Uncategorized

Dear Mr. President:

We are disappointed and gravely concerned to learn that the right of military chaplains to pray according to their faith is in jeopardy. As you may know, the Air Force leadership recently released proposed guidelines that will restrict how Air Force chaplains can pray, and if approved, those guidelines may well be implemented throughout the entire DoD. We believe that the Air Force’s suppression of religious freedom is a pervasive problem throughout our nation’s Armed Forces, and it has come to our attention that in all branches of the military it is becoming increasingly difficult for Christian chaplains to use the name of Jesus when praying. There are currently no laws or regulations that prohibit chaplains from praying according to their respective denominations or different faiths, and we are deeply concerned that chaplains are now being instructed on what to say when they pray.

Throughout our nation’s history, chaplains not only have remained an integral part of our military, but they also have always prayed according to their faith tradition. We believe that if chaplains are chosen to pray before a professional setting, they have a constitutional right to adhere to the religious expressions of their faith. For Christian chaplains, praying in the name of Jesus is a fundamental part of their belief and to suppress this form of expression would be a violation of religious freedom.

The current demand in the guidelines for so-called “no-sectarian” prayers is merely a euphemism declaring that prayers will be acceptable only so long as they censor Christian beliefs. Current surveys in the military indicate that upwards of 80 percent of soldiers identify themselves as Christians, and such censorship of Christian beliefs is a disservice not only to Christian chaplains, but also to the hundreds of thousands of Christian soldiers in the military who look to their chaplains for comfort, inspiration, and support, just as our military soldiers of other faiths look to their chaplains.

While some military members may find certain prayers to be offensive and wrongly claim that they are not non-pluralistic, we believe these restrictions raise constitutional issues involving the Establishment, Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses of the First Amendment (There are numerous other offensive provisions throughout the proposed guidelines, including the onerous provision that chaplains can only speak of their faith with officers–the “peer to peer” provision). Officially inhibiting or defining what chaplains can and cannot say in effect establishes an official religion and burdens our military’s chaplains’ right of free speech.

We are requesting that you, as Commander and Chief, protect by Executive Order the constitutional right of military chaplains to pray according to their faith.

With deep concern,

Walter B. Jones (R., No Carolina)
________________________________
The well-known disease, PCism, appears everywhere you turn. Sadly, the U.S. military is no exception.

Representative Jones is trying to alert us all to this oppression of our armed forces personnel to exercise their freedom of religion. To stop this absurd quashing of their religious faith to please the jealous gods of PCism.

Let’s help him do so.

Contact your Congressman!

Mr. President, heed the words of the original President George…

“[E]very man, conducting himself as a good citizen, and being accountable to God alone for his religious opinions, ought to be protected in worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience.” —George Washington

_________________________________

— Republican Rep. Lee Terry is seeking co-sponsors for his Public Trust and Accountability Act (HR 4548), denying retirement benefits to any federal employee, including judges and elected officials, convicted of abuse of power in their position.

Please contact your congressman to help get this measure passed. Why should we, the People, pay these louts’ benefits in-perpetuity if they have been convicted of abusing their position?

The pensions these people get are a sweet deal, but it should be EARNED, not assumed.

WTH
_______________________________________

US Should Cut Off Aid to Palestinian Thieves
by Jim Kouri, CPP

Other Gods
by Erik Rush

Well, the Blogosphere has been abuzz with this Hammas supremacy at the polls in the Palestinian elections last week and there is good reason for it.

We have two competing ideas where it concerns Hammas’ future.

1)- Hammas actually running for election will eventually bring them into the real world of politics and distance them from terror as it did the IRA in Ireland. Because democracy tends to ameliorate extremism they will find their terrorism a thing of the past.

2)- This is a failure of democracy and Hammas will never be anything other than a murderous band of criminals.

Truthfully, there is no way to tell. Both points have their merit and logic and choosing one or the other is just guesswork this early in history. Yes, guesswork even with the fact that Hammas is claiming they have no intention of changing their tact and direction.

But, there is a long-range problem for the Palestinian Authority that tends to prevent it from coming into Democracy. The lies that form the basis of how Arabs think about their central problem, Israel, prevents them from being able to even make sense on the issue. They are so filled with lies, myths and garbage that they just cannot sensibly address their issues with the Jewish state.

Here are some of the fictions that seem to be widely believed by Palestinians (and the Arab middle East in general):

-The Jews on 9/11 warned their fellows not to go to work and no Jews died on 9/11. (Untrue. Somewhere around 500 Jews died that horrible day)

-The two blue stripes on the Israeli flag stand for the Nile and Euphrates rivers. The Jewish state intends to forcefully conquer all the land between those two rivers and incorporate that land into the Jewish state. (The two blue stripes represent the prayer shawl worn by Jews, the Tallit)

-There is a plaque or sign in the Knesset (The Israeli government’s building) that claims the Jewish state will spread between the Nile and Euphrates. (this is just idiotic)

-The Holocaust did not happen (What can one say about such stupidity?)

-Jewish scholars use the blood of young Arab boys (sometimes Christians) in their food for ceremonial purposes (ditto)

-Jews are pigs and dogs (ugh)

These idiotic, racist and childish claims go on and on, but these are some of the worst. They form the very basis underlying how Arabs think about Jews. With ideas like this infecting the thought process of how Arabs deal with Jews and the state of Israel it’s no wonder that no logic seems to ever be forthcoming in their conflict. And, until such ridiculousness is refuted, Arabs just will not be able to have enough respect for Jews or be able to treat them as human.

It’s also no wonder that Americans cannot understand the situation because we just have no frame of reference to be able to do so. The closest ideologies we ever had were the ways many whites felt about the American Indians or Negroes, both racist ideas that have been defeated soundly among the bulk of Americans.

It is almost beyond the average American’s ability to realize how racist Arabs are towards Jews.

By Warner Todd Huston

Multiculturalists Refuse To Feed Homeless
– By Frederick Meekins

Normally, liberals and other assorted leftists love to make a display about how much they care for the indigent; however, it seems now in France such gestures of goodwill are only acceptable if the meals appeal to the dietary peculiarities of every immigrant falling off the boat.

Groups linked to the “extreme right” in France are offering pork soup to their countrymen needing a helping hand. Since certain religious groups don’t consume pig products — particularly Muslims — the eleemosynary is being denounced as “racist”.
………..
Click HERE To Read On

NSA Spying: Why Is There Confusion?
by Jim Kouri, CPP

Tired of War? Better Get Used To It
by Sher Zieve

Education’s Iron Curtain
by Nancy Salvato

Handwringing over government intrusion rings false
– By Michael M. Bates

The debate over wiretapping U.S. citizens has joined critics from both the Left and the Right. There are not yet many details known about the surveillance and until there are I think reserving judgment is prudent. What I wonder is where some of these commentators who now seem so troubled about encroachments on citizens’ liberties have been the last several decades.

In ways large and small, government at every level has been curbing our freedoms for a long time.

We aren’t free to decide our own retirement plans. Government mandates participation in the actuarially unsound Social Security system.

We aren’t free to protect the most vulnerable among us, unborn children. Government has decided the Constitution protects the taking of innocent human life.

We aren’t free to do with our own property as we see fit. Government sets up zoning laws dictating what we can do and, if government deems it necessary for any reason, our property can be seized.
………………..
Click HERE To Read On

I just couldn’t resist this one. It’s just too funny…

What A Daughter Learned — What A Father Taught
– By Resa LaRu Kirkland

As I sit here, January 22, 2006 is fading into history. It is doing so in the normal manner; light begins to dwindle, cool air replaces warm, the sun slips behind a mountain cuing stars to twinkle and the moon to take over. A night like so many others.

Yet it is one I have dreaded to see come and now dolefully bid farewell. It isn’t the day itself that has caused such emotional duality, but what it represents.

It is the one year anniversary of the day we buried my dad, the last of those first anniversary dates that all mourners mark the year after losing a loved one. After tonight, I will no longer lament “A year ago at this time…” Instead I will fall into the verbiage of those long gone: “Back when dad was alive…”………
Click HERE To Read On

If They Don’t Write About It, It Didn’t Happen?
by Randall H. Nunn

Jimmy Carter: At Least Hamas Isn’t Corrupt
by Jim Kouri, CPP

Dem Mice Continue to Fight for Cheese and Other Odd Realities
by Sher Zieve

“Truthiness” and Secular Education
by Thomas E. Brewton

America Versus Mexico’s Ponzi Pyramid Scheme
– By Justin Darr

If there is anything people hate more than buying a used car, filling out tax forms, or visiting their attorney’s office it is meeting the glassy eyed enthusiasm of some acquaintance who wants to recruit you into a multi-level-marketing scheme. You know the ones. If you can make a list of everyone you know, and they can make a list of everyone they know, and each of you spend a few hundred dollars a month on some assorted widget or another, in three to five years you could be living on your own Caribbean island.

Fortunately, in the United States, the worse of these Ponzi pyramid schemes are illegal. But, imagine for a moment if they were not. Imagine also if, rather than toothpaste, insurance, and Saint John’s Wort, the product you were purchasing was the right to build a shed in your back yard, open a business, or avoid police harassment? And, what if this extortion was institutionalized to the point that it became the price of trying to live a normal life?………….
Click HERE To Read On

Here is the link for the full text. It is on Byrd’s website and he just posted it…

TEXT OF SPEECH
_________________________

Senator Robert Byrd, former Klansman from West Virginia, just came out in favor of Judge Samuel Alito to amazed Americans of all stripes.

In his speech on the floor of the Senate today he also decried the partisan bickering that bedeviled the confirmation hearings. I only heard some of his points, but I find it interesting that, if he was so incensed, that he didn’t name names and point out specifics.

In any case, it would seem odd that one of the extreme left’s prime attack dogs would turn against them to vote in favor of this nomination. But, when looking at his situation back home, we can hazard a guess why he did this. And it certainly wasn’t for reasons of “conscience” or “principle”.

Byrd is headed for an election fight for the first time a many, many decades. A Republican has announced that he will face Byrd in the up coming elections. Further, the state of West virginia has begun to lean Conservative and Byrd knows it.

So, he is attempting to gain himself a campaign talking point. Positioning himself as a “conservative” where it concerns judicial nominations. And, since Alito is going to win anyway, this is a painless way for Byrd to make some points along those lines.

In other words, it is a mere campaign ploy. Byrd doesn’t believe a WORD of what he is saying.

After all, it must be remembered that he was beating the drum of filibustering the Roberts hearings and Roberts is considerd FAR less “conservative” than Alito by the extreme left to which Byrd generally holds fealty.

Lastly, I would like to say that it is obvious that these Democrats really don’t believe the tripe they are dishing out about Alito. If he really was the “danger to the constitution” they claim he is they would make every attempt to filibuster his nomination. But they are not. they lack the courage of their claimed convictions.

Bin Laden/DNC Deliver Joint „State of The Jihad‰ Message
by Christopher Adamo

Alito Hearings Bring Fathers Back into the Abortion Debate
by Carey Roberts

Chutzpah: Clinton Cabinet Members Say US Military Broken
by Jim Kouri, CPP

An Unhealthy Obsession
by Thomas Lindaman

GraphicGoogle will be called to task in Washington next month following a controversial decision by the internet search engine to launch a China-based version of its website that will censor results to avoid angering the country’s Communist government.

The decision by Chris Smith, a Republican congressman from New Jersey who chairs a House subcommittee on Human Rights, to call for a February 16 hearing to examine the operating procedures of US internet companies in China, represents the first signs of what could become a serious backlash against Google and other internet companies in Washington that are perceived as capitulating to the Chinese government.

Mr Smith on Wednesday accused Google of “collaborating .. with persecutors” who imprison and torture Chinese citizens “in the service of truth”.

“It is astounding that Google, whose corporate philosophy is ‘don’t be evil’ would enable evil by cooperating with China’s censorship policies just to make a buck,” he said.

Search provider chooses less of two evils
Click here
The hearing will also include testimony from Yahoo, Microsoft, Cisco and senior State Department officials who advise on China.

Mr Smith on Wednesday in a statement drew comparisons between Google and Radio Free Europe and Asia, reflecting on the capacity the radio stations had on empowering the “voices of freedom throughout Communist countries”.

News about the congressional hearing came just hours after another lawmaker, Democratic senator Patrick Leahy, spoke out on another issue that has enveloped Google in recent days: the company’s refusal to comply with a subpeona by the Justice Department that would require it to hand over toe the government extensive records about the way people use the company’s search engine.

In a letter to attorney general Alberto Gonzales, Mr Leahy demanded more information about four subpoenas to major internet companies, including how the DOJ intended to use the information while protecting privacy rights, and whether the DOJ planned to request further information from the companies.

Mr Leahy, the leading Democrat on the judiciary committee, said the collection of data on law-abiding Americans posed “unique concers”.

Original source: Financial times
__________________
I thought it was supposed to be that “education” or “information” leads to freedom? Why is it that Google feels it easy to deny the US government its info to help stop terrorism, but feels it just fine to assist China to oppress its people?

SHAME on Google! Shame on AOL and the REST of them, too, because they are MORE interested in Chinese money than doing what is morally RIGHT to do.

Google should have told China that it isn’t interested in doing business with them. So should AOL and the rest of them. The commie Chinese scum will just steal the technology anyway, like they do everything else, and leave Google holding the bag in the long run.

Information IS freedom and Google is oppressing the beleaguered Chinese people.
___________________

Our next offering in the conservative Book Reading list:

I, Pencil by Leonard Read

Click here to read on

FORT WORTH, Texas After two decades collecting Civil War treasures, Ray Richey finally reached a turning point.
The 50-year-old Texas oilman had to decide whether to build another storage building, a museum for his collection — or quite collecting.

Richey went with the museum idea — and developed an expansive building just a short walk from his office on Fort Worth’s western outskirts.

But the Texas Civil War Museum, which opened to the public today, is more than just his huge stockpile.

Richey partnered with the United Daughters of the Confederacy, whose Texas collection was displayed in Austin from 1904 to 1988. The U-D-C had been seeking a permanent home for their artifacts since being uprooted by renovation of the State Capitol.

Original source:KLTV
___
Texas Museum
______________________________
Oh, how the lefties must HATE this “eeeevil” rich guy opening a Civil War museum!

I applaued the man for seeing it his civic duty to save our history.

One other thing. I am heartened to see this happen by the private sector. See, we DON’T need government to do everything!
_______________________________

IT IS AN axiom of commerce that economic development follows Interstate highways. Except in Vermont.

A new study by University of Vermont economist Arthur Woolf has found that development that should have come along I-91 up the Connecticut River instead came across the river — in New Hampshire. The reason? Higher taxes and regulations in Vermont.

“We’re seeing the gap grow larger and larger each time we do the study,” he told the Valley News. “Those communities along the river are really feeling the impact now.”
Continue reading “Taxes and regulations: The Vermont Disadvantage”

Of Bums And Babies: Why Scalia’s Wrong on Roe
by Daniel Clark

Leaky Leahy: Keep Him Away from Classified Intelligence
by Jim Kouri, CPP

Hillary Clinton Ignores Far Left – Will They Vote For Her Anyway?
– By Warner Todd Huston

In a speech before a Princeton audience of about 800 on January 18th , Hillary Rodham Clinton, Senator from New York, had a few words of scorn for the Bush administration’s handling of the Iran nuke situation.

“I believe that we lost critical time in dealing with Iran, because the White House chose to downplay the threats, and to outsource the negotiations. I don’t believe you face threats like Iran or North Korea by outsourcing it to others, and standing on the sidelines. We cannot, and should not, must not, permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons. In order to prevent that from occurring, we must have more support, vigorously and publicly expressed, by China and Russia, and we must move as quickly as feasible for sanctions in the United Nations.”

This is so filled with non-sequiturs and reversals of logic that it boggles the mind. It smacks of tirangulation as opposed to a clarification of her position as she tries to come at the problem from every angle to appear as if she can please all her potential constituents at once………………

Click HERE To Read On

Vermont’s Senator, Patrick Leahy, gave us his reasons for voting against the confirmation of Judge Sameul Alito for the Supreme Court on the 24th of January. ( Click here for full text) After reading the remarks as published, one cannot help but imagine that Leahy feels anyone hearing his remarks must not be smart enough to see that he is a blatant liar. Further, he must imagine that those same people are so stupid that they will not be able to look up simple historical facts easily enough to see where he is lying.

I don’t usually like to come right out and say that this politician or that is an outright liar, but it just cannot be avoided with so many of today’s crop of say-anything-to-win Democrats. And Leahy is one of the worst demagogues they have.

It is always lamentable when politicians treat us as if we were all dolts.

First of all, much of Leahy’s speech was time wasted on issues not germane to the Alito nomination. A large portion was simply blatant advertisements for his many off topic resolutions and agendas that he has been pushing since 9/11.

But he started out right off the bat with a major lie.

“This is a critical nomination, one that can tip the balance on the Supreme Court radically away from constitutional checks and balances and the protection of Americans’ fundamental rights.”

Was Leahy absent during the confirmation hearings? Or was he one of the cadre of Democratic Senators who couldn’t be bothered to stay through all the testimony about Alito’s character offered by past acquaintances from both ends of the political spectrum? If he had stayed he would have realized that there is no proof, not even a hint, that Alito desires to move the Court away from a protection of fundamental rights.

Next, Leahy launched into his partisan claims that US citizens have lost fundamental rights because of Bush’s activities since 9/11. Typically, though, he offers no specifics just presenting his claims to be fact.

Leahy goes on to subtly try to recast the Supreme Court’s role in the US system. In a subtle comment he attempts to cause the American people to imagine that the SCOTUS has a simple role to “serve as an effective constitutional check on the presidency”.

But, while the SCOTUS does have this role as a part of its venue, it is not the sole reason it exists. In fact, it is one of its lesser roles, the main role being to review laws passed by Congress and the states to determine if those laws abide by the Constitution. So, the SCOTUS serves as a check on Congress and the states and the laws they craft to govern the country much more often than it serves as a check on the president.

Further on, Leahy shows that truth and fact will never enter into an argument posed by the good Senator. He continues to posit the lie that Alito enjoyed seeing a child “strip searched”.

Leahy said, “We know Judge Alito would have excused the strip search of a 10-year-old girl that was not expressly authorized by the search warrant.”

Leahy knows this is a lie, but he uses this for partisan effect anyway. First of all, a truthful reading of the case in question (Doe v. Groody) proves that the child in the case was not “strip searched”. Further, the concept of “good faith” requests by police for search warrants vindicates the search of the child who was suspected of having drugs hidden upon her person by her own drug dealing Father.

Alito also answered to this case in the confirmation hearings. “I wasn’t happy that a 10-year-old was searched”, he said. He continued with: “I don’t think there should be a Fourth Amendment rule … that minors can never be searched. Because if we had a rule like that, then where would drug dealers hide their drugs?”

Apparently, Leahy is just fine with drug dealers being allowed to use children to hide illegal drug stashes from searches by police. Leahy would “excuse” this child abuse as long as it serves to knock down a Bush appointment.

If it wasn’t enough for Leahy to misquote Alito’s intentions on the non-existent “strip search” question, he also had to reach back further into history and misquote one of our Founders. Leahy misuses Ben Franklin’s famous admonition that, “Those who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security.”

Franklin’s warning words would be apropos if Leahy could have followed his usage up with any “essential liberty” that US citizens have lost under this president. However, using the quote as a simple form of demagoguery is all Leahy leaves us with.

Leahy next attempts to claim “This President has made some of the most expansive claims of power since American patriots fought the war of independence”.

I hate to say it, but we have here another outright lie. Bush’s actions in wartime pale in comparison to the abusive use of presidential power of past presidents. Lincoln, Wilson and FDR, just to name three, used their emergency powers much more energetically in wartime than has Bush. And Leahy knows this to be a fact. He is merely attempting to purposefully mislead anyone who reads his remarks in a effort to hurt the Bush Administration.

Now, here is the segment that many writers have focused on re Leahy’s ridiculous comments and it is another area with which we can discover Leahy’s lies.

“No President should be allowed to pack the courts, and especially the Supreme Court, with nominees selected to enshrine presidential claims of government power.”

Here is a sly allusion to the court-packing scheme that FDR conceived in the late 1930’s to force the Supreme Court to accede to his New Deal policies, policies that were being knocked down by the SCOTUS one by one.

But, FDR actually attempted to create additional seats on the Court thereby enlarging the Court, seats he would stuff with judges who would vocally support his policies. Bush, on the other hand, is only filling positions that have naturally become open with retirements and deaths of sitting justices. There is no “packing” scheme in the offing today. Further, we must all realize that Bush ahs only made two nominations which is a far cry for “packing” anything.

Further, every president has a right to offer candidates that he feels will support the correct principles of American jurisprudence and those correct ideas will surly be the ideas to which the president himself adheres and nearly every president, to a man, has made such nominations. There is simply nothing out of the ordinary here and Leahy also knows this.

It is sad that we are in an era where Democrats know no limits to using outright lies to further their political aims. In years past, a Supreme Court nomination was considered one of such importance that injecting “politics” into the process was thought to be improper.

Apparently, to Democrats today, nothing is sacred.

By Warner Todd Huston

Propaganda With My Morning Coffee
by Randall H. Nunn

The West Wing vs. “The West Wing”
by Thomas Lindaman

Radical Lawyers Undermine US War Effort
by Jim Kouri, CPP

John Adams and John Jay
by Thomas E. Brewton

Roe Babies and Reagan Babies
– By Hans Zeiger

The rising generation of Americans has been shaped profoundly by two events that have anniversaries this week. The first event was the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade 34 years ago. The second event was the inauguration of Ronald Reagan 25 years ago.

Because of the first event, one fourth of our generation is no longer alive. Roe Babies, 45 million of them since 1973, are missing.

But there are some positive signs on the cultural horizon. In recent years, public opinion regarding abortion has continually shifted toward the pro-life position. The number of Americans calling themselves pro-choice has declined by 10 points since 1995, while the number of Americans calling themselves pro-life has increased 16 points. According to a Gallup poll, a decade ago, 56 percent of Americans considered themselves pro-choice and 33 percent said they were pro-life. Today, according to a Zogby poll, 49 percent of Americans say they are pro-life, compared to 46 percent who say they are pro-choice.12 ………
Click HERE To Read On

Christian Research Institute Endorses Tattoos
– By Frederick Meekins

Seems even the Christian Research Institute has fallen to the spirit of the age.

Though the article is not on-line, the author was interviewed by Todd Wilken of Issues Etc..

As usual, the author was spouting how the true Christian does not judge by appearance since God looks on the heart. But doesn’t the true Christian realize the outside is a reflection of what’s on the inside?

Actually, if these people weren’t so wrapped up in appearances, why are they in such a rush to look like every other slob on the streets today? Even those that got them in the military know doubt did so as a result of peer pressure and often regret having done so later in life often after coming to a saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ.

But unlike previous generations or those with some class about them who later felt a godly sense of shame and exhibited repentance over what they had done or at least try not to draw attention to themselves, those getting them nowadays in light of our therapeutic Winfreyite culture have to tell everyone and expect all those hearing about it to offer up a hearty round of applause or be prepared to face the ubiquitous charges of prejudice and closemindedness (they’d probably even work in allegations of racism and homophobia if they could)…………
Click HERE To Read On

Dissecting Another Lefty’s Misconceptions
– By Warner Todd Huston

With every extreme Lefty’s new round of misconceptions so boldly on display in the Main Stream Media, it becomes ever more plain that they truly just have no capability to think beyond the talking points their buddies fax to them on a daily basis.

They have no knowledge of history, either past or present. They cast all blame immediately on our own country and its actions and absolve any action made by those who wish to kill us. And, worse yet, they don’t even have any faith in the American system or character.

Here is another Op Ed by one of those foolish little Lefties. It’s called Spying on innocent Americans unlawful – Do wiretaps dim rights? Written by Nasombi Lambright of the Charlotte Ledger.

I have decided the best way is to answer her is a point-by-point dissection of her Op Ed. Yes, I’m going to have her “fisked”!

So, from this point the I will have Ms. Lambright’s original Op Ed in quotes…

“I don’t feel safe here in America. When George Bush said on 9-11, “This is a new day, America,” I think that most Americans were too much in shock to understand what he had in mind.”

Funny how she focuses on the US and not the terrorists in that right off the bat we are obviously going to focus on bush and not the enemy. Makes you realize she hated her own country long before Bush or 9/11 came around and that her latest “worries” are more like her latest excuses.
……………..

Click HERE To Read On

Delerium Putrescens
by Erik Rush

Leftist Hollywood Mouthpiece Belafonte Snarls Again
by Sher Zieve

Fathers, Sons, and Senators
by Vincent Fiore

The January Effect: Legality as a Laxative for Conscience
by Robert E. Meyer

Nuts for Chocolate? –No, just nuts
– By Resa LaRu Kirkland

Ask anyone who knows me, and they will confirm that I love chocolate. A bona fide chocoholic. Chocolate is proof that God loves us; it is the closest thing to celestial glory we will find on earth. Yep, I just can’t get enough chocolate.

And apparently, neither can Mayor Ray Nagin.

When I said that chocolate is proof that God loves us, I meant it literally. It wasn’t a metaphor for a race of people. In our Politically Castrated society, referring to blacks as “chocolate” could only be done by a black. If a white had tried that, he’d already be attacked, sacked, and hacked.

Mayor Nagin, however, believes that God’s blessing of chocolate food is proof that He also prefers chocolate people. He made that enormous leap with ease, and not a single PC cop called him on the blatantly racist comment.

After all, MSM are chocoholics too; the people, if not the food. They’ve made it easy for racists such as Ray Nagin, Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton to speak their bigoted minds with the same reflexive simplicity that most of reserve for a sneeze. The message has been loud and clear for forty years now: what’s good for chocolate ain’t good for vanilla. ………
Click HERE To Read On

Ready to Cash in on My ‘White Privilege’
by Dustin Hawkins

A Culture of Corruption: Democrat Party Lapses in Ethics
by Jim Kouri, CPP

Teaching to the Test
by Thomas E. Brewton

Kennedy claims Capitol Hill cutup title
– By Michael M. Bates

In his first run for the Senate, Edward Moore Kennedy’s Democratic primary opponent looked him in the eye and said, “I ask, if his name was Edward Moore, with his qualifications – with your qualifications, Teddy – if it was Edward Moore, your candidacy would be a joke, but nobody’s laughing.”

They were too busy voting. With one brother in the White House and another running the Justice Department, the joke sailed to victory. With vigor, naturally.

More than four decades of senatorial bloviating later, Kennedy is still playing it for laughs. It’s taken me a while to realize it, but I’m beginning to think the irrepressible Teddy has been teasing us all this time.

Take last week as an example. At the Alito hearings the Massachusetts solon had a flunky stand behind him holding a large card. The sign was titled, “Excerpt from Concerned Alumni of Princeton Magazine.” The judge’s membership in that organization had become an issue, at least for Teddy and comrades.

The excerpt was from a 1983 article and began: “People nowadays just don’t seem to know their place. Everywhere one turns, blacks and Hispanics are demanding jobs simply because they’re black and Hispanic. The physically handicapped are trying to gain equal representation in professional sports. And homosexuals are demanding the government vouchsafe them the right to bear children. And now … and now come women.”. ………………..
Click HERE To Read On

Developers Conspire To Confiscate Property From New Orleans Residents
– By Frederick Meekins

As usual, the mantra of tyranny in this instance is “sustainability” and “isolation”.

As I figured, the poor souls that have lost everything in the Katrina tragedy will now have what little remains taken away for the sake of the elites.

There are plans to finagle away property at only 60% of its actual value, but even if 100 times the market value was offered, that is not the point.

If one really wants to lay the foundation of a new New Orleans, why not raize Bourbon Street notorious for its debauchery and devil worship.

So what if those that want to move back are isolated? It is their property.

One person to be commended shouted out at a hearing, “I’m ready to rebuild, and I’m not letting you take mine. I’m going to fight, whatever it takes, to rebuild my property. It’s going to be baby Iraq for Joe Canizaro.”

Seems this next battle of New Orleans could be the shot heard round the world in the ongoing war for the property rights of all Americans.

Related Links:

1.http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/weather/hurricane/bal-te.neworleans12jan12,1,7354188.story?track=rss

Copyright 2005 by Frederick Meekins