Featured Article

The Gods of Liberalism Revisited


The lie hasn't changed, and we still fall for it as easily as ever.  But how can we escape the snare?



Saturday, June 23, 2007

Man charged with killing wife, 3 kids

Man charged with killing wife, 3 kids

By CARLA K. JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer 17 minutes ago

JOLIET, Ill. - Just hours before a man was to attend a memorial service for his wife and three young children, authorities arrested him at a Missouri funeral home on charges of gunning down his family in their sport utility vehicle.

Police initially said Christopher Vaughn, 32, was not a suspect in the killings that were discovered June 14 after Vaughn flagged down a motorist on a service road in Channahon, about 40 miles southwest of Chicago.

Vaughn, who works as a computer forensic adviser, had been shot in the thigh. His wife, Kimberly, 34, was shot once, while each their children — Abigayle, 12; Cassandra, 11; and Blake, 8 — were shot twice. His handgun was found at the scene, authorities said.

(Complete article)

Other pregnant women also have disappeared

Other pregnant women also have disappeared
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
BY Tim Botos

You know the Laci Peterson story, but how about Amanda Jones?

She's the less-famous pregnant woman who vanished two years ago near her home in Hillsboro, Mo. And it's Jones' story that more resembles the disappearance of Lake Township's mother-to-be, Jessie M. Davis.

Both women were 26 years old.

Both were nine months pregnant.

Both already had a small child.

(Complete article from The Repository)

Bobby Cutts Jr Arrested: Charged With Murder of Jessie Davis, Baby

By Tim Morgan
Jun 23, 2007

Bobby Cutts Jr has been placed under arrest and is now charged with the murder of Jessie Davis and her unborn child. A body believed to be hers was found a week after she vanished from her home, authorities said. Jessie Davis, 26, was due to deliver a baby girl on July 3. Her mother found Davis' 2-year-old son alone in her home, where bedroom furniture was toppled and bleach spilled on the floor on June 15.

(Complete article from The National Ledger)

Legislator Misconduct Difficult to Fix

Guest Column

By Senator Bill Napoli
District 35, South Dakota

"When government governs and legislators legislate, woe be unto you."

How true. Because of the scandals during the last several legislative sessions, all sorts of "cures" are being considered concerning the page and intern programs.

In a recent article, Bob Mercer summarized all the talk about ethics by those who feel government can "Be All," "Is All," and will solve every problem people have. (Full Story)

Deb Hadcock Opposes Fellow Alderman for Mayor

From today's Forum page in the Rapid City Journal, it seems somebody (Alderman Deb Hadcock) doesn't support fellow alderman Sam Kooiker's bid for mayor.

She particularly takes issue with a recent column by freelance Journal op/ed writer and former state senator Alan Aker:

Who is trying to influence the election? Mr. Aker wields more power than Hamilton or Adelstein when the Journal is the only print medium in town and Aker controls the information to the people. What about Mr. Aker’s personal contribution given to Sam’s campaign? Are we a little biased in our endorsement of mayor?

"Aker controls the information to the people?" I like Alan, but I didn't realize he had a lock on information to the people. I thought I shared at least a little of that role of subverting the people, but I guess I've been fooling myself.

What little I know of either Kooiker or Hadcock has left me with the impression that they're both good folks. There are a lot of dynamics behind this year's city elections (it's been more like a circus--or insane asylum--in Rapid City's city hall lately), and I'm sure I don't know the half of it.

But I wish city hall would get its collective act together and quit being such a public embarrassment. I'd like to see our city government playing grownup to get the job done instead of backbiting each other all the time. As the Journal article on the Stan Adelstein emails points out, city government should be less about partisan bickering (nothing wrong with fighting for what you believe in) and more about the nuts and bolts of making a city run.

Friday, June 22, 2007

Evolution and Assumptions Redux

Ken Blanchard at South Dakota Politics has replied to my post taking issue with assumptions passed off as facts by evolutionists. **Note that in this discussion I'm not trying to argue that creation is the correct theory, just that most evolutionists unquestioningly presuppose their position to be factual and refuse to approach the debate from an equal starting point.

Blanchard was kind and complimentary, but I think he's still missed my main point: just because evolutionists believe something, and despite the contention that because they're in the majority and believe they get to "make the rules" and define what is and is not valid, their contentions are still only theories built on assumptions--assumptions that are shaky.

Why do I believe Blanchard and I still aren't on the same page? Take this quote, responding to one of my analogies:

If a Christian wants to take issue with Islam from a position that is legitimate within the confines of Islamic thought, then he would have to concede that there is no god but Allah and that Mohamed is his profit (sic).

If a Christian concedes these fundamental elements of Islam, then there is no point in arguing about the truth of Islam, because you've already agreed that Islam is true. It may be "legitimate within the confines of Islamic thought," but that doesn't mean it's true or even legitimate in a broader sense. It's completely illogical to say, "Yes, your contention is true. But here's why it isn't true." You've already pulled the rug out from under yourself.

Also consider Blanchard's next statement:

Evolutionists get to define the legitimate ground in biology for the same reason that chemists get to define the ground in chemistry: in each case they have the only scientifically viable theories and research programs.

No, evolutionists do not get to define what is legitimate, only what they consider legitimate. They don't have all the answers; like the rest of us, they are looking for answers.

Evolutionists also don't have the only scientifically viable theories. Creation scientists have scientifically viable theories; they only reason they aren't considered scientifically viable by some is because the dominant segment of the scientific community has redefined the study of science from "the pursuit of knowledge" to "the pursuit of knowledge within an exclusively naturalistic framework."

In other words, they refuse to consider any supernatural origin or cause, which is a closed-minded position. Naturalists say that ID'ers and creation scientists haven't come up with a viable framework for their theories; they have, but because that framework doesn't fit the naturalist's contention that there can be no supernatural influence in the universe, naturalists claim it isn't viable. Again, we're back to the illogical contention that you have to agree that someone is right before you can explain why they're wrong.

Just for a moment, stop and consider this possibility: If God does exist and did create the universe, then he is the author of science. Yet naturalists refuse to even consider this possibility; if God did create the universe, they they are arguing that the being who created all scientific laws--science itself--is unscientific and unworthy of consideration. No amount of evidence pointing to intelligent design will dissuade them from ignoring God, because they already assume He doesn't exist, and that assumption for them is already settled and not worthy of revisiting.

I don't object to assumptions; since no human being knows everything, we all have to make certain assumptions. What I do object to is when assumptions are accepted as incontrovertible truth, which is what materialists and naturalists do. I also find it disingenuous that practically all naturalists dogmatically deny that they hold any assumptions or presuppositions in the first place.

Blanchard says criminal investigation and scientific investigation "move in almost the opposite direction[s]." While it is true that there are some differences, they are actually very similar. Criminal investigations almost always involve scientific principles, and especially absent immediate and conclusive evidence, usually employs the scientific method (formulation of a question, gathering data through observation and experimentation, and the formation and testing of a theory).

And while eyewitness testimony isn't absolutely necessary for the formation of viable theories in either science or criminal investigation, it's a great boon to the accuracy of and confidence in your conclusions.

In fact, eyewitness observation is usually the beginning of a scientific investigation (you see lightning, wonder what it is, and begin experiments to define it; you witness an apple fall from a tree, wonder what made it fall, and begin your research; you see an organism reproduce, you wonder how that's possible, and investigate it). In each of these examples, there would have been no impetus for discovery without the initial witnessed observation. And that observation, both in the criminal and scientific investigation, acts as a standard or "measuring stick" for the accuracy and viability of any theories you form during your investigation. In fact, it will determine to some extent what experiments and tests you perform, because it's difficult to devise an accurate and appropriate test when you don't have some definable idea of what it is your're researching in the first place. In other words, if your experiments can't match what was witnessed, then you haven't found the answer yet. And if nothing was witnessed in the first place, how can you possibly have dogmatic certainty that your experiments prove something never even witnessed?

Blanchard's concluding paragraph says

I do not believe that Darwinian evolution contradicts the Biblical creation story. A Christian may well disagree, and choose to reject the former. He is deceiving himself if he thinks he can do so without rejecting modern science as a whole.

While it is true that God could have used evolution as an engine for ongoing creativity and biological change, it is incompatible with the claims of both the Old and New Testaments. In fact, without even getting into the whole fact vs. symbolism argument, the claims of evolution are incompatible with most of the basic tenets of Christian theology. These include the fall/depravity of man, the need for redemption that Christ met, the source and cause for death and decay

Finally, Blanchard's last paragraph also indicates that he still defines "modern science" wholly by the naturalistic philosophy held by many in modern science. Science (the laws that govern the universe) is what it is; it doesn't change according to the worldview of a Christian or an atheist or someone who tries to harmonize the two worldviews. The bulk of the modern scientific community claims evolution to be true, but that does not mean that it is. They clearly assume it is, but you know what they say happens when you assume.

Which gets back to the key problem I have with evolutionists: they assume they are right, even though they have no more proof than the creationist, and arrogantly demand that all science must be addressed on their terms, or it isn't science at all.

Just saying your daddy can beat up my daddy doesn't make it so. Such a posture is worth a chuckle when we see children hold it. But when adults take such an attitude about the origin of a universe that has not been witnessed or documented, it is misleading and parochial.

But I'm grateful for the opportunity to debate the issue with the esteemed Professor Blanchard. Iron sharpens iron, as they say.

Video: Robert Spencer - The Truth About Muhammad, Part 7

The Heritage Foundation: Robert Spencer knows a thing or two about the prophet Mohammed. His latest book, The Truth about Muhammad: Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion, looks at what Islam's founder actually did and taught.

Colson Indicts Churches that "Privatize" Faith

From OneNewsNow, Chuck Colson indicts many churches for "privatizing" faith and becoming therapy groups instead of bulwarks of truth:

Colson believes most Christians cannot defend their faith because the church no longer puts a premium on the defense of biblical truth. "We privatize the faith," he says. "We don't care so much any longer about truth, as we do about therapy.

"You know, when truth retreats in a church, therapy takes over -- [we are more concerned about] how can we make people feel better about themselves. That's not what the church is for," he states. "The church is for worshipping God."

Health Care: Leave Them Alone

National Review features an editorial against universal health care coverage that sums up my thoughts on the issue:

Most universal-coverage plans accept the least rational features of our health-care system — its reliance on employer-based coverage and on “insurance” that covers routine expenses — and merely try to expand that system to cover more people. Republicans should go in a different direction, proposing market reforms that make insurance more affordable and portable. If such reforms are implemented, more people will have insurance.

Some people, especially young and healthy people, may choose not to buy health insurance even when it is cheaper. Contrary to popular belief, such people do not cause everyone else to pay much higher premiums. Forcing them to get insurance would, on the other hand, lead to a worse health-care system for everyone because it would necessitate so much more government intervention. So what should the government do about the holdouts? Leave them alone. It’s a free country.

Low-Cost Health Care Freedom

Market-driven changes in health care habits? The Manitowoc Herald Times illustrates some positive, low-cost, freedom-enhancing changes already underway:

Retailers are getting into the game, offering clinics and other more direct services. Wal-Mart recently announced it will offer clinics in as many as 2,000 of its stores. Walgreens and CVS Pharmacies have purchased national retail clinic chains.

In many markets, a mom who has a child with an ear infection can walk into a retail location and see a nurse practitioner without an appointment. They can get a diagnosis and leave with an eardrop prescription in as little as 15 minutes. They pay for this visit by credit card, generally for under $50, and often at their own expense. Convenience is an important benefit to consumers and one they are willing to pay for.

The Leede Research Group has seen consumer trends that are contributing to the rate of change and the change itself. Its health care studies have shown that those under 35 years of age show stark differences in their usage patterns for health services. They tend to use walk-in facilities more often, even though they have physician relationships and believe they could see their doctor the same day if needed. They also show less loyalty to their physicians and provider networks and show more cross usage.

I'll take this kind of change over a bloated, costly, freedom-robbing socialized health care "solution" any day.

HT to the National Center for Policy Analysis.

Thursday, June 21, 2007

California Woman Dead After Abortion Attempt - Mother Sues

By Hilary White

RIVERSIDE, California, June 21, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Erica Goode died of toxic shock syndrome at the age of 21 after an abortion at the Planned Parenthood clinic in Riverside, California. Her mother, Aletheia Meloncon, has filed a wrongful death and medical malpractice suit against the abortionist group.

"I'm hoping to shed light and expose the negligent and improper care my daughter received," Meloncon said Wednesday at Schuler's Riverside office. "I hope this sends a message to Planned Parenthood."

Goode had gone for an abortion on January 31, 2007 but was taken to hospital after developing a fever. A laminaria and gauze had been inserted and Goode was expected back at Planned Parenthood the next day. But because Meloncon was not informed of her daughter's intention to have an abortion, she was not able to inform hospital staff, so treatment was delayed.

The suit names the laminaria, a medical product meant to stretch the cervix preliminary to some types of abortion, as the conduit for the infection that killed Goode. She was taken to Riverside County Regional Medical Center in Moreno Valley on Feb. 4 and found to be 14 weeks pregnant. Goode miscarried her unborn child on February 13 and died the next day.

Attorney Jack M. Schuler stated, "If it wasn't for the negligent medical care that Erica Goode received, she would be alive today."

(Full Story)
June 21, 2007

How many teenagers has this happened to and no one knew?

Get Ready for Global Cooling

From Canada's Financial Post, global cooling is coming in a few years:

In a series of groundbreaking scientific papers starting in 2002, Veizer, Shaviv, Carslaw, and most recently Svensmark et al., have collectively demonstrated that as the output of the sun varies, and with it, our star's protective solar wind, varying amounts of galactic cosmic rays from deep space are able to enter our solar system and penetrate the Earth's atmosphere. These cosmic rays enhance cloud formation which, overall, has a cooling effect on the planet. When the sun's energy output is greater, not only does the Earth warm slightly due to direct solar heating, but the stronger solar wind generated during these "high sun" periods blocks many of the cosmic rays from entering our atmosphere. Cloud cover decreases and the Earth warms still more.

The opposite occurs when the sun is less bright. More cosmic rays are able to get through to Earth's atmosphere, more clouds form, and the planet cools more than would otherwise be the case due to direct solar effects alone. This is precisely what happened from the middle of the 17th century into the early 18th century, when the solar energy input to our atmosphere, as indicated by the number of sunspots, was at a minimum and the planet was stuck in the Little Ice Age. These new findings suggest that changes in the output of the sun caused the most recent climate change. By comparison, CO2 variations show little correlation with our planet's climate on long, medium and even short time scales.

Imagine that: the sun causing climate change!

Bush Skirting Embryonic Stem Cell Issue?

LifeSite.net has an article about President Bush's veto of the embryonic stem cell bill, and the subsequent Executive Order he signed allowing some stem cell research.

I oppose embryonic stem cell research because it destroys a human life, even if in the embryonic stage. I support adult stem cell research because unlike embryonic stem cell research it has ALREADY produced cures and therapies, and it does not involve the destruction of human life.

However, I know little about this "pluripotent" stem-cell research referenced in Bush's EO. From what LifeSite says about it, though, it sounds like it may just be embryonic stem cell research that just takes the long way around.

From a 2006 report:

In the SCNT cloning process, the nucleus (the cell compartment containing the genome) of an adult cell is inserted into an egg cell that has had its nucleus removed. The result is a cloned embryo that is then killed in order to extract embryonic stem cells. This is objectionable on two counts. First, killing human embryos is wrong. Second, the harvest of the necessary eggs exploits and injures women. It also entails the risk of death.

Though I find egg harvesting from women repugnant (I felt this way even before the Ted Klaudt incidents came to light), the most troubling aspect would be if this is just a roundabout way of still producing a human embryo. At this point, I'm uncertain if this is the case.

More from last year's LifeSite article:
William Hurlbut, M.D., a member of the President's Council on Bioethics and a professor at Stanford University, proposed ANT/OAR as a way around these moral difficulties. (We will refer to the process as ANT henceforth.) He strongly advocated this technique in the Spring 2005 issue of Perspectives in Biology and Medicine1, and then in a May 2005 paper from the President's Council on Bioethics2. At that time the procedure was "untested experimentally (even in animals)."

Hurlbut suggested that the genome be modified before transferring the somatic cell nucleus to the egg cell. By disabling the genes necessary for the organization and development characteristic of a human embryo, he stated:

The resulting biological entity, while being a source of pluripotent stem cells, would lack the essential attributes and capacities of a human embryo [emphasis in original]. For example, the altered nucleus might be engineered to lack a gene or genes that are crucial for the cell-to-cell signaling and integrated organization essential for (normal) embryogenesis. It would therefore lack organized development from the very earliest stages of cell differentiation. Such an entity would be a 'biological artifact,' not an organism.

The council's paper notes that there was some debate over whether the resulting entity would only be a disabled embryo or whether it would truly be a "biological artifact" that lacked the attributes of a human organism. However, it appeared at least conceptually possible that ANT could be used to derive the pluripotent stem cells typical of embryos, without creating or killing any human embryos.

"Sadly," said Judie Brown, "the experimental testing of ANT so far has rendered this benign hypothesis beside the point. The current research in mouse models does not fit the original vision of creating non-embryo entities. Rather, it has created embryos that, like the 'replicant' characters of the science fiction thriller Blade Runner, come with a 'termination date.'"

The article says some believe this pluripotent method does constitute a human embryo:
Turning off Cdx2 creates a severely disabled embryo but an embryo nonetheless, says Tadeusz Pacholczyk of the National Catholic Bioethics Center in Philadelphia. Stem cell researcher George Daley of Children's Hospital in Boston says the data Jaenisch and Meissner show suggest Pacholczyk has a point. 'The embryo that is established in the first few days is substantially normal,' he says.

Human embryologist C. Ward Kischer, Ph.D., emeritus professor from the University of Arizona, analyzed and objected to this use of ANT. He stated: "These examples of ANT do not resolve the moral issue and do not resolve the scientific issue of the continuum of human life." He added that this ANT protocol, "Involves the destruction of human life."

For my part, I plan to do more research into this method, but at this point I'm dubious.

Journalists: 89% Give Money to Dems

Still got your head in the sand about liberal media bias?


MSNBC.com identified 144 journalists who made political contributions from 2004 through the start of the 2008 campaign, according to the public records of the Federal Election Commission. Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left: 125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes. Only 17 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties.

Can a journalist have a political opinion and still give fair and balanced coverage? Of course. But I don't think many try to.

If most of the "mainstream" media had been giving us balanced coverage for the past several decades, I'd say journalists were managing to keep their personal allegiances personal. But since most of the media has functioned as a Leftist propaganda machine since the 1960s, and continues to do so, well...

Congressional Approval Lowest EVER

Dems certainly don't have anything to crow about now with Bush's poll numbers. According to USA Today, a new Gallup poll has Congress now pulling the lowest approval ratings EVER:

Just 14% of Americans have a great deal or quite a lot of confidence in Congress.

This 14% Congressional confidence rating is the all-time low for this measure, which Gallup initiated in 1973. The previous low point for Congress was 18% at several points in the period of time 1991 to 1994.

Remember the House banking scandal and the health care debacle in 1994 that got the Dems thrown out of congressional control for the first time in 50 years? Harry Reid's probably wishing he had those numbers right now.

YAHOO! Missouri HB1055 Defeats Planned Promiscuity...parenthood not

Planned Promiscuity (parenthood) was dealt a stunning defeat by the brave champions of life in Missouri.

House Bill1055(HB1055) declares that groups that perform abortions have a conflict of interest if they also teach sex education and therefore they can't do both.

Planned Terrorism-in-the-womb (parenthood-not) knows that where they teach children about sex in a titillating, co-ed, anti-Christian-value-free way, unwanted pregnancies will increase and their butchery for hire business will prosper.

I call on all states to do everything possible to defund al-Quida and Planned Parenthood(not)!

God Bless Missouri and their stand for the ultimate God given Freedom...Life itself.

Have you taken the Liberty Pledge? #3

Tearing Down the Wall

CNS News commemorates the 20th anniversary of President Ronald Reagan's "Tear down this wall" speech, also pointing out that Reagan had been calling for the wall to come down for a long time:

Reagan is on record as having called for the Berlin Wall to be dismantled as early as May 1967, when as governor of California he appeared in a debate with Sen. Robert F. Kennedy (D-N.Y.).

"Reagan was way ahead of everyone," Kengor told Cybercast News Service in an interview. "Right from outset, he envisioned a world without the Soviet Union, when even his political allies on the right pre-supposed it would be around for a long time."

At the time, liberals in the media and everywhere else were aghast that Reagan would say such a thing to their secret idols in the Soviet Union.

I was in England when the Wall came down, and I remember the euphoria felt by Europeans during that time. On New Years Eve 1989 I was celebrating with some British friends, and as we partied in the streets, I don't think there's ever been a time when I was so thanked for being a U.S. serviceman, with dozens of complete strangers hugging me and girls kissing me and thanking me (and so many others) for being there in Europe to force this change.

I now have a chunk of that wall downstairs in my mementos, and there is a section of that wall near the Civic Center in Rapid City. They remind me and all of us of the brutality and failure of Marxism, and also of what can be accomplished when people resolutely stand against evil.

Wednesday, June 20, 2007

Video: Robert Spencer - The Truth About Muhammad, Part 6

The Heritage Foundation: Robert Spencer knows a thing or two about the prophet Mohammed. His latest book, The Truth about Muhammad: Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion, looks at what Islam's founder actually did and taught.

From Secondhand Smoke: The Euthanasia Crowd Keeps Playing With Words

The Euthanasia Crowd Keeps Playing With Words

Euthanasia activists are obsessed with lexicon. They believe that if only they can find the right words to use in identifying mercy killing and assisted suicide, people will see the wisdom of their proposal and embrace medicalized homicide.

This obsession with words and terms has marked the euthanasia movement from the very beginning. Indeed, euthanasia, the current word for mercy killing, once meant a pain free natural death, experienced in a state of grace, and ideally, surrounded by family--akin to the modern concept of hospice. But as Professor Ian Dowbiggin noted in his splendid book, A Concise History of Euthanasia, the word was co-opted in one of the first modern essays supporting mercy killing, authored in 1870 by a school teacher named Samuel D. Williams. From Dowbiggin's account:

In advocating voluntary active euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, Williams was instrumental in redefining euthanasia as an act of mercy killing rather than a passive process in which the discomforts of death are mitigated but not intentionally ended by pain killers.

(Wesley J. Smith's Complete Article)

Farm Subsidies Harmful to Farmers

The Heritage Foundation features an analysis of how farm subsidies are bad for consumers, taxpayers, and even farmers.

Here are some of their points:

Farm subsidies are intended to alleviate farmer poverty, but the majority of subsidies go to commercial farms with average incomes of $200,000 and net worths of nearly $2 million.

Farm subsidies are intended to raise farmer incomes by remedying low crop prices. Instead, they promote overproduction and therefore lower prices further.

Farm subsidies are intended to help struggling family farmers. Instead, they harm them by excluding them from most subsidies, financing the consolidation of family farms, and raising land values to levels that prevent young people from entering farming.

Farm subsidies are intended to be consumer-friendly and taxpayer-friendly. Instead, they cost Americans billions each year in higher taxes and higher food costs.

I grew up on a farm and married into a ranch family, so I've seen a lot of this firsthand. A lot of small farmers struggle to make ends meet (we did), but a lot of farmers--especially those lined up at the taxpayer gravy train--do quite well. You can often tell which kind are which by the truck they drive, like the new Ford F150 that looks like it's never even been close to the field or pasture.

The piece also provides some insight into the history of farm subsidies:

When President Frank?lin D. Roosevelt introduced farm subsidies in the 1930s, Secretary of Agriculture Henry Wallace called them "a temporary solution to deal with an emergency."

Like most "temporary" programs started by FDR and other socialists, government giveaways seldom see a sunset.

But centrally controlled farming is a bad deal. If the sad state of family farming in America isn't enough to reveal this, ask some Soviet farmers. Oh, the Soviet Union isn't around anymore, is it?

Tuesday, June 19, 2007

The Alliance Defense Fund: Fighting for Jesse Ramirez

June 2007 Online Issue

The Alliance Defense Fund: Fighting for Jesse Ramirez

by Jason T. Christy

Jesse Ramirez, the Gulf War Veteran who remains hospitalized as a result of his injuries from a car accident on May 30, has a powerful ally on his side – the Alliance Defense Fund. Only 240 hours after a severe car accident, and then after being removed from his feeding and hydration sources, the Alliance Defense Fund stepped in to file an emergency order with the court to prevent the starvation and dehydration death of the father of three. It was after being moved from the hospital to a hospice, that the ADF received notice of Jesse’s life-threatening predicament from their intake center, a group of tireless workers who “sort through hundreds of calls for help every day,” according to Senior Counsel, Gary McCaleb.

(Full Story)

From CR DAILY: Gulf War Veteran Jesse Ramirez in the Fight for His Life

Article Date: Jun 18, 2007

Gulf War Veteran Jesse Ramirez in the Fight for His Life

Gulf War veteran and father, Jesse Ramirez, is in the biggest fight of his life, literally. Ramirez, 36, was hospitalized with serious head injuries after a May 30 car accident. Jesse Ramirez is a devoted father of three children: Justin (17), Kasey (14) and Austin (11). His family says he enjoys spending his time away from his job at the U.S. Postal service playing video games with his children, taking them to movies and sharing stories about his time in the Navy. Jesse has worked tirelessly to keep his family together throughout his 20-year marriage. According to court documents, Jesses and Rebecca had ongoing marital problems, and at one time, had been separated for as long as five months. Jesse always persevered, though it is reported he often suspected his wife of extra-marital affairs, including May 30th, the day of the near fatal car accident, in which police reports indicate they were arguing again.

(Full Story)

Evolution's Case Built On Unproven Assumptions

By Bob Ellis
Dakota Voice

Ken Blanchard at the South Dakota Politics blog continues the ongoing blogosphere discussion of the merits of evolution theory by referring to a review by Jerry Coyne of Michael Behe's new book, The Edge of Evolution.

South Dakota Politics is one of my favorite blogs, but I have to disagree with Blanchard. He says,

I note only how much ground Behe is willing to concede to evolutionary theory. From Coyne:

For a start, let us be clear about what Behe now accepts about evolutionary theory. He has no problem with a 4.5-billion-year-old Earth, nor with evolutionary change over time, nor apparently...
(Full Story)

South Dakota Nonprofits Exonerated by IRS

Alpha Center, National Abstinence Clearinghouse targeted by liberal group

WASHINGTON — Attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund have helped to secure exoneration by the Internal Revenue Service for two non-profit organizations targeted by a Left wing special interest group in Washington. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington sent a complaint to the IRS, demanding that it open an investigation to revoke the tax-exempt status of a crisis pregnancy center and an abstinence information clearinghouse in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. (Full Story)

3-D Computer Model Sheds Light on Dead Sea Scrolls Site

Helps answer questions about Essenes community at Qumran

LOS ANGELES, June 19 /Standard Newswire/ -- The mysterious archaeological ruins located paces from where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered 60 years ago served first as a fortress before being adopted by a Jewish religious sect, two UCLA researchers contend.

"Qumran was established originally as a fortress, just as the archaeological evidence shows, and then it was abandoned," said Robert R. Cargill, a UCLA graduate student in Near Eastern Culture and Languages. "It was later resettled by the Essenes, an early Jewish religious community that came from Jerusalem, bringing with them the scrolls and continuing to copy and compose new scrolls." (Full Story)

Lives Shattered: When the Truth No Longer Matters


By Carrie K. Hutchens

The madness that is over-taking this world never fails to amaze me! I continue to wonder just how all this is possible. When did we stop being, as a whole, compassionate people with the ability to comprehend and reason? When did that all happen? Is there a cure for the insanity that is devouring us?

Mike Nifong, the district attorney from North Carolina, got caught withholding evidence that PROVED the accused were innocent of the charges against them and caught lying to the court. That is spelled, P-R-O-V-E-D and C-A-U-G-H-T! Yet, there are those who are still talking as though the three Duke lacrosse team members (accused of rape) are guilty and that their money simply bought them out of it. Excuse me?!?!? (Full Story)

Video: Robert Spencer - The Truth About Muhammad, Part 5

The Heritage Foundation: Robert Spencer knows a thing or two about the prophet Mohammed. His latest book, The Truth about Muhammad: Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion, looks at what Islam's founder actually did and taught.

Illegitimacy: Unintended Consequence of Abortion

John R. Lott Jr. has a piece at the Opinion Journal today about the rise in illegitimacy due to abortion.

You'd expect abortion on demand to mean fewer out-of-wedlock births, so what's the deal?

As to the first puzzle, part of the answer lies in attitudes to premarital sex. With abortion seen as a backup, women as well as men became less careful in using contraceptives as well as more likely to have premarital sex. There were more unplanned pregnancies. But legal abortion did not mean every unplanned pregnancy led to abortion. After all, just because abortion is legal, does not mean that the decision is an easy one.

Many academic studies have shown that legalized abortion, by encouraging premarital sex, increased the number of unplanned births, even outweighing the reduction in unplanned births due to abortion. In the United States from the early 1970s, when abortion was liberalized, through the late 1980s, there was a tremendous increase in the rate of out-of-wedlock births, rising from an average of 5% of all births in 1965-69 to more than 16% two decades later (1985-1989). For blacks, the numbers soared from 35% to 62%. While not all of this rise can be attributed to liberalized abortion rules, it was nevertheless a key contributing factor.

Many of the attitudes Lott mentions (seeing abortion as backup contraception, the man washing his hands of the situation, etc.) are attitudes I once held when I used to tomcat around (before I gave my life over to the Lord, then got married). Thankfully I never got a woman pregnant back then, but if I had, abortion was my backup plan. I shudder to think what I might have done, back when I believed what I was spoon-fed by the Leftist media.

There are often unintended consequences to our actions, especially when they involve an escape from responsible behavior. Apparently this is yet another unintended consequence of abortion: more children growing up outside the ideal family home...and paying the price for it.

Nearly Half in SD Women's Prison Used Meth

From KELO, a staggaring statistic:

A state prison system official says 42 percent of the women who are locked up in South Dakota are hooked on methamphetamine or have used the drug.

When I interviewed state Senator Bill Napoli a couple of months ago for a column on the new drug court pilot program in Meade County, he told me the state women's prison was overflowing, due largely in part to drug addiction.

Drug court seeks to redirect the nonviolent drug user (not dealers) into a comprehensive rehab program to break the addiction. Drug court in other states (South Dakota is the last state not to have a drug court) have produced better results with less cost than traditional drug rehab programs.

The legislature approved funds for the Meade County program during the last session, and the program is set to go online in July.

Looks like they'll have plenty of business.

New Stealth Amnesty Bill

The Heritage Foundation has posted a link to the new and resurrected amnesty, er, immigration bill introduced by Senators Ted Kennedy and Arlen Specter (doesn't that just make you wince?).

It sounds like the bill will be on the fast track to a vote (obviously to minimize protests from us bothersome law-and-order types who also want protected borders).

Go read the bill and follow up with the Heritage Foundation in days to come as they analyze the bill. *WARNING: The bill is a 20 MB download, so don't try it if you're on a dialup connection.

Climate Scientist: Global Warming Unsupported by Evidence

From the Courier Mail, environmental scientist and professor at James Cook University Bob Carter says global warming is just a lot of "hot air":

The salient facts are these. First, the accepted global average temperature statistics used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change show that no ground-based warming has occurred since 1998. Oddly, this eight-year-long temperature stasis has occurred despite an increase over the same period of 15 parts per million (or 4 per cent) in atmospheric CO2.

Second, lower atmosphere satellite-based temperature measurements, if corrected for non-greenhouse influences such as El Nino events and large volcanic eruptions, show little if any global warming since 1979, a period over which atmospheric CO2 has increased by 55 ppm (17 per cent).

Third, there are strong indications from solar studies that Earth's current temperature stasis will be followed by climatic cooling over the next few decades.

I thought this was "settled science" and there was no dissent? Hmmmmmm...

Monday, June 18, 2007

Poll: Less than One Percent of Christians Believe Evolution-Only Should be Taught

40% believe children should learn both creation and evolution

HOUSTON, Texas, June 18, /Christian Newswire/ -- ChristiaNet.com, the world's largest Christian portal with twelve million monthly pages loads recently conducted a poll asking participants to decide whether Creationism or Evolution should be taught to children in the classroom. Participants could also cast a vote in favor of both being taught or for neither choice. Voters were given the opportunity to comment about their selection. Because ChristiaNet's Internet community consists largely of people who claim to follow the Christian faith, the results of the poll were surprising. (Full Story)

Poll: Most Americans Want a Religious President

Nearly half say their faith guides their political views

FAIRFIELD, Conn., June 14 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- According to the Sacred Heart University Polling Institute, a nation-wide telephone survey of 958 Americans reveals what role religion may play in the 2008 elections.

Over half of all respondents with an opinion, 60.7%, believe a presidential candidate should be a religious person while 39.3% do not. (Full Story)

Bush's 'Fiscal Restraint' - How Politicians Think

By Paul E. Scates

The headline was enough to make any American taxpayer stand up and cheer – “Bush Threatens Veto of Runaway Congressional Spending.”

But wait a minute...who is this “Bush” who’s making such a promise? If it’s our president, we need to recall that during the past ten years, while the Republican Party has controlled Congress, he didn’t veto even one appropriations bill. Even the most expensive public works legislation in history, the $286.4 BILLION highway appropriations bill of 2005, which contained over $24 BILLION in earmarks – i.e., pet projects selected by virtually every senator and representative to gain favor with voters by providing federal funds in the form of construction projects and jobs, and added just prior to the final votes so nobody has the opportunity to question or oppose these expenditures. (Full Story)

A Chance of Having a Chance: The Jesse Ramirez Case


By Carrie K. Hutchens

It's happening again! A spouse attempting to have a spouse starved and dehydrated to death. This time it is in Arizona.

News reports state that on May 30th, Jesse Ramirez and his wife Rebecca were in the mist of an argument, when he lost control of the SUV they were driving in, which resulted in a roll over crash. Both were ejected from the vehicle. Jesse, 36, reportedly suffered critical injuries, which include a broken neck and head injuries, while Rebecca, 33, suffered only minor injuries. (Full Story)

Video: Robert Spencer - The Truth About Muhammad, Part 4

The Heritage Foundation: Robert Spencer knows a thing or two about the prophet Mohammed. His latest book, The Truth about Muhammad: Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion, looks at what Islam's founder actually did and taught.

Leading Australian Scientist: Global Warming Just Politics

Ooops, yet another scientist who isn't with the herd on global warming. This time, a top Australian scientist who says it's just a bunch of political hot air.
From MineWeb:

"Global warming is not a word of science, it's a word of politics," he said.

How can he say this? I thought the science was settled? I thought there was inconclusive proof that this global warming was unprecedented and undeniably caused by man's SUVs, power plants, etc.
There is no scientific evidence that carbon dioxide causes global warming.

Over time the planet will "wobble" on its axis, and over time the sun will generate sun spots, so there have been times where the earth has been far warmer than it is today - an example of this was an abundance of fruit trees near Hadrian's Wall built in AD 122-30 on the border of England and Scotland.

Prof Plimer, who is Professor of Mine Geology at Adelaide University, said what is clearly misunderstood is that 96% of greenhouse gases are created by water vapour, almost entirely through mother nature, with the "man made" component being 0.001%. He asked: Who would want to eradicate water vapour?

Temperature variances taken since the late 1880s to 2000 in the United States showed that temperatures had increased marginally in cities and urban areas but declined in rural areas and a factor behind the heavily populated areas was the impact of concrete, roads and reflection.

I believe this last paragraph is one of the factors discussed in Michael Crichton's "State of Fear," which was a novel but was factually well-researched.

We all know it's usually hotter in cities because of all the concrete and steel that bounces back the warmth of the sun, rather than gently absorbing it as dirt and vegetation does. As civilization grows, more of our climate monitoring equipment is located in urban areas which can result in higher average temps. Meanwhile, as the article points out, many rural areas have actually seen declines in temperature. CO2 Science publishes historic temperature readings each week from around the globe which show temperature drops in the past 50-100 years. If the global climate were truly affected by man's activity, these temperature drops would be impossible.

Don't believe everything you're told, just because the messenger is someone in a white coat with letters after their name. Scientists are subject to the same temptations, fears and biases as the rest of us.

DV Poll Results: Immigration Legislation

Here are the results from last week's Dakota Voice poll: What do you think will be the next development on the illegal immigration issue?

The amnesty caucus will revive the amnesty bill per President Bush's request 25%
Lawmakers serious about the law and border control will produce a bill that honors both. 25%
Nothing significant will happen in the near future. 50%

The new poll is up in the upper left corner of the page: Should President Bush pardon Scooter Libby?

Thanks to those who participated in last week's poll!

Why Liberals Hate Being Called Liberals

From Adbusters, an article by a liberal about liberalism and how liberals hate to be called liberals (Warning: contains profanity).

This is by Rolling Stone editor Matt Taibbi and it's called "The American Left's Silly Victim Complex."

I've often chided liberals for being so ashamed of being called what they are (not too many conservatives are ashamed of being called conservatives); they always prefer that forward-sounding, hopeful, optimistic "progressive" that few people understand, to the "liberal" that all too many people understand.

Apparently Taibbi also finds this "shame of the name" interesting:

When the people who are the public voice of a political class are afraid to even wear the party colors in public, that’s a bad sign, and it’s worth asking what the reasons are.

Of course, Taibbi attributes many of the wrong reasons for this, beginning by blaming the handful of conservative media outlets for giving liberalism a bad name, even though the vast bulk of the "mainstream" media (ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, PBS, NPR, New York Times, et al) have been hard at work for decades to slap an attractive label on this dead-end political philosophy which is paved with broken dreams.

At times, though Taibbi's analysis is dead-on:
Thus, the people who are the public voice of American liberalism rarely have any real connection to the ordinary working people whose interests they putatively champion. They tend instead to be well-off, college-educated yuppies from California or the East Coast, and hard as they try to worry about food stamps or veterans’ rights or securing federal assistance for heating oil bills, they invariably gravitate instead to things that actually matter to them – like the slick Al Gore documentary on global warming, or the “All Things Considered” interview on NPR with the British author of Revolutionary Chinese Cookbook.

And another insight where he hits it dead-on:
This is another dirty little secret of the left – the fact that, at least when it comes to per-capita income, those interminable right-wing criticisms about liberals being “elitists” are actually true. According to a 2004 Pew report, Americans who self-identify as liberals have an average annual income of $71,000 – the highest-grossing political category in America. They’re also the best-educated class, with over one in four being post-graduates.

Would that he'd go one step further and explain that much of the reason these "educated" people are so liberal is that they're indoctrinated with liberalism from Day One showing up at college by snobbish liberal academia that cannot harbor the slightest whisper of something not in harmony with Das Kapital or the Communist Manifesto. (Of course they're not opposed to some good ole' capitalism when it fattens their wallets).

Perhaps one of Taibbi's most astute observations of why the Left is so wacky and has fallen out of favor with the average American:
We all know where this stuff comes from. Anyone who’s ever been to a lefty political meeting knows the deal – the problem is the “spirit of inclusiveness” stretched to the limits of absurdity. The post-sixties dogma that everyone’s viewpoint is legitimate, everyone‘s choice about anything (lifestyle, gender, ethnicity, even class) is valid, that’s now so totally ingrained that at every single meeting, every time some yutz gets up and starts rambling about anything, no matter how ridiculous, no one ever tells him to shut the [REDACTED] up. Next thing you know, you’ve got guys on stilts wearing mime makeup and Cat-in-the-Hat striped top-hats leading a half-million people at an anti-war rally. Why is that guy there? Because no one told him that war is a matter of life and death and that he should leave his [REDACTED] stilts at home.

I recall one liberal conference in particular that I attended a few years ago which perfectly illustrated this. There were some of the most whacked people on the planet getting up and speaking at this event (some talking about crystals, and how we're all just composed of energy waves and not really matter, and drivel such as this), but all the other liberals in the room simply nodded in a sage and broad-gauged manner and rendered the obligatory "tolerant" applause when these nut-jobs sat down.

No, I'm just not buying into the whole "progressive" thing. I think it's a waste of everyone's time forcing the average American to spend months or years to learn that "progressives" are just liberals with a new name. Let's just save everyone time and trouble, and use a term that everyone knows what it means.

You can call liberalism "progressive" or "onomatopoeia" or any other thing all you want, but a pig in lipstick is still a pig.

HT to World Magazine blog.

Police Smash Global Pedophile Ring

Police Smash Global Pedophile Ring

By D'ARCY DORAN (Associated Press Writer)
From Associated Press
June 18, 2007 7:39 PM EDT

LONDON - A team of international investigators infiltrated an Internet chat room used by pedophiles who streamed live videos of children being raped, rescuing 31 children and identifying more than 700 suspects worldwide.

Undercover officers in Britain, the U.S., Canada and Australia busted up the pedophile ring using surveillance techniques more commonly associated with fighting terrorism and organized crime.

The chat room, which was called "Kids the Light of Our Lives," featured images, including live videos, of children - some only months old - being subjected to horrific sexual abuse, said Jim Gamble, chief executive of Britain's Child Exploitation and Online Protection Center."

(Full Story)

I wonder if the ACLU is rushing to the rescue of the accused?

Why is the church losing the marriage battle?

From LifeSite.net, Phil Lawler, the editor and founder of Catholic World News, says the reason the Catholic church is losing the marriage battle is the failure to discipline errant Catholic politicians:

Lawler said at the time, "It's clear that the archdiocese is not serious about this issue." He added, "There is no real penalty being exacted on people who are in support of same sex marriage."

This is also true in the area of abortion. Having an opinion contrary to biblical doctrine is one thing; it probably warrants better education on what the Scriptures say. But actively working against what the Bible says--that's another thing altogether.

If, after biblical steps are taken (witnesses, confrontation, call to repentance, refusal to repent), someone in the church continues to defend and promote things contrary to the Bible, then they should be put out of the church.

This goes not only for Catholics, but anyone and any church that associates themselves with Christ. If someone refuses to change after being shown their error and given an opportunity to change, then further association between that church and that individual only brings discredit on that church.

I've seen church discipline (disfellowship, or as Catholics call it, excommunication) administered a couple of times in recent years. It's unpleasant, but necessary both for the good of the individual and the good of the church.

Need an example? Look at the harm the pedophile priests, and especially the church's failure to deal with the problem, have done to the Catholic Church's credibility.

When churches don't discipline their members who are publicly behaving in ways contrary to the Bible, they give the impression that the church condones that behavior. This confuses the public and brings discredit on that church, on the Bible, and ultimately on God himself.

Data Supporting Global Warming Myth May be Compromised

The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review features a story about meteorologist Anthony Watts of Chico, CA who is going around the country checking the accuracy of 1221 weather sites used by National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Watts believes the accuracy of data from many stations has been compromised by their surroundings.

To assure accuracy, stations (essentially older thermometers in little four-legged wooden sheds or digital thermometers mounted on poles) should be 100 feet from buildings, not placed on hot concrete, etc. But as photos on Watts' site show, the station in Forest Grove, Ore., stands 10 feet from an air-conditioning exhaust vent. In Roseburg, Ore., it's on a rooftop near an AC unit. In Tahoe, Calif., it's next to a drum where trash is burned.

His findings can be found at surfacestations.org.

Here are a couple of pics from his homepage showing a well-placed weather site versus one that is almost certainly compromised by surrounding objects.

Notice the difference in trend lines between the uncompromised station and the one surrounded by asphalt, air conditioning exhausts and other buildings. Coincidence?

Father of Scientific Climatology: Global Warming is Hooey

From the Capital Times, Reid Bryson says global warming is "a bunch of hooey." Is he a radical Right-winger? Is he a pro-business drone? No, he's known as the father of scientific climatology.

There is no question the earth has been warming. It is coming out of the "Little Ice Age," he said in an interview this week.

"However, there is no credible evidence that it is due to mankind and carbon dioxide. We've been coming out of a Little Ice Age for 300 years. We have not been making very much carbon dioxide for 300 years. It's been warming up for a long time," Bryson said.

The Little Ice Age was driven by volcanic activity. That settled down so it is getting warmer, he said.

Even if the scientific consensus claimed by Al Gore were true (it isn't--not by a longshot), what would it mean?
Just because almost all of the scientific community believes in man-made global warming proves absolutely nothing, Bryson said. "Consensus doesn't prove anything, in science or anywhere else, except in democracy, maybe."

Even in a democracy, it only proves what the majority believes; it doesn't prove that what the majority believes is right or true. So why do we have all this global warming hysteria in the first place?
So, if global warming isn't such a burning issue, why are thousands of scientists so concerned about it?

"Why are so many thousands not concerned about it?" Bryson shot back.

"There is a lot of money to be made in this," he added. "If you want to be an eminent scientist you have to have a lot of grad students and a lot of grants. You can't get grants unless you say, 'Oh global warming, yes, yes, carbon dioxide.'"

I've said before that global warming has become a religion to many (it requires faith just like a religion, and it's disciples display a religious-like ardor), and apparently I'm not alone in that analysis:
"There is very little truth to what is being said and an awful lot of religion. It's almost a religion. Where you have to believe in anthropogenic (or man-made) global warming or else you are nuts."

What does Bryson think of Al Gore's "Inconvenient Truth?"
"Don't make me throw up," he said. "It is not science. It is not true."

The article is a bit lengthy, but very informative and even has quotes from global warming disciples. I'd encourage you to read the whole thing.

BBC Admits: We're Biased for the Left

From WorldNetDaily:

The BBC, the British Broadcasting Corporation, has acknowledged the network is biased toward the left, following a report commissioned by the company.

A yearlong probe revealed the corporation especially partial in its treatment of single-issue politics such as climate change, poverty, race and religion, according to the London Times.

"It concludes that the bias has extended across drama, comedy and entertainment, with the corporation pandering to politically motivated celebrities and trendy causes," the paper said.

Here's a specific instance of how their bias plays out:
A seminar on staff impartiality held last year is documented, with officials admitting they would broadcast images of the Bible being thrown away, but not the Koran for fear of offending Muslims.

Now if you could only get the "mainstream" media in the United States to admit their bias and deal with it...

Sunday, June 17, 2007

Study: Media Needs Improvement in Transparency

Time, CNN among the worst

COLLEGE PARK, Md., June 13 /Standard Newswire/ -- The Scooter Libby trial dramatically illustrated that all is not well in the Bush administration and in Washington power politics in general. But it also showed how little most of mainstream media care about transparency, despite frequent calls from media organizations for greater accountability and openness from public officials. During the Libby saga, not only were journalists reluctant to say what they knew and how they knew it, but their news organizations were also loathe to admit mistakes and seemingly couldn't bear going public with their internal staff and reporting guidelines. (Full Story)

Scientifically Based 911 Animation Created by Purdue

Simulation shows effects of plane crash on WTC

WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind., June 13 /Standard Newswire/ -- Although most Americans believe they know what brought down the World Trade Center twin towers on Sept. 11, 2001, civil engineers are still seeking answers to questions that could save lives in the future. (Full Story)

Someone has to tell these people that freedom isn't free

By Gordon Garnos

AT ISSUE: Communities across South Dakota are preparing to commemorate this nation¹s most significant observance, Independence Day. But in the very wake of this important day patriotism does not seem to be playing as important of a role to far too many people. Someone has to tell these people that our freedom in this great land isn¹t free. (Full Story)

Mike Nifong Disbarred: Is it over???

Disbarred Duke prosecutor's future dim

By AARON BEARD, Associated Press Writer Sun Jun 17, 7:32 PM ET

RALEIGH, N.C. - His law license lost and reputation in tatters, Mike Nifong seemingly can fall no further. But the disgraced prosecutor who committed "intentional prosecutorial misconduct" in his pursuit of the Duke lacrosse rape case faces an uncertain — and likely troubled — future.

The falsely accused players and their families, having racked up millions of dollars in legal bills, appear likely to file civil lawsuits against the disbarred prosecutor. Their attorneys want a judge to consider holding Nifong in criminal contempt for lying to the court.

"Some people will take that as being mean-spirited and kicking somebody when they're down," defense attorney Joseph Cheshire said Sunday. "But we believe that this issue is enormously important and it carries significant precedent and (the judge) ought to be the one to make that decision because it happened in his court."

(full story)

Native American Kids Mistreated in Schools

Alan Aker has a great column in the Rapid City Journal this morning on the mistreatment of American Indian kids in school. The column doesn't go where you probably think it would, though.

But the bigots are not the ones who think more discipline is needed for Indian students; the bigots are the ones demanding, and winning, less discipline for them. The discrimination against Indians happens every time they don’t get disciplined for breaking the rules.

The bigots say that because Indians are disciplined more than other kids, it must mean that teachers and principals are “out to get” Indian kids and are giving preferential treatment to the other kids. They’re arguing for a quota system.

Their logic requires that if 10 percent of the kids are Indian, then only 10 percent of the disciplined kids can be Indian. If Indian kids break the rules more often, you have to stop disciplining them while you continue disciplining white kids, and that’s discrimination.

Is there a reason why Native American kids might have more discipline problems than other kids? Is it bigotry? Is it some sort of racial defect? Of course not:
A higher percentage of them come from homes in which there is alcoholism. A higher percentage of them come from fatherless homes. A higher percentage of them come from homes in which there is abuse or neglect. A higher percentage of them have relatives who have committed crimes and are in prison.

Take any group of blond-haired, blue-eyed, white kids and drop them into an alcoholic, fatherless, abusive, criminal home life, and guess what? A higher percentage of them will break rules in school. It has nothing to do with race.

Alan displays tremendous courage for such a politically incorrect but true message today. Proverbs says if we love our children we'll discipline them.

Happy Father's Day!

God give us Victory in Iraq

God give us Victory in Iraq.

Bless our brave troops and their leaders. Protect them from al-Qaida. Breathe Love
and Thanks for our Great Champions of Freedom into hearts of the people being liberated,

Please Lord, help patriotism to well up in the Democrat Party and multiply its influence among
Republicans, Independents; and all other Freedom loving people in America and elsewhere.

Radical Islam hates America and calls us the great satan. The terrorists hate all Jews and
many, including Saddam Hussein, thought and those living still think, Hitler was a Hero.

They are waging Jihad (holy war) against us and Israel.....Forever!!

We must understand that one-world liberals have contempt for everything
Nationalistic like "Love for America." These people have seized effective control of many colleges and much of the media and the Democrat Party.
Make a Liberty Pledge Today!
God Bless us in the fight for Liberty;(2)

Clicky Web Analytics