Critical Mass

Obama on gun rights

2008-06-27T09:04:00.002-04:00

It was interesting to see both candidates responses to the Supreme Court's ruling on the DC handgun ban. What was even more interesting was the Obama campaigns soft dismissal of the ruling, when in reality, Obama is much more liberal on the 2nd Amendment than he claims.

This section of the AP article on yesterday's ruling is quite revealing:

Obama has voted to leave gun-makers and dealers open to lawsuits. He also took largely liberal positions on gun laws while in the Illinois legislature, including backing a ban on all forms of semiautomatic weapons and tighter state restrictions generally on firearms.

A ban of all semiautomatic weapons? That's probably close to 60 or 70 percent of all guns. That is hardly supportive of the 2nd Amendment.

AIDS Pandemic is Over

2008-06-08T12:52:00.001-04:00

A quarter of a century after the outbreak of Aids, the World Health Organisation (WHO) has accepted that the threat of a global heterosexual pandemic has disappeared.

In the first official admission that the universal prevention strategy promoted by the major Aids organisations may have been misdirected, Kevin de Cock, the head of the WHO's department of HIV/Aids said there will be no generalised epidemic of Aids in the heterosexual population outside Africa.

Interesting article. I wonder two things:

1. What are all of the domestic AIDS programs going to redirect their funds to?
2. Why did the gay community protest the fact that AIDS was most rampant in their lifestyle for so long?

Abortion is racist.

2008-03-07T20:21:00.001-05:00

This is an article written by my friend, and black pastor, Reverend Clenard Childress. It is a telling view of abortion from the African American community perspective.

Margaret Sanger Would Have Loved Barack Obama

Contact: Rev. Clenard H. Childress Jr., 866-242-4997, 201-704-9325 cell revchildress@verizon.net, www.Theurbanprophet.org

OPINION, March 5 /Christian Newswire/ -- Rev. Clenard H. Childress Jr., founder of Black Genocide.Org, and president of Learn North East, submits the following and is available for comment:

Revelations of eugenic ideology and the racist practices of Planned Parenthood are unfolding more and more.

The public is just beginning to believe what people of conscience have known long ago. Planned Parenthood has diabolically perpetrated their murderous plot to surgically eliminate those they deem undesirable. In other words, kill the babies of unsuspecting minority women by aborting their children .Then, tell them this is a "good thing" for you and your people. No other ethnic group in the United States has been decimated more by abortion than the Afro-American community. The war being waged upon innocent captives in the womb is led by Planned Parenthood.

The strategy?

Convince the targeted community to accept their eugenic racist plan by selecting one from their ethnicity to promote it. One of Planned Parenthood's earliest known projects was in 1939. It was called the Negro Project. A project designed to control the birth of "human weeds" which was how Margaret Sanger referred to colored people. A project designed to introduce abortion, sterilization and different forms of birth control. This is what a co-eugenic wrote to Margaret Sanger to make sure the "Negro Project" was a success:

Clarance Gamble the Heir of Proctor and Gamble wrote a memorandum in November 1939 entitled "Suggestions for the Negro Project," In the letter he suggested black leaders to be placed in positions where it would appear they were in charge."

This is a letter to Clarance Gamble, from Margaret Sanger, which she wrote,

"We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don't want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members."

For those of you that don't know Barack Obama became a "minister" of Planned Parenthood a long time ago. He's so good at carrying out their racist murderous agenda against Afro-Americans and society at large that they gave him a 100% score on his voting record. Planned Parenthood is following the strategy of their racist founder Margaret Sanger to the letter. Planed Parenthood is saying 'We have our poster boy' get him out in front as a lure for their women and men. Get them into our abortion clinics and dismember their children by the millions! You say absurd? No Way? Planned Parenthoods Valentine cards were sent out to hundreds of thousands of young people in the nation. Whose face is plainly seen waving to them with a big smile? Whose endorsement is given to this racist and calloused organization? Who is used to lure children and give credibility to its hideous plot? Barack Obama, that's who!

On July17,2007, Barack Obama said this a few months ago before the Planned Parenthood Action Fund,

"Thank You, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you, ($) Thanks to all of you at Planned Parenthood for all the work that you are doing for women all across the country and for families all across the country-and for men who have enough sense to realize you are helping them, all across the country. I want to thank Cecile Richards (national president of Planned Parenthood) for her extraordinary leadership. I am happy to see so many good friends here today, including Steve Trombley and Pam Sutherland from my home state of Illinois. We had a number of battles down in Springfield from many years and it's wonderful to see that they are here today"

The first friend mentioned is Cecile Richards who he commends for extraordinary leadership in killing babies who are disproportionately black.

The second is Steve Trombley; he is the president of Planned Parenthood Chicago. You can imagine how many of our young women have been victimized and whose pre-born children were killed under his supervision. His third friend he mentions is Pam Sutherland. She is the State CEO of Planned Parenthood for Illinois. America needs to know how much these folks were and continue today to be into the head and actions of Senator Barack Obama. How much did he compromise his own values?

I choose here to quote Dr. Martin Luther King from his last Sunday sermon before his death, "There comes a time when one must take the position that is neither safe nor politic nor popular, but he must do it because conscience tells him it is right. I believe today that there is a need for all people of goodwill to come with a massive act of conscience and say in the words of the old Negro spiritual, We ain't goin' study war no more." This is the challenge facing modern man.

When the challenge came to Barack Obama to call on conscience, he refused. What most Americans would say no to, he chooses to say, YES. He refused to do what the Dream called for, to allow your conscience to tell you what is right and what would be wrong. You may ask why but always remember this observation. Abortion is a lot like slavery. If it was not lucrative it would not have been legal!

Pam Sutherland ... of ... Illinois Planned Parenthood ... told ABC News, "We worked with him specifically on his strategy. The Republicans were in control of the Illinois Senate at the time. They loved to hold votes on 'partial birth' and 'born alive.' They put these bills out all the time ... because they wanted to pigeonhole Democrats. ..."

Let me interpret. We, Planned Parenthood, told him what to say and how to say it so we could continue to kill infants. Babies just a few inches from birth and those completely out of the womb that we missed! Our "colored minister" was well prepared by Planned Parenthood. Partial Birth abortion, which I will not describe here but know that 80% of Americans don't want this barbaric act practiced here in this country, Barack voted to keep it legal. The Born alive victims act is a law to protect a child that was born alive after a botched abortion. A law that would require that the child would receive medical assistance. Barack Obama voted against it. Yes Barack Obama with an "engaging personality" is being used by the leading abortion provider in the

United States

to promote and execute infanticide of predominately minority babies.

And what are most Afro-Americans saying, "Yes We Can, Yes We Can!" They are ignoring conscience. They are ignoring the Dream!

I have a Dream that one day, my four little children will live in a world where that they won't be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

Yes, I believe it would be wonderful to have a Black man as president but it's more important for there to be God's man as president. That his or her character would reflect my values, values that are reflected in the 10 Commandments and our Declaration of Independence.

Most African-Americans are applauding him for the color of his skin. They have failed to look at closely the content of his character.

Martin Luther King , while sitting in a Birmingham jail, without the internet, cell phone, library resources or communication from the outside, penned that famous prophetic letter to answer some local Pastors who questioned his use of public demonstrations. Martin, in a portion of his letter discussed the responsibility of the church to address social issues, he said, "the early church put an end to such evils as infanticide" Martin Luther King wrote from the passion of his spirit. The spirit that was fighting for justice and equality. Martin called infant killing evil. Barack Obama calls it a women's right. Martin Luther King made his observation from a jail cell having been put there for defending the civil rights of those whom had been denied. Barack Obama has made his from caucusing with those who profit from the destruction of babies in the womb. These are men and women whom ignore the silent screams of a lost generation. Can we trust Obama's judgments? I think not.

Another quote form Dr. Martin Luther King that would be so appropriate here is "The Negro cannot win if he chooses to sacrifice the future of his children for immediate comfort and safety." It is now imperative that we all hear the words of this great prophet of God. It is obvious that we must reject the Barack Obamas that have placed us in great danger by their ideologies. A position Martin Luther King warns us we cannot expect to win!

Yes, Margaret Sanger would love Barack Obama. Her protégés certainly do

Interview with Jonathan Krive

2008-02-26T12:00:00.002-05:00

CollegePlus! Newsletter Accleration interviewed me on the art of communication. Below is the text:

According to researcher George Barna, only about half of Christians in America feel comfortable communicating what they believe. In fact, in his recent book Revolution, Barna notes that most believers don’t even base their decisions on the Scriptures but instead on what they take in from the media, family members, and peers. CollegePlus! graduate Jonathan Krive has made it part of his goal in life to change this disturbing phenomenon.

Krive currently lives in the Washington, D.C. area with his wife Noel. In 2007, he received a Presidential appointment to the Bush administration as a political appointee to the Department of Labor. He recently left the administration to become the fundraising coordinator for a nonprofit organization that helps philanthropists achieve their charitable goals.

Krive has been involved in persuasive communication for over a decade, beginning with speech competitions sponsored by the National Christian Forensics and Communication Association, or NCFCA for short. Krive won this nationwide competition for three consecutive years before pursuing his college studies and other outlets for communicating a biblical worldview in today’s postmodern culture.

To read the rest of the article, click here.

Jena 6 Myths

2007-10-24T20:24:00.000-04:00

Michelle Malkin posted an editorial on her website today from the Christian Science Monitor that completely debunks the media's portrayal of the Jena 6 incident. And the myths that have pervaded the media are extreme and revealing. You can read the whole article here.

"The media got most of the basics wrong. In fact, I have never before witnessed such a disgrace in professional journalism. I should know. I live in Jena. My wife has taught at Jena High School for many years. And most important, I am probably the only reporter who has covered these events from the very beginning.The real story of Jena and the Jena 6 is quite different from what the national media presented. It’s time to set the record straight.

"Myth 1: The Whites-Only Tree. There has never been a “whites-only” tree at Jena High School.

"Myth 2: Nooses a Signal to Black Students. An investigation by school officials, police, and an FBI agent revealed the true motivation behind the placing of two nooses in the tree the day after the assembly. According to the expulsion committee, the crudely constructed nooses were not aimed at black students.

"Myth 3: Nooses Were a Hate Crime. Although many believe the three white students should have been prosecuted for a hate crime for hanging the nooses, the incident did not meet the legal criteria for a federal hate crime.

"Myth 7: The Schoolyard Fight. The event on Dec. 4, 2006 was consistently labeled a “schoolyard fight.” But witnesses described something much more horrific. Several black students, including those now known as the Jena 6, barricaded an exit to the school’s gym as they lay in wait for Justin Barker to exit. (It remains unclear why Mr. Barker was specifically targeted.)

"Myth 8: The Attack Is Linked to the Nooses. Nowhere in any of the evidence, including statements by witnesses and defendants, is there any reference to the noose incident that occurred three months prior. This was confirmed by the United States attorney for the Western District of Louisiana, Donald Washington, on numerous occasions."

North American Union Moving Forward

2007-08-20T06:22:00.000-04:00

This week, President Bush will be meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon at the Fairmont Le Chateau Montebello resort in Canada. The topic of discussion will be the Security and Prosperity Partnership. While the White House continues to dismiss the North American Union as a "silly conspiracy," documents obtained in FOIA requests suggest otherwise.

The Washington Times picked up this story on the front page today. I found one paragraph of this story specifically interesting.

"The White House dismissed suspicions of a coming North American Union as a 'silly' conspiracy theory. 'Americans are going to remain Americans, Canadians are going to remain Canadians and Mexicans are going to remain Mexicans,' a senior Bush administration official said on the condition of anonymity."

The irony? Even when the White House is trying to dismiss claims of the North American Union it has to use anonymous officials. Why didn't it come right out and say, this is not a plan to cede away American sovereignty? Because that would be denying the truth.

Worldnetdaily.com reported that 21 members of Congress sent a letter to President Bush urging him to open up the backroom deals being made about the SPP.

"The last paragraph of the letter called upon the president 'not to pledge or agree to any further movement in connection with the SPP at the upcoming North American summit.'

"The letter concluded that, 'in the interest of transparency and accountability, we urge you to bring to the Congress whatever provisions have already been agreed upon and those now being pursued or contemplated as part of this initiative, for the purpose of obtaining authorization through the normal legislative process.'

"Signatories to the letter included the following members of the House of Representatives:

Rep. Terry Everett, R-Alabama
Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-California
Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colorado
Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas
Rep. Nancy Boyda, D-Kansas
Rep. Walter Jones, R-North Carolina
Rep. David Davis, R-Tenn.
Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Georgia
Rep. John Boozman, R-Arkansas
Rep. John Duncan, R-Tenn.
Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Virginia
Rep. Tom Price, R-Georgia
Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, R-Florida
Rep. Sue Myrick, R-North Carolina
Rep. Jo Bonner, R-Alabama
Rep. Gary Miller, R-Calif.
Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa
Rep. Greg Walden, R-Oregon
Rep. Michael Rogers, R-Alabama
Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, R-Michigan
Rep. Robert Aderholt, R-Alabama
Rep. Todd Akin, R-Missouri

Thankfully members of Congress and the media are picking up on this plan to cede away American sovereignty.

GOP just doesn't get it

2007-08-16T06:18:00.000-04:00

Yesterday, at the St. Petersburg Chamber of Commerce, Republican Party chairman Mel Martinez confirmed that, sometimes, the GOP just doesn't understand. Sen. Martinez scolded Republican presidential candidates Giuliani and Romney for taking a tough stance on illegal immigration and opposing the President's immigration reform. The St. Petersburg Times reported.

"Presidential contests are about leadership. ... It's about leading on the tough issues," Martinez told the St. Petersburg Area Chamber of Commerce. "It was easy to say, 'This wasn't good enough, this isn't right, I don't agree with Martinez.' ... But at the end of the day what is your answer? How would you solve this?"

Well the first step is to deport illegal immigrants, put the national guard back on the border, and toughen penalties against employers. And do not grant illegal aliens amnesty.

Isn't it simple logic, that if you increase some thing's desirability that more people will want it? Well how about offering citizenship in the greatest country in the world to the people of a corrupt third-world country? That's a pretty big incentive. And it will only increase the number of immigrants who seek to cross the border illegally.

Why doesn't the Republican Party get it? When tens of thousands of people called their senators to oppose the immigration bill, didn't that send a clear message? When GOP donations dropped off by almost 40 percent, didn't that send a clear message? The American people do not want amnesty, and they don't want illegal immigration. What ever happened to politicians representing the people?

Well, thankfully, most of the Republican Senators did represent America, and voted down the bill. Yet, Sen. Martinez still finds reason to criticize.

2007-08-06T06:38:00.000-04:00

Georgetown professor Yahya Hendi spoke at a gathering of Saudi Arabians yesterday, saying that Muslims are improving their image and position in society. The Washington Times picked up this Reuters news clip.

"Mr. Hendi said U.S. Muslims were working on 'nationalizing' Islam as part of the fabric of U.S. society, including cutting funding links to Muslim countries.

"Mr. Hendi, who met with President Bush days after September 11, said Muslims exhibited a tendency to shun political action such as voting and running for office because it was considered akin to surrendering to U.S. culture."

This position contradicts itself sorely. If Muslims want to integrate in our society, then they will have to realize that voting is a basic part of being a responsible citizen. And just for the record, that holds true for the 50 or so percent of eligible voters who do not exercise this right.

But seeing voting as a submission to U.S. culture is a fundamental flaw. Our forefathers died for the right to have a Constititutional Republic. Voting is not U.S. culture, it is basic freedom and liberty. And Muslims see this as weak and surrender, at least, according to Mr. Hendi.

Now, Mr. Hendi presents a rather tame image of Islam. However, the website Their Own Words presents a startling counterpart to this image. Ahmad Bahr, Acting Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council said on Sudan TV said, "America will be annihilated, while Islam will remain… Allah is greater than America, by whom many are blinded today."

"We should have no conservatives in the media"

2007-08-01T06:21:00.000-04:00

With liberals trying to resurrect the unconstitutional Fairness Doctrine, society has increased its scrutiny of the media. And while Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton attempt to censure conservative talkshow hosts, the liberal print and television media has gone mostly unmentioned.

News Corp. owner Rupert Murdoch has drawn much attention recently. He finalized purchase of the Dow Jones company, including a much debated takeover of the Wall Street Journal. While DJI owners the Bancroft family fought off the Murdoch empire for several months, after much negotiation and haggling over editorial protections. the Wall Street Journal is now apart of the Murdoch machine.

Many journalists have decried the Murdoch takeover. Hopefully, he will provide one avenue in print media where conservatives can get a fair hearing. But that is exactly what liberals don't want - a fair hearing.

What, you say? Liberals want to censure conservatives? Absolutely.

Robert Licter, director of the Center for Media and Public Affairs said, "Murdoch brings together two things that many journalists think ruins their profession: money and conservatism."

Money ruining journalism, perhaps. But conservatism?

There you have it. From the horse's, or more appropriately, the donkey's mouth. The Fairness Doctrine has nothing to do with fairness and everything to do with suppressing conservative freedom of speech.

Featured on WND.com

2007-07-30T06:09:00.000-04:00

On Saturday, July 28, 2007, Worldnetdaily.com published my article "Our cotton-candy-fluffy-bunny news." Disgusted with the recent coverage of celebrity lawbreakers, I decided to write an article decrying the low standards of journalism, especially in television coverage.

"This was a full week for the world media: President Bush explained that insurgents in Iraq are tied to al-Qaida, Attorney General Gonzalez sparred with U.S senators, and the Dow lost 226 points. Yet, as I watched the headlines blur across my TV screen, it was clear the media had "Hilton syndrome." Lindsay Lohan's arrest dominated headlines and was the lead story on almost every news program. A nauseating reminder of the Hilton media frenzy, America confirmed its infatuation with the cult of the celebrity.

"A month ago, when socialite Paris Hilton managed to get herself a jail sentence, the media pushed aside world affairs for the opportunity to catch a glimpse of the blond heiress. Enamored with her looks, and nothing else, the media reached rock bottom in standards of coverage.

"To confirm the permanence of our society's deterioration, news of Lindsay Lohan, as well as the meltdown of Britney Spears, spread across TV screens Thursday and Friday like a bad virus on your computer. Yet these are these stories Americans want. We clamor for news about our favorite celebrities. Does she trim her nails herself? Did he have a weekend fling on the beach? Will they get married, or just continue living together for the next 12 years?
Why are we so shallow?"

Al Qaeda in Iraq

2007-07-23T21:25:00.000-04:00

While liberals continue to tell America that Iraq is not apart of the war on terrorism, a revolutionary partnership has taken place in Iraq that confirms exactly the opposite. The Washington Times reported today that, "U.S. forces have brokered an agreement between Sunni and Shi'ite tribal leaders to join forces against al Qaeda and other extremists..."

Public Terrorist Number One is Al Qaeda, and it has terrorist cells in Iraq.

The rival tribes Suuni and Shi'ite have been warring factions for hundreds, or thousands of years. For these two groups to join forces is historic. It takes something pretty extreme to cause these rivals to halt their bloody feuding and take up arms against someone else. But Al Qaeda has enough of a presence in Iraq that it is the catalyst.

Iraqi President Talabani told President Bush earlier this year that, "We have serious problems with terrorism. The main enemy of Iraqi people is al Qaeda and terrorists cooperating with them."

So liberals, take a hint. We cannot accept anything except complete victory in Iraq.

A Less Hypocritcal Mexico

2007-07-20T06:11:00.000-04:00

"It's very hard for Mexico to preach to the north what it does not do to the south," said Mexico's ambassador Artuor Sarukhan in a meeting with some editors and reporters at The Washington times yesterday. "Unless we correct the fundamental challenge of the violation of human rights o fLatin American or Central American migrants crossing the border into Mexciao, it's very hard for me to come up and wag a finger and say you guys should protect the rights of my citizens in this country."

Ironically, Mexico has created a situation where many Mexicans no longer want certain jobs because they can come to the US and get better jobs. The International Herald Tribune reported on this story last year in its article "Mexico worries about its own southern border."

"Here at Mexico's own southern edge, Guatemalans cross legally and illegally to do jobs that Mexicans departing for the north no longer want."

Former Deputy Foreign Minister Geronimo Gutierrez admitted in an interview with the New York Times last year that, "Mexico's immigration laws were 'tougher than those being contemplated by the United States,' where the authorities caught 1.5 million people illegally crossing the Mexican border last year."

I guess Mexico is starting to realize that it can't enforce its own immigration laws and ask the US to ignore ours. However, even if Mexico opened its southern border, we certainly shouldn't follow suit.

One Nation, Under Shiva?

2007-07-16T20:38:00.000-04:00

“We meditate on the transcendental Glory of the Deity Supreme, who is inside the heart of the Earth, inside the life of the sky, and inside the soul of the Heaven. May He stimulate and illuminate our minds.”

These words were not the utterances of a priest at a pagan temple, nor were they the invoking of some New Age group. These were the opening words at the US Senate on Thursday. For the first time since the Senate was formed in 1789, a Hindu chaplain led the openings prayers in the upper chamber.

Guest Chaplain Rajan Zed, who directs interfaith relations at a Hindu temple in Reno, Nevada, prayed for peace and unity of spirit. He asked the “Deity Supreme” to, “Lead us from the unreal to the real, from darkness to light, and from death to immortality.” He continued to emphasize unity, enlightenment, and being in one accord.

Sorry Mr. Zed, but unity is one thing the Senate is not good at. And praying to the ambiguous god of the earth, or the sky, or the soul of Heaven probably won’t do much good.

It wasn’t Krisha, Ganesh, Shiva, Maya, or any of the other hundreds of Hindu gods that the Founding Fathers prayed to.

In a handwritten manuscript book, George Washington recorded this prayer.

“O Most Glorious God, in Jesus Christ, my merciful and loving Father; I acknowledge and confess my guilt in the weak and imperfect performance of the duties of this day. I have called on Thee for pardon and forgiveness of my sins, but so coldly and carelessly that my prayers are become my sin, and they stand in need of pardon.”

You’ll notice the lack of Hindu gods in George Washington’s prayer. Hiduism plays no role in America’s heritage. However, hundreds of books document the strong Christian foundation of this country. And it is this heritage that gives the Senate the tradition of opening up its proceedings with a Christian prayer.

John Quincy Adams, during a 4th of July celebration address, specifically tied the founding of this nation to the Christian faith.

“Why is it that, next to the birth day of the Saviour of the World, your most joyous and most venerated festival returns on this day? Is it not that, in the chain of human events, the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birth-day of the Saviour? Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer's mission upon earth? That it laid the corner stone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity.”

The House Judiciary Committee took up the constitutionality of chaplains in Congress in 1854. In its findings, the committee specifically cited Christianity as vital to America.
“[W]hereas the great vital and conservative element in our system is the belief of our people in the pure doctrines and divine truths of the gospel of Jesus Christ, it eminently becomes the representatives of a people so highly favored to acknowledge in the most public manner their reverence for God: therefore, Resolved, That the daily sessions of this body be opened with prayer and that the ministers of the Gospel in this city are hereby requested to attend and alternately perform this solemn duty.”

After guest chaplain Zed finished his prayer, Senator Harry Reid saw it fit to comment on the blessing. “I think it speaks well of our country that someone representing a faith of about a billion people comes here and can speak in communication with our Heavenly Father regarding peace,” he said.

It sounds like Senator Reid wasn’t listening to Mr. Zed’s prayer. If Senator Reid is referring to the God of the Bible when he says “Heavenly Father,” then he and the guest chaplain are talking about two different things. The Bible does not support the idea of a god who dwells in the earth, but also in the sky and heaven. (In fact, traditionally it is someone else who is in the “heart” of the earth.)

This idea of compatibility among all faiths is a myth. The world contains more Muslims than Hindus, but that doesn’t mean the Senate should invite Osama Bin Laden or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to give an opening prayer to Allah.

Our country has a specifically Christian heritage. And we should protect and preserve this heritage by continuing the tradition of Christian chaplains asking God’s blessing on the proceedings in Congress.

A Talking Polar Bear

2007-07-16T06:34:00.000-04:00

I was riding the Metro in Washington DC the other day when I saw this advertisement on the wall. I found it quite ironic that organizations will put more time into protecting a polar bear than an unborn baby.

Instead of wasting money putting words in a polar bear's mouth, which I'm sure he would much rather have had a seal or a human in his mouth, this group should run an ad that says something along the lines of, "First you create a single-parent home for me. Now you want to kill me." (Yes, many children are born into wonderful homes, but almost half, if not more, of all babies are born into homes that have a less than optimal environment.)

Where did this organization get the idea that polar bears are mad about their ice melting? Even that first statement is dubious. Who says that the ice is the polar bears? I think the next ad in this hypothetical world should be a seal or sea lion to the polar bears, "First you eat my baby seal, now you eat me."

Obviously polar bears, seals, and every other predator does not believe in animal rights. They freely eat members of other animal species, and sometimes of their own species. A predator will often look for the weak, the sick or the young. Like I mentioned in my article about sea lions earlier this month, animal rights activists are mostly self-contradictory.

"One day the self-appointed protector of the environment decries humanity for encroaching on wildlife and crimping the mating habits of the deer mouse; and the next day the same environmentalist swears by the theory of evolution, praising the notion of survival of the fittest and natural selection.

Justice for Border Agents

2007-07-12T06:54:00.000-04:00

The Washington Times reported today that the Senate Judiciary committee will hold hearings next Tuesday on the punishment of two border agents.

"Ignacio Ramos, 37, and Jose Alonso Compean, 28, were sentenced in October to 11- and 12-year prison terms, respectively, for shooting Osbaldo Aldrete-Davila, a Mexican national, as he fled into Mexico after abandoning 743 pounds of marijuana near Fabens, Texas."

"Border Patrol agents have a difficult and often dangerous job in guarding our nation's borders," [Senator Diane Feinstein] said in letters to Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. "I believe that aggressive prosecution of Border Patrol agents has a chilling effect on their ability to carry out their duties and on the morale of all agents.

"I am extremely concerned about how this case continues to unfold," she said.

While Senator Feinstein is normally wrong on most issues, she certainly does not dissapoint here. She is absolutely right. Not only does the Border Patrol have to worry about automatic rifles and drug smugglers, but now, agents also have to worry about federal prosecution.

Not only did the government prosecute these two heros, but it proceeded to give both medical attention and full immunity to the known drug smuggler. An article in WorldNetDaily.com puts things in perspective.

"When Border Patrol Agent Ignacio Ramos pulled the trigger last February, all he knew was that his partner was lying on the ground behind him – bloodied from a struggle with a fleeing suspect – shots had been fired and now, it appeared, the drug smuggler he was pursuing had turned toward him with what looked to be a gun in his hand.

In the split-second he had to respond, Ramos determined the course of his and his partner's lives – federal prison for the next 20 years for assault with serious bodily injury, assault with a deadly weapon, discharging of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence, violating civil rights and obstruction of justice. "

Both of these agents were named Men of the Year on FrontPageMag.com.

Hopefully, after review of the events, the committee will recommend, and President Bush will grant, a commutation, if not a full pardon to these two men.

Enforcing our immigration laws

2007-07-11T06:41:00.000-04:00

Monday evening, the Prince William County Board of Supervisors passed a resolution to start enforcing immigration laws. Prince William, a large suburban county in northern Virginia, adopted this resolution with some excellent provisions.

"All officials, agencies and personnel of the County shall fully comply with and, to the full extent permitted by law, support the enforcement of federal law prohibiting the entry into, presence or residence in the United States of aliens in violation of federal immigration law.

"County Police Officers shall inquire into the citizenship or immigration status of any person detained for a violation of state law or municipal ordinance..."

I'm sure it won't be long before the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund files suit to prevent this resolution from being fully enforced. I wonder why MALDEF even has "American" in its title. There is little American about it.

Hopefully other counties will follow this bold example.

Who can kill the N-word

2007-07-10T06:31:00.000-04:00

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People hosted its annual convention in Detroit this past weekend. On Monday, the NAACP held a "funeral" for the N-word.

"Today we're not just burying the N-word, we're taking it out of our spirit," said Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick. "We gather burying all the things that go with the N-word. We have to bury the 'pimps' and the 'hos' that go with it."

Mayor Kilpatrick is absolutely right, the N-word embodies a whole attitude - a whole culture. If the NAACP wants to get rid of the n-word, it will have to to do more than push for racial equality. It must eradicate a whole attitude. Much of the hip-hop culture is centered around a demeaning attitude. In our society the n-word has as much to do with culture as it does race.

I could list lyrics fom some of the many famous hip-hip artists like 50 cent, Kanye West or Eminem (Yes, he is white, but he is also certainly part of the hip-hop culture.) But everyone knows that the n-word is featured prominently in some, if not many of their songs.

I strongly believe that we are all created equal, and endowed by our Creator with the unalienable rights of life, liberty and property. I hope that the NAACP will follow through on this metaphorical funeral and kill the attitude that goes along with the n-word as well.

Liberal Opposition Totally Illogical

2007-07-09T21:59:00.000-04:00

On July 12, 2007, the Senate will hold confirmation hearings for Dr. James Holsinger, nominated to be the Surgeon General of the United States. His nomination has sparked opposition from both liberals and conservatives. Liberals detest his position on homosexuality, and conservatives question his ambiguous positions on stem cell research. While he may quell the conservative opposition by giving straightforward answers about his current positions, Dr. Holsinger will likely be unable to change the minds of liberals.

While liberals point to many incidents in attempt to paint Dr. Holsinger as "anti-homosexual," much of this rhetoric stems from a paper he published in 1991 as the Chief Medical Director at the US Department of Veteran Affairs. The paper was titled "Pathophysiology of Male Homosexuality." (WARNING: This paper is graphic, and should only be read by adult readers.) In the paper, he reasoned that acts of male homosexuals pose a higher risk of disease and bodily damage than heterosexual relationships.

The paper closes with this statement.

The logical complementarity of the human sexes has been so recognized in our culture that it has entered our vocabulary in the form of naming various pipe fittings either the male pipe fitting or the female pipe fitting depending upon which one interlocks within the other. When the complementarity of the sexes is breached, injuries and disease may occur as noted above. Therefore, based on the simplest known anatomy and physiology, when dealing with the complementarity of the human sexes, one can simply say, Res ipsa loquitur - the thing speaks for itself!

Upon President Bush's announcement to nominate Dr. Holsinger, Human Rights Campaign president Joe Solmonese said, “his writings suggest a scientific view rooted in anti-gay beliefs that are incompatible with the job of serving the medical health of all Americans."

Nowhere in his paper did Dr. Holsinger exhibit any sentiment that suggests he is against homosexuals. He simply pointed out an obvious fact. Yet he was immediately labeled "anti-gay." No amount of explanation will quell the liberal opposition because this opposition is not based on a logical progression.

Official Documentation on the North American Union

2007-07-09T21:27:00.000-04:00

WorldNetDaily.com reported today:

A powerful think tank chaired by former Sen. Sam Nunn and guided by trustees including Richard Armitage, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Harold Brown, William
Cohen and Henry Kissinger, is in the final stages of preparing a report to the White House and U.S. Congress on the benefits of integrating the U.S., Mexico and Canada into one political, economic and security bloc.

The final report, published in English, Spanish and French, is scheduled for submission to all three governments by Sept. 30, according to the Center for Strategic & International Studies.

Here is some more background information about the North American Union:

It is being promoted through the Security and Prosperity Partnership. Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act application to get files about the SPP. This is what they found.

"On March 23, 2005, heads of government Vincente Fox, George W. Bush, and Paul Martin launched the North American partnership at a meeting in Waco, Texas, with the expressed goal of 'a safer, more prosperous North America.'"

Back in 2006, NewsMax.com did a three part series about the NAU and SPP. In the interview, Diane Alden interview author Jerome Corsi. Mr. Corsi had this to say.

"We are close to a coup d'état by the executive branch. What I have come across in my investigation reminds me of the plot in the blockbuster '60s book 'Seven Days in May' ... having to do with a military coup plot against civilian government. The conclusions I arrive at seem more in line with some fantastic plot line of the TV series '24'."

Highlights in Irony

2007-07-06T06:13:00.000-04:00

Today, the top stories drip with irony. First, of course, is our friend Bill and his comments about President Bush for commuting the sentence of Scooter Libby.

"You've got to understand, this is consistent with their philosophy," Bill Clinton said. The Bush administration officials "believe that they should be able to do what they want to do, and that the law is a minor obstacle."

Sounds vaguely familiar. Perhaps that's the line America should have used when Clinton pardoned or commuted over 175 sentences in one day. Here is a good laundry list of some of the more notable pardons Clinton granted during his terms.

While the guilt of Scooter Libby is obvious, the punishment likely does not fit the crime. Dan Proft has a great commentary on HumanEvents.com.

"Libby was about to be sent to the federal hoosegow for 2.5 years for lying about how he had learned about Plame’s identity, even though said lies were not in furtherance of any criminal act and -- since he was not the leak in the first place -- even though his lies ultimately had nothing to do with the stated purpose of the investigation in the first place."

Looks like Clinton doesn't have a leg to stand on. Sudan might as well start criticizing the US for human rights violations

Sticking with the Clinton administration, Al Gore's Live Earth concerts are set to kick off today. However, the British rock band Arctic Monkeys pointed out the irony of all this hoopla.

"It's a bit patronising for us 21 year olds to try to start to change the world," said Arctic Monkeys drummer Matt Helders, explaining why the group is not on the bill at any of Al Gore's charity concerts. "Especially when we're using enough power for 10 houses just for (stage) lighting. It'd be a bit hypocritical," he told AFP in an interview before a concert in Paris.

Remember "The Filthy Fifteen"? The Parents Music Resource Center, co-founded by Tipper Gore, released a list of musicians whose songs should be banned because of gross obscenity. Madonna made it to number eight on the list for her sexually explicit lyrics in the song "Dress You Up."

Oh, and did I mention that Madonna will headline the Live Earth concert in London. Let's just hope that Tipper Gore doesn't attend that concert.

What does Independence Day mean to you?

2007-07-05T10:04:00.000-04:00

Growing up in the United States, I often take our liberties for granted. Every year, I celebrate July 4th in the typical American way: fireworks. Sometimes with family, other times with friends. July 3rd always finds me scouring the local pages of my newspaper for the best fireworks displays. Being in Washington DC definitely has its benefits during Independence Day. The National Symphony Orchestra and top artists always perform a great show on the Capitol Lawn. Then to the backdrop of Tchaikovsky's 1812 overture, one of the most impressive fireworks displays wows audiences all over DC. The fireworks light up the foreground of the Washington Monument for a picture perfect evening.

But is that what Independence Day really is?

Prior to my venture to the Capitol lawn, I was lounging in my apartment taking care of some weekend type chores when my roommate said hi on his way out the door. He is Serbian, and he grew up under communist oppression. Though he's been in DC for a little while now, his enthusiasm for liberty is inspiring. In his thick French accent, he asked what I was doing for the day. I replied with my plans to attend the concert, then asked him what he was doing. His answer embodies how all Americans should feel. "I am going to celebrate my first Independence Day in the capital for the free world," he said.

The capital of the free world.

His first Independence Day.

What a powerful idea. Perhaps it would do us all some good to spend time with those celebrating their July 4th in America for the first time.

Animal Rights? Sea Lions Say No!

2007-07-02T07:07:00.000-04:00

Most animal rights activists put themselves in the stickiest contradiction and never seem to realize it. One day the self-appointed protector of the environment decries humanity for encroaching on wildlife and crimping the mating habits of the deer mouse; and the next day the same environmentalist swears by the theory of evolution, praising the notion of survival of the fittest and natural selection.

Such is the situation that the Department of Agriculture has gotten itself into. DOA has actually deployed a salmon protection team to fend off hungry sea lions. Ironically, "preliminary numbers indicate the sea lions caught more salmon this season than in any of the six others since records have been kept."

This article is really hilarious. One should ask, did the salmon actually ask for protection? Even more important, are the sea lions going to feel that their animal rights have been violated?

Marine animals are protected by the 1972 Marine Mammals Protection Act, which imposes stiff penalties for killing such an animal. Perhaps we should jail the sea lions for killing the salmon?

Us humans have taken on a mantle of protection via legislation and legislated handcuffs around our own hands. The salmon should really protest this law and ask the death penalty for sea lions.

I will believe in animal rights the day an animal of any species speaks and asks for individual rights. It's a simple request.

Immigration Bill Must Come as a Package

2007-06-29T06:48:00.000-04:00

Yesterday, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff reacted to the defeat of the Senate immigration bill with disappointment saying that, "Some necessary tools of enforcement were left on the floor of the Senate."

I do not understand why the Senate cannot pass legislation adopting these "necessary tools" and rejecting an amnesty. Its as if the Senate cannot secure the border without providing an amnesty bill. This self-imposed handicap further emphasizes the irony of this schizophrenic body. Why would America want to increase border security, and then offer increased incentive for would-be illegal immigrants.

American citizenship is a prized possession. And if someone from a third-world country with a corrupt government can attain this prize simply by crossing the border and then paying a small fine, well that's quite a deal...for them. But what an insult to the thousands of applicants who are standing in line, sometimes literally, to get legal citizenship.

Perhaps Mr. Chertoff will encourage the Senate to take up increased border security with no strings attached.

Feature on WorldNetDaily

2007-06-29T06:44:00.000-04:00

Today, the top visited online news site posted my commentary on the recent Supereme Court decision on race. WorldNetDaily.com featured my article "Racism on the High Court." Here is an excerpt:

"School districts in Seattle and Louisville both had programs to ensure a racially diverse school population. In fact, the program in Seattle attempted to create schools where 41 percent of students were white and 59 percent were nonwhite. The court struck these programs down. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said, "The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race."

"Wait, did he say to prevent discrimination one should stop discriminating? What a novel idea."

Read more here.

Immigration Bill Fails

2007-06-28T21:41:00.000-04:00

The Senate had its immigration showdown today, and conservatives won! Because this immigration bill is so important, I am posting a list of votes:

YEAs ---46
Akaka (D-HI)Bennett (R-UT)Biden (D-DE)Boxer (D-CA)Cantwell (D-WA)Cardin (D-MD)Carper (D-DE)Casey (D-PA)Clinton (D-NY)Conrad (D-ND)Craig (R-ID)Dodd (D-CT)Durbin (D-IL)Feingold (D-WI)Feinstein (D-CA)Graham (R-SC) Gregg (R-NH)Hagel (R-NE)Inouye (D-HI)Kennedy (D-MA)Kerry (D-MA)Klobuchar (D-MN)Kohl (D-WI)Kyl (R-AZ)Lautenberg (D-NJ)Leahy (D-VT)Levin (D-MI)Lieberman (ID-CT)Lincoln (D-AR)Lott (R-MS)Lugar (R-IN)Martinez (R-FL) McCain (R-AZ)Menendez (D-NJ)Mikulski (D-MD)Murray (D-WA)Nelson (D-FL)Obama (D-IL)Reed (D-RI)Reid (D-NV)Salazar (D-CO)Schumer (D-NY)Snowe (R-ME)Specter (R-PA)Whitehouse (D-RI)Wyden (D-OR)

NAYs ---53
Alexander (R-TN)Allard (R-CO)Barrasso (R-WY)Baucus (D-MT)Bayh (D-IN)Bingaman (D-NM)Bond (R-MO)Brown (D-OH)Brownback (R-KS)Bunning (R-KY)Burr (R-NC)Byrd (D-WV)Chambliss (R-GA)Coburn (R-OK)Cochran (R-MS)Coleman (R-MN)Collins (R-ME)Corker (R-TN) Cornyn (R-TX)Crapo (R-ID)DeMint (R-SC)Dole (R-NC)Domenici (R-NM)Dorgan (D-ND)Ensign (R-NV)Enzi (R-WY)Grassley (R-IA)Harkin (D-IA)Hatch (R-UT)Hutchison (R-TX)Inhofe (R-OK)Isakson (R-GA)Landrieu (D-LA)McCaskill (D-MO)McConnell (R-KY)Murkowski (R-AK) Nelson (D-NE)Pryor (D-AR)Roberts (R-KS)Rockefeller (D-WV)Sanders (I-VT)Sessions (R-AL)Shelby (R-AL)Smith (R-OR)Stabenow (D-MI)Stevens (R-AK)Sununu (R-NH)Tester (D-MT)Thune (R-SD)Vitter (R-LA)Voinovich (R-OH)Warner (R-VA)Webb (D-VA)

Not Voting - 1
Johnson (D-SD)