Live Video: CPAC Conference Today

See the Annual Convention for Conservatives Live

Saturday's schedule includes: Sen. Santorum (9am), Gov. Pawlenty (9:30am), Bill Bennett (11:15am), Ann Coulter (12:30pm), Rush Limbaugh (5pm)

Farmer Builds Model of Biblical Temple

A retired farmer has spent more than 30 years building an enormous scale model of a Biblical temple.

Alec Gerrard has spent 30 years constructing the ancient Herod's Temple. Photos: GEOFF ROBINSON

From The Telegraph

Alec Gerrard constructed the amazing 1:100 scale model, which is now housed in a huge building in his back garden Photo: GEOFF ROBINSON

Alec Garrard, 78, has dedicated a massive 33,000 hours to constructing the ancient Herod's Temple, which measures a whopping 20ft by 12ft.

The pensioner has hand-baked and painted every clay brick and tile and even sculpted 4,000 tiny human figures to populate the courtyards.

Historical experts believe the model is the best representation in the world of what the Jewish temple actually looked like and it has attracted thousands of visitors from all over the globe.

But Mr Garrard, who started the elaborate project in his 40's, says his masterpiece will not be finished in his lifetime.

"I've always loved making models and as I was getting older I started to think about making one big project which would see me through to the end of my life," he said.

"I have an interest in buildings and religion so I thought maybe I could combine the two and I came up with the idea of doing the Temple.

"I'd seen one or two examples of it in Biblical exhibitions, but I thought they were rubbish and I knew I could do better.

"I have been working on it for decades but it will never be finished as I'm always finding something new to add."

Mr Garrard, from Norfolk, spent more than three years researching the Temple, which was destroyed by the Romans 2000 years ago and deemed to be one of the most remarkable buildings of ancient times.

He then started to construct the amazing 1:100 scale model, which is now housed in a huge building in his back garden.

"Everything is made by hand. I cut plywood frames for the walls and buildings and all the clay bricks and tiles were baked in the oven then stuck together," he said.

Mr Garrard sculpted and painted 4,000 figures, measuring just half an inch and all wearing their correct costumes including 32 versions of Jesus.

Visitors come from all over the world to see the model and Mr Garrard provides binoculars so they can see all the details.

Could Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor Become the First Catholic Prelate Since the Reformation to Join the House of Lords?

There is considerable discussion in Britain about the possibility that the soon to be retired Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, could be the first Roman Catholic churchman since the Reformation to serve in the House of Lords.

In a major lecture delivered this week, Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor demonstrated why he wields influence far beyond Britain's Catholic community. He is a counter-cultural figure who has thought deeply about society, politics, the Church, and the secularism and spiritual poverty that characterize modern, western nations. The Cardinal's lecture from Westminster Cathedral follows:

Conservative Senator Blasted for Pro-Family Stance

From OneNewsNow

By Charlie Butts and Marty Cooper

A Utah state senator has been disciplined over remarks about homosexual activism.

State Senator Chris Buttars recently commented to a documentary filmmaker that he believes the homosexual lifestyle is immoral, adding that militant homosexual activism poses a grave threat to American culture. Matt Barber, director of cultural affairs at Liberty Counsel, says Utah's Senate president Michael Waddoups caved in and took punitive action against Buttars instead of supporting his own constituent.

"What's unfortunate is the Republican leadership has thrown him under the bus," he contends. "Senator Buttars' comments and beliefs are shared by the vast majority, certainly of Utahans, and by the conservative majority of Americans."

Waddoups has removed Buttars from his post as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, a move which Barber calls a validation of the radical left-wing agenda. Barber believes action taken against Buttars indicates the Republican Party is deserting the traditional values that helped make it strong.

"Until they start defending those values unapologetically and boldly as Senator Buttars has done here, they will continue to lose membership," he points out. "And who needs Democrat-Lite? So having a bunch of RINOS, Republicans in name only, in the GOP has just decimated the Republican Party."

In a Liberty Counsel press release, Barber claims the Republican Party is "spiraling into the abyss of political irrelevancy." He also states that America's conservative majority is starved for leaders to represent traditional values.

Barber is asking people to contact Senator Waddoups and urge him to reinstate Senator Buttars.

Jesus was a Reformed Racist, Says Anglican Church of Canada

From The Telegraph
By Damian Thompson

The Anglican Church of Canada (ACoC) has published a Lenten reflection that portrays Jesus as a racist who saw the error of his ways after being challenged by the Canaanite woman in Matthew's Gospel. The ACoC was long ago taken over by politically correct bores but, as Anglican Samizdat notes, this "reflection" turns Jesus into a sinner - in Christian terms, a pretty basic heresy. Here's the reflection. Sick-bags at the ready:

“… a Canaanite woman from that region came out and started shouting, ‘Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David; my daughter is tormented by a demon.’ He answered, ‘I was sent only to the lost sheep of the houseof Israel.’ But she came and knelt before him, saying, ‘Lord, help me.’ He answered, ‘It is not fair to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs.’ She said, ‘Yes, Lord, yet even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.’ ” - Matthew 14:22-27

This not a story for people who need to think that Jesus always had it together, because it looks like we’ve caught him being mean to a lady because of her ethnicity. At first, he ignores her cries. Then he refuses to help her and compares her people to dogs.

But she challenges his prejudice. And he listens to her challenge and grows in response to it. He ends up healing her daughter. What we may have here is an important moment of self-discovery in Jesus’ life, an enlargement of what it will mean to be who he was. Maybe we are seeing Jesus understand his universality for the first time.

Or maybe not. Maybe someone has been on a "racism awareness course" and decided to redefine the divinity of Jesus in a way that flatters ethnic sensibilities. How very Anglican. How very Canadian.

Senate Bars FCC from Revisiting 'Fairness Doctrine'

From OneNewsNow
By Jim Abrams

The Senate has barred federal regulators from reviving a policy, abandoned two decades ago, that required balanced coverage of issues on public airwaves.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Senator Shelby: "You Have To Be Born In America To Be President"

We're getting an enormous number of hits today because someone linked the following YouTube video to one of our earlier posts about the Holy Grail of American politics, Obama's birth certificate. It remains under lock and key in a Honolulu vault. Thanks go to Senator Shelby for reminding America that, for some reason, the document has never been made public.

No One Trusts John McCain's Shoe Shine Boy

It would seem from the comments reported in the following column that Lindsey Graham's Democrat colleagues don't know him very well. They are suspicious that he might harbor some ulterior motives in advocating nationalization of the banks and socialism for the American economy. We wish he had some conservative instincts and loyalty to Republican principles, hidden or otherwise. Haven't they noticed that he's John McCain's shoe shine boy?

What is Lindsey Graham Up To?

From The New Republic
By Noam Scheiber

You may recall that Lindsey Graham has been strongly intimating we should nationalize our banks. Not only that, but he says several other Republican senators are open to it.

So why won't Democrats, many of whom feel the same way, at least discuss it with him? Obviously one issue is the enormous complexity, which everyone would like to avoid. But the bigger hold-up is that Democrats just don't trust Graham. The same senior Senate aide I spoke with yesterday told me, "I think they’re betting on failure. I don’t know what his angle is. I’m hesitant to give him credit given my severe loathing for the guy."

Then today, another senior Democratic source elaborated, suggesting Democrats think Graham's nationalization comments are designed to talk down the banks' stock, making it impossible (as opposed to just extremely difficult) to attract private capital and making nationalization more likely. That is, the fear is that Graham wants to force the Democrats' hands. “These people say ‘free markets,’ ‘leave everything alone,’ ‘let them fail,’” says the source. “Now all of a sudden they’re saying ‘nationalize the banks?'” The cynicism is just incredible.”

For what it's worth, I'm personally torn. There are plenty of reasons to be suspicious of Graham and the Republican caucus. But he did sound genuinely exercised about the situation when he spoke to the Financial Times last week. (Graham’s office didn't return a call seeking comment.) And even Democratic senators like Chris Dodd and Chuck Schumer have inadvertently talked the markets down with comments about nationalization.

My Muslim President Obama

From Forbes.com
By Asma Gull Hasan

I know President Obama is not Muslim, but I am tempted nevertheless to think that he is, as are most Muslims I know. In a very unscientific oral poll, ranging from family members to Muslim acquaintances, many of us feel, just as African-Americans did for the non-black but culturally leaning African-American President Bill Clinton, that we have our first American Muslim president in Barack Hussein Obama.

I know it's odd to say this. At first, I thought I was the only Muslim engaging in this folly, and I am reluctant to express it lest right-wing zealots try to use "Muslim" as a smear and cite my theory as proof of an Islamic traitor in the White House or some such nonsense. But, since Election Day, I have been part of more and more conversations with Muslims in which it was either offhandedly agreed that Obama is Muslim or enthusiastically blurted out. In commenting on our new president, "I have to support my fellow Muslim brother," would slip out of my mouth before I had a chance to think twice.

"Well, I know he's not really Muslim," I would quickly add. But if the person I was talking to was Muslim, they would say, "yes he is." They would cite his open nature and habit of reaching out to critics, reminiscent of the Prophet Muhammad's own approach, and also Obama's middle name, Hussein. Most of the Muslims I know (me included) can't seem to accept that Obama is not Muslim.

Of the few Muslims I polled who said that Obama is not Muslim, even they conceded that he had ties to Islam. These realists said that, although not an avowed and practicing Muslim, Obama's exposure to Islam at a young age (both through his father and his stint in Indonesia) has given him a Muslim sensibility. In my book, that makes you a Muslim--maybe not a card-carrying one, but part of the flock for sure. One realist Muslim ventured that Obama worships at a Unitarian Church because it represents the middle ground between Christianity and Islam, incorporating the religious beliefs of the two faiths Obama feels connected to. Unitarianism could be Obama's way of still being a Muslim. (And let's not forget that the church Obama worshiped at for so many years had a minister who reminds most Muslims of their own raving, excitable ministers. Even if Obama really is Christian, he picked the most Muslim-esque minister out of the bunch to guide him.)

The rationalistic, Western side of me knows that Obama has denied being Muslim, that his father was non-practicing, that he doesn't attend a mosque. Many Muslims simply say back, "my father's not a strict Muslim either, and I haven't been to a mosque in years." Obama even told The New York Times he could recite the adhan, the Islamic call to prayer, which the vast majority of Muslims, I would guess, do not know well enough to recite.

I think many of us Muslims see Obama as Muslim, or at least of Muslim heritage, because his background epitomizes one of the major Muslim experiences--a diverse upbringing that eludes any easy classification as specifically one religion or one culture. So many of us Muslims around the world have Islam in common, but an altogether different culture from one another. Many Muslims share a culture with a Christian, Hindu or Buddhist community but not the same religion. When faced with such diversity, there are no hard and fast rules for Muslim identity.

The Qur'an speaks often of the umma, or the worldwide community of Muslims. In the early days of Islam, the Prophet Muhammad led the small umma. Every decision, every effort, everything was for the umma--people who were often unrelated by blood but had become related by choice as Muslims. In those early days, many Muslims had gone against the wishes of their own families in converting to Islam, pitting brother against sister, father against child. Perhaps that's why the concept of umma became so dear and is still echoed today--in my opinion, echoed more than that Western favorite jihad--in Muslim homes, whether those homes are in the United States or in Palestine.

Perhaps it is my--and most Muslims'-- loyalty to the umma that is behind our insistence on seeing Obama as Muslim. Islam survived and continues to survive because Muslims believe we have to respect and take care of each other, as members of the umma. If we were to start excluding members, or revising our broad guidelines for admittance, the very essence of the community feeling that is important in Islam, that gives me and other Muslims comfort everyday, would be undercut. So when Obama says he's not Muslim, my umma mentality says I know better. Once you have a Muslim parent, especially a dad, you're in. Whether you like it or not, Muslims all over the world see you as one of them.

I work with my father, and, once, we were seeking business with a white American man who had married a Muslim woman. Noticing how much fond attention my dad paid to this man, I asked him why he liked the man so much. My dad responded that, in his marriage to a Muslim woman (who wasn't related to us), "He's our brother-in-law!" So if that white, middle-aged man can be my brother-in-law, then Obama can certainly be my Muslim president.

Asma Gull Hasan is the author of Red, White, and Muslim: My Story of Belief.

Religion Of Peace Update: Wife Beheader Only Charged With Second Degree Murder

From Traditional Values Coalition

Muslim TV Executive Muzzamill Hassan, the man who has been arrested for cutting his wife Aaisya’s head off, is being charged with second degree murder in the slaughter.

First degree murder includes premeditation, planning or lying in wait to kill the person; second degree murder is non-premeditated.

“Why is this man only being charged with unpremeditated murder,” asks TVC Executive Director Andrea Lafferty. “Police have yet to find the weapon used to cut her head off, but it’s likely that he planned this killing and lay in wait for her. How many people routinely carry around swords or cutting weapons big enough to lop off a head? Would Muzzamill have been charged with first degree murder only if he’d used a wood chipper or a guillotine?

“Are police going easy on Muzzamill because he’s a Muslim? Would cops treat evangelist Pat Robertson the same way if he chopped off his wife Dee Dee’s head at the 700 Club headquarters in Virginia Beach?”

Muzzamill had a long history of mistreating his wife. This is why she finally decided to divorce him and seek a restraining order to keep him away from her. This is Muzzamill’s second wife.

According to Islam expert Daniel Pipes, Islamic theology teaches that a Muslim who has his or her head cut off cannot enter into Paradise!

A battle is looming over whether or not to interpret this crime as an honor killing or domestic violence. An honor killing is done to a woman who has shamed or embarrassed her family or husband. In this case, Muzzamill had claimed she had no right divorce him – even though she was his second wife.

In addition, the whole concept of Bridges TV was fraudulent. It pretended to be a moderate voice for Islam, yet was endorsed by some of the worst Islamic radicals in the U.S., including Nihad Awad, Ibrahim Hooper, Iqbal Yunus and Louay Safi.

Phyllis Chesler has written on the topic of domestic violence versus honor killing: “Are Honor Killings Simply Domestic Violence?”

Cutting Off Heads Is Standard Practice And Religious Duty In Islam

The Qu’ran (Koran) contains numerous verses that encourage Muslims to behead, mutilate or slaughter those considered to be infidels. Here are a few:

5:33-“The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution (by beheading), or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;”

8:12- “I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off.”

47:4- “Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), strike off their heads; at length; then when you have made wide Slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining captives”: thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens.”

9:123: “Oh ye who believe! Murder those of the disbelievers and let them find harshness in you.”

2:191- “Kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from wherever they drove you out.”

5: 45-- “We ordained therein for them: “Life for life, eye for eye, nose for nose, ear for ear. Tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal.”

2:193- “Fight them on until there is no more tumult and religion becomes that of Allah”

9:29- "Fight those who do not believe in God and the last day... and fight People of the Book, (Christian and Jews) who do not accept the religion of truth (Islam) until they pay tribute (Zizziya tax) by hand, being inferior.”

8:17—It is not ye who Slew them; it is God; when thou threwest a handful of dust, it was not Thy act, but God’s…..” (Allah is a real merciful indeed!)

“As more Muslims immigrate to America, we will be seeing more and more cases of violence against Muslim women – including beheadings,” said Lafferty. “Islam poses a serious threat not only to American security, but to women who are treated like slaves or property in Islamic homes.”

Message of His Holiness Benedict XVI for Lent 2009

MESSAGE OF HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI FOR LENT 2009 "He fasted for forty days and forty nights, and afterwards he was hungry" (Mt 4,1-2) Dear Brothers and Sisters! At the beginning of Lent, which constitutes an itinerary of more intense spiritual training, the Liturgy sets before us again three penitential practices that are very dear to the biblical and Christian tradition – prayer, almsgiving, fasting – to prepare us to better celebrate Easter and thus experience God’s power that, as we shall hear in the Paschal Vigil, “dispels all evil, washes guilt away, restores lost innocence, brings mourners joy, casts out hatred, brings us peace and humbles earthly pride” (Paschal Præconium). For this year’s Lenten Message, I wish to focus my reflections especially on the value and meaning of fasting. Indeed, Lent recalls the forty days of our Lord’s fasting in the desert, which He undertook before entering into His public ministry. We read in the Gospel: “Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. He fasted for forty days and forty nights, and afterwards he was hungry” (Mt 4,1-2). Like Moses, who fasted before receiving the tablets of the Law (cf. Ex 34,28) and Elijah’s fast before meeting the Lord on Mount Horeb (cf. 1 Kings 19,8), Jesus, too, through prayer and fasting, prepared Himself for the mission that lay before Him, marked at the start by a serious battle with the tempter. We might wonder what value and meaning there is for us Christians in depriving ourselves of something that in itself is good and useful for our bodily sustenance. The Sacred Scriptures and the entire Christian tradition teach that fasting is a great help to avoid sin and all that leads to it. For this reason, the history of salvation is replete with occasions that invite fasting. In the very first pages of Sacred Scripture, the Lord commands man to abstain from partaking of the prohibited fruit: “You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die” (Gn 2, 16-17). Commenting on the divine injunction, Saint Basil observes that “fasting was ordained in Paradise,” and “the first commandment in this sense was delivered to Adam.” He thus concludes: “ ‘You shall not eat’ is a law of fasting and abstinence” (cf. Sermo de jejunio: PG 31, 163, 98). Since all of us are weighed down by sin and its consequences, fasting is proposed to us as an instrument to restore friendship with God. Such was the case with Ezra, who, in preparation for the journey from exile back to the Promised Land, calls upon the assembled people to fast so that “we might humble ourselves before our God” (8,21). The Almighty heard their prayer and assured them of His favor and protection. In the same way, the people of Nineveh, responding to Jonah’s call to repentance, proclaimed a fast, as a sign of their sincerity, saying: “Who knows, God may yet repent and turn from his fierce anger, so that we perish not?” (3,9). In this instance, too, God saw their works and spared them. In the New Testament, Jesus brings to light the profound motive for fasting, condemning the attitude of the Pharisees, who scrupulously observed the prescriptions of the law, but whose hearts were far from God. True fasting, as the divine Master repeats elsewhere, is rather to do the will of the Heavenly Father, who “sees in secret, and will reward you” (Mt 6,18). He Himself sets the example, answering Satan, at the end of the forty days spent in the desert that “man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God” (Mt 4,4). The true fast is thus directed to eating the “true food,” which is to do the Father’s will (cf. Jn 4,34). If, therefore, Adam disobeyed the Lord’s command “of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat,” the believer, through fasting, intends to submit himself humbly to God, trusting in His goodness and mercy. The practice of fasting is very present in the first Christian community (cf. Acts 13,3; 14,22; 27,21; 2 Cor 6,5). The Church Fathers, too, speak of the force of fasting to bridle sin, especially the lusts of the “old Adam,” and open in the heart of the believer a path to God. Moreover, fasting is a practice that is encountered frequently and recommended by the saints of every age. Saint Peter Chrysologus writes: “Fasting is the soul of prayer, mercy is the lifeblood of fasting. So if you pray, fast; if you fast, show mercy; if you want your petition to be heard, hear the petition of others. If you do not close your ear to others, you open God’s ear to yourself” (Sermo 43: PL 52, 320. 322). In our own day, fasting seems to have lost something of its spiritual meaning, and has taken on, in a culture characterized by the search for material well-being, a therapeutic value for the care of one’s body. Fasting certainly bring benefits to physical well-being, but for believers, it is, in the first place, a “therapy” to heal all that prevents them from conformity to the will of God. In the Apostolic Constitution Pænitemini of 1966, the Servant of God Paul VI saw the need to present fasting within the call of every Christian to “no longer live for himself, but for Him who loves him and gave himself for him … he will also have to live for his brethren“ (cf. Ch. I). Lent could be a propitious time to present again the norms contained in the Apostolic Constitution, so that the authentic and perennial significance of this long held practice may be rediscovered, and thus assist us to mortify our egoism and open our heart to love of God and neighbor, the first and greatest Commandment of the new Law and compendium of the entire Gospel (cf. Mt 22, 34-40). The faithful practice of fasting contributes, moreover, to conferring unity to the whole person, body and soul, helping to avoid sin and grow in intimacy with the Lord. Saint Augustine, who knew all too well his own negative impulses, defining them as “twisted and tangled knottiness” (Confessions, II, 10.18), writes: “I will certainly impose privation, but it is so that he will forgive me, to be pleasing in his eyes, that I may enjoy his delightfulness” (Sermo 400, 3, 3: PL 40, 708). Denying material food, which nourishes our body, nurtures an interior disposition to listen to Christ and be fed by His saving word. Through fasting and praying, we allow Him to come and satisfy the deepest hunger that we experience in the depths of our being: the hunger and thirst for God. At the same time, fasting is an aid to open our eyes to the situation in which so many of our brothers and sisters live. In his First Letter, Saint John admonishes: “If anyone has the world’s goods, and sees his brother in need, yet shuts up his bowels of compassion from him – how does the love of God abide in him?” (3,17). Voluntary fasting enables us to grow in the spirit of the Good Samaritan, who bends low and goes to the help of his suffering brother (cf. Encyclical Deus caritas est, 15). By freely embracing an act of self-denial for the sake of another, we make a statement that our brother or sister in need is not a stranger. It is precisely to keep alive this welcoming and attentive attitude towards our brothers and sisters that I encourage the parishes and every other community to intensify in Lent the custom of private and communal fasts, joined to the reading of the Word of God, prayer and almsgiving. From the beginning, this has been the hallmark of the Christian community, in which special collections were taken up (cf. 2 Cor 8-9; Rm 15, 25-27), the faithful being invited to give to the poor what had been set aside from their fast (Didascalia Ap., V, 20,18). This practice needs to be rediscovered and encouraged again in our day, especially during the liturgical season of Lent. From what I have said thus far, it seems abundantly clear that fasting represents an important ascetical practice, a spiritual arm to do battle against every possible disordered attachment to ourselves. Freely chosen detachment from the pleasure of food and other material goods helps the disciple of Christ to control the appetites of nature, weakened by original sin, whose negative effects impact the entire human person. Quite opportunely, an ancient hymn of the Lenten liturgy exhorts: “Utamur ergo parcius, / verbis cibis et potibus, / somno, iocis et arctius / perstemus in custodia – Let us use sparingly words, food and drink, sleep and amusements. May we be more alert in the custody of our senses.” Dear brothers and sisters, it is good to see how the ultimate goal of fasting is to help each one of us, as the Servant of God Pope John Paul II wrote, to make the complete gift of self to God (cf. Encyclical Veritatis splendor, 21). May every family and Christian community use well this time of Lent, therefore, in order to cast aside all that distracts the spirit and grow in whatever nourishes the soul, moving it to love of God and neighbor. I am thinking especially of a greater commitment to prayer, lectio divina, recourse to the Sacrament of Reconciliation and active participation in the Eucharist, especially the Holy Sunday Mass. With this interior disposition, let us enter the penitential spirit of Lent. May the Blessed Virgin Mary, Causa nostrae laetitiae, accompany and support us in the effort to free our heart from slavery to sin, making it evermore a “living tabernacle of God.” With these wishes, while assuring every believer and ecclesial community of my prayer for a fruitful Lenten journey, I cordially impart to all of you my Apostolic Blessing. BENEDICTUS PP. XVI

Homosexual Republican Group Calls Pro-Family Activists "Domestic Terrorists"

From LifeSiteNews.com
By Kathleen Gilbert

A homosexualist Republican group is lobbying GOP chairman Michael Steele to turn a deaf ear to pro-family activists, who the group leader labeled in a letter "Anti-American" and "domestic terrorists." James Ensley, President of the Georgia Log Cabin Republicans (LCR), made the comments after the pro-family group, Americans for Truth, petitioned Steele to work to return the GOP to its conservative roots and protect true marriage.

"I want to urge you not to allow small biggoted [sic], anti-American and anti-Christian fringe groups such as Americans for Truth to influence you," wrote Ensley in a letter addressed to Steele.

"Groups like Americans for Truth simply want to divide Americans, and truthfully their group would be more welcome as a mainstream Nazi Germany organization, than an organization which provides any value at all in 21st Century America," Ensley continued.

Ensley said he hoped Steele would support the LCR, a radically homosexualist group, "and not listen to the radical Christian extremist domestic terrorist groups such as Americans for Truth."

Log Cabin had praised Steele's election as chairman of the GOP last month, saying the former Maryland lieutenant governor "believes in a big tent GOP" and "is an inclusive leader who will bring a new energy and a new vision to the GOP at a critical time." Following Log Cabin's endorsement of Steele, Americans for Truth of Homosexuality (AFTAH) petitioned Steele to strengthen the GOP's conservative roots by protecting marriage as between one man and one woman.

WorldNetDaily (WND) reports that the Georgia Republican Party responded to Ensley's inflammatory rhetoric, stating, "While a healthy debate on the issues can help strengthen us as a party, to use the word 'terrorist' to describe those that disagree with you is not appropriate." Georgia GOP spokesman Doug Reineke emphasized that the Log Cabin Republicans were an independent group not officially associated with the Georgia Republican Party.

Log Cabin Republicans (LCR) "really have an anti-Christian animus, an anti-Christian bigotry about them, which would actually stoop to calling us ... terrorists," AFTAH President LaBarbera told LifeSiteNews.com (LSN).

"We see the same trend: this Log Cabin group is seated as if it's a hugely important constituency to the GOP, and what I'm trying to tell people is: 'Look, these guys have 20,000 members nationwide - 20,000,'" La Barbera said. "It's a tiny organization that's not worth losing millions and millions of conservatives, pro-life, pro-family Republicans over."

After Californians voted into law Proposition 8, adding to the state constitution the true definition of marriage, LCR sent an amicus brief to the California Supreme Court arguing that the voter-approved amendment should be overturned because it denies a "fundamental right" to same-sex "marriage."

"If you're crusading to overturn the popular will of California voters on defending marriage between a man and a woman - to me, don't call yourself a Republican," LaBarbera told LSN. "That's a radical thing to do - even some gays don't say we should overturn that vote. There's really nothing distinguishing them - when it comes to the hardcore homosexual activism - they're just like the Democratic gay activists. That's what they value most highly. "

Laurie Higgins of the Illinois Family Institute also condemned Ensley's words, stating: "It appears that James Ensley just came out of his bigot closet, hurling pernicious charges - with no evidence - at not only Mr. LaBarbera but also at countless others who share the view that homosexual behavior is immoral behavior." (See: http://www.illinoisfamily.org/news/contentview.asp?c=34271)

Both AFTAH and the Illinois Family Institute are encouraging followers to urge Steele to oppose the homosexualist agenda.

To contact GOP Chairman Steele:
Email: chairman@gop.com

The Time is Right for a Religious Freedom Day

A state legislator in Hawaii has introduced legislation (HB 1282) to establish the second Saturday in July of each year as "Religious Freedom Day."

Our first reaction to this was to dismiss it as yet another expression of civil religion being promoted for political purposes. Yet as we reflected we recognized, as did the founding fathers, that all the rights and freedoms, indeed our very ideas of what it means to be an American, are rooted not in ethnicity or territory as is true with every other nation, but in the profoundly religious idea "that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God."

In an excellent book, America's Real War, Rabbi Daniel Lapin provides irrefutable evidence that this nation was founded as a Christian nation where freedom of religion, not freedom from religion is protected. Those freedoms are in danger from a populace that has not been told its true history in the government schools, they are in danger from secularists in national leadership promoting Marxist materialism, and they are threatened from without by Islmamic jihadists determined to eliminate all vestiges of our faith and culture and impose Sharia Law.

In 1954, President Eisenhower heard a sermon delivered by Reverend George M. Docherty that resulted in the words "under God" being added to the Pledge of Allegiance. Concluding his sermon, Docherty stated:

In Jefferson's phrase, if we deny the existence of the God who gave us life, how can we live by the liberty He gave us at the same time? This is a God-fearing nation. On our coins, bearing the imprint of Lincoln and Jefferson, are the words "In God We Trust." Congress is opened with prayer. It is upon the Holy Bible the President takes his oath of office. Naturalized citizens, when they take their oath of allegiance, conclude, solemnly, with the words "so help me God."

This is the issue we face today: A freedom that respects the rights of the minorities, but is defined by a fundamental belief in God. A way of life that sees man, not as the ultimate outcome of a mysterious concatenation of evolutionary process, but a sentient being created by God and seeking to know Him well, and "Whose soul is restless till he rest in God."

In this land, there is neither Jew nor Greek, neither bond nor free; neither male nor female, for we are one nation indivisible under God, and humbly as God has given us the light we seek liberty and justice for all. This quest is not only within these United States, but to the four corners of the globe, wherever man will lift up his head toward the vision of his true and divine manhood.

If we are to restore respect for the U. S. Constitution, protect America's liberties, and build on the foundations that made our republic great, we must restore a deep respect for the religious roots of our nation. As Rabbi Lapin points out, "either America has no religious roots and no special spiritual destiny, or it has both." Establishing a Religious Freedom Day close to the Fourth of July will be an important reminder that freedom from something is unimportant unless we are truly free for something -- the love of God, our country, its ideals, and our fellow man.

Geert Wilders on Bill O'Reilly

Free speech can be a challenge when being interviewed by Bill O'Reilly, but Americans can be proud that Geert Wilders has been welcomed in the United States and his message about the threat of Islamo-Fascism is being heard here.

Hat Tip to Gates of Vienna and Vlad Tepes for the following video.

Pope Names Dolan Archbishop of New York

Time will tell, but it appears that Pope Benedict has made an excellent choice in naming Milwaukee Archbishop Timothy Dolan as the new Archbishop of New York. Like Cardinal Egan, he is politically and theologically orthodox, but unlike Egan, he is first and foremost a spiritual shepherd of souls.

The New York Archdiocese, with 2.5 million Catholics, is second to Los Angeles in size. Its territory includes Manhattan, Staten Island, Bronx, and seven counties stretching up the Hudson River to within twenty miles of Albany. However, the Archbishop of New York, presiding over a world cultural, financial and media center, has traditionally wielded national and international influence. Former Archbishops of New York, such as Cardinals Spellman, Cooke and O'Connor, have been the public face of American Catholicism, tangling with the nation's leaders when necessary, and providing spiritual counsel. They have typically been large personalities, seen by New Yorkers of all faiths as fathers of the city.

Unfortunately the incumbent, Cardinal Egan, has seen his role as very much a business manager. Aloof from his priests and people, he has been zealous in closing schools and parishes, streamlining Archdiocesan operations, and restoring financial stability to a system that was tottering after the O'Connor years.

Many New Yorkers will never forget that weeks after the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, Cardinal Egan left town for a month to preside over a meeting of bishops in Rome. Given that many of the dead police and fire personnel were Catholic, it would be hard to imagine Cardinal O'Connor, or most of New York's previous Archbishops ignoring their pastoral obligations in the aftermath of such a crisis.

The Church in America is confronted as never before with radical national leadership, promoting perverted science, perverted lifestyles, abortion and assaults on faith and the freedom and dignity of the individual. American Catholics need a man who is both grounded in truth and a shepherd of souls, who will boldly teach and sanctify and, when necessary, speak truth to power. If Pope Benedict XVI has appointed a man like himself, America will have a great, new Catholic leader at a time when leadership is sorely needed.

Pepsi Produces Another TV Ad Promoting the Gay Lifestyle

Pepsi has produced another TV ad not only promoting Pepsi but also promoting the gay lifestyle. Click here to see the ad.

Pepsi had released a similar ad before. The ads serve two purposes for Pepsi: to sell Pepsi and to promote the homosexual lifestyle. The American Family Association, which is leading a national boycott, has asked Pepsi to remain neutral in the culture war, but the company refused - choosing to support the homosexual activists.

Pepsi has made no effort to hide their support for the homosexual agenda:

• Pepsi gave a total of $1,000,000 to the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) and Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) to promote the homosexual lifestyle in the workplace.

• Both HRC and PFLAG supported efforts in California to defeat Proposition 8 which defined marriage as being between a man and a woman. HRC, which received $500,000 from Pepsi, gave $2.3 million to defeat Proposition 8.

• Pepsi forces employees to attend sexual orientation and gender diversity training where the employees are taught to accept homosexuality.

• Pepsi is a member of the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce.

The American Family Association is urging all concerned Americans to take the following action:

Sign the Boycott Pepsi Pledge. After signing the pledge, please call Pepsi (914-253-2000 or 1-800-433-2652) and tell the company you will boycott their products until they stop promoting the homosexual agenda.

Call the Pepsi bottler nearest you and ask it to stop supporting the homosexual agenda.

Pepsi’s products include Pepsi soft drinks, Frito-Lay chips and snacks (800-352-4477), Quaker Oats (800-367-6287), Tropicana (800-237-7799) and Gatorade (800-884-2867).

Print the Boycott Pepsi Pledge and distribute it.

Robin Mark -- "All I Once Held Dear"

George Washington's Farewell Address To The People of the United States

Friends, and Fellow Citizens:

The period for a new election of a citizen to administer the executive government of the United States being not far distant, and the time actually arrived when your thoughts must be employed in designating the person who is to be clothed with that important trust, it appears to me proper, especially as it may conduce to a more distinct expression of the public voice, that I should now apprise you of the resolution I have formed, to decline being considered among the number of those out of whom a choice is to be made.

I beg you, at the same time, to do me the justice to be assured that this resolution has not been taken without a strict regard to all the considerations appertaining to the relation which binds a dutiful citizen to his country; and that in withdrawing the tender of service, which silence in my situation might imply, I am influenced by no diminution of zeal for your future interest, no deficiency of grateful respect for your past kindness, but am supported by a full conviction that the step is compatible with both.

The acceptance of, and continuance hitherto in, the office to which your suffrages have twice called me have been a uniform sacrifice of inclination to the opinion of duty and to a deference for what appeared to be your desire. I constantly hoped that it would have been much earlier in my power, consistently with motives which I was not at liberty to disregard, to return to that retirement from which I had been reluctantly drawn. The strength of my inclination to do this, previous to the last election, had even led to the preparation of an address to declare it to you; but mature reflection on the then perplexed and critical posture of our affairs with foreign nations, and the unanimous advice of persons entitled to my confidence, impelled me to abandon the idea.

I rejoice that the state of your concerns, external as well as internal, no longer renders the pursuit of inclination incompatible with the sentiment of duty or propriety, and am persuaded, whatever partiality may be retained for my services, that, in the present circumstances of our country, you will not disapprove my determination to retire.

The impressions with which I first undertook the arduous trust were explained on the proper occasion. In the discharge of this trust, I will only say that I have, with good intentions, contributed towards the organization and administration of the government the best exertions of which a very fallible judgment was capable. Not unconscious in the outset of the inferiority of my qualifications, experience in my own eyes, perhaps still more in the eyes of others, has strengthened the motives to diffidence of myself; and every day the increasing weight of years admonishes me more and more that the shade of retirement is as necessary to me as it will be welcome. Satisfied that if any circumstances have given peculiar value to my services, they were temporary, I have the consolation to believe that, while choice and prudence invite me to quit the political scene, patriotism does not forbid it.

In looking forward to the moment which is intended to terminate the career of my public life, my feelings do not permit me to suspend the deep acknowledgment of that debt of gratitude which I owe to my beloved country for the many honors it has conferred upon me; still more for the steadfast confidence with which it has supported me; and for the opportunities I have thence enjoyed of manifesting my inviolable attachment, by services faithful and persevering, though in usefulness unequal to my zeal. If benefits have resulted to our country from these services, let it always be remembered to your praise, and as an instructive example in our annals, that under circumstances in which the passions, agitated in every direction, were liable to mislead, amidst appearances sometimes dubious, vicissitudes of fortune often discouraging, in situations in which not unfrequently want of success has countenanced the spirit of criticism, the constancy of your support was the essential prop of the efforts, and a guarantee of the plans by which they were effected. Profoundly penetrated with this idea, I shall carry it with me to my grave, as a strong incitement to unceasing vows that heaven may continue to you the choicest tokens of its beneficence; that your union and brotherly affection may be perpetual; that the free Constitution, which is the work of your hands, may be sacredly maintained; that its administration in every department may be stamped with wisdom and virtue; that, in fine, the happiness of the people of these States, under the auspices of liberty, may be made complete by so careful a preservation and so prudent a use of this blessing as will acquire to them the glory of recommending it to the applause, the affection, and adoption of every nation which is yet a stranger to it.

Here, perhaps, I ought to stop. But a solicitude for your welfare, which cannot end but with my life, and the apprehension of danger, natural to that solicitude, urge me, on an occasion like the present, to offer to your solemn contemplation, and to recommend to your frequent review, some sentiments which are the result of much reflection, of no inconsiderable observation, and which appear to me all-important to the permanency of your felicity as a people. These will be offered to you with the more freedom, as you can only see in them the disinterested warnings of a parting friend, who can possibly have no personal motive to bias his counsel. Nor can I forget, as an encouragement to it, your indulgent reception of my sentiments on a former and not dissimilar occasion.

Interwoven as is the love of liberty with every ligament of your hearts, no recommendation of mine is necessary to fortify or confirm the attachment.

The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts.

For this you have every inducement of sympathy and interest. Citizens, by birth or choice, of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate your affections. The name of American, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion, manners, habits, and political principles. You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together; the independence and liberty you possess are the work of joint counsels, and joint efforts of common dangers, sufferings, and successes.

But these considerations, however powerfully they address themselves to your sensibility, are greatly outweighed by those which apply more immediately to your interest. Here every portion of our country finds the most commanding motives for carefully guarding and preserving the union of the whole.

The North, in an unrestrained intercourse with the South, protected by the equal laws of a common government, finds in the productions of the latter great additional resources of maritime and commercial enterprise and precious materials of manufacturing industry. The South, in the same intercourse, benefiting by the agency of the North, sees its agriculture grow and its commerce expand. Turning partly into its own channels the seamen of the North, it finds its particular navigation invigorated; and, while it contributes, in different ways, to nourish and increase the general mass of the national navigation, it looks forward to the protection of a maritime strength, to which itself is unequally adapted. The East, in a like intercourse with the West, already finds, and in the progressive improvement of interior communications by land and water, will more and more find a valuable vent for the commodities which it brings from abroad, or manufactures at home. The West derives from the East supplies requisite to its growth and comfort, and, what is perhaps of still greater consequence, it must of necessity owe the secure enjoyment of indispensable outlets for its own productions to the weight, influence, and the future maritime strength of the Atlantic side of the Union, directed by an indissoluble community of interest as one nation. Any other tenure by which the West can hold this essential advantage, whether derived from its own separate strength, or from an apostate and unnatural connection with any foreign power, must be intrinsically precarious.

While, then, every part of our country thus feels an immediate and particular interest in union, all the parts combined cannot fail to find in the united mass of means and efforts greater strength, greater resource, proportionably greater security from external danger, a less frequent interruption of their peace by foreign nations; and, what is of inestimable value, they must derive from union an exemption from those broils and wars between themselves, which so frequently afflict neighboring countries not tied together by the same governments, which their own rival ships alone would be sufficient to produce, but which opposite foreign alliances, attachments, and intrigues would stimulate and embitter. Hence, likewise, they will avoid the necessity of those overgrown military establishments which, under any form of government, are inauspicious to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty. In this sense it is that your union ought to be considered as a main prop of your liberty, and that the love of the one ought to endear to you the preservation of the other.

These considerations speak a persuasive language to every reflecting and virtuous mind, and exhibit the continuance of the Union as a primary object of patriotic desire. Is there a doubt whether a common government can embrace so large a sphere? Let experience solve it. To listen to mere speculation in such a case were criminal. We are authorized to hope that a proper organization of the whole with the auxiliary agency of governments for the respective subdivisions, will afford a happy issue to the experiment. It is well worth a fair and full experiment. With such powerful and obvious motives to union, affecting all parts of our country, while experience shall not have demonstrated its impracticability, there will always be reason to distrust the patriotism of those who in any quarter may endeavor to weaken its bands.

In contemplating the causes which may disturb our Union, it occurs as matter of serious concern that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations, Northern and Southern, Atlantic and Western; whence designing men may endeavor to excite a belief that there is a real difference of local interests and views. One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts. You cannot shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heartburnings which spring from these misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection. The inhabitants of our Western country have lately had a useful lesson on this head; they have seen, in the negotiation by the Executive, and in the unanimous ratification by the Senate, of the treaty with Spain, and in the universal satisfaction at that event, throughout the United States, a decisive proof how unfounded were the suspicions propagated among them of a policy in the General Government and in the Atlantic States unfriendly to their interests in regard to the Mississippi; they have been witnesses to the formation of two treaties, that with Great Britain, and that with Spain, which secure to them everything they could desire, in respect to our foreign relations, towards confirming their prosperity. Will it not be their wisdom to rely for the preservation of these advantages on the Union by which they were procured ? Will they not henceforth be deaf to those advisers, if such there are, who would sever them from their brethren and connect them with aliens?

To the efficacy and permanency of your Union, a government for the whole is indispensable. No alliance, however strict, between the parts can be an adequate substitute; they must inevitably experience the infractions and interruptions which all alliances in all times have experienced. Sensible of this momentous truth, you have improved upon your first essay, by the adoption of a constitution of government better calculated than your former for an intimate union, and for the efficacious management of your common concerns. This government, the offspring of our own choice, uninfluenced and unawed, adopted upon full investigation and mature deliberation, completely free in its principles, in the distribution of its powers, uniting security with energy, and containing within itself a provision for its own amendment, has a just claim to your confidence and your support. Respect for its authority, compliance with its laws, acquiescence in its measures, are duties enjoined by the fundamental maxims of true liberty. The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the Constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government.

All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.

However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.

Towards the preservation of your government, and the permanency of your present happy state, it is requisite, not only that you steadily discountenance irregular oppositions to its acknowledged authority, but also that you resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its principles, however specious the pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms of the Constitution, alterations which will impair the energy of the system, and thus to undermine what cannot be directly overthrown. In all the changes to which you may be invited, remember that time and habit are at least as necessary to fix the true character of governments as of other human institutions; that experience is the surest standard by which to test the real tendency of the existing constitution of a country; that facility in changes, upon the credit of mere hypothesis and opinion, exposes to perpetual change, from the endless variety of hypothesis and opinion; and remember, especially, that for the efficient management of your common interests, in a country so extensive as ours, a government of as much vigor as is consistent with the perfect security of liberty is indispensable. Liberty itself will find in such a government, with powers properly distributed and adjusted, its surest guardian. It is, indeed, little else than a name, where the government is too feeble to withstand the enterprises of faction, to confine each member of the society within the limits prescribed by the laws, and to maintain all in the secure and tranquil enjoyment of the rights of person and property.

I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositaries, and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern; some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them. If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield.

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?

Promote then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.

As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit. One method of preserving it is to use it as sparingly as possible, avoiding occasions of expense by cultivating peace, but remembering also that timely disbursements to prepare for danger frequently prevent much greater disbursements to repel it, avoiding likewise the accumulation of debt, not only by shunning occasions of expense, but by vigorous exertion in time of peace to discharge the debts which unavoidable wars may have occasioned, not ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear. The execution of these maxims belongs to your representatives, but it is necessary that public opinion should co-operate. To facilitate to them the performance of their duty, it is essential that you should practically bear in mind that towards the payment of debts there must be revenue; that to have revenue there must be taxes; that no taxes can be devised which are not more or less inconvenient and unpleasant; that the intrinsic embarrassment, inseparable from the selection of the proper objects (which is always a choice of difficulties), ought to be a decisive motive for a candid construction of the conduct of the government in making it, and for a spirit of acquiescence in the measures for obtaining revenue, which the public exigencies may at any time dictate.

Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it 7 It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant period, a great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. Who can doubt that, in the course of time and things, the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages which might be lost by a steady adherence to it ? Can it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue ? The experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?

In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence, frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of nations, has been the victim.

So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils 7 Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.

The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none; or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.

Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people under an efficient government. the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.

Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?

It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it, therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.

Taking care always to keep ourselves by suitable establishments on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.

Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations, are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand; neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing (with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the government to support them) conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary, and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied, as experience and circumstances shall dictate; constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that, by such acceptance, it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favors, and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.

In offering to you, my countrymen, these counsels of an old and affectionate friend, I dare not hope they will make the strong and lasting impression I could wish; that they will control the usual current of the passions, or prevent our nation from running the course which has hitherto marked the destiny of nations. But, if I may even flatter myself that they may be productive of some partial benefit, some occasional good; that they may now and then recur to moderate the fury of party spirit, to warn against the mischiefs of foreign intrigue, to guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism; this hope will be a full recompense for the solicitude for your welfare, by which they have been dictated.

How far in the discharge of my official duties I have been guided by the principles which have been delineated, the public records and other evidences of my conduct must witness to you and to the world. To myself, the assurance of my own conscience is, that I have at least believed myself to be guided by them.

In relation to the still subsisting war in Europe, my proclamation of the twenty-second of April, I793, is the index of my plan. Sanctioned by your approving voice, and by that of your representatives in both houses of Congress, the spirit of that measure has continually governed me, uninfluenced by any attempts to deter or divert me from it.

After deliberate examination, with the aid of the best lights I could obtain, I was well satisfied that our country, under all the circumstances of the case, had a right to take, and was bound in duty and interest to take, a neutral position. Having taken it, I determined, as far as should depend upon me, to maintain it, with moderation, perseverance, and firmness.

The considerations which respect the right to hold this con duct, it is not necessary on this occasion to detail. I will only observe that, according to my understanding of the matter, that right, so far from being denied by any of the belligerent powers, has been virtually admitted by all.

The duty of holding a neutral conduct may be inferred, without anything more, from the obligation which justice and humanity impose on every nation, in cases in which it is free to act, to maintain inviolate the relations of peace and amity towards other nations.

The inducements of interest for observing that conduct will best be referred to your own reflections and experience. With me a predominant motive has been to endeavor to gain time to our country to settle and mature its yet recent institutions, and to progress without interruption to that degree of strength and consistency which is necessary to give it, humanly speaking, the command of its own fortunes.

Though, in reviewing the incidents of my administration, I am unconscious of intentional error, I am nevertheless too sensible of my defects not to think it probable that I may have committed many errors. Whatever they may be, I fervently beseech the Almighty to avert or mitigate the evils to which they may tend. I shall also carry with me the hope that my country will never cease to view them with indulgence; and that, after forty five years of my life dedicated to its service with an upright zeal, the faults of incompetent abilities will be consigned to oblivion, as myself must soon be to the mansions of rest.

Relying on its kindness in this as in other things, and actuated by that fervent love towards it, which is so natural to a man who views in it the native soil of himself and his progenitors for several generations, I anticipate with pleasing expectation that retreat in which I promise myself to realize, without alloy, the sweet enjoyment of partaking, in the midst of my fellow-citizens, the benign influence of good laws under a free government, the ever-favorite object of my heart, and the happy reward, as I trust, of our mutual cares, labors, and dangers.

Geo. Washington.

Barack Obama Under Fire for Picking a Crony Fundraiser as His Ambassador to Britain

Barack Obama has been embroiled in a cronyism row after reports that he intends to make Louis Susman, one of his biggest fundraisers, the new US ambassador in London.

Mr. Obama's campaign promises to change politics as usual had raised hopes that he would not continue the practise of doling out prized ambassadorships to cronies. Photo: AP

From The Telegraph
By Tim Shipman

The selection of Mr Susman, a lawyer and banker from the president's hometown of Chicago, rather than an experienced diplomat, raises new questions about Mr Obama's commitment to the special relationship with Britain.

American commentators denounced the selection of a rich friend to the plumb post, regarded as one of the most prestigious in the president's gift, as worthy of a "banana republic".

Read the rest of this entry >>

The Vienna Philharmonic - Mozart's "Coronation Mass" - Herbert Von Karajan, Conducting

City of Big Shoulders Vows to Become City of Big Brother

Chicago's Democrat Mayor, Richard Daley, is promising a surveillance camera on every street corner in Chicago. But if the City of Big Shoulders is to become the City of Big Brother, how about publicly accessible surveillance cameras, with audio, in the Mayor's office, in the offices of the City Council, in the Mayor's Conference Room, in the back hallways of City Hall, and the front and back doors of the Mayor's home.

If government is to use the latest technology to watch every move of the people, shouldn't the people demand the right to watch every move of the government, particularly one known to produce so many corrupt politicians?

More from South Carolina's Government Nationalizer

Lindsey wants the nation's banks to be run from government offices in Charlotte, North Carolina. In this interview with the Charlotte Observer he explains his big plans for government takeovers.

United In Hate

Book Review by Ben R. Furman

United In Hate -- The Left's Romance With Tyranny and Terror is a book that examines the seamy underbelly of the radical Left which considers Western society and its values an anathema. Dr. Jamie Glazov, the Editor of FrontPage Magazine, methodically details the causational factors that have lead modern Leftists to adhere to the death and destruction mantra of tyrannical Islamic Jihadists.

The Twin Towers are destroyed, 2973 people die in the attack and the radical Left cheers; the war in Iraq is won and the Left expels a disgusted sigh; totalitarian thugs kill innocent millions that the Left justifies as a “cleansing” required to forge a utopian society; suicidal Jihadists shred shoppers in malls with nail bombs and are excused by the Left as door-matted victims striking back at their oppressors; women are vilified, stoned, mutilated and killed by radical Muslims as Leftist feminists remain silent, save here in America where they rail mightily against a country club that’s denied membership to a female executive.

What draws Leftists moth-like toward the annihilating fires of unbridled totalitarianism, or drives them to slavishly worship at the feet of dictators that kick them to the curb when they are considered no longer useful? Why does the Left cleave to a radical Islamic terrorism that vows to destroy all non-believers, including them? Dr. Glazov answers these and other “head scratching” questions in a court-ready presentation of the Left’s mindset that will make forensic psychologists proud.

The Left’s hatred and rejection of Western civilization, its freedoms and values, begins with an acute sense of alienation from it, and unable to “fit in” the Left believes radical societal change, regardless of the consequences, is necessary. After all it’s the West’s fault that the Left has no sense of purpose or direction. Although the Left vehemently argues against this premise, its words and actions prove Dr. Glazov’s case.

The ideological descendents of the communist/progressive Left that spent its capital hoping the West would lose the Cold War to the Soviet Union are today’s leftist core. Based on their hatred for the United States, the Left has forged a symbiotic relationship with radical Islam, whose hatred for America equals theirs. Both make it clear that they consider Western civilization evil and unworthy of preservation. Violent revolution is the Left’s path to change; the Jihadists’ follow the path of war and annilation.

Some might think Dr. Glazov has taken a wrong turn in his analysis of the radical Left’s agenda and beliefs. If so, they should read the scurrilous quotes of Michael Moore extolling the virtues of the “Iraqi freedom fighters,” or Ward Churchill’s and Jeremiah Wright’s crowing after 9/11 that “America’s chickens have come home to roost.” Or, they should examine the genuflexing before the world’s tyrants by the likes of Jimmy Carter, Sean Penn and Tom Hayden. Dr. Glazov’s take on the radical Left is correct and as sharp as a tightly focused laser.

Should the book cause even one radical Leftist to re-examine his or her contorted beliefs and return from the “dark side,” Dr. Glazov’s efforts will be a resounding success. A great thought provoking read!

The official release date of United in Hate is March 3. To pre-order the book on Amazon, see the Amazon widget in the column to the right.

---

Ben R. Furman is the FBI's Former Counterterrorism Chief. He writes a blog at blackhawkpress.com/blog.

Censorship Query Uncovers Pro-'Gay' Activist

Spokesman worked at station that silenced Christian program

From WorldNetDaily

By Drew Zahn

A Michigan television station agreed to broadcast a Christian documentary critical of the "gay rights" movement, but later backed out – and now a family values organization is questioning whether the station's about-face was influenced by a former newsroom executive who is a homosexual activist.

As WND reported, WOOD-TV of Grand Rapids, Mich., originally agreed to air the hour-long paid program "Speechless: Silencing Christians," a documentary seeking to expose the agenda of homosexual activists and their impact on families and freedom of religion. The station later canceled the agreement shortly after the Human Rights Campaign, a pro-homosexual organization, issued a national alert against the film urging people to call for its cancellation.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Obama Picks Defenders of Child Porn., Euthanasia & Abortion for Justice Dept.

From The Traditional Values Coalition

President Barack Hussein Obama has chosen four lawyers for key Department of Justice posts who have long records of supporting abortion, euthanasia, and pornography – including child pornography. Each of them is committed to legal and judicial activism. They believe that they are to use the law to enforce liberal social and political agendas upon America without regard to the Constitution. They are: David Ogden, Elena Kagan, Thomas Perrilli, and Dawn Johnsen.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Preteen's Pro-Life Speech Goes Viral

The mother of a 12-year-old girl whose pro-life speech has become a hit YouTube video says her daughter's passion for the unborn is genuine.

From OneNewsNow
By Pete Chagnon

Lia is a preteen from Canada who decided to speak out against abortion in her school's speech contest, despite teachers and school officials who encouraged her to pick a different topic.

"What if I told you that right now someone was choosing if you were going to live or die? What if I told you that this choice wasn't based on what you could or couldn't do, what you had done in the past, or what you would do in the future? And what if I told you [that] you could nothing about it? Fellow students and teachers, thousands of children are right now in that very situation," she says in her speech.

Kimberly, Lia's mother, says Lia was told by school officials that if she chose the topic of abortion, she would not be allowed to participate in the speech contest. But both were surprised when Lia's pro-choice teacher had a change of heart.

"Her teacher was really impressed by this speech and perhaps moved by it, and therefore her teacher kind of was a real supporter of [Lia] winning for the class," Kimberly notes. "And she had to go through a couple of hoops and get clearance from a couple of other teachers before she could be declared winner of the class."

Another controversy erupted when the panel of judges had a supposed big disagreement and one stepped down. Initially Lia was disqualified, but later the panel declared her the winner. She was asked to take out this portion of her speech: "[F]etuses are definitely humans knit together in their mother's womb by their wonderful Creator who knows them all by name."

Kimberly says after Lia was told to remove that portion of her speech, she took time to think about her decision and ultimately decided to leave it in. Lia also competed in a regional speech competition but did not win. However, her speech has been viewed by over 200,000 people on YouTube.

Royals and Catholics... Again

From InsideCatholic.com
By Joanna Bogle

So here we are again, with another discussion about Catholics and the royal family. We have been here before, each time some royal falls in love with a Catholic, or even when royal marriages in general are discussed.

This time it's a bit different: There is no specific royal eyeing the aisle with a Catholic in mind. But a Member of Parliament, Dr. Evan Harris, has announced his intention to introduce legislation to amend the law that currently states that no Catholic can ever marry the heir to the throne; that Catholics can only marry other members of the royal family with the monarch's consent; and that said royal spouse loses his/her place in the line of succession as soon as the marriage takes place.

Of course the law is unjust, and we all know that. But the Private Member's Bill being put forward by Harris, as presented, does more than change the law about Catholics: It abolishes male primogeniture in the royal line -- which may or may not be a good thing, but has some repercussions worth discussing first. Why should the line of succession be changed in the royal family but not elsewhere? What exactly is wrong with a line of succession going through males? Why, for that matter, do children take their father's name? Should it be made illegal to do so? Why is Harris trying to change things? Is he really so anxious that Princess Anne should draw nearer to the throne? Why, particularly? In what way can this really be seen as urgent?

Harris is the leading promoter of abortion and euthanasia in parliament, nicknamed "Dr. Death" even by his supporters because he is so dedicated to the cause. Why is he suddenly appearing to campaign for something that Catholics do not particularly want or need? None of us lies awake at night worrying that our nieces can't marry Prince William, but we do worry -- a great deal -- about people being deliberately killed in our hospices and hospitals, and about babies being aborted on a massive scale, and scary unethical experiments being carried out on human embryos in laboratories.

I have taken part in radio debates with Harris, and his fanatical opposition to the whole Christian view of human beings and their place in the natural world is, to put it mildly, worrying. Just why he wants to get the law changed relating to the royal family is anyone's guess, but mine would be that he's keen on using up parliamentary time and a private member's privilege that might otherwise have been used to achieve legislation blocking euthanasia or giving a tiny bit of protection to unborn children, or to teenagers currently bombarded with pressure to have abortions and to engage in sordid sexual antics -- and he's simply gleeful at the notion of posing as the hero-spokesman for the Catholic community.

If the situation warranted it -- if, say, HRH Prince William did meet a suitable Catholic girl -- a law could be whisked through Parliament to achieve a marriage without any of Harris's baggage attached. The mood in the country now would emphatically be on William's side: Several Catholics have married into the royal family in recent years, and the absurdity of the law is made more apparent each time. The latest ridiculous nonsense was over Autumn Kelly, who renounced her faith in order that her husband, Peter Philips, could become king -- once eleven of his nearest and dearest had died. (Pure Macbeth! One wonders what plans they have made . . .) Everyone knows the anti-Catholic law is a nonsense.
Poor Harris is a sad case. He really does have a fervent enthusiasm for things that most people recognize to be deeply wrong: aborting babies, healthy or otherwise; ensuring the speedy demise of the gravely and permanently ill or injured; carrying out experiments on human embryos aimed not at the embryos' survival or health but their destruction after use.

There are many injustices against Catholics -- and against other Christians and Jews -- that ought to be amended. Chief among these is the pressure on our schools: The present government is trying to insist that Catholic, Church of England, and Jewish schools be blocked from interviewing parents and choosing pupils who belong to a particular faith and show evidence of seeking schooling within that specific believing community. Instead, the schools must take a certain proportion of children from other beliefs or none -- only the intervention of the Catholic bishops stopped the enforcement of a rigid quota backed by the full penalty of the law -- thus making it difficult for the school to maintain its religious practices and ethos. Where non-believing parents chose to announce that their child was offended, or suffered discrimination, because of the nature of the beliefs being taught or celebrated in the school, there could be penalties for the school concerned.

We'd like something done about this, please, Dr. Harris. We'd like an assurance that when discussing baptism, Mass attendance, and family commitment to Church beliefs and practices, the government gets its sticky hands out of our business. We seek the freedom to live as Catholics and run schools without government interference on the religious side. We don't mind -- indeed, we have helped to frame -- a certain cooperation with public authorities on all sorts of aspects of school life, ranging from ensuring decent lavatories to use of public funds for providing essential structures and staff. But what we really need is simply the right, as British people, to live and pray and teach as Catholics.

And while we're at it, we'd also like a legal assurance that children will not be forced into attending sessions of sexually explicit propaganda masquerading as "sex education," that Catholic agencies working in adoption and foster care won't be forced to send children to homosexual couples, and that there will be freedom to discuss these matters and to preach and teach the fullness of Catholic sexual ethics without falling foul of the law.

The loyalty of Catholics to the crown is deep: It includes not only the genuine affection for the queen that is shared by the nation at large, but also a recognition of the ancient Catholic roots of our royal traditions, which meshes with our understanding of the central importance of family, and with our grasp of the importance of human beings living in a community with neighborly duties and a sense of common purpose. We pray for the queen on important royal occasions; we have her picture hanging in many of our schools; we loved it when she came to Westminster Cathedral. Of course we'd like if it Prince William married some delightful Catholic girl -- prayerful, knowledgeable about her faith, committed to a life of joyful Christian service to the country. And we can see, along with everyone else, the absurdity of a legal ban on such a possibility.

But in the absence of this happening, we aren't too bothered and will live happily with some other suitable bride. Please, Dr. Harris, leave us alone. We'll cope. In the meantime, stop pushing the killing of unborn babies and supporting unjust schemes to meddle in Catholic schools and institutions.


Joanna Bogle is an author and broadcaster living in London.

Sunlit Uplands Declares Itself a "Hate" Website

The following story is a good reflection of how far this nation has strayed from what it was founded to be - a republic of the people, by the people, and for the people, where the Constitution guarantees God-given rights and freedom for all.

We have tragically become a nation where the people are instead the docile workers, supporting an ever larger, more centralized, more powerful, and more arrogant government that serves a small power elite. If criticism of our President and our federal government makes one a "hater," or this a "hate site," then we proudly accept the appellation.

We hate the federal government's arrogance and disregard for the U.S. Constitution. We hate what has become of the U. S. Congress, an overpaid, over-staffed, self-perpetuating institution that appropriates more and more tax dollars for the sake of its own political preservation.

We hate that America's public schools have become instruments of the state, rather than the agents of parents, where values contrary to those of most parents and antithetical to America's Constitution are imposed, and where critical thinking is suppressed.

We agree with Samuel Adams that "While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but once they lose their virtue they will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader." A national government that defends immorality while banishing religious practice and values from our schools and the public square, is a government determined to undermine the moral strength and conviction that flows from those who have well formed consciences and know that truth is objective and real, not relative, and must be proclaimed and defended.

We hate those who would present themselves and their government programs as idols and substitutes for the One True God, the Creator of Heaven and Earth.

We hate a government that defends the deliberate taking of human life and funds abortion and other means of population control here and around the world.

We hate its unconstitutional, undeclared and preemptive wars.

We hate that our national government has suppressed all notion of the United States as a voluntary association of free and independent states, where all but a few, enumerated powers are reserved to the states.

We hate a government that is subservient to major, international corporations, entangling alliances and trade agreements that put ideology and corporate interests above those of American families, small business owners and workers, and have exported American manufacturing and jobs to nations with slave labor wages.

We hate a government intent on imposing socialist principles that are contrary to human nature, natural law, and have always and everywhere failed.

We agree with Thomas Jefferson that "Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God," and that "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

With Jefferson, "I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just."

A story that should concern all liberty loving Americans follows. May it inspire us to restore America's Constitution.

OKC officer pulls man over for anti-Obama sign on vehicle

From The Enid News and Eagle
By Bridget Nash

An Oklahoma City police officer wrongly pulled over a man last week and confiscated an anti-President Barack Obama sign the man had on his vehicle.

The officer misinterpreted the sign as threatening, said Capt. Steve McCool, of the Oklahoma City Police Department, and took the sign, which read “Abort Obama, not the unborn.”

Chip Harrison said he was driving to work when a police car followed him for several miles and then signaled for him to pull over.

“I pulled over, knowing I hadn’t done anything wrong,” Harrison said in a recent phone interview.

When the officer asked Harrison if he knew why he had been pulled over, Harrison said he did not.

“They said, ‘It’s because of the sign in your window,’” Harrison said.

“It’s not meant to be a threat, it’s a statement about abortion,” Harrison said.

He said he disagrees with the president’s position on abortion.

“I asked the officer, ‘Do you know what abort means?’” Harrison said. “He said, ‘Yeah, it means to kill.’ I said, ‘No, it means to remove or terminate.’”

Harrison said his sign was to be interpreted as saying something like: Remove Obama from office, not unborn babies from the womb.

The officers confiscated Harrison’s sign and gave him a slip of paper that stated he was part of an investigation.

Harrison said he later received a call from a person who said he was a lieutenant supervisor for the Internal Investigations Department and wanted to know his location and return his sign to him.

According to Harrison, the supervisor said the Secret Service had been contacted on the matter and had told them the sign was not a threat to the president.

Harrison was asked if he would like to file a complaint. He said he was not sure but would take the paperwork, just in case.

But his run-in with the law wasn’t over yet.

“The Secret Service called and said they were at my house,” Harrison said.

After talking to his attorney, Harrison went home where he met the Secret Service.

“When I was on my way there, the Secret Service called me and said they weren’t going to ransack my house or anything ... they just wanted to (walk through the house) and make sure I wasn’t a part of any hate groups.”

Harrison said he invited the Secret Service agents into the house and they were “very cordial.”

“We walked through the house and my wife and 2-year-old were in the house,” Harrison said.

He said they interviewed him for about 30 minutes and then left, not finding any evidence Harrison was a threat to the president.

“I’m still in contact with a lawyer right now,” Harrison said. “I don’t know what I’m going to do.”

Harrison said he feels his First Amendment rights were violated.

McCool said the officer who pulled over Harrison misinterpreted the sign.

“We had an officer that his interpretation of the sign was different than what was meant,” McCool said. “You’ve got an officer who had a different thought on what the word ‘abort’ meant.”

McCool said the sign basically meant Obama should be impeached and it was not a threat.

“(The officer) shouldn’t have taken the sign,” McCool said. “That was (Harrison’s) First Amendment right to voice his concern.”

McCool said although the sign should not have been confiscated, the situation was made right in the end.

“We always try to do the right thing and in the end we believe we did the right thing by returning the sign,” McCool said.

Enid Police Department Capt. Dean Grassino said such an incident most likely would not have occurred in Enid.

“We wouldn’t pull over anybody for a bumper sticker or a sign like that unless it was a safety issue,” he said.

Grassino said a safety issue would be a sign that obstructs the view of the driver.

“We wouldn’t do it based on the views of the bumper sticker or sign,” Grassino said.

If a sign was undoubtedly a threat to the president, Grassino said it is not within the jurisdiction of the city police to handle that and the FBI or the Secret Service would be called before any action was taken.

Anne Murray - "How Great Thou Art"

In Loving Memory of a Special Friend on Her Birthday.

Abraham Lincoln's America

Lincoln's America Does Not Resemble The Land Washington Birthed

From News With Views

By Chuck Baldwin

America just celebrated Presidents Day this past Monday. What first began as an observance for President George Washington has (since the 1980s) morphed into the generic "Presidents Day," which is a politically correct celebration of mediocrity that forces our nation's greatest President to be lumped together with incompetents such as Ulysses S. Grant, Woodrow Wilson, and Jimmy Carter.

On the occasion of Presidents Day, a USA Today/Gallup poll asked the American people to select the greatest President. The top five Presidents, according to the Gallup poll, are (in order): Ronald Reagan, John Kennedy, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, and George Washington.

Read the rest of this entry >>

UN Says No to Brazilian Homosexual Group; U.S. Says Yes

From OneNewsNow
By Jim Brown

A conservative activist who monitors the United Nations warns that the U.S. State Department is attempting to enable homosexual activists who are "flooding" the international body.

The U.N.'s Economic and Social Council voted 8-6 last week to deny official non-governmental (NGO) status to Brazil's Association of Gays, Lesbians and Transgenders. Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council (FRC) says the Brazilian group supports sex with children and notes the U.S. was one of the six member nations that voted to approve the pedophiles.

Perkins says the State Department's vote in favor of the Brazilian homosexuals is not surprising, given that the same White House has nominated "liberal extremist" David Ogden to the second-highest post in the Justice Department. Ogden's nomination has been opposed by conservative groups like FRC because of his past representation of hard-core porn distributors.

Austin Ruse, president of Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute, says homosexual activists are consistently pressing the U.N. to accept their agenda. "This instance is new, but this kind of story has been going on for years," he contends. "The gay groups, including those who overtly support pedophilia, have been flooding the U.N. with applications for official accreditation."

Ruse says the State Department's support for the Brazilian homosexual group is reflective of a policy begun under former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. "There was a very well-organized group of homosexuals within the State Department who directly petitioned Condoleezza Rice, and the Bush administration toward the end of his second term began voting for these groups," he points out. "And this policy is carried over to the Obama administration."

The effort by homosexual groups to obtain NGO status, according to Ruse, is part of a broader strategy by homosexual activists to "suborn the United Nations and its treaty monitoring system to their will."

Pope Gently Rebukes Pelosi

There is considerable discussion about Church excommunications these days. Many conservatives and orthodox Catholics advocate the excommunication of Catholic legislators who are "personally opposed, but" are willing to permit the slaughter of innocent babies. Frequently, excommunication is portrayed in the secular media as a harsh, un-Christian shunning, causing permanent division, hurt and alienation. It is, in fact, something quite different and in most cases it is a condition that one imposes on oneself.

Among many theological considerations, the Catechism of the Catholic Church calls the Eucharist "the source and summit of the Christian life." Among many attributes, "the Eucharist is the efficacious sign and sublime cause of that communion in the divine life and that unity of the People of God by which the Church is kept in being." Thus, reception of Holy Communion is an affirmation that one is fully united with all that the Church believes and teaches. And unity of belief is essential to the Church's very being. If one does not fully believe those teachings, their reception of Holy Communion is a sham and a lie. This is the reason the Church does not permit inter-communion with other faiths.

When the Church excommunicates a member, it does so to impress upon the individual that their salvation is in jeopardy. The act of excommunication is not meant to be a permanent action. It is an act of charity intended as a sharp warning that one has veered seriously off the path that leads to salvation. It is always hoped that the one excommunicated will recognize their error and return. The path to return is as simple as a sincere, heartfelt confession, the Sacrament of Reconciliation, which is always available from any priest.

As a good and loving shepherd, Pope Benedict XVI gently informed Speaker Nancy Pelosi today that her pontifications on Sunday news shows, suggesting that the Church has been ambivalent on questions of life and death, are just plain wrong. She has been clearly told by the highest authority in the Church of which she claims to be an "ardent" member, that she has a responsibility to protect human life at all stages of its development.

Having been clearly warned by the Vicar of Christ, if she persists in her support of the culture of death, she will be excommunicated by her own action, if not officially by the Church itself.

Saint Thomas More, patron saint of statesmen, politicians and lawyers wrote:

“Because the soul has such deep roots in personal and social life and its values run so contrary to modern concerns, caring for the soul may well turn out to be a radical act, a challenge to accepted norms.”

Mrs. Pelosi has the opportunity to be truly radical, counter-cultural, and to save her own soul in the process. The choice is hers.

The Holy See Press Office released the following communique at midday today:

"Following the general audience the Holy Father briefly greeted Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, together with her entourage.

"His Holiness took the opportunity to speak of the requirements of the natural moral law and the Church's consistent teaching on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death which enjoin all Catholics, and especially legislators, jurists and those responsible for the common good of society, to work in co-operation with all men and women of good will in creating a just system of laws capable of protecting human life at all stages of its development".

Rahm's Rent is Just Tip of Ethics Iceberg

From The New York Post
By Dick Morris and Eileen McGann

NEWS broke last week that Rahm Emanuel, now White House chief of staff, lived rent- free for years in the home of Rep. Rosa De Lauro (D-Conn.) - and failed to disclose the gift, as congressional ethics rules mandate. But this is only the tip of Emanuel's previously undislosed ethics problems.

Read the rest of this entry >>

We've Been Unfair to New York and Massachusetts

In our utter contempt for South Carolina's pusillanimous senior Senator, Sunlit Uplands has frequently accused Lindsey Graham of being the third Senator from Massachusetts or New York. We owe those states an apology. As the following video makes clear, New York's liberal senior Senator, Charles Schumer, has expressed opinions about the nationalization of banks that accord with conservative, South Carolina views, while our own Marxist Obamabot has given it a limp-wristed thumbs up.

Geert Wilders' Party Explodes after Expulsion

From CBN News
By Dale Hurd

THE HAGUE, Netherlands - Critics say the freedom to criticize Islam in Europe has been put in jeopardy after Dutch politician Geert Wilders was banned last week from entering Britain because of his attacks on Islam.

But while the controversial politician may have failed to enter the United Kingdom, the Dutch public has rallied around Wilders, and support for his party has exploded.

His party, the Party for Freedom, is now the second largest party in the Netherlands, based on recent polling. It's a stunning political development.

Wilders, like him or not, has a two fold mission. One is to sound the alarm bells about the spread of Islam in Europe, and the other is to show how far he thinks western governments have gone in appeasing radical Islam.

Hurd: Why do you think support for your party has surged?

Wilders: Common people in many cities in the Netherlands, in Amsterdam and Rotterdam and there are many smaller cities and villages, see that their country is changing, see that the influence of Islam and Islamization is growing, and they don't like that.

They are not xenophobes. They are not racist. They do not hate Muslims. But they feel that their own culture, based on Christianity, Judaism, and humanism is something to fight for.

Hurd: What does your not being allowed in the United Kingdom prove, if anything?

Wilders: It proves that the influence of Islam in Western European countries is huge.

Wilders still faces trial in the Netherlands for hate speech. But his political stock continues to grow.

The speech that Britain's Labour Party would not permit to be heard.

Founding Fathers Foresaw Threats of Tyranny

How Children are Sexually Corrupted in Public Schools

From News With Views
By Joel Turtel

One of parents’ most important duties is to protect their children from harmful sexual values and behaviors. Yet many public schools force potentially harmful, sometimes shockingly explicit sex education on their students. Most of the time, parents have no control over the content of these classes. Occasionally, a group of parents finds out about a particularly obnoxious sex education class and protests to the principal or local school board. The class may be dropped, only to be replaced by another class that teaches equally objectionable material, again without parent’s consent. School authorities’ attitude towards parents on this issue shows their anti-parent bias, and their contempt for parent’s rights to control the values their children are taught.

Many school authorities insist that children need comprehensive sex education from kindergarten through high school. They believe parents can't be trusted because they have shameful feelings about sex or have “outdated” moral or sexual values. School authorities, claiming that they know best regarding sex education, usurp parents’ role, allegedly for the “good of the children.” In doing so, they show contempt for parents’ rights, values, and common sense.

Read the rest of this entry >>

The Choir of Clare College -- "Te Deum" -- By Henry Purcell

Te Deum, also sometimes called the Ambrosian Hymn because of its association with St. Ambrose, is a traditional hymn of joy and thanksgiving. First attributed to Sts. Ambrose, Augustine, or Hilary, it is now accredited to Nicetas, Bishop of Remesiana (4th century). It is used at the conclusion of the Office of the Readings for the Liturgy of the Hours on Sundays outside Lent, daily during the Octaves of Christmas and Easter, and on Solemnities and Feast Days.

English translation of

Te Deum


We praise Thee, O God: we acknowledge Thee to be the Lord.
All the earth doth worship Thee and the Father everlasting.
To Thee all Angels:
to Thee the heavens and all the Powers therein.
To Thee the Cherubim and Seraphim cry with unceasing voice:
Holy, Holy, Holy: Lord God of Hosts.
The heavens and the earth are full of the majesty of Thy glory.
Thee the glorious choir of the Apostles.
Thee the admirable company of the Prophets.
Thee the white-robed army of Martyrs praise.
Thee the Holy Church throughout all the world doth acknowledge.
The Father of infinite Majesty.
Thine adorable, true and only Son
Also the Holy Ghost the Paraclete.
Thou art the King of Glory, O Christ.
Thou art the everlasting Son of the Father.
Thou having taken upon Thee to deliver man
didst not abhor the Virgin's womb.
Thou having overcome the sting of death
didst open to believers the kingdom of heaven.
Thou sittest at the right hand of God
in the glory of the Father.
We believe that Thou shalt come to be our Judge.
We beseech Thee, therefore, help Thy servants:
whom Thou has redeemed with Thy precious Blood.
Make them to be numbered with Thy Saints in glory everlasting.
Lord, save Thy people:
and bless Thine inheritance.
Govern them and lift them up forever.
Day by day we bless Thee.
And we praise Thy name forever:
and world without end.
Vouchsafe, O Lord, this day to keep us without sin.
Have mercy on us, O Lord: have mercy on us.
Let Thy mercy, O Lord, be upon us:
as we have hoped in Thee.
O Lord, in Thee have I hoped:
let me never be confounded.

Founder of 'Positive' Muslim TV Channel Charged with Beheading Wife

From The Telegraph
By Damian Thompson

No, I didn't make up that headline. It's from an item posted to Kathy Shaidle's genius Five Feet of Fury blog. The Buffalo News carries the story:

Orchard Park police are investigating a particularly gruesome killing, the beheading of a woman, after her husband — an influential member of the local Muslim community — reported her death to police Thursday.

Police identified the victim as Aasiya Z. Hassan, 37. Detectives have charged her husband, Muzzammil Hassan, 44, with second-degree murder.

Authorities say Aasiya Hassan recently had filed for divorce from her husband.

"She had an order of protection that had him out of the home as of Friday the 6th [of February]," Benz said.

And then that fascinating detail:

Muzzammil Hassan is the founder and chief executive officer of Bridges TV, which he launched in 2004, amid hopes that it would help portray Muslims in a more positive light.

Still some way to go, methinks.

The Islamization of Britain Continues.......

Queen Boadicea, the Ancient British Queen

On the heels of Dutch Parliamentarian Geert Wilders' deportation from Britain, we wonder if a militant atheist, or anti-Christian zealot would have met the same fate in that once Christian nation. Geert Wilders was responding to an invitation to show a well documented film that exposes the clear teachings of the Koran. That his message could not even be heard in the Palace of Westminster is a measure of how advanced the nation's dhimmitude is, even in the Mother of Parliaments.

The British national security service, MI5, has identified over 2,000 Islamists posing a national security threat. Has anything been done to deport a single one of them? The silencing of Geert Wilders in a nation that once championed freedom of speech will accelerate the colonization of that nation by barbarians who will overturn the progress of a millenium toward freedom and human rights and return her, in the words of Tennyson, "to the slave, the scourge, the chain."

Walter Bagehot said that "England invented the phrase 'Her Majesty's Opposition'; that it was the first government which made a criticism of administration as much a part of the polity as administration itself." Has that been lost? Are the political elites simply facilitating the handover of their people to the colonizers? Where is the Boadicea who will finally say "enough!"?

Dutch MP Geert Wilders Deported after Flying to Britain to Show Anti-Islamic Film

A controversial Dutch politician has been sent back to Holland after trying to enter Britain to show his anti-Muslim film in the House of Lords.

From The Telegraph
By Christopher Hope, John Bingham and Bruno Waterfield

Geert Wilders had been invited to Westminster to show his 17-minute film Fitna, which criticises the Koran as a "fascist book", by a member of the House of Lords.

But on Tuesday Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary refused Mr Wilders entry because his opinions "would threaten community security and therefore public security" in the UK.

Mr Wilders went ahead with his trip anyway, and flew from Amsterdam to London on a British Midland flight.

When he arrived at Heathrow airport he was met by two plain clothed officers from the UK Border Agency.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Judd Gregg Withdraws as Commerce Nominee

"Obviously the president requires a team that is fully supportive of all his initiatives. It has become apparent during this process that this will not work for me as I have found that on issues such as the stimulus package and the Census there are irresolvable conflicts for me."

From The Washington Times

By Christina Bellantoni

Sen. Judd Gregg is withdrawing his nomination to be secretary of commerce, the fourth of President Obama's nominees to pull their names from consideration and a major blow for Mr. Obama's efforts to have a bipartisan administration.

Read the rest of this entry >>

School Choice? Yes: New Studies Show All Students’ Scores Rise

From The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

By David Pusey

For cynics who do not believe school vouchers help students who remain in public schools or those who transfer to another public or private school of their choice, solid new evidence is emerging that will make believers out of the biggest skeptics.

Two new studies find school choice is indeed a tide that lifts all boats in educating all students. Just as Milton Friedman, the Nobel Prize winner and founder of the modern school choice movement, suggested 50 years ago, evidence now shows that competition helps all students, even those who remain in public schools.

A July 2008 study by David Card of the University of California-Berkley shows that competition in Ontario, Canada, led to higher achievement for all students. Pupils in Ontario may attend a public school or a Catholic school. The taxpayer-funded voucher is equivalent no matter whether a parent chooses a public or private school. Card and his research colleagues found that students who stayed in their assigned public schools performed better on standardized exams of reading, writing, and math under this school choice model. The positive effects on student achievement were largest where there was more choice. Since choice is restricted to public schools or Catholic schools in Ontario, one wonders if student achievement would increase even more significantly if options were made available beyond Catholic schools.

A second 2008 study, this one by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, analyzed two phases of the Milwaukee voucher program and showed student achievement increased with the availability of school choice.

When the Milwaukee program was initially launched between 1990 and 1996, there were never more than 1,500 students using a voucher. That’s because the state forbade children from using the scholarship to attend a religious school, and the voucher amount was very small.

After Wisconsin court rulings declaring vouchers constitutional, changes were made to the program. Milwaukee pupils were then allotted a $4,900 voucher and could apply that to a secular or religious school of their parents’ choice. That enabled more families to participate in the program.

The New York Fed study found no effects of vouchers — positive or negative — on any students when the Milwaukee voucher program did not provide much competition or choice. However, once students were given larger voucher amounts, once students could choose from a variety of schools, and once public schools actually faced competition, then students using the vouchers and students who remained in public school both earned higher test scores. This study confirms a 2003 study on this topic by Stanford University economist Caroline Hoxby.

These new studies show that if you care about the students who remain in public schools, then more choice and more competition are what will improve their academic outcomes.

The point of these research papers is clear. If we are to be successful with vouchers in Georgia, we must not create a half-hearted program. Specifically, the data show that true competition will compel all schools to improve. A successful program would provide a substantial scholarship and have few restrictions where parents could use the voucher.

Some opinion writers and defenders of the status quo cite no academic benefits of school choice plans. However, a careful read of the evidence shows that while limited choice and limited competition may have no benefits, more competition does lead to academic gains for all students. It is telling that detractors of choice cannot find a single study that finds school choice harms a single student.

All Georgia public school students would benefit from students who use a voucher to attend a private school. The threat of losing customers — students and their parents — would motivate public schools to take better care of their remaining patrons.

David Pusey is an education specialist with the Center for an Educated Georgia.

Peace, Love, and Harsh Reality Has His Priorities Straight

We've known that Sunlit Uplands readers are passionate about truth, and we knew when we read this post by a Brother Knight and fellow blogger that they also have their daily priorities straight too.

I'm afraid, however, that at 5:36 AM you won't find us doing much posting here, with or without the coffee.

Bailing Out Statism

From The Freeman
By Sheldon Richman

The key to understanding the saga of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—the recently nationalized twin government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) that dominate home financing—is this: They were set up—intentionally—to distort the housing and mortgage markets. Government planners were not content to let voluntary exchange and spontaneous market forces configure those industries unmolested. So—holding the taxpayers hostage—they intervened.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Lincoln: Two Virginians, Two Views

From The Daily News Record

Forget the "Glorious Cause" Myth
By George Wead

After 1865, influential Southerners constructed myths of noble Confederate warriors who fought to maintain their courtly traditions.

This helped Southern whites deal with their defeat and impoverishment in a war they had been sure they were going to win. Southern historians gave the cause a professional gloss, and the myth was encapsulated in D.W. Griffith's movie "The Birth of a Nation" (1915), which now looks ridiculous.

The basic premises of the Lost Cause are: (1) Southern independence, not slavery, prompted the war; (2) we were betrayed by Lincoln, who wrote his Emancipation Proclamation to win an election; and (3) we were beaten down by the overwhelming numbers of Grant and Sherman, who burned and raped our homeland.

Ritchie and Price make these arguments because, like me, they were raised on them. And they’re right: it’s time we all did more reading. Try "This Mighty Scourge" by James McPherson, a Pulitzer-prized historian who brings a terrible weapon to bear on the myth of the Lost Cause: facts.

The existence of slavery was not an issue of the war; expanding slave territory was. If Lincoln could have stopped war by letting slavery remain as it was, he would have. But that wasn’t enough. Alexander Stephens, the Confederate vice-president, echoed other Southern leaders when he said that "slavery, subordination to the superior race, is (the negro’s) natural and normal condition," and the South wanted that "moral truth" expanded into new territories. Lincoln wrestled with the political wisdom of emancipation until inspired by the Union’s victory at Antietam.

The war started at Fort Sumter, as we’re aware. But we may not know that when Lincoln advised Jefferson Davis he was sending an unarmed fleet with supplies for the besieged fort, Davis ordered the Confederates to open fire before the fleet arrived. Thus, Southern arrogance started the war and cost us mightily. It was Lee’s army, not Grant’s or Sherman’s, that had the highest casualty rates.

In "The Hard Hand of War," Mark Grimsley's careful research makes it clear that the killing or rape of white civilians in the South by Union soldiers was extremely rare. Of course, Sherman burned crops and houses. He was trying to win a war that the South had started.

We should lay aside desperate beliefs and consider the results of cooler research. Unfortunately, some research suggests that this isn’t our way. American psychologist James Garabino proposed to a conference in England this month that Southern culture has been influenced by a large population of Scots who are quick to bear long grudges.

In 1861 Scots were more than half our population. Garabino’s theory, which is contested, of course, would explain why to this day we keep rising up in bitter anger over the Civil War.

Maybe it’s time to let up. Admit it. We lost. Accept the fact as our forefathers accepted the horses Grant let them keep after Appomattox.

The Yankees whipped us fair and square. The Union won. Time to go home. Be Americans.

George Wead is a resident of Bridgewater, Virginia.

Lincoln Was No Friend Of Freedom

By Rex Miller

I HAVE BEEN remiss in responding your recent article about the forthcoming Lincoln celebrations (“A Southerner Looks At Lincoln,” Jan. 21) Inasmuch as I am a productive taxpayer engaged in the daily duties of stewardship toward my family and business.

I do not count one of my functions as fact checker for the Daily News-Record. Additionally, my lot as a revenue producer for the Commonwealth and federal government allows me little time for other activities. Please forgive me.

The aforementioned is indeed filled with factual error and common propaganda. If Phil Stone is a Southerner, he is genuinely reconstructed, which is the purpose of this missive. You see, even a rudimentary investigation of history reveals the piece inaccurate in every way.

First, even a cursory investigation reveals that Mr. Lincoln was most probably the progeny of Abraham Enloe of western North Carolina. Abraham Enloe’s legitimate son Wesley and Mr. Lincoln bear such similar paternal resemblance as to be almost twins. Is it not often affirmed that the fruit seldom falls far from the tree? Civilized students do not fear where the facts lead.

Additionally, in mouthing Mr. Stone’s hagiographic views of Mr. Lincoln, the DN-R does a great disservice to the citizens of this Commonwealth. Virginia was the first Western Christian nation established upon this continent and created the first elected representative legislature. The collective wisdom of Virginia’s leading citizens created our Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution, as well as the Bill of Rights. Virginia is the mother of presidents and statesmen.

Additionally, lands west to the Mississippi and north to include Michigan and Wisconsin were unselfish gifts to the central government, hard won in the French and Indian War by Virginians. Virginians have a rich heritage of virtue, which includes diligence toward duty and honesty toward heritage. Virginia did not wish to secede until she was requested to furnish troops to violate her Southern sisters.

Mr. Stone opined that “Lincoln should be admired and respected…” I should hope not! Every contended evil of modern culture may be traced to his administration as the following quotes reveal.

It was stated he was the emancipator of the slaves. Historical fact reveals that his Emancipation Proclamation did not free a single slave, just as King George’s proclamation failed decades earlier during our first secession from Great Britain.

If the federal army invading sovereign states was about freeing slaves, why did its most acclaimed commander, Ulysses S. Grant, possess slaves in his Washington household until December 1866? It is quoted that he saved the Union. My inquiry is, was it the union as formed by our founders? Of course not! He saved a Hamiltonian consolidated union of servile political districts.

The sovereign states of the Confederacy were no threat to their northern brethren. The Declaration of Independence clearly encourages and proclaims a people’s right to a government of their choosing.

It was further quoted that Lincoln was the protector of core values “and as a model for the office of the presidency.” I must admit that this is finally a truthful statement. Because his wife, law partner and secretary affirm that he was never a Christian and because he and his Cabinet ushered into Washington the procedure and system of political plunder and demagoguery, he does correctly fit the modern presidency.

The burial of our Constitutional Republic in 1865 does not grant my permission for the publication of shoddy, plagiarized history. I value my Commonwealth and its historic reputation too much to allow such maleducated statements to go unchallenged.

I am neither a government-paid academic or government-schooled journalist, but I do possess common sense and the rare ability to read. I sincerely implore Mr. Stone to avail himself of both, as in spite of the organs of government propaganda, the truth is available.

I am shocked and chagrined that the president of a presumably Christian university would parrot the transcendental humanist views of Jacobin revolutionists.

Should Mr. Stone wish to refute my remarks I encourage him to contact me at his earliest convenience so we might share mutually beneficial information.

Mr. Miller lives in Timberville, Virginia.

NY Parents Grilled in 'Religious Sincerity Test'

A family in New York is fighting for the rights of parents to opt their children out of vaccines.

From OneNewsNow

Ron and Rita Palma of Bayport, New York, have been fighting for the right to opt their children out of the vaccines that public schools require children have before attending school. Parents are allowed to opt out of the medical requirement if they cite objections on religious grounds. The Palmas did so, citing their Catholic faith as a reason, but they were met with resistance from the Bayport-Blue Point Union Free School District. Rita Palma explains.

"I handed in my letter, handed in my application, and they called me in and insisted that I come in for a face-to-face interview," she shares. "Now I know other people in the community who have gone through this, so I talked to some lawyers. I knew that they [school officials] were within their legal boundaries, and I really didn't think that it was going to be all that much of a problem. You know, my feelings were true, my beliefs fit squarely with the law -- so I complied."

But Palma says she and her husband were grilled for two hours by the school's attorney, David Cohen. She refers to the session as a "sincerity interview." Following is an excerpt from that meeting:

Cohen: "If you believe God is on your side, does that mean he's not on the side or can he be on the side of somebody who believes in immunization?"

Rita: "Mr. Cohen, I wouldn't know. I know my deepest, most spiritual beliefs. I don't know the belief system of others and..."

Ron: "And nor do we control God."

Rita: "Yeah."

Cohen: "Okay."

Rita: "I wouldn't know."

Rita says the attorney concluded that her beliefs were not "sincere" enough and decided to deny her vaccine waiver. She is now taking her fight to the New York State Capitol.

Videos of the Palmas' session with Cohen are available on YouTube (Part 1 / Part 2 / Part 3) (view all three parts).

Intimidation

In an interview with OneNewsNow, Rita Palma claims David Cohen, the school's attorney, tried to intimidate her in the questioning process.

"He has been named in enough publications where I'm sure he has experienced some pressure -- and some not-so-nice pressure -- from other sources criticizing his actions," she says. "My assemblywomen actually wrote a letter to my school district...criticizing their actions."

Rita is currently working with state lawmakers to pass New York Bill A00883, which would amend existing law to ban so-called "religious sincerity tests."

"Rather than appeal this decision, the route that I chose to take is to change the law," says Rita. "[I hope] to really compel school districts to accept the [opt-out] letter at face value, and make it illegal for school districts to close the door and ask you what your belief system is all about."

Rita is also working to help pass New York Bill A00880, a bill that would make medical waivers accepted at face value. According to Rita, she handed the school a medical waiver from her doctor that would exempt her son from vaccines, but the school rejected that as well.

OneNewsNow asked Rita if she had considered private school or home school. She replied that her children really like their current teachers, and apart from the vaccine issue they have no complaints. Rita also explains that private school would put undue financial pressure on the family; but if they do decide to switch schools, she wants the choice to be hers -- and not something the public school forces them to do because of the vaccine issue.

Rita operates the website MyKidsMyChoice.com, which assists parents who also wish to opt out of childhood vaccines.

Lincolnism Today: The Long Marriage of Centralized Power and Concentrated Wealth

From Chronicles
By Daniel Larison

In the Anglo-American experience, the partisans of concentrated wealth and advocates for political centralization have long been connected. Over the last three centuries, that connection has grown stronger, and in the United States this process accelerated dramatically during and after the Lincoln administration. Lincolnism, the idea that the central state can and should use its coercive apparatus to serve the narrow interests of an economic elite at the expense of the commonwealth, prevailed decisively in the War of Secession and during the decades that followed, with high tariffs, railroad subsidies, and the apportionment of public lands. Times have changed and so, too, have the specific policies that Lincolnists champion. But their basic goal remains the same, and the interests being served by Lincolnism over the years are remarkably similar in kind to those championed by Lincoln himself. In the end, Lincolnism is essentially a form of state capitalism, which Clyde Wilson has defined as “a regime of highly concentrated private ownership, subsidized and protected by government.”

Read the rest of this entry >>

Obama Throws Biden Under the Bus

From The Telegraph
By Toby Harnden, US Editor

Pity poor Joe Biden. His "there's still a 30 percent chance we're going to get it wrong" quote is put straight to President Barack Obama during the White House press conference just now and his boss seemed to want to say: "Vice-President Who?"

As reporters started giggling, Obama came close to conceding that Biden was indeed a joke. "You know, I don't remember exactly what Joe was referring to, not surprisingly."

The President went on to say that "I think what Joe may have been suggesting, although I wouldn't ascribe any numerical percentage to any of this, is that given the magnitude of the challenges that we have, any single thing that we do is going to be part of the solution, not all of the solution."

Of course, Biden wasn't saying anything of the sort - Obama knew that and all the rest of us did too.

Biden's exact quote, read out by Fox's Major Garrett at the presser was: "If we do everything right, if we do it with absolute certainty, if we stand up there and we really make the tough decisions, there's still a 30 percent chance we're going to get it wrong."

Clearly, Obama and his aides were unhappy about Biden's loose lips. On Friday, top Obama adviser David Axelrod said on CNN: "I don't know exactly about what that math was."

We're probably going to have to get used to Obama explaining "what Joe may have been suggesting". And Biden must be wondering if he's going to end up as a Dan Quayle figure.

The Decline of the English-Speaking World

From The Brussels Journal

By Fjordman

I will defend all Western countries but I feel especially close to Britain, which makes it all the more sad to see how humiliated this once-great nation currently is. The English language once conquered the world. Now the rest of the world is conquering the English-speaking countries. If current trends continue, people in Singapore will know English while the nation that created the English language will cease to exist.

At the same time as sharia law has gained official recognition as a part of the British legal system and Muslims proudly talk about conquering the Western world, a British woman was arrested because of a supposedly "racist" doll she kept in her window. In al-Britannia a Muslim man can claim benefits for children with multiple wives and brag about subduing the country and reducing its traditional inhabitants to second-rate citizens or worse, but you cannot have a "racially insensitive" doll in your own home, at least not if you're white.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Child Porn Pandemic as Police Estimate 600,000 Americans, 65,000 Canadians Trading Child Porn Online

From LifeSiteNews
By Kathleen Gilbert

Ontario police yesterday celebrated the results of a province-wide child pornography bust, the largest in Ontario's history - yet officers acknowledge they have only scratched the surface of the massive underworld of child sexual abuse in North America.

Police officers said at a press conference Thursday that the sweep led to the arrest of 31 child sex offenders between the age of 14 and 60, as well as the rescue of two young victims, a 4-year-old boy and 12-year-old girl. The maximum jail time for creating and distributing child pornography is ten years, with five years for possessing images.

But the "huge" bust has hardly put a dent in the actual child pornographer population - which officials estimate at a staggering 600,000 in the U.S., and 65,000 in Canada. The profits for creating and trading images of often-violent sexual abuse of children, toddlers, and infants amount to an estimated $2- to $3-billion each year.

The child pornography unit of the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) believes the 65,000 figure is very low, as 40,000 computers in Ontario alone are known to be used to access child porn.

“The OPP is arresting about 75 of these offenders a year, when we know there are tens of thousands of them,” said Inspector Andy Stewart in a Canadian press report, also calling the 65,000 estimate "very conservative."

“We’re never going to be in a position to arrest our way out of this," he said.

“There’s just not enough manpower to go and identify and arrest these 65,000 individuals,” said Paul Gillespie, former head of Toronto police's child exploitation unit, now president and CEO of the Kids’ Internet Safety Alliance. “That’s where it gets scary and people sort of change the channel, because they don’t want to hear that the police know there’s 65,000 suspects they’re never going to get to.”

The number is even more alarming when considering how many children, toddlers and infants are put in danger by the spread of child pornography addiction. According to information released at the press conference, studies indicate that those who engage in actual child abuse - somewhere between 30-80% of those possessing abusive images - have anywhere from 13 to 30 child victims each.

Inspector Dave Ross, Deputy Director of the OPP Corporate Communications Bureau, told LifeSiteNews.com (LSN) that, while the public is alerted when a child abuser has been arrested, there is no such alert after they are released from jail.

Thorough investigation of the sex offenders proves difficult, not only for lack of manpower, but due to the sheer perversion of the images officers must sift through to track down offenders and identify enslaved children. The evidence trail is so revolting that investigators go to yearly counseling, said Det. Staff-Sgt. Frank Goldschmidt of the OPP.

Dr. Judith Reisman, an internationally-recognized author, scientist, and educator specializing in sexual perversion, says the growing appetite for child pornography corresponds to the "pornographic, erototoxic epidemic.”

"It’s called in science 'social contagion' or 'emotional contagion,'" Reisman told LifeSiteNews.com. "Historically it is known as ‘monkey see monkey do.’ Pornography wires viewers brains to lust after rape of women and children, globally breeding nations of child rapists, serial rapist murderers and the like among men, women and even children.

Reisman said pornography "mutilates the human brain" and creates offenders, rather than simply pandering to an existing pathology. "Erototoxins turn what could have been normal, decent humans into vile and deformed molesters," she said. "Our brains and our behavior are shaped by our environment.

"Some people will withstand pornographic conditioning due to their genetic inheritance (perhaps) but more likely due to strong moral absolutes. However, even those moral absolutes can be exploited and violated by exposure to these erototoxins we call pornography."

Reisman said that someone who sees no connection between "legal" porn and the child porn pandemic is "in denial."

"Literature, music, art, cross cultural history and current brain science all coalesce to confirm the addictive, destructive process of all 'sexually provocative' visual stimuli," said Reisman. "All porn are Erototoxic because the brain converts sexual images into an endogenous drug ‘high’ via the reward system, pouring a supranormal drug cocktail similar to cocaine throughout the brain/body.

"The withdrawal state following use will be the same as withdrawal from a street drug, calling the user back to the source of image-arousal. Like alcoholics, any cue that is associated with their lust (here booze) will drive the addict, the user, back to his or her source."

See related LifeSiteNews.com articles:

Road to Perversion Is Paved With Porn
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/apr/060412a.html

Child Porn Among Fastest Growing Internet Businesses
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/nov/05110905.html

Climate Change Indoctrination Takes a Mental Toll

We don't share the assumptions in this article that man-made global warming will precipitate global catastrophe. However, millions of students around the world are being brainwashed and traumatized by politicians and ideologues in government schools.

Climate Change Takes a Mental Toll

From The Boston Globe
By Emily Anthes

Last year, an anxious, depressed 17-year-old boy was admitted to the psychiatric unit at the Royal Children's Hospital in Melbourne. He was refusing to drink water. Worried about drought related to climate change, the young man was convinced that if he drank, millions of people would die. The Australian doctors wrote the case up as the first known instance of "climate change delusion."

Robert Salo, the psychiatrist who runs the inpatient unit where the boy was treated, has now seen several more patients with psychosis or anxiety disorders focused on climate change, as well as children who are having nightmares about global-warming-related natural disasters.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Melanie Phillips: "America -- What Have You Done?!"

One of our favorite commentators here at Sunlit Uplands is British columnist and author, Melanie Phillips. The author of Londonistan and other very worthwhile books, she speaks the truth clearly and with no-holds-barred.

In her latest column, "America -- What Have You Done?!," she sums up Obama's first two weeks and the "tax cheats, pork-barrel politics, ancillary child abuse, incompetence, chaos, treachery and infantilism" that are the hallmarks of Obamanation. Being American, however, we take a slightly brighter view, in that we believe that the corruption, incompetence and chaos will undermine the truly evil Marxist intent of this administration, while forging a new conservative resistance.

In these dark days, it is helpful to remember "that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose." (Romans 8:28).

America -- What Have You Done?!

President Obama has had, by general consent, a torrid First Fortnight. To put it another way, it has taken precisely two weeks for the illusion that brought him to power to be exposed for the nonsense that it so obviously was. The transformational candidate who was going to sweep away pork-barrel politics, lobbyists and corruption has been up to his neck in sleaze, as eviscerated here by Charles Krauthammer. Despite the fact that he came to power promising to ‘ban all earmarks’, his ‘stimulus’ bill represents billions of dollars of special-interest tax breaks, giveaways and protections -- which have nothing to do with kick-starting the economy and everything to do with favouring pet Democrat causes.

He has been appointing one tax dodger, lobbyist and wheeler-dealer after another. After appointing one official,Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who had unaccountably forgotten to pay his taxes, he then watched his designated Health Secretary Tom Daschle fall on his sword because he too had taken a tax holiday. Daschle was furthermore a prominent actor in the world of lobbying and influence-peddling. Leon Panetta, Obama’s nominee for Director of the CIA has also, according to the Wall Street Journal, consulted for prominent companies and sat on the board of a public affairs firm that lobbies Congress. The Weekly Standard reports that Secretary of Labour nominee Hilda Solis was not only involved with a private organization lobbying her fellow legislators on a bill that she helped sponsor, but she apparently kept her involvement secret and failed to reveal a clear conflict of interest.

In foreign policy, Obama has started by trashing his own country through grossly misrepresenting its history and grovelling to America’s enemies such as Iran, which has flicked him aside with undiluted contempt. He has gratuitously upset America’s ally India by suggesting that America should muscle in and resolve the Kashmir question.

His right hand doesn’t seem to know what his left hand is doing. He reportedly asked retired Marine General Anthony Zinni to be US ambassador to Iraq, but then abruptly withdrew the appointment without explanation after it had been confirmed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. And the precise role he is offering Dennis Ross – special envoy to Iran? Special adviser to Hillary? Special adviser to other special advisers? – remains mired in confusion.

I have argued before however that, given Obama’s radical roots in the neo-Marxist, nihilist politics of Saul Alinsky, it is the undermining of America’s fundamental values that is likely to be this President’s most strategically important goal. I have also suggested that, since this agenda is promoted through stealth politics which gull the credulous middle-classes while destroying the ground upon which they are standing, his second-tier appointments should be closely scrutinised.

And here’s a humdinger. Obama has picked a man called David Ogden to be deputy Attorney-General. Ogden has made his legal career from representing pornographers, trying to defeat child protection legislation and undermining family values. As FoxNews reported this week, he once represented a group of library directors arguing against the Children's Internet Protection Act, which ordered libraries and schools receiving funding for the Internet to restrict access to obscene sites. And on behalf of several media groups, he successfully argued against a child pornography law that required publishers to verify and document the age of their models, which would have ensured these models were at least 18.

The Family Research Council has more examples of his contribution to upholding American and western values. In one such case, he expressed the view that abortion was less damaging to a woman than having children:

In sum, it is grossly misleading to tell a woman that abortion imposes possible detrimental psychological effects when the risks are negligible in most cases, when the evidence shows that she is more likely to experience feelings of relief and happiness, and when child-birth and child-rearing or adoption may pose concomitant (if not greater) risks or adverse psychological effects ...

In another, co-authored brief, he argued that it was an unconstitutional burden on 14-year old girls seeking an abortion for their parents to be notified -- because there was no difference between adults and mid-teens in their ability to grasp all the implications of such a decision:

There is no question that the right to secure an abortion is fundamental. By any objective standard, therefore, the decision to abort is one that a reasonable person, including a reasonable adolescent, could make. [E]mpirical studies have found few differences between minors aged 14-18 and adults in their understanding of information and their ability to think of options and consequences when asked to consider treatment-related decisions. These unvarying and highly significant findings indicate that with respect to the capacity to understand and reason logically, there is no qualitative or quantitative difference between minors in mid-adolescence, i.e., about 14-15 years of age, and adults.

And how did the 44^th President react to the growing public dismay over the mess he was making? He threw his toys out of the pram -- or perhaps that should read, he got into the pram. For he fled the scene of the disaster and sought the company of seven year-olds instead. As the Telegraph reported:

‘We were just tired of being in the White House,’ he told a group of excited seven-year-olds before discussing Batman and reading them a book.

Tired of being President – after two weeks!

Tax cheats, pork-barrel politics, ancillary child abuse, incompetence, chaos, treachery and infantilism. America – what have you done?!

Pope Reaching Out to Traditional Catholics

From the National Post (Canada)
By Charles Lewis

Pope Benedict's decision to bring back to the fold four bishops from a schismatic religious order was an attempt to reach out to a growing element of the Church that longs for a more traditional practice of Catholicism, especially in the heart of worship -- the Mass, writes Charles Lewis.

In the storm following the Pope's decision to lift the excommunication of four bishops -- triggered by the revelation that Richard Williamson, one of the bishops from the Society of St. Pius X, was a Holocaust denier and 9/11 conspiracy theorist -- a profound message about the future of Catholicism was obscured.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Kansas Governor Sebelius Considered for HHS

Radical Pro-Abort on Short List

By Jennifer Loven

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius was very near the top of President Barack Obama's list of candidates to head the Health and Human Services Department, a senior administration official said Saturday.

The source, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss private administration deliberations, said no decision was imminent. But the official said the former Kansas.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Bill Gaither - "Let There Be Peace On Earth"

(For high quality video, click arrow at bottom right after video begins and select "HQ".)

“Good Saint Anne” Visits New York

From Tradition, Family and Property
By John Horvat II

Unheralded and unexpected, Bishop Marquis arrived at the rectory of Saint Jean Baptiste in New York City on a Sunday morning, May 1, 1892. Traveling from Rome to Quebec, he had stopped in New York to rest before continuing his trip.

No sooner did Fr. Frederick Tetreau and his assistants learn of the prelate's mission—he was the bearer of a relic of Saint Anne, solicited from His Holiness Pope Leo XIII by the Cardinal-Archbishop of Quebec—than they begged him to allow this sacred treasure to be exposed for the veneration of the faithful during the evening's Vespers service. Since the bishop was not scheduled to leave for Quebec until the next day, he consented and the reliquary was taken to the church.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Europe's War On Free Speech

From The Brussels Journal
By Soeren Kern

The Amsterdam Court of Appeals has ordered the criminal prosecution of a Dutch Member of Parliament for criticizing Islam. The court’s ruling overturns a previous decision by Dutch public prosecutors, who had determined that there was not enough evidence to charge Geert Wilders, leader of the conservative Freedom Party, for hate crimes after he produced a hard-hitting film that says Islam promotes violence. In a written judgment, the appeals court said that “by attacking the symbols of the Muslim religion, [Wilders] also insulted Muslim believers.”

The ruling will please the Dutch Muslim immigrant groups who asked the appeals court to force the justice department to prosecute Wilders for expressing his opinions. But many others say the prosecution is an alarming attack on free speech by politically correct activist judges who are trying to silence criticism of the growing power of Islam in Europe.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Russia to Start Iran Nuclear Plant by Year End

Iran's Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant

From the International Herald Tribune
By Denis Dyomkin and Guy Faulconbridge

Russia plans to start up a nuclear reactor at Iran's Bushehr plant by the end of the year, the head of Russia's state nuclear corporation said on Thursday.

"If there are no unforeseen events...then the launch will go according to the timetable," Rosatom chief Sergei Kiriyenko told reporters in the Kremlin.

"The launch is scheduled for this year," he said, adding that this was the original plan laid down in a timetable agreed with Iran. "I plan to be at the Bushehr plant in February."

Read the rest of this entry >>

Merkel, Yad Vashem Welcome Vatican Statement As Chancellor Faces Criticism

From Catholic World News

The chairman of Yad Vashem, the Holocaust Martyrs' and Heroes' Remembrance Authority in Jerusalem, welcomed Wednesday’s Vatican statement calling upon Bishop Richard Williamson of the Society of St. Pius X to retract his statements on the Holocaust. “When the highest moral authority of the Church states that Holocaust denial is unacceptable, that is a vital message for the entire world,” said Yad Vashem Chairman Avner Shalev.

As German Chancellor Angela Merkel welcomed the statement as an “important and good signal,” she faced criticism for publicly calling upon Pope Benedict to speak out against Bishop Williamson. “Much of what is being imputed to the pope is almost malicious, and certainly not fair,” said Norbert Lammert, the speaker of the parliament. Archbishop Reinhard Marx of Munich also criticized the chancellor. “The pope took a clear position against any form of Holocaust denial,” he said. “To suggest that the pope would tolerate anti-Semitism is outrageous.”

Source(s): these links will take you to other sites, in a new window.

• Pope's Call for Bishop to Retract Holocaust Claim Welcomed (Deutsche Welle)

Legislator of the Week: Wendy K. Nanney, Greenville, SC

Representative Wendy K. Nanney is a freshman member of the SC General Assembly from District 22 in Greenville, South Carolina, but she has honed in like a laser in addressing our state's most pressing issues.

In the following video she discusses legislation she has cosponsored to require a 24-hour waiting period before an abortion can be performed in South Carolina, (H-3245). This legislation will give frightened and often pressured young women an opportunity to reflect before having abortions they will regret for the rest of their lives.

Representative Nanney also mentions in the video H-3140, which would require party registration for a period of time before one may vote in partisan primary elections. This would put an end to the gamesmanship South Carolina has seen too often, where members of one party attempt to determine the nominees of the other. In last years Republican presidential primary the winner's edge was provided by Democrat votes. Representative Nanney has also cosponsored H 3005, requiring all voters to present a photo ID.

Finally, we salute Representative Nanney for supporting greater transparency and accountability by demanding that legislation be subject to recorded roll call votes instead of mere voice votes, and for her sponsorship of H-3458, requiring an independent audit of the State Department of Education and other departments and agencies to be determined by the State Budget and Control Board.

These reforms are needed and long overdue. Greenville is fortunate to have a hard working, right thinking representative in Wendy Nanney; may we see many more like her in the State House.

Let's make this column a regular feature of Sunlit Uplands. If any of our readers, anywhere in the US, would like to suggest a Legislator of the Week, state or federal, we would welcome your recommendations.

Pro-Life Leaders Warn of New Strategy to Pass Freedom of Choice Act

Abortion Advocates Not Backing Away, They Say

From The Elliot Institute

Abortion advocates in Congress may try to pass the Freedom of Choice Act in pieces rather than risk the controversy of trying to pass the legislation as a single bill, some pro-life leaders are warning.

The Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), which would enshrine abortion as a national law and invalidate state and federal laws regulating or restricting abortion -- such as informed consent and parental notification laws -- has attracted particular controversy since President Obama promised during his presidential campaign to sign such legislation if it were passed.

According to LifeNews.com, some abortion advocates, including Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards, have said they are not that interested in passing FOCA. Charmaine Yoest of Americans United for Life and Brad Mattes of Life Issues Institute say that their backing away from this legislation is merely a ruse and that Congress could instead try to pass the legislation through a series of bills, hoping pro-life advocates and the public won't notice.

"We are now seeing the abortion forces waging an incremental battle — working to pass what we have termed 'FOCA-by-Stealth,'" Yoest was quoted as saying. "They think that if they take FOCA and repackage it and pass it in pieces and under different names . . . that we won't notice."

Obama has already the Mexico City Policy, which prevented millions of dollars from flowing to groups that promote abortions overseas. He is also likely to restore funding to the United Nations Population Fund, which was denied funding by the Bush Administration after being linked to China's program of coerced and forced abortions.

Such laws will not only likely increase the number of abortions around the world, but also subject more women and girls to unwanted, coerced or forced abortions and increased physical and psychological harm associated with abortion.

Tom Daschle, Frugal Man of the People

Thanks to President Obama's cabinet nominees we now know why Democrats have no problem with high taxes -- they don't pay them. They also think the American people are stupid. Given our national leadership, they may be right about that.

Here's Tom Daschle's Senate campaign ad made to con the rubes back home; obviously filmed before the gift of a limo and driver for which he "forgot" to pay taxes.

We Support and Thank Pope Benedict XVI

"Pray for me, that I may not flee for fear of the wolves."
~ Pope Benedict XVI

Sign the support letter here: www.soutienabenoitxvi.org

Requiem Mozart KV 626, "Dies Irae" Part 4
Conducted by Leonard Bernstein.
Choir of Bayerischen Rundfunks

Boycott Urged as Pepsi TV Ad Pushes Homosexual Lifestyle

From LifeSiteNews

After giving major financial contributions to homosexualist organizations, Pepsi is now using its TV spots to promote the homosexual lifestyle. In a recent spot aired in the UK, a man is shown in a bar being urged to ask out a girl that appears to be interested in him. He drinks a Pepsi Max to find courage, but then passes up two attractive women sitting at the bar and instead expresses interest in a man.

The American Family Association has urged a boycott of the company after asking Pepsi to remain neutral in the culture war. Pepsi, however, refused, telling AFA that it will continue major financial support of homosexual organizations seeking to legalize homosexual marriage.

Pepsi has given $500,000 to the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the largest and most powerful homosexual lobbying group in America. The company also gave $500,000 to Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG). The total gift of $1,000,000 to the two homosexual activist groups was to help promote the homosexual lifestyle in the workplace.

AFA notes that Pepsi also forces its employees to attend sexual orientation and gender identity diversity training, where they are taught to accept homosexuality.

To view the ad and join the boycott visit:

http://www.boycottpepsico.com/

Alveda King Writes to President Obama

I am very proud to count among my friends Dr. Alveda King. The niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, she is a valiant champion of the pro-life movement. She knows that all the progress America has made in civil and human rights is undermined if the most fundamental right, the right to life, is not respected.

On January 23 she presented the following message at the gates of the White House for President Obama:

Delivered at White House Gates
Washington, DC
January 23 at Noon for Birmingham Letter Project

Ezekiel 34

1 Then this message came to me from the LORD: 2 "Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds, the leaders of Israel. Give them this message from the Sovereign LORD: Destruction is certain for you shepherds who feed yourselves instead of your flocks. Shouldn't shepherds feed their sheep? 3 You drink the milk, wear the wool, and butcher the best animals, but you let your flocks starve. 4 You have not taken care of the weak. You have not tended the sick or bound up the broken bones. You have not gone looking for those who have wandered away and are lost. Instead, you have ruled them with force and cruelty. 5 So my sheep have been scattered without a shepherd. They are easy prey for any wild animal. 6 They have wandered through the mountains and hills, across the face of the earth, yet no one has gone to search for them.

7 "Therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the LORD: 8 As surely as I live, says the Sovereign LORD, you abandoned my flock and left them to be attacked by every wild animal. Though you were my shepherds, you didn't search for my sheep when they were lost. You took care of yourselves and left the sheep to starve. 9 Therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the LORD. 10 This is what the Sovereign LORD says: I now consider these shepherds my enemies, and I will hold them responsible for what has happened to my flock. I will take away their right to feed the flock, along with their right to feed themselves. I will rescue my flock from their mouths; the sheep will no longer be their prey. 11 "For this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I myself will search and find my sheep. 12 I will be like a shepherd looking for his scattered flock. I will find my sheep and rescue them from all the places to which they were scattered on that dark and cloudy day. 13 I will bring them back home to their own land of Israel from among the peoples and nations. I will feed them on the mountains of Israel and by the rivers in all the places where people live. 14 Yes, I will give them good pastureland on the high hills of Israel. There they will lie down in pleasant places and feed in lush mountain pastures. 15 I myself will tend my sheep and cause them to lie down in peace, says the Sovereign LORD. 16 I will search for my lost ones who strayed away, and I will bring them safely home again. I will bind up the injured and strengthen the weak. But I will destroy those who are fat and powerful. I will feed them, yes – feed them justice!

17 "And as for you, my flock, my people, this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I will judge between one sheep and another, separating the sheep from the goats. 18 Is it not enough for you to keep the best of the pastures for yourselves? Must you also trample down the rest? Is it not enough for you to take the best water for yourselves? Must you also muddy the rest with your feet? 19 All that is left for my flock to eat is what you have trampled down. All they have to drink is water that you have fouled. 20 "Therefore, this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I will surely judge between the fat sheep and the scrawny sheep. 21 For you fat sheep push and butt and crowd my sick and hungry flock until they are scattered to distant lands. 22 So I will rescue my flock, and they will no longer be abused and destroyed. And I will judge between one sheep and another.

Although we rejoice with President Obama’s historic win as the first African-American elected President of the United States, we are deeply troubled by his radical support of abortion. His embracing of prenatal murder is a tragedy and travesty of social justice and the principles of Dr. Martin Luther King and the Scriptures. By supporting policies which have resulted in the deaths of over 50,000,000 innocent American lives, President Obama overlooks the eternal truth of “loving your neighbor as yourself.” Throughout history, the people of God have always been a public prophetic witness against injustice and “spoken truth to power.” We see many examples of this in Scripture and throughout church history.

• In 2 Samuel 12:1:7, we read how the prophet Nathan confronted King David for his sin of adultery with Bathsheba and the murder of her husband Uriah.

• In Mark 6:17-28, the prophet John the Baptist confronted King Herod for having an adulterous relationship with his brother’s wife.

So, it is in that “prophetic spirit” that God is calling the church to prayerfully challenge President Obama on his radical support for abortion in Washington, D.C. this January. The reality is, President Obama, FOCA and all of your other pro-murder plans would set the human rights and civil rights movements back 35 years with your tragic prenatal murder policies even as you persist in the face of millions of Americans who are growing more and more uncomfortable with abortion. As I close with the message of my uncle Martin, and more strongly and persistently with the message of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, I’ll revisit their words:

If I have said anything today that overstates the truth and indicates an unreasonable impatience, I beg you to examine your own hearts. If I have said anything that understates the truth and indicates my having a patience that allows me to settle for anything less than the unadulterated love of Jesus Christ, I beg God to forgive me.

I hope this message finds you strong in the faith. I also hope that circumstances will soon make it possible for me to pray for all of you, not as an integrationist or a civil-rights leader but as a Christian sister. Let us all hope that the dark clouds of racial prejudice and prenatal murder will soon pass away and the deep fog of misunderstanding will be lifted from our fear drenched communities, and in some not too distant tomorrow the radiant stars of love and brother and sisterhood will shine over our great nation with all their scintillating beauty. In Deuteronomy 30, God commands us to choose life. In Matthew 19: 18 Jesus says: Thou shall do no murder. The choice of abortion is prenatal murder.

As a repentant and silent no more post abortive mother, as a citizen of these United States whom you are pledged to serve, from the youngest, the weakest, to the most mature, until our natural deaths, I beseech you, President Obama, in the name of Jesus, let the babies live!

Obama and the Treatment of Terrorist Suspects

From Stratfor;
By Fred Burton and Ben West

U.S. President Barack Obama signed an executive order Feb. 1 approving the continued use of renditions by the CIA. The order seems to go against Obama’s campaign promises to improve the image of the United States abroad, as renditions under the Bush administration had drawn criticism worldwide, especially from members of the European Union. The executive order does not necessarily mean that renditions and other tactics for dealing with terrorist suspects will proceed unchanged, however.

Obama came into office promising changes in the way the United States combats terrorism. One of these changes was a new emphasis on legal processes and a shift away from controversial methods of treating terrorist suspects, like rendition, harsh interrogation techniques and secret prisons. The Obama administration can and will roll back some of these tactics, as demonstrated by the president’s Jan. 22 order to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay. But some will continue.

Renditions and the Legal Process

Renditions are a powerful tool for counterterrorism operations. They involve agents moving into a foreign country to execute a warrant. Once the fugitive is located, agents track, seize and transport him out of the country for interrogations, or to stand trial, as in the cases of Lebanese hijacker Fawaz Younis, CIA shooter Mir Amal Kanzi, 1993 World Trade Center bombers Abdel Basit (aka Ramzi Yousef) and Mahmud Abouhalima, and even Ilich Ramirez Sanchez (aka Carlos the Jackal).

Some of the individuals targeted for renditions have warrants out for their arrest, but are taking refuge in countries that either lack the law enforcement capability to capture them or cannot arrest and extradite them for political reasons. By contrast, the renditions where there is no indictment or warrant and where the suspect is transported to a secret prison for interrogation and detention without a public trial are far more controversial. Renditions of either kind virtually always occur with the knowledge of the host country, and usually with the host government’s express consent. (Few countries wish to shelter suspected terrorist masterminds.)

Renditions thus involve legal questions as much as they do diplomatic questions. Before renditions can be carried out, the Washington bureaucracy kicks into full swing. The U.S. State Department must consider the diplomatic ramifications. The ambassador in the host country must consider his or her position and judge the response of his or her contacts in the host country government. The U.S. Justice Department must also sign on. Finally, the agency in charge of actually nabbing the suspect must be willing to work within any restrictions imposed by any one of the many individuals who must approve the operation.

Even when the government ultimately deems a rendition operation legal, numerous factors can still stymie the effort (not least of which is that by the time all the necessary approvals have been obtained, the window of opportunity to nab the suspect might have closed). So while Obama’s executive order in theory permits renditions, it is only one part of the whole process; the appropriate members of Obama’s administration must also be on board.

Many members of the Obama administration also served in the Clinton administration, which was widely seen as considering all legal ramifications of potential renditions before taking any action. As a former deputy attorney general in the Clinton administration, new Attorney General Eric Holder enjoyed a reputation for deliberating on renditions to the point of inaction — effectively vetoing such operations.

While an appearance of greater attention to the law might come as a relief to many, actors in the field do not have the luxury of endless deliberation and total consensus — they have a narrow window of opportunity in which to act on perishable intelligence. Assuming that Obama’s administration acts with deliberation and pursues consensus building (as he himself has emphasized, and has demonstrated in the bipartisan nature of his Cabinet selections), the legality of renditions might become moot if they are not agreed upon in a timely manner. There is a fine line to walk between efficiency and legality in this field, with extremes on either side being detrimental to national security.

By their very nature, renditions are ad hoc and rarely fit into a nice, clean process, something that explains their controversial nature. They frequently occur in countries allied to the United States, meaning the practice falls outside the scope of war. And renditions resulting in suspects’ standing trial are far less controversial than those involving secret prisons, harsh interrogation tactics and reliance on third countries to carry out interrogations — tactics disfavored by the Obama administration.

Alternatives to Rendition

Apprehending suspects in foreign countries does not always involve controversial tactics. U.S. counterterrorism officials also use tactics abroad that are not forbidden under U.S. law, though they might be illegal if used within the United States (and could well be illegal in the country where U.S. agents employ them). In general, such tactics remain constant as administrations change. These tactics include surveillance of foreign targets, ruse operations and economic incentives and punishments to encourage cooperation in counterterrorism efforts.

Ruse operations, a less controversial way to apprehend fugitives than renditions, involve deception, obviating the need to jump through the bureaucratic hoops required for renditions. Ruse operations involve luring suspects to a location where U.S. agents can apprehend them legally. This involves persuading targets to venture into international waters, for example, or even to travel to the United States, where U.S. agents lie in wait.

While such tactics avoid the legal complexities surrounding renditions, they are extremely difficult to carry out. Suspects worth chasing around the world typically are not overly gullible, and know where it is safe to travel. So while there is no reason to believe that ruse operations will cease anytime soon, successful ones are few and far between.

Sometimes killing a terrorist target is both more efficient and less legally complex than renditions or ruse operations. Tactical strikes, such as the unmanned aerial vehicle-launched missile strikes against suspected al Qaeda targets in Pakistan, both remove a suspected terrorist target and avoid drawn-out legal processes. Like its predecessor, the Obama administration apparently sees striking at al Qaeda targets along the Pakistani-Afghan border as acceptable within the scope of the ongoing war in Afghanistan, despite Pakistani protests. The latest such U.S. strike came Jan. 23, just three days after Obama took office. Given the administration’s presumed hesitation based on legal reservations and an unwillingness to expand warfare beyond the Afghan theater, this tactic is unlikely to pop up in other areas of the world without a serious threat escalation.

Secret Prisons and Interrogation Issues

Obama on Jan. 22 also ordered the CIA to close its secret prisons around the world that hold detainees without adhering to U.S. legal standards. Because fewer than 100 detainees were held in these prisons, however, this is a minor point.

A different executive order also issued Jan. 22 applied the interrogation guidelines outlined in the U.S. military field handbook and the Geneva Conventions to the CIA. Obama and Holder also have made it clear that the new administration views waterboarding as torture and thus illegal, settling the debate on the matter.

Still, it is only a matter of time before new techniques used by interrogators in the field will face questions of legality and morality. No national leader can micromanage at the field level. Even though the Justice Department and senior White House officials in the Bush administration signed secret findings authorizing the CIA to conduct waterboarding in specific cases, tactical, field-level topics do not stick around at the level of national policy for very long.

With secret prisons on the way out, more restrictions on how agents act in the field and an expected decline in renditions, a greater U.S. reliance on third countries to carry out rendition operations is possible. During the Clinton and Bush administrations, countries like Egypt and Jordan were known to cooperate with U.S. agencies in detaining and interrogating prisoners.

Critics claimed that relying on third countries exploited a loophole that allowed the United States to see that unsavory acts were committed without directly carrying them out. Obama’s emphasis on using diplomacy to improve the U.S. image in the world suggests that his administration will turn to other countries for counterterrorism assistance instead of operating unilaterally. Obama already has asked for other countries to help out more in Afghanistan (specifically European countries). Obama might also tap third countries like Portugal, Switzerland or Germany to take in detainees leaving Guantanamo who are not sent back to home countries like Yemen and Saudi Arabia after the facility’s closure. Working with these countries to ensure safe delivery of the detainees out of U.S. custody will remove a lightning rod for criticism of the United States in the Muslim world.

Delegating counterterrorism responsibilities to other countries allows the United States to avoid the legal complexities inherent in renditions, secret prisons and harsh interrogation. But ultimately, increased reliance on other countries with different interests can enhance the overall complexity of missions. It is also important to remember that the United States possesses one of the most capable counterterrorism forces in the world, and that other countries simply cannot carry out the same missions that the United States does. This is not to say that pursuing U.S. interests abroad does not call for diplomacy (which is one of the administration’s main tools to fight terror), but that seeking international approval and establishing legal cover does reduce efficiency and restrain U.S. capabilities. Finding the balance between fighting terror efficiently and remaining within legal boundaries will be a key challenge for the Obama administration.

Tax Cheat Quota Filled, Daschle Out!

Democrats love their quotas, but unfortunately for Tom Daschle the Obama cabinet has already filled its tax cheat quota in Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. The limousine liberal from South Dakota has been forced to pay $130,000 in back taxes and interest for failing to report a gift of a private car and driver.

The Washington Times reports on the stunning withdrawal of Tom Daschle as the nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Services.

Senator Bend Over, Grab the Ankles Needs to be Recalled

Eric Holder has been confirmed by the U.S. Senate for the position of Attorney General by a vote of 75 to 21.

He is the most radical and dangerous man ever to occupy that position, and if you liked Janet Reno, you will love Eric Holder.

Thankfully, 21 Republican Senators voted against this seriously flawed nomination. They are:

Barrasso, Brownback, Bunning, Burr, Coburn, Cochran, Cornyn, Crapo, DeMint, Ensign, Enzi, Hutchison, Ihofe, Johanns, McConnell, Risch, Roberts, Shelby, Thune, Vitter, Wicker

But no, not Lindsey Graham, Senator Bend Over, Grab the Ankles. Let's face it, it's a position that Lindsey enjoys. We should expect to see a lot more of this from the one that The American Spectator dubbed "the worst Republican Senator ever." He seems to have a perverse need to betray his own and sellout to those he should oppose. But whatever this RINO's psychololgical problems may be, do we need to let this man betray the overwhelming conservative values of South Carolina, damage our country, undermine the Republican caucus, and cancel out Senator DeMint's solid conservative voting record for the next 6 years? Is anyone else ready to join in a recall movement?

The Real Meaning of Religious Persecution

From The American Spectator
By Doug Bandow

"The persecution of Christianity in America has begun," complains Rick Scarborough of Vision America. He points to criticism of Christian supporters of California's Proposition 8, banning gay marriage, and cites an email to him "so vile that I cannot reprint the letter." He asks for contributions "to assist us as we confront the growing threat of domestic terror being perpetrated by homosexual activists."

The protests against Prop 8 backers, particularly the Mormon Church and individual Mormons, took an ugly turn. There may even be "growing hostility against religion in America and particularly against Christians," as Scarborough asserts, at least in the cultural realm. But this hostility does not amount to persecution. After all, America's outgoing president is an avowed evangelical, the Republican Party's 2008 vice presidential nominee was an outspoken evangelical, and the new president is a self-identified Christian. The last chose a high-profile evangelical minister to pray at the inaugural. Some Christians may be treated badly, but Christians are not being persecuted.

In America, that is.

Elsewhere in the world there is persecution of Christians and other religious believers. Real persecution. The faithful are arrested and imprisoned. Their homes and churches are invaded and confiscated. And hundreds or thousands every year are martyred -- sometimes by mobs and other times by governments.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Feast of The Presentation of the Lord

Luke 2:22-35

"When the days were completed for their purification according to the law of Moses, they took him up to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord, just as it is written in the law of the Lord, 'Every male that opens the womb shall be consecrated to the Lord,' and to offer the sacrifice of 'a pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons,' in accordance with the dictate in the law of the Lord.

Now there was a man in Jerusalem whose name was Simeon. This man was righteous and devout, awaiting the consolation of Israel, and the holy Spirit was upon him. It had been revealed to him by the holy Spirit that he should not see death before he had seen the Messiah of the Lord. He came in the Spirit into the temple; and when the parents brought in the child Jesus to perform the custom of the law in regard to him, he took him into his arms and blessed God, saying:

'Now, Master, you may let your servant go in peace, according to your word, for my eyes have seen your salvation, which you prepared in sight of all the peoples, a light for revelation to the Gentiles, and glory for your people Israel.'

The child's father and mother were amazed at what was said about him; and Simeon blessed them and said to Mary his mother, 'Behold, this child is destined for the fall and rise of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be contradicted and you yourself a sword will pierce so that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.'"

In the following video, the Canticle of St Simeon is set by Sergei Rachmaninoff for his "Vespers," opus 37. Anticipating the great day when the Church "breathes with both her lungs," East and West, it is Russian music set against a backdrop of (mainly) Western artworks of the Presentation. The final image is the St Andrei Rublyov icon of the feast.

The Third Jihad: A Wakeup-Call for America

This video needs to be seen by every American. It is a wakeup-call to a nation and its national administration that is unsure as to whether international terrorism consists of nothing more than the random acts of a few zealots. It makes clear that America, whether it recognizes it or not, is involved in a life or death struggle between the "values of freedom and democracy, and the values of barbarism.”

The film, created by a Muslim, reveals the radical Islamist manifesto, already documented by the FBI, to destroy America from within.

From The Third Jihad website:

The Third Jihad is a groundbreaking film that exposes the truth and reveals what the media is not telling you about the Jihadist quest to rule America. Based on the accounts of the one person who is not afraid to tell you the truth; Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, former physician to the US Congress and a Muslim American.

Following the FBI release of a radical Islamist manifesto outlining its plan to destroy America from within, Dr. Jasser decided to investigate. The movie The Third Jihad is about what he discovered. Its focus is on a secret manifesto of the American Muslim Brotherhood discovered by the FBI.

It describes the 'Grand Jihad' goal of the Islamic Radicals to destroy Western civilization from within by infiltrating and dominating North America. This document outlines how Radical Islamists are taking advantage of our country’s democratic processes, and using them to destroy the American way of life.

Renata Tebaldi - "O Divine Redeemer" - By Charles Gounod

I had the privilege of hearing and meeting the great "Queen of Italian Opera," Renata Tebaldi, when the Kennedy Center hosted one of her last performances in the mid-seventies. The concert had ended and I followed a group that seemed to know where they were going. I later learned they were from the Italian Embassy and I had followed them to a receiving line in the Green Room, where a very gracious Renata Tebaldi greeted each of us and signed our programs.

This performance of Charles Gounod's great hymn makes clear why Tebaldi remains one of the world's most acclaimed and beloved sopranos.

Ah! turn me not away, receive me, tho' unworthy!
Hear Thou my cry, behold, Lord, my distress!
Answer me from Thy throne, haste Thee, Lord, to mine aid,

Thy pity show in my deep anguish!
Let not the sword of vengeance smite me,
Tho' righteous Thine anger, O Lord!
Shield me in danger, O Regard me! On Thee, Lord, alone will I call.

O Divine Redeemer! O Divine Redeemer!
I pray Thee, grant me pardon, and remember not my sins!

Forgive me, O divine Redeemer!
Night gathers round my soul; fearful I cry to Thee;
Come to mine aid, O Lord! Haste Thee, Lord, haste to help me!

Hear my cry, Save me, Lord, in Thy mercy;
Hear my cry! Come and save me, O Lord!

O, divine Redeemer! I pray Thee, grant me pardon,
And remember not, O Lord, my sins!

Save, in the day of retribution, from Death shield Thou me, O my God!

O, divine Redeemer, have mercy! Help me, my Savior!