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?

 

READ ABOUT IT...

Saturday, June 07, 2008

Young Courage

You don't see this kind of courage in a lot of adults, much less a 6-year old.

From the Atlanta Journal-Constitution and ABC News comes word of a young boy who rescued his 5-year old friend from drowning.

Josiah, who cannot swim, took off water wings that kept him afloat in the shallow end to join the other kids in the pool's 8-foot deep end. He was not able to keep himself above water without the flotation devices.

Haden noticed a shadow on the pool floor. He strapped on his goggles and dove in to investigate.

"I saw my friend on the bottom," Haden said. "He was on his back, his eyes were open and he was shaking."

Haden, who has been a swimmer for about three years, acted quickly.

"I went right to him and got him," he said, showing how he grabbed Josiah's arm and pulled him up to the surface, using his other arm to propel them both up. "I yelled, 'Help, he drowned,' and laid him on the steps."

Thanks to Haden and some quick CPR, Josiah is doing fine now.

ABC has some video of the rescuer and rescuee here.

At six, this young man already knows what it means to look out for one another.

Good job, Haden!


Obama's life story is a Republican one

BY STAR PARKER
FOUNDER & PRESIDENT
COALITION ON URBAN RENEWAL & EDUCATION

The words we're hearing most during this presidential campaign are "historic" and "change." But what I see is "paradox."

Take our new Democratic Party nominee, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois.

This is a man, to be sure, of extraordinary talent and ambition. But what a gap between the reality he manifests and the reality he talks about.

No one could have predicted, even a year and half ago, that today Obama would stand as leader of his party, running for president of the United States. It's the possibility of this type of surprise -- allowing for the inconceivable and the unpredictable -- that makes freedom so powerful and speaks to the sham and pretense of government and political planning.

Who can question that the success and prosperity of this country -- with its vast cast of individuals who have changed the world through creativity and innovation, with our long list of Nobel Prize winners -- is due to freedom?

And yet, Obama's prescription for the many challenges we face today, whether it is health care, education, or global competition, is increased government planning and control. Here is a man who now stands where no "expert" could have predicted, yet wants to tether our nation's future to the mind games of the same kinds of "experts", rather than letting what truly drives America's unique success -- free individuals and free markets -- work. A paradox.

Also paradoxical is the liberal message we hear from this man whose own life is the picture of conservatism. Who is greater proof of the conservative message that anyone in today's United States, willing to pay the price in grit, hard work, and determination, can achieve any success that his or her talent justifies, than Obama?

He loves and is devoted to his wife and daughters, who he sends to private school. The family portrait is traditional in every sense. If we measured Obama by the test of "do as I do and not as I say" this first black presidential nominee would be a Republican and not a Democrat.

And what about New York Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton?

We're hearing testimonials to what her run for president has done for American women. I am an American woman and I'm hard pressed to see a thing that Clinton's campaign has contributed to my life or the realities and challenges that I face.

It's a certain kind of narcissism that drives liberal feminists to think they are representing the interests of "women."

A number of years ago I was invited by Newsweek to attend a luncheon of prominent women in New York. I think I was the only conservative in the place.

At my lunch table, I listened to successful women talk about their pride in keeping their maiden name in their marriage. Amidst the banter, I thought about what the destruction of family has done to inner city black communities and about young black single mothers who only wish there was a responsible man in their life, a husband, whose name they would gladly carry.

How is it that Clinton, whose accomplishments directly derive from those of her husband and her willingness to stay years in a flagrantly abusive marriage, is feminism's poster woman? How does Clinton, who sat by untroubled as millions of unborn children were destroyed while she was first lady of Arkansas, and then of the United States, represent women's potential? Or who thinks that the young women damaged by the barbarism of abortion do it as free agents exercising rights, rather than out of confusion and ignorance.

On the other side, we have the paradoxical Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain of Arizona.

McCain somehow thinks that this campaign will be about contrasting visions without seeming to appreciate that being a maverick is not a vision. He's going to have difficulty winning this election by simply branding Obama a liberal when his own conservatism is so amorphous.

No wonder Americans are feeling confused these days. We're not hearing much that makes a lot of sense.

In a year when it looks like rhetoric and style will trump substance, McCain has got his work cut out. He might consider a weekend off with a Bible, a copy of the Constitution, and some old Ronald Reagan speeches.

Star Parker is president of the Coalition on Urban Renewal & Education and author of the new book White Ghetto: How Middle Class America Reflects Inner City Decay.

Prior to her involvement in social activism, Star Parker was a single welfare mother in Los Angeles, California. After receiving Christ, Star returned to college, received a BS degree in marketing and launched an urban Christian magazine. The 1992 Los Angeles riots destroyed her business, yet served as a springboard for her focus on faith and market-based alternatives to empower the lives of the poor.


Friday, June 06, 2008

The Horrendous Killing: Death by Dehydration & Starvation

By Carrie K. Hutchens

Karen Weber, a 57 year old woman from Florida, suffered a stroke in December. Husband, Raymond Weber, has sought to have Mrs. Weber's feeding tube removed claiming she is in a vegetative state. However, according to "Family split on feeding tube - Schiavo case remembered" (The Washington Times -- June 5, 2008), "A judge issued an injunction, prohibiting the tube's removal, and has appointed a committee composed of a neurologist and two psychologists to determine her competency."

In March of 2005, Florida held the public and horrendous execution of an innocent young woman, who had mysteriously collapsed on February 25, 1990. It was a death that stretched through thirteen days of unspeakable torture and hideous cruelty that would not be allowed if done unto an animal. But it wasn't done unto an animal -- it was done to Terri Schiavo. Ms. Schiavo died at 9:05 a.m. on March 31, 2005 with the world watching. Will we be forced to watch again?

The Washington Times quoted Mr. Weber's attorney (Colin Cameron)...
"Mr. Weber is of the opinion that Karen does not want to live as a vegetable and that she would prefer the body to take its natural course," Mr. Cameron said.
Death by dehydration and starvation is not a "natural course." It is a forced and agonizing death.

To order no heroic measures to counter an event created by the body giving up, is one thing. To order the removal of a feeding tube is quite another. Removing a feeding tube is creating the event and staging an intended outcome from the onset. That is not "letting someone go" -- that is "making the person go."

It is difficult for some to feel comfortable with Florida having jurisdiction over helpless individuals who have fallen victim to illness or injury after the Schiavo and Ted Stith cases. (In January 2006, Ted Stith Sr had a stroke while visiting in Florida. On or about January 31, 2006, he died as a result of death by dehydration and starvation with no time given for a hint of recovery.) Will Mrs. Weber share their legacy?

On the other hand, unlike the Schiavo case, the article goes on to say...
"Mr. Weber did not contest the March injunction that kept his wife's feeding tube in place, Mr. Cameron noted. If the judge determines that Mrs. Weber has the capacity to make her own choices, Mr. Weber would abide by the decision.

"There is no intent at this point to fight what's going on," Mr. Cameron said.

Martha Tatro, Mrs. Weber's mother, objects to the removal of the feeding tube and has hired attorney Joseph Rodowicz to assist in her efforts to prevent it from happening. Both Mrs. Tatro and Mr. Rodowicz are adamant that Karen Weber is responsive and deserves a chance to live. Thus, a reason the judge has issued the injunction and appointed a committee to review Mrs. Weber's condition and make a determination and recommendation.

Mr. Weber may very well have the best of intentions and be under the belief that removal of a feeding tube is a quiet, natural and peaceful way to go. (Some in Florida preach such to be so.) However, one can hope that as he gathers further and more complete information, he will come to realize that the forced and agonizing death by dehydration and starvation should never be an option considered and therefore determine that it won't be.


Carrie Hutchens is a former law enforcement officer and a freelance writer who is active in fighting against the death culture movement and the injustices within the judicial and law enforcement systems.


The Great Hand of Providence

As the 64th anniversary of the D-Day invasion at Normandy draws to a close, consider the words spoken by President Ronald Reagan at U.S. Ranger Monument Pointe du Hoc in France on June 6, 1984.

From Human Events:

Something else helped the men of D-Day: their rock-hard belief that Providence would have a great hand in the events that would unfold here; that God was an ally in this great cause. And so, the night before the invasion, when Colonel Wolverton asked his parachute troops to kneel with him in prayer he told them: Do not bow your heads, but look up so you can see God and ask His blessing in what we're about to do. Also that night, General Matthew Ridgway on his cot, listening in the darkness for the promise God made to Joshua: "I will not fail thee nor forsake thee.''

These are the things that impelled them; these are the things that shaped the unity of the Allies.

The entire speech is worth the read, and fitting for this day of remembrance for the brave men who risked so much and gave so much so that other men might be free.


Poll: Support for Nuclear Power is High

A new poll out from Zogby today shows a strong majority supporting new nuclear power plants.

Republicans (85%) and political independents (70%) were more likely than Democrats (49%) to support the construction of new nuclear power plants. A majority of respondents of all ages – with the exception of those age 18 to 24 (47%) – expressed support for building new nuclear power plants, with the greatest overall support among those age 65 and older (78%). Men (82%) are more likely than women (52%) to favor building new nuclear power plants in the U.S.

Amazingly, a hair under half of Democrats support it; I don't know if support will ever get stronger (without energy prices going higher).

Some people only know nuclear power through liberal fear-machine fiction movies like China Syndrome, and maybe some sketchy information about Three Mile Island or Russia's Chernobyl disaster.

I lived in Europe shortly after Chernobyl, and while it was definitely a bad thing, it should be understood that the chain of events that led to the explosion was an unlikely "comedy of errors" that defy odds of repetition; in other words, the Russians did almost everything wrong, every step of the way.

While some mistakes were made during the Three Mile Island incident in Pennsylvania, it is an example that (unlike the sloppiness of the Soviets) the technology is safe, even when the unexpected happens.

When I lived in England back in the late 1980s, you couldn't swing a dead cat without hitting a nuclear reactor. Take a drive of any significant distance anywhere in a built-up area and you were going to see at least one nuclear reactor. England is much more densely populated that the United States, and the British people are doing quite well living with nuclear power.

It isn't just a matter of rising fuel costs. Remember just a few years ago when California was having brownouts and rolling blackouts? Other parts of the country's power grid is overtaxed, too.

Unfortunately, due to fear mongering from environmental extremists, pandering by liberals in congress, and a lack of action by Republicans when they were in charge, the entire energy policy of the United States is still somewhere around the late 1970s or early 1980s. We have a lot more people living here now, with a lot more energy demands.

It's time we quit playing around and craft an energy policy fitting for the 21st Century, and for the world's lone superpower. These poll results indicate the time is NOW.


South Dakota Mostly Drought-Free

KOTA has a story today pointing to the US Department of Agriculture's drought watch page indicating there is little drought remaining in South Dakota...for now.



A couple of years ago, most of the state was covered in D2-D4. Coincidentally (?) in 2005 after Governor Mike Rounds declared a day of prayer for the drought, almost all or all of those D4 areas disappeared when we received some much-needed rain, and the other areas dropped a level or two.


Homeschooling Equals Educational Anarchy?

You've heard the saying about the pot calling the kettle black? There's a classic case of that in California's public school system.

Even before the intellectually and morally brilliant decision that two men or two women who are sexually involved can constitute a "marriage," the judicial braintrust on the Left Coast ruled that parents have no right to homeschool their children.

A number of groups are working to overturn this ruling, with many on both sides issuing "friend of the court" briefs, arguing for and against the ruling.

The California Teachers Association has of course come down in favor of the anti-homeschool ruling, and in doing so, have made a grossly inaccurate charge.

From OneNewsNow:

Dacus did a double-take when he read one specific charge made by the teachers' union. "In their brief, the teachers' union said that to allow parents to be able to home school without being credentialed teachers could result in 'educational anarchy,'" he shares.

That argument, he says, discounts reality. "This is ignoring the facts that home schooling is widespread in California," he exclaims. "Over 200,000 children are being home schooled right now in California -- and they score higher academically than not only public school children, but also children in traditional private schools. If there's anarchy, the anarchy is in public schools."

That nails it! With children being taught about condoms but not sexual responsibility; with children being taught that terms like "mother" and "father" are obsolete, bigoted terms; with children being taught they are descended from apes and have no God-given dignity and worth; with children being taught that their religious faith is something to be ashamed of or something to be kept out of the "real world;" with children who have an adults sexual knowledge but can barely read or do math...with the state of our public education (especially in California), the educational anarchy is in the public schools.

My 10-year-old daughter (who is homeschooled) recently took her required standardized test. Instead of "educational anarchy," she scored "post high school" in most areas, and the remaining ones were all several years ahead of her normal grade level. And we don't even push our daughter as hard as many homeschool families do.

Some school districts spend north of $10,000 per child per year, but we spent less than 1/10th of that (I would expect most homeschool families do) and got better results. What's the magic?

Parental involvement. You can still have parental involvement in education even when the kids are going to public school...but they're going to get a lot more of it in homeschool. Sadly, many parents don't even put in much involvement when their kids are in public school--and it shows.

Until we as a society decide we're going to put our children's welfare ahead of our grownup toys and self-actualization goals, academic results are going to continue to stink. The choice is ours.


New 'I Believe' License Plates in South Carolina



Reprinted by permission of The Christian Post


By Aaron Leichman
Christian Post Reporter
Fri, Jun. 06 2008 05:32 PM ET

Drivers in South Carolina are now be able to purchase license plates that display and represent their faith, thanks to a new measure passed by the South Carolina legislature that went into effect Thursday.

Under the new legislation, residents will be able to purchase license plates engrained with the words “I Believe” alongside the image of a cross and stained glass church window.

While support for the measure among lawmakers was unanimous, critics said that the new law was a violation of the separation of church and state.

A nearly identical measure to create “I Believe” plates in Florida died in April after lawmakers found themselves divided over the issue.

"The Legislature is clearly favoring Christianity over other faiths, and that violates the separation of church and state and basic fairness," said Americans United spokesman Joe Conn, according to Cybercast News Service.

"Under our Constitution, government must never favor one religion over others,” he added.

Republican Senator Lawrence K. Grooms, one of the sponsors of the bill, however, disagreed.

“I didn’t see a constitutional problem with it,” he explained to The New York Times.

“We have other plates with religious symbols on them and phrases like ‘In God We Trust.’ Just because it’s a cross, some very closed-minded people don’t believe it should be on a plate,” he added.

Other lawmakers also added that the new license plates would be no different than the other 200 different license plates that South Carolina residents currently have the option of choosing from.

“[I]t is my personal view that the largest proclamation of one’s faith ought to be in how one lives one’s life,” Republican Gov. Mark Sanford wrote, commenting on the legislation Thursday after it became law.

According to reports, proceeds from the plates will not benefit any organization.

Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


Only $45 Trillion to Stop HALF of Global Warming

From Yahoo News:

TOKYO - The world needs to invest $45 trillion in energy in coming decades, build some 1,400 nuclear power plants and vastly expand wind power in order to halve greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, according to an energy study released Friday.

That's all, huh? A paltry $45 trillion. Just 15 times the entire annual budget of the United States to stop half of something that, if it's happening at all, is almost certainly natural (sun, natural climate cycles) and completely beyond our control anyway.

And they say Christians are nuts for having faith in what can't be proven!

At least not a single thing in the Bible has been proven false; a far better track record than Al Gore's global warming religion.


Texas Board of Ed. Considers Removing Criticism of Evolution



Reprinted by permission of The Christian Post


By Lawrence Jones
Christian Post Reporter
Fri, Jun. 06 2008 10:07 AM ET


Darwinists in Texas are seeking to remove a science standard that requires schools to teach both the "strengths and weaknesses" of evolution.

Under current standards for the state's science curriculum, students are expected to "analyze, review, and critique scientific explanations, including hypotheses and theories, as to their strengths and weaknesses using scientific evidence and information."

But when the Texas Board of Education look to update state science standards this summer, some committee members will ask the board to remove the "strengths and weaknesses" phrase, according to The New York Times.

Among those requesting the board to drop the phrase is Kevin Fisher, a committee member who told the NY Times that questions left unanswered by evolution shouldn't be regarded as its weaknesses.

Other critics include Texas Freedom Network, a group that has opposed state proposals for Bible classes and Bible textbooks in the past.

Several board members appear to favor the current standard, saying it maintains a balanced debate on evolution.

"Evolution is not fact. Evolution is a theory and, as such, cannot be proven," Board Vice Chairman David Bradley told The Houston Chronicle. "Students need to be able to jump to their own conclusions."

Bradley also dismissed concerns by critics over the board's intention to sneak religion into the classroom.

"The only thing that this board is going to do is ask for accuracy."

Barbara Cargill, the vice chair of the board's Committee on Instruction, said giving students the freedom to discuss both sides of evolution will ensure them a "well-rounded education."

"It prompts them to be critical thinkers, and it also helps them to respect the opinions of other students even if they disagree," she told The Houston Chronicle.

Meanwhile, Discovery Institute, an intelligent design think tank, has rejected allegations that the group is using the "strength and weaknesses" rhetoric as a new strategy in pushing intelligent design in schools following the 2005 Dover case – when intelligent design was barred from being taught in Pennsylvania's Middle District public school science classrooms.

On the organization's blog site, staff member Robert Crowther points out that the "strengths and weaknesses" language was adopted by the Texas Board of Education over a decade ago, long before the Dover case, and that debate over it has been going on across the nation since then. In 2003, the Texas Board of Education was asked to enforce its previously adopted "strengths and weaknesses" language in biology textbooks but has yet to fully comply, according to Crowther.

Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


64th Anniversary of D-Day Invasion

American Minute from William J. Federer

D-Day was JUNE 6, 1944. 156,000 troops landed on the Normandy coast of France in the largest invasion force in history.

Supreme Allied Commander General Dwight Eisenhower issued the order: "You are about to embark upon the Great Crusade...The hopes and prayers of liberty-loving people everywhere march with you...Your task will not be an easy one. Your enemy is well trained, well equipped and battle-hardened. He will fight savagely...Let us all beseech the blessing of Almighty God upon this great and noble undertaking."

President Franklin Roosevelt stated JUNE 6, 1944: "My fellow Americans: Last night, when I spoke with you about the fall of Rome, I knew at that moment that troops of the United States and our allies were crossing the Channel in another and greater operation...I ask you to join with me in prayer: Almighty God, Our sons, pride of our Nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion, and our civilization...They will need Thy blessings...Some will never return. Embrace these, Father, and receive them, Thy heroic servants, into Thy kingdom."

FDR concluded: "Help us, Almighty God, to rededicate ourselves in renewed faith to Thee."

William J. Federer is a nationally recognized author, speaker, and president of Amerisearch, Inc, which is dedicated to researching our American heritage. The American Minute radio feature looks back at events in American history on the dates they occurred, is broadcast daily across the country and read by thousand on the internet.


Poll: Americans Divided on Whether They Consider Homosexuality a Sin



Reprinted by permission of The Christian Post


Audrey Barrick
Christian Post Reporter
Fri, Jun. 06 2008 08:16 AM ET


Americans are nearly evenly divided on whether they believe homosexual behavior is a sin, a new survey showed.

While 48 percent of Americans agree it is a sin, 45 percent said they don't believe homosexuality is sinful, according to a LifeWay Research study, released Wednesday.

Although those who are religiously affiliated were more likely to call homosexual behavior sinful, the director of the research group cautions that there are still many believers who don't view the behavior as sin.

The study showed that 61 percent of Protestants believe homosexuality is sinful compared to 31 percent who don't. Among born-again, evangelical or fundamentalist Americans, 79 percent say it is sinful while 17 percent do not believe it is.

"Seventeen percent in that latter category may seem low compared to the others, but considering these people consider themselves born-again, evangelical, or fundamentalist, it reminds us of the need for clear biblical teaching on the issue in our community," said Ed Stetzer, director of LifeWay Research, in the report.

"We did not develop our views of sexuality because we flipped a coin or took a poll," he noted. "We believe the teaching of Scripture is clear that monogamous, heterosexual marriage is God’s best for people, culture and society."

Stetzer also called it surprising to find that the majority of Catholics (55 percent) do not believe homosexual behavior is a sin. Only 39 percent of Catholics called it a sin.

Catholics were also most likely to say same-sex attraction is inevitable and determined at birth. Thirty percent of Catholics said that that is what contributes most to homosexuality compared to 20 percent of Protestants, 12 percent of born agains, and 24 percent of Americans overall.

The born-again, evangelical, fundamentalist group (48 percent) is most likely to believe homosexuality is a choice while 42 percent of Protestants, 41 percent of Catholics and 39 percent of Americans agree, saying "choice" is what contributes most to same-sex attraction.

As debate continues over homosexuality and many churches struggle to address the issue, the LifeWay survey found that what a church teaches about homosexuality can greatly impact a person's decision on whether to visit or join the church.

According to survey results, 32 percent of Americans said that if the church they were considering visiting or joining taught that homosexual behavior was sinful, it would negatively impact their decision. Meanwhile, 29 percent of Americans said that it would positively impact their decision.

"It’s clear we have a challenging but essential task," Stetzer commented. "We need to strive to show the love of Christ, while upholding the standard of Scripture, to those who struggle with same-sex attraction."

Many churches have begun to shift from preaching condemnation to showing love to homosexuals while still not compromising their belief that homosexuality is a sin.

In recent years, the Southern Baptist Convention - the largest Protestant denomination in the country - created a task force that would inform, educate and encourage Southern Baptists to be proactive in reaching out to those struggling with same-sex attractions. Bob Stith, who heads the task force, said many, including himself, have harbored a negative and judgmental attitude toward homosexuals and he now wants to encourage fellow Baptists to give a biblical yet compassionate response to homosexuality.

Still, the large Protestant group still has a ways to go when reaching homosexuals.

Tim Wilkins, a Southern Baptist and former homosexual, claims the denomination has not steered much effort toward the Ministry to Homosexuals Task Force.

“If Southern Baptists are going to invest time and money in reaching homosexuals with the Gospel, let's at least steer Southern Baptists to the appropriate resources," Wilkins said Thursday, noting that the task force has received little attention.

Among other findings by LifeWay Research, 66 percent of Americans, Protestants and born agains are personally acquainted with someone who has same-sex attraction. And among those who personally know a homosexual, 44 percent call homosexual behavior sinful and 49 percent say it is not a sin.

The survey was conducted on April 10-12, 2008, on a sample size of 1,201 American adults.

Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


Half of U.S. Oil is Off Limits to Drilling

According to CNS News, a report on the United States' oil reserves has been prepared for congress.

The good news: we have LOTS of oil. The bad news: myopic energy policy prevents us from using about half of it.

The report, which was produced at the request of Congress by the U.S. Department of Interior's Bureau of Land Management (BLM), said there are 279 million acres under federal management where oil and gas could potentially could be extracted.

More than half of it is totally off-limits to drillers.

"The total onshore resource is 31 billion barrels," said BLM's lead scientist Richard Watson, who authored the report. "Of that, 19 billion barrels are currently inaccessible or 62 percent. A little over 2 billion barrels, or 8 percent, is accessible under what we call standard lease terms."

If you add in the 85.9 billion barrels of oil that lie offshore, as determined by the Interior Department's Minerals Management Service, there are 117 billion barrels of oil on lands owned or managed by the U.S. government.

But all expansion of offshore oil recovery is currently off-limits.

Adding in what's available on privately held land, the figure rises to 139 billion barrels of oil, according to the government - more than the known oil reserves of Iran, Iraq, Russia, Nigeria or Venezuela, respectively.

When you consider the Artic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in Alaska, throw in another 7.7 billion barrels.

So we have huge amounts of oil here in the United States; we could likely have gas for a dollar a gallon or less, if we simply ignored environmental extremists and tapped our resources.

It isn't just that huge areas are off limits for drilling. Many others are hindered by regulation and permitting.
"The permitting process is very slow, very cumbersome," he said. "What happens is that the window of opportunity to operate on some lands is very limited. Usually you are talking about areas where they have winter-use restrictions, where there can be no activity, to allow for migratory birds or animals."

With horizontal drilling, a lot of oil can be tapped with a very small presence on the land surface.
With directional drilling, producers obtain the rights to drill on land adjacent to the forbidden turf, drill down a short way, then drill horizontally - if they are allowed to.

"Directional drilling has revolutionized the industry," he said. "You don't ever want to tap into other areas that are not your property, but directional drilling has allowed the industry to reduce its footprint. From one well-pad, you can get a number of wells drilled."

This is why the huge reserves in ANWR in Alaska could be tapped with a very small drilling facility (2,000 acres out of millions of acres). But no; even that isn't good enough for environmental and animal rights extremists.

Environmentalists are probably quite happy having you pay $4.00 a gallon for gas; they're of the "spread the misery" lobby, not the "lift everyone up" lobby.

But if you're unhappy paying $4.00 a gallon for gas, maybe it's time to put the heat on your elected representatives.


Senate Action Unlikely on Global Warming

From Yahoo News, "Senate action on climate bill seems doomed"

Whew!


NewsBusted Conservative Comedy 6/6/2008



Topics in today's show:

--Scott McClellan's book

--Fidel Castro endorses Barack Obama

--The Woodstock museum opens up

--CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer admits he used to smoke weed

--An opera version of "An Inconvenient Truth?"

--Spike Lee and Clint Eastwood feud over Eastwood's new movie

NewsBusted is a comedy webcast about the news of the day, uploaded every Tuesday and every Friday.


Ted Kennedy Health Care: Good for Me, Not for Thee

Though he usually provokes visceral political reactions, most people have been pulling for Senator Ted Kennedy's recovery from his recent problems with brain cancer and subsequent surgery for it.

Despite the demonization of Kennedy and many others in his party, he had access to the best health care system in the world right here in America. He got an MRI right away, and within a couple of weeks was operated on to remove the tumor.

Our free market system can be expensive, but you usually get quick, quality service. Having lived three years in a socialist country with a nationalized health care system, I can tell you that "free" medicine simply can't compete in speed or quality. And that is the system Kennedy and other socialists in the Democrat Party are trying to force on us all here in the United States.

NewsMax points out that the socialist "reforms" being pushed by Kennedy and his party can prove deadly to the average person:

Those reforms would include universal healthcare coverage, and countries with such a policy “always wind up cutting corners simply to save money,” Goldberg observes. “People with Kennedy’s condition are dying or dead as a result.”

The expert cites the example of a 22-year-old woman in England — which has universal coverage — who complained of headaches for months, but had to wait a year to see a neurologist.

She then had to wait more than three months to get what Britain’s National Health Service decided was only a “relatively urgent” MRI scan.

Three days before the MRI appointment, she died.

The article also points out that the drug Temodar which Kennedy is being treated with was deemed by the British National Health Service as not worth the money.

Even today, only a handful of people with brain tumors can get Temodar, and Brits who want to pay for the drug out of their own pocket are forced to pay for all their cancer care — about $30,000 a month, according to Goldberg.

No, the answer is not more government intervention in health care, but LESS. We already have too much government involvement (Medicare, Medicaid) and too much government regulation.

The Democrats' solution to health care is like grabbing a bucket of gasoline, running into a burning building and throwing the bucket on the fire in an attempt to put it out.

Of course, the Ted Kennedy's of the world will never have to live by the same rules they impose on average Americans. As it was on George Orwell's "Animal Farm," some animals are always going to be "more equal" than others.

In order to get our ailing system back on track, we need to reduce government meddling, increase insurance and medical competition, and most of all get the consumer fully involved in the process, i.e. making cost vs. benefit decisions to help control costs.

America was founded and rose to economic greatness largely in part because of our free market system. We need to return to what we know works, not cast our hopes on utopian schemes that deny economic realities and human nature.


2006 Marriage Amendment Protects South Dakota From Calif. Same-Sex 'Marriage' Ruling

SOUTH DAKOTA FAMILY POLICY COUNCIL PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: JUNE 5, 2008
CONTACT: CHRIS HUPKE 605-335-8100

“Homosexual-rights activists have in their cross-hairs the redefinition of marriage in America,” said Chris Hupke, President of the South Dakota Family Policy Council.

The recent decision from the California State Supreme Court creating same-sex “marriage” was reacted to by pro-family groups with a request the court put a stay on their decision until after the people of California vote this November on a State Marriage Amendment. The proposed amendment would define into the State Constitution; Marriage is between one man and one woman. Just yesterday that same state Supreme Court refused to stay their decision and declared their decision will be final at 5:00 pm on June 16.

Since 2000, twenty-seven states have passed state constitutional amendments defining marriage is between one man one woman.

States that do not have a state marriage amendment will see legal challenges to their current laws that define marriage as between one man and one woman.

“Several years back, South Dakota passed into law Defense of Marriage Act in the State Legislature. In 2006, the people of South Dakota amended the State Constitution to define Marriage as between one man and one woman. This effectively takes marriage out of the hands of judicial review.

Hupke said opponents argued in 2006, that South Dakota did not need a Constitutional Amendment since it had a Defense of Marriage Act. Hupke stated, “Today, South Dakotans that care about marriage are breathing a sigh of relief.”

Studies state children grow healthier and happier when both mother and father, living in the same home are involved raising the child. “By defining marriage as between one man and one woman in our Constitution as we have, South Dakotans are saying we recognize the critical importance of the institution of marriage to children and holding family together,” Hupke said.

According to Hupke, states without the Constitutional Amendment, but with state marriage laws are the target. Homosexuals will travel to California, get married and return to their home state filing lawsuits demanding their same-sex “marriage” be recognized by their respective state.

“The strange situation may come later when same-sex “marriages” dissolve and one of the partners moves to a state like South Dakota. South Dakota courts will get involved in divorce decrees, adoption issues, support orders, and many family related legal issues,” said Bruce Hausknecht, Judicial Analyst, Focus on the Family.


Bible Park Still Looking for a Home



Reprinted by permission of The Christian Post


By Elena Garcia
Christian Post Reporter
Thu, Jun. 05 2008 02:46 PM ET


Developers behind Bible Park USA are considering other sites for their proposed religious theme park after being turned down by Rutherford County in Tennessee.

SafeHarbor Holding, the New York-based company behind the park, recently held "serious" conversations with Lebanon Mayor Don Fox to locate the park in Wilson County, Tenn., reported The Wilson Post.

Special tax zones approved by state legislators in Rutherford and Wilson countries would allow the sales tax generated by the Bible-theme park to help pay for the $180 development, according to News Channel 5.

"They had already come over and had driven off the sites. They were very familiar with Tater Peeler Road, the dead end and that's where they zoomed in on," said Fox, as reported by News Channel 5.

The developer, Armon Bar-Tur, has also been fielding other offers, saying in a statement that the company has been "overwhelmed" with inquiries about sites for the Bible Park.

Bar-Tur had been courting Rutherford County for about a year before his proposal for the 282-acre park was rejected. A simple majority of the Rutherford County Commission approved, 12-9, a rezoning request in favor of the park in mid-May. However, a petition spearheaded by homeowners residing near the proposed site required a two-thirds majority County Commission vote.

Developers originally planned to open Bible Park USA by Easter 2010. The $175-$200 million project was presented as an “edutainment” experience – a mixed offering of education and entertainment, that will allow visitors to visualize familiar Bible stories and a taste of life in ancient biblical times. Bible stories from both the Old and New Testaments would be depicted in a non-denominational and non-interpretive way.

The Holy Land Experience in Orlando, Fla., is the only other U.S.-based attraction that touts a similar experience although it is more focused on displays related to Jerusalem.

Aside theological objections, including pastors questioning the biblical accuracy of the displays, Bible Park USA has also drawn fierce opposition from opponents who claim the park will bring a host of unwanted problems to the community such as traffic congestion, noise, and unwanted commercialism.

Controversy also brewed in early May when media outlets reported that the developer, Bar-Tur, used to be a photographer for the soft-porn Penthouse magazine in the 1970s.

Safe Harbor Holdings is considering six sites in Lebanon, Tenn., according to WSMV Nashville. Fox said the park could potentially draw 2.5 million people to the area.

Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


Facebook has New Faithbook Page to Foster Religious Understanding



Reprinted by permission of The Christian Post


By Ethan Cole
Christian Post Reporter
Thu, Jun. 05 2008 03:16 PM ET

The first interfaith page on the popular site Facebook was launched Tuesday in an effort to foster greater understanding among people of different religions and to combat extremism.

Faithbook was created by a group of British Jews supported by the London-based Muslim Institute, according to The Times newspaper. It takes advantage of the social networking capabilities of Facebook to offer a space for religious people worldwide to hold religious discussions.

Simon Cohen, spokesman for Faithbook, noted that while there are other faith groups on Facebook, Faithbook is the only page that welcomes people of all faiths to join.

Cohen hopes the page will “engage the younger generation” and inform them about people of other faiths.

Members can upload photos of themselves and others, view images of sacred texts, and see prayers for international and interfaith “understanding” on the page.

The Movement for Reform Judaism, responsible for Faithbook, said it is important to use social networking sites for good.

“So much of what has happened with new media is that it has become a place where extremists can construct messages of hate and intolerance,” said Rabbi Shoshana Boyd Gelfand, executive director of the Movement, to The Times. “We have got to combat that and create a space where people who may not meet face to face can have a constructive debate.”

Discussion topics include the place of religion in modern society and countering religious extremism.

“Irrespective of whatever cultural baggage we carry, racial background or faith that we follow, we have to recognize that our creator is the same whatever we call him,” said Ghayasuddin Siddiqui, director of the Muslim Institute, who believes the page will be successful in spite of the religious differences between its members.

Faithbook so far has 327 fans.

Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


Thursday, June 05, 2008

Housing Crisis: Vacant and Wasted

by Carrie K. Hutchens

A few years back, I saw an enormous amount of upscale housing being built. My question was, "Where are all these people working?" Then I heard about the new fangled loans where one merely pays on the interest for so many years and I knew what was going on. I predicted then that there was going to be a major problem and it wasn't long before I was proven right.

And now?

I think we are headed towards still another major mistake that will merely complicate the original blunder and serve no good purpose.

Holding people accountable can get very complex when considering the housing mess and like crisis. After all, who is the most guilty? The consumer that came to believe the sales pitch (given by a professional) that he or she or they could afford the dream house or the professional who should have known better? Top that off with a bank or mortgage company willing to enter into the loan agreement and a consumer is given even more confidence that the deal is safe and their financial abilities and the economy is up to the challenge. What a shock it must have been when reality came rushing home a few years down the road and many found themselves without the original options and no alternative plans or finances to turn to.

One question is...

If experts didn't see the foreclosure epidemic on the horizon, how can average consumers be expected to have seen it?

There are people that carelessly enter into financial agreements, but there are also people who, in good faith, enter into agreements that turn out to be flawed. Agreements that rely upon outside sources and events that the person has no true control over, like job security, promotions and bonuses. Though perhaps due, the consumer cannot readily MAKE the right thing happen just because it was promised and earned. Life is funny that way.

Now, people are being foreclosed upon and here are all these houses that have no immediate buyers. Houses that are easy targets for vandalism and prone to early decay that seems to travel frequently with vacant homes. So what is the point? What is the benefit to any or all? Is there a benefit?

It is one thing to foreclose upon people who had no intent of honoring the agreement(s) set forth, however, what about those who were deceived by the professionals or hard hit because of the crisis they didn't create? How about the people who most likely would have been able to refinance as planned, if the housing boom hadn't imploded, which, I might add, was through no personal fault of their own? What about those people?

It seems to me that rather than leave those houses sitting idle to punish those who innocently got caught up in the housing movement (that appears to have been little more than a legalized scam), it would make more sense to figure out a plan to keep as many people in their homes as possible. It would make more sense for financial institutions to be bringing in some money, rather than no money on foreclosed houses. After all, how does the latter help the mortgage holders, people or the public (who will most likely pay indirectly)?

Get courts and lawyers involved and up goes the amount due. Put a judgment against people and what are the chances they will be able to borrow and if they can't borrow how are they supposed to pay back the amount in question? And while they are unable to borrow to pay the required amount, the interest and penalties keep growing and growing, and as the vicious circle goes -- because they can't pay -- they can't borrow -- so the penalties keep mounting and so does the hopelessness of the situation. Who, then, really benefits beyond lawyers, collection agencies and the like?

One additional irony to this crazy mess is that mortgage companies may get stuck with receiving pennies on the dollar, especially after paying court fees, collection fees, lawyers and collection agencies. Why are some of these companies so willing to pay such people and the collection costs involved, but often not as willing to work diligently to give the consumer the benefit of those same amounts? Why are they not willing, especially when doing so would give everyone a fresh slate to work on and chance for both to come out with a fair and honest result?

There may have been a day and time, between the depression and now, when the majority of people who failed to live up to their agreements did so through their own fault, but I don't believe that is the case today. Today, I think there are situations where the majority of fault in failed outcomes rests with big business and a system that fails to face it, muchless deal with it. A system that often fails to hold the big business as accountable as the individual. If the system is going to be involved at all, then it should be involved with "true" fairness to all.

It is one thing for people to mis-spend their money, or be otherwise careless in their financial dealings. It is quite another for them to be sold a bill of goods by experts and professionals that should have known better even before this whole housing fantasy (crisis) became a twinkle in someone's eye. And maybe... just maybe... those people that had the twinkle in the eye that turned out to be so blindingly wrong, ought to think about a better fix to the mess they created, than foreclosure that punishes the consumer (regardless of their degree of personal fault), and leaves so many houses vacant and wasted.

Vacant and wasted -- can our economy afford the price tag hanging on the housing crisis?


Carrie Hutchens is a former law enforcement officer and a freelance writer who is active in fighting against the death culture movement and the injustices within the judicial and law enforcement systems.


Calif. Supreme Court Rejects Stay of Homosexual 'Marriage' Ruling



Reprinted by permission of The Christian Post


By Alexander J. Sheffrin
Christian Post Reporter
Thu, Jun. 05 2008 04:52 PM ET

SAN FRANCISCO – Pro-family groups and their case for the sanctity of marriage were dealt a blow Wednesday after the California Supreme Court declined to stay its May 15 ruling, which legalized gay “marriage.”

The court’s latest decision will allow same-sex couples to begin receiving “marriage” licenses as early as June 17.

Pro-family groups had hoped that the state’s high court would postpone handing out same-sex “marriage” licenses until after the results of a November voter referendum on the issue that would nullify the court’s ruling if it draws a majority vote.

Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families (CCF), said it was “arrogant” for the court to allow county offices to hand out same-sex “marriage” licenses before allowing voters to decide on the issue.

"The voters are witnessing unprecedented judicial arrogance," said Thomasson in a statement.

But the most compelling argument made by pro-family groups was that allowing same sex couples to receive “marriage” licenses – only to see them nullified with a majority vote months later – would throw the state into chaos.

“The California Supreme Court ruled in favor of legal chaos,” said Ron Prentice, chairman of ProtectMarriage.com in a statement.

“The court has ignored the will of the people and demonstrated no concern for the legal turmoil it is likely imposing upon the entire country. The court’s decision is perhaps the worst case of American judicial activism in modern times. The refusal to wait for the people to decide by the constitutional process confirms that,” he added.

Although disappointed by the court’s refusal to stay its ruling, pro-family groups believe that support for an amendment to protect traditional marriage – which drew over 1 million signatures – continues to be strong.

“The battle over marriage is far from over and will not be decided by four judges,” said Mathew D. Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel and dean of Liberty University’s School of Law, in a statement.

“The people will decide in November. If any same-sex marriage licenses are issued before November, the passage of the constitutional amendment will make them invalid and invisible,” added Staver, who was among those who helped argue the case against gay “marriage.”

Nationally, support for gay “marriage” has been mixed.

Although a Gallup Poll released last month revealed that only 40 percent of Americans “currently say marriage between same-sex couples should be legal,” a more recent, combined USA Today/Gallup poll released this week said that nearly 60 percent of Americans also “believed government should not regulate whether gays and lesbians can marry the people they choose.”

Since 2004, when the Massachusetts State Supreme Court made its ruling to recognize gay “marriage,” 27 states have passed a constitutional ban on the practice, while over a dozen others have passed laws limiting or outlawing it.

Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


Marie Jon: Obama Slowly Walked Away

By Marie Jon'

America is entering a brand new era. For the very first time we might elect a black president. God bless America. We have awaited this occasion since the struggling days of the Civil Rights Movement led by Dr. Martin Luther King. It is most unfortunate that Senator Barack Obama was the one chosen for the honor, however.

The Democrat National Party picked a man who was not sufficiently scrutinized and vetted. The truth is that Obama is not the suitable uniter for our country. In fact, it is quite likely that he will turn America upside down, bringing about divisive racial retrogression.

Do not question why you may be feeling uncomfortable with Obama. He is the epitome of what we've seen through the prism of those with whom he has chosen to associate for over twenty years.

If you are a person of faith, God has given you the gift of spiritual intuition. Use it wisely. Everyone has common sense. Obama said he resigned his membership from Trinity United Church in Chicago "with some sadness." He also said he was not going to denounce the church that has caused so much pain and ambivalence for so many, including Democrats.

Some Americans are highly insulted by the church congregation that delights with flagrant jubilance while listening to pastors viciously attack their own country while mocking and insulting other people. Their behavior is not Christ-like. Americans must understand that Black Liberation Theology is not Christianity. It is a perversion of the Gospel of Christ.

Both Michele and Barack Obama took Black Liberation Theology studies before they were allowed membership at Trinity United. Their views were formed long before they ever stepped through the doors of a church whose pastor would further indoctrinate them with his own bigoted, anti-Semitic, anti-America doctrine.

Rev. Jeremiah Wright had a politically Marxist agenda shrouded in a false theology. Barack and Michele Obama bought into it because it felt familiar and comfortable to them. They also accepted every political gain that was afforded them by virtue of their association with Wright.

The fact that Obama has left Trinity says that he will do whatever it takes to play out his political hand. Obama has not denounced Black Liberation Theology, and therein lies the real story. He will probably wait until after the election in November before he joins another church that teaches the very same theology being taught at the Trinity United Church of Christ.

The twisted, unscriptural teachings of Rev. James Cone, the founder of Black Liberation Theology is the same man who demands that Jesus Christ become a Marxist. Dr Cone's theology effectively portrays white churches in America as the Antichrist. He would have all white people despised by all of black America. Rev. Cone is a close friend of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and Trinity's creed is centered around Cone's teachings, as well as other black liberation "theologians."

It is not unfair to make the assumption that Sen. Obama holds the same beliefs as his religious mentor, Rev. Wright. Obama and his wife remained in Trinity until it was no longer politically expedient. He then left to grab the gold ring on the political carousel.

In his book, "Black Power and Black Theology," Rev. Cone states: "What we need is the divine love as expressed in black power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal."

Obama's writings are spiritually linked to the "religious left," who have no difficulty with late-term abortions and agendas that are contrary to biblical teachings.

As president, Obama would be able to revitalize enormous powers and galvanize black churches across the country, effusing them with the poison of Black Liberation Theology. It is possible that if Obama becomes America's first black president, advances in race relations gained through the Civil Rights Movement will become severely damaged.

Listen to your troubled mind. What we've seen throughout the divisive Democrat campaign has indeed been all about race. Reflect upon the words that came from a disrespectful and bigoted man who had the nerve to demand that "God Damn America" and blame the United States for what took place on September 11th, 2001.

Excerpts from National Review; The Gospel According to Barack Obama:

"At this rate, Barack Obama will have repudiated every one of his friends in Chicago by November.

"First, he claimed that as long as he belonged to the church the controversial views of its pastors and guest preachers would be unfairly imputed to him. Perhaps so. But the real question is how Obama could have been a member of the church for 20 years — and accepted the Rev. Jeremiah Wright as a personal spiritual mentor — without appreciating the radical 'Black Liberation Theology' that is at the church's heart. Obama's claim to be innocent of Wright's radicalism is not credible.

"...The fact is Obama didn't feel obligated to do his fellow parishioners this courtesy until dumping Trinity became a political imperative for him.

"Obama has slowly walked away from the church as political calculation has dictated. When the first videos of Wright damning America surfaced, Obama compared him to an obnoxious but harmless uncle and gave a widely acclaimed speech in Philadelphia, saying he could no more repudiate Wright than he could repudiate the black community or his own family.

"Now, Obama the presidential candidate — selling the soothing politics of unity and inspiration — has carefully pirouetted away from his former church. But he has yet to give a full, honest accounting of his relationship to Wright and Trinity. The public and the press should demand one." Full Article


Obama shares Rev. Jeremiah Wright's views. The dismal excuse that he did not know what was going on at Trinity United Church of Christ, is too much the suspension of disbelief. "It is inconceivable that Obama was not aware of all of this." — Stanley Kurtz

Obama's connections to the radical far left, which also includes a false racist's religious theology, should be rejected by American voters. It will be up to the (Ronald Reagan) Blue Dog Democrats, Independents, and conservative Republicans to make sure that Obama is defeated in November.

----------*----------


Marie Jon' is a political/religious-based writer and founder of www.DrawingClose.org — a sister website to RenewAmerica. Marie extends her hand of welcome; visit DrawingClose and receive your free gift of salvation by taking an online Bible study. Join Christians from all over the world by becoming a free member of GO Fellowship. The website is a nondenominational gathering of believers.

Marie's writings have appeared on many sites, including The New Media Journal, ChronWatch, and ABCNews, to name a few. She is a regular columnist for CapitolHillCoffeeHouse, The Daley Times Post, RenewAmerica, The Conservative Voice, Newsbull, GreatAmericanJournal.com, Radiofreewesthartford.com, Conservativecrusader.com, RightSideNews.com and WesternFrontAmerica.com.

Marie brings a refreshing and spirited point of view that is reflected in her writings, as well as genuine and spiritual insights regarding God and his teachings as they pertain to our modern society. Marie is a nurse, a lay student of the Bible, and a patriot. She is an advocate for American troops serving abroad, as well as the Blue and Gold Star Mothers of America and their families. Marie has appeared as a guest with political talk show host Bruce Elliott on WBAL-1090 AM (Saturdays 5AM-9AM EST).

© Copyright 2008 by Marie Jon'


Prayers, Donations Pour in for Steven Curtis Chapman Family



Reprinted by permission of The Christian Post


By Katherine T. Phan
Christian Post Reporter
Thu, Jun. 05 2008 10:32 AM ET


Shaohannah’s Hope, the adoption and orphan care ministry founded by music artist Steven Curtis Chapman and his wife, reported that it has been overwhelmed with donations to honor Chapman's daughter Maria Sue.

The organization has raised over $310,000 toward Maria's Miracle Fund in just two weeks, the ministry announced Tuesday. A report by The Associated Press Thursday puts that amount to $360,000. Thousands have contributed to the fund, which honors the Christian singer's 5-year-old adopted daughter, who tragically died on May 21 after being accidentally struck by a car driven by her older brother.

Additionally, over 19,000 people have posted their prayers and condolences to the Chapman family on a blog site dedicated to Maria Sue that is accessible from the ministry's website.

"People have not just been praying for the Chapman family, but crying out to God for them and their healing," Scott Hasenbalg, the ministry's executive director, said in a statement.

Chapman and his wife established Shaohannah’s Hope in 2003 after adopting Shaohannah from China. The organization, based in Franklin, Tenn., helps reduce the financial burden of adoption by giving away grants to participating Christian couples. Over 1,600 families have benefited from grants averaging $3,000 from the ministry, according to The Associated Press.

Maria, who had celebrated her fifth birthday just days before she passed away, was the youngest of three daughters the couple had adopted from China. Following her death, the Chapmans had requested that donations be given to Shaohannah's Hope Ministry in lieu of flowers.

Although the Chapman family is still going through "extreme sorrow," Hasenbalg said the Christian singer recently pointed to the cross and said it is "the resurrection of Jesus that will get us through this, but it doesn't mean it won't be hard," according to The Associated Press.

The Chapmans said they will work with the group's board of directors to decide how to spend the money, as reported by The Tennessean. Hasenbalg said the incident has given the ministry a "deeper sense of responsibility" to help more families looking to adopt.

"We are committed to working hard together as a team to be a good steward of the support that has been poured into this ministry," he added.

"We are filled with sadness for this tragedy, but also gratitude to all who has responded with their love, prayers and support.”


Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


New Columnist at Dakota Voice


I am pleased to announce that Dakota Voice will be adding columnist Marie Jon' to our regular lineup.

Marie Jon' is a political/religious-based writer and founder of www.DrawingClose.org — a sister website to RenewAmerica.

She has been published at ChronWatch and ABC News, and is a regular columnist at Capitol Hill Coffee House, RenewAmerica, The Conservative Voice and many others.

Marie is a nurse, a lay student of the Bible, and a patriot. She is an advocate for American troops serving abroad, as well as the Blue and Gold Star Mothers of America and their families.

Welcome to Dakota Voice, Marie!


Anniversary of the Six Day War

American Minute from William J. Federer

JUNE 5, 1967, the Six-Day War began. Egypt sent 80,000 troops and 900 tanks to attack Israel. Jordan and Syria, with Soviet weapons, violently shelled Jerusalem and Israeli villages. Cairo radio announced: "The hour has come in which we shall destroy Israel."

The hot line between Washington and Moscow was used for the first time.

In a surprise move, Israeli Air Force destroyed 400 Egyptian planes, courageously drove Syria from the Golan Heights and captured all of Jerusalem.

In a CBS-TV interview, Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion stated: "In Israel, in order to be a realist you must believe in miracles."

Seven months after the War, on Jan. 7, 1968, President Lyndon B. Johnson toasted Israeli Prime Minister Levi Eshkol, saying: "Welcome to our family table...All Americans-and all Israelis-know...that none...can ever live by bread alone...One of your ancestors said it for all men almost 2,000 years ago...for peace it is written, 'pursue it.' That is our intention in the Middle East...To pursue peace...If we are wise, if we are fortunate, if we work together - perhaps our Nation and all nations may know the joys of that promise God once made about the children of Israel: 'I will make a covenant of peace with them...it shall be an everlasting covenant.'"

William J. Federer is a nationally recognized author, speaker, and president of Amerisearch, Inc, which is dedicated to researching our American heritage. The American Minute radio feature looks back at events in American history on the dates they occurred, is broadcast daily across the country and read by thousand on the internet.


Greece in Uproar over Homosexual 'Marriage'



Reprinted by permission of The Christian Post


By Joshua Goldberg
Christian Post Reporter
Wed, Jun. 04 2008 07:18 PM ET


Heated controversy erupted in Greece Tuesday after the mayor of Tilos, a small island in the Aegean sea, stood over the nation’s first gay “marriage” ceremony. In total, 30 couples were wed.

Response from government officials throughout Greece – a conservative, Christian Orthodox nation – was furious and prompt. Officials said gay “marriage” was illegal under the law, and were investigating a prosecution case against the mayor for “breach of conduct.”

"There is no legal framework for the holding of same-sex weddings in Greece," Greek Justice Minister Sotiris Hatzigakis explained in a statement.

Mayor Anastassis Aliferis, a self described socialist, however, said that he would block any attempts to see the marriages annulled.

"I have no intention of annulling the marriages," he told Agence France-Presse.

Aliferis has sided with gay rights groups in claiming that the country’s constitution does not specify that marriage is “between a man or woman.”

"Under European law, there can be no discrimination, and I hope the authorities keep that in mind to avoid ridiculing our country," he said.

According to a poll conducted in April by Ethnos daily, a plurality of Greeks surveyed said they were opposed to gay “marriage.” Over 48 percent said they “oppose the legalization of same-sex relations.”

Also, the Greek Orthodox Church also officially frowns upon homosexuality. In a 2004 statement, the late head Archbishop Christodoulos called homosexuality a “defect.”

Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


Big (Taxpayer) Bucks for Abortion

After looking at Planned Parenthood's latest annual report, I'd be tempted to say they were making a killing...if it wasn't such a sick joke.

Page 16 of the report shows Planned Parenthood's balance sheet. Last year they received over $1 billion in revenue. That's BILLION with a B.

Of course, YOU kicked in about 1/3 of that. What, you didn't know you helped Planned Parenthood make that $1 billion last year? $337 million in government grants and contracts went to Planned Parenthood. And since the government can only get it's money from YOU, you, the taxpayer, paid for 1/3 of Planned Parenthood's income.

The nation's largest abortion provider brought in $357 million from their "health centers." Having performed 289,750 abortions in 2006, a substantial chunk of that $357 million must have come at the expense of hundreds of thousands of dead children.

Do we really want to continue taxpayer funding for this kind of bloodshed?

For that matter, do we really want to continue this kind of bloodshed, period?


Wednesday, June 04, 2008

Islam Channel to Show British Interfaith Game Show



Reprinted by permission of The Christian Post


By Ethan Cole
Christian Post Reporter
Wed, Jun. 04 2008 03:23 PM ET

What is thought to be the first interfaith game show in Britain will begin broadcasting next week to dozens of countries on the Islam Channel.

The show, “Faith Off,” draws contestants with religious backgrounds from Buddhism, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Islam and Sikhism, and has them compete for cash prizes by answering questions on both general and religious knowledge.

“Faith Off” is filmed from the London studios of the Islam Channel and will begin broadcasting on June 15, according to TotallyJewish.com.

Producer Abrir Hussain said his goal in creating the show is to facilitate better understanding between different religions.

"I wanted to do something to promote good relations and bring a new approach to the interfaith debate other than that of the usual consultative round table format,” Hussain explained to Ecumenical News International.

Another goal is to attract the attention of younger people, many of whom may consider interfaith initiatives praiseworthy yet “boring.”

Hussain noted, however, that the show is not designed to debate contentious issues. It will instead serve as an opportunity for discussions based on questions asked.

The show will create two teams of four that will answer questions posed by Muslim comedian Jeff Mirza, according to ENI. In the home-or-away round, contestants can answer questions about their own faith or the opposing team’s for additional points.

Contestants are not theologians or scholars, but will vary in degree of religious knowledge.

“A game show is an original idea, to say the least,” said Danny Judelson, one of the show’s Jewish contestants, to U.K.-based Guardian newspaper. “I thought it was interesting that the channel were taking seriously the opportunity to educate their audience. There’s a very serous purpose behind it.”

Questions will include identifying blurred pictures of religious figures and answering multiple choice questions on religion and current affairs.

The show’s producer hopes participants and viewers will recognize the similarities between religions rather than only the differences, and build better relations.

“We’re living in a multi-faith, multi-cultural society,” Hussain told the Guardian newspaper.

“You learn about religions at school and then you forget, so it’s about transferring the basic blocks of knowledge,” he said, “it’s also about learning the similarities between religions, instead of focusing on the differences.”

“Faith Off” will be shown in 31 countries and also be available on the Internet, according to ENI.

Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


Should Hillary Be Obama's VP Running Mate?

NewsMax says Jimmy Carter advises against Barack Obama naming Hillary Clinton to be his Vice President.

Naming Hillary Clinton as Barack Obama’s vice presidential running mate “would be the worst mistake that could be made,” said former President Jimmy Carter.

In an interview Carter gave to the U.K.-based publication,” The Guardian,” Carter urged Democratic presidential nominee Obama not to pick the New York Senator for the bottom slot on his general election ticket. Carter cites opinion polls showing that half of U.S. voters have a negative view of Clinton.

It is true that Hillary's negative numbers are very high. But then, a lot of Democrats (somewhere between 20-24%, depending on the poll) say they won't support the party's nominee if it isn't Hillary; putting her on the ticket as VP might diffuse that discontent.

Besides, Democrats are big into victim groups. With Obama and Clinton, the ticket would be in a perfect position to pander identity politics to blacks and females like never before.

But there's another factor here that should help cut through the murkiness of whether Hillary should or shouldn't be on the ticket.

Given that I can't think of a single thing Jimmy Carter has ever been right about (e.g. energy, Iran, the Panama Canal, Afghanistan, the economy, terrorism, etc.), that means odds are pretty good that bringing Hillary on as VP would be a good thing for the Democrats.

Therefore I think Obama should follow Carter's advice. Quod erat demonstrandum.

Who says it's difficult to figure out the right thing to do?


Huckabee the Socialist

When I was in the voting booth last night, I was tempted for several seconds to vote for Mike Huckabee as a protest vote against John McCain--even though I know the matter is settled.

The length of my vacillation came mainly because they're both left-of-center and I find them both extremely distasteful as a Republican nominee. I was tempted to make a protest-vote for Huckabee anyway, since at least he doesn't bear contempt for Christian voters (neither Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo or Fred Thompson were on the ballot), but in the end I voted for McCain, since voting for Huckabee wouldn't really accomplish anything and I could at least "support my party's nominee" this way.

Now, after seeing this Huckabee quote posted by Tommy Oliver at Race 4 2008, I'm glad I didn't vote for Huckabee.

“The greatest threat to classic Republicanism is not liberalism; it’s this new brand of libertarianism, which is social liberalism and economic conservatism, but it’s a heartless, callous, soulless type of economic conservatism because it says “look, we want to cut taxes and eliminate government. If it means that elderly people don’t get their Medicare drugs, so be it. If it means little kids go without education and healthcare, so be it.” Well, that might be a quote pure economic conservative message, but it’s not an American message.” -Governor Mike Huckabee, May 26, 2008

Not an American message? It is THE historic and central American message!

Nobody is saying let old people die and let kids suffer without education and healthcare. We're talking about the proper and constitutional role of government, here!

As I said countless times before last fall and this spring, Huckabee is a pro-life liberal. In addition to a profound misunderstanding of the nature of evil, he profoundly misunderstands human nature and the free market system.

Is Mike Huckabee that ignorant of history that he doesn't even realize that charity was handled completely by the private sector before FDR's New Deal?

Doesn't he realize that churches and private charity used to handle all handouts and hand-ups in this country? Huckabee is a former pastor; he ought to know this, in addition to the Biblical examples of private charity, without a single one to government wealth redistribution.

Doesn't Mike Huckabee realize that there is zero constitutional authority for programs which spend taxpayer money for the benefit of the "needy?" An American president should know that our Constitution creates a government of enumerated powers; in other words, if it isn't spelled out and listed, the government has no authority to do it.

Is Mike Huckabee ignorant of what so many great statesmen of America once knew:


- Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated. - Thomas Jefferson

- With respect to the two words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators. – James Madison

- I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents. – James Madison

- Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government. – James Madison

- We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. — Congressman Davy Crockett

I hope Huckabee doesn't plan on coming back for another run in 2012. There are enough liberals who run for president in the Democrat Party; we don't need more liberals running under the Republican ticket.


Calif. Supreme Court Refuses 4-3 to Stay Homosexual 'Marriage' Decision

By one vote, California Supreme Court ignores pleas of California voters and state attorneys general to prevent needless legal turmoil nationwide

Wednesday, June 04, 2008, 12:08 PM (MST)
ADF Media Relations 480-444-0020

SAN FRANCISCO — The decision of the California Supreme Court Wednesday refusing to wait until after a vote in November on a proposed state marriage amendment to implement its May 15 marriage decision ignored the pleas of millions of California voters and attorneys general from 10 other states to prevent legal chaos, according to attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund.

“The court has not only ignored the will of the people of California, it has imposed years of legal chaos quite possibly on the entire nation. Without exaggeration, this decision is the most egregious case of judicial activism in modern American history. By one vote, the court deafened its ears to millions of California voters and pleas from state attorneys general nationwide to avoid the potential of nationwide legal turmoil,” said ADF Senior Counsel Glen Lavy, who argued before the court March 4.

Three of the justices wanted to grant the motion for rehearing filed by ADF attorneys May 22. Though the majority of the justices refused to prevent potential legal chaos, the court did agree to the portion of the motion requesting that the court officially note the status of the marriage amendment, which the California secretary of state certified for the November ballot Monday.

“Voters should take note now: same-sex couples who plan on obtaining ‘marriage’ licenses between now and November do so fully knowing that the amendment vote is going to happen; therefore, activists are simply attempting to play upon voter sympathy. These couples already have every right the state can provide, and those rights are unaffected by the decision. A desire to manipulate the democratic process and a total lack of concern for the ramifications are the only reasons a couple would not wait a few months for a vote on the amendment,” Lavy explained.

“The people of California will vote in November,” Lavy added. “The courts report to the people, not the other way around.”

A copy of the order from the California Supreme Court refusing to grant a stay of its marriage decision and granting the request for notice filed by ADF attorneys in the consolidated marriage cases, In re: Marriage Cases, which includes the lawsuit Proposition 22 Legal Defense and Education Fund v. City and County of San Francisco, is available here.

The text of the proposed constitutional amendment is available here.

ADF is a legal alliance of Christian attorneys and like-minded organizations defending the right of people to freely live out their faith. Launched in 1994, ADF employs a unique combination of strategy, training, funding, and litigation to protect and preserve religious liberty, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family.


School Officials Harass Boy over Pro-Life T-Shirt



Reprinted by permission of The Christian Post


By Alexander J. Sheffrin
Christian Post Reporter
Wed, Jun. 04 2008 01:48 PM ET

A Christian legal group is suing a middle school in Hutchinson, Minn., in federal court over the right of a 12-year-old boy to wear pro-life t-shirts in school.

The boy, referenced in the lawsuit only as “K. B.,” was reportedly and repeatedly harassed, ostracized, publicly ridiculed, and threatened with disciplinary action by school officials because he wore t-shirts produced by the American Life League as part of their anti-abortion awareness campaign.

The t-shirts displayed images of unborn babies accompanied with such messages as, "Abortion: Growing, Growing, Gone,” "What part of abortion don't you understand?" and "Never Known – Not Forgotten" alongside “47,000,000 babies aborted 1973-2008" printed on the back.

Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), said that the case was a clear issue of viewpoint discrimination. Hutchinson Middle School officials were clearly in the wrong, he said.

“This courageous young Christian was ridiculed and threatened by teachers for expressing his deeply held beliefs. These school officials clearly violated the U. S. Constitution and the school’s own written Dress Policy which specifically states it is not intended to abridge the rights of students to express political or religious messages,” he explained in a statement.

Although the school lists as its policy that students with “inappropriate” clothing deemed disruptive to "the educational process” may be sent home, TMLC attorney Brandon Bolling noted that the young student was never asked to do this.

“The Supreme Court has held it permissible for public schools to limit student speech only when there is an actual and substantial disruption of school activity,” he said.

“That is not the case here. The only people who took issue with the pro-life t-shirts were the school’s employees – in fact, if any one caused any disruption, it was the school’s employees, by their constant public harassment of our client because they disagreed with his pro-life message,” he added.

The boy’s mother told the local St. Paul Pioneer Press that she hopes the case will help rectify the unjust treatment of her son.

"My son kept getting singled out," she said. "He should be able to wear those shirts at school, and they decided that he can't. It's not right," she said.

"He knows [abortion] is the termination of life. He knows that it's wrong,” she added. “Even if he's the only person at the school who believes that, he should still be able to wear that shirt under the Constitution, and they've taken that away from him.”

Copyright 2008 The Christian Post. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


Catholic Priest Investigated for 'Hate Crime' in Canada

You know, I've never understood "love crimes" as they relate to "hate crimes," but maybe I'm just slow.

I've also never understood why the law should consider the same crime more heinous because it was theoretically motivated by hate of the victim's physical characteristics...or in the case of neo-"hate crime" law, because of the victim's sexual behavior. To me, murder is heinous, period; assault is heinous, period, and so on. Doesn't matter who the victim is or what the perpetrator's motive was; the crime is the crime. Maybe I'm just not hip to that, either.

But while things are getting ominous here in the United States with "hate crime" legislation (dare I say "thought crime"?), it's getting downright scary up in Canada.

Pete Vere in the Catholic Exchange writes today about a Catholic priest, Fr. Alphonse de Valk, who is being investigated by the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC).

Apparently, when this group of politically correct witch-hunters gets you in their sites, your goose is cooked.

The CHRC is using section 13 of Canada’s Human Rights Act to investigate the priest. This is a section under which no defendant has ever won once the allegation has gone to tribunal — the next stage of the process.

Most defendants end up paying thousands of dollars in fines and compensation. This is in addition to various court costs. Moreover, defendants are responsible for their own legal defense. In contrast, the commission provides free legal assistance to the complainant.

Canada has a recent history of persecuting any Christian who doesn't pay the proper obeisance to the government-mandated approval of homosexuality.
In 2005, the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal fined a Knights of Columbus council over $1,000 dollars for declining to rent their hall to a couple for a lesbian marriage ceremony.

Five years previous, the Ontario Human Rights Commission fined Protestant printer Scott Brockie $5,000 for declining to print homosexual-themed stationary. The Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal fined Hugh Owens thousands of dollars for quoting a couple of Bible verses in a letter to the local newspaper. And Mayor Diane Haskett in London, Ontario, was fined $10,000 plus interest for declining to proclaim a gay pride day.

So what kind of vicious, bloodthirsty "hate crime" did de Valk perpetrate that so offended the moral conscience of the CHRC?
Father defended the Church’s teaching on marriage during Canada’s same-sex ‘marriage’ debate, quoting extensively from the Bible, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and Pope John Paul II’s encyclicals. Each of these documents contains official Catholic teaching. And like millions of other people throughout the world and the ages - many of who are non-Catholics and non-Christians — Father believes that marriage is an exclusive union between a man and a woman.

Imagine that: this priest had the audacity to repeat his church's teaching on marriage and human sexuality. This priest was so brutal that he apparently repeated God's design for human sexuality and His divine definition of "marriage."

So it seems that even teaching from the Bible may be considered a "hate crime" in "enlightened" Canada.

With liberals in this country clamoring that the United States needs to be more like Canada and the socialist countries of Europe, can this be very far behind here?

The article in Catholic Exchange points out that Christians are already getting hammered here in the States. New Mexico hammered a Christian photographer (a private businessman) who didn't want to photograph two lesbians make a commitment to each other.

And there are other examples:

- Catholic Charities in Boston was forced out of the adoption ministry because they refused to put children in homes of homosexual couples.

- Boston school teachers have been threatened with termination if they fail to cast homosexuality in a positive light to students.

- The University of Toledo fired a black administrator for writing a "letter to the editor" of a local newspaper about the inconsistency of comparing homosexuality to ethnicity.

- Christians in Philadelphia were arrested for reading Bible verses and praying out loud during a homosexual festival.

- Philadelphia has also decided to stick it to the Boy Scouts (who don't allow homosexuals in leadership positions of their loyal-to-God organization), charging them $200,000 a year rent to use facilities that other charities use for free.

We're headed for a bad place, folks. We've had it good in America for more than 200 years. We've enjoyed religious freedom in a culture founded on Christian values. But we fell asleep and let the inmates take over the asylum.

Not only is the First Amendment about to fly out the window, but freedom in general is right on it's heels.


 
Clicky Web Analytics