.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}
 
 
 
Lobo's Links
 

Sunday, April 30, 2006

Theodore Roosevelt's Ideas on Immigrants

Theodore Roosevelt's ideas on
Immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907.
"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."
— Theodore Roosevelt 1907

Friday, April 28, 2006

POEM - Illegal Immigrants

I posted this poem April 8th. Since then, I have been getting hits from all over the world. So to make it easier for visitors. I'm reposting it on top.

I cross border,
poor and broke,
Take bus,
see employment folk.
Nice man
treat me good in there,
Say I need
go see Welfare.
Welfare say,
"You come no more,
We send cash
right to your door."
Welfare checks,
they make you wealthy,
Medicaid
it keep you healthy!
By and by,
Got plenty money,
Thanks to you,
TAXPAYER dummy.
Write to friends
in motherland,
Tell them
'come, fast as you can'
They come by foot
and Ford trucks,
I buy big house
with welfare bucks.
They come here,
we live together,

More welfare checks,
it gets better!
Fourteen families,
they moving in,
But neighbor's patience
wearing thin.
Finally, white guy
moves away,
..
I buy his house,
and then I say,
"Find more aliens
for house to rent."
In my yard
I put a tent.
Send for family
they just trash,
...
But they, too,
draw welfare cash!
Everything is
very good,
Soon we own
whole neighborhood.
We have hobby
it called breeding,
Welfare pay
for baby feeding.
Kids need dentist?
Wife need pills?
We get free!
We got no bills!
TAXPAYER crazy!
He pay all year,
To keep welfare
running here.
We think Canada/America
darn good place!
Too darn good
for white man race.
If they no like us,
they can scram,
Got lots of room
in Pakistan.

Thursday, April 27, 2006

ACLU Policy To Legalize Child Porn Distribution

Many of us find it disturbing to hear the sympathetic apologists defend the ACLU's work to protect pedophiles over our children. We watch the ACLU fight for sex offenders to live next to Elementary schools, and playgrounds. We watched in horror as the ACLU defended NAMBLA, under the banner of free speech, to plan and talk about how to rape young boys. It doubles the anger to hear the apologists defend the ACLU with some twisted talk perverting the Constitution.

In Mississippi, billboards of sex offenders and child molesters are being errected, but of course the ACLU oppose this. Of course all of these things we hear excused away by liberal apologists, but lets take a deeper look at the ACLU's agenda. Let's take a deeper look at the industry that the ACLU wants to defend here.

"It would be a mistake to think that all the children who are being exploited sexually are kidnapped by "kid porn" operators. Many of the children are being sold to people by their parents. In some cases, the parents have agreed to perform incest with their children. Gonorrhea of the throat in infants as young as nine and eighteen months has been reported".source
This is as sick as it gets folks. But the ACLU believes it is a freedom being denied to people. And before liberals start to ask. Yes, the ACLU has a current policy advocating the legalization of child porn distribution and possession.


"Students of liberty, from John Stuart Mill to Thomas Emerson, have all intentionally excluded children from their formula for freedom. The ACLU does not. Not even when the subject is pornography.Quote from Twilight Of Liberty


In 1982, the ACLU, in an amicus role, lost in a unanimous decision in the Supreme Court to legalize the sale and distribution of child pornography."

The case is...: New York Vs Ferber, 458 U.S. 747
It can be found here.



The ACLU's position is this: criminalize the production but legalize the sale and distribution of child pornography. This is the kind of lawyerly distinction that no one on the Supreme Court found convincing. And with good reason: as long as a free market in child pornography exists, there will always be some producers willing to risk prosecution. Beyond this, there is also the matter of how the sale of child pornography relates either to free speech or the ends of good government. But most important, the central issue is whether a free society should legalize transactions that involve the wholesale sexploitation of children for profit."

The ACLU objects to the idea that porn movie producers be required to maintain records of ages of its performers; this would be " a gross violation of privacy."Quotes from Twilight Of Liberty


I don't think that any other ACLU stance evokes more anger from me, than this one. I mean, how sick can you get? Do these people not have a conscience at all, or are they just plain EVIL? How can one argue this sick, twisted view in the name of "protecting civil liberties?" Please, some liberal out there that loves defending this evil organization...explain this to us. No wonder the ACLU doesn't want the public to have access to its policy guide!

Since the ACLU thinks that child pornography should be legal, it is not surprising to read that it is against making it a felony to advertise, sell, purchase, barter, exchange, give, or receive child pornography. It is particularly distressed about the prohibition on advertisement, arguing that "the law cannot expect every publisher to decode every advertisment for some hidden and sinister meaning," as if it took a technician-armed with a special decoding device-to ferret out pictures of children ludely exhibiting their genitals.Quote from Twilight Of Liberty


As legislative counsel for the ACLU in 1985, Barry Lynn told the U.S. Attorney General's Commission on Pornography (of which Focus on the Family President Dr. James C. Dobson was a member) that child pornography was protected by the First Amendment. While production of child porn could be prevented by law, he argued, its distribution could not be. A few years later (1988), Lynn told the Senate Judiciary Committee that even requiring porn producers to maintain records of their performers' ages was impermissible.
"If there is no federal record-keeping requirement for the people portrayed in Road and Track or Star Wars," he said, "there can be no such requirement for Hustler or Debbie Does Dallas."Quoted Reference


Is the ACLU completely retarded? I would love to think there was some kind of saving grace for an organization that says it is about protecting civil liberties, but with positions like this...which you KNOW are against the will of the people, I don't know if there is. My head is about to explode just typing this stuff!

Let's take a deeper look at the industry that the ACLU wants to defend here.

"It would be a mistake to think that all the children who are being exploited sexually are kidnapped by "kid porn" operators. Many of the children are being sold to people by their parents. In some cases, the parents have agreed to perform incest with their children. Gonorrhea of the throat in infants as young as nine and eighteen months has been reported". source
This is as sick as it gets folks. But the ACLU believes it is a freedom being denied to people. And before liberals start to ask. Yes, the ACLU has a current policy advocating the legalization of child porn distribution and possession. Yes, the ACLU still currently defends pedophile organization's.

"Mere possession should not be a crime," said John Roberts, executive director of the Boston branch of the American Civil Liberties Union."
Quoted Reference


They are a radically, out of control organization that consistently goes too far, and they must be stopped, before they destroy our Nation. And as for those who support the ACLU, this is the kind of crap your money goes to. As a parent of a 5 year old child, and as a citizen of this great nation, I am outraged! Help us stop this insane organization!

STAND UP! TELL YOUR REPRESENTATIVE TO SUPPORT THE PUBLIC _EXPRESSION OF RELIGION ACT OF 2005

Sign The Petition To Get The ACLU Off The Taxpayer's Dole

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay or Gribbit. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 180 blogs already on-board

Tuesday, April 25, 2006

White House Snubs 9/11 Families and Victims of Illegal Alien Crimes

HAWLEY, PA (April 25, 2006) – 9/11 Families for a Secure America member Peter Gadiel, along with other families who lost loved ones to murders committed by illegal aliens, held a rally at the White House Monday to deliver over 570,000 petition signatures to demand that President Bush enforce immigration laws. Gadiel, who lost his son, Jason Gadiel, on 9/11 in the north tower of the World Trade Center, 103rd floor, made the following statement:

“Families of Americans murdered by illegal aliens held a rally outside the White House on Monday, April 24th, to demand that the president start enforcing immigration law. Also present were Roy Beck and staff members of Numbers USA who had collected over 570,000 signatures on petitions to the president asking him to enforce US immigration law and stop the invasion of illegal aliens.

“We attempted to deliver these petitions to the White House, and after the Secret Service contacted Administration officials, the message was relayed to us that Mr. Bush's minions would not accept them.

“It was not particularly surprising to us, given the president's longstanding policy of refusal to enforce the law; his disregard for the security of the nation and the contempt he has shown for those of us who have seen our loved ones murdered by illegals, or raped, shot or otherwise victimized.

“Nevertheless, each additional refusal by this man who professes a belief in God and has sworn an oath on the Bible to ‘preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, so help me God,’ is a further reminder that this president is little different from his discredited predecessor, Bill Clinton.

“The foundation for the 9/11 attacks was prepared by al Qaeda during the Clinton Administration and principal responsibility for America's failure to prevent the attacks lies with Clinton, Albright, Reno and Jaime Gorelick. However, Mr. Bush's refusal to take even minimal action to stop the foreign invasion that has continued during the five and a half years of his term shows that he has as little concern for the security of Americans as Clinton. When there is another terrorist attack, Bush will have to accept full responsibility.

“We were informed later in the day that Mr. Bush had spoken in Orange County, California and that Republican Representative Dana Rohrabacher refused to speak on the same program with him, saying that the president had sold out to the cheap labor lobby. We applaud Mr. Rohrabacher's integrity and good judgment.”


Its articles like this that just chafes my butt. 500,000 illegal aliens waving Mexican flags can make President Bush sit up and take notice, but the opinion of 570,000 American citizens, and he can't even send someone out to the gate to accept them.

I don't know why Peter Gadiel and Numbers USA didn't take these petitions to the Senate to begin with. Pesident Bush has made it clear that he couldn't care less what the American people think, but there is still time to convince the Senate that the price of ignoring us is significant to some Senators and political suicide for the RINOs.

This might shed some more light on why the politicians are risking so much...

REFORMING DUAL CITIZENSHIP:
INTEGRATING IMMIGRANTS INTO THE AMERICAN NATIONAL COMMUNITY

Sunday, April 23, 2006

May Day ... May the Day be a Flop

May Day ended in the United States in 1905. It was replaced by Labor Day on the first Monday of September and sanctioned by the federal government in 1894.

From that time onward, May Day in the United States was organized by the left wing of the labor movement, against the more conservative labor bureaucracy. In 1910, for example, the Socialist Party brought 60,000 into the streets of New York City for May Day, including 10,000 women of the Shirt Waist Makers' Union. Five hundred thousand ( sounds familiar, doesn't it? ) workers marched on May Day in 1911.

In 1919, following the now-certain victory of the workers and peasants in the Soviet Union, a vicious red scare swept the U.S. May Day rallies were attacked both in the press and physically.

From 1919 onward, the success of May Day in the United States would depend on the success of the communist movement.

Keywords for May Day are; social justice, economic justice, solidarity, coalition work, equality, global community, strikes, marx, socialist, eight-hour day, Knights of Labor, anarchists, International Working People's Association, class struggle, Marxist International Socialist Congress, proletariat, communism.


Protest Rally on May Day 2006

This is the day chosen by various groups attempting to streamline the acceptance of illegal aliens into the United States as "guest workers". In Latin America, the day has its meaning of a mere labor day. Individuals opposed to this project have already posted internet sites which refer to the use of the day by Communist governments in the Cold War.

There are 106 organizations(as of 4/11/06) supporting the upcoming May 1 ‘Great American Boycott of 2006’ of which include;

Berkeley May 1st Mobilization Committee (Berkeley, CA)
Communist League
Communist Party USA Wisconsin section (Green Bay, WI)
Communist Party, USA Southern California (Los Angeles, CA)
Freedom Socialist Party (Seattle, WA)
Industrial Workers of the World (Cincinnati, OH)
International Socialist Organization (Los Angeles, CA)
Liars of America (Middletown, CA)*
May Day Boston (Boston, MA)
Revolutionary Workers Party of Argentina (Buenos Aires, Argentina)
Third Way Peace and Justice Fellowship (San Francisco, CA)
Workers Solidarity Alliance

Bob McCloskey - Democratic Candidate 29th Congressional District (Monterey Park, CA)
Feminism Without Borders (College Park, MD)
Fight Imperialism Stand Together (San Diego, CA)
Idaho Progressive Student Alliance (Boise, ID)
Immigrant Students in Action (Providence , RI)
Peace & Freedom Party of Orange County (Anaheim, CA)
Queers For Peace And Justice (New York, NY)
Project Islamic HOPE (Los Angeles, CA)
CAIR
ACLU

*This group I have never heard of but it could very well be an off-shoot of CAIR or the ACLU;)

I could not find ANY known conservative group supporting this... I seriously wonder why we have Republican Senators ready and willing to support it.

Tuesday, April 18, 2006

An ugly reality (Illegal Aliens)

Thank heaven for the massive marches across the country by those favoring illegal immigrants. These marches revealed the ugly truth behind the fog of pious words and clever political spin from the media and from both Democrats and Republicans in Washington.

"Guest workers"? Did any of the strident speakers, with their in-your-face bombast in Spanish, sound like guests? Did they sound like people who wanted to become Americans?

Were they even asking for amnesty? They didn't sound like they were asking for anything. They sounded like they were telling. Demanding. Threatening.

Somebody must have told them that their Mexican flags that dominated the earlier marches were not making a good impression on television, so they started flying American flags. But such cosmetic changes did not keep the ugly reality from coming through in their hostile speeches.

[snip]

The ugly display of grievance-mongering bombast at the illegal immigrant marches is just one of those circumstances that are not the same as in an earlier era.

When people came here from Europe, they came here to become Americans. There was no prouder title for them.

[snip]

The underlying tragedy of the present situation is that it is doubtful whether the activist loudmouths, who were too contemptuous of this country to even speak its language while demanding its benefits, represent most immigrants from Mexico.

Both legal and illegal immigrants have come here primarily to work and make a better life for themselves and their families. But a country requires more than workers. It requires people who are citizens not only in name but in commitment.

Click on the title to read the article.

Thomas Sowell is the prolific author of books such as Black Rednecks and White Liberals and Applied Economics.

Sunday, April 16, 2006

Resurrection Day 2006: Hidden liberty

Apr 13, 2006
by Mark M. Alexander


Easter arrives each year as we turn from winter's darkness to springtime's renewal and is often acknowledged as the holiday of hope. Yet this commemoration is incomplete. When we Christians contemplate the crucifixion of Jesus Christ each Good Friday and His resurrection on Easter morning, we are reminded of the singular nature of these events. In addition, we are reminded that there is not only hope within these events -- but something well beyond hope.

Scholars variously attribute the name "Easter" to a derivation from Eostra (a Scandinavian goddess of dawn or spring) or Ostern (a Teutonic fertility goddess), both pagan figures honored at festivals celebrating the vernal equinox. Eostra is one of many similar names of Euro-Mediterranean pagan goddesses, with the form Ishtar most often associated with the region around the Euphrates River in Mesopotamia. Traditions associated with these festivals include the Easter rabbit, a symbol of fertility; and Easter eggs, painted with the bright colors of spring, signifying growth and new life.

The Christian holiday builds on the traditions of the Jewish festival of Passover, or Pesach (the derivation of Pascha, another name for Easter), celebrating deliverance of the Israelites from bondage in Egypt. This week, Passover begins on Thursday, when we're reminded that Jesus traveled with His followers to Jerusalem in observation of the feast He came to fulfill.

[snip]

Hope without object is for Good Friday -- an inchoate yearning. Hope that is intransitive can be ephemeral, evanescent. Christ's followers were frightened and demoralized at His death. Lasting hope, however, is transitive. Just as faith is no mere sentiment or loose conviction, the resurrection of Easter is about liberty -- liberty from sin and bondage -- and a freedom almost beyond comprehension.

From the beginning of His earthly ministry, Jesus claimed His mission as Deliverer: "So He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up. And as His custom was, He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read. And He was handed the book of Isaiah. And when He had opened the book, He found the place where it was written:

The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, Because He has anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor. He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, To preach deliverance to the captives And recovery of sight to the blind, To set at liberty those who are oppressed, To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.

Then He closed the book, and gave it back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of all who were in the synagogue were fixed on Him. And He began to say to them, 'Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing'." (Luke 4:16-21) While the Jews anticipated a Messiah coming in glory to vanquish their enemies, restore political rights and usher in a kingdom of justice, Jesus Himself provided a different, fuller and more heavenly explanation.

The liberty He brought was, for the time being, a hidden liberty: "Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, 'If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.' They answered Him, 'We are Abraham's descendants, and have never been in bondage to anyone. How can you say, "You will be made free?"' Jesus answered them, 'Most assuredly, I say to you, whoever commits sin is a slave of sin. And a slave does not abide in the house forever, but a son abides forever. Therefore if the Son makes you free, you shall be free indeed'." (John 8:31-36)

God created us as beings of liberty; but in our fallen state we are neither fit nor fitted for freedom. Misunderstanding of liberty abounds. The inability of the human mind to wrap itself around the concept of real freedom is manifest, with tyranny often offered up in the guise of false freedom. Man is forever fashioning prisons, failing to note that the warden is as confined as his charges.

[snip]

Why is liberty so difficult for us to comprehend? It is because of its hidden qualities. As Jesus lived through the days leading to the first Easter, even those closest to Him failed to grasp the import of His foretelling of coming events. They feared that Good Friday was the end of the story. They should have known better -- but would we? When Lazarus lay dead and Jesus said he'd rise again, his sister Martha said to Jesus, "I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day." Jesus replied, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die." (John 11:24-26)

The Resurrection is the central event and tenet that distinguishes Christianity from all other faiths. Only God Himself could ransom us from our sin-slavery through His sacrifice on the cross, fulfilling the requirements of the Law -- we can do nothing to aid Him. All other faiths add human works into the equation. Our Risen Lord then returned to deliver unto His followers the very freedom He'd paid His life to secure.

Do we yet comprehend liberty? The rising, after death, of the physical body bearing the personal soul conveys eternal liberation. We have this liberty even now, though it is still not yet fully revealed. In truth, this liberty is too great for anyone to comprehend. What we do know, though, is that on Easter Sunday, our hope is realized. Death has died, and we are free forever. Consider the words of the Apostle Paul to the Colossians:

If then you were raised with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God. Set your mind on things above, not on things on the earth. For you died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God. When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory.

Hidden with Christ, appearing with Christ. This is our liberty.


Click on the title to read the entire article.

Mark Alexander is executive editor and publisher of The Patriot Post, the Web's "Conservative E-Journal of Record." You may contact him here.



Saturday, April 15, 2006

ONE SOLITARY LIFE

Here is a man who was born in a lowly manger, the child of a peasant woman. He grew up in an obscure village. He worked in a carpenter shop until He was thirty, and then for three years He was an itinerant preacher. He never wrote a book. He never held an office. He never went to college. He never owned a house. He never had a family. He never traveled two hundred miles from the place where He was born. He never did one of the things that usually accompany greatness. He had no credentials but Himself. He had nothing to do with this world except the power of His divine manhood. While still a young man, the tide of popular opinion turned against Him. His friends ran away. One of them denied Him. He was turned over to His enemies. He went through the mockery of a trial. He was nailed upon a cross between two thieves. His executioners gambled for the only piece of property He had on earth while He was dying - His coat. When He was dead, He was taken down and laid in a borrowed tomb through the pity of a friend.

Nineteen centuries have come and gone. Today He is the center-piece of the human race and the leader of the column of progress. I am within the mark when I say that all the armies that ever marched, and all the navies that were ever built, and all the parliaments that ever sat, and all the kings that ever reigned, put together, have not affected the life of man upon this earth as powerfully as has that one solitary life.

-- Phillips Brooks

Thursday, April 13, 2006

One Nation, Under The ACLU

I thought it would be interesting and informative to illustrate what our Nation might be like if it caved into all of the radical ideals of the ACLU. It ended up quite scary, and if we were to follow the law of consequence to its end, I'm certain I have only scratched the surface.

On October 27, 1787, Alexander Hamilton predicted that a "dangerous ambition" would one day tyrannize the gangling young American Republic, all the while lurking "behind the specious mask of zeal for the rights of the people." It could almost be said that Hamilton had a prophecy of the ACLU.

Our nation would be quite a scary and dangerous place if it were left in the hands of the ACLU. Creating an accurate picture of what our nation would be like is complicated by the inconsistencies in the ACLU's philosophy, but one can conclude that it would definitely be a much more dangerous society to live in.

To begin with, if our nation were under the ACLU's ideas, national sovereignty would be no more. Our constitution would become obsolete and superceded by International law. This would completely undermine national security, which the ACLU are constantly at odds with.

For instance, the ACLU filed a formal complaint with the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention against the United States, stating that the United States violated international law when it detained 765 Arab Americans and Muslims for security reasons after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack on our nation. Eventually, 478 were deported. ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero said, “With today’s action, we are sending a strong message of solidarity to advocates in other countries who have decried the impact of U.S. policies on the human rights of their citizens. We are filing this complaint before the United Nations to ensure that U.S. policies and practices reflect not just domestic constitutional standards, but accepted international human rights principles regarding liberty and its deprivations.”Source


Since the 5th amendment is pretty much already gone under judicial tyranny, one of the first things you can kiss goodbye is the 2nd amendment. The U.N. are already pushing for international gun control laws, and you can bet the ACLU won't fight against that.

ACLU POLICY “The ACLU agrees with the Supreme Court’s long-standing interpretation of the Second Amendment [as set forth in the 1939 case, U.S. v. Miller] that the individual’s right to bear arms applies only to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia. Except for lawful police and military purposes, the possession of weapons by individuals is not constitutionally protected. Therefore, there is no constitutional impediment to the regulation of firearms.” –Policy #47


Without any means to protect ourselves, lets take a look at crime in the world of the ACLU. To begin with, many of our current crimes would no longer be considered so. They don’t belive in zoning laws, and do believe in fully legalalized, and unregulated prostitution. So there wouldn’t be any law that could keep a prostitution house from being a certain distance from your neighborhood, your Church, or your child’s preschool. This is especially disturbing when they think child pornography distribution and possession should be legal. So, in the ACLU world, we would probably find it much like Amsterdam, child prostitution rampant. Under the ACLU, All drugs would be legal, and Capitol Punishment would completely be abolished.

The 10th amendment would be gone, rendering all states rights to the international community. We would become a welfare state, with our taxes being used to redistribute wealth around the world, as long as the U.N. didn't pocket it in scandals.

Freedom of religion would be eliminated. Churches would lose their tax exempt status, completely pushed out of the public sphere, and forced to comply with international laws that compromise their core values.

In spring 2003, a group from the United Nations Human Rights Commission, of which former ACLU officials Paul Hoffman and John Shattuck are a part, met and discussed a resolution to add “sexual orientation” to the UNHRC’s discrimination list. Homosexual activists at the meeting called for a “showdown with religion,” clearly intending to use international law to silence religious speech that does not affirm homosexual behavior. Source


What a scary and dangerous place this would be if it were given over to the ACLU's vision for America. In no way would it resemble what our founding father's intended. For the sake of our children, and their children's future, Americans can not sit idly by and allow the ACLU's radical agenda to continue. Help us expose the ACLU's radical agenda for the subversive danger it is. Get involved. Donate and support organizations like the Alliance Defense Fund and the ACLJ that are out there fighting the ACLU's agenda. Contact your representatives and Senators and tell them to support Constitution Restoration Act that would put an end to the use of foreign law in our courts. Tell them to support the The Public Expression of Religion Act which would put a stop to taxpayer funding of the ACLU in establishment clause case. Sign Our Petition To Stop Taxpayer Funding Of The ACLU. Pray that America wakes up before its too late.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay or Gribbit. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 180 blogs already on-board

Tuesday, April 11, 2006

Reclaiming Our Freedoms One Brick at a Time

Via Montana News and STOPtheACLU

A federal judge has ordered an upstate New York school district to return bricks inscribed with Christian messages to a high school walkway, and a pro-family civil liberties attorney is praising the outcome as a victory against viewpoint discrimination.

The dispute arose after the Mexico Academy High School class of 1999 in Mexico, New York (Oswego County), sold bricks that could be inscribed with personal messages and included in a walkway as a fundraiser. However, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) complained that certain bricks, particularly those inscribed with the messages “Jesus Saves/John 3:16″ and “Jesus Christ, the only way,” constituted public school endorsement of Christianity.

The ACLU maintained that the bricks violated the so-called “separation of church and state,” and the group’s complaints prompted school officials to remove the contested bricks in 2000. Other bricks purchased by private individuals bore messages that referred to God or to local churches but were allowed to remain in place; only the bricks mentioning Jesus were taken out of the walkway.

Leave it to the ACLU to complain that upholding the first amendment actually violates it. How much more twisted can logic be and still be called logical. Seriously, according to ACLU logic the first amendment violates the first amendment!! The school encouraged people to express themselves individually, and because they did not act to censor Christian expressions, the ACLU concludes they have endorsed it. And then through legal threats the school caved in and censored them! Insanity!

Two community residents who had purchased the extracted bricks filed a lawsuit challenging the school district’s censorship of their messages. In that case, Judge Norman Mordue of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York has now ruled that removal of the bricks bearing the Christian messages was a violation of the free-speech rights of those individuals who paid for them.

Although the District Court initially refused to grant a preliminary injunction to have the bricks reinstalled, it was forced to reconsider the issue when the Second Circuit Court of Appeals remanded the case for reconsideration. The court’s ultimate ruling orders school officials to restore the bricks inscribed with religious messages to the school walkway.

Pro-family attorney John Whitehead is president of The Rutherford Institute, the civil liberties and human rights defense organization that represented the Christian plaintiffs in the lawsuit, arguing that the school’s censorship violated rights guaranteed to citizens by the First and Fourteenth Amendments as well as by the New York Constitution. He is pleased with the court’s ruling and says it is consistent with the outcomes of many similar suits in which his legal group has been involved.

“We’ve won several of these cases in this area,” Whitehead notes. ” It’s called viewpoint discrimination. You can’t discriminate against the religious viewpoint, and the judge said that’s what happened here. It violates the First Amendment.”

The attorney asserts that officials with the high school, in initiating the walkway fundraiser, created a public forum that allowed for private speech, and apparently the bricks with the Christian messages were initially welcomed. “But when the ACLU threatened a lawsuit,” he says, “they actually removed the bricks, and the judge said that’s viewpoint discrimination. That violates the First Amendment when you have different messages on a sidewalk or in [another public] forum.”

That’s the ACLU for you in all its shining glory; America’s number one religious censor! It is quite shameful that an organization that prides itself as the protector of religious liberty to use legally threaten people to actually violate people’s rights. But that is what the ACLU are best at.

Alan Sears describes the ACLU well in this WND column.

This dramatic erosion of religious liberty is the result of the ACLU’s deliberate, incremental strategy. The group often starts its attacks against cash-strapped organizations or legally unsophisticated governmental agencies. Many times, a forceful letter from a big-firm ACLU lawyer is enough to cause an administrator to restrict the public expression of religion.

Even if the embattled organization is sympathetic to a believer’s plight, officials often determine it isn’t worth the hassle or considerable expense to fight the ACLU in a protracted battle. When people do stand their constitutionally protected ground, the ACLU often finds judges and courts likely to support their leftist legal interpretations. And every successful case serves as a precedent for the next.

The ACLU’s destructive assault on the religious heritage of this nation must be challenged – and vigorously. We as a people must stand our ground to protect our constitutionally guaranteed right to freely practice our religion in public and private.

Support The Rutherford Institute and
The Alliance Defense Fund

Crossposted from STOPtheACLU

Saturday, April 08, 2006

POEM - Illegal Immigrants

I cross border,
poor and broke,
Take bus,
see employment folk.
Nice man
treat me good in there,
Say I need
go see Welfare.
Welfare say,
"You come no more,
We send cash
right to your door."
Welfare checks,
they make you wealthy,
Medicaid
it keep you healthy!
By and by,
Got plenty money,
Thanks to you,
TAXPAYER dummy.
Write to friends
in motherland,
Tell them
'come, fast as you can'
They come by foot
and Ford trucks,
I buy big house
with welfare bucks.
They come here,
we live together,

More welfare checks,
it gets better!
Fourteen families,
they moving in,
But neighbor's patience
wearing thin.
Finally, white guy
moves away,
..
I buy his house,
and then I say,
"Find more aliens
for house to rent."
In my yard
I put a tent.
Send for family
they just trash,
...
But they, too,
draw welfare cash!
Everything is
very good,
Soon we own
whole neighborhood.
We have hobby
it called breeding,
Welfare pay
for baby feeding.
Kids need dentist?
Wife need pills?
We get free!
We got no bills!
TAXPAYER crazy!
He pay all year,
To keep welfare
running here.
We think Canada/America
darn good place!
Too darn good
for white man race.
If they no like us,
they can scram,
Got lots of room
in Pakistan.

Linked to STOP the ACLU

Linked to Is It Just Me?

Linked to euphoricreality.net

Friday, April 07, 2006

What Bush fails to see at the border

... What is happening on the southern border is unprecedented. Not only in our own history, but in the history of the world. No country at any time anywhere has sustained the influx of tens of millions of foreigners across its borders. A wave of anti-American leftism is sweeping Latin America. A socialist radical may soon be elected as the president of Mexico, a country which officially encourages its emigrants to vote in Mexican elections, urging them to think of themselves as Mexican first and perhaps only. The eventual outcome is plain for anyone with eyes to see. This is invasion masquerading as immigration.
It may already be too late to avoid a future annexation of the Southwest by Mexico or the evolution of a Mexican-dominated satellite state. This is not to say Mexican people are better or worse than any of God's children. It is to say that millions of ethnically and culturally homogeneous people will seek self-determination in a land they will increasingly feel justified in claiming as their own. Especially when the natural weight of demographic change is accompanied by the soundtrack of radical demagoguery which seeks to legitimize and moralize this phenomenon as a "reconquista." Many pundits claim you will be remembered in history as the president who won (or lost) the war in Iraq. I see it differently. I believe you will come to be seen, in the years and decades to come, as the President who saved (or lost) the Southwest of the United States.
Mr. President, this is a time for candor. Your immigration policy is viewed as captive to the cheap labor -- big business lobby and inimical to the survival of our country. It is splitting the party and draining away support for your presidency. We who understand the vital stakes will not be placated by rhetoric or slogans. The failure to recognize this growing and deep disaffection among Republicans, conservatives, independents and, indeed, many Reagan Democrats, is, in the short run, going to lead to a monumental defeat for your party at the polls in November.
The last two years of your presidency will be plagued with impeachment hearings, with pressures to diminish the war against terrorism, with the cutting off of funds for the war of liberation in Iraq for which so many of our brothers in uniform have paid the ultimate price. The American people will once again be forced to endure a painful repetition of the humiliating withdrawal from Vietnam. We will be dedicating yet another monument to brave men who gave their lives for honor, country and a lost cause.

[snip]

The American people have been made the victims of monumental social engineering perpetuated upon them without their consent and against their will by an arrogant governing elite. Those who try to neutralize their justifiable instincts of self-preservation as a people and a sovereign nation by constantly invoking the mantra of "a nation of immigrants" are trying to pull the wool over their eyes.

[snip]

The moment has arrived. The Senate has already begun its bloviations and self-agrandizing platitudes, its morality play of good and evil wherein they the noble senators are cast as the redeemers of the entire world population seeking only to "live the American dream." We know by their coded words they will do nothing meaningful to really solve the problem or to defend America. If their actions of the past 20 years are a guide, they will only take the pose of pretending to do so. As a movie director I can see bad acting a mile away.
Today there are two Republican Parties. One is now seen correctly by most Americans as responsive first and foremost to the demands of multinational corporations, the agro-business and the Chamber of Commerce. The other, best represented by the embattled members of the House, represents grass-roots America -- we the people. In this debate you have the opportunity to make the party one and whole again, to regain its soul and return it to the service and the sovereignty of the American people.

(Click on the title to read the whole story.)

Monday, April 03, 2006

Little Bit of This...Little Bit of That

What country are we talking about here?

- Immigrants and foreign visitors are banned from public political discourse.

- Immigrants and foreigners are denied certain basic property rights.

- Immigrants are denied equal employment rights.

- Immigrants and naturalized citizens will never be treated as real ____ citizens.

- Immigrants and naturalized citizens are not to be trusted in public service.

- Immigrants and naturalized citizens may never become members of the clergy.

- Private citizens may make citizens arrests of lawbreakers (i.e., illegal immigrants) and hand them to the authorities.

- Immigrants may be expelled from ____ for any reason and without due process.
____________________________________________________

What Conservatives Believe (and Politicians Don’t)
Written by Edward L. Daley
Friday, March 31, 2006



Here’s what I believe to be true regarding some of the most important issues facing America today, and what most politicians apparently don’t believe.

IMMIGRATION LAW ENFORCEMENT

I’m going to be as blunt as I can be with respect to the illegal alien problem in this country, while refraining from using the profane terms that routinely leap to mind every time I think about our government’s unrelenting failure to address this issue in any responsible way. To get right to the point, any person in this country who doesn’t support (A) doing whatever is necessary to stop illegals from entering this country, (B) severely punishing individuals and businesses that knowingly hire illegals, and (C) immediately deporting anyone who is found to be in this country illegally, is either an illegal alien himself, an opportunistic politician, or an idiot.


Suffice it to say that if you’re having a difficult time understanding the fact that illegal aliens have no business being in the United States, don’t expect me to waste my time explaining the relatively simple concepts of right and wrong to you.

While it may be true that we can’t possibly hunt down and deport every illegal alien in this country, we sure as hell can kick out the ones that our law enforcement officers stumble upon everyday. The ones we don’t catch will eventually come to the conclusion that staying here is no better an option than going back home once we decide to deny them jobs, welfare assistance, and political influence.

Oh, and all this stuff we keep hearing about illegals doing work that Americans refuse to do is a load of crap! The minute that able-bodied Americans are no longer allowed to collect government money for sitting on their backsides, you’ll see them taking whatever jobs are available in order to avoid starving to death.



HEALTHCARE

The cost of basic medical coverage to average Americans nowadays is scandalously high, and the primary causes are (A) ever-increasing government manipulation of the healthcare system, and (B) the steadily rising number of bogus malpractice lawsuits being filed by slip-and-fall lawyers like John Edwards. The millions of illegal aliens who exploit our hospitals’ policy of never turning sick or injured people away, whether they can afford treatment or not, also contributes to the rising price of medical care to the folks who actually pay for it. That’s why people who are unable to show some sort of proof that they belong in this country, when the seek medical assistance at one of our hospitals, should be detained and handed over to the authorities once they’ve received the help they need.

Socialist kneebiters like Hillary Clinton believe that letting the federal government take complete control of the American healthcare system is the answer to all our prayers, but any person who recognizes the truly inept nature of the government, understands the basic principles of supply and demand, and appreciates the positive influence of competition upon virtually every aspect of our lives, knows that her proposal is too ridiculous to even consider.

What we need to do is cut as much government bureaucracy out of the process as is humanly possible, while simultaneously punishing with massive fines anyone (and that includes lawyers) who brings a false malpractice claim against a doctor. We also need to electronically modernize every applicable facet of the medical profession, such as records-keeping and prescription drug dispensing. In essence, let the free market determine the price of healthcare, and make sure that the people who provide us with medical services are able to do so as efficiently as possible.

SOCIAL SECURITY

The Social Security system is a government-run ponzi scheme, pure and simple, and even the man who created it did not intend for it to become the unsustainable federal monstrosity that it has. As Franklin D. Roosevelt himself put it, “In the important field of security for our old people, it seems necessary to adopt three principles: First, non-contributory old-age pensions for those who are now too old to build up their own insurance. It is, of course, clear that for perhaps thirty years to come funds will have to be provided by the States and the Federal Government to meet these pensions. Second, compulsory contributory annuities which in time will establish a self-supporting system for those now young and for future generations. Third, voluntary contributory annuities by which individual initiative can increase the annual amounts received in old age. It is proposed that the Federal Government assume one-half of the cost of the old-age pension plan, which ought ultimately to be supplanted by self-supporting annuity plans.”

President Bush’s proposal to allow for the creation of voluntarily individual retirement accounts, using a small percentage of funds earmarked for social security, is the only viable plan currently on the table that even attempts to prevent this doomed system from caving in on itself in the coming decades, and the only reason most politicians oppose it is because allowing you to control your own money takes power away from the politicians.

GOVERNMENT SPENDING

In February of this year, the president submitted to Congress his $2.77 trillion budget for fiscal year 2007. This is an obscene proposal, and there is absolutely no justification for the federal government spending anywhere near this amount of money. Every federal spending program that is not directly related to fighting the war on terror should be cut by a minimum of ten percent over the course of the next 12 months. And don’t let anyone try to con you into thinking that the government won’t have enough money to feed and shelter the elderly and the disabled, or educate our children if we make such drastic cuts. Every year we increase spending for these socialist schemes by billions upon billions of dollars, and every year the ranks of the welfare poor swell, and our public school students become more ignorant.

Clearly money is not the reason why practically every domestic federal program in this country is a pathetic failure; incompetence is! Cutting funding to these programs just might, at the very least, force the bureaucratic weasels in charge to use the money they receive wisely instead of frittering it away as if it grew on trees, while simultaneously complaining that they’re not getting enough.

TAXATION

Two words... Flat Tax.

PUBLIC EDUCATION

Forcing children to attend government-run schools in this day and age condemns most of them to a life of mind-numbed mediocrity at best, and every time some teachers union lackey tries to tell us that all is well with our public education system, that individual should be dragged kicking and screaming into a public park, locked in a pillory, and then flogged.

If you ask me, half of the tax money we spend on public education should be divided up among working class families so that parents can afford to send their kids to schools that are capable of teaching them how to read and write.

THE SUPREME COURT AND OUR CONSTITUTION

The Constitution of the United States is a contract between the citizens of this country and their government. Like any contract, the terms within it are meant to be concrete and inflexible, unless the parties bound by its terms mutually agree to modify it at a later date. Nobody in their right mind would ever enter into a contract with another party if the terms of that agreement could be changed after the fact by a judge. The whole point of creating a contract is to show that there is a meeting of the minds between the parties who agree to abide by its terms, and whenever there is a dispute between those parties over some aspect of the contract once it’s been entered into, a judge is charged with figuring out what the parties actually agreed to in the first place.

Initially the judge does this by reading the contract and considering the literal meaning of the words within it. If he should come across a passage that uses an ambiguous term like “excessive,” he then must determine what the parties involved understood the term to mean when the contract was written. He can accomplish this task in several different ways, but what he should never do is simply make up a definition out of whole cloth. This, however, is exactly what activist judges do on a regular basis.

You see, ORIGINALIST judges attempt to figure out what the original intent of the people who created our most important contract was, so that the parties currently bound by it (aka the citizenry and the government) are dealt with fairly and reasonably. Activist judges, on the other hand, seek to change the terms of the original agreement and force upon everyone involved their own personal opinions of what that contract SHOULD say. This practice is grossly unfair, because it forces one of the parties to the contract (whichever one is ruled against at any given time) to accept terms that they did not agree to, and that is precisely why activists should never be allowed to preside over any court which deals with Constitutional issues.

ENERGY PRODUCTION

The policies of nutbag environmentalists have caused the United States to become increasingly dependent upon foreign countries (including potential enemies of our nation) for satisfying our energy needs. This situation is not only the primary cause of increased energy costs to American consumers, it’s also a direct threat to our national security, which is why every environmental regulation that’s been imposed upon the oil, natural gas, coal, and nuclear industries over the past two decades should be done away with immediately.

Furthermore, oil exploration, drilling, and refining efforts should be increased by 50 percent as soon as possible, and dozens of new nuclear power plants should be constructed over the course of the next decade.

THE WORLD TRADE CENTER

After four and a half years, ground zero in Manhattan is still a giant, empty hole in the ground, and I for one am outraged by that fact. Since the World Trade Center’s original twin towers were constructed in under seven years, I see no reason why it should take a decade to build only one new tower. Now, I understand that it took many months to clear out the rubble after the twin towers fell on 09/11/01, and there are several other structures that have to be built at the location, but we’ve had at least three full years to start construction on the “Freedom Tower,” and so far the only thing the folks responsible for the rebuilding project have managed to do is draw some fancy colored pictures of it.

Can somebody please explain to me why someone like Donald Trump wasn’t put in charge of rebuilding the WTC complex back in 2002? I can almost guarantee that if “The Donald” were running the show, the primary structure, or more likely a building of superior design, would be well on its way to completion by now.

THE UNITED NATIONS

The United Nations is both useless and corrupt. It is a thorn in the side of the United States, and a threat to the sovereignty of every free nation on earth. It should be disbanded at once, and its headquarters in New York converted into a public recreation center for underprivileged children.
____________________________________________________

highboy from Christ Matters shows 18 Ways To Be A Good Liberal

To that I'll add... Top 25 Rules for Being a Democrat

1. Drug addiction is a disease that should be
treated with compassion and understanding...unless the
addict is a Conservative talk show host.

2. The United States should be subservient to the
United Nations. Our highest authority is not God and
the U.S. Constitution, but a collective of tinpot
dictators (and their appeasers) and the U.N. charter.

3. Government should relax drug laws regardless of
the potential for abuse, but should pass new and
unConstitutional anti-gun laws because of the
potential for abuse.

4. Calls for increased security after a terrorist
attack are "political opportunism," but calls for more
gun control after a criminal's killing spree is "a
logical solution."

5. "It Takes a Village" means everything you want
it to mean...except creeping socialist government
involvement in the nuclear family.

6. Disarming innocent, law-abiding citizens helps
protect them from evil, lawless terrorists and other
thugs.

7. Slowly killing an unborn innocent by tearing it
apart limb from limb is good. Slowly killing an
innocent disabled woman by starving her to death is
good. Quickly killing terrorists, convicted murderers
and rapists is BAD.

8. Every religion should be respected and promoted
in public schools in the name of diversity, so long as
that religion isn't Christianity.

9. The best way to support our troops is to
criticize their every move. This will let them know
they're thought of often.

10. Sexual harassment, groping and drug use are
degenerate if you're the governor of California, but
it's okay if you're the President of the United
States.

11. Sex education should be required so that
children can make informed choices about sex, but gun
education should be banned because it will turn those
same children into maniacal mass-murderers.

12. Minorities are blameless for the hatred of the
racist; women are blameless for the hatred of the
rapist; but America is entirely at fault for the
hatred of Islamofascists.

13. Poverty is the cause of all terrorism...which is
why the leaders of al Qaeda are typically
U.S.-educated and were raised in wealth and luxury.

14. The Patriot Act is a horrific compromise of
Constitutional rights, but anti-Second Amendment laws
and Franklin Roosevelt's Presidential Order 9066 must
be regarded "reasonable precautions."

15. We should unquestioningly honor the wishes of
our age-old allies, even when said allies no longer
act like our allies and have vested economic interests
in propping up our enemies.

16. Socialized medicine is the ideal. Nevermind all
those people who spend every dime they have to get to
the United States so they can get quality medical
care...that their nation's socialized medical
community can't provide.

17. Michael Moore, Noam Chomsky and Natalie Maines
are perfectly qualified to criticize our leadership,
but Arnold Schwarzenegger, Charlton Heston, and Dennis
Miller are just ignorant political hacks.

18. John Lott's research on how gun ownership
reduces crime is junk science, but Michael Bellesiles
is still an authority on why gun control is good (even
though he was forced to resign from Emory due to
research misconduct over his book "Arming America").

19. Bush's toppling the Saddam regime was a
"diversion," but Clinton's lobbing a couple of cruise
missiles at Iraq in the thick of the Lewinsky sex
scandal was "sending a message."

20. A president who lies under oath is okay, but a
president who references sixteen words from an allies'
intelligence report should be dragged through the
streets naked.

21. Government should limit itself to the powers
named in the Constitution, which include banning
Second Amendment rights and shopping the courts for
judges sympathetic to causes that wouldn't pass in any
legislature.

22. "The People" in the First Amendment means The
People; "the People" in the Fourth Amendment means The
People; "the People" in the Ninth Amendment means The
People; "the People" in the Tenth Amendment means The
People; but "the People" in the Second Amendment
(ratified in 1791) means the National Guard (created
by an Act of Congress in 1903).

23. You support a woman's "right to choose" to kill
her unborn child, but don't believe that same woman is
competent enough to homeschool the children she bears.

24. Proven draft-dodging is irrelevant, but baseless
claims of AWOL status is crucial to national security.

25. Threatening to boycott Dr. Laura's and Rush
Limbaugh's advertisers is exercising Freedom of
Speech, but threatening to boycott CBS's "The Reagans"
and Liberal actors over their asinine anti-American
remarks is censorship and McCarthyist blacklisting.
___________________________________________________

Jay from STOPtheACLU reveals the jury has reached a verdict... Moussaoui is qualified to recieve the humanitarian vaccination.(I'd tell him just as they start the injection, that I added a little "pig serum" just for him).
___________________________________________________

Kit Jarrell, a fellow Sooner, from euphoricreality has a great post on the Oklahoma Immigration Reform Rally: A First-Timer’s Story. I liked this story, so much so that I wanted to post it to FreeRepublic but unfortunately, do not know how to post pics yet.
By the way Kit, "those dedicated men and women who support our troops outside Walter Reed on Friday nights can go there, week after week, month after month." are FReepers from FreeRepublic.
They are a great bunch of Patriots that do great work.

PC Free Zone 

Only The Truth is Spoken Here
 






My Blogroll

Help Fight The ACLU

Powered 

by Blogger