It’s been an amazing year at Cao’s house. I saw my oldest son prepare and then leave for Kuwait in February, and move on to Iraq in March. My younger son figured out what he had to do not to flunk out of college, and my husband hit his 30-year anniversary at work. My job has been going extremely well, I’ve been taking online courses.

All in all, it’s been a great year–and the blog has been an amazing experience. Thanks to everyone for coming here and reading my rants, contributing with comments and suggestions, and just giving me moral support. The amazing part about this whole experience has been -the fantastic people I’ve met.

Many thanks to the following: Raven (you’ve been amazing), Lisa at Elegant Webscapes, Margi Lowry, Koolaid, Jay, Paul, Tomslick and Rage (you two are amazing), Leanne, Rick, TS from TS Right Dominion, Zeke (thanks for giving me the opportunity to guest blog), 2Slick, The Questing Cat, Ogre, Craig, Edward Chmura at Ambergnat, Beth (at MVRWC), SC&A, Stacy, Amy Allen, the Mad Tech, Tracey at the Baraws, the soldiers and marines who have posted here; I can’t even think of all the names right now, but you know who you are. I appreciate you beyond what words can ever express.

I received a couple of private emails yesterday, that expressed appreciation of what I’m doing over here. What amazed me is that this blog is getting noticed by some people with influence and position. Not only the little guy (who are all important to me) but some big dawgs, too. Mheh. I do this for fun, you guys. It’s a labor of love and it’s a rockin’ good time.

Happy New Year and drive safe and appointed a designated driver if you’re going drinking. I’m going out to dinner with my honey and then…well…nevermind.

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

Picked up this little gem from Cass over at Villainous Company.

Apparently, Fareed Zakaria is actually putting in print some POSITIVEs about the War in Iraq and the upcoming elections.

Most memorable:

We have gotten used to bad news from Iraq—and there will be more. But there is good news as well. Elections are likely to go ahead as scheduled. In November, as the attack on Fallujah began, I argued that it would be a turning point, one way or another. It now appears that Fallujah altered the dynamic for the better. It’s not simply that it was a military victory—everyone expected that. Far more important, the victory did not seem to generate a high political cost (something I was worried about). The uproar that was expected across Iraq in response to the operation simply did not happen. The Shia and Kurds did not complain, and even the “Sunni street” was much quieter than anticipated.

Yes, we knocked the crapped out of those lily livered cusses. And so..

The United States has paid a terrible price for this war—in Iraq and in the world at large—unconscionably high, given how many of these costs were avoidable. And I could be wrong about Iraq, in the sense that things could get much worse. Civil war, rampant anti-Americanism and terrorism are all part of the possible future. But what I am not wrong about is that a more decent, pluralistic Iraq would make a huge difference in the Arab world. Already the preparations for Iraq’s elections are stirring debate and discussion among its neighbors. Remember, these are the first genuine, national elections in the entire region. As 300 million Middle Easterners watch Iraqis going to the polls, they will surely ask a simple question: “Why not us?”

And that, dear friends, is exactly what we’ve been working toward. It is quite surprising to me that the leftist media, particularly NEWSWEEK, would dare to print such a thing.

Cross posted to It Is What It Is

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

This column by New York Times Thomas Friedman rang a bell with me. It was called “Worth A Thousand Words” when it appeared just before Christmas, but I like to think of it as “A Liberal Who Gets It.” This is exactly why we are in Iraq, and the fact that Tom Friedman, who is a Democrat and a liberal can understand this, makes it all the more puzzling why Al Gore and Jimmy Carter, not to mention the entire crew of reactionary leftists now opposing the war, don’t.

Worth A Thousand Words
by Thomas Friedman
(New York Times, December 23, 2004)

There has been so much violence in Iraq that it’s become hard to distinguish one senseless act from another. But there was a picture that ran on the front page of this newspaper on Monday that really got to me.

A gunman shoots dead one of the election officials after ambushing their car as they drove through central Baghdad. Three workers died in the attack, two others managed to escape (PHOTO AP)

It showed several Iraqi gunmen, in broad daylight and without masks, murdering two Iraqi election workers. The murder scene was a busy street in the heart of Baghdad. The two election workers had been dragged from their car into the middle of the street. They looked young, the sort of young people you’d see doing election canvassing in America or Ukraine or El Salvador.

One was kneeling with his arms behind his back, waiting to be shot in the head. Another was lying on his side. The gunman had either just pumped a bullet into him or was about to. I first saw the picture on the Internet, and I did something I’ve never done before - I blew it up so it covered my whole screen. I wanted to look at it more closely. You don’t often get to see the face of pure evil.

There is much to dislike about this war in Iraq, but there is no denying the stakes. And that picture really framed them: this is a war between some people in the heart of the Arab-Muslim world who - for the first time ever in their region - are trying to organize an election to choose their own leaders and write their own constitution versus all the forces arrayed against them.

Do not be fooled into thinking that the Iraqi gunmen in this picture are really defending their country and have no alternative. The Sunni-Baathist minority that ruled Iraq for so many years has been invited, indeed begged, to join in this election and to share in the design and wealth of post-Saddam Iraq.

As the Johns Hopkins foreign policy expert Michael Mandelbaum so rightly pointed out to me, “These so-called insurgents in Iraq are the real fascists, the real colonialists, the real imperialists of our age.” They are a tiny minority who want to rule Iraq by force and rip off its oil wealth for themselves. It’s time we called them by their real names.

However this war started, however badly it has been managed, however much you wish we were not there, do not kid yourself that this is not what it is about: people who want to hold a free and fair election to determine their own future, opposed by a virulent nihilistic minority that wants to prevent that. That is all that the insurgents stand for.

Indeed, they haven’t even bothered to tell us otherwise. They have counted on the fact that the Bush administration is so hated around the world that any opponents will be seen as having justice on their side. Well, they do not. They are murdering Iraqis every day for the sole purpose of preventing them from exercising that thing so many on the political left and so many Europeans have demanded for the Palestinians: “the right of self-determination.”

What is terrifying is that the noble sacrifice of our soldiers, while never in vain, may not be enough. We may actually lose in Iraq. The vitally important may turn out to be the effectively impossible.

We may lose because of the defiantly wrong way that Donald Rumsfeld has managed this war and the cynical manner in which Dick Cheney, George Bush and - with some honorable exceptions - the whole Republican right have tolerated it. Many conservatives would rather fail in Iraq than give liberals the satisfaction of seeing Mr. Rumsfeld sacked. We may lose because our Arab allies won’t lift a finger to support an election in Iraq - either because they fear they’ll be next to face such pressures, or because the thought of democratically elected Shiites holding power in a country once led by Sunnis is anathema to them.

We may lose because most Europeans, having been made stupid by their own weakness, would rather see America fail in Iraq than lift a finger for free and fair elections there.

As is so often the case, the statesman who framed the stakes best is the British prime minister, Tony Blair. Count me a “Blair Democrat.” Mr. Blair, who was in Iraq this week, said: “Whatever people’s feelings or beliefs about the removal of Saddam Hussein and the wisdom of that, there surely is only one side to be on in what is now very clearly a battle between democracy and terror. On the one side you have people who desperately want to make the democratic process work, and want to have the same type of democratic freedoms other parts of the world enjoy, and on the other side people who are killing and intimidating and trying to destroy a better future for Iraq.”

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

Looking for feedback on the music–Vote yes or no in the comments.

Got it from Rage and I think it’s killer-you can turn it off if you hate it. Just click on the ’stop’ button (the button with the square on it). Let me know if you think it sucks-but I’d also like to know if you like it. Leave a comment.

If you don’t like it, suggest a song. I’ll try to get it.

It’s called Rainforest, and it’s by Paul Hardcastle.

Rage4Truth.com

Hey Rage–as usual, thanks.

I Like it 1
I don’t like it 0 (so far)

I have a suggestion:

Cao! I like the music - just don’t go too nutty on it (like gangsta or headbanger rock). For surfing I like something that won’t jar the quiet n the room as we surf en famille

Boy the tunes scared the he** out of me! LOL You know how I have the volume cranked for the Rooster’s Crow, Whoowie! GOOD MORNING CAO!!!

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

In recent news articles, as Leanne pointed out (I think the link she had was to Al Jazeera but mine is Arab News here), it’s been officially announced that Ramsey Clark is going to join the jet-setting and beautiful lawyer, Ghaddafi’s daughter (click here), Aisha al-Gaddafi, and the American lawyer Curtis Doebbler (click here) who is infamous for defending rejects based on International Law. I’m not sure if people know it, but Ramsey Clark was Saddam Hussein’s personal attorney and represented Iraq prior to the war.

To see an example of how he outrageously struggled to keep us out of Iraq (and save Saddam), here is a letter from Ramsey Clark urging the United Nations not to support the war in Iraq (click here) Shannon was saying that the anti-war movement was NOT TRYING TO SAVE SADDAM HUSSEIN. I think this is clear evidence that it was. If that’s not enough, in February of 2003, Ramsey Clark sent a letter to Kofi Annan saying the United States is guilty of war crimes (the ACLU is doing the same thing, take a look at Mike Whitney’s article here if I’m not mistaken, he’s also writing for Al Jazeera, the “voice of Al Qaeda see this).

The group at the forefront of the recent anti-war rallies, International A.N.S.W.E.R (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) is in reality a front organization designed to further the radical agenda of several extremist movements from the political Left. Despite the media’s assertions to the contrary, the present incarnation of the peace movement, led by ANSWER, is anything but representative of mainstream America.

ANSWER’s steering committee reads like a “Who’s Who” of radical political organizations. The most influential member of ANSWER’s steering committee, Ramsey Clark’s pet project known as the International Action Center (IAC), is considered by many observers to be little more than a communist front organization for an obscure Stalinist organization known as the World Workers Party (WWP). (The FBI considers the WWP a terrorist organization. On May 10, 2001, FBI Director Louis Freeh stated that “Anarchists and extremist socialist groups — many of which, such as the Workers World Party, have an international presence and, at times, also represent a potential threat in the United States.” Imagine that; the mainstream media somehow missed the fact that the most ubiquitous organizer of “anti-war” protests is directed by a terrorist support group. Shouldn’t a question on this front be aimed directly at Ramsey Clark at one of his regular press conferences?)

Yet, the IAC is not the only member of ANSWER’s steering committee committed to extremist causes. The Korean Truth Commission and Pastors for Peace are staunch allies of Kim Jong Il and Fidel Castro, respectively, and both groups continue to support these murderous regimes’ violation of International law. In addition to its role as a front for the support of totalitarian/communist governments in North Korea and Cuba, members of ANSWER’s steering committee such as the Muslim Student Association and the Free Palestine Alliance continue to provide ideological, logistical and financial support for organizations devoted to the destruction of the state of Israel, including the terrorist group, Hamas. A comprehensive investigation of the members of ANSWER’s steering committee make it clear that the organization is in actuality one of Peace’s greatest enemies.

Criticism of Saddam Hussein is (not surprisingly) not aired at IAC/A.N.S.W.E.R.-controlled protest events. No mention is made of Saddam’s gassing of the Kurds, invasion of Kuwait, murder of an estimated 1 million (some estimates are as high as 3 million) of his own people, environmental terrorism, imprisonment, torture or execution of political prisoners.

The suffering of the Iraqi people is blamed solely on the United States, just as the suffering of Palestinians is blamed solely on Israel. When you see pictures on liberal websites of deformed suffering Iraqi children who then blame the United States for it, just remember that these deformed Iraqi children are a direct result of Saddam’s chemical assault on his own people.

IAC/A.N.S.W.E.R leaders have aligned themselves exclusively with pro-Arafat/PLO groups. The only Jewish people truly embraced as “brothers and sisters” are those who equally denounce Israel or deny Israel’s right to exist. A.N.S.W.E.R’s pro-Palestinian march in April was regarded by many, in fact, little more than a thinly disguised public display of anti-Semitism masquerading as a “pro-Palestinian” march. Frequent mention was made at the march of a “supposed holocaust,” and of a “genocide” in Jenin, despite the fact that New York Times reporters allowed into the area had already discredited such reports as fullobalogney.

Ramsey Clark himself has a long and dubious history of aiding and abetting the enemy.

It was Ramsey Clark who urged Lynne Stewart to become attorney to the “blind Sheik” Omar Abdel Kahman, who was later convicted as the mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombings and the planner behind the proposed bombings of New York City landmarks, including the Lincoln and Holland tunnels. In 1995, few people were paying attention. Today, the trial transcript reads like a 20,000-page prelude to Sept. 11: sleeper cells, secret funds, international jihad, connections to a group called Al Qaeda and a man named bin Laden.

Clark’s two previous choices, Center for Constitutional Rights attorneys and noted defenders of criminals and terrorists — including the Palestinian assassin of Meyer Kahane — William Kuntsler and Ron Kuby, had disqualified themselves from participation on the grounds of personal prejudice (Kuby said he couldn’t in good faith represent someone who wanted to see him and his family dead). Stewart is also well known for her representation of “revolutionaries” and murderers. She represented several cop-killers (whom she no doubt considered revolutionaries) and Sammy “the Bull,” Gravano a Mafioso (whom she no doubt considered just rebellious).

Stewart shares the Communist beliefs of the WWP and IAC and the Center for Constitutional Rights. She is anti-capitalist and believes the USA is an imperialistic nation, and that anti-capitalist violence is justified. In a 1995 New York Times interview she said, “I don’t believe in anarchistic violence, but in directed violence. That would be violence directed at the institutions which perpetuate capitalism, racism, and sexism, and at the people who are the appointed guardians of those institutions, and accompanied by popular support.” Obviously, Stewart’s worldview meshes seamlessly with that of Saddam Hussein, Yassir Arafat, the blind sheik and Osama Bin Laden. And with that of Deirdre Griswold Brian, Becker, Ramsey Clark and the Workers World Party.

Stewart and Clark’s legal defense of the blind Seik resulted in a conviction. They placed America on trial as a repressive, imperialist and terrorist state, and portrayed the Sheik as nothing more than an innocent holy man and political activist. It did not work.

I’m not sure people like Shannon realize it–but anyone who equates a religious Christian such as Falwell, for example with Osama bin Laden is taking the exact same approach to terrorism as the World Workers Party, International ANSWER, IAC, Ramsey Clark and Lynne Stewart. And these people are certainly not “patriots” or “moderate” liberals. This is the same exact argument Lynne Stewart was using to defend her blind sheik terrorist.

As an attorney, Clark has taken it upon himself to represent several clients primarily characterized by their intense hatred of Jews. In 1989, Clark represented Lyndon Larouche, who by the late 1970’s embraced far-right anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial. Despite Larouche’s documented history of anti-Semitism, Clark expressed ‘amazement’ at the personal ‘vilification’ directed at Larouche throughout the trial. Clark also represented PLO leaders in a suit brought by the family of Leon Klinghoffer, the elderly vacationer who was shot and thrown overboard from the hijacked Achille Lauro cruise-ship by renegade Palestinian terrorists in 1986. Another Clark client was Karl Linnas, an ex-Nazi concentration camp guard in Estonia (where he had overseen the murder of some 12,000 resistance fighters and Jews), who was being deported from the US to the USSR to face war crimes charges. Clark again lost the case but again went to bat for his client in the public arena, questioning the need to prosecute Nazis “forty years after some god-awful crime they’re alleged to have committed.”

Al Awda , a.k.a. The Palestine Right To Return Committee (PRRC) allies itself with International Answer and the International Action Center, Ramsey Clark’s outfits. Al Awda means “the Return” in Arabic and is a front for the PLO that advocates unconditionally that 5 million Palestinians be allowed to move inside Israel displacing the Jewish population and dismantling the Jewish state. The Texas chapter used to have a website extolling the glory of suicide bombers. The other groups just want the US out of Iraq to enable the comeback of Saddam Hussein. (Happily, that won’t happen because Saddam was captured and is now in custody.) Ramsey Clark was Saddam Hussein’s personal attorney and represented Iraq prior to the war. The PLO has always been the dictator Hussein’s closest ally in the Middle East.

The same journalists who will be more than happy to tell their readers that a group is related to, or receives funds from, say the NRA or the Christian Coalition or the dreaded Scaife Foundation, will never mention the relationship of a liberal group with communist organizations – even if such organizations are labeled terrorist by the FBI.

But Islamic fundamentalism isn’t black power, and the history that began on Sept. 11 will not be forgiving of people who pick the wrong side. These are just more examples of how the war on terror is being fought right here at home. Ramsey Clark and Lynne Stewart have not only stood on the ‘wrong side’, but they represent and root for the very people who struck us on 9/11.

See these links here, here, here, here, here, here.

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

It’s not TS, It’s Cao! Since the other two have revealed themselves, I thought I’d come out and say “hi”. I’m Caoilfhionn and I’m from Cao’s Blog. If you want to know what the heck that name is all about, because you’re saying to yourself WTF is that? take a look here.

You’ll see some cross posting every now and then, but lucky for you I won’t be cross posting every single post from Cao’s Blog because I want to give the other guest bloggers a chance to say something, lol!

I wish Zeke and his family the best, and hope for a safe and uneventful trip on their way to Alabama from Maryland.

I guess I should make an attempt at describing my political tendencies.

I consider myself a “moderate”. I am conservative, which means I want to preserve our government as it was seen through the eyes of our founders. I’m a Christian and believe we should be allowed to teach the Declaration of Independence in schools, even though it mentions the word “God”. I disagree with some of the things Bush is doing, but I supported Bush in the election campaign. I don’t agree with big government, the intrusion of government on our lives, because I believe that capitalism and individual freedom is what has made this country great. I oppose everything Michael Moore and his ilk stands for.

So I hope that gives you an idea where I’m “at”.

Cross-posted to It is What It Is

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

click here for windows

click here for real player

click here for quicktime

Hmmm. I didn’t realize they were quite so diverse. Got this here, and although some libs might be ‘offended’ I think it’s spot on.

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

As the Anti Idiotarian Rottweiler reports, we sick Americans are cannibalizing dead bodies of Iraqis by stealing their organs and teleporting them back to our secret evil experimental laboratories of doom.

Sir George shares with us this link of a translation of an article written in Belgium:

“Secret European military intelligence reports indicate the transformation of the American humanitarian mission in Iraq into a profitable trade in the American markets through the practice of American physicians extracting human organs from the dead and wounded, before they are put to death, for sale to medical centers in America. A secret team of American physicians follow the troops during their attacks on Iraqi armed men to ensure quick [medical] operations for extracting some organs and transferring them to private operations rooms before they are transferred to America for sale.”

I’m sure Count Dracula is in on this and Agent 007 channelled the ghost of Jeffrey Dahmer. The organs must be used within 10 hours or they’ll self-destruct, so they’re utilizing secret teleporting techniques that were discovered at Roswell from alien space ships.

These teams offer $40 for every usable kidney and $25 for an eye.

That must be how the stingy Americans are raising money for the Great Satan’s Inauguration.

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

I received a comment to my blog today on BE:

Lame. Way too many words on the page for me to possibly hope to read easily.

Here’s a bulletin for ya: This is a BLOG, not NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC.

On a more positive note, I received a review from SC&A, you can see it here. Beth at My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy was reviewed in that same post.

And I received an email from Shannon Hubbell–this time a private rant, asking for clarification and a response, peppered with more insults. Dear readers, Shannon is a GUY.

Rick, at Rightwing Nuthouse, posted Shannon’s commentary on the Sandinistas with our rebuttals. Go check it out here.

And last but not least, I will be filling in as a guest blogger over at It Is What It Is-for Zeke. He has a few other bloggers who will be helping out while he’s moving his family from Maryland to Alabama. I wish his family the best. His wife has been packing while he’s been in denial, but hopefully he’s ‘coming to grips’ with the whole thing.

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

You Are a Warrior Soul

You’re a strong person and sometimes seen as intimidating. You don’t give up. You’re committed and brave. Truly adventuresome, you are not afraid of going to battle. Extremely protective of loved ones, you root for the underdog. You are picky about details and rigorous in your methods. You also value honesty and fairness a great deal. You can be outspoken, intimidating, headstrong, and demanding. You’re a hardliner who demands the best from themselves and others. Souls you are most compatible with: Old Soul and Peacemaker Soul

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

10 years ago, with eager support from the Clinton administration, Congress enacted the so-called “Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act.” That measure created a federally enforced ‘no protest zone’ around abortion “clinics”. Under FACE, protesters who obstruct access to abortuaries can be prosecuted for federal offenses. The same is not true of radical environmentalists, union activists or other political protesters who commit acts of violence, vandalism, or obstruction targeting businesses other than the abortion industry.

FACE is akin to a Bill of Attainder, an unconstitutional measure singling out one specific group of people for special punishment. US District Judge Kenneth Hoyt has correctly ruled that the act exceeded congressional authority and violated the reserve powers of the states. Most conservatives would expect that the “pro life” Bush administration’s Justice Department would approve of a judicial ruling against an unconstitutional law passed in service of the abortion industry. They are wrong.

In late November, assistant US Attorney General Peter Keisler flew from Washington to New Orleans to defend FACE before a three-judge panel from the US Circuit Court of Appeals. The judicial panel was considering a Bush administration challenge to District Judge Hoyt’s ruling. The original case involved an incident in which a Houston man named Frnak Bird rammed his van into a local Planned Parenthood facility.

“Congress chose to enact an unconstitutional statute which permits [the federal government] to do exactly what our Framers would have been appalled by, which is to regulate local violent criminal conduct,” argued Bird’s public defender, Brent Newton. “We still believe there are 50 states that are separate sovereigns in this country. That is what is at issue here. It’s not about abortion rights.”

Speaking on behalf of the Bush administration, Keisler “shot back by asking the appeals judges to recognize the simple motives behind acts such as the one Bird is accused of,” reported an AP account of the hearing. “It doesn’t [involve[ a commercial transaction, but it does interfere with the workings of an interstate market,” contended Keisler. This reflected the view of a third-party brief in the case filed by the abortion advocacy group Legal Momentum. That brief, summarized the AP, maintained that “a local attack [on an abortuary] can dissuade doctors in other states from continuing to perform abortions or prompt them to spend more money on security, which would possibly raise prices for patients.”

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

I really love to put pictures in my posts. So I’ve just about exceed my bandwidth already. AGAIN. I just upgraded to the next largest bandwidth package and ate up all my bandwidth. Damn.

What I can’t figure out is–when I upload a picture, and figure out it’s the wrong size, I go back and re-size it, but I don’t know how to delete the big one that I just uploaded. So there are a lot of pictures that I should delete…I just don’t know how to see them or look at them. I don’t know enough of about this freakin’ system, that’s what the problem is. And I hate to keep bugging Lisa about it.

So…I’m going to try to chill with the pictures, if I can help it. I’m going to try to stop uploading them, and stop posting them on the front page. Yikes. Can I stop? Can I exercise some restraint? I hope so. There’s only a few days before January 1.

If anybody has some tips on this, let me know.

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

December 27, 2004

The intense media focus on the divide between “red” and “blue” states in the wake of the presidential election has raised new questions regarding our federal voting system. One U.S. Senator has promised to introduce legislation to abolish the electoral college, claiming it is an anachronism that serves no good purpose in modern politics. Her stated goal is “simply to allow the popular will of the American people to be expressed every four years when we elect our president.” Many Americans agree, arguing that the man receiving the most votes should win; anything else would be unfair. In other words, they believe the American political system should operate as a direct democracy.

The problem, of course, is that our country is not a democracy. Our nation was founded as a constitutionally limited republic, as any grammar school child knew just a few decades ago. Remember the Pledge of Allegiance: “and to the Republic for which it stands”? The Founding Fathers were concerned with liberty, not democracy. In fact, the word democracy does not appear in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution. On the contrary, Article IV, section 4 of the Constitution is quite clear: “The United States shall guarantee to every state in this Union a Republican Form of Government” (emphasis added).

The emphasis on democracy in our modern political discourse has no historical or constitutional basis. Yet we have become obsessed with democracy, as though any government action would be permissible if a majority of voters simply approved of it. Democracy has become a sacred cow, a deity which no one dares question. Democracy, we are told, is always good. But the founders created a constitutionally limited republic precisely to protect fundamental liberties from the whims of the masses, to guard against the excesses of democracy. The electoral college likewise was created in the Constitution to guard against majority tyranny in federal elections. The President was to be elected by the states rather than the citizenry as a whole, with votes apportioned to states according to their representation in Congress. The will of the people was to be tempered by the wisdom of the electoral college.

By contrast, election of the President by pure popular vote totals would damage statehood. Populated areas on both coasts would have increasing influence on national elections, to the detriment of less populated southern and western states. A candidate receiving a large percentage of the popular vote in California and New York could win a national election with very little support in dozens of other states! A popular vote system simply would intensify the populist pandering which already dominates national campaigns.

Not surprisingly, calls to abolish the electoral college system are heard most loudly among left elites concentrated largely on the two coasts. Liberals favor a very strong centralized federal government, and have contempt for the concept of states’ rights (a contempt now shared, unfortunately, by the Republican Party). They believe in federalizing virtually every area of law, leaving states powerless to challenge directives sent down from Washington. The electoral college system threatens liberals because it allows states to elect the president, and in many states the majority of voters still believe in limited government and the Constitution. Citizens in southern and western states in particular tend to value individual liberty, property rights, gun rights, and religious freedom, values which are abhorrent to the collectivist elites. The collectivists care about centralized power, not democracy. Their efforts to discredit the electoral college system are an attempt to limit the voting power of pro-liberty states.

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

Michelle at a Small Victory has a list of charities who are helping the Tsunami victims here.

The UN has pledged to “help”, but I don’t have any faith in those incompetents, with news like this. Honestly, US membership in that organization is a total waste of money and we should just get the hell out while the gettin’s good.

Of course that’s unlikely to happen with Bush’s pledge here.

Beth at My Vast Rightwing Conspiracy came over and shared this blog: here It’s called the The South-East Asia Earthquake and Tsunami blog, and you can get the latest ’skinny’ on what’s happening with that disaster over there. Thanks, Beth!

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

Months before Hollywood and the libs launched the massive love-fest for Kinsey, the movie, your fed tax dollars were hard at work promoting a dreadful annual report that would have made the pervert proud. (see the previous piece about Kinsey here) Each year, since 1997, the Fed Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics (FIFCFS) has published a report entitled America’s Children: Key National Indicators of Well-Being. Once again, this 20-agency report has brought forth data that appears to support some very incredible claims. The fed report would have us believe, for example, that while more children today reject religion (or have no formal exposure to religion) and fewer children live with both parents, they are less likely to be “victims of violence” than were mom and dad when they were children. WHAT?

That’s right, according to the FIFCFS, families were much more dangerous for children back in the violent days of Ozzie and Harriet than in today’s idyllic family life a la Ozzie and Sharon Osbourne. Even if common sense and experience tell us this is preposterous, nevertheless, it must be true, since it’s supported by authoritative-looking tables and seemingly irrefutable statistics. After all, libs claim, America’s Children bears the imprimatur of the US Department of Education, Defense, Commerce, labor and Justice, as well as such impressive institutions as the National Science Foundation.

How did this multi-agency forum find “objective” data to support the Kinseyan claims that intact, religious families are harmful to children? Simple. It imitated Kinsey, the master of fraud, and eliminated facts that conflicted with its thesis. The FIFCFS study eliminates the pandemic consequences of Kinsey’s gospel of pansexuality, which holds that any and all sexual activity should be considered normal. For example, from the period from 1960 to 1999, according to the Department of Justice, saw violent crimes increase 396 %. This includes robbery, up 279%, aggravated assault up 168%, murder up 70%, and forcible rape up 418%–despite the fact that fewer women or children stroll our parks and streets alone than pre-1960. The “child well-being” analysts, however, attempt to hide the rape plague by stripping out of their statistics on “violent crime” affecting children.

Most people definitely would consider child rape and other forms of child sex abuse to be serious indicators of “unwellness”. Most parents, I am sure, would consider information about the dangers to their children from sex offenders every bit as important as (if not more important) than the National Ambient Air Quality Standards of the area in which they live. Table POP9A, “Children’s Environments,” in America’s Children provides great detail on the threats to childhood wellness posed by sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter, and other air pollutants. Likewise, there is abundant statistical detail on family income distribution, child care, parental employment, diet quality, esxposure to second-hand smoke,and so on, ad infinitum. However, the politically correct FIFCFS researchers have very conspicuously gutted from their report all child “unwellness” data that would undermine belief in the so-called benefits of sexual liberation. Consider these glaring omissions:

• All violent sex crime against children under 12 years of age are gutted. (Girls under 12 accounts for 37% of the victims of these crimes, and boys under 12 account for 25%)
• All child rape data are dumped, yet 67% of sex victims are kids.
• All statutory rape and rape that was plea-bargained down to a misdemeanor are gutted.
• All boy sodomy victim data are gutted.
• All child runaway data are gutted, yet between 1.3 and 2.8 million children are said to be runaways.
• All data regarding the 350,000 to one million children used in prostitution and pornography are gutted.
• All child AIDS, Herpes, HPV and chlamydia data, epidemic among youths, are gutted.
• All child kidnapping data are gutted, yet 58,200 children were kidnapped by non kin in 1999.
• All incrased school sexual assault, child suicide, and sexual homocide data are gutted.

As I said above, America’s Children is a report which would make Alfred Kinsey proud. Like Kinsey’s infamous research, it shamelessly manipulates data and lies by omission to promote a perverse agenda. It uses Kenseyan techniques regarding children’s “well-being” to undermine marriage, religion, and parental authority, and downplays the seriousness of child abuses. Are fraudulent, anti-marriage and anti-family data the rotten fruit of pansexual “training”? You be the judge. In the past few years, trusted government-funded researchers inflated rates of parental sex abuse by redefining “parent” to include: “boyfriends or girlfriends or adoptive step-parent [or] parent substitute.” These researchers also defined “family” predator or anyone in “a romantic or sexual relationship with a parent.” This is a very vicious attack on parenthood and families, an attempt to make parents appear to be the real danger to children.

Who are these researchers? One of the most well-known is Dr. Duane Alexander, director of the National Institute for Child Health and Human Development, a spokesman for the America’s Children publication. He also is a well-seasoned champion of ancient forms of “human sexuality”.

Alexander vigorously defended his on-going funding of Dr. John Money, who calls for an end to age-of-consent laws and whose surgical child sex-change program was exposed as a fraud and a failure.

Dr. Alexander claims that Dr. Money (who pioneered sex changes for children) has proven that no one is born psychologically male or female. Alexander explained that if parents raise their sons as girls, they will be “female”, but if they raise thir sons as boys, they will be “male”.

Alexander savaged the parents of Dr. Money’s most famous sex-change victim for the boy’s stubborn refusal to complete the “scientific” process of making him a girl. Tragically, the victim of Dr. Money’s “experiment” committed suicide as an adult. Alexander’s unscientific and illogical conclusion as to why the boy rebelled at his forced gender change was that his parents didn’t raise him consistently as a girl so “it didn’t turn out well.” Yet, amazingly, Dr. Alexander is still being funded by our tax dollars and is one of the federal “experts” shaping family policy.

Reliable scholars should be found to plot the timeline trends of sexual and child welfare from 1950-the beginning of the Kinseyan pansexual revival-to today to correct other governmental reports that similarly hide the barbaric consequences of bringing back, legalizing, and professionalizing ancient, pagan pansexuality.

You can look up the sex offenders in your area, complete with their picture, an approximate idea of what kind of offenses they are guilty of, and whether or not they’re doing what they’re supposed to be doing to stay ‘compliant’ with the law. I looked up my town and was surprised to find how many there are living right here in my city. Here’s the website for Illinois. Do a search in google (this is how I found it) for registered sex offenders in (your state). You may see someone you know. I ran across a blog where the writer posted the name and picture of someone he went to school with who was guilty of 3rd degree sodomy against a child.

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.