Thursday, August 30, 2007

Is it Scriptural to Deny Public Benefits to Illegal Aliens?

I notice that our leftist friends at the Arkansas Times site have a new article up which is pro-illegal alien. It cites scriptures to defend the position that illegal aliens should be entitled to all the public benefits of regular citizens.

Now I think it is a fine thing to cite scripture to support one's position. I approve of that and I hope they won't mind when I do the same regarding other issues. Still, when you use scripture to support a position, you need to get it right. Though it is an understandable mistake with the way different Hebrew words are translated into the same English word, they are wrong to cite the scriptures they use to support the things they advocate. To know why I say that, it is going to take nine minutes of your time listening to this audio file.

Socialized Medicine Strikes Again

When the government provides health care and messes you up bad, the only place you have to go for justice is a government judge. In Germany, a man lost the top of his head due to bungling on the part of the government health care system. It was placed in a cooler that did not keep it cool enough, and so the doctors decided to replace it with plastic!

The man sued. He only asked for about $30,000. He said the plastic was not as good an insulator, gave him headaches, and made him sensitive to the weather. The judge decided that that was too much and that the plastic skull "was better than the original". Right. The man was awarded about $4,000. Would that be enough for you if it happened to you?

Wednesday, August 29, 2007

Big Hillary! Donor on the Lamb

How odd that we are not hearing much about this story from the networks!

ICE Reassigns 1,000 Agents to Customs

Yep, the Washington Times reports that about 1,000 Immigration Control and Enforcement Personnel will be transferred to Customs. The move will reduce the manpower involved in detention and removal of illegal aliens to 4,000 nationwide.

What is this, part of our "punishment" for rejecting Jorge's "comprehensive immigration reform"? GOP voters, you simply cannot vote too radically anymore. Any candidate with a hint of a connection to the globalist establishment must be summarily rejected with prejudice at the ballot box. The future of our nation depends on your willingness to break with these people.

Monday, August 27, 2007

Adding Two and Two: Prepare for Huge Scandal

UPDATE THURSDAY AUG 30th. 5:14PM. Could this be it? Independent Inquiry on whether Gonzales perjured himself in regards to sworn testimony on both the US Attorney firings and warrantless domestic spying program.

I don't claim to be a prophet, but I do try to pay attention to things and connect the dots. Many times, this gets me in trouble as I see things coming that are beyond the horizon of folks who are not trying to pay attention and blissfully unaware of the dots scattered all around their feet. They just write me off as a nut or a bore or both when I sound off these warnings.

Later, when what I warned about goes down, they are panicked and act all surprised and get upset. Most of them don't remember that I saw it coming. They don't remember what I said was going to happen, they only remember that they have already decided I am a nut! And now that we are in this unforseen crisis, we have even less time to listen to nuts like that! Instead, we must show even more faith in those who failed to see this coming!

Yep. They just remember me as the guy who hallucinates, even after what I warned them about proves to be all too real. Hey, what I predicted three years ago and what just happened today are dots, two points of data, and like I said, these folks are not good at connecting them.

Anyway, I want to reach out and I thought a good way to get through to them was to try a prediction that has a bit shorter time frame, so that it will be easier to make the connections. Ready? Here goes.... This is Monday night, August 27, 2007. Within 10 days a huge scandal is going to rock the administration. It is going to involve Karl Rove and Alberto Gonzales conspiring to do one of two things: 1) attempting to place political operatives as U.S. attorneys in key spots like Arkansas in order to do things like use their office to mount political prosecutions on potential Democratic candidates or 2) Use the government's new surveillance powers under the "Patriot Act" to do some political spying, or both.

On this one, there are less dots to connect than usual. I will name only a couple of the most obvious. Karl Rove suddenly resigned with precious little explanation that made sense. It was very sudden. This Friday, Alberto Gonzales resigned in a phone call to President Bush, the story just made it out today. It also was sudden and little explanation was given. A phone call! Connect the dots. Something is going on folks. Something is about to hit the fan with such force that a fine coat of fecal matter is going to cover the rest of this Presidency.

As to what it could be, well more dots. What possible issues could connect Rove and Gonzales? Why, the matter of the U.S. Attorney removals has a line to Rove and Gonzales going right through it! The other possibility is that Gonzo was overzealous in the use of some executive branch operations with the new powers under the Patriot Act. Sure they are only supposed to be used against terrorists, but when you are that much in the clique, it is hard to remember sometimes that your political enemies are not always the Country's enemies.

Anyway, we will know by 8 September if I am connecting dots, or just hallucinating!

Saturday, August 25, 2007

Vietnam Comparisons

Young Bush Poses with Air National Guard Jet

When President Bush started making comparisons between Iraq and Vietnam, something about it really made me bristle. It was too visceral to be about policy. The absurdity of his policy connections were clear enough- the pro-war line at the time was there there would be a "domino effect" with all of Asia falling under Communism if we withdrew. It did not happen. Thirty years later, we are trading "most favored nation" style with the same folks that we were told we absolutely must keep fighting with 30 years ago. So were we wrong then, wrong now, or both?

But no, the "surge" going on in my gut was too personal in tone. Then it hit me when I read an article about the 39th Infantry Brigade of the Arkansas National Guard being called back to Iraq for the second time in two years. The rules of deployment were recently "re-interpreted" so that National Guard units could be ordered to deploy more frequently than they were originally led to believe.

In Vietnam, George Bush hid from combat by using his privileged connections to get in the "Air National Guard". Now, he repeatedly sends overseas not just Army active duty unites, or even Army Reserve units, but National Guard units. He has overtaxed our military so much that even National Guard units are being sent on virtually back-to-back deployments. He has no qualms about ordering our current National Guardsmen to make the sacrifice that he used the National Guard to avoid. In fact, he does it with such a smug air of righteousness and total lack of self-doubt or introspection that it boggles the mind. Here is how Wikepedia puts it..

"..........In a 1994 interview, Bush stated that he joined the Guard because "I was not prepared to shoot my eardrum out with a shotgun in order to get a deferment. Nor was I willing to go to Canada. So I chose to better myself by learning how to fly airplanes."[6]

The unit in which Bush served was known as a "Champagne unit," where the scions of the Texas aristocracy could avoid combat duty with relatively few demands on their time. Serving in that unit with Bush were the sons of three prominent men: Democratic Governor John Connally, Democratic Senator and future Vice-Presidential nominee Lloyd Bentsen, and Republican Senator John Tower, as well as seven members of the Dallas Cowboys professional football club, and a man named James R. Bath, who would become a longtime friend of Bush's."

I am just amazed at his nerve. He calls up comparisons with Vietnam that are wrong on a policy level, but even more disgraceful on a personal level. A man who used the National Guard to escape deployment to the war zone ought to feel at least a mustard seed of shame or self-doubt that he is demanding that National Guardsmen be torn from their families again and again, risking their lives in the worst possible example of the kind of nation-building mission that he said when running in 2000 that we should avoid. And not only does he call them up, but he refers back to the conflict he took a pass on to justify doing it!

Thursday, August 23, 2007

Cost of Low-Skill Immigrants to the US Taxpayer - Approximately $20,000 a year

Texas Spends $4 Billion Alone On Education For Illegal Immigrants. The ADE In Arkansas Reported Only $169 Million For Education And Imprisonment.

Lawmakers have been discussing the best way to tackle the illegal immigration at the state level. The following excerpts are taken from a scholarly paper by the Heritage Foundation, entitled "The Fiscal Cost of Low-Skill Immigrants to the U.S. Taxpayer." I would recommend that those involved in leadership positions, or those writing about the topic, read this entire long report with charts and a great deal of data to document his calculations. Main points are highlighted in red.

Illegal aliens may not receive all the benefits used in the following study, but they receive most of them. Also see an article below entitled, "Illegals cost Texas $4.7 billion - Estimate based on analysis of Census data," written in 2005. Also see excerpts from article on 60 to 83 hospital closings in California because of emergency treatment of illegal aliens.

"Each year, families and individuals pay taxes to the government and receive back a wide variety of services and benefits. A fiscal deficit occurs when the benefits and services received by one group exceed the taxes paid. When such a deficit occurs, other groups must pay for the services and benefits of the group in deficit. Each year, govern­ment is involved in a large-scale transfer of resources between different social groups.

"On average, low-skill immigrant households re­ceived $30,160 per household in immediate govern­ment benefits and services in FY 2004, including direct benefits, means-tested benefits, education, and popula­tion-based services. By contrast, low-skill immigrant households paid only $10,573 in taxes. Thus, low-skill immigrant households received nearly three dollars in benefits and services for each dollar in taxes paid.

"The net fiscal deficit of a household equals the cost of immediate benefits and services received minus taxes paid. As Chart 5 shows, if the costs of direct and means-tested benefits, education, and population-based ser­vices were counted, the average low-skill household had a fiscal deficit of $19,588 (expenditures of $30,160 minus $10,573 in taxes).

"However, the fiscal burden becomes most severe among elderly households, where the net annual fiscal deficit soars to $32,686 per household per year. This amounts to roughly $15,000 per year for each elderly low-skill immigrant.

"It is often argued that low-skill immigrants have a positive impact on U.S. taxpayers because they pay taxes into the Social Security trust fund. Low-skill immigrant households receive many other government benefits as well, receiving ten dollars in total government benefits for each dollar they pay in Social Security taxes.

"Current immigrants (both legal and illegal) have very low education levels relative to the non-immigrant U.S. population. As Chart 1 shows, at least 50 percent, and perhaps 60 percent of illegal immigrant adults lack a high school degree… By contrast, only 9 percent of non-immigrant adults lack a high school degree. The current immigrant population, thus, contains a disproportionate share of poorly edu­cated individuals. These individuals will tend to have low wages, pay little in taxes, and receive above average levels of government benefits and services.

"There is a common misconception that the low edu­cation levels of recent immigrants is part of a permanent historical pattern, and that the U.S. has always admitted immigrants who were poorly educated relative to the native born population. Historically, this was not the case. For example, in 1960, recent immigrants were no more likely than were non-immigrants to lack a high school degree. By 1998, recent immigrants were almost four times more likely to lack a high school degree than were non-immigrants.

"As the relative education level of immigrants fell in recent decades, so did their relative wage levels. In 1960, the average immigrant male in the U.S. actually earned more than the average non-immigrant man. As the relative edu­cation levels of subsequent waves of immigrants fell, so did relative wages. By 1998, the average immigrant earned 23 percent less than the average non-immigrant.

"Low wage levels in low-skill immigrant households lead to high levels of poverty: Over 30 percent of persons living in low-skill immigrant households were poor in 2004 compared to the overall poverty rate of 12.7 percent in the U.S. population."

For rest of this article see this link, click on Thursday below, or just arrow down if you were sent here.,000%20a%20yr%20low%20skill%20immigrant%20family.htm

State Figures for Educating & Imprisoning Illegal Immigratns Inaccurate

See Next Post For Details On How Each Household Of Illegal Aliens Cost Taxpayers $20,000 A Year.

"Reports revealed that Arkansas spends about $169 million annually to educate and imprison immigrants and their families." THERE IS NO WAY THIS AMOUNT IS CORRECT. 1.

I don't know how the ADE arrived at their figure, but to get a good estimate the figure would have to include the following:

· Per pupil spending at $7,795 for at least 70% percent of the 34,772 K-12 Hispanic students in Arkansas. My figures below show an approximate figure of $210 million for just this per pupil spending alone without including the other costs listed below. ADE's figure of $169 million was supposed to also include the cost of imprisonment for the illegal aliens as well. 2

· Cost of Pre-K programs for which probably ALL the illegal alien families qualify. In 2006 the state was spending $ 71 million a year on preschool programs. 7.4 % of all K-12 students in Arkansas are Hispanics. If just 7.4% of illegal immigrants were in Pre-K programs, that would be over $5 million. Surely there are some figures somewhere on the number of Hispanics in Pre-K programs. (I think more money was added for Pre-K in 2007)

· College tuition (many illegal aliens are attending college in Arkansas, and some are receiving scholarships).

· Numerous required programs for Spanish speaking children in all the schools. These programs would cost in the millions no doubt. Hiring additional teachers for those classes gets very expensive.

· Remedial programs for Spanish students. Most of the illegal aliens have to take remedial courses which adds to the cost of education.

· Money being allocated by the state for facilities to take care of the students because of the massive influx of illegal aliens in areas like Springdale. Springdale received an $8.2 million from the state to build five new elementary schools (the highest allotment in the state) in 2006. 3 The Hispanic student population there has more than doubled since 2001 and is now 38% of the student body with 6,258 Hispanic students. 4 The state pays less than half on these facilities plans so the cost of the five elementary schools would be at the very minimum in the neighborhood of $20 million. 38% of 20 million is about $7.5 million for students of illegal aliens in just this one district. In 2006 the state paid 86 million and the local school districts paid 214 million so $20 million may not be nearly high enough to base this figure on. (See below for another injustice this is causing)

· "In all, 1, 646 long-term projects have been approved in what the state calls the 'partnership program' for facilities, with a total state and local cost of $ 1. 4 billion. 5 The state’s share is $ 631 million and will be paid with cash." 7.4% of the students in Arkansas are Hispanic. 7.4% times $1.4 billion is approximately $104 million so $104 million would be spent on facilities to benefit a population that is mostly illegal.

At this time, I don't know the cost of special programs for Spanish speaking students, or the remedial programs. I am sure there are still some things I am missing as well. But I know someone out there does know how to figure the costs on these.

However ADE has just awarded Springdale $1.3 million grant for 100 Springdale teachers to learn to instruct students who don't speak English fluently. 18% of the Hispanic students in the state are enrolled at Springdale; so it would take about five to six million dollars for teachers across the state just to have this training, not to speak of all the teachers that have to be hired to teach the students, and other special programs.
Since some Spanish speaking students are enrolled in all classes, I presume this would mean that all teachers should have this training, which could get expensive indeed.

I noted that the cost of imprisonment for illegal aliens in the newspaper report was figured just for cost of keeping them in jail. What about all the cost for law enforcement, court costs, prosecuting attorney's fees, appointed attorneys, etc it took to arrest them and to get them in prison.

For rest of this article go to this link, click on Thursday below; or if sent here just scroll down.

No Matter What You Call It, North American Union Is Happening

President Bush met with the leaders of Canada and Mexico in a secret three-day conference that ends today. Without directly denying that the meetings are to grease the skids for a union of the countries, Bush mocked and ridiculed the idea. One of the business leaders at the conference brushed off complaints that no reporters were allowed to attend, claiming that the items discussed were as mundane as making sure the contents of jelly beans was the same in all three countries! Right. You really need secret meetings with three heads of state to talk about jelly beans!

NASCO changed its website to imply that the "NAFTA Superhighway" was just good old I-35 all along. But why then did the U.S. Department of Transportation threaten to with hold highway money from Texas if it's "two year moratorium" on construction of toll roads stood? It did not stand, thanks to a veto by Gov. Rick Perry. And there were signs all up and down the route advertising the "Trans Texas Corridor" until they recently vanished.

The US Postal service has also reached an agreement with Mexico to help improve that countries post office! I defy supporters of the project to show us where in the constitution the federal government of the United States is authorized to expend resources developing the postal infrastructure of another nation.

What is going on here? Follow the money. Big business has exported their factories and jobs to Mexico, now they are finding out that the infrastructure down there is not the high quality they were used to when they operated in the United States. Their solution is that they want United States taxpayers to help pick up the tab to improve the infrastructure in the countries they have left us for! It is classic "cost-shifting", that is to say, theft. They want to socialize their costs while the privatize the profits.

Tax dollars are no longer being spent based on what is best for the citizens of this country, but on what is best for multinational corporations with influence in many countries by loyalty to none. Its why we need a big, interventionist military and foreign policy which occupies over 100 foreign countries to "defend our interests". Its why our highway dollars are spent to make an end-run around U.S. ports instead of having to come through them. Its why it now becomes our government's responsibility to improve Mexico's postal system. Follow the money and it all becomes clear.

Our New Partner for Peace in Iraq

Izzat Al-Douri, one of Saddam Hussein's inner circle and the "King of Clubs" on the famous card deck of America's most wanted in Iraq, has announced that his group will work directly with the U.S. to purge Al-Qaeda in Iraq. Until recently, the Baathists (Saddam's former party) had formed an alliance of convenience with Al-Qaeda in Iraq in order to fight both the U.S. occupation and the current Iraqi government.

The reasons for their alliance, and its unraveling, are complex. The Baathists are drawn from Iraq's minority Sunni Arab population, but are mostly secular and had little use for the hyper-Sunni Al-Qaeda while Saddam was in control. The Sunni Arabs ruled over the majority Shia Arabs and the Kurds with an iron fist under Saddam. Now that the Shia control the government, extra-judicial payback was occurring with secret help from government officials. The Sunnis turned to Al-Qaeda as a possible force to protect them now that the Baathists were too weak to do so alone. They now see that as a mistake. Al-Qaeda inflamed the Shias even more with brutal terror attacks on civilians and government targets alike. In addition, the Sunni Arabs soon found that though they thought they were inviting in protectors, what they got were lords. Lords who enforced hyper-strict religious codes and who were almost as quick to turn their guns on the Sunnis as they were to massacre Shia civilians.

In the midst of that, America has changed tactics and started buying off the Sunni tribes with offers of infrastructure improvements and even weapons. The Sunni realized that the tyrants from Al-Qaeda could not protect them, and in fact could not even protect themselves against U.S. forces. They did what Arab tribes in the region have been doing for centuries- they switched sides. They are helping to drive Al-Qaeda back out of Sunni Iraq.

If this allows us to declare victory and go home, I am all for it. It does raise some questions though. If we are going to have to turn to Saddam's henchmen to get Al-Qaeda out of Iraq, then why did we overthrow the government in the first place? We are now arming the Sunnis and are basically creating another militia. How does the government of Iraq feel about that? And how long can we buy their love? Al-Qaeda had lost most of its taste for taking on our troops in Iraq anyway. They preferred to slaughter civilians. 73% of the attacks on our troops are now from Shia militias who have infiltrated the police and the army. What do we do about them? About the Iranians who are sending them weapons? We are giving many sides weapons, including tribes that were allied with Saddam. Is it only OK to hand out weapons when we do it?

Our present policy of distributing guns to all sides willing to fight Al-Qaeda is working to eradicate Al-Qaeda in Iraq, and that is a great thing. It is not going to help bring stability to Iraq though. Imagine you are one of the sane families in a neighborhood of crazy idiots. Someone wants a certain criminal family dead so bad that they hand out guns to everyone who is willing to fight with them. Hey, its good the criminals are gone, but now all the crazies have more guns than ever. Do you, as one of the sane families, feel more secure?

Illegals Leaving Oklahoma En Mass

An estimated 25,000 illegal aliens, 30% of the total, are leaving Oklahoma in advance of a new state law taking effect. HB 1804 requires businesses to check the immigration status of their new hires and the work eligibility of independent contractors. Oklahoma's state agencies will have to follow the same rules for checking new hires' work eligibility and immigration status effective Nov. 1. The new law also allows a U.S. citizen who has been fired to pursue a discrimination claim against the employer if an illegal alien is employed to do the same job.

The law has yet to take effect and many of them are "self-deporting". If it was national policy, I guess we would not have to deport 12 million people after all. Unfortunately, it is only Oklahoma state policy and many of those illegals are "self-deporting" to Arkansas and Kansas! We need a similar law here or we will get a new flood.

Oklahoma business interests are whining and moaning about no longer being able to cheat American Citizens out of a fair market wage by taping a flood of slave labor. The media coverage is completely slanted in favor of the big business folks who buy advertising from the media. It really is heavy handed, but the statesmen in Oklahoma are not buying it- they are listening to the voters.

Will Arkansas politicians do the same? A few, like Jon Woods of Springdale, are. But Gov. Beebe continues to insist that this "is a federal issue" despite what is going on right next door in Oklahoma. There are some poultry interests that are getting their money's worth from that guy!

Tuesday, August 21, 2007

Huckabee And Flawed Views of the Self

Mike Huckabee, way cooler than you and not afraid to say so.

"I'm a conservative too, I'm just not mad at anybody", says a smarmy ex-governor Mike Huckabee out hustling for votes and favorable media. The implication of course, is that most conservatives are angry, and that this anger somehow makes them inferior in attitude to Mr. Huckabee.

Where to begin to unravel this quote? Perhaps with the first four words. Let's start with the idea that Mike Huckabee is a "conservative". On abortion he is moderately conservative, and on defense of marriage a bit more so. On virtually every other issue he is a nanny-state open borders liberal who never met a 25 year income stream that he did not want to spend in four years (see federal highway and tobacco settlement money). Government spending grew 60% in his term of office, and borrowing grew even more. We had to have a Democratic Governor before the grocery tax got cut! Mr. Huckabee pushed through a school consolidation bill that takes more and more control over children's education away from parents. There is simply nothing conservative about his record outside of defense of traditional marriage and a moderate interest in pro-life issues.

But onto the second part of his quote, about not being mad at anyone. There are two things I have to say about this, one is the issue of whether or not it is ever appropriate to be angry, and the other is the issue of the reality about Mike Huckabee and anger rather than the image that he seems to have of himself about it.

(continued- click TUESDAY below and scroll down for rest of article)

Sunday, August 19, 2007

Democrats Dominate in Race for Campaign Cash

For some reason, Republicans are not staying competitive with the Democrats in terms of campaign cash.

Democratic Senatorial Campaign Cash on Hand: $20 million
Republican Senatorial Campaign Cash on Hand: $6 million

Democratic Congressional Campaign Cash on Hand: $20 million
Republican Congressional Campaign Cash on Hand: $2 million

Democratic Presidential Candidates: $95 million
Republican Presidential Candidates: $33 million


This lack of competitiveness is a matter of great concern for every American. One party rule is not good for the country. The Republican establishment has carpet-bombed their base in an effort to curry favor with mega-business. It looks like it is not working. The base has gotten tired of the betrayals and the mega-business is looking only at the numbers- Democrat politicians look like a better investment now.

The Einsteins at national have thrown the true believers overboard in an effort to please some big money folks. Now they learn it is the true believers who donate and stick with you even when the chips are down. The big money guys only give to winners- losers are not able to bend policy to repay the investment.

The true believers in the base would come in mighty handy right now, but they are not energized. The establishment is like an exec who leaves his wife for another woman- who dumps him when she realizes that the wife was the one with the real money and made him who he was.

Thursday, August 16, 2007

Fred Thompson is Not Pro-Life

ABC News has found that former Senator Fred Thompson's old campaign files had two position papers on abortion. One paper was labeled "Pro-Life" in the upper right-hand corner and the second was labeled "Pro-Choice". Here is a PDF file of the two documents.

Even in the "Pro-Life" position paper, Thompson does not take much of a "pro-life" position outside of his vote to ban the barbaric procedure known as "partial birth abortion". The rest of his record is about limiting but not eliminating the circumstances under which you and I should be taxed in order to pay for abortions. Thompson's position is that you and I should be taxed to pay for abortions in the cases of "rape, incest, or when the life of the mother is in danger".

Is that really a "pro-life" position? Why would a "pro-life" candidate be in favor of taxing you and I to pay for the abortion of any innocent child? We are not even talking about under which circumstances it should be legal to terminate the life of an unborn child, we are talking about circumstances under which Fred Thompson thinks we taxpayers should ante up for it.

There is no mention of overturning Roe, and in fact Thompson outright says that he does not believe that early term abortions should be criminalized. Should murder be against the law or not? What about child abuse? Thompson expresses support for moderate state restrictions on abortion such as parental notification and 48 hour waiting periods.

Taken on the whole, this is an attempt at fence-riding on an issue with no middle ground. Either you believe human life is sacred, or you don't. No honest person can claim that limiting the circumstances under which I am forced by the government to pay for ripping up innocent babies is a "pro-life" position.

Intervention time again for my conservative friends who are in entrenched denial about Fred Thompson. A lot of Thompson supporters out there also consider yourselves pro-life. You can't be both, and if you think you are, it is willful delusion. His position papers are right there to see. Fred Thompson shows no interest in supporting laws that would ban abortion, and wants nothing to do with the issue. Voting for him is voting for the massacre of the innocents to continue.

Clergy to be Used to Get Our Guns Under Martial Law

TV report below. You have to hear it to believe it. What is happening in this country?

Illinois Straw Poll Results

The Illinois State Republican Party held it's own straw poll today. The event only had 1/15th of the voters that the much-publicized Iowa straw poll had, but one presumes that it is still a better measure of real primary voter strength on the ground than a telephone poll.

The results went like this....

1st Mitt Romney 40%
2nd Fred Thompson 20%
3rd Ron Paul 19%
4th Rudy Giuliani 12%
5th John McCain 4%
6th Mike Huckabee 3%
All others 1% or less

It does not take much of an IQ to do an analysis on these numbers. Mitt Romney is a national candidate who has the base to carry his Iowa win over to another state. Mike Huckabee's and Sam Brownback's Iowa numbers appear to be a result of concentrating their resources in Iowa. So far they are not parlaying their finish in the Iowa Straw poll to strong national, or even regional, appeal.

Rudy Giuliani once again does poorly in the heartlands. He and especially John McCain seem more like media creations than true dominant candidates.

Fred Thompson continues to garner interest, in spite of fears that his campaign has peaked too soon. Ron Paul pushed Thompson very hard for a second place finish in this poll. Assuming Thompson enters, those two may battle it out for the "limited government conservative" vote which makes up so much of the GOP. Giuliani is emerging as the candidate for liberal republicans, and Mitt Romney is running hard right in an effort to convince the moderate to mild right Republicans that he is their man.

Tuesday, August 14, 2007

Militant Gays Target Arkansas Family Council Members for Death

Should Jerry Cox, Director of the Arkansas Family Council, hire a bodyguard? Recently a homosexual activist group-, had posted an enemies list with the AFC on it. The "enemies" were explicitly targeted for death.

The FBI has been notified and the post has since been yanked, but a contributor managed to get the missive up before it was pulled.

Thirty Pieces of Silver ("Benefits" of Illegal Aliens)

The Morning News had an article on the costs and benefits of illegal aliens on our state economy. The source was a Rockefeller Foundation study. Since they give money to the pro-illegal groups that marched in our streets on several occasions I think it is safe to assume that any bias in the report will be in favor of the "contribution" that criminals from other countries "make to our economy". Even then, the numbers only highlight to me that our elected officials should cease their traitorous selling out to corporate interests in favor of serving their constituents, upholding the law, and honoring their oaths of office. And if you think I am upset about it, I assure you that there are many far angrier than I. It is time for the politicians to be less afraid of the nasty editorials from the gated-community liberals at the Dem-Gaz and more afraid of the aroused citizenry.

As for me, I am a passionate man, but an old black pentecostal preacher once said from the pulpit that emotions make a good caboose, but a bad engine. He was right then and now. I will let facts and reason pull my heart along. Let's look at the numbers from the study:

Here is the key line from the report. This is driving businesses in Arkansas to flood us with alien invaders;"Illegal immigrants make possible $1.4 billion in production annually for state manufacturers and other companies, which pay them $95 million less than they would legal citizens, the study found."

Ninety five million dollars a year in cost savings to them. That is what is driving them to sell the rest of us out. And what does that $95 million in cost savings to them cost the rest of us?

Well, the PC foundation is like the rest of the corporate media who can't seem to separate immigration into a legal and an illegal component. The most it could do was say "Immigrants, both legal and illegal, cost the state about $170 million a year,". We all know that the majority of that cost is for illegal "immigrants". If I cared to I could show yo u how even that number is low. But let's accept it for the sake of moving forward.

Still, that figure does not take into account all the costs. If an illegal alien gets drunk and runs over and kills a small girl, as happened in Springdale this year, or another is involved in gunning a driver down in the road as happened in Rogers this year, only "court and incarceration" costs are figured into the number. Is that the true total cost? Tell it to the families!

The figures for schools does not include other monetary and non-monetary costs. There are school buildings that would not have to be built if not for the influx. As a former educator, I can tell you that if you fill a room up with students who have special education needs and cultural and language barriers to learning, that it has a negative effect on the total learning environment of all children in the classroom.

But we have not finished counting the monetary price yet. The bad-faith employers may have grabbed an extra $95 million in profits by cheating while mostly shifting the extra $170 million in costs onto the backs of the rest of us, but even that does not fully expose the folly of their greed. If they had hired local people then those local people would tend to spend the money locally. It would go back into our local economy and keep circulating. Instead, we have aliens who live ten to a house and send every extra dime out of the country. It is sucking our local businesses dry. I guess if you hire illegals to process chickens to send to Russia, what it does to the local economy does not matter to you. But it matters to the rest of us.

Monday, August 13, 2007

China Learns Just as the West Forgets

A speaker from the esteemed Chinese Academy of Social Sciences in Beijing said in a scheduled lecture for tourists:

“One of the things we were asked to look into was what accounted for the success, in fact, the pre-eminence of the West all over the world (…) but in the past twenty years, we have realized that the heart of your culture is your religion: Christianity. That is why the West has been so powerful. The Christian moral foundation of social and cultural life was what made possible the emergence of capitalism and then the successful transition to democratic politics. We don’t have any doubt about this.”

Full story here.

Sunday, August 12, 2007

Iowa Straw Poll Part II: Return On Investment

In absolute terms Governor Mitt Romney won the Iowa Straw poll. It took him over $400, and maybe $1,000, per vote to do it though. Mike Huckabee got less votes, but his did not cost him as much either, only $58 a vote. In fact, he did not even put as much into it as his other main rival in Iowa, Senator Sam Brownback. "Brownback spent a lot more on organization ($148 per vote), time and effort, but Mike Huckabee has just turned out to be a better candidate," said David Yepsen, a columnist for the Des Moines Register (according to nwanewsonline).

Brownback is talking like he wants to stay in the race, but the Iowa straw poll proved to be a poor return on investment. Of course, the next two finishers spent even less. The Ron Paul campaign only bought 500 tickets, and those mostly went to workers, many of whom were out of state and could not vote. It is not known how many Tancredo bought, but it is likely the same or less than Paul. It is likely their votes cost even less per vote than Mike Huckabee's.

The other way to measure investment is time spent. Brownback made 32 trips to the state. Huckabee made 19. Tancredo and Paul made one or at most two trips to the state. Iowa is all wrong for Paul because a good deal of the vote is decided by people who vote by which candidate wants to tax other people the most in order to overpay them to grow corn. Look for New Hampshire to be a better fit for Paul.

There is another disappointing finisher in the race- the poll itself. It attracted a much smaller crowd than last time and only about half the votes as last time. I would say energy is down for Republican candidates in Iowa and across the nation.

Assume this Conversation is Being Monitored

At least for a while, the Democrats cave on stopping warrantless wiretaps of American citizens. Even the independent FISA judges, a special court made just for the purpose of churning out warrants, was too restrictive for the New Order. From the Washington Times...

Democrats were reluctant to give the NSA blanket permission to capture such data without a warrant unless independent oversight was provided, either by the court or by the Justice Department's inspector general. They also worried that providing warrantless authority to spy on targets other than foreign terrorism suspects would lead to potentially abusive monitoring of Americans innocently in contact with foreign targets.

Other provisions in the White House-backed bill added to the Democrats' discomfort. For instance, a Democratic bill would have authorized warrantless surveillance "directed" at individuals reasonably believed to be outside the United States. But the administration's draft -- and the one passed into law -- permitted collecting data "concerning" people reasonably believed to be outside the country. Democrats said the difference between collection efforts "concerning" foreigners and "directed" at foreigners could be enormous, allowing intelligence officials far greater leeway.

As much as the Democrats want to get President Bush, their mutual fondness for big brother style fascism would not let them defeat his plans to continue warrantless wiretaps on American citizens. Say you use the same dry cleaners as someone they deem to be a "suspected terrorist". Why, you are eligible for complete monitoring of your life's communications. So be careful not to express any thoughts that your government might not approve of.

There are lots of things that could get you in trouble with the myriad of "public servants" staffing the numerous government agencies at work using your tax dollars, and in the new DHS, they can now all share data. For example, be very careful when you speak to your accountant about how you express a desire to pay fewer taxes. Be completely accepting of all alternative lifestyles, and be especially careful to avoid "homophobic" statements that could run afoul of new "hate crimes" legislation. Remember that much of what was formerly called "free speech" has been reclassified by your government as "hate speech". Also, never fail to use a pleasant and cheery tone when speaking to your children no matter what they do. Don't be "verbally abusive" to your children when they misbehave.

All these activities and many more can and will be monitored and recorded by government officials. The expansion of communication monitoring when combined with the explosion of "crimes" and government "mental health service agencies" means that anytime they want to, anyone of us can be locked up for either "criminal" or "mental health" reasons. So again, avoid even jokingly making statements that might trigger a "red flag" at one or another group of government monitors. It looks good when they make arrests, and if it is too hard for them to catch the most dangerous people then they will catch the ones that are easiest to catch. Don't let it be you. And remember, these measures are completely justified and necessary in order to "protect our freedoms".

Saturday, August 11, 2007

Iowa Straw Poll Results and What They Mean

There were apparent malfunctions with the controversial Diebold voting machines, which delayed the results over an hour as they were forced to fall back on a paper hand count.

1. Gov Mitt Romney 4516 votes 31%.- STOCK UP SOMEWHAT. He did what he had to do, and got a percentage of the vote comparable to Bush in 99.

2. Gov. Mike Huckabee 2587 votes 18.1%- STOCK WAY UP. He beat Brownback using fewer chips. He is still broke, but if Brownback is forced from the race Huckabee will benefit the most.

3. Sen. Sam Brownback 2192 votes 15.3%- STOCK DOWN- his third place finish would have been good if the man in 2nd wasn't Mike Huckabee. Iowa is a neighbor to his home state of Kansas. Brownback made a tremendous effort in this state and came up short.

4. Tom Tancredo 1961 votes 13.7% - STOCK UP SOMEWHAT. Tancredo was the victim of a hoax in which an email was sent to 500 of his supporters falsely telling them that their bus rides had been canceled at the last minute. One wonders if he could not have pushed Brownback for 3rd otherwise. His message is getting some traction.

5. Ron Paul 1305 votes 9.1%- STOCK UNCHANGED. Paul came late to the party. He only spent a week in Iowa and bought far less tickets than the other campaigns. His wife spent the day in the hospital with heart trouble. His supporters are passionate and he has some cash on hand, so he did not need a top three finish, but it would have been nice.

6. Tommy Thompson 1,009 votes 7.3%- STOCK TAKEN OFF MARKET. Will leave the race.

7. Fred Thomson 231 votes- STOCK DOWN. I know he said he wasn't trying, but this was still a very weak showing. Guys who the media mentions 100,000 times as often as Ron Paul or Tom Tancredo should not lose to them this badly.

8. Rudy Giuliani 183 votes- SEE ABOVE

9. Duncan Hunter 174 votes. STOCK WAY DOWN. He may leave the race. Tancredo is the "strong against illegal immigration" tough-guy candidate that is gaining traction.

10. John McCain 101 votes- STOCK WAY DOWN. Media Creation rather than a true top-tier candidate.


Fed Up: FOX Poll Shows Majority Would Vote 3rd Party

It received very little coverage, even on their own website, but FOX News conducted a poll that had some interesting revelations on the willingness of Americans to vote 3rd party, even if they felt the candidate had little chance to win. The results were buried on page 10 of this PDF file.

The upshot is that 67% of voters said they would vote for a third party independent candidate if they liked them. Even 63% of self-identified Republicans and Democrats said they would do so. I believe the poll greatly under-represented independents who were more likely to vote for a 3rd party candidate, so if anything the real figure could be higher than 67%.

This dissatisfaction with the two-party system also expressed itself in bottom basement approval ratings for both the Republican White House (31%) and Congress. 45% of respondents said that it would be good if a 3rd party candidate or independent won the Presidency in 2008, and another 25% said "it depends on the candidate"!

Clearly, people do not feel like the current system represents them well. There is building frustration at the lack of a political outlet to express this feeling.

Thursday, August 09, 2007

Arkansas Surrogacy Law, Magnet for Gay Surrogacy Parenting and the Trafficking in Children

Arkansas Surrogacy Law Is Among the Most Liberal in the U. S., Much More Liberal than New York and European Laws

Arkansas is one of 9 states that "allow gay surrogacy. A growing number of gay and lesbian couples and individuals are turning to the use of surrogate mothers as a means of starting their family! ..."It's becoming quite popular," says the Lesbian & Gay Parenting Resource.1 [But "trafficking in children" is a term a New York Court used in reference to surrogacy contracts like those allowed in Arkansas."]

In fact, it appears that Arkansas has become a magnet for gay surrogacy. The surrogacy law in Arkansas is among the most favorable in the United States, according to the website of Surrogacy Solutions in Sherwood, Arkansas, which advertises, "Most of our clients do not live in Arkansas, and several of our surrogates and egg donors do not live in Arkansas. You are not required to live in Arkansas to form your contract under and take advantage of Arkansas law on surrogacy. In all surrogacy arrangements through Surrogacy Solutions, the contract provides that Arkansas is the place the parties select for the laws to govern, interpret, and enforce the contract." 2 See below for provisions in Arkansas law that makes it attractive to gays and for a link to the law, Act 647 of 1989.

"There is a quiet but thriving network of Arkansas women who have been carrying babies for couples from all over the country and Europe, where surrogacy is illegal...Melissa Brisman, a New Jersey attorney specializing in reproductive law, said about 10 percent of the surrogates her agency uses live in Arkansas," according to Arkansas Democrat Gazette article August 5, 07.3

"Gary Sullivan, a Little Rock fertility lawyer, helps connect surrogates with prospective parents and makes arrangements for necessary court orders," reports the Arkansas Democrat Gazette. Gary Sullivan is described in another article in that paper as gay and as having a daughter by a surrogate parent: "Sullivan and his domestic partner worked with two egg donors and two surrogates before Leslie-Joe was born....Both surrogates were single. ) Can we assume that the prospective parents with whom Sullivan works are probably gay? 4

On the other hand, "In 1992, New York's legislature declared surrogate parenting contracts void, unenforceable and contrary to public policy... because surrogacy contracts have been interpreted to involve, in the words of one New York court, the 'trafficking in children.'"5

And in Europe, according to the Department of Obstetrics, Cambridge University, in England, "Surrogacy has been described as an emotional and ethical minefield that is putting human nature under pressure. In most countries it is banned, in many others it is not practiced, and only the UK and Israel openly allow for surrogacy. "6 But in England and Israel the surrogate mother cannot be paid for her services] 7

Among the arguments against surrogacy parenting given in a New York Times article are the following: 8

For rest of this article see this link: or click on Thursday below ; or if sent here, just scroll down.

Hanging Out With Fools


Leave the presence of a fool, Or you will not discern words of knowledge.

Proverbs 14:7 NASB

Today in America, millions of us are spending much of their available free time remaining in the presence of fools. Hour upon hour of valuable precious life is spent watching the train wrecks that are their lives. This is on both shows that bill themselves as entertainment or on alleged "news" programs that are all about some disturbed young woman's life and latest trip to rehab. In the days before television, each town may have had one or two disturbed people who would be considered freaks, and you would cross the street to avoid interacting with them. Or if you were feeling spiritual that day, you may try to talk to them in an effort to get them to turn their lives around, not to get their autographs. Thanks to the magic of television, those same kinds of folks are now "celebrities" and we are supposed to invite them into our living rooms each night for hours on end.

Of course, many of us only watch such things because it is like watching a train wreck. We are, at first, appalled but somehow fascinated by the horror of it all. In the end though, it does not matter that we come only to mock. Fools may make a mock of sin, but eventually, sin will mock the fool. Spend two hours each day for ten years learning of fools and their foolishness, and you cannot help but be a different person than you would be if you had decided to spend that same amount of time seeking out the company of the wise and stable.

I understand that the corporate media has no interest in making you wise, just getting your attention however they can. And it is always easier to go for the lowest common denominator. It takes a lot of work and talent to entertain through creativity and skill. Doing something outrageous is a lot easier. All you have to do to remain in the presence of fools is to ingest what the corporate media feeds you each day. It has never been easier to be dumbed down.

That's right. Dumbed down. The scripture says that such people will not discern words of knowledge. Now different translations say it differently, but I have observed the truth of it as expressed in this translation. I have found that it is increasingly difficult to make myself understood by people who are immersed in the pop culture. It seems they no longer have the ability to understand derious conversation. That is to say, they do "not discern words of knowledge". This does not seem to be a function of education or innate intelligence, but rather is a issue of conditioning. I find it very sad and disturbing.

I ask you today to make a conscious decision to leave the presence of foolish persons, in whatever form that presence may take. Thank you for reading and may God bless you all.

Wednesday, August 08, 2007

National Federation of Republican Assemblies Convention

....was held in St. Louis over the weekend. This organization bills itself as "the Republican Wing of the Republican Party". As you might imagine, they run from very conservative to downright reactionary!

Two prizes were up for grabs at this event. One was a straw poll in which all 250 or so attendees could vote. The other was the official endorsement of the organization, and only delegates could vote in that. I have been unable to discover how many of those attendees were delegates, but judging from the divergent results in the two votes, I would have to say less than half.

Here are the results from the straw poll....

Fred Thompson 33%
Mitt Romney 15%
Ron Paul 14%
Duncan Hunter 10%
Tom Tancredo 10%
John Cox 6%
Newt Gingrich 3%
Mike Huckabee 3%
Tommy Thompson 2%
John McCain 2%
Rudy Giuliani 1%
Sam Brownback 1%

The endorsement process was conducted differently. A two-thirds majority was required for an endorsement. The delegates went into a separate room and voted for their candidates. Only the ones who got more than 15% that first round would be voted on in subsequent rounds. As it was, only two men got more than 15% of the vote- Congressman Duncan Hunter and Fred Thompson. Hunter actually got more votes than Thompson among the delegates- 60%. I find it odd that Hunter got only 10% of the total attendees votes and yet he got 60% of the delegates votes. Fred Thompson more than tripled Hunter's total in the straw poll, yet got heavily out-voted in the endorsement chase. Six more rounds of voting were held in an effort to get some undecideds or Thompson people to switch to Hunter so that the required two-thirds majority could be met and they could give an endorsement. The word is that Hunter got up to 64.8 percent- less than two percent away from an endorsement.

In the end, no endorsement was made.

Homosexual Agenda Like That of Radical Islam

The free people of the West face at least two great threats to their liberty in the form of totalitarian idealogies that have shown themselves incapable of truce or appeasement. You can't just agree to disagree with them. Their goals are 100% subjugation of your culture and everyone in it. They will not stop out of some sense of decent respect for your right to make your own decisions and value judgments. They will not stop at all until the mass of the people either bends the knee to their creed or rises up in defense of their liberties and stops their encroachments.

Ten or so years ago, the Lutheran Church in America agreed to allow the ordination of homosexual, bisexual and transgendered "ministers" so long as they lived a "celibate" lifestyle. The pervs jumped on the chance to ruin a Christian organization. They first made a mockery of the celibacy clause and now they want to eliminate it. The mistake of the Lutheran Church in America was their belief that they could reach some kind of truce or compromise with the homosexual mafia. You can't. That was just another hill for them to take in the campaign to bring the Lutheran Church (the Missouri Synod has not taken part in this madness) under submission. Nor will they stop until the pulpits are filled with their disciples who will use those pulpits to badger the faithful into celebrating perversity and hating those who dare to call it sin.

Item Two: San Diego fire fighters were ordered to participate in that city's "Gay Pride" parade and endure lewd taunts and solicitations along the three-hour route. Once again, compulsion is the preferred method of both radical Islam and the Homosexual Agenda. Again, it is not enough for you to "live and let live". You will only be able to pretend that "I won't bother them if they won't bother me" idea will work. It will only "work" until they are done with the rest of us and it is your turn. Then, you too will be compelled to march in their parades, listen to their "ministers" from the pulpit, attending their compulsory "sensitivity training" and subject your elementary school children to their indoctrination in the classroom.

The free people of the West face at least two great threats to their liberty in the form of totalitarian idealogies that have shown themselves incapable of truce or appeasement. Unfortunately, we have only acted to check the threat of one of them. The enemy within marches on.

Wal-Mart Goes Left

Capitol Research has this report:

Wal-Mart, the family-friendly, patriotic company founded by the late Sam Walton has transformed itself into a reliable ally of the political left in order to boost revenues by pacifying its growing chorus of critics. The company now funds radical groups and intimidates its suppliers into adopting its liberal, Big Government agenda.

Rest here...

Includes funding for the race-based organization "La Raza" and homosexual activists.

Tuesday, August 07, 2007

Four Generals Face Charges for Appearing In Christian Video

Link to MSNBC story. The group is affiliated with Campus Crusade for Christ. My how times have changed, and so has our direction as a nation. Changed in such a way that our Republic will not survive much more of a walk down this path.

North American Union via the SPP

I can't say it better than Human Events Online says it through the keyboard of the magnificent Phyllis Schafley.

Monday, August 06, 2007

Iowa Straw Poll Looms (August 11th)

The Iowa straw poll has been considered the first real test of strength on the ground for Republican candidates since 1980. No candidate who has finished below third place in the straw poll has ever won the Republican nomination, and only once did the 3rd place finisher win the nomination. This year, several of the media-anointed "top-tier" candidates have declined to really engage in Iowa. They are counting on the national media to carry them by ceaselessly mentioning their names no matter what is happening on the ground.

So does a top two finish in Iowa still mean as much as it did? I assure you, no matter what they say every candidate would like to be one of the top two. Even if they don't want to campaign on the ground there, they want a high finish. If a top two finish does not have the weight that it once did it might be for a reason other than candidates dodging it- it may be that the race for number two is so incredibly close that a number three or number four is only a percent or two away from a top-two finish.

So who will it be? The smart money says Mitt Romney will win it. He has stacked a huge number of chips here. Maybe too many. Anything less than a win for Romney will be seen as a set-back. The real battle will be for second place.

By the polls, Rudy G. should be locked in a duel with Fred Thompson for that second spot, but this straw poll also measures intensity of effort and those two have not made much here. Their share of the 25,000 votes expected to be cast will come from party regulars looking for an "electable" candidate. That will be balanced against those party regulars who are offended that they and John McCain put so little effort into campaigning in their state.

That gives the second tier candidates a chance to zoom by them and into second place. I see three candidates from the second tier as having a chance to get that number two spot- or at least be so close in a number three or four spot that they can argue that it is almost as good as a second place finish. Of those three, the one most able to argue that a fourth place finish should keep him in the race is former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee. The reason is that he and another 2nd-tier guy who has gained a little traction in Iowa directly compete for the same voters. That would be Kansas Senator Sam Brownback. If Huckabee can finish ahead of Brownback (whose home state borders Iowa) then Brownback is liable to call it quits. Most of his supporters will gravitate to Huckabee. If you put Brownback and Huckabee's support in Iowa together, you get enough folks to gain traction in what should be a five to seven man field. Huckabee can argue that a fourth place finish for him that knocks out Brownback would result in a second place finish if they had another one in a month.

Congressman Tom Tancredo is another one that I think will surprise in Iowa. There are a lot of Iowa Republican Caucus goers who are not put off by the Congressman's threat to use nuclear weapons on Mecca should Islamic extremists detonate a nuke on our soil. Sure he is polling low, but some folks who don't mind nuking Mecca are still a little reluctant to tell a telephone pollster that they don't mind nuking Mecca. I look for Tancredo to make a serious run for that second place spot.

The third person that might sneak in there is the wildcard, Texas Congressman Ron Paul. Paul has zero support from the Republican establishment in Iowa and little shows up in polls of likely caucus attendees. Still, I am getting signals that his under-the-radar campaign could push hard for a 2nd place spot in the straw poll. The key for him will be getting new voters who have never before attended this event to do so. Paul could surprise the experts again since he is drawing new voters to Republican events and this event is a measure of intensity of support as well as volume of support.

Your comments/prediction? (don't count unless you put your real name on them!)

Judge Hendren Again

Judge Jimm Hendren has made another ruling that both I and likely Rogers Judge Doug Schrantz find perplexing. You may recall that Hendren is the judge whose disgraceful actions in the Hollis Wayne Fincher case have drawn the ire of this keyboard. Some defenders of Hendren have tried to argue that no judge lets juries hear questions of law. If so, this is a recent occurrence in our Republic, like so many of the recent erosions of our rights and liberties. Historically, juries were able to decide on matters of both fact and law.

To underline how fast the bad guys are tossing our protections against government in the trash can, I would point out to you that in my lifetime I am aware of another local judge, former Circuit Judge Mahlon Gibson, who was known to have allowed arguments in court that amounted to a straight-up effort at jury nullification. Even though American and local recent history say otherwise, Hendren's defenders make the ignorant and absurd claim that "Judges never let juries hear questions of law and it is not the way we do things in this country".

I understand that the system from the top down may be applying pressure on judges to remove defendant's rights to make constitutional defenses to a jury, but that does not mean that a righteous judge has to yield to such pressure. Indeed, what makes one a good public servant is resisting such temptations to "go along to get along". Yielding to pressure from on high without question leads from polite society to Aschwits.

That brings us to this latest case. One Mindy Gayle Offutt pled guilty to possession of a controlled substance. Rogers Judge Doug Schrantz gave her a 30 day jail sentence, but agreed to suspend it if she would attend a 12-step program. Offutt found the program had religious underpinnings and sued Judge Schrantz. Her lawyer said in the suit, "An individual should be allowed to decide whether or not to accept a particular religion, or whether to accept any religion at all," and "A government authority is prohibited by the First and 14th Amendment from forcing any person to participate in any religious activity."

Hendren dismissed the suit, but instructed Judge Schrantz to change the sentence. Schrantz did not want the suit dismissed. He wanted a ruling. Now Offutt gets the sentence suspended regardless of her attendance at the 12-step program.

Look, I am a strong defender of freedom of conscience. The whole idea of "coerced Christianity" strikes me as ridiculous. But Offutt (and Hendren) are wrong here and Judge Schrantz is right. Offutt did the crime. Then sentence imposed was a fair one for that crime. It was her choice whether she wanted to do the 12-step program or not. If she didn't, she should do the time. All this ruling will do is take away the option of a judge using that twelve step program for others. People who don't mind acknowledging a need for God to deal with their drug (or other) problems have just lost an opportunity to get help. Man's need for God is a reality. We were created with a God-shaped hole in our souls that some try to fill with other things like drugs. Government is not "imposing religion" on anyone when they offer an option to convicted criminals which recognizes the truth that man is a spiritual creature. The modernist view of man as an ape wearing trousers has not met man's true needs.

The government continues to act to drive any connection to faith in God out of our society, and Hendren's decision is now a part of that effort.

Saturday, August 04, 2007

What is Globalism and Why is it Bad?

i would like to ask an honest question. it may sound stupid & maybe I've missed something, but i have been see a lot of references to "globalists".
could you define the term for me & what you mean by it?


Thank you for your question.

A globalist is someone who wants to weaken the national sovereignty of individual nations in favor of a unified world system, in an effort to advance some other goal.

They come in various flavors. For example, a leftist may want to advance a single set of rules for "gay rights" and impose that agenda on cultures they feel are "backward". A multi-national corporation may seek such a system in order to maximize its own profits, regardless of the costs to others.

While you may think that a gay rights activist and a global corporation have little in common, you can see that both share the same goal of weakening national sovereignty in order to impose unified global rules that are in their own interests. This helps explain the otherwise inexplicable support for the homosexual agenda you see in so many giant corporations such as Ford Motor Company.

As for the political class, their interest is in obtaining more and more power over your life with less and less accountability to you. This is why unless they make a conscious and sustained effort of the will to fight it, government people tend to be centralizers. They like to centralize control and decision making. Global government gives them one more layer of power and one more layer of bureaucracy between them and their subjects.

There is also the tendency to see themselves as the "cream of the crop" from their own nation. As they pursue relations with those who view themselves as "the cream of the crop" from other countries, it is only human that a certain amount of elitism creeps in. That is, they come to view the foreign leaders as their friends and equals while viewing the "little people" in their home countries as inferiors.

I need not take the space here to inform you that the Founders were in steadfast opposition to such thinking. They desired to give only limited essential authority to the central government and let regulation of most daily affairs of life pass to the states, or to the people.

Here is a Milton Friedman quote which applies, ""Government power must be dispersed. If government is to exercise power, better in the county than in the state, better in the state than in Washington. [Because] if I do not like what my local community does, I can move to another local community... [and] if I do not like what my state does, I can move to another. [But] if I do not like what Washington imposes, I have few alternatives in this world of jealous nations." -Milton Friedman

Of course, a global government would make it even harder to hide from a government which goes wrong and starts persecuting people for the sake of "political correctness".

It may surprise some that the scriptures also take a dim view of the nations becoming united under one banner. Psalms chapter two is one of the classic passages in which it is revealed that world leaders will attempt to shake off the constraints that God has declared apply to all men. The elite, used to having their own way, are most likely to resent God's standards for civil government and private conduct.

A radical hyper-individualistic view of freedom is that no locality has any right to impose any rules on you. A classic view of liberty respects the rights of localities to order their lives as they see fit by imposing agreed-upon rules on its members. Under the latter view, a homosexual man cannot strut into a town which considers homosexuality a deviant act and demand that they change all their rules to accommodate he and his partner, who wants to be the church organist. Under the former view, a central government can impose its own standards, or lack thereof, on the community. Thus, this view of government and individual rights takes form the townsfolk the liberty to order the rules of their society as they see fit and transfers that authority to a distant and unaccountable elite in a distant capitol.

In this short article I have not written a tithe of what I could write on the wicked potential of globalist thinking. Suffice to say that it is the duty of all persons who desire freedom for their posterity to fight the rising power of globalism in all the hydra-headed policies by which it devours our liberties.

Friday, August 03, 2007

House in Chaos: Illegal Immigration Vote Closed Over Republican Protests

The Democratic Congress operated like a Banana Republic yesterday. The guys at The Politico describe some of the action here...

"numerous Republicans argued afterward that they had secured a 215-213 win on their motion to bar undocumented immigrants from receiving any federal funds apportioned in the agricultural spending bill for employment or rental assistance. Democrats, however, argued the measure was deadlocked at 214-214 and failed, members and aides on both sides of the aisle said afterward.

One GOP aide saw McNulty gavel the vote to a close after receiving a signal from his leaders – but before reading the official tally. And votes continued to shift even after he closed the roll call"

So far, no record of the vote has appeared on congressional websites. This outrage cannot be permitted to go unchallenged. The rule of law is at stake and thus our very Republic itself. People who follow this site know that I don't hesitate to criticize Republicans when I think they earn it. Hopefully, that will give me some kind of credibility when I say that the Democrats are doing an abysmal job of running Congress. I would rather be ruled by the first 535 names in the NWA Area Phone book than to be ruled by this Congress and Senate. Their corrupt and incompetent management is as bad as their flawed and morally destructive policies. Our nation is in trouble, and we cannot afford to return them to power again.

Now with a very few exceptions like Oklahoma Senator James Coburn, the best Republicans are in the House. My theory, supported by considerable evidence, is that the globalists who run the Republican party only let patriotic conservatives rise so far in the ranks before they either 1) leave them twisting in the wind in key elections or 2) actively campaign to defeat them. They are trying to undermine the grassroots, but their reach does not extend to every congressional district in this country. Because of that, a number of good people do make it to Congress- but that is as high as they normally go. If they try to get any higher, the opposition from the power brokers becomes stronger.

Occasionally, a James Coburn will get in anyway, but it will not be with their help but rather in spite of their determined opposition. This also explains grassroots dissatisfaction with the GOP field. The kind of people that the grassroots prefer are not allowed to rise high enough to be "top tier" candidates. The net result is that the House Republicans are largely still loyal to the citizens of the United State of America while the Republicans in the Senate are loyal to global interests. There is no "Senate in Chaos" story because Trent Lott and Ted Kennedy both agree that Talk Radio is too powerful and that it is a shame they could not impose the amnesty bill on this country.

The House Republican caucus is our last thin thread that keeps the globalists from imposing their will on this country. They have the White House, they have the Courts, they have the Senate, they have the Media. They have most of the Democrats in the House and a good part of the Republicans in the House. What they don't have are The People, but they are working to make sure that does not matter. At this time in our history the house Republicans who still care about the United States should reach out to the few house Democrats who still do and join together to stop this madness.

Thursday, August 02, 2007

Hendren Piles On

In Communist China, when the government executes you they send your family a bill for the bullet. Judge Jimm Hendren's court in Arkansas works much the same way. First he appoints attorneys, then he refuses to permit them or you to put your defense before the jury, then he sends you the $8,300 bill for the court-appointed attorneys that he did not permit to defend you. At least that is the way he did it for Hollis Wayne Fincher.

Fincher is currently rotting in prison after living an honest life for 60 years. His "crime" was possession of a machine gun without a license from the federal government. Since freemen have a 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms, the government cannot ban these weapons outright. Instead, the law he was convicted on derives its authority from the Constitution's interstate commerce clause (Congress shall have the power to regulate interstate commerce). Such a law should have no bearing in this case since Fincher made the guns himself, never carried them out of the state, and never engaged in any commerce with the weapons. Too bad a jury never got a chance to hear that or any other defense from the government lawyers that Fincher is now being required to pay.

The Morning News Article is here, but don't expect to get Fincher's side of the story from it. Still, the chronology is disturbing. Fincher did not transfer the property until two weeks after his conviction, long after the Judge had already decided that Fincher could not afford his own attorney and so appointed ones from the state. Everyone knew that Fincher owned the land in question, it was in the papers. It was brought out in the trial and in the pre-trial. The judge had to know about the land. Now, suddenly the judge decides that Fincher's transfer of the property to his daughters - after his trial and conviction mind you - is somehow evidence that Fincher was trying to hide his wealth so that he would not have to pay for his own lawyer.

Hendren's logic appears chaotic and irrational. Bad logic often springs from bad motives. I cannot judge his motives, but this sure looks like a petty and vindictive retroactive move by a judge who does not like the criticism he has earned from his abysmal performance in this case.

Wednesday, August 01, 2007

Pirates Take Hostages

Greenland Pirates take 60 former Winslow Squirrels Hostage

This Morning News article is the latest chapter on the hostage crisis in Greenland. The legislature forced small schools like Winslow into "administrative consolidation" despite our warnings that is would lead to actual school closings and long bus rides for rural students. Winslow had a gun to its head. It had to consolidate with somebody, either Greenland or West Fork. They chose Greenland in the belief that Greenland would be less likely to close down their campus and ship the students to a single campus. They were wrong. What happened is just what we said would happen and what has happened all over the state. The larger school district absorbs the smaller one, takes whatever pile of incentive cash the state gave them for doing so, and then steam-rolls over the desires of the citizens in the smaller community and closes down their campus regardless of any agreements beforehand. That's how "administrative" consolidation really works. It was totally predictable and the legislators and Demozette were totally in denial about it.

Now 60 former Winslow students (a sizable chunk of the total) have requested a transfer to West Fork. Greenland does not want to grant the transfers. The reason? It's not the children, its the money. Greenland will lose over $300,000 in annual revenue if the agree to the parent's wishes and transfer the students. So, Greenland is taking hostages. It wants to hold those students in Greenland against their will. It was not even a matter of choosing their school by choosing where they want to live. The parents got their homes with the understanding that they would go to Winslow schools. Greenland took over, closed down that campus, and now won't let them go.

A couple of the state legislators had comments on it. One was not around when it started but is trying to minimize the damage in a tough situation, the other- well I hope he was just misquoted. Rep. Mark Martin, whose district includes many of the families involved, is trying to convince Greenland that the details of the law will get them back some extra money even if they release the hostages. So far they are not buying it. At least he is trying to undo some of the damage that the consolidation bill brought to the families of his district.

Less understandable are the comments of Senator Dave Bisbee. He is term-limited out, but his wife has expressed interest in the House Seat being vacated by Aaron Burkes. Bisbee is quoted as saying the problem was that there was not enough consolidation, that Greenland should have been consolidated into Fayetteville too. I remember the days when Republicans believed that people should be empowered with more choices, not fewer, and that authority should be pushed down to the smallest government unit possible in order to help make this happen. You don't improve education by closing down schools just because they are small, nor do you do it by alienating parents and disrespecting their wishes in the educational process.