Monthly Archives: October 2011

Putting The Focus Where The Problem Is

Posted on by
Peter king

Image via Wikipedia

As Congress tries to find ways of cutting the federal budget, a few Congressmen are looking at ways to make some agencies more efficient in dealing with the problems they were created to solve. In Washington, that is easier said than done.

Representative Peter King is asking for changes at the Department of Homeland Security that would allow the Department to focus formally on “homegrown violent Islamist extremism.” Joe Lieberman has introduced a companion bill in the Senate that would require a czar to oversee the program.

The article reports:

“Sen. Lieberman and I think it’s important to focus on the most serious threat, and Islamist radicalism is the most dangerous threat,” the Long Island Republican said. “By not saying that, we would be creating the appearance of equivalency with any number of different threats.”

Under President Obama, Homeland Security has avoided the term “terrorism” and references to radical Islam.

Whether it is politically correct to say so or not, the majority of our problems with terrorism have been with Islamist extremists. It is foolish to say that by ignoring that fact, we are doing something constructive.

The article further reminds us:

Both bills, for example, would consolidate redundant DHS offices and impose tight controls on spending by the agency, which has wasted billions in its first seven years.

Most notably, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that DHS spent more than $4 billion on nuclear detection equipment that either didn’t work or wouldn’t fit in lanes at U.S. ports of entry.

It will be interesting to listen to the debate as these two bills move through Congress.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Closing Down A Government-Funded Religious School

Posted on by

Scott Johnson at Power Line reported today on the closing down of the Tarek ibn Ziyad (TiZA) Academy K-8 public charter school in suburban St. Paul, Minnesota. The school was originally sponsored by Islamic Relief USA.

According to the article:

The school was housed in a building that was owned by the Muslim American Society of Minnesota. The study of Arabic was required at the school. The Arabic came in handy for the Koranic studies that follow the regular school day.

Star Tribune reporter Katherine Kersten charged that the school was a religious school operating with public funds. After her columns were published, the Minnesota American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) investigated and sued the school and the Minnesota Department of Education.

The article further reports:

As a result of its failure to find a sponsor as required by state law, TiZA failed to open this fall. The ACLU’s case against TiZA nevertheless remains. Despite the blasé media reports on the settlements with the Department of Education and Islamic Relief USA, the ACLU Minnesota obviously obtained some highly interesting evidence in the case. The “stipulation of facts” underlying the settlement has now been approved by the court and unsealed. The ACLU Minnesota has posted relevant documents here.

Thanks to the work of Katherine Kersten, the Star Tribune has owned this story. Yet it cannot have been a pleasant experience for her to have worked on the story while inside an organization that would sooner have served as TiZA’s public relations arm than investigator or whistleblower. In its pathetic editorial postmortem on TiZA, the Star Tribune jumped straight to the ACLU lawsuit without including in its chronology the fact that one of its own writers broke the story. By contrast, the ACLU Minnesota acknowledged Kersten’s role in uncovering the scandal from the outset of the lawsuit. Wouldn’t a genuine newspaper want to tout its key role in the events? Why is this story different from any other story?

Please follow the link to Power Line to read the entire story. There were problems with the school from the start. When the case was finally brought by the ACLU, the school charged anti-Muslim bigotry in an attempt to intimidate the investigators. The article points out that one of the weapons used by the Muslims when they are challenged to obey American laws is to charge bigotry against Muslims. The laws of America should apply to all of us equally, and they should be enforced equally. We need to remember that when dealing with any group that is looking for special privileges.

Enhanced by Zemanta

A Slightly Different Take On Occupy Wall Street

Posted on by

Yesterday The Corner at National Review OnLine posted an interesting commentary on the Wall Street protests. The article points out that although part of the crowd protesting is ‘old lefties and sundry off-their-meds street people,’ many of them are college graduates. The protesters have stated that they are mad because they cannot get jobs. The problem is not that they can’t get jobs–they can’t get the jobs they want where they want them.

The article points out:

Wages for entry-level and semi-skilled workers have barely budged in ten years. I credit this to employer’s wariness about hiring anyone at all. Hiring people (and all the litigation risks they present) is simply too risky unless that hire is obviously going to enhance the bottom line. Risks on the young and the untested are simply unacceptable in a tight economy tied down with regulation.

In short, if an Occupy Wall Street kid is ever inclined to look for work, the job he finds is not likely to be the groovy one he and his beleaguered parents envisioned when that $200,000 was shelled out for a four-year degree in poli-sci or women’s studies.

The point of this article is that the revolution we may be seeing may eventually target the educational system in America.

The article concludes:

We haven’t had a bad enough economy to test this proposition in a while — an economy that forces employers to hire only the most essential workers — but what we are seeing these days is that a four-year liberal-arts degree is completely non-essential. The only twentysomethings I know who are gainfully employed and living like men, with their own apartments, cars, and girlfriends, are in the building trades. My upstairs neighbor has more work than he can handle designing and installing sound systems in large places like auditoriums and shopping malls.

If there’s going to be a revolution in this country, I would like one part of it to look like this: Vocational schools would be opened again (and celebrated, not marginalized) and parents would tell junior that a four-year degree is off the table unless he knows exactly how he can use it.

I am not opposed to sending children to college, although I will admit that when I sent my children to college it was much less expensive. All three of my daughters are gainfully employed in the fields that they studied to the degree that they choose to be employed. One daughter is a practicing lawyer, one is an electrical engineer, and one has an art degree. The lawyer and engineer work full time. The artist teaches part-time (which is her choice. She lives in California which has eliminated public school art teachers). I can, however, understand that a degree in women’s studies might not put you on the top of the resume pile.

It is interesting to note that as government aid to students has increased, the cost of an education has also risen rapidly. There is a chart at a website called trends.collegeboards.org which shows the rise of the cost of college since 1976. The question that some of the protesters need to ask is, “Is the government college loan program providing cover for colleges to raise their tuition fees beyond what those fees would normally be?”

 

An Ordinary Man

Posted on by
Looking South on Route 1A, Plainville, Massach...

Image via Wikipedia

I live in Plainville, Massachusetts. I have lived here for thirty-three years. When we moved here, our children were young and the town had a population of about 6,000 people. The town has now grown to a population of about 8,000, but it still has that small-town, family-oriented feeling.

Today I went to a funeral in Plainville. The funeral was for Frank Sorrento, who died last Saturday. The Sun Chronicle published his obituary on Wednesday. When you read the obituary, it really doesn’t seem very different than the other obituaries on the page–it’s kind of a nice summary of some of the things Frank was involved in. But that is not anywhere near the whole story.

The obituary says that Frank grew up in Quincy and graduated from North Quincy High School. It doesn’t mention any further education. The obituary mentions his wife, his children, and other family members, but that really doesn’t tell you anything either.

There were so many people at the graveside today that the cemetery was almost totally full with the cars of the people who came to pay their respects. The reception after the funeral filled both floors of the senior center.

This was not really an ordinary man, although his obituary may have given that impression. Frank was a vital part of the town of Plainville. At various times in his life he was involved in the Jaycees, Little League and Cub Scouts. He was also part of the North Attleboro Sons of Italy. But even that list does not tell the whole story. Frank was one of those people who willingly provides the foundation that allows others to build. He and his wife Rosie (who has driven the Senior Citizens van since the mid 1980’s) have always worked to make Plainville a great place to live and raise children. They never sought the spotlight, they both simply continued to improve their part of the world. Frank will be missed. He showed how one person living his life and simply doing things to help the community and the people around him can truly make a difference. He really was not an ordinary man.

 

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

What About Protester Greed ?

Posted on by

Fox News reported yesterday that one of the organizers of the Occupy Wall Street demonstration in Washington, D. C., paid the protesters.

The article reports:

But he also says the demonstrators wanted to be there, and he was merely compensating them for their time. 

“If you think I’m going to ask impoverished Latinos out of work, and out of luck, to parade for four hours under a broiling sun … think again,” Jim McGrath, chairman of the D.C. Tenants Advocacy Coalition, told FoxNews.com. 

Wow. My first question is where does the D.C. Tenants Advocacy Coalition get its money? Mr. McGrath explained that he paid them out of his own pocket. Let’s see–there were approximately 10 protesters that the article reports that he paid (there may be others paid by someone else, but we don’t know).  The minimum wage in the District of Columbia is $8.25 an hour, so that is $82.50 an hour for ten people.  Assuming they protested for one eight-hour day (with appropriate breaks and lunch hour), that is $660. Were taxes taken out of their paychecks? Were the proper forms filled out to show that they were legally here and eligible to be employed? Were their social security numbers checked with e-verify? Did they fill out the appropriate paperwork to receive wages? Which federal laws is Mr. McGrath in violation of by not filling out and returning the proper paperwork for hiring people? Was Workman’s Compensation taken out of their checks in case an angry passerby hit them over the head with their protest sign? In addition, why does the chairman of the D. C. Tenants Advocacy Coalition have that kind of money to throw around? Is he being paid the way a corporate fat cat is being paid? Are any of the major news outlets looking into that?

Behind The Scenes On Obamacare

Posted on by

The Associated Press posted an article today on the behind the scenes activity that is taking place on Obamacare.

The article reports:

The federal government is taking on a crucial new role in the nation’s health care, designing a basic benefits package for millions of privately insured Americans. A framework for the Obama administration was released Friday.

Obamacare will be decided at the Supreme Court this session, but the government is already putting together a package of government-run healthcare.

The article reports how the government is changing the healthcare insurance industry:

Until now, designing benefits has been the job of insurers, employers and states. But the new health care law requires insurance companies to provide at least the federally approved package if they want to sell to small businesses, families and individuals through new state markets set to open in 2014.

I suppose it is nice that the government is planning ahead, but I sincerely hope that Obamacare is repealed as soon as possible. The good news is that the healthcare plans are set to start in 2014. We need to elect every Republican we can in 2012 in order to get Obamacare repealed–whether it be by Congress or the Supreme Court.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Moving The Goalposts In The Middle Of The Game

Posted on by
The United States Supreme Court.

Image via Wikipedia

Something important happened in the United States Senate last night. It may not be earth-shaking right now, but it could be extremely important in the coming year. Heritage.org posted the story late last night. The bottom line is that Harry Reid blocked a vote on President Obama’s jobs bill. That is not really news–the news is the way he went about blocking the bill.

The article reports the events that actually began the change in the Senate rules:

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) had pledged to offer an unchanged version of the President’s American Jobs Act as an amendment to the Currency Exchange Rate Oversight Reform Bill (S. 1619). Reid stopped a vote on the President’s so called jobs bill by filling the amendment tree.  Last year I wrote about Reid’s obstructionism and argued that Reid’s strong arm tactics by constantly filling the amendment tree as a means to block out all amendments were against the spirit and letter of the Senate’s rules.

The article further reports:

The maneuver is arcane but momentous. If a simple majority of the Senate votes with Reid and strikes down the ruling, the chamber’s precedent will be changed through the unilateral action of one party. Republicans had considered using this maneuver, dubbed the “nuclear option,” in 2005 to change Senate rules to prohibit the filibuster of judicial nominees. Democrats decried the plan and the crisis was resolved by a bipartisan agreement forged by 14 rank-and-file senators known as the Gang of 14.

This maneuver severely limits any input the minority party will have on bills brought before the Senate. I am sure there will be a lot of discussion about this move on talk radio today. In view of current events, this is a major step, but there is another aspect of this I would like to look at.

Sometime during this session of the United States Supreme Court, Obamacare will be discussed. As the Court stands right now, the decision could go either way–the deciding vote will be Justice Kennedy. If he votes to uphold Obamacare, he will have to explain why it is constitutional for the government to require every citizen to purchase health insurance. Let’s just suppose for a minute that filibusters of judicial nominees are no longer allowed in the Senate and Justice Kennedy steps down. The Obama Administration will nominate a judge who will support Obamacare and we will be stuck with national health care.

I understand that this scenario seems farfetched, but the left side of the political spectrum is rather desperate right now, and unfortunately, the left plans ahead better than the right does.

Steve Jobs, Rest In Peace

Posted on by

Steve Jobs had a tremendous impact on America with his vision, his work ethic, and his success. You can read about his life pretty much anywhere on the internet today. I just want to post a quote he cited during one of his press conferences when he was releasing a new product. Behind him, on a screen, were the words:

“I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been.”  

                                       —Wayne Gretzky

To me, this sums up the life of Steve Jobs. America and American technology will truly miss this man. Rest in peace, Steve Jobs.

Limiting Religious Freedom In The United States

Posted on by

On Sunday the Daily Caller posted an article about The Franciscan University of Steubenville in Ohio. This 60-year old Roman Catholic College of over 2,400 students is being required by Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius dispense abortion-producing drugs and pay for sterilizations, both of which are strictly proscribed by the Catholic faith. Unfortunately, this is not the only incidence of this sort of behavior on the part of the Obama Administration.

The article reports:

Writer Charlotte Allen wrote of the “Persecution of Belmont Abbey” by the Obama administration in 2009. There, too, liberal zealots were demanding that the Catholic school, founded in 1876, provide contraception, abortifacients and sterilizations or face federal sanctions. This, according to the institution’s president, could lead to closing down the historic little college.

The article further reports:

Chai Feldblum is a tenured professor at Georgetown University’s law school. Georgetown is the oldest Catholic university in the country. Ironically, Feldblum is also a homosexual legal activist. She was Barack Obama’s choice for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. She told a panel at Family Research Council that if it came to a clash between what she calls gay rights and religious liberty, religious liberty must give way. In other words: “Be Amish, or be quiet.”

Why are we having this discussions now? Simple. America was founded on Judeo-Christian principles. There was, up until about the 1960’s, a moral consensus in this country. We have lost that moral consensus. Now before you decide that I am anti-gay or whatever else, let me explain. I don’t care what anyone does in the privacy of their own home. I don’t care what rules anyone chooses to govern their life. I do care when their rules overflow on to my rights. Just as medical clinics have the right to prescribe whatever medical treatments they choose, a religious medical clinic also has the right to refuse procedures that are against its religious beliefs. Just because Chai Feldblum has the right to be gay (which she does), does not mean that she has the right to override the religious freedom of others. When gay marriage became legal in Massachusetts, the Catholic adoption agencies were driven from the state because it was against their religion to adopt children out to gay couples. Their rights were infringed on in the name of granting other people rights. We need to be careful in granting various groups rights that we don’t infringe on the rights of people in groups whose rights are also protected by our constitution.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Some Random Thoughts On ‘Occupy Wall Street’

Posted on by

There are some interesting facts behind the ‘Occupy Wall Street’ protest. Bill Ayers (a man not known for his love of America or his patriotism) has a blog on Word Press (I’m sorry to hear that, but I believe in free speech). Bill is an aging 60’s radical who admits to being responsible for killing people. There is a long statement on his blog explaining what the protest is about.

The first line of that statement:

They have taken our houses through an illegal foreclosure process, despite not having the original mortgage.

Think about this for a minute. When a homeowner takes out a mortgage, he signs a contract that requires him to pay back that mortgage. It is understood that if he cannot pay the mortgage, he will lose the house. The subprime mortgage market was the result of government pressure to issue mortgages to people who could not pay them back. The banks then had to find a way to share the risk of these mortgages. The problem was partially the banks, but the root of the problem was the government. Why are the protesters protesting the banks and not the government?

While we are on the subject. The handbook used by Bill Ayers and Barack Obama during their organizing days in Chicago was Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. As you watch the demonstrations on Wall Street, you need to keep the principles of this book in mind.

11.  Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it.  Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies.  Identify a responsible individual.  Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.

They have not yet picked a person to demonize, they are simply demonizing banks and big corporations. Another thing to remember is that union leaders are supporting this protest. What is the difference between the union leaders who get rich off the dues of their members and the so-called corporate ‘fat cats’ who are actually responsible for producing a product?

Listening to the comments of the protesters, I am convinced that what they want is to get everyone else’s money without actually having to work for it. Many of the protesters are spoiled children who do not want to pay back their school loans or accept the responsibilities of adulthood. I suspect they will be gone as soon as the weather gets cold–they are not thinking for themselves–they simply are buying a story someone is selling them. Until they find their own purpose, they will lack the direction to accomplish anything meaningful.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Who Is Actually Blocking The ‘Jobs’ Bill ?

Posted on by
President Obama talks alone with Senate Majori...

Image via Wikipedia

First of all, the best laid plans of mice and men do not always unfold as planned. The current situation regarding the ‘jobs’ bill is an example of this. When President Obama introduced his jobs bill, he made sure it had enough ‘poison pills’ in it to prevent Republicans in Congress from voting for it. The idea was to create a campaign issue by saying, “The Republicans are preventing me from fixing the economy.” There is no way the jobs bill would fix the economy, but as long as the Republicans in Congress prevented it from being passed, most Americans wouldn’t figure this out, and President Obama had a campaign issue that voters who were not paying close attention might believe. Well, life got complicated.

Harry Reid blocked a Senate vote of the jobs bill yesterday, even as he complained that Republicans were stalling a vote on the bill. The problem–no Democrat running for re-election wants to vote for the bill. The bill raises taxes and increases spending. The Obama administration may be tone deaf to the results of the 2010 election, but the Democrats running for Congress in 2012 are not.

Guy Benson at Townhall.com reported:

So Obama’s jobs act doesn’t have a single Democratic co-sponsor in the House, and Democrats in the Senate have pulled out all the procedural stops to block even a vote on a bill their party’s president insists must be passed right away…and the Obama campaign is blasting out emails ripping Republicans for obstructionism.  Pardon me as I laugh my ass off at the ineptitude.  Speaking of ineptitude, let’s also take a moment to reflect on Senate Democrat’s 8-8-8 plan.  No, I’m not talking about liberals’ alternative to Herman Cain’s tax proposal, I’m talking about the 888-day anniversary of the last time Harry Reid’s motley crew deigned to introduce a budget, which they’re required by statute to do every year.  Good work, guys.

The Weekly Standard reports:

The Obama campaign sent out an email today asking supporters to urge Congress to at least vote on the president’s jobs bill almost immediately after Democratic majority leader Harry Reid blocked a vote on the bill in the Senate.

On the Senate floor today, Republican leader Mitch McConnell asked for unanimous consent to proceed on voting on the bill. Reid, who has struggled to find enough votes for the bill in the Democratic caucus, objected to the motion and killed the opportunity for a vote. 

The question I have is very simple. How many people are actually paying enough attention to realize what is actually going on?

Enhanced by Zemanta

One Reason You May Not Be Hearing The Entire Truth In The Mainstream Media

Posted on by

Yesterday Mark Hemingway at the Weekly Standard reported that CBS News investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson, who has been covering the Operation Fast and Furious scandal for CBS News was screamed at by the White House and Justice Department for reporting on the story. Ms. Attkisson was interviewed on the Laura Ingraham show, the transcript of the interview is posted in the Weekly Standard article.

The article reports:

Ingraham: So they were literally screaming at you?
Attkisson: Yes. Well the DOJ woman was just yelling at me. The guy from the White House on Friday night literally screamed at me and cussed at me. [Laura: Who was the person? Who was the person at Justice screaming?] Eric Schultz. Oh, the person screaming was [DOJ spokeswoman] Tracy Schmaler, she was yelling not screaming. And the person who screamed at me was Eric Schultz at the White House.”

Finally, Attkisson notes that the White House is claiming that a thorough investigation of the scandal is unwarranted:

[The White House and Justice Department] will tell you that I’m the only reporter–as they told me–that is not reasonable. They say the Washington Post is reasonable, the LA Times is reasonable, the New York Times is reasonable, I’m the only one who thinks this is a story, and they think I’m unfair and biased by pursuing it.

This may explain why CBS is the only news outlet that has actually asked questions about Operation Fast and Furious. I think it is particularly interesting that the reporter was accused of being biased because she has pursued the story. Wouldn’t she have been biased if she had chosen to ignore the story?



Enhanced by Zemanta

I Don’t Agree With This, But I Totally Understand It !

Posted on by
A bottle of Heinz ketchup

Image via Wikipedia

The U.K. Telegraph is reporting today that France has banned tomato ketchup from its elementary schools. This has nothing to do with the ingredients of ketchup–it’s an effort to protect the French culinary culture.

The article reports:

“We have to ensure that children become familiar with French recipes so that they can hand them down to the following generation,” he (Christophe Hebert, chairman of the National Association of Directors of Collective Restaurants) explained this week. “We have to stop children from being able to serve those sauces. Children have a tendency to use them to mask the taste of whatever they are eating.” Which, if meals in French schools are anything like those on which we were brought up, is surely the point. 

On the surface, this is a bit much, but I actually understand it. A child’s eating habits and taste are developed when they are young. If you want a child to grow up appreciating the complexity of French cooking, taking the ketchup off of the table is a really good idea. Most children, given the opportunity, will pour ketchup on anything on their plate that isn’t moving. Taking the ketchup off the table will give French children a chance to appreciate the fantastic heritage of French cooking. This isn’t the nanny state intervening for health reasons–this is a country attempting to preserve an invaluable heritage.

Enhanced by Zemanta

A ‘Beam Me Up, Scotty, There’s No Intelligent Life Down Here’ Moment

Posted on by
Mrs. Nixon meeting with Big Bird from Sesame S...

Image by The U.S. National Archives via Flickr

Entertainment Weekly reported yesterday that Sesame Street is going to introduce a character to acquaint young children with the concept of poverty and hunger. Good grief. Can’t we let them be children for a few years?

The article reports:

The special will share the stories of real-life families to raise awareness of hunger issues in the United States, as well as strategies that have helped these families find food. The United States Department of Agriculture estimates that 17 million American children — nearly 1 in 4 — have limited or uncertain access to affordable and nutritious food. Walmart is sponsoring the show as part of a $1.5 million grant toward the initiative and holding screenings in select communities.

The concept of food insecurity is going to be spotlighted in this one-hour Sesame Street primetime special, Growing Hope Against Hunger. I am not unsympathetic to the problem of hunger in this country, although I wonder why it exists. We spend billions on food stamps to deal with the problem, where does the money go? I do have a problem with the idea of throwing this information at young children. Children do not have the same understanding as grown-ups as to the challenges of adulthood. To me, this is exposing young children to something that will make them fearful–I can’t imagine it having any other effect. Compassion is something children learn as they grow up. Showing images and stories of children who are hungry does not engender compassion–it just causes children to worry if this will happen to them. They are children.!!!

Enhanced by Zemanta

Little Things Mean A Lot

Posted on by
The distinctive multiple-arched BYU Jerusalem ...

Image via Wikipedia

Little things mean a lot–only this is not a little thing. One of the blogs at the Weekly Standard posted two pictures of an item on the White House website. The pictures are of a meeting between Vice President Biden and Israeli President Shimon Peres taken last year in Jerusalem. What is the problem? In the original picture, the caption states that the picture was taken in Jerusalem, Israel. The White House website later changed the caption to say “Jerusalem”–leaving out Israel. I believe this is the beginning of the move to deny that Jerusalem is the eternal, undivided capital of Israel. How would we as Americans feel if Mexico decided that half of Arizona was actually theirs and half of Phoenix was the capital of the new Mexican state formed? Somehow I don’t think we would take kindly to the idea.

Up until the Obama administration, America has been a protector of the existence and freedom of Israel. Unfortunately, that began to change after President Obama was sworn in. Support of Israel is an important part of America’s role in the world. Israel is the only functioning democracy in the Middle East. Israel is a country that has been a close ally of America since its founding in 1948. There is also the Biblical aspect–Genesis 12:1-3 states, “And I will bless those that bless you and curse the one who curses you. And in you shall all families of the earth be blessed.” Dividing Jerusalem in the name of peace in the Middle East will have dire consequences. It will eventually destroy the nation of Israel and the only hope for real freedom and democracy in the Middle East.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Between A Rock And A Hard Place

Posted on by

There is an old joke (I’m a grandmother—all I know are old jokes) about a man walking back and forth under a streetlight. A friend comes by and asks him what he is doing. The man who is walking explains that he dropped his keys when he got out of his car, so he is looking for them. The second man asks why, since the car is parked across the street, the first man is looking on the other side of the street. The first man replies, “Because the light is better here.” That is my commentary on the current state of the mainstream media.

Big Journalism posted an article yesterday contrasting the media’s charges of racism against Rick Perry because of a rock on a property he did not own and the way President Obama’s more recent association with the New Black Panthers has been covered. This dust-up has nothing to do with Rick Perry–it has to do with the political left’s belief that Mitt Romney will be an easier candidate for Barack Obama to defeat. If Mitt Romney is the nominee, the left will attack him on Romneycare and his Mormonism. They have no other weapons.

President Obama’s economic plans have been a total failure. The only way that he can win re-election is to destroy any candidates who could defeat him and make sure his opposition is vulnerable enough to be defeated. Republicans need to be very careful not to let the mainstream media choose their candidates.

Please follow the link to the Big Journalism article to see the contrast in the reporting of ‘racism’ regarding Rick Perry and President Obama. We need to be very careful not to let the mainstream media determine who the Republican presidential candidate will be.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Will Starting A Trade War With China Create Jobs In America ?

Posted on by

Investors.com posted an editorial yesterday about the China currency bill the Senate is planning to introduce this week. The National Retail Federation (NRF) has stated their opinion that passage of the bill will cost American jobs–not create them.

Today’s Wall Street Journal (not linked–subscribers only) posted an editorial titled, “The Obama-Romney Tariff.” The article at the Wall Street Journal describes the bill as “the most dangerous trade legislation in many years.”

The article at the Wall Street Journal reports:

The legislation is now coming to the floor because Senate Democrats want protectionist political cover against unions in return for voting on the free-trade pacts with Columbia, Panama and Korea that President Obama finally sent to Congress yesterday. But what is cynical posturing in Washington may look more threatening to the rest of the world, and once trade wars start they can be hard to stop.

We do not trade with China on an even level–they use slave labor and they manipulate their currency to give themselves an advantage. The Chinese are not fair trading partners. I understand that, and I would like to see that change. However, this may not be the time to attempt that change. We need to clean up the internal downward forces on the American economy so that we approach this problem from a position of strength rather than a position of weakness. The answers to America’s economic problems are internal–they are not external. This currency bill is not Smoot-Hawley, but unfortunately, it may have a similar result.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Amanda Knox Is Acquitted

Posted on by

John Hinderaker at Power Line posted an article yesterday about the acquittal of Amanda Knox in an Italian court. As a lawyer, Mr. Hinderaker followed the case closely and in his post he details some of the reasons he felt the innocent verdict was appropriate. I will admit that I had not followed the case very closely, and much of what I read at Power Line was new information to me.

There was no evidence linking Ms. Knox or Raffaele Sollecito to the murder of Meredith Kercher. There was evidence linking Rudy Guede to the rape of Meredith Kercher.

Mr. Hinderaker points out:

The most bizarre aspect of this miscarriage of justice, perhaps, was that Guede’s sentence was reduced to 16 years, while Knox was sentenced to 26 years and Sollecito–the forgotten man of the story, who must wonder more than anyone what he did to be trapped in such a nightmare–got 25 years. How on earth did the prosecution justify this focus on Knox and Sollecito, in preference to the man whose DNA showed that he (and he alone) had raped Kercher? Simple: Knox was a “she devil,” whereas Guede was merely her tool–seriously! The evidence for this claim? There wasn’t any. This kind of fantasy is inconceivable in a modern court.

When you read the details in the Power Line article, you begin to appreciate the justice system in America. The case against Amanda Knox would never have made it through an American court with the evidence the police had–it would have been either thrown out or dismissed as soon as the lack of evidence was apparent. This is the kind of story that makes me truly glad to live in America.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Third Choice For A Non-Muslim In An Islamic State

Posted on by

Tonight I had the privilege of hearing the Reverend Dr. Mark Durie, Vicar ofImage of Mark Durie St. Mary’s Anglican Church in Caulfield, Australia, speak on the subject of dhimmitude. Reverend Durie is the author of the book The Third Choice.

Reverend Durie began his lecture with a brief historical perspective of how the religion of Islam treats those who are not Muslims in countries where Islamists are in control. The religion of Islam gives the non-believers in a land they conquer three choices—convert to Muslim, death by the sword, or dhimmitude. Dhimmitude is an option that is traditionally open only to Jews and Christians—pagans must either convert to Islam or be killed.

Reverend Durie points out the Sharia Law (the Islamic justice system) guides all aspects of a man’s life. It assumes an Islamic state. In an Islamic state those who choose dhimmitude are required to pay an annual tax (jizya tax) to the state in recognition of their defeated status. The ritual surrounding that payment makes it clear that the dhimmis are expected to pay the tax gratefully for the privilege of keeping their heads for another year.  Part of the ritual includes two ritual blows to the neck, mimicking the beheading of the person.  At this point it was pointed out that Sharia law will be part of the new Palestinian State when or if it is created—religious freedom will not be part of the state.

The aim of Dhimmitude is to destroy the souls of the conquered people. Even if they do not convert to Islam, they will still be in submission to Islam.  The system is very damaging to the dhimmis. It is designed to destroy their love for life.

There have been some very negative cultural effects of Dhimmitude on western countries. Many western leaders have remained silent as Christians are persecuted in the Islamic world. Western leaders have been afraid to engage in a discourse about the theology of Islam, refusing to look at it critically. All faiths are not equal, and what you believe matters.

One of the problems in dealing with the spread of Islam is that Islamists have successfully controlled the vocabulary. When President Obama spoke in Cairo in June 2009, he exhibited the cultural traits of dhimmitude—he expressed gratefulness for Islam’s contributions to civilization and stated, “Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance.” These statements reflect the gratitude to Islam and the inferiority of the dhimmis in dhimmitude. There was no desire to actually address the intolerance Islam has shown to non-Muslims.

Reverend Durie stated that he is optimistic that Islam will not eventually reach its goal of world domination. He pointed out that where Sharia law is in effect, there has been a negative reaction to it. In Algeria and Iran, thousands are converting to Christianity. Islam’s rise is not based as much on Islam’s strength as much as it is based on the western world’s weakness.  Islam sets long-term goals—centuries rather than years. The western world needs to learn to set longer goals—reflected in education, text books, cultural strength, and appreciation of freedom.  We need to learn to pass the torch of western civilization from one generation to the next.

There is an expression in some Christian circles, “God has no grandchildren—He only has children.” We need to make sure that the coming generations understand the gift and blessings of freedom that are a major part of western civilization.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tonight In Stoughton Massachusetts

Posted on by

 

Image of Mark Durie
ATC Speakers Forum Presents:
“Islam and Dhimmitude: From Ancient Rituals to Present Realities”
With
Dr. Mark Durie
WHEN:            October 3, 2011 at 7:30 PM
WHERE:         Ahavath Torah Congregation – 1179 Central Street, Stoughton, MA
PRICE:            $5
Dr. Mark Durie is a theologian, human rights activist and pastor of an Anglican church. He has published many articles and books on the language and culture of the Acehnese, Christian-Muslim relations and religious freedom. A graduate of the Australian National University and the Australian College of Theology, he has held visiting appointments at the University of Leiden, MIT, UCLA and Stanford, and was elected a Fellow of the Australian Academy of the Humanities in 1992.
This lecture by an Australian scholar of Islam discusses the position of non-Muslims – Jews, Christians and others – under sharia law.
There are two stories about non-Muslims living under Islam, who Muslims call dhimmis. One is that dhimmis were the fortunate recipients of Islamic benevolence. The other is that non-Muslims had to buy their heads back each year in a legal system designed to degrade and belittle them, and to ensure their decline. The story of the dhimmis, and their centuries of subjugation under Islamic law, raises troubling questions about the spiritual trajectory of western societies, and their seemingly inexorable drift towards the psychology of surrender.
Enhanced by Zemanta

A Comment On The Killing of Anwar al-Awlaki

Posted on by
Hugh Hewitt at the American Freedom Alliance c...

Image via Wikipedia

Yesterday the Washington Examiner posted a column by Hugh Hewitt on the legality of killing Anwar al-Awlaki. Hugh Hewitt is a law professor at Chapman University Law School and a nationally syndicated radio talk show host who blogs daily at HughHewitt.com.

As a lawyer, he is qualified to comment on the legal issues involved in the killing of al-Awlaki. Mr. Hewitt states:

Al-Awlaki was actively involved in plotting the death of Americans via terrorist acts and encouraging such acts across the globe. There isn’t a serious student of the jihadist movement that disagrees with this assessment. Al-Awalki was thus an enemy combatant the president could and rightfully did order killed. Not to have acted to remove such a danger to the nation would have been an abrogation of the president’s oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.

The loss of life that would have been involved in attempting to capture al-Awlaki and bring him to trial in America would have been extensive, and there would have been no guarantees that al-Awlaki could have been captured alive. At some point we need to realize that we are fighting a war. It is a war different from any other we have fought–it is worldwide and the soldiers of the enemy do not wear uniforms. Al-Awlaki was an enemy soldier–he had willingly given up his rights as an American when he began taking part in the killing of Americans. The lives of many Americans will be spared due to the killing of this man–his value to Al Qaeda was that as someone who had lived in America, he was adept at radicalizing American Muslims. America (and the world) are both safer places because this man is dead.

Enhanced by Zemanta

One Perspective On Bringing Peace To The Middle East

Posted on by

One definition of appeasement is letting the alligator eat everyone else first. It really doesn’t solve the problem–it just delays the inevitable conflict. At some point, if you choose to live, you will have to fight the alligator. Do you want to do it after he has eaten all of your potential allies and is strong or do you want to do it while he is weak and hungry? That is where we are in the discussions of a Palestinian state.

Yesterday Haaretz reported on a statement made by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad explaining how he would bring peace to the Middle East.

The article reports:

Speaking at the sidelines of the the International Conference on Palestine in Tehran, the Iranian president was quoted by AFP as saying that if “the backers of the Zionist regime want to solve the issue… the solution is simple … everyone should go home.” 

“Some poor people were brought to Palestine on the promise of security and jobs while they made Palestinian people into refugees… So now Palestinians should go home and those brought here should go to theirs,” Ahmadinejad was quoted by AFP as saying. 

He doesn’t want to drive the Jewish people into the sea, he just wants to kick them out of Israel and take their land. How peaceful. Does anyone really believe that he will stop at Israel? Does anyone doubt that Iran is smuggling weapons into Gaza and bringing weapons into Lebanon to prepare for an attack on Israel? Iran has territorial ambitions. A video smuggled out of the country details the international goals of Iran (see rightwinggranny March 28). We need to listen to what Ahmadinejad is saying. He is telling us what to expect.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Iranian Government Is Trying To Save Face

Posted on by

Yesterday the International Business Times reported that Christian Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani, who is facing the death penalty in Iran, is actually being charged with rape–not apostasy.

However, the article reports:

However, a December 2010 court ruling issued and signed by Supreme Court judges Morteza Fazel and Azizoallah Razaghi mentions the religious charges against Nadarkhani and nothing more.

What has happened here is that the world has noticed that Pastor Nadarkhani was facing the death penalty for apostasy and has begun to question the Iranian record on human rights.

The article further reports:

As the case slowly garners international attention, the rape allegation is a signal that Nadarkhani has become, to put it bluntly, a public relations disaster for Iran.

In what could prove to be Nadarkhani’s last days, world leaders have finally condemned the death sentence and pushed for the pastor’s release.

There is no doubt in my mind that this is a made-up charge. Hopefully the civilized nations of the world can put enough pressure on the Iranian government to prevent the execution of an innocent man.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Friday Night Document Dump

Posted on by
Darrell Issa

Image via Wikipedia

Traditionally, the White House (regardless of which party the President represents) uses Friday night as the time to release information that they hope no one will pay attention to. This weeks document dump had to do with Operation Fast and Furious.

CBS News reports:

The documents show extensive communications between then-ATF Special Agent in Charge of the Phoenix office Bill Newell – who led Fast and Furious – and then-White House National Security Staffer Kevin O’Reilly. Emails indicate the two also spoke on the phone. Such detailed, direct communications between a local ATF manager in Phoenix and a White House national security staffer has raised interest among Congressional investigators looking into Fast and Furious. Newell has said he and O’Reilly are long time friends.

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air reports:

However, the chief counsel to President Barack Obama, Kathryn Ruemmler, indicated that the White House was withholding an unspecified number of internal e-mails exchanged among three National Security Staff aides.

“These internal NSS emails are not included in the enclosed documents because the [Executive Office of the President] has significant confidentiality interests in its internal communications,” Ruemmler wrote in a letter to House Oversight & Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). The letter, posted here, was obtained Friday by POLITICO.

The latest batch of 102 pages of records partially duplicated information previously sent to Congress and didn’t appear to include any smoking guns showing that White House officials were aware that the operation involved allowing hundreds or thousands of guns to flow essentially unimpeded from the U.S. to Mexican drug cartels.

Mr. Morrissey further reminds us that:

This is rather amusing.  Three years ago, a Democratic House sued to get Karl Rove and Harriet Miers to testify over the termination of US Attorneys, who are political appointments that serve at the pleasure of the President, and rejected the notion that executive privilege applied to such executive-branch personnel decisions.  Now we have an ATF operation that armed drug cartels and resulted in hundreds of murders from guns supplied by the US government, including the murder of a Border Patrol agent here in the US — and Democrats think that should be covered by executive privilege. 

I hope the Congressional Oversight Committee has the tenacity to get to the bottom of Operation Fast and Furious and remove those people who were responsible for the operation from their government positions.


Enhanced by Zemanta