Wednesday, December 29, 2004

Iraq: Missing the Point

Sometimes people focus on little things, and miss the big things. Hardly anybody hasn’t heard the old saying “you can’t see the forest for the trees.” This is precisely the case with the war in Iraq. Quite a few want to see it as, to quote Democrat Senator John Kerry during the presidential campaign, “the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time.”

Maybe they subscribe to this view for partisan political reasons, seizing upon this cute phrase in order to criticize a President they intensely dislike. They most often recite some dopey factoid like the one that blames the Bush administration for falsely thinking there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, ignoring the truthful fact that everybody in the world thought there were WMD in Iraq.

Perhaps they have not thought through the issue very well, instead believing the mass media reporting that leads one toward a gross misunderstanding of the circumstances in the post-9/11 world.

Or maybe they are simply unable to pull back and see the bigger picture, seeing a tree here and there, but ignoring the forest right before their eyes.

They fail to understand the full significance of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and a third target suspected to be either the White House or the U.S. Capital building. It was on that day that Americans should finally have understood that Islamic terrorists had the United States in their sights, even though it was not the first such attack, which occurred nearly thirty years earlier, nor even the first on American soil, back in 1993 when the first World Trade Center bombing took place.

Americans are a little slow on the uptake where Islamic terrorism is concerned.

Islamic terrorism predates the first WTC bombing by more than 20 years, since the kidnapping and subsequent deaths of Israeli athletes during the 1972 Munich Olympic games. America has been a target for nearly as long. Fifty-two American citizens were taken hostage when militant students of radical Islam stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in 1979. Since then some of our embassies have been bombed, the Marine barracks in Beruit was bombed, airplanes and cruise ships have been hijacked, Pan Am Flight 103 was blown up over Lockerbie, Scotland, the USS Cole was attacked in a harbor in Yemen.

Despite this decades-long history, many Americans still do not understand the threat posed by radical Islam. Among the good, the bad, and the ugly that came from the presidency of Bill Clinton was “compartmentalization,” referring to the then-President’s ability to separate unpleasant things from the larger whole to which they belong, as if they didn’t exist. Many Americans want to compartmentalize the Iraq war, to separate it from the whole to which it belongs – the war against Islamic terrorism – and instead imagine the two are not connected. In addition to this failure to correctly connect the dots is a second failure, that of misunderstanding the true nature of Islam.

We are told that Islam is as a religion of peace. However, evidence suggests otherwise. Islam dictates the social, economic and political life of the twenty-one different Arab nations of the Middle East that includes Syria, Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman, Kuwait, Afghanistan, and Iraq. According to the League of Arab States, the Arab people enjoy common bonds of history and tradition, and consider that they are all part of one nation.

The teachings of Islam are comprised of both faith and duty. One branch of Muslim learning defines all that a man should believe, while the other branch prescribes everything that he should do. Islam’s advocates must perform duties, the “five pillars of faith”: Creed, Prayer, Almsgiving, Fasting, and Pilgrimage. A sixth religious duty associated with the five pillars is Jihad, or Holy War, which requires that if the situation warrants, men are required to go to war to defend or spread Islam. If they are killed, they are guaranteed eternal life in Paradise.

Despite that the five pillars appear to be elements of a religion, Islam is not merely a religion. Far more comprehensive than that, it is a culture, a way of life of which religion is but one component. Islam also has an economic component and a political component. Islam is an intolerant philosophy that brands Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, believers of other faiths and creeds and those who believe in no supreme being as infidels who deserve to die to cleanse the earth of non-Islamic influences.

Terrorism is the political component of Islam, and today is the prime force of its three components. It easily subjugates the peaceful tenants in the religious component, if any truly exist.

Islamic terrorism is Jihad, and today Jihad is the face of Islam.

It is an ugly, evil face. If “good Muslims” oppose the evil deeds of their brutal, murderous brethren, that opposition is whispered, if spoken at all.

Islam as described by the League of Arab States unites all Muslims in a common culture with a common cause: spreading Islam across the world. In this, Saddam Hussein was a major influence.

Deroy Murdock, a Senior Fellow with the Atlas Economic Research Foundation, published a well-documented report, Saddam Hussein's Philanthropy of Terror, highlighting Saddam's ties to Islamic terrorism, in the Hudson Institute's American Outlook magazine's fall 2003 edition. In it he states: “Many critics of the war in Iraq belittle claims of Saddam Hussein's ties to terrorism. In fact, for years, he was militant Islam's Benefactor-in-Chief.”

The U.S. went to war against a brutal Islamic dictator whom the world believed possessed weapons of mass destruction, a dictator who had previously used these weapons against his own people, and who was a source of support for Islamic terrorism. That war was won in short order. But Islamic terrorists have not given up, and will not give up. They ignore Hussein’s brutality against his own people, and his support for Jihad against the West, because they share his belief system: Islam. Radical Muslims fear freedom, they hate the infidels of the West and of the free world and will do all they can to see that Iraq remains a place where radical Islamic fundamentalism can thrive, and the Jihad against the West can fester.

Failing to comprehend that the war in Iraq is an integral part of the war against terrorism is to ignore reality.

Some day, just as it has come to appreciate the United States for its brave and noble stand against the Japanese and Germans in World War II, the world will hopefully come to understand that the U.S. once again has stood tall in the face of this menace and threat to peace and freedom.

Monday, December 20, 2004

Common Sense: R.I.P.

Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Mr. Common Sense. Mr. Sense had been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he was since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape.

He will be remembered as having cultivated such value lessons as knowing when to come in out of the rain, why the early bird gets the worm and that life isn't always fair. Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend more than you earn) and reliable parenting strategies (adults, not kids, are in charge).

His health began to rapidly deteriorate when well intended, but overbearing regulations were set in place. - Reports of a six-year-old boy charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended from school for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition.

Mr. Sense declined even further when schools were required to get parental consent to administer aspirin to a student, but could not inform the parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion.

Finally, Common Sense lost the will to live as the Ten Commandments became contraband; churches became businesses; and criminals received better treatment than their victims.

Common Sense finally gave up the ghost after a woman failed to realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot, she spilled a bit in her lap, and was awarded a huge settlement.

Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents, Truth and Trust, his wife, Discretion; his daughter, Responsibility; and his son, Reason. Two stepbrothers survive him: My Rights and Ima Whiner.

Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone. If you still remember him, pass this on; if not, join the majority and do nothing.

Author Unknown

My Holiday Greeting To Everyone!

Happy Solstice
Happy Hanukkah
Merry Christmas
Happy Kwanzaa

Happy New Year 

Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low stress, non-addictive, gender neutral, celebration of the winter solstice holiday(tm), practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasions and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all . . . and a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling, and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year (insert year), but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make America great, (not to imply that America is necessarily greater than any other country or is the only "AMERICA" in the western hemisphere), and without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith, choice of computer platform, or sexual orientation of the wishee. 

By accepting this greeting, you are accepting these terms:

This greeting is subject to clarification or withdrawal. It is freely transferable with no alteration to the original greeting. It implies no promise by the wisher to actually implement any of the wishes for her/himself or others, and is void where prohibited by law, and is revocable at the sole discretion of the wisher. This wish is warranted to perform as expected within the usual application of good tidings for a period of one year, or until the issuance of a subsequent holiday greeting, whichever comes first, and warranty is limited to replacement of this wish or issuance of a new wish at the sole discretion of the wisher.

Saturday, December 18, 2004

Chevy Chase soils both the Kennedy Center and People for the American Way in One Fell Swoop

The phrase “I’m Chevy Chase, and you’re not” probably was never more ascribed to than after the awards ceremony staged by People for the American Way at the Kennedy Center last Wednesday. Even the Hollywood elite were dumbfounded by Chevy’s comments, and running in all directions to distance themselves from his stupid tirade. If Chevy was looking for a way to get his staggering career shocked back to life, no doubt this will be of some help. You know what they say: Even bad publicity is good publicity.

What is it about the beautiful people in Entertainment Land that causes them to believe that what they think about every subject is important and must be voiced? What is it that prohibits them from exercising good judgment and decorum in situations where decorum and good judgment are appropriate?

The answer is that their gigantic, yet sensitive egos survive on the idea that they are special; that the adoring masses will swoon at their every word; that the world needs their guidance if it is to survive these tumultuous times.

Many of these “special” people exhibit juvenile qualities associated with young, spoiled brats. When they don’t get their way, they lose control, and are unable to behave like adults, unable to exercise restraint or self-discipline.

Chevy, in his whining, four year-old, foot stomping, I’m-gonna-hold-my-breath-‘til-I-get-my-way tirade actually offended Norman Lear, founder of People for the American Way, no conservative, who said: "I thought it was utterly untoward, obviously unexpected and unscripted and all that stuff. And, uh - it was Chevy Chase. He'll live with it, I won't." People for the American Way also distanced itself Wednesday from the actor's rant.

Poor Chevy was so upset he didn't return for a curtain call or to savor dessert at the reception after the event. Sources told news agencies that he hurt his back and needed to call it a night by 9. Maybe his yellow streak was acting up. His PR person said Wednesday she was unable to reach him. He’s probably gone into hiding.

Perhaps he is embarrassed. Lord knows he deserves to be. Maybe he’ll do the right thing, and apologize.

Prediction: He won’t. That would be the adult thing to do, something one does when one realizes he’s made a fool of himself, and has embarrassed his host. That’s not Chevy. He imagines himself a hero, in some perverted way. “Boy, I really told him off, didn’t I?”

The election was more than a month ago. Even John Kerry realizes that he lost and George Bush won. But the beautiful people who make up the Hollywood Left can’t get past it. They are still campaigning, claiming massive vote fraud, still fighting a losing battle, still staggering in disbelief that 53 percent of the American voters do not agree with their worldview.

It’s just sad.

Friday, December 17, 2004

Six years, 400 lawsuits

Wes Pruden had a piece in The Washington Times this past Tuesday about a man who has filed 400 lawsuits against various businesses charging them with violations of the Americans With Disabilities Act.

This man's story strains belief. Here is a brief excerpt to whet your appetite:

So Jarek Molski, 34, who lost his mobility in a motorcycle accident six years ago, has used the Disabilities Act aggressively, asserting his rights. In fact, Mr. Molski has filed 400 such lawsuits, against restaurants, wineries, bowling alleys, banks and just about any place he thought infringed his right to use the facilities. He has made a living at it.

You can read the entire piece, entitled, In a blue state, a little relief .

Wednesday, December 15, 2004

America the Beautiful: A Poem by Judge Roy Moore

The following poem was written by Justice Roy Moore, Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, who was sued by the ACLU for placing a 5,280-pound monument to the Ten Commandments in the lobby of the state Supreme Court building. Judge Moore was subsequently removed as a sitting Justice by the Alabama Court of the Judiciary for disobeying the order of a Federal Court Judge to remove the display.

Judge Moore appealed his removal to the Alabama Supreme Court, but all eight remaining Justices recused themselves from the case. The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear Judge Moore's appeal of the state court ruling, in effect upholding the decision to remove him from the bench.


America the Beautiful, or so you used to be.
Land of the Pilgrims' pride; I'm glad they'll never see.
Babies piled in dumpsters, Abortion on demand,
Oh, sweet land of liberty, your house is on the sand.

Our children wander aimlessly poisoned by cocaine,
Choosing to indulge their lusts, when God has said abstain.
From sea to shining sea, our Nation turns away
From the teaching of God's love and a need to always pray.

So many worldly preachers tell lies about our Rock,
Saying God is going broke so they can fleece the flock.
We've kept God in our temples, how callous we have grown.
When earth is but His footstool, and Heaven is His throne.

We've voted in a government that's rotting at the core,
Appointing Godless Judges who throw reason out the door,
Too soft to place a killer in a well deserved tomb,
But brave enough to kill a baby before he leaves the womb.
You think that God's not angry, that our land's a moral slum?
How much longer will He wait before His judgment comes?

How are we to face our God, from Whom we cannot hide?
What then is left for us to do, but stem this evil tide?
If we who are His children, will humbly turn and pray;
Seek His holy face and mend our evil way:
Then God will hear from Heaven and forgive us of our sins,
He'll heal our sickly land and those who live within.
But, America the Beautiful, if you don't then you will see,
A sad but Holy God withdraw His hand from Thee.

Judge Roy Moore

Sunday, December 12, 2004

Positioning for 2008 begins

There is great speculation as to which and how many Democrats will run for their party’s nomination in 2008. Hillary Clinton tops most lists, and some even have John Kerry trying again. But it’s too soon to give much serious thought about this particular subject. All we can do is sit back and watch as the Democrats try to figure out what to do to get their party back into the mainstream of America.

But today NewsMax reports that Republicans have begun thinking actively about who will run to replace George W. Bush in 2008, and John McCain is already heading in that direction.

NewsMax reports that McCain talked openly of his plans during a recent visit to London.

There, he and his Senate ally, Senator Lindsey Graham, met with leading political and media figures for lunch. They left their audience with little doubt a 2008 race was in the works.

A source who attended the lunch said, "McCain never said he decided, but it was clear he was preparing to run."

McCain acknowledged that his age, 72 if elected in 2008, might be an obstacle, but not an insurmountable one.

McCain told the audience that John Kerry had asked him to jump party lines and join him on the 2004 Democratic ticket.

McCain said had he done so, Kerry would have certainly won the 2004 election. But McCain said he was a lifelong Republican and such a move would not have been good for the country.

Though McCain said he has supported President Bush, our source said all of his references to President Bush "had a total lack of warmth."

McCain has been a pretty good soldier, leaving aside the obvious “looking-out-for-what’s best-for-John-McCain” behavior. He supported his party when that support was needed, and that earns him some points. But McCain, like Bush, is not a true conservative, and what the country needs in 2008 is a true conservative.

We’ll just have to sit back and watch this contest develop, too.

Re: Regulating the Blogosphere

An interesting note appears on the blog relating to the above title. The piece features an email to from Richard Poe, author of Hillary's Secret War: The Clinton Conspiracy to Muzzle Internet Journalists. Here is Poe’s message:

I expect that the VLWC (vast leftwing conspiracy) will be turning up the heat on dissident journalists between now and Hillary's Senate reelection bid in 2006. Look for revisions in McCain-Feingold to close the "Internet loophole."

Down the road a bit, Internet users should expect to see major connectivity outages caused by alleged overloading of the Internet's root servers. As the old Internet becomes increasingly unreliable due to negligent maintenance; ineffective security and destructive viruses, corporations and other well-monied interests will be advised to transfer their online operations to Internet2 -- an alternative broadband Internet which the Clintons, along with a consortium of universities and corporations, have been spearheading since the mid-1990s -- accessible only to those who can afford the annual subscription fee (which I have heard may reach as high as $10,000 per year).

Aside from being expensive, I suspect that Internet2 will be tightly regulated, on the argument that the project was government-generated and its bandwidth "public property," subject to the same sorts of government controls that govern the use of radio and television frequencies. That's just a guess, [b]ut we'll see.

Townhall C-Log

Whenever freedom of speech becomes too free, some entity or group will rise up to squelch it. Vigilance and protest are in order.

Saturday, December 11, 2004

Europe – Thy Name is Cowardice

The column excerpted below reflects the opinion of many Americans about European nations and their political personalities. The entire article can be found at the site of
Republican Dan .

Europe – Thy Name is Cowardice
by Mathias Döpfner

A few days ago Henryk M. Broder wrote in Welt am Sonntag, "Europe – your family name is appeasement." It’s a phrase you can’t get out of your head because it’s so terribly true.Appeasement cost millions of Jews and non-Jews their lives as England and France, allies at the time, negotiated and hesitated too long before they noticed that Hitler had to be fought, not bound to agreements. Appeasement stabilized communism in the Soviet Union and East Germany in that part of Europe where inhuman, suppressive governments were glorified as the ideologically correct alternative to all other possibilities. Appeasement crippled Europe when genocide ran rampant in Kosovo and we Europeans debated and debated until the Americans came in and did our work for us.

Thursday, December 09, 2004

The Twelve Rules of Christmas

John Whitehead of The Rutherford Institute has begun to fight back against the efforts to remove Christmas from the American culture. The piece that follows outlines the Twelve Rules of Christmas that explain why it is constitutional, legal, and otherwise okay that the religious significance of Christmas to be celebrated and taught.

This was not the mother’s first trip to her child’s classroom, where parents regularly volunteered to lead story time. Because it coincided with the holiday season, she thought the ideal story to tell would be the original Christmas story that began nearly 2,000 years ago. But she remembered the memo.

Sent weeks earlier, it was a stern reminder by the school principal that children in public schools could not celebrate Christmas. The sensitive kindergarten teacher added in her own handwriting, “It’s that old ‘separation of church and state’ thing.”

While the children seemed to enjoy A Pocket for Corduroy, the mother felt a certain injustice in her eventual decision to change her choice of books. There was no reason the children should not have been allowed to hear a story about the first Christmas. But she had given up the fight long ago when, after generating a few ripples when her first child was going through school, well-meaning family and friends had advised her to be a help, not a hindrance, to her child’s education.

Unfortunately, far too many parents, students and teachers think they cannot do anything to celebrate Christmas in the public schools. Whether it is ignorance or fear, Americans are painfully misguided about the recognition of religious holidays. Ironically, the most targeted religious holiday for exclusion is Christmas—also the most popular in American culture.

Are children really forbidden from learning about one of the most culturally significant events because it is religious? For that matter, are adults forbidden at work or in public places to celebrate the religious aspects of Christmas?

The truth is simply that no, they are not. In fact, there are constitutionally sound principles that, if followed, will allow the religious significance of Christmas to be celebrated and taught. The following twelve rules are offered:

1. Public school students’ written or spoken personal expressions concerning the religious significance of Christmas (e.g., T-shirts with the slogan “Jesus is the Reason for the Season”) may not be censored by school officials absent evidence that the speech would cause a substantial disruption.

2. So long as teachers are generally permitted to wear clothing or jewelry or have personal items expressing their views about the holidays, Christian teachers may not be prohibited from similarly expressing their views by wearing Christmas-related clothing or jewelry or carrying Christmas-related personal items.

3. Public schools may teach students about the Christmas holiday, including its religious significance, so long as it is taught objectively and for its historical or cultural importance and not for the purpose of promoting Christianity.

4. Public school teachers may send Christmas cards to the families of their students so long as they do so on their own time, outside of school hours.

5. Public schools may include Christmas music, including those with religious themes, in their choral programs if the songs are included for their musical quality or cultural value or if the songs are part of an overall performance including other holiday songs relating to Hanukkah, Kwanzaa or other similar holidays.

6. Public schools may not require students to sing Christmas songs whose messages conflict with the students’ own religious or nonreligious beliefs.

7. Public school students may not be prohibited from distributing literature to fellow students concerning the Christmas holiday or invitations to church Christmas events on the same terms that they would be allowed to distribute other literature that is not related to schoolwork.

8. Private citizens or groups may display crèches or other Christmas symbols in public parks subject to the same reasonable time, place and manner restrictions that would apply to other similar displays.

9. Government entities may erect and maintain celebrations of the Christmas holiday, such as Christmas trees and Christmas light displays, and may include crèches in their displays—at least so long as such items are placed in context with other symbols of the holiday season as part of an effort to celebrate the public Christmas holiday through its traditional symbols.

10. Neither public nor private employers may prevent employees from decorating their offices for Christmas, playing Christmas music or wearing clothing related to Christmas merely because of their religious content so long as these activities are not used to harass or intimidate others.

11. Public or private employees whose sincerely-held beliefs require that they not work on Christmas must be reasonably accommodated by their employers unless granting the accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the employer.

12. Government recognition of Christmas as a public holiday and granting government employees a paid holiday for Christmas does not violate the law.

We must remember that those who founded this country and established the freedoms we still cherish were a religious people, and they passed these traditions down to us. Hopefully, we will not be too timid to continue their legacy of freedom.

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. He can be contacted at

Will the intelligence overhaul make us safer?

First, the Democrats complained that George W. Bush wasn’t acting fast enough to enact the recommendations of the September 11 Commission. Apparently, they would have prefered that the President automatically endorse, and the Congress automatically pass the Commission report into law without considering its provisions. That’s no way to run a railroad.

Now that the President has endorsed the bill and the conflict among Congressional Republicans has been worked out and the bill has passed, the Democrats are complaining about the bill that was passed.

There’s just no pleasing some people.

But in the haste to appease the Democrats and the families of 9-11 victims who are vocal critics of the President, the bill passed with some serious problems. We are assured, as were the reticent Republicans, that these problems can and will be addressed next year. We can only hope that really happens.

"We remain a nation at war, and intelligence is our first line of defense against the terrorists who seek to do us harm. I am pleased the measure also contains many critical law enforcement tools that I have called for that will help make America more secure. I look forward to signing this landmark piece of legislation into law," said the President in after the Senate vote.

But the best intelligence in the world won’t be enough unless we get a few aspects of national security under control.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., wrote a column appearing on the TruthNews Website on October 23 that said, in part:

The 9/11 reform bill is currently snagged by the Senate's refusal to address three critical issues: Should states continue to issue driver's licenses to illegal aliens? Should we tighten our asylum system that terrorists exploited to such deadly effect? Have we ensured the military chain of command is not broken in our intelligence restructuring?

Intelligence-reform efforts will be wasted if we fail to address other security loopholes that the 9/11 hijackers studied to hatch their deadly plans. Once the 19 hijackers arrived here, they were able to secure 63 validly issued driver's licenses. Using these licenses, they were able to blend in and eventually board U.S. planes. Learning from this, the 9/11 Commission Report -- which this legislation is based upon -- recommends that the federal government "set standards for the issuance of birth certificates and other sources of identification, such as driver's licenses. Fraud in identification documents is no longer just a problem of theft." … What is controversial about setting strong standards to stop another [terrorist] from receiving a driver's license?

The chain of command issue was resolved, but the other issues remain. After the bill’s passage, Mr. Sensenbrenner held a press conference outlining a bill he will introduce in the next session that addresses the issues omitted from the intelligence reform bill.

However, nobody’s talking much about doing something to stem the flow of illegal immigrants into the U.S., particularly from Mexico. It is a no-brainer that allowing this to continue is stupid and, worse, dangerous.

Numbers USA reports that “Census 2000 results indicate that there between 8 and 11 million illegal aliens living in the United States in 2000. The Center for Immigration Studies has reported that Census Bureau stats show that 700,000 to 800,000 new illegal aliens were settling in the U.S. during the late 1990s and that around 1 million settled in the most recent year of record. Far more than that enter illegally each year, but there is a lot of back and forth. The 1 million represents illegals who truly settle in for at least a couple of years, and usually much, much longer.”

Even if none of those illegals is a terrorist or criminal, this trend is unhealthy and expensive for taxpayers. An estimated $20 billion net taxpayer dollars go to support illegal immigrants each year.

Tuesday, December 07, 2004

Of God and Country

The Declaration of Independence states, in part:

“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, …” The Declaration of Independence

In those two paragraphs are two references to God/the Creator. Those paragraphs tell us that the Founders believed that certain rights are given to mankind by God/the Creator, and that government ­– the government of the United States that they are about to create – gets its power from the people.

The U.S. Census Bureau tells us that 78% of Americans are Christian/Catholic, 2% are Jewish, 2% are Mormon, 8% are Other (specific), and 9% either claim no religion or did not designate a religion. The report also tells us that 65% of Americans are members of a church or synagogue. Census data


Since the Founders believed that the most fundamental and important rights of mankind are derived from God/the Creator, and

Since Americans are overwhelmingly religious people, and

Since the government is empowered by people who are by choice religious,

Why should the majority of the American people accede to the wishes of a minority of Americans that objects to references to God/the Creator?

This is not a matter of government instituting a national religion, which is prohibited by the U.S. Constitution. America is a land of many religions among which citizens are free to choose, or to not choose.

This is simply a matter of upholding traditions begun more than two centuries ago that a substantial majority of Americans want upheld. The majority believes in God/the Creator, and does not want references to their God to be removed from traditional places or things.

America is the land of the free, and a large majority of its citizens – by a margin of ten to one – insist on maintaining their freedom to acknowledge the authority that endowed them with the power to create this nation, as they have ever since the nation was formed.

While our government is not a theocracy – there is no formal national religion here – religion and the birth and evolution of the United States of America are inextricably intertwined. Religion has been and is an integral part of America. Its benefits accrue to all, even to those who do not believe in God. As Irving Kristol said, religion is a vehicle for a moral tradition that plays a crucial role in the nation’s development, and nothing can take its place.

Those who wish to remove references to religion and to God are striking a blow at the very heart of America.

Friday, December 03, 2004

How liberalism destroys America

Columnist Walter Williams tackles a subject near and dear to me: The decline of our culture at the hands of liberal ideologues. Williams says:

The importance of customs, traditions and moral values as a means of regulating behavior is that people behave themselves even if nobody's watching. There are not enough cops, and laws can never replace these restraints on personal conduct so as to produce a civilized society. At best, the police and the criminal justice system are the last desperate lines of defense for a civilized society.

Customs, traditions and moral values have been discarded without an appreciation for the role they played in creating a civilized society, and now, we're paying the price. What's worse is that instead of a return to what worked, many of us fail to make the connection and insist "there ought to be a law." As such, it points to another failure of the so-called "great generation" -- the failure to transmit to their children what their parents transmitted to them.
Read Walter Williams complete column.

Danforth steps down

Are you wondering about John Danforth's early and surprize resignation as U.N. Ambassador?

Read the opinion of William F. Buckley, Jr. for his take on this recent development.

Taxpayers subsidize ACLU's liberal activities

Did you know that when the ACLU sues to challenge many of the traditional things that we do here in the U.S., you, the taxpayer, pay the ACLU lawyers fees?

42 U.S.C., Section 1988, of the United States Code now allows judges to award attorney fees to plaintiffs in civil-rights cases brought against local governments. This means that taxpayers often pay public money to the ACLU for its activities that are contrary to what a majority of Americans want.

A new online petition asks Congress to change this statute in hopes of preventing the American Civil Liberties Union from collecting attorney fees from taxpayers of local governments the ACLU takes to court.

The effort – spearheaded by Craig McCarthy of, a site dedicated to stemming judicial activism – seeks to change this part of the United States Code.

To right-thinking Americans, this is a particularly offensive affront. If you would like to sign the petition, click on the link above.

The language of the statute follows:

Section 1988. Proceedings in vindication of civil rights

(a) Applicability of statutory and common law The jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters conferred on the district courts by the provisions of titles 13, 24, and 70 of the Revised Statutes for the protection of all persons in the United States in their civil rights, and for their vindication, shall be exercised and enforced in conformity with the laws of the United States, so far as such laws are suitable to carry the same into effect; but in all cases where they are not adapted to the object, or are deficient in the provisions necessary to furnish suitable remedies and punish offenses against law, the common law, as modified and changed by the constitution and statutes of the State wherein the court having jurisdiction of such civil or criminal cause is held, so far as the same is not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States, shall be extended to and govern the said courts in the trial and disposition of the cause, and, if it is of a criminal nature, in the infliction of punishment on the party found guilty.

(b) Attorney's fees

In any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of sections 1981, 1981a, 1982, 1983, 1985, and 1986 of this title, title IX of Public Law 92-318 (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.), the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 2000bb et seq.), the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 2000cc et seq.), title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.), or section 13981 of this title, the court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorney's fee as part of the costs, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity such officer shall not be held liable for any costs, including attorney's fees, unless such action was clearly in excess of such officer's jurisdiction.

(c) Expert fees

In awarding an attorney's fee under subsection (b) of this section in any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of section 1981 or 1981a of this title, the court, in its discretion, may include expert fees as part of the attorney's fee.

Thursday, December 02, 2004

Canada is busy sending back Bush-dodgers

The flood of American liberals sneaking across the border into Canada has intensified in the past week, sparking calls for increased patrols to stop the illegal immigration.

The re-election of President Bush is prompting the exodus among left-leaning citizens who fear they'll soon be required to hunt, pray and agree with Bill O'Reilly.

Canadian border farmers say it's not uncommon to see dozens of sociology professors, animal-rights activists and Unitarians crossing their fields at night.

"I went out to milk the cows the other day, and there was a Hollywood producer huddled in the barn," said Manitoba farmer Red Greenfield, whose acreage borders North Dakota.

The producer was cold, exhausted and hungry. "He asked me if I could spare a latte and some free-range chicken. When I said I didn't have any, he left. Didn't even get a chance to show him my screenplay, eh?"

In an effort to stop the illegal aliens, Greenfield erected higher fences, but the liberals scaled them. So he tried installing speakers that blare Rush Limbaugh across the fields.

"Not real effective," he said. "The liberals still got through, and Rush annoyed the cows so much they wouldn't give milk."

Officials are particularly concerned about smugglers who meet liberals near the Canadian border, pack them into Volvo station wagons, drive them across the border and leave them to fend for themselves. "A lot of these people are not prepared for rugged conditions," an Ontario border patrolman said. "I found one carload without a drop of drinking water. They did have a nice little Napa Valley cabernet, though."

When liberals are caught, they're sent back across the border, often wailing loudly that they fear retribution from conservatives. Rumors have been circulating about the Bush administration establishing re-education camps in which liberals will be forced to drink domestic beer and watch NASCAR.

In the days since the election, liberals have turned to sometimes-ingenious ways of crossing the border. Some have taken to posing as senior citizens on bus trips to buy cheap Canadian prescription drugs. After catching a half-dozen young vegans disguised in powdered wigs, Canadian immigration authorities began stopping buses and quizzing the supposed senior-citizen passengers.

"If they can't identify the accordion player on The Lawrence Welk Show, we get suspicious about their age," an official said.

Canadian citizens have complained that the illegal immigrants are creating an organic-broccoli shortage and renting all the good Susan Sarandon movies.

"I feel sorry for American liberals, but the Canadian economy just can't support them," an Ottawa resident said. "How many art-history majors does one country need?"

In an effort to ease tensions between the United States and Canada, Vice President Dick Cheney met with the Canadian ambassador and pledged that the administration would take steps to reassure liberals, a source close to Cheney said.

"We're going to have some Peter, Paul & Mary concerts. And we might put some endangered species on postage stamps. The president is determined to reach out."

---- Author unknown

The Groningen Protocol

Posted at A Time For Choosing

For those of you who have not heard, death by committee has arrived in the Netherlands via the "Groningen Protocol". I became aware of this story via a screaming red headline on the Drudge Report two days ago. The Netherlands, one of the only countries in the world to legalize euthanasia, has now decided to allow the killing of children who are deemed unworthy of life due to any number of various illnesses or deformities.

The decision it seems, is made by a committee of medical professionals. If this committee deems the child to be suffering, then they have the ability to end it's life. The protocol is to be used primarily on infants, but covers any child to the age of 12. It is also important to note that the parents role in the decision is very limited, their opinion is considered but the doctors make the final decision.

The story seems like a bad horror movie, but it is true, and the killing has already begun in the Netherlands. The debate is being tied into the overall debate about adult euthanasia, but the killing of children who are incapable of deciding for themselves is far different than even the controversial practice of assisted suicide of consenting adults.

This was the next logical step in the evolution of abortion. When a society is willing to abort a perfectly healthy and viable child at 8.5 months, it is not a leap to assume that any child deemed unworthy of life after birth would be subject to termination. This is, in fact the argument of Peter Singer, a radical Australian "ethicist". He has argued for years that parents should be allowed to "terminate" the life of a child legally until a certain age after birth. This nightmare has become reality in the Netherlands, and it will surely be practiced by other European countries soon, if it isn't already. How long until the abortion lobby in the United States picks up this argument?

To this point the main stream media has ignored the story, as has much of the blogoshpere I am sad to report. As Drudge is read by millions of people each day, including the major players in network news, it can be assumed that the media is fully aware of this story, but has decided not to cover it. Why they have decided not to cover the story is open to speculation.

Mark D. Roberts has some very useful links on the topic on his blog, and Hugh Hewitt has discussed the protocol on his radio show and has blogged about it on his site. This is a story that all conservative bloggers who believe in the sanctity of life should make known to as many people as possible. Normally the blogoshere is ahead of the curve, but there is an obvious reluctance to talk about this issue. Are we too wrapped up in holiday cheer to involve ourselves in one of the most important issues of our time?

It’s called “gall” y’all

A couple of days ago I posted a column about a corrupt West Virginia Delegate, Jerry Mezzatesta, who had plead no contest to charges of tampering with official House of Delegates documents. He is generally known to have indulged in much more mischief than that, but he and his staffer wife were caught faking documents to try to throw off ethics investigators looking into his activities.

I noted the problems with periods when the same political party holds power, and the instances of wrongdoing and arrogance that often result from one-party rule. Delegate Mezzatesta exemplifies all of this.

As one more insult to the good taxpayers of West Virginia, whom he has so poorly served, Mezzatesta arrogantly filed for nearly $1,000 of reimbursement for the day he was sentenced following his plea, and for the time spent cleaning out his office (he was not re-elected in November), including extra duty pay for three days, room and food expenses, and mileage. An AP news story also notes that he was paid extra duty pay for the day he and the missus illegally changed the House documents.

Few people would have Mezzatesta’s audacity. The House Majority Leader, Rick Staton noted that were he in the same position as Mezzatesta, “I would not turn in my paperwork.” Then there’s House Speaker Bob Kiss, who only said he will review the reimbursement request.

Mezzatesta did not contest charges that he had broken the law, is accused of multiple instances of misfeasance and favoritism as Chairman of the House Education Committee. He received far less than the maximum sentence, and ought to consider himself fortunate to not have received jail time. But he apparently has not learned much from this experience, and continues to thumb his nose at the public that pays his salary. If that isn’t gall, I don’t know what is.

Wednesday, December 01, 2004

Help, please


Islam is a religion few of us Americans know much about. It is the fastest growing religion in the world, and since the 9-11 attacks it has been near the top of our awareness.

The so-called radical Muslims are terrorists and murderers. That much we all know. But we are told that Islam is really a religion of peace, despite the plain fact that the “good” Muslims mostly give lip service in denunciation of the foul deeds of their evil brethren. But Muslim leaders are not actively trying to dissuade them.

This deafening silence has led me to conclude that Islam is not the peaceful religion some would have us believe it is, and that we are now in the early stages of an all-out religious war pitting Islam against everyone else.

I am therefore asking for comments from readers, and for you to also seek to get others who have information or opinions on this subject to comment on this page to help me fully form my opinions on Islam.

Serving to confirm my present concepts about Islam is a new book, The Sword of the Prophet , by Serge Trifkovic, which I have not yet read, but which I have read reviews of and comments about. Conservative columnist Don Feder had this to say about the book: "Like communism and Nazism (mere blips on the historical radar screen, by comparison), the foe this time is as much an ideology as a religion. It’s an all-encompassing dogma that regulates the lives of its followers down to the most minute detail. It’s an ideology which cannot coexist with other creeds. Its a worldview which sanctions -- nay, glorifies -- mass murder to advance its goal of world conquest."

Below is a series of what are termed “politically incorrect” facts about Islam. If these points are true, and the gist of Trifkovic’s book is correct, we are in for a long battle, and we had better step up our fight if we hope for our way of life to survive.

However, I am interested in contrary points of view, particularly those with some basis other than just opinions.

Thanks in advance.

  • The Koran sanctions pillage, looting, ransom, and the rape of captive women as an incentive to join in jihad or "holy war."
  • Mohammed kept one-fifth of all spoils of war for himself.
  • The Koran allows a man to have up to four wives -- at any one time. He can divorce a wife by simply saying so 3 times.
  • Mohammad had as many as 25 wives. One was six when they married; he was 54. He consummated the marriage when she was 9.
  • At least 27 people were murdered on Mohammed's orders.
  • Mohammed allowed temporary marriage "for three nights" or more, so that soldiers in the field could "marry" prostitutes.
  • The Koran assures the Muslim the right to own slaves by purchasing them or as a bounty of war
  • Mohammad had dozens Almsgiving and mercy is commended in Islam -- but the beneficiaries have to be Muslims only.
  • In Islam, the definition of what is "right" or "just" is not fixed, but changeable by divine decree -- enabling the most heinous sins and crimes to be declared "the will of Allah."
  • The joys and glories of the Islamic "paradise" are tangible and sensual and include sex with virgins -- and young boys.
  • As Mohammad progressed from visionary and teacher to warlord and ruler, his style and message became more depraved, violent and intolerant.
  • It is these later "revelations" that are considered definitive by Islamic authorities when they conflict with earlier ones often cited for Western consumption.
  • The Crusades were a belated military response to three centuries of Muslim aggression against Christian lands and peoples.
  • Islam divides the world into the House of Islam (where Islam rules) and the House of War (where it doesn't).
  • The two are permanently at war; there may be temporary truces, but peace will come only upon the completion of global conquest.
  • When Muslims are a minority community, the Koran permits them to adopt a peaceful attitude to deceive their neighbors, until they feel strong enough to dispense with the pretense.
  • The massacres perpetrated by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history, bigger in sheer numbers than the Holocaust.
  • Muslim persecution of Christians has caused suffering and death for millions over 13 centuries -- and continues today.
  • The myth of Islam's "tolerance" of religious minorities contradicts its teaching, history, and present reality.
  • Islam's "golden age" was parasitic on the Christian cultures and peoples it conquered, and ended when it "killed the host."
  • In 1993, Saudi Arabia's supreme religious authority declared that the world is flat, and that anyone who disagrees is an infidel to be punished.
  • Like Communism, Islam cannot foster prosperity, and is always reliant on plunder or unearned wealth (e.g., from oil) .
  • Islam recognizes no distinction between temporal and divine authority; the only "legitimate" government is a theocracy.
  • America's "ally" Saudi Arabia remains the most intolerant Islamic regime in the world, where the practice of any religion besides Islam is as strictly prohibited as in Mohammed's day.
  • The first imam to deliver a Muslim prayer for the U.S. House of Representatives in 1991, declared in 1997 that Muslims will eventually elect the president and replace the constitutional government with an Islamic caliphate.