even if it is a call by socialists and anarchists for
violent overthrow of the Constitution, and liberalsÕ push to remove any vestige
of religion from public life).
As he says, liberals are concerned with political results, not ideology. But
far from a realistic pragmatism of the theoretical John Dewey sort, in practice
liberal government creates gigantic regulatory bureaucracies whose inherent
dynamic is self-perpetuation and self-aggrandizement, bureaucracies that become
special interest groups themselves, whose constituenciesÕ votes have been
purchased by liberalsÕ dispensation of tax revenues from the conservative
middle class (bourgeoisie).
Claims to moral high ground in SchlesingerÕs variety of liberalism have two
problems: (1) the moral concepts used to justify liberalismÕs preoccupation
with ends rather than means are Christian morality, not liberal socialist
doctrine; (2) in practice, without a religious, moral rudder, New Deal
regulatory government has turned into Òpluralistic democracy,Ó a system based
on every interest group seeking to maximize its own personal wants, motivated
by pure greed, without a unifying concept of the public good in the sense of
the ConstitutionÕs preamble.
By definition, in a liberal society that eschews value judgments, there can be
no principle other than raw political power upon which to make choices between
competing public demands. As long as the mechanical procedures of ÒdemocracyÓ
are observed, literally anything goes. The Federal judiciary can arbitrarily
demote certain fundamental rights, such as the Bill of Rights protection of
private property, to secondary status (an action that is an unacknowledged
value judgement).
Liberalism discards Adam Smith’s Òinvisible handÓ operating through individuals
guided by religious morality under a constitutional government, substituting
collectivized license under a government in which Òvalue judgmentsÓ are
permitted only when they conform to current liberal ideas. Such a government
can be no more than a registrar of fleeting public opinion and momentary
political power.
New Deal liberalism transformed the media, by default, into the the creator and
shaper of public morality. Whatever ÒwrongÓ the media chooses to publicize and
whatever ÒremedyÓ it chooses to support tends to become public opinion. As
Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes (and Nazi propaganda minister
Joseph Goebbels) said, there being no independent standards of truth or
morality, truth is whatever wins out in the marketplace. And when public
opinion in that sense is the mode of government, with no value placed on a
conservative respect for morality, religion, and tradition, we are under the
sway of TocquevilleÕs tyranny of the majority.
This, of course, is the process we have seen recently when throngs block public
streets to demand “constitutional rights” for illegal immigrants.
Liberal socialism worked in the 1930s and after World War II purely on the
momentum of past cultural morality and religion, but lost its mooring in the
1960s with the new generation of students that understood nothing of the past
and had no connection with its cultural traditions.
Today’s young adults and children have reverted to a pre-civilization state of
nature, Thomas HobbesÕs war of all against all. Liberalism has come to mean
unfettered materialism and hedonism, the more disgusting and degraded the
better. Far from being Professor Schlesinger’s theoretical, moderate center
between conservatism and radical socialism, liberalism has become synonymous
with any action or doctrine that tends to destroy existing standards of
morality and decency.
Liberalism is moving rapidly toward nihilism, the “anything goes” doctrine of
Mikhail Bakunin aimed at freedom in the sense of removing all restrictions on
thought and action. The measures for that purpose, some of which are now being
employed by liberals, are obliteration of God and religion, along with
destruction of private property, marriage, and moral codes, all aimed at
letting personal sensual gratification be the only guide to conduct and
thought.
That is hedonistic license, not liberty of the sort understood in the
Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
Thomas E. Brewton is a staff writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc. The New
Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers,
journalists and grass-roots media outlets.
His weblog is THE VIEW FROM 1776
http://www.thomasbrewton.com/
========================================================
Making Sure Crime Doesn¹t Pay
It¹s hard for me to think of a job that¹s more frustrating these days than
that of a local cop. Day in and day out, local police officers and sheriff¹s
deputies lay their lives on the line in an effort to bring criminals to
justice.
However, shortly after they bring these punks to the jailhouse, the
lawbreakers are out on the streets again, free to commit even more heinous
crimes. It seems that many of today¹s lawbreakers are nothing more than
career criminals. You and I, as taxpayers, foot the bill for their care and
feeding much of the time. And for that investment, what do we get? More
crime, more frustration, more burned-out cops.
But Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County Arizona believes he has a better
way. And for his crime-fighting efforts, he¹s re-elected time and time
again.
What is the secret of Sheriff Joe¹s success? To put it bluntly, he treats
criminals like criminals. The convicts in his charge lose the precious
privileges they might have at other correctional institutions.
For instance, they have no right to smoke. They have no right to read
pornographic magazines. They have no write to bulk themselves up with
state-of-the-art weightlifting equipment. And they have no right to see ³R²
movies in the cellblocks.
Oh‹and they have to pay for their meals‹just like the rest of us do.
Shocking? Maybe. But I say it¹s a good shock to the system, one that just
might reduce the repeat offender rate.
The sheriff¹s inmates are required to work on county and city projects,
providing local governments with no-cost labor. Interestingly enough,
Sheriff Joe even started chain gangs for women so he would not be sued for
discrimination.
Initially, he eliminated cable TV from jail, until he discovered there was a
federal court order to require it. When he hooked up the cable again, he
only permitted two stations: Disney and the Weather Channel. Cruel and
unusual punishment? Hardly. That¹s the type of punishment you¹d give your
seventeen-year-old for refusing to mow the lawn.
The sheriff even went so far as to purchase the Newt Gingrich lecture
series, which he plays in the jails. When a reporter asked him if he had a
lecture series by a Democrat, he noted that a Democratic lecture series
might explain why many of the inmates where in jail in the first place.
When inmates complained after the sheriff took away their coffee (which has
no nutritional value), he responded, ³This isn¹t the Ritz-Carlton. If you
don¹t like it, don¹t come back.²
Convicts are human beings and they deserve to be treated with dignity.
However, the fact of the matter is they have broken the law and many of them
have little respect for law enforcement officers, their own grandmothers,
and even themselves. Criminals do not need coddling. They need discipline.
If their parents or caregivers failed to supply it when they were young,
it¹s up to people like Sheriff Joe to supply it in the best way he knows
how.
Liberals may cringe at the sheriff¹s tent city jails, but the accommodations
are certainly no worse than what our brave fighting men and women face in
Iraq and other hot spots around the world. Sheriff Joe issued his own
fighting words when he said, ³It¹s 120 degrees in Iraq and our soldiers are
living in tents too, and they have to wear full battle gear, but they didn¹t
commit any crimes, so shut your damned mouths!²
We need more Sheriff Joes‹jail keepers who are not afraid to run their jails
like, well, jails. To make a criminal understand the severity of his
actionsŠto make him see that only misery awaits him if he violates the law
againŠis actually the responsible, loving thing to do.
True, it¹s tough love‹but sometimes that¹s the only kind of love that works.
Copyright © 2006 by Nathan Tabor
Nathan Tabor is a conservative political activist based in Kernersville,
North Carolina. He has a bachelor¹s degree in psychology and a master¹s
degree in public policy. He is a contributing editor at
www.theconservativevoice.com and his 60-second commentaries are heard on
over 250 stations daily. Visit www.aconservativemoment.com to hear them. You
can contact him at Nathan@nathantabor.com
[0] comments (3177 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Wed May 03, 2006
The Truth Be told...
Baptists: Plan exit from government schools
New resolution tells churches to develop strategy for pulling kids out
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49910
====================================================
Mission America
www.missionamerica.com
See our new Risk Audit, assessing schools on homosexuality.
====================================================
From Traditiona Values Coalition
www.traditionalvalues.org
CBS And GLAAD Use PSAs To Label Critics Of Homosexual Sex As Bigots
May 2, 2006 – CBS and the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD)
have teamed up to produce a series of Public Service Announcements (PSAs) that
will be dropped into a day-time soap opera promoting teen homosexuality.
The CBS/GLAAD PSA will be included in the CBS daytime soap opera “As The World
Turns” on May 9. This particular show includes a teenager who tells his parents
that he is a homosexual. The PSA will tell viewers that they should take a
stand against “discrimination” and “prejudice” faced by homosexuals, bisexuals,
and transgendered people (cross-dressers, transsexuals, and homosexual drag
queens).
This PSA is part of GLAAD’s propaganda campaign called “Be an Ally and a
Friend” effort to promote homosexuality, bisexuality and transsexuality as
normal sexual behaviors.
GLAAD is one of the most dangerous organizations in America. It has a powerful
influence over Hollywood and the print media. The group has published its 7th
edition of a “Media Guide” that tells journalists what terms they should use in
describing homosexuality. It also tells them to avoid giving fair treatment to
organizations that are critical of homosexual behavior. In short, this media
guide teaches journalists to censor opposing viewpoints. Read this GLAAD media
guide to understand why you do not get an accurate portrayal of homosexuality
in the mainstream media. GLAAD is controlling what you read and see.
GLAAD also meets with script writers, directors, and other powerful Hollywood
executives to shape the kinds of messages Americans receive in TV programming
and in movies about homosexuality.
Your voice matters! Send a strong message to CBS. It is important for Hollywood
and network executives to hear your concerns. In 2002, for example, TVC exposed
the efforts of Nickelodeon to promote the homosexual agenda. More than a
quarter of a million emails went to Nickelodeon to protest the promotion of
homosexual “families” by Linda Ellerbee and hosted by Rosie O’Donnell. They
were forced to tone down the show because of the incredible public outrage.
GLAAD and groups like the Gay, Lesbian and Student Education Network have done
their job well in censoring accurate information about homosexual behavior in
the media.
The Hollywood Reporter noted in April, 2005 that “GLAAD and others who carry
out its mission meet with editorial boards, casting directors, producers,
writers and directors, where they discuss what they are thinking about, what
they are working on and offer suggestions on ways to accurately reflect the
lifestyle.”
GLAAD is serving as a censor and a gatekeeper on what information Americans
receive in the mainstream media about homosexual behavior! It urges journalists
and Hollywood producers to promote homosexuality, while condemning any
organization or individual who is critical of homosexuality.
GLAAD equates opposition to homosexuality as bigotry, prejudice and
discriminatory attitudesand now CBS is joining with them in promoting their
homosexual agendato normalize homosexual sex for teenagers!
TVC Urges CBS To Provide Equal Time
Traditional Values Coalition Chairman Rev. Louis P. Sheldon has written a
letter of concern to Mr. Leslie Mooves, President and CEO of CBS asking that he
provide TVC with equal time to respond to GLAAD’s PSA.
Rev. Sheldon told Moonves: “Most major religions denominations consider
homosexuality a sinful and disordered behavior. GLAAD calls these Americans
discriminatory and hateful because of their religious beliefs.
“At the very least, I believe CBS should apply an equal time standard to this
sort of activity. My organization, Traditional Values Coalition, would be
willing to discuss some sort of message which would provide the balance lacking
from GLAAD’s anti-religious attacks.”
TAKE ACTION: Use TVC’s CapWiz email system to write a letter of concern to Mr.
Moonves asking for CBS to give equal time to TVC to present an alternative
viewpoint on homosexual behavior. Forward this alert to your friends!
GLAAD only wants a positive portrayal of homosexuality presented to the
American people over public airwaves. This is a betrayal of the public trust.
CBS should be willing to prevent a fair and balanced message on homosexuality
and not promote only one viewpoint on this controversial topic.
Go to TVC’s Media Guide section and click on CBS News to create your letter to
Mr. Moonves: Traditional Values Coalition—Media Guide.
.....................................................................................................................
Rev. Sheldon is a graduate of Princeton Theological Seminary, an ordained
minister, and the founder of the Traditional Values Coalition in Washington,
DC. His new book, The Agenda—The Homosexual Plan to Change America, was
recently released by FrontLine Publishers, a Strang Communications company.
Traditional Values Coalition is an inter-denominational public policy
organization speaking on behalf of over 43,000 churches.
========================================================
[0] comments (3279 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks
Tue May 02, 2006
Persecution....
From Life Site News
www.LifeSiteNews.com
EU to Force Poland, Malta, Italy to Recognize Gay “Marriages”
Is advancing leftist “soft totalitarianism,” that wants “atheist, nihilistic”
state religion
by Hilary White
BRUSSELS, May 2, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The European Union continues to
favour the homosexual movement’s program at the expense of national sovereignty
and religious rights. A new law coming into effect today effectively orders the
countries of the Union to “facilitate” homosexual partners who have “married”
in their home countries and want to live or travel in countries where their
unions are not legally recognized.
The law is intended to allow EU citizens to move around the Union as freely as
they do within their own countries. The directive means that citizens within
the EU will no longer be obliged to obtain a residence permit when moving to
another member state. When registering in their new country, homosexual couples
may use the European Courts to force sovereign countries to recognize their
unions.
The law will force countries to allow nationals of other states to live
permanently in the new country without visas or residency permits. In some
places in the EU, such as Malta, immigration is extremely problematic due to
limitations on space and economic and natural resources.
Although only five EU member states have ratified the decision, European
justice commissioner Franco Frattini warned national governments that the law
was “immediately applicable” – whether ratified or not.
The law applies not only to the states but to individuals who may move and then
use the courts to force member states to comply. As of the compliance deadline
today, only Austria, Denmark, Slovenia, Slovakia and the UK have ratified, with
measures pending in France and Spain.
Three countries of the EU, the Netherlands, Belgium and Spain have laws which
allow homosexuals to imitate lawful marriage. Britain, Germany and a number of
other countries have accommodated homosexual unions with some form of civil
recognition. Other states, however, such as Poland, Italy and Malta have
resisted the push by lobbyists for “gay marriage” and the threat of coercion,
becoming a common method of EU politics, is directed against them.
The law will require states to carry out investigations into the nature of the
relationship and determine if the partners are in a “long-term stable
relationship.”
“The main provision is that you can recognise marriages or partnerships only
when the hosting country has similar provisions,” said Frattini.
“In those cases where there is no direct obligation to recognise, member states
must facilitate entry and residence of partners in a durable relationship after
a concrete assessment. This new provision will facilitate the situation of gay
couples across Europe,” Frattini said.
Frattini is a former leader in the Italian Socialist party and a long time
member of Silvio Berlusconi’s government. He was appointed to the EU to replace
Rocco Buttiglione who, as a believing Catholic, was opposed to the homosexual
movement’s legal inroads in European politics.
Buttlglione said the EU is advancing a leftist “soft totalitarianism,” that “
wants to have a state religion. It is an atheist, nihilistic religion - but it
is a religion that is obligatory for all.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MoveOn.org, Nancy Pelosi, and her fellow Democrats want to regulate the Internet.
Don’t let them!
MoveOn.org and the far left are pulling out all the stops to pass legislation that
will regulate the Internet under a scheme known as “network neutrality.”
If liberals have their way, instead of the free
market, the government will decide the future of the Internet.
The House of Representatives will vote any day!
This regulatory scheme would give Big Government the right to regulate
and control the Internet for the first time in history.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact Your Congressman today and say
“Don’t regulate the Internet!”
E-mail your Congressman right now by visiting
www.InternetFreedomCoalition.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tell your Member of Congress:
“Please oppose MoveOn.org’s and Nancy Pelosi’s network neutrality scheme. Don’t Regulate the Internet!”
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Kenneth Galbraith: Statist Advocate
By Thomas E. Brewton
Widely known economist John Kenneth Galbraith, who recently died at age 97, was
one of the radical left’s most articulate and prolific advocates for state
control of economic and social activity.
-------------------
Living through most of the 20th century, Professor Galbraith was the embodiment
of the era’s atheistic and materialistic religion of socialism, a description
he proudly accepted. Naturally, he was a member of the Harvard economics
department, the fountainhead of socialistic economics in the United States.
From early 20th century Progressivism, to open advocacy of socialism in the
1920s and 1930s, through post-World War II liberalism, he was probably the most
quoted and most admired single icon of American left-wing intellectuals.
The Washington Post’s obituary observed: “One of the most influential [of
Galbraith’s books] was “The Affluent Society” (1958), which argued that
overproduction of consumer goods was harming the public sector and depriving
Americans of such benefits as clean air, clean streets, good schools and
support for the arts.
“Dr. Galbraith was generally considered to have been an apostle of the theories
advanced by British economist John Maynard Keynes: that government could
promote full employment and a stable economy by stimulating spending and
investment with adjustments in interest and tax rates, and deficit financing.”
Galbraith’s self-assurance not withstanding, Keynes’s prescriptions failed
miserably; unemployment never fell below 14% until our military mobilization
for World War II.
Professor Galbraith was called an economist, but more accurately he should be
identified as a liberal sociologist and propagandist. Few of his “economic”
ideas are used or respected by economists. Even the New York Times, the
journal-of-record for American socialism, admits this.
As the Times obituary put it, “… other economists, even many of his fellow
liberals, did not generally share his views on production and consumption, and
he was not regarded by his peers as among the top-ranked theorists and
scholars.”
“.....Later, in “The New Industrial State” (1967), he tried to trace the shift
of power from the landed aristocracy through the great industrialists to the
technical and managerial experts of modern corporations. He called for a new
class of intellectuals and professionals to determine policy.”
“......In 1973 he published “Economics and the Public Purpose,” in which …
[he] called for a “new socialism,” with more steeply progressive taxes; public
support of the arts; public ownership of housing, medical and transportation
facilities; and the conversion of some corporations and military contractors
into public corporations.”
Michael Harrington, then head of the American Socialist Party, wrote in his
1968 “Toward a Democratic Left: A Radical Program for a New Majority”:
“The very character of modern technology, [Harvard economist] Galbraith says,
renders the old market mechanisms obsolete. In these circumstances planning is
obligatory. The state must manage the economy in order to guarantee sufficient
purchasing power to buy the products of the industrial system.Ó
This is typical Galbraithian “wisdom” that, at best, was counter-productive and
more often disastrous.
Harrington’s book was published as price levels were quadrupling under
President Nixon’s embrace of Keynesian, socialist economics, leading OPEC to
impose its oil embargo and catapult prices to an inflation-adjusted $95 per
barrel. On the eve of this unfolding catastrophe, the liberal media lauded the
Keynesian-oriented Council of Economic Advisors for having finally learned to
exert perfect, fine-tuning socialistic control over the economy.
Economic stagflation Ð soaring inflation coupled with a moribund economy - soon
thereafter revealed the hollowness of this hubristic claim. Savings and loan
institutions went bankrupt. Stock market prices fell to fractions of
replacement costs for company assets, giving rise to the take-over boom by
stock market raiders that dismembered companies and threw long-loyal workers
into the streets. Mothers were compelled to leave home for full-time
employment and fathers had to moonlight on extra jobs, just to pay monthly
bills. With fewer parents at home to supervise their children, crime and drug
abuse rose.
Yet to this day Galbraith’s ruinous prescriptions remain central tenets of
American liberals’ socialistic religious catechism.
Thomas E. Brewton is a staff writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc. The New
Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers,
journalists and grass-roots media outlets.
His weblog is THE VIEW FROM 1776
http://www.thomasbrewton.com/
[0] comments (3319 views) | [0] Trackbacks [0] Pingbacks